20:00:20 <tdawson> #startmeeting EPEL (2022-03-16)
20:00:20 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Mar 16 20:00:20 2022 UTC.
20:00:20 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
20:00:20 <zodbot> The chair is tdawson. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
20:00:20 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
20:00:20 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2022-03-16)'
20:00:20 <tdawson> #meetingname epel
20:00:20 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
20:00:21 <tdawson> #chair nirik tdawson pgreco carlwgeorge salimma dcavalca
20:00:21 <zodbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge dcavalca nirik pgreco salimma tdawson
20:00:21 <tdawson> #topic aloha
20:00:28 <carlwgeorge> .hi
20:00:29 <zodbot> carlwgeorge: carlwgeorge 'Carl George' <carl@redhat.com>
20:00:32 <nirik> morning
20:00:39 <michel> .hello salimma
20:00:40 <zodbot> michel: salimma 'Michel Alexandre Salim' <michel@michel-slm.name>
20:00:46 <michel> AFK, finishing lunch
20:01:03 <tdawson> Hi carlwgeorge
20:01:06 <tdawson> Hi nirik
20:01:13 <tdawson> Hi michel
20:02:08 <c4t3l> .hi
20:02:09 <zodbot> c4t3l: Sorry, but user 'c4t3l' does not exist
20:02:22 <rcallicotte> .hi
20:02:23 <zodbot> rcallicotte: rcallicotte 'Robby Callicotte' <rcallicotte@mailbox.org>
20:02:30 <tdawson> Hi rcallicotte
20:02:43 <rcallicotte> Im glad I exist
20:02:46 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> jello
20:02:48 <tdawson> :)
20:02:49 <rcallicotte> :)
20:02:56 <tdawson> Hi Ebeneezer_Smooge
20:03:15 <pgreco> .hi
20:03:16 <zodbot> pgreco: pgreco 'Pablo Sebastian Greco' <pablo@fliagreco.com.ar>
20:03:25 <pgreco> dst.....
20:03:28 <tdawson> Hi pgreco
20:05:10 <tdawson> #topic EPEL Issues
20:05:10 <tdawson> https://pagure.io/epel/issues
20:05:10 <tdawson> https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
20:05:20 <dherrera> .hi
20:05:21 <zodbot> dherrera: dherrera 'None' <dherrera@redhat.com>
20:05:31 <tdawson> Hi dherrera
20:05:45 <tdawson> .epel 164
20:05:46 <zodbot> tdawson: Issue #164: Requesting to join EPEL Packagers SIG - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/164
20:05:46 <salimma> back
20:05:58 <tdawson> Welcome back salimma :)
20:06:10 <salimma> welcome back tdawson ! hope you had a great break
20:06:21 <davide> .hi
20:06:22 <zodbot> davide: Sorry, but user 'davide' does not exist
20:06:27 <tdawson> Has anyone added maximillion to the packagers SIG yet?
20:06:32 * davide is on the bus
20:06:42 <davide> .hello dcavalca
20:06:43 <zodbot> davide: dcavalca 'Davide Cavalca' <dcavalca@fb.com>
20:06:56 <salimma> not yet, we agreed to wait the customary 1 week so we're going to do that at this meeting
20:06:56 <tdawson> Hi davide ... you exist to us. :)
20:07:18 <rsc> .hell robert
20:07:21 <rsc> .hello robert
20:07:21 <tdawson> Oh, I thought the wait for a week was only if there wasn't any +1 votes.  I'll have to re-read that.
20:07:22 <zodbot> rsc: robert 'Robert Scheck' <redhat@linuxnetz.de>
20:07:24 <salimma> I can do that now
20:07:27 <tdawson> Hi rsc
20:07:36 <rsc> (why that early today?)
