21:00:53 <carlwgeorge> #startmeeting EPEL (2022-03-02)
21:00:53 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Mar  2 21:00:53 2022 UTC.
21:00:53 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
21:00:53 <zodbot> The chair is carlwgeorge. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
21:00:53 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
21:00:53 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2022-03-02)'
21:01:00 <carlwgeorge> #meetingname epel
21:01:00 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
21:01:08 <salimma> .hi
21:01:09 <zodbot> salimma: salimma 'Michel Alexandre Salim' <michel@michel-slm.name>
21:01:10 <rsc> .hello robert
21:01:12 <zodbot> rsc: robert 'Robert Scheck' <redhat@linuxnetz.de>
21:01:25 <dcavalca> .hi
21:01:26 <zodbot> dcavalca: dcavalca 'Davide Cavalca' <dcavalca@fb.com>
21:01:34 <yselkowitz[m]> .hello yselkowitz
21:01:35 <zodbot> yselkowitz[m]: yselkowitz 'Yaakov Selkowitz' <yselkowi@redhat.com>
21:02:18 <nirik> morning
21:02:31 <carlwgeorge> #chair carlwgeorge dcavalca nirik salimma
21:02:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge dcavalca nirik salimma
21:02:58 <Eighth_Doctor> .hello ngompa
21:02:59 <zodbot> Eighth_Doctor: ngompa 'Neal Gompa' <ngompa13@gmail.com>
21:03:32 <carlwgeorge> #chair Eighth_Doctor
21:03:32 <zodbot> Current chairs: Eighth_Doctor carlwgeorge dcavalca nirik salimma
21:03:43 <carlwgeorge> #topic aloha
21:03:57 <salimma> hello again, people I saw at office hour :)
21:04:00 <dherrera> .hi
21:04:01 <zodbot> dherrera: dherrera 'None' <dherrera@redhat.com>
21:04:10 <salimma> carlwgeorge++ for running that
21:04:10 <zodbot> salimma: Karma for carlwgeorge changed to 2 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
21:04:16 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> hello
21:04:28 <rcallicotte> .hi
21:04:29 <zodbot> rcallicotte: rcallicotte 'Robby Callicotte' <rcallicotte@mailbox.org>
21:04:38 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> thanks for running this carlwgeorge. i misrememebered and thought I was on the hook
21:05:04 * nirik couldn't make it this time, hopefully next one. ;)
21:05:42 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> ok next item I think
21:05:48 <carlwgeorge> well i may lean on you for help, i've never done this before :D
21:05:52 <carlwgeorge> #topic EPEL Issues
21:06:01 <carlwgeorge> https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
21:06:29 <carlwgeorge> #link https://pagure.io/epel/issue/159
21:06:44 <carlwgeorge> hmm, that's not the command...is it `#info`?
21:06:50 <carlwgeorge> #info https://pagure.io/epel/issue/159
21:07:05 <salimma> carlwgeorge: we agreed to revisit 159 in a few weeks, I think (March 23?)
21:07:25 <salimma> but quick update, no new EPEL8 CVEs at priority high+, and we closed 33 EPEL7 CVEs
21:07:45 <salimma> most of it are when we retire libvncserver, but seems like there's something else too
21:07:48 <carlwgeorge> ah i see the last comment
21:08:13 <carlwgeorge> related, i submitted a syncthing update to fix it's cve https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-17ae719cb2
21:08:38 <salimma> syncthing gone, chromium picked up one more CVE, nodejs gone (actually that's 19, libvncserver only has 14)
21:08:41 <carlwgeorge> it's a substantial update from 1.8.0 to 1.18.6, so i disabled auto-push to give people adequate time to test
21:08:58 <salimma> oh, libvncserver has 20-something but that's all bugs, not just hi-pri CVEs
21:10:17 <carlwgeorge> thanks for the recap, we'll revisit in 3 weeks
21:10:24 <carlwgeorge> #topic Old Business
21:11:52 <carlwgeorge> anyone have anything before we move on?
21:12:29 <salimma> I think pgreco has his new macros but he's not here?
21:12:36 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> yes
21:12:53 <carlwgeorge> yeah he dropped a message in #epel saying he wouldn't make it
21:13:17 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> [2022-03-02-15:51] <pgreco> Ebeneezer_Smooge: dealing with a few things at work, might not make it to the meeting
21:13:17 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> [2022-03-02-15:51] <pgreco> Eighth_Doctor: please ack the latest version of the systemd macros if you can, so we can merge them
21:13:30 * rcallicotte is firefighting again... might have to bail
21:13:42 <Eighth_Doctor> it's done
21:13:49 <Eighth_Doctor> EPEL7: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b2a2bc29b6
21:13:58 <Eighth_Doctor> EPEL8: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-b3311854ed
21:13:58 <carlwgeorge> lovely
21:14:04 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> ok cool
21:14:36 <carlwgeorge> anything else for old business before moving to epel7
21:15:22 <carlwgeorge> #topic EPEL-7
21:17:52 <carlwgeorge> regular reminder that epel7 will be retired on 2024-06-30 in line with the end of the rhel8 maintenance 2 phase
21:18:43 <salimma> s/RHEL8/RHEL7?
