2025-04-16 18:01:16 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !startmeeting EPEL Steering Committee
2025-04-16 18:01:18 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-04-16 18:01:16 UTC
2025-04-16 18:01:18 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'EPEL Steering Committee'
2025-04-16 18:01:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !topic howdy
2025-04-16 18:02:00 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-16 18:02:01 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-04-16 18:02:16 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh right no Troy today?
2025-04-16 18:02:16 <@dherrera:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-16 18:02:17 <@elguero:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-16 18:02:21 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his
2025-04-16 18:02:21 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (elguero)
2025-04-16 18:03:01 <@davide:cavalca.name> !hi
2025-04-16 18:03:02 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah, he messaged me ask me to run the meeting, he was having some possible hardware issues with his computer
2025-04-16 18:03:03 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his
2025-04-16 18:03:17 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning
2025-04-16 18:03:22 <@salimma:fedora.im> hardware issues affecting even text meetings, ouch
2025-04-16 18:04:25 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-16 18:04:26 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his
2025-04-16 18:04:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-16 18:04:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his
2025-04-16 18:05:53 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> welcome everybody, let's get this show on the road, i think we have quite a few topics to discuss
2025-04-16 18:06:02 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !topic EPEL issues
2025-04-16 18:06:09 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
2025-04-16 18:06:40 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i can knock out the older one with a quick status update
2025-04-16 18:06:46 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !epel 324
2025-04-16 18:06:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **epel #324** (https://pagure.io/epel/issue/324):**EPEL 10 minor version upgrade path**
2025-04-16 18:06:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** carlwgeorge
2025-04-16 18:06:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** 5 days ago
2025-04-16 18:06:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 4 weeks ago by carlwgeorge
2025-04-16 18:06:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-16 18:07:29 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> this is basically done, with some straggler details of mock and the docs
2025-04-16 18:07:34 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/rpm-software-management/mock/pull/1568
2025-04-16 18:07:55 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/epel/pull-request/326
2025-04-16 18:08:46 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> any questions/feedback on those, or should we move on?
2025-04-16 18:09:00 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> 🎊
2025-04-16 18:10:16 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !epel 328
2025-04-16 18:10:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** 5 days ago
2025-04-16 18:10:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **epel #328** (https://pagure.io/epel/issue/328):**Figure out getting selinux-policy-epel autoinstalled**
2025-04-16 18:10:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-04-16 18:10:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-16 18:10:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 6 days ago by ngompa
2025-04-16 18:10:38 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> Conan Kudo: you around to go over this one?
2025-04-16 18:10:48 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yes
2025-04-16 18:10:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-16 18:10:53 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-04-16 18:10:59 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> go ahead
2025-04-16 18:12:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so basically this situation kind of stinks because we need the policy package installed right after the epel repo is installed because without it, software in epel may fail inscructably
2025-04-16 18:12:32 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> most methods of automatic installation don't work because dnf's default is to ignore weak dependencies for already installed packages
2025-04-16 18:13:08 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i can confirm that selinux-policy-epel didn't get installed on the upgrade of epel-release for me
2025-04-16 18:13:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the best I could come up with is supplement the base package on the selinux-policy-epel and hope it triggers when you do an upgrade
2025-04-16 18:13:49 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> so tldr, https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-release/c/ffadafbe85e0ab364725909a5f8a4558fa5f78ca?branch=epel10 doesn't work
2025-04-16 18:13:53 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> right?
2025-04-16 18:14:07 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yup
2025-04-16 18:14:42 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> instead of hope, can someone prototype this to confirm so we're not just switching to another non-functional approach?
2025-04-16 18:14:45 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> couldn't we just make it a requires? or are there actually cases you never want to install selinux policies?
2025-04-16 18:15:02 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> if it's a requires then the documented install method doesn't work
2025-04-16 18:15:21 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i.e. `dnf install https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/epel/epel-release-latest-10.noarch.rpm`
2025-04-16 18:15:55 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> well, no I meant requires in epel-release... instead of reccommends?
2025-04-16 18:16:05 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it will always fail then
2025-04-16 18:16:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> oh right.
