20:00:26 #startmeeting EPEL (2021-10-13) 20:00:26 Meeting started Wed Oct 13 20:00:26 2021 UTC. 20:00:26 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 20:00:26 The chair is tdawson. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 20:00:26 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 20:00:26 The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2021-10-13)' 20:00:26 #meetingname epel 20:00:26 The meeting name has been set to 'epel' 20:00:26 #chair nirik tdawson bstinson pgreco carlwgeorge michel dcavalca 20:00:26 #topic aloha 20:00:26 Current chairs: bstinson carlwgeorge dcavalca michel nirik pgreco tdawson 20:00:44 .hi 20:00:44 pgreco: pgreco 'Pablo Sebastian Greco' 20:00:55 Hi pgreco 20:01:23 .hi 20:01:24 carlwgeorge: carlwgeorge 'Carl George' 20:01:32 Hi carlwgeorge 20:01:37 hello 20:01:49 ... has now made 3 meetings? 20:01:57 Hi smooge 20:02:08 And I've been in two of them. :) 20:02:49 hello! 20:03:10 Hi themayor 20:03:51 themayor: I don't think I've seen you here before. Are you new, or someone with a different alias? 20:04:44 new. well, ive not been here in a few years ;) 20:05:04 Cool. Well, welcome back. 20:05:25 I'm AlmaLinux's community manager. Former Full-Time Fedoran 20:05:31 nirik said he was going to be a little late. 20:05:39 * carlwgeorge waves at themayor 20:05:53 * themayor waves back to everyone 20:06:00 themayor: very nice. Did you need to bring anything in particular up? 20:06:54 no, just getting back into the swing of things as time now allows 20:07:00 waves to themayor 20:07:04 Nice 20:07:05 hey smooge 20:07:07 #topic Old Business 20:07:18 they worked in Fedora a long time ago also 20:08:01 Since nirik isn't here yet, I'll wait a bit on -next. I do have an old old business that just came up ... Fails To Install 20:08:23 Duh duh dunnnn 20:08:49 I've been revamping my old Will-It-Install script, and it's working pretty good. - https://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/epel/willit/status-overall.html 20:09:44 cool 20:09:52 It's still got some bugs ... it barfed on too many open files halfway through epel8 ... but it's getting there. 20:10:26 As much as I like Fedora's version ... there isn't anywhere someone can just look at everything. 20:11:38 The "Build" section is for a future "Will It Build" ... it's for epel9-next and epel9. It will check if the packages that are used to build will be available in the epel9 buildroot. 20:12:23 I don't really have anything to test on yet, so that part isn't built. 20:13:16 Anyway, progress is being made. Once it get's stable and can do a whole run, I'll get the interface a bit more clean, and then we can think about bugzillas and things like that. 20:13:25 triple cool 20:13:57 That's about all I have for that, although I am/was concerned about 380 pages in epel8-testing 20:14:17 Looks like there are alot of packages in both epel8 and epel8-test ... and even epel8-testing-pending 20:15:22 But ... I'll file some releng tickets to clean those up. 20:15:38 weird 20:16:08 Well, looking at it, the vast majority of them are from when I first imported kde, and I think bodhi barfed a bit, cuz they were all one update. 20:16:18 yeah it did 20:16:34 it barfed a bit on a lot of the early packages so they may have been in some sort of trapped state 20:16:46 yep. 20:17:22 Once I've got things stable, or maybe even before, I'll do some quick koji tagged stuff and get a good list for releng to cleanup. 20:17:31 Anyway, moving on. 20:18:13 pgreco: Do you have any progress to report on the macros you were working on? 20:18:34 tdawson: crazy week, slow progress 20:18:50 the code is done, it is mostly testing 20:19:15 hoping $dayjob allows me to do it for next week 20:19:37 Sounds good. I'll check in next week. Did you need any help with it? 20:20:17 if you know of a package that uses the macros in fedora, send it my way 20:20:22 but no more than that ;) 20:20:32 * nirik arrives late 20:20:35 OK, will do 20:20:46 Hi nirik 20:21:04 And moving on. 20:21:19 nirik carlwgeorge How is epel9-next coming along ? 20:21:56 got my epel-release pr merged for epel9-next, but while building it discovered a bad blocker 20:22:04 it happened to pick an s390x builder for the noarch build, which failed to initialize the mock root because c9s packages require z14+ 20:22:17 fedora infra builders are on something older and have an open ticket to migrate to z15 20:22:34 * nirik nods sadly 20:22:39 Ouch 20:23:10 last we heard that is supposed to happen by the end of this month, but i'm skeptical 20:23:30 So, what are we on right now? z13? 