20:02:09 #startmeeting EPEL (2022-07-06) 20:02:09 Meeting started Wed Jul 6 20:02:09 2022 UTC. 20:02:09 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 20:02:09 The chair is carlwgeorge. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 20:02:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 20:02:09 The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2022-07-06)' 20:02:24 .hi 20:02:25 rcallicotte: rcallicotte 'Robby Callicotte' 20:02:27 #meetingname epel 20:02:27 The meeting name has been set to 'epel' 20:02:38 #chair carlwgeorge rcallicotte 20:02:38 Current chairs: carlwgeorge rcallicotte 20:02:53 #topic howdy 20:03:10 .hello gotmax23 20:03:11 gotmax[m]: gotmax23 'Maxwell G' 20:03:15 Hi everyone! 20:03:16 .hello dcavalca 20:03:17 davide: dcavalca 'Davide Cavalca' 20:03:46 #chair gotmax[m] davide 20:03:46 Current chairs: carlwgeorge davide gotmax[m] rcallicotte 20:05:12 looks like light attendance today, but we can get started anyways 20:05:21 #topic EPEL issues 20:05:34 https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open 20:05:55 morning 20:06:03 #chair nirik 20:06:03 Current chairs: carlwgeorge davide gotmax[m] nirik rcallicotte 20:06:19 i only see one issue tagged for the meeting 20:06:20 https://pagure.io/epel/issue/39 20:06:47 Hey guys, I'm traveling for work, I pinged troy but he's not here either... 20:06:51 but it was tagged a month ago, and it looks like there are pull requests in progress 20:07:01 Yeah 20:07:13 Not sure if we want to talk about it without Michel Alexandre Salim 🎩 20:07:19 pgreco: yeah troy is at a mechanic at the moment, he mentioned to me he wasn't sure when he'd be back 20:07:31 gotmax[m]: agreed, we can punt it to next week 20:07:48 i believe michel is on vacation this week 20:08:01 I thought they were moving? 20:08:22 oh i don't know details, i just meant vacation in the "not at work" sense 20:08:24 I have some general EPEL stuff that I'll save for open floor 20:08:38 I see 20:08:42 any other issues in the tracker people want to bring up in this topic? 20:09:53 Nothing sticks out to me 20:09:57 #topic Old Business 20:10:08 https://pagure.io/epel/pull-request/184 20:10:29 that one has been going on a bit, there were a few minor nits to sort and then i think it's ready to merge 20:10:48 i tried to push to troy's fork but pagure doesn't seem to allow that like github does 20:11:18 I believe src.fp.o allows PPs to push to anyone's forks, but that's not applicable 20:11:22 here 20:12:07 it's a pref I think 20:12:44 or not. not sure. 20:12:52 github lets you do it per pull requests, it's a check box, something like "allow maintainers of destination branch to push to your fork branch" 20:13:17 oh well, off topic here regardless. troy can handle it whenever he gets back. anything else for old business? 20:13:46 My epel-rpm-macros PR? 20:14:20 https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/44 20:14:41 I can mege/build it... 20:14:55 i see you address the python2 thing miro brought up, thanks 20:15:04 Yeah 20:15:09 I think it's ready to go, no? 20:15:14 That will unbreak the buildroot 20:15:15 lgtm 20:15:24 Yeah, I addressed all of the feedback 20:15:33 cool 20:16:23 thanks for handling the merge/build nirik 20:17:39 🎉 20:17:51 #topic EPEL-7 20:18:19 #info epel7 will be retired on 2024-06-30 in line with the end of the rhel7 maintenance 2 phase 20:20:42 anything else for epel7? 20:20:52 Not from me 20:21:29 #topic EPEL-8 20:21:38 #info epel8-next will be retired on 2024-05-31 in line with the c8s eol (end of rhel8 full support phase) 20:22:19 Not sure how much there is to discuss about it here, but the EPEL 8 Next buildroot has been completely broken for several days due to c8s pushing out a broken python27 module. 20:22:27 Meaning that it's impossible to build anything 20:23:03 My epel-rpm-macros PR had a temporary fix for that 20:23:04 i was able to rebuild the python27 module to fix it, it should be composed and pushed out today i think 20:23:19 Thanks for that! 20:23:26 sure, sorry it's taking so long 20:23:50 This whole CentOS Stream 8 is not really upstream of RHEL thing is kind of annoying 20:23:56 some of the processes changed since i switched focus from centos to epel so i'm not fully up to speed on all the push processes 20:24:10 Makes sense 20:24:13 you have no idea (well you have some idea but yes it's worse than you can imagine) 20:24:31 Yeah 20:24:32 in the team we called it building the distro "inside out" 20:24:51 At least from my outsider experience, there's often problems with things syncing over from the RHEL nightly compose. 