2025-03-13 19:02:37 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !startmeeting ELN SIG 13 Mar '25
2025-03-13 19:02:38 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-03-13 19:02:37 UTC
2025-03-13 19:02:38 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'ELN SIG 13 Mar '25'
2025-03-13 19:02:40 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-13 19:02:42 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-03-13 19:02:47 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !meetingname eln
2025-03-13 19:02:48 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now eln
2025-03-13 19:02:55 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic Init process
2025-03-13 19:05:02 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-13 19:05:03 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
2025-03-13 19:06:54 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> are people tied up in go/no-go too?
2025-03-13 19:07:10 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: just noticed https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/dbs_status.html hasn't updated in a week
2025-03-13 19:07:44 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Yeah, they are decommissionining the shell server that my sync script is running on.
2025-03-13 19:07:49 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I'm trying to figure out what to do about that.
2025-03-13 19:07:53 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> again?!?
2025-03-13 19:08:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Yeah, looks like they're killing them ALL off
2025-03-13 19:09:21 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> We may need to just go ahead and move EBS to the Fedora OpenShift and worry about the build submission endpoint after the fact. (The worst case is submitting a lot of build requests that EBS ignores or Koji cancels for reuse of NVRs)
2025-03-13 19:10:57 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> we can't leave that endpoint open, but I'm wondering if there's a way to use it within the openshift context?
2025-03-13 19:11:09 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-13 19:11:09 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Troy Dawson (tdawson)
2025-03-13 19:11:23 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> iow something that could only be accessed with `oc` or the web console?
2025-03-13 19:11:26 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> yselkowitz: Sorry, I don't understand what you're asking
2025-03-13 19:12:06 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Oh
2025-03-13 19:12:26 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> No. It's just a separate path on the built-in webserver.
2025-03-13 19:12:45 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> If we were using something like Apache, I suppose we could add auth to a subdirectory.
2025-03-13 19:13:00 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> oh ☹️
2025-03-13 19:13:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> But this is just a simple python-twisted webserver. If we want authn, it has to be implemented in the EBS code
2025-03-13 19:13:43 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> The endpoint is VERY limited in what it can do.
2025-03-13 19:13:58 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> It can only trigger builds for packages that EBS already has on the lists from Content Resolver.
2025-03-13 19:14:14 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> we still can't leave that open imo
2025-03-13 19:14:40 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> So yes, someone could try to DDoS it by constantly sending the same package name over and over, but  we deduplicate in the code, so it probably wouldn't really succeed.
2025-03-13 19:15:23 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> The worst-case would be if someone managed to send the complete CR list to us just as we bumped the buildroot number. That would lead to an unplanned mass-rebuild.,
2025-03-13 19:15:27 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Which is not great.
2025-03-13 19:16:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info we need to revisit this as a possible solution to the above, but the trigger endpoint needs authn first
2025-03-13 19:16:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info dbs_status is not syncing again
2025-03-13 19:16:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/11
2025-03-13 19:16:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic New business
2025-03-13 19:16:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/217
2025-03-13 19:17:00 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> just to summarize the discussion we just had
2025-03-13 19:17:08 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> anything else on this point?
2025-03-13 19:17:35 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> One thing
2025-03-13 19:17:57 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I will not have any cycles to do any work on EBS until at least May.
2025-03-13 19:18:42 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> understood, we have some new people coming on board that I hope will be able to take on our tooling
2025-03-13 19:19:11 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I can try to carve out some time for code review here and there. I can't promise more than that.
2025-03-13 19:19:22 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> ack, thanks for the headsup
2025-03-13 19:19:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info kernel-rt packages are now available in RT and NFV repos
2025-03-13 19:20:09 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info RT repo is now available for aarch64, with kernel-rt (but not kernel-rt-64k yet)
2025-03-13 19:21:30 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> ^^^ that mostly completes the RT and NFV repos, which were deficient until now.  that leaves HA still needing work (see #229)
2025-03-13 19:22:40 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> go/no-go just ended (f42 beta is go!)
