16:01:49 <smooge> #startmeeting EPEL 16:01:49 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Aug 30 16:01:49 2010 UTC. The chair is smooge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:49 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:01:56 <smooge> #meetingname epel 16:01:56 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel' 16:02:23 <smooge> #ping stahnma tremble nirik smooge Jeff_S 16:02:28 * nirik is somewhat around, but busy catching up on monday morning stuff... 16:02:33 <smooge> same here 16:02:38 * tremble is actually about. 16:02:42 <smooge> #topic who is here? 16:02:47 <stahnma> I'm here for now 16:02:48 <stahnma> :) 16:02:53 * sgallagh loiters 16:02:57 <tremble> See above 16:03:06 <smooge> #topic agenda https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2010-August/msg00162.html 16:03:23 <smooge> #topic RHEL Beta 6 Server/Workstation 16:03:38 <stahnma> this problem is nearly identical to what we had with rhel5 16:03:51 <smooge> you type gaster than me 16:03:59 <smooge> new kehboard 16:04:02 * Jeff_S here but trying to wrap some things up before I can join the meeting... 16:04:37 <stahnma> I don't think we ever really solved it for el5 either.... 16:04:37 * smooge watches Jeff_S wrap up the body and orders new carpet rolls 16:04:44 <Jeff_S> ;) 16:04:56 <smooge> stahnma, actually they created a productivity channel for server 16:04:59 <nirik> in 5 we are using the productivity channel. 16:05:09 <nirik> dgilmore: any news on this in 6 ? 16:05:14 <smooge> but they didn't have it until I want to say 5.0 or 5.1 16:05:36 <dgilmore> nirik: i dont expect news until RHEL 6 is GA 16:05:53 <nirik> so what do we do before then? ;( 16:06:00 <nirik> we do have some broken deps due to this... 16:06:00 <stahnma> cry 16:06:15 <tremble> Just a suggestion, but since we're doing it for a shed load of perl packages what's wrong with just rebuilding the RHEL packages ? 16:06:55 <tremble> Although we would want a very defined process for doing so... 16:07:00 <dgilmore> tremble: its really a bad idea. it takes alot of effort to make sure they stay in sync 16:07:05 <sgallagh> tremble: At that point, why wouldn't we be working with CentOS? 16:07:11 <dgilmore> and we have no way to truely enforce it 16:07:39 <stahnma> sadly, I think I have to go AFK. I'll leave this up to read scrollback. 16:07:40 <dgilmore> tremble: things could be just fine when RHEL6 is ga 16:07:41 <tremble> Fair, although if we can catch it it would be within the remit of a pp 16:07:41 * stahnma & 16:07:53 <dgilmore> but we have no way of knowing what the final product will be 16:07:59 * tremble nods 16:08:14 <dgilmore> sadly as this point we have to play a waiting game 16:08:31 <dgilmore> trying to guess will only lead us to having to clean up messes 16:08:37 * tremble nods 16:08:40 <nirik> yeah, there's a trac bug and a bugzilla bug where maintainers are getting upset. ;( 16:08:40 <tremble> Fair 16:09:12 <dgilmore> nirik: they have to have paitence 16:09:20 <nirik> yeah. 16:09:21 <nirik> ;( 16:09:52 <smooge> ok I would say that we would need to pull the broken deps and then work on a plan B 16:10:45 <sgallagh> smooge: It sounds to me like "Plan B" is close up shop until RHEL 6 is released 16:11:20 <tremble> sgallagh : at least on the packages that have problems. 16:11:33 <sgallagh> yes 16:11:38 <smooge> no that is plan A on packages that have problems 16:11:55 <smooge> plan C is CentOS. 16:12:22 <nirik> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=553142 and https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3916 16:12:46 <tremble> I think z00dax was intending on matching RHEL as closely as possible which would probably include the server/desktop split. 16:12:49 <nirik> I don't think there is much else we can do aside from waiting at this point. 16:13:37 <sgallagh> tremble: You're telling me that CentOS 6 won't have a single combined repo? 16:13:47 <smooge> we don't know 16:14:16 <smooge> z00dax, has said he wanted to be more upstream but it might be that its too ugly for the CentOS crowd 16:14:31 <smooge> so its another waiting game 16:14:54 <smooge> I mean they are currently on 2 DVD's by combining things together in EL5.5 16:16:23 <smooge> Proposal: We have to wait for EL-6 final before we can fix these issues because things are still not stable upstream 16:16:38 <sgallagh> +1 16:16:53 <tremble> +1 16:16:58 <smooge> dgilmore, nirik ? 