20:24:58 And CVEs that don't get fixed for months 20:25:05 the goal is at some point this year for rhel maintainers to take over their c8s builds 20:25:12 And the RHEL maintainers have no visibility into the process 20:25:14 and build c8s in the same koji as c9s 20:25:19 That would be great 20:25:29 it's majorly work in progress 20:25:48 not epel8 per say, but related question, do yall think we should keep doing these info things for the repo retirements this far out? 20:25:50 I assume this has to do with CentOS Stream 8 being introduced after RHEL 8 was released? 20:26:08 I don't mind it 20:26:11 yes 20:26:18 I think it's helpful to have in the back of your mind 20:26:30 yeah, I think it's a nice reminder 20:26:39 it's not a lot of trouble but this far out feels odd to me 20:26:42 until one day... it's 'yikes! oh no!' 20:27:00 also alert fatigue in a way 20:27:41 yeah I personally tend to tune these out, but I don't mind having them if folks find them useful 20:28:03 yeah tuning it out is what i want to avoid 20:28:24 I think of them as more info... shrug. 20:28:43 i'll bounce it off troy later and see what he thinks 20:28:54 maybe switch to do it once a month rather than every meeting 20:29:07 That could be a good compromise 20:29:16 anything else for epel8? 20:29:22 Maybe more frequently when the release is closer to its EOL? 20:29:25 Yes 20:29:32 How do we want to handle appstreams that aren't supported for the whole 10 years? 20:29:33 for sure 20:29:58 nothing epel can do about them, they exist in rhel but get no further updates 20:30:06 e.g. python38, python39, python27, ansible-core that has major version bumps 20:30:14 Will we retire packages that depend on them? 20:30:57 i would think no, but i don't have a strong opinion on it 20:31:01 can we actually tell they are getting no more updates? 20:31:11 we don't automatically retire other software that's eol 20:31:22 They have published EOL dates 20:31:34 in the module data? 20:31:53 no in https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhel-app-streams-life-cycle 20:32:13 Thanks for the link. I was trying to find that 20:32:30 python27 will be retired in Jun 2024 20:32:40 firefox bookmark keywords are great 20:32:50 yeah, I was looking too. ;) 20:32:53 And 87 source packages in EPEL depend on it 20:33:08 I was searching through my history and was typing appstream instead of application stream 20:33:44 not sure if it's good to retire them or not.. perhaps this would be a good topic for epel-devel ? 20:33:54 The thing is, even though they're retired in RHEL, they're still kept in the repos 20:34:08 I'm not sure if retired is the term that RH uses, but whatever 20:34:12 yeah i think this one should be opened up for wider comment 20:34:12 yeah, they never remove things... which is... sometimes a pain 20:34:31 gotmax[m]: it is, on that page "retirement date" column 20:35:07 gotmax[m]: can you start an epel-devel thread on that? 20:35:10 I think they sometimes remove things that actively cause problems (e.g. an ansible-core release that had an incorrect Obsoletes and broke things) 20:35:23 Yeah 20:35:58 they didn't want to remove the old ansible in extras when that was retired. ;( 20:36:19 #action gotmax[m] to start an epel-devel thread about EPEL and appstream retirements 20:36:41 ansible 2.9.27 is still supported to some degree 20:36:43 I think 20:37:29 well, not upstream, but perhaps in some rhel channel sure. 20:37:44 Yeah, a separate channel 20:38:04 retired != supported 20:38:21 #info RHEL 8.7 will have a major release bump of ansible-core (2.12.x > 2.13.x) and switch from being built against python38 to python39. 20:38:59 that sounds weird. what i mean is that just because it's retired doesn't mean it's unsupported (i.e. they'll still take support cases for it) 20:39:11 Yeah, but I don't think it's technically retired 20:39:42 The ansible-core bump will mean that we'll have to update ansible from 5.x.x to 6.x.x. 20:40:35 and all the folks adding python38 versions of things will need to do it again for python39 things. ;( 20:40:48 joy 20:40:53 Yeah, that's why I `#info'd` it 20:41:06 does the move from 5 to 6 have a lot of backwards incompat things? 20:41:22 Not too much, I don't think 20:41:42 can't avoid it of course, but how compatible it is should dictate how loudly we message it 20:43:04 while we're still on 8 i'll add the action thing for nirik offering to build the epel-rpm-macros thing 20:43:20 Some of the incompatibilities that are listed in ansible's changelog are related to ansible-core things (the changelog is unified) and some are about dropping support for ansible 2.9.27 or older python versions. 20:43:54 They tend to be pretty conservative about marking things as minor changes, so some of the "major changes" aren't really that major. 