20:00:11 <tdawson> #startmeeting EPEL (2023-04-26)
20:00:11 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Apr 26 20:00:11 2023 UTC.
20:00:11 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
20:00:11 <zodbot> The chair is tdawson. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
20:00:11 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
20:00:11 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2023-04-26)'
20:00:12 <tdawson> #meetingname epel
20:00:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
20:00:13 <tdawson> #chair nirik tdawson pgreco carlwgeorge salimma dcavalca dherrera gotmax23 smooge
20:00:13 <zodbot> Current chairs: carlwgeorge dcavalca dherrera gotmax23 nirik pgreco salimma smooge tdawson
20:00:15 <tdawson> #topic aloha
20:00:27 <jonathanspw> .hello
20:00:29 <zodbot> jonathanspw: (hello <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "hellomynameis $1".
20:00:31 <smooge> hi
20:00:32 <jonathanspw> .hi
20:00:33 <zodbot> jonathanspw: jonathanspw 'Jonathan Wright' <jonathan@almalinux.org>
20:00:45 <tdawson> Hi smooge and jonathanspw
20:00:52 <jonathanspw> howdy tdawson
20:01:25 <rsc> .hello robert
20:01:26 <zodbot> rsc: robert 'Robert Scheck' <redhat@linuxnetz.de>
20:01:37 <tdawson> Hello rsc
20:01:44 <yselkowitz[m]> .hello yselkowitz
20:01:44 <dherrera> .hi
20:01:45 <zodbot> yselkowitz[m]: yselkowitz 'Yaakov Selkowitz' <yselkowi@redhat.com>
20:01:48 <zodbot> dherrera: dherrera 'Diego Herrera' <dherrera@redhat.com>
20:02:13 <carlwgeorge> .hi
20:02:14 <zodbot> carlwgeorge: carlwgeorge 'Carl George' <carl@redhat.com>
20:02:20 <tdawson> Hi dherrera and carlwgeorge
20:05:00 <tdawson> #topic End Of Life (EOL)
20:05:02 <tdawson> RHEL 7 / epel-7 will go EOL on 2024-06-30
20:05:03 <tdawson> CentOS Stream 8 / epel-8-next goes EOL in 2024-05-31
20:05:04 <tdawson> CentOS Stream 9 / epel-9-next goes EOL in 2027-05-31
20:05:19 <tdawson> #topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues
20:05:20 <tdawson> https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
20:05:34 <tdawson> So, we do have an issue marked for meeting this week
20:05:52 <tdawson> .epel 226
20:05:53 <zodbot> tdawson: Issue #226: Incompatible update in apptainer-suid-1.1.8 - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/226
20:06:06 <carlwgeorge> i've gotten as far as opening it in a tab to read it
20:06:10 <tdawson> :)
20:06:23 <tdawson> Since this just came in today, I'm not expecting us to vote on it today.
20:06:24 <carlwgeorge> that was about an hour ago, then i got distracted
20:06:30 <jonathanspw> I've loosely skimmed it when I was giving advice to him on devel but that's as far as I've gotten.
20:06:54 <carlwgeorge> is there a thread on devel that would be helpful to skim first?
20:06:56 <Eighth_Doctor> .hello ngompa
20:06:57 <zodbot> Eighth_Doctor: ngompa 'Neal Gompa' <ngompa13@gmail.com>
20:07:03 <tdawson> Hello Eighth_Doctor
20:07:14 <jonathanspw> "apptainer 1.1.8-1 has an incompatible change for apptainer-suid users" has some info.
20:07:54 <tdawson> The emails on it have been rather long and detailed ... my biggest problem is I'm not sure if people are for or against it.   Or a little of both.
20:08:42 <smooge> i skimmed it and it seemed to be trying to focus back on the older singularity fight
20:08:51 <nirik> oh hai
20:09:01 <smooge> no nirik no meeting for you
20:09:06 <smooge> go back to email
20:09:06 <tdawson> From what I see, at least for epel-8 ane epel-9 it seems like the CVE has already been patched in RHEL.