2025-04-16 18:16:15 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> because the repo doesn't exist yet until _after_ epel-release is installed
2025-04-16 18:16:16 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> tricky
2025-04-16 18:16:44 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> the supplements method seems like a good idea, i'd just like to know if it for sure works the way we want it to
2025-04-16 18:16:50 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah it will have to be supplement I think
2025-04-16 18:17:08 <@salimma:fedora.im> because then it only gets processed the first time the package is seen, so it will not just fail because the package is not seen
2025-04-16 18:17:23 <@salimma:fedora.im> though how recommends work seems really buggy and we really should ... file an issue to get that fixed anyway?
2025-04-16 18:18:00 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> the recommends logic works as advertised, it's a soft dep that is skipped if unavailable
2025-04-16 18:18:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it used to work the other way, where it always fired regardless, and people complained
2025-04-16 18:18:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so it was switched
2025-04-16 18:18:32 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> you can never win. ;)
2025-04-16 18:18:37 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> oh right, the "i uninstalled this, stop re-installing it" thing
2025-04-16 18:18:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> pretty much
2025-04-16 18:18:57 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yup
2025-04-16 18:19:06 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> so i guess the inverse wasn't done for supplements?
2025-04-16 18:19:17 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it was
2025-04-16 18:19:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but it only applies to installed packages
2025-04-16 18:19:34 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> technically selinux-policy-epel is not installed yet
2025-04-16 18:20:05 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> which is why it shouldn't be affected by `exclude_from_weak_autodetect=True` (the current default)
2025-04-16 18:20:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> can you work up a pr and then test upgrades with the scratch build artifact?
2025-04-16 18:20:48 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> or if anyone else wants to volunteer
2025-04-16 18:21:44 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I guess I could, is the new stripped selinux-policy package in CentOS Stream yet?
2025-04-16 18:21:55 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> also, does this affect RHEL 10.0?
2025-04-16 18:22:58 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yes to both
2025-04-16 18:23:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> well at least testing should be straightforward then
2025-04-16 18:23:47 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and did selinux-policy-epel make it into EPEL 10.0 too then?
2025-04-16 18:24:28 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> confirmed the first, the change was part of selinux-policy-40.13.26-1, current is selinux-policy-40.13.28-1
2025-04-16 18:25:07 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> oh good catch, it's missing from 10.0
2025-04-16 18:25:23 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I suspected it might (even if I can't check right now)
2025-04-16 18:25:28 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> it was first built after the mass branching
2025-04-16 18:26:18 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> we can work on testing the upgrade with c10 now, then sort out 10.0 after that
2025-04-16 18:26:48 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> sounds good
2025-04-16 18:27:18 <@salimma:fedora.im> should we ship a mock config separately just to test that? seems useful
2025-04-16 18:27:21 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> see the aforementioned mock pr
2025-04-16 18:27:34 <@salimma:fedora.im> ah, I missed it (multitasking), thanks
2025-04-16 18:27:42 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> that adds the epel-z-10 template that would be needed
2025-04-16 18:28:01 <@salimma:fedora.im> nice
2025-04-16 18:28:18 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> ok, anything else on this before we move on?
2025-04-16 18:28:50 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i can file the bug to request the 10_0 build of selinux-policy-epel
2025-04-16 18:28:57 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> sounds good
2025-04-16 18:29:54 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i think that's it for open issues, unless anyone has any they forget to tag for the meeting?
2025-04-16 18:31:01 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-16 18:31:02 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jonathan Wright (jonathanspw)
2025-04-16 18:31:08 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> Here for about 10m
2025-04-16 18:31:29 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !topic old business
2025-04-16 18:32:03 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> we've got a pr for something old, let me see if this works...
