16:00:22 #startmeeting EPEL (2010-04-23) 16:00:22 Meeting started Fri Apr 23 16:00:22 2010 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:23 #meetingname epel 16:00:24 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:27 The meeting name has been set to 'epel' 16:00:32 #chair smooge 16:00:33 Current chairs: nirik smooge 16:00:44 Hey, whos around for an epel meeting? 16:01:03 Me 16:01:52 me too sorta... 16:02:45 At least we don't have quorum rules to worry about... 16:02:53 yeah, true enough. ;) 16:03:11 anyhow, I think we would like to use this meeting to discuss bugs, new packages, and general work on epel stuff. 16:03:23 also to help new folks get more involved if they would like to. 16:03:26 There was also the whole EL-6 thing 16:03:44 "15:37 <@smooge> or we can do a meeting today because well EL-6 came out 16:06:23 i'm here 16:06:44 yeah... if dgilmore is around, he could give us an update. 16:07:00 I think we are waiting to get access to the el6 repo to import it into koji 16:07:58 is the rest of the infrastructure set up for that? 16:08:03 due to the xz update 16:08:07 I thought dgilmore was delaying the branch for other reasons too, but I dunno 16:08:21 jokajak That came up elsewhere, yes 16:09:37 * nirik gets a phone call. 16:09:51 Ergh! the EL6 beta list archives are non-public. 16:10:14 Basically looks like the builders use a more up to date version of RPM. 16:10:22 fedora builders already do tho 16:10:39 I'm here, but barely 16:10:47 not so much a good time for me 16:11:32 stahnma: are any? ;) 16:11:47 fewer and fewer it seems 16:12:18 hey all 16:12:37 Ah someone who knows what's going on :) 16:13:02 i almost have all of rhel6 on the infrastructure mirror 16:13:22 * tremble notes that this is actually one of the biggest turnouts for a while... 16:15:15 it looks like we should build EPEL-6 for ppc64 x86_64 and i686 16:15:21 we could do s390x also 16:15:47 * stahnma gets pulled away...will read scrollback later :( 16:16:36 its probably going to take a couple of weeks before we can open up building EL-6 16:16:53 we need to give time to peopel to opt in and out of EL-6 branches 16:17:10 we need to make sure that we dont branch anything thats now in RHEL 16:17:40 dgilmore: would we be able to build against EL-6 with scratch builds before we have EL-6 EPEL branches? 16:17:40 * tremble wonders if allowing scratch builds would be benificial. 16:17:53 jokajak: we can set that up 16:18:22 i would like to build some packages against el6 and currently have no easy way to do that 16:18:29 The trouble is you'd only have access to EL deps. 16:18:31 once i get things up and running ill do an early branch of epel-release and build it 16:18:42 we will have a new GPG key for EL-6 16:19:12 jokajak: you can always setup a mock config 16:19:35 dgilmore: then i'd have to install the mock from fedora-infra 16:20:57 im thinking that when we open up epel we should put everything in /pub/epel/beta/6/ 16:21:14 morning 16:21:17 when EL-6 goes final we can see if anything needs a rebuild 16:21:25 sorry I had a house problem to dela with 16:21:28 Evenin' smooge 16:21:40 smooge: Good (UGT) morning 16:22:57 hi how are things going 16:23:34 dgilmore: is there already a /pub/epel/beta ? 16:23:46 dgilmore: if not, why /pub/epel/beta/6/ and not /pub/epel/6/beta ? 16:24:53 dgilmore, would we build s390x with qemu or some special hardwar 16:26:13 smooge: we would build s390x with a lpar thats inside of RH 16:26:13 jokajak, it matches other trees I think 16:26:19 ok 16:26:33 we could s/beta/test 16:26:43 jokajak, also we could do betas for other trees in the far future that way. 16:26:44 but i think beta makes sense for epel 16:27:10 dgilmore, do we know if AP covers every package? what is in AP-optional? etc 16:27:10 i'd do beta because it matches the title given to the product we are building against 16:28:29 smooge: ive asked and not yet got answers 16:28:33 ok no problem 16:29:30 I think for the time being we would just keep to our rule if its in AP we build against it. Then we can deal with damage later 16:30:33 dgilmore, when can we do scratch builds against EL-6? I need a couple of packages.. for the desktop :) 16:31:05 smooge: the rsync is almost done 16:31:07 that is obviously the topic of choice 16:31:20 scratch builds should be enabled today 16:32:12 ok cool. 16:32:28 Ill email the list when they are working 16:33:21 I know at least some (existing) packages are going to need new packages before they'll build with new versions... 