20:07:53 <salimma> with sponsors (which we copy) I think we wait one week
20:08:01 <salimma> rsc: US DST starts 2 weeks earlier than Europe :p
20:08:25 <rsc> salimma: ... ;-(
20:08:55 <rcallicotte> just wait until 2023 ;)
20:09:02 <salimma> I've added maxamillion . closing the ticket now
20:09:10 <tdawson> salimma: Thank You
20:09:14 <salimma> yeah, looks like the US will be permanently on DST :D
20:09:25 <tdawson> .epel 159
20:09:27 <zodbot> tdawson: Issue #159: Follow up on EPEL CVEs - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/159
20:09:42 <salimma> oh, we agreed to discuss that on the 23rd right?
20:10:12 <tdawson> Yep, just saw my notes ... so ... disregard that.
20:10:15 <salimma> I've been doing a lightweight update on the bug count in the meantime, but give me a sec to pull in the numbers
20:10:29 <salimma> ah ok, I'll give the quick update when we get to the relevant EPEL sections
20:10:34 <tdawson> salimma: Let's wait till next week, like you said.
20:10:52 <tdawson> So, those were the only issues marked for meeting ... moving on ...
20:10:58 <tdawson> #topic Old Business
20:11:41 <tdawson> It's been a couple weeks for me ... pgreco ... how are the macros coming?
20:11:56 <pgreco> tdawson: already merged and released
20:12:02 <tdawson> Ya!!
20:12:09 <tdawson> pgreco: Good job, and thank you.
20:12:18 <nirik> pgreco++
20:12:18 <zodbot> nirik: Karma for pgreco changed to 1 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
20:12:25 <pgreco> np, took longer than expected, but at least they are done ;)
20:12:32 <tdawson> Yep
20:13:32 <tdawson> That was the only old business that I had ... was there any from the two weeks that I was gone?  Or should I just move to the different sections?
20:14:30 <carlwgeorge> there are a few open discussions on the mailing list
20:14:34 <salimma> I can't remember anything significant, carlwgeorge ?
20:14:41 <salimma> ah, jinx
20:14:59 <tdawson> Did we need to discuss the HA repos ?
20:15:35 <carlwgeorge> i've been meaning to reply to that one but have been on pto
20:16:01 <carlwgeorge> i think adding pacemaker is valid, but i also think we need a stated policy around it
20:16:23 <carlwgeorge> fedora has this
20:16:35 <pgreco> carlwgeorge, something like base packages or other free repos from rhel?
20:16:35 <carlwgeorge> "All package dependencies (build-time or runtime, regular, weak or otherwise) MUST ALWAYS be satisfiable within the official Fedora repositories."
20:16:41 <carlwgeorge> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_package_dependencies
20:17:04 <tdawson> I was thinking it was already implied, in that if it's not in the repo's that we build from (AppStream, BaseOS, CRB) then it's fair game to put in EPEL.
20:17:22 <nirik> the policy before was based on what we build against yeah.
20:17:30 <carlwgeorge> fair to put into epel, sure, that part is easy
20:17:32 <nirik> but we did include HA in 6 at least and I think in 7?
20:17:42 <carlwgeorge> the question is are epel packages allowed to require ha/rs stuff
20:17:44 <tdawson> Yes, we included HA in epel7
20:17:54 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> for 6 and 7 it was available at .0 without special subscription
20:18:11 <nirik> is that true with 8? 9?
20:18:28 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> as far as I know
20:18:29 <carlwgeorge> the strictest translation of the fedora guidelines would be no, but it seems excessive to require someone to maintain pacemaker in epel when it's already readily available
20:18:57 <nirik> I think if it's available to all subscribers we should just add it to the buildroot and not overlap with it.
20:18:59 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> nirik, so for 8.0 they decided it was not going to be available
20:19:13 <tdawson> Is HA available from RHEL8 without a special subscription to it?
20:19:14 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I don't know if they added it to being general available afterthat
20:19:20 <tdawson> I thought the answer was no.
20:19:28 <carlwgeorge> nirik: it gets messier because there are a few shipped packages in ha/rs with missing subpackages
20:19:33 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> there was a lot of pushback from internal NOT to add HA before we did EPEL-8
20:20:04 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> good times, good times
20:20:42 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> sorry my "as far as I know" was supposed to be that it isn't generally available for 8 or 9. But that might have changed
20:20:48 * nirik has no visibility into that. Perhaps we could ask internally and revisit next week?
