20:00:04 <tdawson> #startmeeting EPEL (2023-04-12)
20:00:04 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Apr 12 20:00:04 2023 UTC.
20:00:04 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
20:00:04 <zodbot> The chair is tdawson. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
20:00:04 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
20:00:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2023-04-12)'
20:00:05 <tdawson> #meetingname epel
20:00:05 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
20:00:07 <tdawson> #chair nirik tdawson pgreco carlwgeorge salimma dcavalca dherrera gotmax23 smooge
20:00:07 <zodbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge dcavalca dherrera gotmax23 nirik pgreco salimma smooge tdawson
20:00:09 <tdawson> #topic aloha
20:00:19 <carlwgeorge> .hi
20:00:20 <zodbot> carlwgeorge: carlwgeorge 'Carl George' <carl@redhat.com>
20:00:28 <salimma> .hi
20:00:29 <zodbot> salimma: salimma 'Michel Alexandre Salim' <michel@michel-slm.name>
20:00:30 <nirik> morning
20:00:40 <neil> .hi
20:00:40 <tdawson> Hi carlwgeorge and salimma
20:00:41 <zodbot> neil: neil 'Neil Hanlon' <neil@shrug.pw>
20:00:46 <tdawson> Morning nirik
20:00:48 <dherrera> .hi
20:00:49 <zodbot> dherrera: dherrera 'Diego Herrera' <dherrera@redhat.com>
20:00:55 <tdawson> Hi neil and dherrera
20:01:21 <neil> o/ heya folks
20:02:29 <tdawson> I think everyone is waiting for the 5 minute mark when I really start the meeting
20:02:59 <neil> IRC meetings are nice cause they give a buffer to get water, use the restroom... etc
20:03:00 <tdawson> They just say hi, then run and grab a snack.
20:03:14 * nirik nods
20:04:56 * salimma is half back from his sabbatical, attending to catch up
20:05:11 <tdawson> #topic End Of Life (EOL)
20:05:13 <tdawson> RHEL 7 will go EOL on 2024-06-30
20:05:14 <tdawson> CentOS Stream 8 goes EOL in 2024-05-31
20:05:16 <tdawson> CentOS Stream 9 goes EOL in 2027-05-31
20:05:29 <tdawson> #topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues
20:05:31 <tdawson> https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
20:06:02 <tdawson> No issues marked for the meeting.  And no new issues.
20:06:11 <tdawson> Always nice
20:06:42 <tdawson> #topic Old Business
20:07:23 <tdawson> I do have one old business ... hmmm ... maybe it goes better in the previous section
20:07:32 <tdawson> .epel 198
20:07:33 <zodbot> tdawson: Issue #198: Drop modularity from EPEL-8. Do not enable modularity for EPEL-9 - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/198
20:07:54 <nirik> I think this is done?
20:07:57 <tdawson> If I'm looking at this right, all the actions have been done.
20:08:27 <neil> 🥳
20:08:28 <carlwgeorge> seems we can close it then i believe
20:08:34 <tdawson> Ya!!
20:08:48 <nirik> was the final announcement made?
20:08:54 <tdawson> I just wanted to ask before closing
20:09:00 <tdawson> nirik: Yep
20:09:25 <tdawson> The announcement said that the tags and targets were being removed, but didn't have an actual date on it.
20:09:38 <pgreco> sorry I'm late
20:09:40 <pgreco> .hi
20:09:41 <nirik> yes, it was, a while back. ;)
20:09:43 <zodbot> pgreco: pgreco 'Pablo Sebastian Greco' <pablo@fliagreco.com.ar>
20:09:55 <tdawson> If people want, I could reply and say that they are now really gone ... but I figure people have assumed it's gone by now.
20:10:00 <tdawson> Hi pgreco
20:11:34 <tdawson> OK, closed.
20:11:53 <tdawson> Any other old Business that people want to bring up?
20:12:43 <carlwgeorge> if anyone hasn't yet, please add your thoughts to the epel10 bikeshedding threads
20:12:57 <salimma> that's still not settled?
20:13:05 <carlwgeorge> #info epel10 dist tags
20:13:08 <carlwgeorge> #link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/epel-10-bikeshedding-dist-tag/80510
20:13:32 <carlwgeorge> #info pointing users at the right epel10 repo
20:13:34 <carlwgeorge> #link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/epel-10-bikeshedding-pointing-users-at-the-right-repo/80551
20:13:43 <tdawson> salimma: We've settled that we are going to do the epel10 in the new way.  But there are a couple of details that need to be figured out.