2025-04-16 18:32:07 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !epel 329
2025-04-16 18:32:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Issue querying Pagure: Issue not found
2025-04-16 18:32:17 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> guess not
2025-04-16 18:32:23 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/epel/pull-request/329
2025-04-16 18:33:03 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> thats not old? but I guess the topic is
2025-04-16 18:33:18 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC-6: want to say anything on this one, or just leave it as an fyi for folks to go review
2025-04-16 18:33:29 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah old topic, new pr
2025-04-16 18:33:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> I can mention something quick
2025-04-16 18:34:03 <@salimma:fedora.im> so yeah I found two occurences of EPEL Packagers SIG - let me know if I miss any. the page describing what it is, which I now just mark deprecated but not touching further (we can remove it later)
2025-04-16 18:34:38 <@salimma:fedora.im> and also the stalled request process, which I updated to say use the packager SIG that you want, *but* only if they consent to it. With examples pointing to the wikis for Python, Rust and Go SIGs
2025-04-16 18:35:08 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i like it
2025-04-16 18:35:23 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> happy to merge after those two small tweaks suggested in the comments
2025-04-16 18:35:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> e.g. for Rust if the package is written in Rust but does not start with rust- the automation to add rust-sig won't work, so you might need to manually request it anyway if the maintainer forgot
2025-04-16 18:35:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> 
2025-04-16 18:35:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> Python seems to say packagers can add the SIG willy nilly (which seems like a mistake) but.. we should not dictate policy here, the SIGs should
2025-04-16 18:35:50 <@salimma:fedora.im> will look at the tweaks after the meeting, thanks
2025-04-16 18:36:29 <@smooge:fedora.im> I can say that working with the python people in the past... that probably isn't their intent
2025-04-16 18:36:39 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i believe we already voted on the deprecation, so merging this will just close the loop on the paperwork side
2025-04-16 18:37:00 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah python people tend to expect someone to own the EPEL branch if they're branching
2025-04-16 18:37:45 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Python#Python_SIG_FAS_group
2025-04-16 18:38:40 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> alright, ready to move on?
2025-04-16 18:39:11 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i have two things for open floor, one small fyi and one can of worms
2025-04-16 18:39:13 <@salimma:fedora.im> yup that link is also in the PR doc
2025-04-16 18:39:14 <@salimma:fedora.im> but yes move on
2025-04-16 18:39:22 <@salimma:fedora.im> can we start with the FYI :)
2025-04-16 18:39:33 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !topic open floor
2025-04-16 18:39:42 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> does anyone else want to go first?
2025-04-16 18:40:43 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i'll drop my fyi one, then give others a chance to jump in if they have open floor items
2025-04-16 18:40:59 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/toddlers/issue/151
2025-04-16 18:41:25 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> scm_request_processor now automatically retires the rawhide branch for packages ending with -epel
2025-04-16 18:41:30 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I have a fyi...
2025-04-16 18:41:37 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, that was what mine was gonna be. ;)
2025-04-16 18:41:45 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> perfect 😀
2025-04-16 18:42:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> sweet
2025-04-16 18:42:06 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> anybody else before my other one?
2025-04-16 18:43:20 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !link https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-chooses-forgejo/
2025-04-16 18:44:32 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> in case anyone has been living under a rock, the future of fedora git forges is forgejo.  they're working on dist-git first, but eventually there will be a general fedora forge too.  i saw that pagure.io is now closed for new repos as well, so let's say that's in sunsetting phase now.
2025-04-16 18:46:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - random epel issues that cover more than one package
2025-04-16 18:46:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> not solving this today, but i wanted to ask the question:  what do we want to do with pagure.io/epel?  right now it's multipurpose.
2025-04-16 18:46:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> 
2025-04-16 18:46:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - the source for our docs
2025-04-16 18:46:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - issues for steering committee topics/votes
2025-04-16 18:46:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - issues cle epel team (me and Diego Herrera) issues to track work
2025-04-16 18:48:00 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> a long time ago when it looked like fedora was moving to gitlab, i suggested we move to gitlab too.  i remember some folks were very against that due to the open core nature, and honestly i'm glad we didn't go that route because i'm not a fan of the gitlab ux.
2025-04-16 18:48:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> my muscle memory for gitlab broke again with their latest UX change
2025-04-16 18:48:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> not solving this today, but i wanted to ask the question:  what do we want to do with pagure.io/epel?  right now it's multipurpose.