20:20:52 <tdawson> Sounds like we need someone to get an official policy from Red Hat, on whether HA (and RS) is available to every RHEL 8 user, or if it's an extra people pay for.
20:21:01 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> it is also 'very broken' for use because it doesn't ship most of the devel needed to work with it
20:21:18 <carlwgeorge> i think the best compromise would be that requirements have to be in epel or baseos/appstream/crb, but epel packages can recommend ha/rs packages
20:21:34 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> so its sort of like 'we can use it as a dep but dont expect to be able to use any devel from it'
20:22:41 <carlwgeorge> i'm happy to defer this to the list for another week
20:23:00 <nirik> I don't think we should recommend it if people can't all get it...
20:23:36 <tdawson> carlwgeorge I second that, unless anyone has any objections let's find out more information from Red Hat, and discuss this on the mailling list until next week.
20:24:03 <rsc> I still would like to see drbd-pacemaker (or what the exact name is) further on in EPEL 9. Just to note it.
20:24:26 <nirik> yeah, we should ask about both 8 and 9
20:24:37 <tdawson> Ya, I'd like pacemaker in epel too ... I don't use it anymore, but when I did, having it in epel would have been nice.
20:25:08 <dherrera> sounds good to me
20:25:16 <carlwgeorge> tdawson: so who's gonna maintain it?
20:25:44 <tdawson> Well ... not me, I don't use it anymore. :)
20:26:16 <nirik> ok, it looks like it is available to everyone in 8...
20:26:21 <nirik> ha at least
20:26:37 <nirik> but you get no support
20:26:52 <nirik> unless you get an addon... https://access.redhat.com/articles/3290191
20:27:57 <nirik> (at least I think)
20:28:15 <carlwgeorge> i'll check the devsub and see if ha/rs is included
20:28:32 <nirik> sounds good. sorry to derail.
20:28:59 <tdawson> available is good.   But then that means we have to re-word the policy ... anyway, ya. let's email the discussion until next week.
20:29:00 <carlwgeorge> but either way, i think allowing epel packages to have recommends (not requires) on rhel packages in add on channels (extra cost or not) would be a good thing
20:29:15 <tdawson> +1
20:29:22 <tdawson> #topic EPEL-7
20:29:22 <tdawson> CentOS 7 will go EOL on 30 June, 2024
20:29:59 <tdawson> Do we have any EPEL7 things?
20:31:11 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> nirik, yeah I went spelunking through my emails and only had that they wanted HighAvailability to be restricted but also not for us to build them but try to use the CentOS ones
20:31:19 <tdawson> I seem to remember something coming up dealing with epel7, but maybe it was the HA thing.   ... too much email gone through, in too short of a time.
20:31:27 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> but that was 3 years ago
20:31:38 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I have no epel7 things
20:31:54 <tdawson> #topic EPEL-8
20:32:00 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> other than centbot> CentOS 7 will go EOL on 30 June, 2024 -- in 2 years, 15 weeks, 1 day, 3 hours, 28 minutes, and 8 seconds
20:33:16 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> nothing for EPEL-8 either
20:33:17 <tdawson> And epel8 has more than 7 years before EOL
20:33:27 <salimma> for EPEL 8... I'm going to look at branching azure-cli
20:33:49 <salimma> it triggers this ebranch bug I haven't had time to debug when finding dependencies, so - that's probably going to be good to fix anyway
20:34:23 <carlwgeorge> i hear azure-cli is a doozy as far as dependencies
20:34:42 <salimma> yeah the script ran forever before it crashed
20:35:01 <salimma> we... ah, have an internal build we want to kill, it's no longer working anyway :p
20:35:14 <tdawson> Wow ... your right.  Good luck with that one - https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/rpminfo?rpmID=29744994
20:35:46 * salimma thinks it's whiskey o'clock
20:36:44 <nirik> yow.
20:36:54 <tdawson> I'll be sending out an email, but we're going to have to update the KDE Plasma Desktop earlier than the year that I promised on epel8.
20:36:57 <davdunc[m> oh that's Major's work!
