16:00:08 #startmeeting EPEL (2012-06-15) 16:00:08 Meeting started Fri Jun 15 16:00:08 2012 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:08 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:08 #meetingname epel 16:00:08 The meeting name has been set to 'epel' 16:00:08 #topic init process/agenda 16:00:08 #chair smooge tremble dgilmore 16:00:08 EPEL meeting ping abadger1999 rsc stahnma tremble dgilmore smooge nb maxamillion tremble Jeff_S HackMan 16:00:08 Current chairs: dgilmore nirik smooge tremble 16:00:12 here 16:00:19 who all is around for a epel meeting? :) 16:00:59 . 16:01:10 I'd like to be a table since we have four chairs already 16:02:08 ha 16:02:19 * abadger1999 here 16:03:12 who all has topics? I assume we will poke more at the overlap issue as we always do. ;) 16:03:31 nothing else here... 16:03:45 #info broken deps script for epel6 that needs to be cleaned up: http://fedorapeople.org/~kevin/epel-deps/spam-o-matic-el6 16:04:34 #topic Overlapping with RHEL (part 10) 16:04:51 so, where were we on this? abadger1999 sent a proposal to the list... 16:05:21 there was a bunch of discussion. 16:05:56 much of it was from what is a 'basic subscription. 16:06:52 I think people on list disputed what went into "Basic Subscription", whether there's additional cost involved with addons, and whether we could/should split on Addons vs channels instead of basic subscription. 16:06:59 and some was things that seemed to go much more high level and just confused me. ;) 16:07:05 yeah 16:07:57 perhaps we could try and answer those questions via talking with Red Hat support folks. 16:08:17 I think we keep it simple and say we have /en/os and we added two extra channels. If people have a problem iwth that then EPEL is not the project for them. 16:09:37 * nirik re-reads thread 16:11:12 smooge: I agree that would be easiest. 16:12:29 so, I think the 'base subscription' thing is just not going to help us any... perhaps we should drop trying to use that. 16:12:50 yeah. It looks like it depends on when, who and what was bought. 16:13:28 16:14:15 dgilmore: any more luck finding channel owners? or thats all unknown still? 16:14:18 (is this still loosely about the puppet thing?) 16:14:25 rbergeron: somewhat. 16:14:27 and centos includes more than "/en/os and we added two extra channels."? 16:14:30 nirik: still unknown 16:14:36 * rbergeron is happy to help run people down 16:14:37 or chase down 16:14:44 i suppose running down sounds pretty bad :) 16:14:44 rbergeron: it's about what epel will allow in it's repo. 16:14:51 nirik: yeah, i got that part :) 16:14:52 * Jeff_S pictures rbergeron in her car running down channel owners 16:15:14 the problem is we can't just say "nothing thats in RHEL' 16:15:24 because there are eleventy gillion channels. 16:15:45 Jeff_S, well what is in CentOS these days not counting Extras and such 16:16:25 smooge: not counting extras, correct. I think it's important to consider centos users as well. IMO more important than RHEL (yes, I said that!) 16:16:25 is there a list of specific owners you're looking for or just "general list, whateve ryou can find" 16:17:40 rbergeron: one of the thoughts was that we do 'nothing in base os/optional/lb/ha and if a channel owner of another channel requested it, we could add their channel packages to the list of 'don't ship these'' 16:18:07 but for that to work channel owners would need to communicate with us and say "please don't ship channel-foobar packages in epel' 16:18:36 okay 16:18:51 dgilmore: is your list at 0 or started? 16:19:49 this would mean channel owners could be disruptive if they started shipping a bunch of stuff epel users use and then asked us to stop shipping them, but I would hope they would be reasonable. 16:20:33 rbergeron: ive been talking to stickster_afk 16:20:46 nirik: I don't think we could have a policy that puts channel owners in charge of what we ship. But we surely should consider their requests when reasonable 16:21:12 Jeff_S: sure. I guess I was thinking case by case... 16:21:18 +1 16:21:20 I don't think anyone wants to cause problems for others... 16:21:26 nirik: maybe just some people ;) 16:21:41 at least I hope we can minimize problems caused by epel for both rhel and other distros. 16:22:12 Jeff_S, my question was what is in Centos Core for 6 and how does it overlap with RHEL .. eg is it built out of just /en/os or does it pull in other channels. 