20:09:21 <tdawson> Morning nirik
20:09:33 <nirik> ha. email will always be there
20:09:37 <Eighth_Doctor> I think it's a nothingburger for everyone on RHEL 8/9, so we shouldn't have an incompatible behavior update
20:09:38 <jonathanspw> smooge: I think it's more or less singularity trying to prevent confusion in their ecosystem because there seems to be a lot of overlap between the projects and I'd imagine users are quite confused on who's who/what's what.
20:09:59 <Eighth_Doctor> but for RHEL 7, I'm not sure whether we should allow the update
20:10:29 <Eighth_Doctor> especially since Red Hat's rating of the CVE was considerably lower than apptainer's
20:10:52 <jonathanspw> Another interesting point is that the maintainer in this case IS part of the apptainer team.  Why can't they just backport a fix themselves?
20:11:10 <jonathanspw> They should be perfectly equipped to patch it.
20:11:11 <salimma> .hello
20:11:11 <zodbot> salimma: (hello <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "hellomynameis $1".
20:11:28 <salimma> sorry, had to watch the kid. uh... still apptaineR?
20:11:31 <salimma> .hi
20:11:32 <zodbot> salimma: salimma 'Michel Alexandre Salim' <michel@michel-slm.name>
20:11:39 <tdawson> hello salimma
20:11:43 * nirik hasn't caught up on this one at all
20:12:06 <Eighth_Doctor> Michel Alexandre Salim 🎩: yes
20:12:30 <carlwgeorge> without reading it all yet, my gut instinct is that like rhel7 itself, we should be less inclined to grant an incompat update request if the severity is not bad
20:13:03 <carlwgeorge> the nvd page doesn't have a rating yet, it's "awaiting analysis"
20:13:43 <salimma> does it affect ext4 as well, or really just ext3?
20:13:48 <Eighth_Doctor> it's all extfs
20:13:58 <salimma> ah, the ticket should be clarified perhaps
20:14:01 <Eighth_Doctor> the actual upstream GHA mentions ext4
20:14:11 <jonathanspw> apptainer's own advisory cites ext4 at least
20:14:14 <salimma> "As first discussed on epel-devel: apptainer-suid-1.1.8 by default disables mounting of ext3 filesystems, because of an announced high-severity vulnerability, CVE-2023-30549. I request permission to distribute this change in EPEL."
20:15:24 <carlwgeorge> uhh, looks like the maintainer is proceeding without waiting for an answer from us?  https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/XNHDXHVIOUWTMLQ4QTDK2KRDEVLTNT5F/
20:15:49 <nirik> yeah, the sent to announce already?
20:15:56 <jonathanspw> carlwgeorge: he's waiting to push it to stable.  Did you see my thread earlier discussing it with him?
20:16:04 <carlwgeorge> no haven't found it yet
20:16:16 <jonathanspw> He'd already pushed it to testing at that point and I told him to hold it from stable for sure, and do the policy items in the meantime.
20:16:25 <carlwgeorge> but i'm pretty sure the policy doesn't say "put it in testing first then ask permission"
20:16:29 <jonathanspw> Ohh it was on epel-devel not fedora-devel.
20:16:52 <jonathanspw> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/LHQDDPAAVGSQBIELADJXL2YQNDK2YCMY/
20:16:54 <carlwgeorge> this maintainer has already show a complete disregard for policy and claiming ignorance after the fact
20:18:21 <Eighth_Doctor> carlwgeorge: it's definitely not that
20:18:36 <Eighth_Doctor> (that is, push to testing then ask)
20:19:08 <jonathanspw> It's weird to think he was ignorant about the incompatible upgrade policy since that's what we *just* went through with him a few months ago.  Alas I gave him the benefit of the doubt and just told him to hold it from stable and pointed him at the policy and now here we are.
20:19:28 * carlwgeorge sighs
20:19:58 <tdawson> Anyway, we're not going to vote on it this week since it just came in.
20:20:11 <smooge> agreed
20:20:48 <tdawson> So, if ya'll would join in the discussion and become familiar with it till next week, that would be good.
20:21:04 <tdawson> Moving on.