20:23:37 i'll be raising the issue up to management to hopefully get it prioritized 20:23:47 we = fedora infrastructure 20:23:48 tdawson: yes 20:23:57 and we are supposed to move to z15 20:24:14 z14 is right out! 20:25:10 So, if we were to move forward without s390x entirely ... any non-noarch would have to be rebuilt after we get s390x setup ... correct? 20:25:24 everything archfull would need rebuilding again yeah. 20:25:36 that sounds like a world of hurt 20:25:42 Ya 20:26:03 It would let us know what builds and what doesn't ... but beyond that ... ya ... a bunch of hurt. 20:26:52 Is epel-release and epel-macros no-arch ? 20:27:01 My mind is just wondering what we can do while we wait. 20:27:33 yes, both noarch 20:28:06 we can certainly start setting up epel-rpm-macros like i did for epel-release, although i'm not sure what macros need to get overridden already 20:28:41 I think at this point, the main reason we need epel-rpm-macros is to pull in all the other macros. 20:29:09 ah, so it's more about the other macros it requires, not it's overrides initially 20:29:20 although we could also do that by adding them to the koji package list for the buildroot or srpm buildroot 20:29:41 .hi 20:29:42 dcavalca: dcavalca 'Davide Cavalca' 20:29:49 Hi dcavalca 20:30:08 * carlwgeorge is in favor of nirik's alternate suggestion 20:30:30 hopefully we will hear back from the mainframe folks soon and have at least a eta... we could decide what to do when we know more. 20:30:44 well, on second thought, it's fairly certain we'll need to do overrides at some point, so we might as well have epel-rpm-macros 20:31:17 Let's at least work on it, get it branched. 20:32:36 just requested the branch, i'll set it up the same way, merged epel8 commits and then a pull request for discussion 20:32:50 +1 20:32:50 carlwgeorge Sounds good, thanks 20:33:30 I'm a bit bummed about the overall news (s390x) but at least there will be something to work on while we wait. 20:33:52 hopefully it won't be too long... 20:33:58 fingers crossed 20:34:02 Yep 20:34:12 Anything else for epel9-next ? 20:34:13 so currently the s390x is used by a couple thousand systems. 20:34:23 that many? 20:34:24 most of them CI in amazon 20:34:47 Ha ! So... you mean most of them are emulators? 20:35:11 Or .... whatever the term is for "not real s390x machines" 20:35:26 sorry couple hundred 20:35:33 nothing else from me 20:35:36 s390x does have one nice thing for us... it's the last big endian arch left we have, so it does show up coding mistakes. 20:35:46 :) 20:35:54 OK, moving on. 20:36:16 dcavalca: Do you have any update on the openssl3 stuff? 20:36:45 tdawson: no update yet 20:36:53 OK. 20:37:16 Do you want me to keep bringing it up in the Old Business? Or just let it be until you have an update? 20:37:46 tdawson: I'll bring it up when I have something (probably next month, given how other things are going at the moment) 20:37:59 thanks 20:38:06 dcavalca: OK, I'll put it on the back burner for now. 20:38:28 I think that's all the Old Business we have ... moving on ... 20:38:36 #topic EPEL-7 20:38:41 I learned some new things about EPEL7 growth 20:38:52 and also why EPEL6 is still big 20:38:59 * nirik got a email asking about koji there today. ;( still need to try and move that forward. 20:39:16 asking about koji ? 20:39:22 on epel6 20:39:32 ? 20:39:32 Did koji stop working on epel7 ? Or is it epel6 ? 20:39:41 koji is python3 now. I cant update epel7 koji without moving it to python3, or it will not work anymore 20:39:50 but I need some deps 20:39:52 aaaaaah 20:40:15 * nirik looks for the bug 20:40:41 as a general statement i'm in favor of epel7 packages switching to python3, and can even help some with adding dependencies 20:40:49 smooge: While he looks that up, why does epel6 still have such big numbers? 20:40:58 186210 20:41:08 amazon aws is 95% of all EPEL6 usage 20:41:19 EUS? 20:41:22 I am guessing Amazon-1 20:41:29 yeah i was gonna say al1 20:41:32 I am guessing Amazon Linux1 20:41:45 it's rhel6 based (sorta) and i believe their docs say to use epel6 20:42:03 * nirik can try and work on it again soon. Too many things to do. ;( 20:42:23 and... that hockey stick growth of EPEL-7 ? https://data-analysis.fedoraproject.org/csv-reports/images/epel-all.png That is AL2 20:42:26 fwiw, al1 went eol on 2020-12-31 20:42:33 is that the one with rhel6 + python 2.6 instead of normal python2? 