2025-03-13 19:22:56 <@salimma:fedora.im> we might as well stay here right
2025-03-13 19:23:11 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> yeah we'll stay here for today
2025-03-13 19:24:16 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/234
2025-03-13 19:24:16 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info llvm-20 has landed in ELN with llvm19 as compat, most packages just need a rebuild
2025-03-13 19:24:24 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> The sync script is back up and running for now, but I don't know how long it'll stay running. The machine it's on only has a six-day uptime. I'll try to keep an eye on it at least until it's decommissioned at the end of the month
2025-03-13 19:25:21 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> thanks!
2025-03-13 19:25:46 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> anything else for new business?
2025-03-13 19:26:24 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Nothing from me
2025-03-13 19:26:44 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic Old business
2025-03-13 19:26:58 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/192
2025-03-13 19:27:18 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> do we have a quorum to continue the votes on the background?
2025-03-13 19:27:42 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I think there is just the 3 of us ... does that constitute a quorum?
2025-03-13 19:27:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> let's see - Yaakov, Troy, Stephen, me ... who else is here
2025-03-13 19:28:31 <@salimma:fedora.im> Davide sends his regrets, he's at the office today which means it's "lunch with colleague" time
2025-03-13 19:29:16 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> we don't have official rules on this, I was hoping for vast majority of the regulars
2025-03-13 19:30:01 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> defer this another week?
2025-03-13 19:30:29 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Ya ... although I might start getting the rpm setup, so when it passes I can just plop in the picture.
2025-03-13 19:31:30 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> sure, and I would like to suggest naming it `fedora-eln-backgrounds`, so that all the `fedora-` packages are grouped together and easy to notice when filtering out what not to branch come c11s
2025-03-13 19:32:04 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Sounds good to me.   I'll put that in the ticket.
2025-03-13 19:32:50 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info new prototype has been posted.  decision deferred another week due to lack of quorum
2025-03-13 19:33:49 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/209
2025-03-13 19:34:41 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: do you think the package.cfg issues with the SB pkgs would be connected to your issue yesterday?
2025-03-13 19:36:25 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !action Yaakov to ping releng on granting SB privs to EBS 
2025-03-13 19:38:21 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Sorry, was looking at another screen.
2025-03-13 19:38:52 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I don't think so. The exact OPPOSITE problem seems to be happening there for some reason.
2025-03-13 19:39:14 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> In my case, packages that should NOT have been built for ELN were triggered, whereas the secureboot packages aren't triggering for ELN when they are explicitly listed.
2025-03-13 19:39:30 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Except it works when *I* do it, and not when the secureboot maintainers do.
2025-03-13 19:41:01 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> ok we'll see what releng comes back with, perhaps it will be moot
2025-03-13 19:43:31 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic Next Meeting
2025-03-13 19:43:59 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> after last week, I thought we should check the next week in advance for conflicts
2025-03-13 19:44:37 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> the next meeting would normally be next Thursday 20 Mar 15:00 EDT (US/Canada)
2025-03-13 19:44:53 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> any conflicts for then?
2025-03-13 19:45:12 <@salimma:fedora.im> someone else should answer that, I personally have no conflict even today
2025-03-13 19:45:54 <@tdawson:fedora.im> No conflicts for me.
2025-03-13 19:46:05 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !info next meeting is on regular schedule, Thu 20 March 15:00 EDT
2025-03-13 19:46:14 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !topic Open floor
2025-03-13 19:46:32 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> anyone have anything else to discuss today?
2025-03-13 19:46:44 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Nothing from me
2025-03-13 19:49:03 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> guess we'll end early then, hopefully next time we can get more attendees
2025-03-13 19:49:19 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> thank you all for joining today
2025-03-13 19:49:21 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !endmeeting