21:18:59 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> yep
21:19:01 <carlwgeorge> yes, sorry for the typo, that was rhel7 maintenance 2 phase
21:19:06 <carlwgeorge> that's 2 years, 3 months, and 29 days from now
21:20:16 <carlwgeorge> #topic EPEL-8
21:20:31 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> hello
21:20:34 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I have stuff
21:20:38 <carlwgeorge> shoot
21:21:02 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I sent an email to the list right before the meeting with the list of initial packages that were put into EPEL-8 which need looking at
21:21:32 <salimma> #info smooge sent https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/VU6EW2RMLYVZ5G53I76GGA5KE4SA6CAW/
21:21:32 <yselkowitz[m]> Ebeneezer_Smooge: message looks unfinished though
21:22:44 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> that is weird
21:22:50 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I surely had a sentence there
21:24:01 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> geez.. ok what I was going to say is that we need to work out what packages we want to have epel-sig co-maintaining and what ones can probably be removed for lack of need.
21:24:19 <carlwgeorge> i expect that the first ones under scrutiny for retirement are the ones that haven't been updated since you added them, right?
21:24:34 <salimma> do we want fedpkg to be available, or have we decided that's a lost cause?
21:24:57 <salimma> I think having fedpkg (beyond fedkg-minimal) available is a 'nice to have' but not hi pri, but... having centpkg available would be nice
21:25:08 <carlwgeorge> fedpkg maintainers don't see to care about epel, i haven't heard anything about work towards getting it into epel9
21:25:13 <nirik> perhaps we should give the maintainers of the other branches time to look and see if they want to pick up the epel branch too?
21:25:25 <yselkowitz[m]> rpkg is pretty important though
21:25:27 <orionp> Having fedpkg in epel8 is pretty critical to my workflow.
21:26:10 <carlwgeorge> looks like the fepkg maintainers have kept it updated in epel8, but the problem is it's dependencies
21:26:15 <salimma> so yeah, I'm OK with adding epel-packagers-sig to all these packages
21:26:41 <salimma> if they haven't been updated all this time, can we just ask releng to do it now, or do we need to bug individual maintainers?
21:26:46 <salimma> or maybe smooge can do it already, given he branched them :)
21:27:10 <orionp> Do they need updating?
21:27:19 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> nirik, how do I get the other maintainers attention. There was a request to remove a couple of these like python-nose
21:27:42 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I branched them using super-user-powers I dont have anymore
21:28:06 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I gold-kryptonited myself
21:28:07 <nirik> well, you could mail packagename-maintainers@ or post to devel perhaps would get more?
21:28:08 <carlwgeorge> nose should be droppable, it's dead upstream and package that br it can switch to pytest or disable tests
21:28:58 <carlwgeorge> we can talk about this a bit but i suspect it's a much longer conversation than we have time for in this meeting
21:29:13 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> yep. I will add an addendum to my email about the dropped sentence
21:29:28 <carlwgeorge> Ebeneezer_Smooge: anything else high level you want to bring up for meeting purposes, before we dig in more on list?
21:29:31 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> and we can go from there
21:29:37 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> dig more on the list
21:29:41 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I just wanted to bring it up
21:29:50 <carlwgeorge> thanks for doing so, it's important
21:29:58 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> and before going to EPEL-9..
21:30:25 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> and never mind.. been awake since 4am local and my brain is goo
21:30:35 <dcavalca> I have a thing: now that we have libselinux-static in Stream proper, I tried retiring https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libselinux-epel but I'm not sure if I did it right
21:30:45 <dcavalca> also, should I orphan the actual package?
