15:00:10 <shertel> #startmeeting Ansible Core Public IRC Meeting
15:00:10 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Nov 11 15:00:10 2021 UTC.
15:00:10 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
15:00:10 <zodbot> The chair is shertel. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
15:00:10 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:00:10 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'ansible_core_public_irc_meeting'
15:00:24 <shertel> #info agenda https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/635
15:00:36 <shertel> Looks like there are a few things on the agenda today
15:00:43 * Zhenech waves
15:00:52 * shertel waves back
15:00:55 <shertel> #topic https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/76113
15:00:59 <shertel> Goneri?
15:02:15 <sivel> this meeting slot really isn't great for us to have a quorum any more
15:03:08 <shertel> yeah, at least on Tuesdays west coast people can attend
15:04:01 <shertel> We can come back to the turbo one
15:04:06 <shertel> #topic https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/76262
15:04:22 <shertel> felixfontein, this one is yours
15:04:33 <shertel> lol
15:05:41 <sivel> I feel like we're going to have to move to something like 1700UTC
15:06:14 <sivel> since our required core quorum count is basically the number of people we have on the core team...
15:06:52 <quorum> its going to be a pain for many timezones not having alternating hours ..
15:07:26 <quorum> moving to a ML format to allow async discussion?
15:08:10 <quorum> having discussion open for 1 week, then issue vote if arguments seem setttled?
15:08:54 <shertel> async is good if people remember to read/respond
15:09:13 <Zhenech> I'd fail at that, but I'm also not a regular :)
15:09:59 <sivel> I would likely fail too :)
15:10:01 <shertel> I'd have an easier time remembering to check a github issue than a mailing list thread
15:10:04 <bcoca> well, people opening the topics would be main interested, core team needs then to be disciplined, probably call out new issues in internal weekly core meeting as part of  it
15:10:20 <bcoca> he ... proposals  ...
15:10:34 <sivel> ...where ideas go to die
15:10:51 <bcoca> so no way live and no way async?
15:13:13 <shertel> we could try the mailing list idea and see if the interaction level changes ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
15:14:24 <shertel> felixfontein: I'll review your PR later today, not sure if there's anything else you wanted to discuss with it. Looks good to me.
15:15:00 <shertel> #topic https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/76277
15:15:28 <Goneri> Hi,
15:15:32 <Zhenech> heh, that's mine
15:15:32 <shertel> Zhenech, did you want to discuss something about this one?
15:15:44 <shertel> hey Goneri
15:15:47 <Zhenech> so I originally put the issue on the agenda yesterday
15:15:57 <Zhenech> as I wanted to raise awareness of the issue and see if I can find someone to fix it
15:16:03 <Zhenech> after a good night of sleep I came up with the patch
15:16:10 <Zhenech> which works, but I find a bit ugly
15:16:27 <Zhenech> most probably because I don't like the dnf module being responsible for packages, groups and modules, all at the same time
15:16:30 <bcoca> package management is rarely pretty
15:16:32 <Zhenech> while tehse have different semantics inside dnf
15:18:48 <Zhenech> so yeah, probably just a "is this crazy? and if not, please review", as I won't have time to campaign for a full split into dnf_package dnf_group and dnf_module
15:19:08 <Goneri> It's Rememberence day, it's off in a lot of countries.
15:20:17 <shertel> it seems like the module is managing a lot - it's a lot simpler when state is just present or absent
15:21:28 <shertel> Zhenech: I'm not especially familiar with that module offhand, but I will review
15:21:45 <shertel> (anyone else have an opinion?)
15:22:11 <sivel> We had an issue where we stated that management of enabling disabling modules should be it's own module
15:22:19 <shertel> Good point about Rememberence day
15:22:20 <sivel> module module module module
15:22:25 <shertel> +1
15:22:38 <Zhenech> aye, feel free to ping me over in #ansible-community (UTC+1 office hours) if you want gory details
15:23:07 <Zhenech> sivel, seems this wasn't truly acted uppon tho? as the current module does enable/disable under the hood?
15:23:54 <sivel> I'd have to go find the issue.  dnf isn't something I'm remotely qualified to speak for in reality
15:24:07 <shertel> I'm looking for the issue
15:24:43 <sivel> https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/64852
15:24:47 <sivel> that one I think?
15:26:11 <Zhenech> certainly related, yes
15:28:50 <shertel> Zhenech: I'm guessing it should be a separate module, but let me familiarize myself with what the dnf module already does for managing modules and I'll leave a review.
15:29:08 <Zhenech> shertel, thanks!
15:29:25 <shertel> Zhenech: thanks for the work on it!
15:29:56 <shertel> Goneri: do you want to discuss https://github.com/ansible/ansible/pull/76113?
15:30:08 <shertel> (we don't really have a quorum though)
15:31:00 <shertel> #topic Open floor
15:32:20 <shertel> if nothing else, I'll end in a few minutes
15:32:22 <TimEisler> Hello. I understand my idea https://github.com/ansible/proposals/issues/201 is not of interest but as a first-timer, I want to know: did I at least implement it correctly and completely (test, docs, etc)?
15:32:55 <shertel> #topic https://github.com/ansible/proposals/issues/201
15:33:42 <TimEisler> async feedback via issue comments certianly welcome.
15:34:23 <bcoca> TimEisler: i believe a strategy is a better way to create 'reversible plays'
15:36:34 <TimEisler> Hmm, intersting. I was not reversing the entire play. And yet I did modify lib/ansible/plugins/strategy/__init__.py as part of the implemtnation. So not sure I follow.
15:37:03 <TimEisler> I will study it.
15:37:54 <TimEisler> thank you and thank you shertel.
15:38:17 <shertel> I'll think about it too, thanks for sharing
15:38:31 <shertel> #topic Open floor
15:39:49 <shertel> thanks for attending!
15:39:51 <shertel> #endmeeting