16:17:23 <nirik> yes, +1 to wait until we get more info... 16:17:29 <dgilmore> +1 16:18:08 <smooge> Approved: : We have to wait for EL-6 final before we can fix these issues because things are still not stable upstream 16:18:12 <smooge> next topic? 16:19:03 <smooge> Ok I sent an email to various people with Scientific Linux and CentOS about what issues adding a cost will do. I forgot to cc dag on it.. so will do so and find out 16:19:34 <smooge> I know what one answer is: "use a reptag :)" 16:20:22 <nirik> I don't have any objections to using a cost. I think it would be easier on those perl packages that we have allowed in that are only in some branches. 16:21:02 <nirik> do we have any kind of list of those? 16:21:24 <tremble> Err I can probably generate one and send it to the list. 16:21:29 <nirik> it might be nice to spam maintainers and tell them about this... so the process is to just keep exactly the same version/spec as rhel has. 16:22:07 <tremble> Which would probably be something we specifically state that PPs can do after X days? 16:23:39 <nirik> PPs? 16:23:48 <tremble> ProvenPackagers 16:23:53 * smooge votes for repotags... <crickets> <sharpening of axes in the background> oh never mind 16:24:13 <nirik> tremble: sure... if we have a list I could work on it, or other folks... 16:24:20 <nirik> but hopefully maintainers would be responsive. 16:24:47 * dgilmore gets ready to visit smooge 16:25:11 <tremble> nirik: indeed but I know I occasionally drop off the grid and I'm one of the people who'd need to stay on top of it... 16:25:46 <nirik> yeah, I wish we had some proactive way to note when updates come along... 16:26:27 <tremble> There's a repo in 5 that updates a couple of days early... 16:26:44 <tremble> (Through RHN) 16:27:19 <nirik> might be cool (although I have no idea how much work) to run repodiff and mail the list anytime the builders update. 16:28:09 <tremble> nirik I was thinking of just running the script I was using to generate the comparisions. 16:28:30 <nirik> and see if any are out of sync from our repo? 16:28:37 * tremble nods 16:29:24 <nirik> that would be cool. ;) 16:30:45 <tremble> Needs a fair bit of polishing, but shouldn't be impossible... Could *possibly* get it to fire off BZ bugs but I'll make no guarantees on that on. 16:30:58 <nirik> so, everyone is ok with cost adding? what value? 16:31:11 <smooge> it has to be over 1000 16:31:18 <tremble> What's the default cost? 1000? 16:32:38 <nirik> 1000 is default I think. 16:32:55 <nirik> I guess we should wait to hear back from all the other repos... really all we care is that we are higher than rhel... 16:33:03 <nirik> but it would be good to play nice with others. 16:33:08 * tremble nods 16:33:50 <tremble> Would say wants to be at least 1100 to allow people to put their own scores above and below easily 16:33:54 <smooge> well my main worry would be if CentOS had a default of 1100 or something and we set to 1005 16:34:13 <smooge> I think 1100 would be good 16:35:14 <smooge> Proposal: EPEL is looking to set a yum.conf cost to 1100 for repositories that support it. [Tabled til next meeting for time for feedback] 16:35:30 <tremble> +1 16:35:41 <nirik> sounds reasonable. 16:36:33 <smooge> ok I think its time for the next topic? 16:36:47 <smooge> #topic Fedora Electronics Lab 16:37:04 <smooge> I know there is some email on this.. not sure what was the resolution about it 16:37:50 <smooge> anyone? 16:38:02 <nirik> I have no idea what this topic is. ;) What was the email about? 16:38:05 * smooge has a horrible sneez fit going on 16:38:45 <nirik> Oh, right, someone wanting to install electronics lab software and having some issues... 16:38:59 <nirik> not sure what all we can do here. I think they did get help on the list. 16:39:02 <smooge> https://www.redhat.com/archives/epel-devel-list/2010-August/msg00121.html 16:39:24 <smooge> it looks like either non-closed deps or missing groups in comps 16:40:03 <smooge> there was something last month also 16:40:21 <smooge> since it had come up twice I wanted to make sure it was covered. 16:40:29 <nirik> I don't think everything is available in EPEL that is in fedora... 16:40:39 <nirik> some things just can't work with el5... 16:40:41 <smooge> ugh I think I just sneezed out my vrains 16:40:55 <smooge> #chair nirik 16:40:55 <zodbot> Current chairs: nirik smooge 16:41:06 <smooge> in case those were nmy brrains 16:41:07 <nirik> nasty. 