21:31:23 <carlwgeorge> looks retired to me
21:31:26 <salimma> oh, did the c8s one get pushed finally? I thought it was missing
21:31:30 <carlwgeorge> orphaning is not necessary
21:31:39 <dcavalca> ah, I was asking because the branches still show up as active on src.fp.o
21:31:48 <carlwgeorge> salimma: i made the comps changes for the c8s one today, it should be in the next compose
21:31:54 <dcavalca> cool, thanks
21:32:09 <salimma> yeah, that looks good: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libselinux-epel/tree/epel8
21:32:33 <salimma> I think branches look active as long as that branch is not globally retired
21:32:37 <carlwgeorge> dcavalca: i'm not sure how long the delay is, but i suspect if you give it a day or two they will show as retired
21:32:46 <salimma> e.g. only EOLed releases show as inactive (f33 and below, epel6 and below)
21:32:55 <dcavalca> ah, makes sense
21:33:19 <dcavalca> I have another EPEL 8 question around golang packaging
21:33:35 <salimma> actually, I'm not sure now. looks like rawhide is marked inactive because there was no build, so... not sure what the exact logic is
21:33:50 <dcavalca> do we have guidelines or an example for those? it looks like the golang macros don't work out of the box in epel8
21:34:48 <dcavalca> this was prompted by an earlier discussion in #fedora-devel where someone was asking about obfs4
21:34:51 <carlwgeorge> golang macros are an incomplete mess on el8.  my recommendation would be to just look at examples of rhel8 packages and avoid macros.
21:34:52 <nirik> blocking and such happens at the start of composes, but it's been broken...
21:34:55 <nirik> we will get it fixed soon
21:35:37 <dcavalca> oh ok, so it's a similar situation to rust then
21:35:40 <dcavalca> thanks carlwgeorge
21:36:06 <carlwgeorge> more context https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1774139
21:36:52 <dcavalca> oh lol of course it's the forge macros again
21:37:28 <dcavalca> and I even subscribed to that ticket a year ago
21:38:16 <carlwgeorge> quick reminder that epel8-next will be retired in line with the c8s eol
21:38:22 <carlwgeorge> that's 2024-05-31
21:38:28 <carlwgeorge> anything else for epel8?
21:38:50 <orionp> Could we talk about python38 for epel8?
21:39:01 <salimma> oh yes please
21:39:07 <carlwgeorge> sure
21:39:24 <carlwgeorge> i imagine this is a carry over from the #epel conversation
21:40:05 <orionp> Yeah.  And I sent a followup email to the mailing list
21:40:39 <orionp> basically at the moment it seems that epel python38- packages will need to be in a module in order to use python38-pytest
21:41:44 <carlwgeorge> i think we can avoid that
21:41:47 <nirik> I'm not sure whats going on... it should work.
21:41:56 <orionp> I'm just wonder if we can avoid that, or barring that coordinate on one or a few modules
21:42:11 <carlwgeorge> there are other devel modules that are enabled in grobbisplitter, we just need to sort out why this one isn't behaving as expected
21:42:44 <carlwgeorge> probably needs a releng ticket, if one doesn't already exist
21:43:01 <orionp> Perhaps because python38-devel is not a default module?  Or should all modules be enabled?
21:43:27 <nirik> we flatten the repo...
21:43:30 <carlwgeorge> none of the devel modules are default, but we enable them in the buildroot via grobisplitter anyways
21:43:32 <nirik> so no modules are enabled or used
21:43:48 <nirik> all the rpms are just piled in there (at least thats my understanding)
21:43:50 <carlwgeorge> yeah, not exactly enabled, but available
21:44:11 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> orionp, having them as a module won't work
21:44:11 <orionp> Okay, if it's just a releng thing then I'll file a ticket.
21:44:24 <carlwgeorge> devel modules corresponding to default streams (i.e. python38-devel for python38) are flattened and made available
21:44:44 <carlwgeorge> tldr, modules are painful, per the norm
21:44:45 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> because the Fedora MBS doesn't see the python38 modules and can't use them
21:45:16 <carlwgeorge> we could take up the rest of the meeting complaining about modules (i know i can), but lets shift that one to a releng issue and move on
21:45:34 <Eighth_Doctor> is this any better for EL9?
21:45:36 <carlwgeorge> anything else for epel8?
21:45:52 <carlwgeorge> Eighth_Doctor: el9 doesn't have default streams
21:46:09 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> Eighth_Doctor, it starts off better and then the sequels will just get worse when non-default streams require something you need later on
21:46:21 * Eighth_Doctor sighs
21:46:33 <Eighth_Doctor> I just want to be able to build on top of non-default streams as modules
21:46:47 <nirik> epel9 doesn't have any modules that I am aware of
21:47:05 <Eighth_Doctor> it won't right now, but when el9.1 drops, it almost certainly will
21:47:10 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> nirik, I was talking about 9.x when modules get added
21:47:44 <carlwgeorge> seems like a good segue into...
21:47:44 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> anyway.. I am running out Jack Daniel shots for everytime I write modules
21:47:47 <nirik> I am personally against adding them at all. ;) At least until mbs can handle things any better. ;)
21:47:48 <carlwgeorge> #topic EPEL-9
21:48:10 * nirik passed Ebeneezer_Smooge the bottle of Ol Grandad. I think I left a small bit in the bottom.