20:42:34 nirik If you need any of the deps worked, on, let us know. 20:43:04 nirik: i think it's 2.7, but yes 20:43:36 well, there was one AL version where they replaced the rhel python2 version. I think it was that one. It caused some real problems with ansible as I recall. 20:44:11 I wonder if AL3 is going to be based off RHEL8 or 9 20:44:49 anyhow... doesn't matter 20:44:58 Nope, moving on. 20:45:05 #topic EPEL-8 20:46:27 I take it nothing for EPEL 8? 20:46:50 not from me 20:46:53 #topic EPEL-Packaging-SIG 20:47:36 dcavalca: Anything needed by the SIG? Hmm ... I should put the openssl3 stuff in here I think. 20:48:26 tdawson: we've started looking at what it'd take to get qemu packaged in epel9 when that's ready, and found a missing dependency: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2004762 20:49:12 the only other thing I had is iptables-legacy, which I think I mentioned in the previous meeting 20:49:23 that we might end up packaging in epel9 depending on how things go 20:49:49 dcavalca: Yep, I remember that. Need any help with it, or any of the others? 20:50:09 tdawson: I think https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2004762 could use a push 20:50:25 for iptables, we'll see when we get to it 20:51:07 OK, I'll see if I can give things a nudge here or there. 20:51:39 I'm going to move on, so we have some open table time. 20:51:58 thanks tdawson 20:52:00 #topic General Issues / Open Floor 20:53:07 I have one thing I wanted to bring up. If I read things correct, we (EPEL) are currently a SIG. I was wondering how people feel of making us a "working group" 20:53:36 is there actually a difference? I thought they were the same thing tbh 20:53:37 I don't think it will make any real difference, but it will make our Documentation less confusing. 20:54:17 we can't really be a working group unless EPEL is a Fedora Edition. ;) 20:54:25 working groups are for editions... 20:54:34 Ah ... ok. 20:54:52 but I guess... we could ask the council. Perhaps we should be a edition... 20:54:52 I for one see us as a CentOS Edition 20:54:54 is this something we should ask the council about for guidance? 20:55:31 i like the idea of becoming a working group 20:55:33 basically what nirik says is their feedback in the past 20:56:04 Working Groups are for an Edition. An Edition is a bootable version of Fedora's Linux Operating System 20:56:48 Maybe Working Group isn't the correct thing that we want. But we seem much more than a SIG. 20:57:05 editions are the major, curated things that fedora linux produces... not just a collection of parts, but a workstation or a server 20:57:19 I think we were at one point a subproject... 20:57:34 we originally were a sub-project back in 2009 20:57:54 I don't think it matters too much... although I think we should get more help/notice/people since so many more people use epel than fedora. ;) 20:58:07 that was when we had yearly elections and had to do weekly reports to the council 20:58:28 Oh ... if it means going back to that ... I'm ok staying a SIG. 20:58:44 I like how people can come and go as their lives change. 20:59:29 I don't think those things exist anymore.. it was an earlier time.. :) 20:59:35 Ah, ok 21:00:01 I'll look into this a bit more ... anything else before we end? 21:00:03 if we become an equivalent to an edition it does come with more 'reporting' and such 21:00:47 Is that what we want? 21:01:04 * nirik doesn't, but if you all want that, go for it. 21:01:44 I don't really either. 21:02:19 OK, sounds like I'll just be quiet, and make sure the Docs are clear on the EPEL SIG vs the EPEL Packagers SIG 21:02:49 I think we are at the place the overall group wants to be. Moving to a sub-project or a edition etc doesn't buy much 21:03:02 Yep 21:03:17 tdawson: so https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/218 is the thread that I was trying to remember on this subject 21:03:24 Well, our time is up. Thank you all for coming and for the good discussion. 21:03:35 to me it sounds like something we could probably discuss with council if we felt the current structure didn't fit us well 21:03:42 but I don't really feel strongly either way 21:04:24 I like our current model ... just not the SGI name, but I don't feel that strongly about it. So ... I'm good. 21:04:39 Talk to ya'll next week. Thank you for all you each do. 21:04:50 until next week, see ya! 21:05:00 #endmeeting