20:14:20 <carlwgeorge> seems like we're not anywhere close to a consensus on either point
20:14:30 <salimma> ah, thanks, I'll catch up on those threads after this
20:14:48 <carlwgeorge> but yes as tdawson said, we've agreed on the general direction, but not all the finer details
20:16:04 <carlwgeorge> reading between the lines on the dist tag stuff, it seems people really are fond of keeping .el10 as the dist tag whenever possible, even if it makes some of the other dist tags longer and possibly more confusing
20:16:32 <salimma> even though... that's not what centos stream uses :(
20:18:02 <carlwgeorge> one thing that crossed my mind, is what if we followed rhel exactly:  .el10 for builds in the leading branch, .el10_x when builds are done in older branches, and leave it up to the package maintainer to ensure the upgrade path (i.e. make sure the leading branch always has a higher version or release)?
20:18:33 <carlwgeorge> the risk there is that a maintainer would build the same commit in multiple branches and not have a correct upgrade path
20:18:48 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: That's a possibility.
20:19:13 <tdawson> Makes me woner how RHEL does it ... do they always have the proper upgrade path.
20:19:26 <carlwgeorge> it would be a decent compromise it think, i'm just worried about that upgrade path problem being a common problem
20:19:45 <nirik> it may be less of an issue with distro-sync, but yeah.
20:20:15 <carlwgeorge> my understanding is that it's not a problem for rhel because of the nature of it being difficult (more acks) to even do builds for already released minor versions
20:21:06 <carlwgeorge> for epel, we won't have those checks and balances, so it would be easier for a maintainer to build the same commit in multiple branches, like they would do in fedora
20:21:16 <salimma> do we think there's a possibility we can get that RHEL policy ... changed?
20:21:21 <nirik> we could put in a bodhi/ci check on it.
20:21:24 <salimma> or ask for it anyway
20:21:37 <tdawson> salimma: But changed to what?
20:21:51 <salimma> but either way, aligning with the RHEL policy is better than diverging, even with any potential flaw
20:22:00 <carlwgeorge> currently bodhi doesn't even do an install check on epel updates like it does for fedora, so i'm skeptical of counting on further bodhi checks being added
20:22:15 <salimma> hmm. I'm probably in favor of stream always using the tag for the soon-to-be-released minor version
20:23:03 <carlwgeorge> yeah my original proposal was to use .el10_x everywhere to avoid this problem, but that doesn't seem to be popular.  unless there are more folks that agree with that and haven't spoken up in the thread.
20:24:00 <carlwgeorge> i guess in theory we could start with the rhel style (.el10 + .el10_x + upgrade path is maintainer responsibility), and adjust later if we see it being a common problem
20:24:14 <neil> I've added it to my thread-list-of-doom that I will attend to within the week and add comments, personally
20:24:17 <nirik> well, I don't think checks will be added magically. We will have to ask and help do the work. ;)
20:25:05 * neil has wanted to learn more about bodhi
20:25:09 <nirik> we could also script something to file bugs/complain when people do break things...
20:25:18 <nirik> but we would have to make that too. everything is work. ;(
20:25:36 <neil> r i p
20:25:45 <salimma> carlwgeorge: yeah, I might not have spoken up. I think my stance (will reply once I catch up) is that's my preference in an ideal world, but aligning with RHEL and using bare el10 is a decent compromise
20:25:45 <salimma> I guess there's the bonus that we can identify what has been rebuilt vs what is inherited
20:25:47 <neil> i thought chatGPT meant we don't have to do more work?
20:26:15 <carlwgeorge> salimma: you were on sabbatical, it's understandable
20:26:22 <salimma> neil: ssssshh
20:26:27 <carlwgeorge> lol
20:27:08 <carlwgeorge> another factor for aligning with rhel, if we discover something built from the same commit with an incorrect upgrade path, should be a super easy release bump rebuild
20:28:31 <carlwgeorge> i'll throw in a comment about option #3, aligning with rhel to the max with the aforementioned drawbacks
20:29:33 <tdawson> Sorry for being quiet, I noticed I haven't commented on that.  I'll put my opinion there.  But my preferences are el10_<minor> (first plan I think), then this new plan to be in sync with RHEL style, then third plan .el10~<minor>
20:30:09 <tdawson> I don't understand why it is ~10.<minor> ... there is already a 10 in the dist tag, why duplicate it.
20:30:11 * nirik has the same order as tdawson
20:30:51 <tdawson> I'll put that into my comment.
20:31:16 <tdawson> Any other Old Business before we move to the Open Floor?