2025-04-16 18:48:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - random epel issues that cover more than one package
2025-04-16 18:48:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - issues the cle epel team (me and Diego Herrera) are working on
2025-04-16 18:48:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - issues for steering committee topics/votes
2025-04-16 18:48:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> - the source for our docs
2025-04-16 18:48:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> 
2025-04-16 18:48:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> we don't have to decide this today right? or we think it will deteriorate soon
2025-04-16 18:48:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it annoys me
2025-04-16 18:48:48 <@salimma:fedora.im> if forgejo is ready I suppose we should use forgejo but I don't want to add to their burden right now
2025-04-16 18:48:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we should wait for the exporter tooling to be written first
2025-04-16 18:49:24 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> not today, but i would point out that the ux on pagure.io is already deteriorating, we routinely can't load issues during meetings
2025-04-16 18:49:39 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> That was likely not a ux issue.
2025-04-16 18:49:42 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> but ai scrapers.
2025-04-16 18:49:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that's the AI spam load
2025-04-16 18:49:55 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it knocks out a lot of stuff
2025-04-16 18:50:01 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that's the AI scraper load
2025-04-16 18:50:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> so much ugh for AI
2025-04-16 18:50:03 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> (which have been under control for the last week or so... so if you are seeing anything still, please do report it!)
2025-04-16 18:50:07 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> not ux in the traditional sense, but if i can't load an issue that is a bad user experience
2025-04-16 18:50:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> but yeah generally pagure.io works better for me than dist-git (where my dashboard never worked because it can't handle hundreds of packages)
2025-04-16 18:50:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I don't even hate AI/ML personally, but man they really do want me to hate it all
2025-04-16 18:50:41 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> lol yeah they're trying
2025-04-16 18:51:05 <@salimma:fedora.im> I do hate it, but I think the scraping is orthogonal and is more "unregulated capitalism is bad"
2025-04-16 18:51:18 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> as neal said, waiting for an export tool (and the existense of the fedora general forge instance)
2025-04-16 18:51:18 <@salimma:fedora.im> yay my two pet hates overlap
2025-04-16 18:51:26 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> as neal said, waiting for an export tool (and the existence of the fedora general forge instance) is one option
2025-04-16 18:51:35 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Michel Lind UTC-6: thousands you mean? ;)
2025-04-16 18:52:09 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> other options are codeberg.org, github.com, and gitlab.com
2025-04-16 18:52:29 <@davide:cavalca.name> I don't really see the point of using an external forge
2025-04-16 18:52:42 <@davide:cavalca.name> It's either forejo or gitlab IMO
2025-04-16 18:52:58 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> gitlab is external
2025-04-16 18:52:59 <@salimma:fedora.im> well codeberg runs forgejo - but yeah why bother except to experiment
2025-04-16 18:53:06 <@davide:cavalca.name> Personally leaning towards forejo as epel is a fedora project after all
2025-04-16 18:53:40 <@davide:cavalca.name> For centos stuff we're going to consolidate on gitlab fwiw
2025-04-16 18:53:48 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> my thinking with codeberg would be it in theory would be a stepping stone to the fedora general forgejo instance
2025-04-16 18:53:55 <@davide:cavalca.name> As that's where the centos stream development is
2025-04-16 18:54:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> yup
2025-04-16 18:54:30 <@davide:cavalca.name> Do we know when the fedora instance is expected to become available?
2025-04-16 18:54:48 <@salimma:fedora.im> I started using it for the beefy miracle repo just to play around with forgejo too
2025-04-16 18:54:50 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> as far as i know, after the dist-git one
2025-04-16 18:55:05 <@davide:cavalca.name> We should probably avoid having multiple forge migrations in a row if we can
2025-04-16 18:55:09 <@salimma:fedora.im> related - will there be anubis or another anti scraping built in from the get go?