21:48:22 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> Oooh the good stuff
21:48:23 <salimma> good news for Python packagers: Hypothesis update is ready for testing https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-ccc5d06dfe
21:48:38 <salimma> I initially wanted to try and enable tests, but thanks to ebranch I now know it's futile
21:49:04 <carlwgeorge> i personally have no problem disabling tests and/or docs for epel9 packages
21:49:06 <salimma> these are the missing BRs needed for tests https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-hypothesis/blob/rawhide/f/missing-epel9-test-brs.json
21:49:21 <carlwgeorge> they can always be re-enabled later, and it's good to get stuff unblocked by having packages available
21:49:38 <salimma> yeah, I'm leaning towards that stance too (I try enabling tests if sensible, otherwise, nope). docs often require... pandoc or a gajillion of Sphinx extensions
21:49:39 <Eighth_Doctor> yeah, it's good to have something to circle back to later
21:50:02 <salimma> sorry for the delay, it dropped off my radar in January because of other stuff
21:50:10 <Eighth_Doctor> iirc, pandoc is being bootstrapped by petersen
21:50:19 <salimma> nice
21:50:52 <carlwgeorge> i had an epel9 thing, come to find out `dnf copr enable` on a c9s system won't automatically pick an epel9 copr chroot https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2058471
21:52:27 <Eighth_Doctor> 🤦‍♂️
21:52:34 <carlwgeorge> you can work around it by appending the chroot explicitly, e.g. `dnf copr enable foo/bar epel-9-x86_64`, but that's no fun.  hopefully it gets fixed soon-ish.
21:52:50 <salimma> yeah, breaking c9s users (who most likely have EPEL enabled if they also want COPR) because 'you're not on EPEL9' is .. what
21:52:53 <Eighth_Doctor> at least it shouldn't affect rhel itself?
21:53:26 <carlwgeorge> i get how it happened, the dnf plugin maintainer thought that since copr had c9s chroots that they should be picked, but it was a bad call
21:53:42 <carlwgeorge> correct, it only affect centos
21:54:05 * Eighth_Doctor mumbles about fixing this in hyperscale for the hyperscale spin while a fix is pending
21:54:16 <carlwgeorge> anything else for epel9?
21:55:41 <carlwgeorge> #topic EPEL-Packaging-SIG
21:56:38 <carlwgeorge> i'm wondering, do we still need a dedicated topic for this during meetings?  or can stuff related to the sig just be left for open floor when it exists?
21:57:02 <salimma> I think we can drop it, yeah
21:57:07 <dcavalca> yeah, I think it's fine
21:57:16 * Eighth_Doctor shrugs
21:57:28 <dcavalca> the only thing I had here is that I've been filing some more branch requests for el9
21:57:31 <salimma> at this point it's well established enough that I feel unless we have specific issues to bring up, we don't need to discuss the SIG itself
21:57:41 <Eighth_Doctor> I think it'll become less important as a topic once we pass EL9GA
21:57:57 <salimma> yeah, that can just be covered in the EPEL9 topic going forward :)
21:58:02 <carlwgeorge> works for me
21:58:27 <Eighth_Doctor> so yeah, for now, we can keep it, and then when RHEL 9 goes out, we can drop it, because I expect our activities will drop precipitously
21:59:28 <carlwgeorge> do we need to wait till then?  seems more appropriate to bring up things in each epel-x topic as needed, or open floor
21:59:36 <salimma> yeah
21:59:47 <carlwgeorge> also might as well...
21:59:48 <carlwgeorge> #topic General Issues / Open Floor
21:59:53 <salimma> Conan Kudo: does bringing it up in the EPEL9 topic work for you?
22:00:09 * Eighth_Doctor shrugs
22:00:21 <carlwgeorge> #info no more epel-packaging-sig meeting topic, just bring up issues in epel-x topic or open floor topic
22:00:22 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> if you keep shrugging like that your arms are going to fall off
22:00:25 <Eighth_Doctor> I don't feel that strongly about it
22:00:36 * Eighth_Doctor shrugs
22:00:44 * Eighth_Doctor sees his left arm fall
22:00:58 * carlwgeorge chuckles
22:01:13 <carlwgeorge> any other open floor things before we close up?
22:01:26 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> not from me
22:01:35 <Eighth_Doctor> not from me this week
22:01:45 <dcavalca> nope
22:01:51 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> well go pick up that arm and go get some dinner then
22:02:09 <carlwgeorge> oh real quick, epel office hours earlier today went really well, hope to see everyone at future ones
22:02:20 <Eighth_Doctor> epel office hours were a great idea
22:02:54 <carlwgeorge> thanks to those that attended, and those that attended here, i appreciate your work on epel
22:03:02 <carlwgeorge> #endmeeting