20:44:49 #action nirik will merge and build https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-rpm-macros/pull-request/44 20:45:09 we need to wrap up so we have time for open floor, so... 20:45:10 it's already done 20:45:15 Looks like he already did :) 20:45:26 #topic EPEL-9 20:48:17 .hi tdawson 20:48:18 tdawson: tdawson 'None' 20:48:32 * gotmax[m] waves 20:48:32 hello sorry for being late 20:48:50 #chair tdawson smooge 20:48:50 Current chairs: carlwgeorge davide gotmax[m] nirik rcallicotte smooge tdawson 20:48:51 Hi gotmax[m] smooge 20:48:59 #topic General Issues / Open Floor 20:49:07 i talked with carlwgeorge about what would be needed to jumpstart go in EPEL 20:49:11 hi tdawson 20:49:26 I think we have a plan which we will need to engage releng on 20:49:41 but i need to talk with nirik and write it up first 20:49:44 What is releng doing? 20:50:02 as little as possible. ;) er, I mean... not sure. 20:51:04 Are you planning on doing the whole golang-*devel package route? Or a bundled route? Or something else? 20:51:36 I feel like y'all have been bothered enough about go stuff with my infra tickets about the src.fp.o dashboard :p 20:51:53 Or, should I not ask that because we don't have enough time in the meeting? 20:52:08 I wouldn't mind discussing 20:52:19 The go-sig is also having a conversation about how we want to handle this 20:52:39 I was going to do a the approrpiate name for a 'side-tag' where I get releng to tag in some needed F36 packages, I then build the EPEL9 ones i need and then untag the F36 out of the sidetag and then merge the tag into EPEL-9 20:52:57 or at least that is hair-brained idea 20:53:08 Because everything is unbundled, there's a lot of packages, some of which are not in good shape, and we want to make sure we're not stretching ourselves too thin. 20:53:21 It's an idea ... it could work. 20:53:46 my main goal will be a small set of end items I 'need' for various work. android-tools, hugo and possibly a couple others 20:53:51 smooge: I would prefer if we just added the appropriate bootstrap logic (some of which is already there) and build things from scratch. 20:54:11 the problem is that I can't figure out how to get the various tools to bootstrap 20:54:16 * davide would like to get golang-github-facebookincubator-go2chef into EPEL at some point too 20:54:22 * nirik notes you can do all this without releng... make a side-tag, tag what you need in and out 20:54:38 nirik, I didn't know if I could tag in Fedora X into an EPEL side-tag 20:54:53 that used to be something needing releng special powers 20:55:02 but used to be is from when I was a lad 20:55:06 you can tag any build into side tags if you are the side tag owner 20:55:14 ah ok 20:55:23 That is good to know. 20:55:30 well then you are correct 'releng is going to do as little as possible' 20:55:36 this would allow the deps to be used in your builds? 20:55:40 I was about to say that same thing word for word, tdawson :) 20:55:46 the cross-tag idea 20:56:18 so my plan would be bootstrap the packages for one set of builds, then rebuild the packages using the bootstrapped ones to lose the deps 20:56:23 yes, each side tag has it's own buildroot... inheriting from what it is a side tag of + what builds are in it 20:56:25 Another idea would be to just tag the library packages in from rawhide and not build them for epel at all 20:56:41 That's what the rust sig used to do, but I don't think it went very well 20:56:46 They did it from rawhide > stable Fedoras 20:56:51 yeah, rust used to do that, but it gets confusing 20:57:00 (All libraries are noarch) 20:57:01 i would prefer to avoid confusion 20:57:32 my main issue is that a set of packages call binaries in other packages which need to be built using the binaries from the first set of packages 20:57:42 and not in the test area 20:57:46 I think it's better to discuss this in more length in the go-sig meeting 20:57:58 yeah.. 20:58:04 anyway that was all I had for EPEL 20:58:07 smooge: Like what? 20:59:06 it was the golang-x-tools needing golang-barflung-tools needing golang-x-tools and my 'I am not a golang developer but I am cribbing from their notes' looked like it was instead of libraries binary calls 20:59:40 if that sentence makes sense, you have had as little sleep as I have 21:00:03 anyway.. I will look at it in the go-sig meeting and work with them on what is needed/wanted/ 21:00:14 doing the lord's work 21:00:14 +1 21:00:16 I just need to find the meeting and see if I can make it 21:00:40 The next one is Monday the 18th 21:00:42 At 18:00 UTC 21:00:51 well we're out of time, any last minute things that can't wait till next week? 21:00:57 That's 2:00 p.m eastern 21:00:57 smooge gotmax[m] Thanks for your go work. That's a tought bunch of dependencies to unravel. 21:01:09 Nothing from me 21:01:10 thar be dragons 21:01:20 I wanted to talk about the EPEL branch requests procedures, but that can wait 21:01:40 carlwgeorge: Very much so 21:01:46 thanks everyone for coming, and all your work in fedora and epel. have a good week. 21:01:52 #endmeeting