21:00:25 <tdawson> #startmeeting EPEL (2020-04-17)
21:00:25 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Apr 17 21:00:25 2020 UTC.
21:00:25 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
21:00:25 <zodbot> The chair is tdawson. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:00:25 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
21:00:25 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2020-04-17)'
21:00:27 <tdawson> #meetingname epel
21:00:27 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
21:00:29 <tdawson> #chair nirik tdawson bstinson Evolution pgreco merlinm carlwgeorge
21:00:29 <zodbot> Current chairs: Evolution bstinson carlwgeorge merlinm nirik pgreco tdawson
21:00:30 <tdawson> #topic aloha
21:00:51 <pgreco> hi, we meet again :)
21:01:08 <tdawson> pgreco: Hi again pgreco
21:01:27 <carlwgeorge> howdy
21:01:33 <tdawson> Hi carlwgeorge
21:02:04 <bstinson> hey all
21:02:38 <tdawson> Hi bstinson
21:03:44 * tdawson waits two more minutes for any others to show up.
21:04:42 <nirik> sorry, here now
21:04:56 <tdawson> Hi nirik
21:05:35 <tdawson> #topic Old Business
21:05:36 <tdawson> #info https://pagure.io/epel/issue/101 Policy for stalled EPEL requests
21:05:38 <tdawson> .epel 101
21:05:39 <zodbot> tdawson: Issue #101: Policy for stalled EPEL requests - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/101
21:06:02 <tdawson> Hopefully we can finish this one this week.
21:06:05 * nirik is +1 to the final/last draft.
21:06:44 <tdawson> Is everyone +1?  Any tweeks needed?
21:07:28 <pgreco> +1
21:07:50 <pgreco> I'm a bit worried that the formal acls are not there yet
21:07:58 <pgreco> but that's just a matter of time, right?
21:08:16 <tdawson> I believe so, yes.
21:08:25 <carlwgeorge> that's a feature not a bug, so more packages can do more things :D
21:08:43 <pgreco> hehe, I can accept that :)
21:09:17 <carlwgeorge> i kid but i remember mattdm saying something similar early on when pkgdb was retired and pagure was adopted
21:09:36 <carlwgeorge> "encourage collaboration between branch maintainers"
21:10:16 <carlwgeorge> tdawson: i still think we should take out the part about admin, it works to request branches with commit now
21:10:59 <tdawson> So, just take that whole line out "Currently that privilege is "admin"" ?
21:11:00 <carlwgeorge> not enough to hold up the vote, so i'm a +0.9
21:11:35 <carlwgeorge> yeah thats my thinking.  the second subbullet about changing in the future is still valid if fedora moves to gitlab.
21:11:54 <tdawson> I guess we are saying "appropriate privileges", we don't have to specifically say which those are.
21:11:59 <carlwgeorge> yup
21:12:22 <tdawson> Everyone else ok with that?
21:12:51 <nirik> sure
21:12:53 <pgreco> I think so, specially because it allows us to enforce the acls in the future, without violating what is written
21:13:07 <carlwgeorge> ^
21:13:12 <tdawson> Yep, let editing (or forgetting to edit)
21:14:21 <tdawson> OK, updated
21:15:08 <tdawson> #info final, final draft accepted: +1 - 4 0-0 -1-0
21:15:12 <carlwgeorge> you've gained my last 0.1 of a vote :D
21:15:18 <tdawson> :)
21:15:48 <tdawson> I'll get that into the docs this week.
21:16:12 <tdawson> #task tdawson will put the new "Stalled EPEL Requests" into the docs.
21:16:30 <tdawson> #info EPEL-6 is End of Life in 2020-11. It will be moved to archives in 2020-12
21:16:32 <tdawson> #info THIS IS NOT A DRILL.
21:16:46 <tdawson> Anything for EPEL6?
21:17:13 * tdawson hopes that is a retorical question.
21:17:22 <tdawson> #topic EPEL-7
21:18:10 <tdawson> I didn't have anything for EPEL7 ... Does anyone else have any EPEL7 things?
21:18:33 <pgreco> not here
21:18:50 <carlwgeorge> silence is acceptance
21:19:04 <tdawson> #topic EPEL-8
21:19:14 <tdawson> https://pagure.io/epel/issue/102
21:19:16 <tdawson> .epel 102
21:19:18 <zodbot> tdawson: Issue #102: Explicitly list EPEL8/RHEL8 channel conflict policy - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/102
21:19:39 <nirik> so just like the other ones we should list the things we build against...
21:19:53 <nirik> but it's less obvious since we have a merged repo used by koji
21:19:53 <tdawson> Correct
21:20:44 <tdawson> There is also the issue of HA, which I keep seeing conflicting reports if it's available to a basic RHEL8 subscription or not.
21:21:05 <nirik> we don't build against it... I am pretty sure.
21:21:15 <nirik> I can gather the exact list of channels.
21:21:20 <bstinson> we are currently shipping HA in CentOS Linux and CentOS Stream (modulo a particular bug in centos-release-stream)
21:21:45 <carlwgeorge> iirc ha is a premium addon, not included in the basic subscription
21:21:51 <nirik> CRB, appstream, baseos and centos Devel
21:22:04 <nirik> ^ those 4
21:22:35 <carlwgeorge> back at rackspace the patching team had to sku servers with ha or resiliantstorage differently so we could report it to red hat and bill accordingly
21:22:42 <tdawson> OK, so if we don't build against it (those 4), then it's not conflicting?  correct?
21:24:03 <pgreco> I don't think it is a build problem
21:24:13 <nirik> yep. thats what we did for 7 anyhow, and I think it's a good method
21:24:58 <pgreco> if HA is available for everybody, we can't release it because it conflicts
21:25:39 <pgreco> if it is not provided for everybody by RHEL, it is not a conflict, just that i bothers for CentOS-HA
21:26:20 <tdawson> Also, if it *is* available to everybody, we should get it into the build area for EPEL8.
21:26:31 <pgreco> yeap
21:26:57 <tdawson> I don't know about RHEL 8.2, but I'm pretty sure, currently, it is *not* available to everyone.
21:27:29 * nirik is pretty sure thats the case also
21:27:51 <bstinson> it is indeed still an addon
21:28:33 <tdawson> OK, well then we'll have to write it without the HA part on it.
21:28:51 <pgreco> so it is fair game, we can recommend the packagers to keep them compatible with CentOS-HA
21:29:02 <tdawson> But, it would also be good if someone could reach out to those that are building packages that conflict with HA, and coordinate things.
21:29:15 <tdawson> Ha ... ya, what you said. :)
21:29:50 <pgreco> ;)
21:30:53 <tdawson> That should be an easy writeup ... since it's fairly close to saying what it was for EPEL7, just different names.
21:31:06 <tdawson> Anything else on this subject?
21:32:08 <tdawson> Anything else for EPEL8 ?
21:32:35 <tdawson> #topic General Issues
21:33:12 <tdawson> Or as some groups say, "Open Floor"
21:33:25 <tdawson> Anything else before we end the meeting?
21:33:37 * nirik has nothing
21:33:46 <pgreco> Nothing here, getting ready to close the day...
21:34:17 <tdawson> Thank you all for being here.
21:34:24 * nirik has a bunch of work to finish, and a new laptop sitting in a box waiting to be installed. ;)
21:34:33 <bstinson> fancy
21:34:37 <bstinson> (the laptop, not the work)
21:34:44 <tdawson> #endmeeting