16:42:26 <smooge> ok I see Chitlesh had some questions about EL-6 things.. I probably answered too nruskly 16:42:34 <smooge> bruskly that is 16:43:05 <smooge> ok since none of us know about it.. I will ask if he needs this on next weeks meeting 16:43:12 <nirik> sounds good. 16:43:25 * nirik goes to get another cup of coffee... back in a few. 16:44:56 <smooge> #topic How do we deal with Emerging Technologies versus Stable tools? 16:45:16 <smooge> Ok this is meant again as a stimulation of debate which I will be emailing the list in a short while. 16:46:46 <smooge> I think the basis of EPEL has changed somewhat from its early days. Early on we were aiming for a stable set of technologies that EL didn't ship that people wanted. 16:47:36 <smooge> However it seems to me that our most passionate customers and packagers are more about pushing emerging technologies into EL stream 16:47:48 <smooge> things that may not have clean upgrade cycles etc 16:48:23 <nirik> examples being? 16:48:32 <smooge> mediawiki is near and dear to my heart. 16:48:42 <smooge> most of the web technologies fall into this 16:49:13 <smooge> couchdb.. git (less so). cobbler all have had incompatible upgrades at times 16:49:14 <nirik> right, so we have had this discussion before. ;) 16:49:36 <nirik> I suspect a lot of the pressure will ease with rhel6. 16:49:44 <nirik> since it will have new versions again. 16:49:50 <smooge> well until 8 months after EL6 16:49:59 <nirik> yeah, of course. 16:50:46 <nirik> under our currently setup, the solution would be newer packages for those new versions... mediawiki99 or whatever. 16:50:57 <smooge> I guess I am bringing up old stuff again.. sorry it seemed so new when I first thought of it as "Emerging Technologies for Enterprise Linux" versus "EPEL" 16:51:44 <nirik> well, we did talk about another, more volitile repo... 16:51:49 <nirik> but never really went anywhere. 16:52:35 <smooge> one sec I have a cat trying to get into the house.. and I don't have a cat 16:53:09 <smooge> ok I guess it wanted a petting or something 16:53:58 <smooge> ok since I am rehashing old stuff.. next topic 16:53:59 <nirik> ...now you have a cat. ;) 16:54:16 <smooge> and call in cleaning gurus to fix our wiki. 16:54:33 <smooge> oh that didnt go well 16:54:42 <nirik> sure, I just don't know who would be such a cleaning crew. ;) 16:54:53 <nirik> I think lots of our wiki could be revamped. ;( 16:54:54 <smooge> I summon rbergerso 16:55:27 <smooge> actually I think the Fedora wiki should be canned but I say that out of a deep love and respect for mediawiki 16:55:57 * smooge thinks he has the package to a point where it passes rpmlint 16:57:04 <smooge> anyway.. I figure we should call in a guru who can help us clean out the ruffage and figure out what we want it to be. 16:57:16 <nirik> thats a great idea if we can get one to help us. ;) 16:57:18 <smooge> who is going to be at Fudcon NA 16:57:59 <nirik> I am hoping to... not sure on details at this point. 16:58:33 * tremble was contemplating going to Fudcon Zurich... 16:59:30 <smooge> I am hoping for 2011 Fudcon EU.. 17:00:14 <dgilmore> smooge: im not planning on being at FUDCon NA 17:00:23 <smooge> FudCon Lichtenstein 17:00:39 <smooge> oh dgilmore I didn't know that 17:00:52 <nirik> dgilmore: bummer. ;( 17:01:44 <nirik> dgilmore: scheduling conflict? 17:01:48 * dgilmore is planning to be at LCA 17:02:03 <dgilmore> if lca falls though ill be at FUDCon 17:02:14 <smooge> LCA? 17:02:15 <dgilmore> but if all works out ill be in Australia 17:02:21 <dgilmore> Linux.conf.au 17:02:28 <smooge> oooooooooh 17:02:49 <nirik> ah, ok. 17:02:51 <smooge> that would be nice to go to also. maybe I should look at that for 2012 17:03:33 <smooge> ok well I was thinking we have an EPEL FAD during the con and clean up stuff there. 17:04:16 <nirik> we talked about doing a FAD sometime... 17:05:34 <nirik> perhaps we could put one together for later this year somewhere... 17:06:43 <smooge> yeah.. I am trying to remember when the fiscal year begins/ends to see what would work better. I think the fiscal year is in March so this year makes sense still 17:08:36 <smooge> ok will put that at the next meeting. 17:08:51 <smooge> going to close in 30.. 17:09:16 <nirik> yeah. since you and I are west, somewhere out here might make sense... 17:10:13 <smooge> ok will put down for FAD-ABQ 17:10:23 <smooge> #closemeeting 17:10:31 <smooge> #endmeeting ?