20:37:48 <davdunc[m> the azure-cli, I mean. That was an amazing fedora win.
20:38:29 <tdawson> I believe the KDE update is IDE compatible and it should just upgrade with no issues.  But, I'm just letting the Committee know.
20:38:33 <salimma> we might use this to get the person who asked for this internally to help packaging :)
20:38:51 <tdawson> salimma: :)
20:38:57 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> IDE compatible?
20:39:04 <salimma> tdawson: when RHEL 9 is out do you plan to do KDE for it too?
20:39:16 <rcallicotte> which IDE? kdevelop?
20:39:22 <tdawson> IDE / API ... some three letter acronym
20:39:31 <rcallicotte> oh
20:39:45 <tdawson> salimma: You should already be able to install KDE on CentOS Stream 9 and epel9
20:40:10 <salimma> ah. duh. yeah I need to prep a VM with it :)
20:40:53 <tdawson> salimma: Litterally the day before I was going to announce it, there was a selinux-policy update in 9 that broke several things :(
20:41:32 <salimma> those are always fun
20:42:13 <tdawson> Anything else for epel8?
20:42:15 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> epel-8-next <centbot> CentOS Stream 8 will go EOL at the end of RHEL8's full support phase on 2024-05-31 -- in 2 years, 10 weeks, 6 days, 3 hours, 27 minutes, and 16 seconds
20:42:33 <tdawson> Oh ... that's good to know.
20:42:50 <tdawson> Hopefully by then we have epel-10-next out.
20:43:10 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I thought EL10 was 2025
20:43:49 <tdawson> It is ... but hay ... after RHEL 9 beta came out ... it's RHEL 10 for me. :)
20:43:50 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> anyway.. I am just sunshine and rainbows
20:43:55 <tdawson> Ha!
20:44:02 <tdawson> #topic EPEL-9
20:44:30 <tdawson> Sorry, that was more of a *laugh* and not a Ha !
20:44:40 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> it worked either way
20:44:58 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> centbot doesn't have anything for C9S so nothing to say there
20:45:53 <carlwgeorge> epel9 is up to 2148 srpms, so still climbing at a decent pace
20:45:58 <tdawson> So, I do have one thing for epel9.   I'm going to get Will-It-Build running finally.   I found another package build issue.
20:46:12 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> on the other hand.. do we need to recompile anything in EPEL-9 due to the openssl change?
20:46:12 <tdawson> Ya!!
20:46:43 <tdawson> Which openssl change?   epel9 has always been building on openssl3
20:47:08 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> wasn't sure if the sha-1 change mentioned on lwn changed ABI issues
20:48:04 <tdawson> I haven't read the article, but I have seen several sha1 emails internally
20:48:23 <maxamillion> carlwgeorge: woot!
20:48:26 <tdawson> They were mainly about having to ssh into old rhel6 machines.
20:48:26 <maxamillion> .hello2
20:48:27 <zodbot> maxamillion: maxamillion 'Adam Miller' <maxamillion@gmail.com>
20:48:29 <maxamillion> sorry I'm so late
20:48:34 <tdawson> Hi maxamillion
20:48:40 <maxamillion> in RH Tower this week ... lot of meetings :)
20:48:41 * dcavalca is currently hating is life because of this sha1 thing
20:48:50 <maxamillion> dcavalca: ?
20:49:18 <salimma> welcome maxamillion !
20:49:19 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> hi maxamillion I will virtually wave to you from 30 miles away
20:49:30 <maxamillion> Ebeneezer_Smooge: o/
20:49:39 <salimma> oh, SSH-ing from C7 to C9 also does not work because SHA1 :)
20:49:41 <dcavalca> maxamillion: we have like 2000 packages in production signed with sha1, which all need to be rebuilt or resigned to be installable on 9
20:49:50 <maxamillion> ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
20:50:13 <dcavalca> I don't mind doing this because it's a good opportunity for cleanup, but I would have loved to know this was coming a few months ago so I could have planned for it
20:50:25 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> we all would have
20:50:26 <dcavalca> anyway, not terribly relevant for this meeting
20:51:24 <pgreco> dcavalca: ranting is always relevant...