20:31:28 <carlwgeorge> i agree tdawson, when i was first recapping it with Eighth_Doctor, i summarized it as .el10~0, and he corrected me that he wanted to duplicate the major (i'm not sure why)
20:32:00 <Eighth_Doctor> I wanted it to be readable and not weird
20:32:12 <dherrera> tdawson: how I interpreted that it was to separate the epel branch version from the target version (but the mayor will always be the same, so it's inherently redundant)
20:32:40 <Eighth_Doctor> you could do .el10~0 too and it would accomplish the same goal
20:33:07 <tdawson> Eighth_Doctor: If we did that, I would be more in favore of it.
20:33:10 <carlwgeorge> i would argue that `.el10~0` is less weird that `.el10~10.0`, but realize it's subjective
20:33:14 <carlwgeorge> *than
20:33:20 <Eighth_Doctor> but I always conceptualized it as an independently readable section
20:33:36 <salimma> carlwgeorge: yeah, the latter feels weird to me
20:33:46 <Eighth_Doctor> I'm fine with either as it accomplishes my goal
20:33:51 <salimma> -el-10-0 is better of course :)
20:33:56 <Eighth_Doctor> oh god no
20:34:12 <neil> el10_A.. EL10_B...
20:34:13 <tdawson> *laughs*
20:34:57 <nirik> el10~Ӛ
20:35:00 <Eighth_Doctor> dashes make rpm unhappy
20:35:20 <carlwgeorge> yeah dashes aren't valid characters for the release field
20:36:00 <neil> easy fix, just use the unicode code point instead
20:36:02 <carlwgeorge> and even if they were, it would break everything that parses nvrs and rpm file names
20:36:21 <neil> carlwgeorge: you mean job stability?
20:36:34 <neil> endless updates!
20:37:25 <tdawson> Before we go too much further, I'm going to move on.  But remember to add your comments to the posts.
20:37:41 <tdawson> #topic General Issues / Open Floor
20:37:50 <tdawson> Are there any items for Open Floor.
20:39:49 <tdawson> Two minutes of silence sounds like an anwer.
20:39:50 <carlwgeorge> i haven't forgotten about the docs overhaul, i'm hoping to have something pushed to a public branch for collab soon
20:40:22 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: Cool.  Thank you for your work on that.
20:41:10 <tdawson> Anything else?
20:41:12 <Eighth_Doctor> this is the unfortunate monthly double booking of EPEL and CentOS Board :)
20:41:44 <tdawson> Eighth_Doctor: Not a problem ... we're pretty light today ... and I'll give you 20 minutes back.
20:41:59 <nirik> How are the monthly office hours calls going? I've not been able to attend the last few.
20:42:39 <Eighth_Doctor> it often turns into the Shaun + Hyperscale discussion meeting because apparently nobody else is ever interested :(
20:42:42 <tdawson> nirik: Pretty good.  We had several pretty good discussions last week ... and most of them were even about EPEL.
20:42:57 <Eighth_Doctor> oh wait, context
20:42:59 <carlwgeorge> pretty good, fairly unstructured but nice to have an open space to discuss whatever.  i definitely don't want people to feel obligated to attend.
20:43:03 <Eighth_Doctor> EPEL office hours is doing quite well
20:43:10 <tdawson> Oh ... are you talking about the CentoS office hours?
20:43:19 <carlwgeorge> he crossed the streams
20:43:20 * carlwgeorge runs
20:43:22 <Eighth_Doctor> there's two separate CentOS office hours
20:43:24 <salimma> Eighth_Doctor: hey, I show up too :) (half the time)
20:43:25 <Eighth_Doctor> the board one and the stream one
20:43:51 <Eighth_Doctor> I go to the Stream one, but the board office hours conflicts with work meetings :(
20:43:55 <nirik> I would like to come, but time has just been hard to come by. ;)
20:44:38 * tdawson still wonders which office hours nirik wants to come to ... but that's ok.
20:44:56 <nirik> the epel one
20:45:06 <tdawson> Ah ... the good one. :)
20:45:16 <carlwgeorge> hehe
20:45:40 <tdawson> Anything else before I close?
20:45:46 * neil needs to add these office hours to my calendar...
20:46:28 <neil> not meeting related, but Rocky is having our monthly community happy hour/hangout this evening. all are welcome. https://forums.rockylinux.org/t/april-happy-hour/9529
20:47:26 <tdawson> Cool
20:48:09 <tdawson> Thank ya'll for coming, and thank you for all you do for the EPEL community.
20:48:18 <tdawson> I'll talk to ya'll next week, if not sooner.
20:48:32 <tdawson> #endmeeting