2025-04-16 18:55:10 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> something about figuring out the harder use case first
2025-04-16 18:55:20 <@salimma:fedora.im> we probably should never launch a replacement forge without one
2025-04-16 18:55:47 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> that would be an issue to raise here probably https://codeberg.org/fedora/forgejo-deployment/issues
2025-04-16 18:55:52 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we need to get anubis packaged
2025-04-16 18:55:53 <@davide:cavalca.name> I started packaging that fyi. Stuck on some nodejs dependency madness now
2025-04-16 18:56:04 <@davide:cavalca.name> But I can put it somewhere if folks want to help with it
2025-04-16 18:56:12 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> please do so
2025-04-16 18:56:22 <@salimma:fedora.im> oof. vendoring does not help?
2025-04-16 18:56:32 <@salimma:fedora.im> looks like tgoday's hyperscale is about packaging hells :)
2025-04-16 18:56:33 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I can't tell you how often I've sat on my thumbs because I couldn't do anything because the scrapers took everything down
2025-04-16 18:56:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> we wouldn't be alone on codeberg either, since the forgejo deployment stuff is also being tracked there
2025-04-16 18:56:46 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> we could get a repo in https://codeberg.org/fedora
2025-04-16 18:56:47 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it made this Fedora release very difficult on me
2025-04-16 18:57:03 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah. the scraping is getting ridiculously bad
2025-04-16 18:57:35 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> on a related note, do we want to keep this multipurpose in the future, or split things up?
2025-04-16 18:57:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> separate docs from the EPSCo repo you mean?
2025-04-16 18:58:09 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah i'm thinking about having one repo for docs specifically, and then another one for the steering committee topics/votes
2025-04-16 18:58:10 <@salimma:fedora.im> probably should split it - get a namespace, and two repos
2025-04-16 18:58:14 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I think my experience with fesco leans toward not splitting it
2025-04-16 18:58:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> also can we get nested namespaces in forgejo?
2025-04-16 18:58:33 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> moving to codeberg and then moving again to a fedora one seems like double the work to me.
2025-04-16 18:58:37 <@davide:cavalca.name> Yeah, I don't think we need to split it
2025-04-16 18:58:43 <@davide:cavalca.name> But also this
2025-04-16 18:58:45 <@salimma:fedora.im> but yeah fesco has this issue where we sometimes forget to look at docs PRs
2025-04-16 18:58:56 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we keep forgetting to address issues in the fesco-docs repo because they're not present and visible like the main fesco project
2025-04-16 18:59:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> docs and SIG issues together, any other repo should be split out (e.g. tooling)
2025-04-16 18:59:06 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> at some point I might actually suggest we move it back into the fesco repo
2025-04-16 18:59:24 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> probably with the forgejo general forge deployment post DC move
2025-04-16 18:59:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> fwiw fesco is looking at explicitly looking at docs issues before every weekly meeting
2025-04-16 18:59:47 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we probably need to file an RFE for CLE engineers to implement it
2025-04-16 18:59:50 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> not telling fesco how to work, but at first glance that sounds more like a process issue than an issue with how it's structured
2025-04-16 18:59:54 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the Gogs family including forgejo does not support it
2025-04-16 19:00:18 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> but the general sig is not the same as the steering committee
2025-04-16 19:00:18 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Michel Lind UTC-6: in case you were curious, I ran the db query that src uses for your home page... you have: 8928 packages that would be listed there. ;)
2025-04-16 19:00:27 <@salimma:fedora.im> we probably don't need it as much if we're on our own instance
2025-04-16 19:00:40 <@salimma:fedora.im> wow, it was probably 3000-ish just last year
2025-04-16 19:01:06 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I think it's a lot of the groups you are in (since it transitively adds those)
2025-04-16 19:01:08 <@salimma:fedora.im> anyway, it's ... time
2025-04-16 19:01:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> anyhow, yeah, I think nested works...
2025-04-16 19:01:21 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> well we're out of time, but i accomplished my goal of putting this out there to get folks thinking about the future
2025-04-16 19:01:41 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> as i said before, no decision needed urgently, i'd just like to stop using pagure sooner than later
2025-04-16 19:03:06 <@dherrera:fedora.im> didn't say anything, but my opinion is that we can just wait for the fedora forge to be ready ^^
2025-04-16 19:03:51 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> thanks everyone for attending, see y'all next week
2025-04-16 19:03:56 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !endmeeting