16:22:49 so, how about this: we rephrase the proposed thing to drop mentions of 'base subscription' and ask on list if anyone has better proposals if they don't like that one. 16:22:59 smooge: it's built out of everything that's shared publicly on ftp.redhat AFAIK. let me see if I can get a better definition 16:23:14 Jeff_S: that would include a number of channels then... 16:23:19 indeed 16:23:38 and things like puppet, mongodb, etc that are shipped by epel too. ;) 16:23:46 do we have numbers on what part of our user and/or developer base are using centos vs. rhel? 16:23:47 I'd be interested in knowing if there's any thought about Addons vs other channels inside of RH. Are addons more stable/won't conflict with each other/have other characteristics that other channels don't? 16:23:50 * Jeff_S thinks not 16:23:51 and stuff that conflicts within those channels :) 16:23:55 * nirik again wonders why there's been no complaints over the last year if overlaps are so common. 16:24:22 abadger1999: I know some of the add ons ship the same packages... so they do overlap 16:24:29 Jeff_S, no we don't. Unless CentOS starts shipping smolt or something :) 16:24:41 smooge: god(s) help us 16:24:47 -- did we figure out if those are presently all the same versions, though? 16:25:09 http://vault.centos.org/6.2/os/Source/SPackages/ 16:25:11 abadger1999: the one case I saw they were. 16:25:19 nirik: no mongo there for example 16:25:22 but not sure if that was deliberate or not. 16:25:33 16:25:42 Jeff_S: yeah, so I wonder if it's not just base + optional 16:25:52 nirik: I'll verify that and post to the list 16:25:59 cool. that would be great 16:26:50 abadger1999: would you be willing to try another proposal post? or would you like me to try? 16:26:59 rpm --changelog might tell us. 16:27:16 abadger1999: hmm? 16:27:35 (at leaset, if those packages in different addons had separate maintainers or not.) 16:28:30 nirik: You can if you like. 16:28:38 :) 16:28:39 sure, can try. 16:28:46 I'd be okay with smooge's proposal. 16:29:10 I'd be okay trying to s/Basic Subscription/Addons/ 16:29:40 and see if people point out that Addons won't work either :-) 16:30:46 well there are too many addons now.. 16:30:48 yeah, it seemed it was unclear who got addons. 16:30:57 and the addons confict with each other 16:31:15 There's 6 addons listed on that page. 16:32:15 abadger1999: which page? 16:32:22 http://www.redhat.com/products/enterprise-linux-add-ons/ 16:32:32 thanks 16:32:42 * abadger1999 not counting the extended lifecycle ones 16:34:19 all the marketing hurts my eyes 16:34:56 ok, hows this: 16:34:58 Jeff_S: it's sort of like an eclipse, you're not supposed to look directly at it. 16:35:02 lol 16:35:02 "EPEL6 will not normally ship packages that are shipped already in the 16:35:03 following RHEL channels: os, optional, lb, and ha. Any overlapping 16:35:03 packages must be to provide binary packages on arches not provided by 16:35:03 RHEL ( following: 16:35:04 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#Limited_Arch_Packages ). 16:35:06 Additional channels may be added to the above list on a case by case 16:35:08 basis. " 16:35:58 seems like a reasonable start to me 16:36:01 I'm not in love with it because there's no expectation of what may or may not be added in that. 16:36:16 yeah, thats true. 16:36:26 But I'd be okay with it since it basically starts us with what we want to do now. 16:36:55 we could drop the last sentence, and just continue to discuss adding critera. 16:38:11 or change it to "additional channels could be added based on a critera we have yet to decide." :) 16:38:53 +1 to the second wording. 16:39:16 at least then people know it's still being discussed and they could provide input on the method. ;) 16:41:19 ok, I can send that out for more comment. 16:41:25 anything else on this? 16:42:00 not from me. 16:42:14 #topic Open Floor 16:42:20 anything for open floor? 16:42:22 I just want to get done with this and move back to making packages versus argueing over the color and floorsize of my bikeshed 16:42:33 I will have mediawiki119 out this weekend I hope 16:42:45 I will also be end of lifing all mediawiki's before then 16:43:02 smooge: cool. ;) 16:43:33 oh, another FYI, I will be not here for the next two meetings... someone else could run them, or we could just skip them. Either way is fine with me. ;) 16:44:19 I can run them 16:44:43 smooge: cool. 16:44:43 if we miss one we may never start again :) 16:44:56 yeah, we are bad about that. ;) 16:45:03 ok, if nothing else will close out the meeting in a minute. 16:45:44 thanks for coming everyone 16:45:47 #endmeeting