16:33:40 tremble, can you elaborate? 16:33:56 RT 3.8 gained a whole load of new deps 16:34:39 which weren't all in EPEL (although I own a batch of them now) 16:35:28 ah the ever growing thing called RT 16:35:52 one day its going to be 'make cpan-all; make rt' 16:35:59 Tell me about it, 16:36:09 just got the lowdown on AP-optional 16:36:22 AP-optional ? 16:36:24 on the other hand its cooler than the evils others are stuck with 16:36:26 AP-optional are packages that fill BuildRequires as well as subpackages that aren't pulled in through deps. There will a child channel in RHN that contains these packages. So, they will be available, but they won't receive the same level of Red Hat support 16:36:38 ahhh. 16:36:54 That's a nice way to do it. 16:37:07 EPEL will build against AP and AP-optional 16:37:08 to avoid the problem with 2.1 and 3 that occured with 1 or 2 packages 16:37:22 cool then we don't have to branch more stuff 16:37:24 changes are you will need to enable both those channels to use epel on EL-6 16:38:02 chances are 16:38:06 dgilmore, I was wondering if we should put in blockers for most of the core packages this time so we don't have to worry about new versions showing up. They can be removed later correct? 16:38:47 dgilmore: What sort of lower level support is it going to be? (If you don't know I'll just wait for the sales droids to explain) 16:39:14 tremble: i have no idea about anything to do with support 16:39:22 Ok 16:39:49 smooge: we can block them in epel 16:40:03 smooge: but we need to unblock them in epel-build 16:40:21 dist-6E-epel can block packages in EL-6 16:40:38 but they need to be unblocked in dist-6E-epel-build 16:40:53 if there blocked there they wont be available to build against 16:40:59 dgilmore, aaaaahh 16:41:37 dgilmore, thanks for explaining. I was just thinking of the CVS branches but I guess there was a lot more than that to deal with 16:41:45 Could you do something like block them in dist-6E-epel-testing-candidate? 16:44:36 tremble: not really 16:45:00 Fair enough 16:45:26 my thoughts were that while LE-6 is in beta we will have a single repo thats auto created without using bodhi 16:45:44 at GA we will rebuild anything that needs to be 16:45:47 Would make life simpler. 16:45:49 filter out broken deps 16:45:52 sounds good 16:46:01 and make that be the inistall stable tree 16:46:10 anything with broken deps would go to testing 16:46:32 and we would use bodhi going forward from there 16:46:46 * tremble nods at dgilmore 16:49:36 more +1 from me. 16:49:47 I think that sounds like a reall good plan for this 16:49:54 dgilmore, how can we help? 16:51:29 smooge: right now we need to spread the word 16:51:41 ok blogs away 16:51:43 we need to get people to opt in and opt out of EL-6 branches 16:51:54 we should have a wiki page for opting in 16:52:13 and existing EL-5 packages need nobranch files added 16:52:25 if there not going to be branched for EL-6 16:52:43 Do you want a list of packages we're happy to be branched or just contributor yes/nos 16:53:03 tremble: what i want to do is this 16:53:30 go though the existing EL-5 branches on the cvs server 16:53:39 and find ones with nobranch files 16:53:57 so we get a list of packages to branch 16:54:22 we then add the new EL-6 packages from the wiki 16:54:34 making sure that we dont branch anything thats in EL-6 16:54:44 #action smooge wiki updates for EL-6 16:55:16 #action smooge blog about EL-6 when dgilmore gives the go 16:55:17 dgilmore: so i understand, is it: determine packages to be branched, put on wiki, wait X time, branch packages set to be branched ? 16:55:19 I assume the usual Fedora -> EL process applies ? 16:55:48 we will create branches from F-12 16:55:55 unless there is no F-12 branch 16:56:02 then it will be from devel 16:56:28 dgilmore, just to make sure the maintainer can update to something newer if they think it is more stable than what was in F-12 16:57:01 smooge: thats fine 16:57:22 I assume the usual "we support this until EL6 dies" will only apply post GA ? 16:57:24 smooge: we will default to branching from FC-12 since thats what EL-6 was branched from 16:57:37 tremble: right 16:57:47 more flexibility while in beta 16:58:56 and to be honest... we don't support everything til EL-X dies. If it doesn't have a sponsor anymore.. we can't support it 16:59:09 ok another meeting starts in 2 16:59:12 or 1 16:59:17 <3 16:59:26 so I think I will call this and we can talk in #epel as it goes 16:59:35 #endmeeting