20:51:46 <tdawson> Ebeneezer_Smooge: Is there a way for us to tell if any epel packages need rebuilding or resigning?  From what I know, the epel9 packages should be ok since we always were buliding with ssl3
20:52:29 <dcavalca> tdawson: easiest I've found is to loop over all packages on a mirror, run rpm -qip and grep for SHA1
20:53:20 <tdawson> Sounds easy enough.
20:53:31 <tdawson> Oh ... I just saw the time, I'm going to move on ..
20:53:31 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I don't think we need to resign EPEL9 packages
20:53:34 <dcavalca> there's probably a more efficient/elegant rpm incantation for this, but this worked well enough for us
20:53:44 <tdawson> #topic EPEL-Packaging-SIG
20:53:59 <tdawson> Ebeneezer_Smooge: I'll believe you.
20:54:34 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> epel9 packages have been working.. copr packages for CS9 have not
20:54:35 <tdawson> maxamillion: You missed it, since this was earlier in the meeting, but you've been added to the epel-packagers-sig
20:54:42 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> congrats
20:54:43 <maxamillion> woot!
20:54:45 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> now get to work
20:54:47 <maxamillion> thank you
20:54:48 <maxamillion> lol
20:54:54 <tdawson> :)
20:55:02 <maxamillion> alright, what needs working on?
20:55:08 <maxamillion> I fire the lasers
20:55:12 <maxamillion> I'll*
20:55:21 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> no you get engine duty
20:55:40 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> we always start off everyone in the coal room then you work your way up to the lasers
20:55:54 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> anyway I am derailing tdawson's meeting
20:55:59 <tdawson> :)
20:56:10 * nirik hands maxamillion a shovel
20:56:11 <maxamillion> <3
20:56:18 <tdawson> Oh ... and ... I'd better get a move on ...
20:56:45 <tdawson> Although maxamillion has a very good question, do we have a place to point people to :)
20:57:02 <tdawson> And, while others answer that, I'm going to move to the next topic, so we can talk about two at once.
20:57:04 <maxamillion> not one that's written down in the contributor docs :)
20:57:11 <tdawson> #topic General Issues / Open Floor
20:57:27 <carlwgeorge> it would be good to have the willit pages linked from the docs
20:57:43 <rcallicotte> +1 to that
20:58:09 <tdawson> Oh, that's a good idea.
20:58:37 <carlwgeorge> would it be useful to have a bugzilla query listing all open epel7/8/9 bugs linked in the docs as well?
20:58:50 <tdawson> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=EPELPackagersSIG
20:59:01 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> oh we have a CVE for the openssl3 in EPEL
20:59:10 <salimma> oh fun
20:59:14 <carlwgeorge> that one is just stuff blocked on the sig tracking bug, right?
20:59:23 <nirik> https://packager-dashboard.fedoraproject.org/user/epel-packagers-sig
20:59:35 <salimma> oh it's brand new, I'm glad I've not been asleep at the wheel
21:00:19 <salimma> Ebeneezer_Smooge: how did you notice it so early? it literally was reported... 8 mins ago
21:01:15 <Ebeneezer_Smooge> I have not turned off my email buzzing on EPEL issues
21:01:26 * Ebeneezer_Smooge goes to fix that
21:01:57 <tdawson> I think we need to put some of these things on https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-packagers-sig/#how_can_i_contribute
21:02:21 <tdawson> Beyond that ... anything else to bring up?  Cuz we're already over time.
21:03:13 <tdawson> The sound of silence  ... is good.
21:03:37 <tdawson> Thank you all for coming.  Thank you for the good discussions.  and thank you very much for all the work you do on EPEL.
21:03:51 <pgreco> see you next week, bye bye
21:03:53 <tdawson> Talk to you next week, unless I talk to you sooner.
21:03:54 <salimma> thanks tdawson
21:04:00 <rcallicotte> thanks!
21:04:05 <nirik> thanks tdawson
21:04:07 <tdawson> #endmeeting