20:21:16 <tdawson> #topic Old Business
20:21:50 <tdawson> Is there any Old Business that needs to come up this week?
20:22:30 <tdawson> I had one Old Business question if nobody has any.
20:22:44 <jonathanspw> shoot!
20:23:07 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: How long do we want to keep the EPEL 10 "various points" discussions open before we make final decisions?
20:23:28 <tdawson> "various points" being things like dist-tag and repo stuff.
20:24:19 <carlwgeorge> not sure, as much as I value the input at some point we have to cut if off and just have the steering committee members vote on each thing
20:24:50 <tdawson> Ya, that's what I was thinking ... I just couldn't think of a good "when"
20:25:20 <nirik> there's not a great hurry is there?
20:25:28 <tdawson> Not really.
20:25:41 <nirik> but also, we could decide and if we need to adjust we can do that too...
20:25:53 <tdawson> I'm fine with 6 months or something ... just so I have it on my agenda to bring up.
20:25:57 <carlwgeorge> not a hurry, but I don't think leaving it much longer will get us any new info
20:26:22 <carlwgeorge> I was thinking a few more weeks at most just so we can consider it settled
20:27:04 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: OK, I'm fine with that.  Just be sure to give us at least a week heads up so people can make sure they are here for a vote.
20:28:01 <tdawson> That's all I have for Old Business, unless anyone else has anything else old.
20:28:28 <nirik> yeah, this week is... not good, but hopefully in a few...
20:28:43 <carlwgeorge> regarding the docs restructuring, if anyone wants to help you can send prs to this branch https://pagure.io/epel/commits/overhaul
20:29:38 <neil> .hi
20:29:39 <zodbot> neil: neil 'Neil Hanlon' <neil@shrug.pw>
20:29:43 <neil> am quite late, sorry.. other meetings
20:29:47 <tdawson> Hi neil
20:29:54 <tdawson> not a problem.
20:30:21 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: I keep telling myself I'm going to help more with the overhaul, and then other things keep piling up.
20:30:34 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: But hopefully next week I'll be able to do a pr or two there.
20:30:42 <carlwgeorge> sounds good
20:31:03 <tdawson> #topic General Issues / Open Floor
20:31:24 <tdawson> Anything for Open Floor?
20:32:42 <rsc> Not sure if it is appropriate here, but is known if the 4% laid of by Red Hat (according to heise.de) will affect EPEL?
20:33:04 <rsc> (EPEL / Fedora infrastructure)
20:33:19 <smooge> be well, be kind, and
20:33:23 <nirik> I don't think things are well known yet.
20:33:29 <Eighth_Doctor> we dunno
20:33:35 <Eighth_Doctor> it's all a bit of a mess right now
20:34:00 <Eighth_Doctor> honestly, my headspace is pretty ruined this week
20:34:09 <nirik> yep. hard to focus... ;(
20:34:14 <neil> that's very fair.
20:34:18 * neil sends love to y'all
20:34:30 <neil> been through that. sucks.
20:34:43 <Eighth_Doctor> every time it happens, it's utter garbage to everyone
20:34:45 <salimma> sending good thoughts. since sadly I can't refer anyone for jobs :(
20:34:49 <Eighth_Doctor> went through it at my previous job too
20:34:56 * nirik seconds smooge's be well, be kind...
20:35:10 <Eighth_Doctor> (losing people left and right, I mean)
20:35:29 <Eighth_Doctor> anyway, on a more positive note, epel seems to be okay
20:35:37 <Eighth_Doctor> and we got new FMN today too
20:35:50 <Eighth_Doctor> I don't understand how the notification configuration works, but it's new and shiny!
20:36:16 <Eighth_Doctor> and it seemingly supports Matrix messaging directly!
20:36:21 <tdawson> Ooohh ... shiny :)
20:36:31 <jonathanspw> Is there anything that can be done about the tier0 mirror issues that cause cascading delays to tier1+ mirrors?
20:36:51 <jonathanspw> Guess that's mostly a nirik question
20:37:47 <nirik> yes, new fmn supports matrix. ;)
20:38:06 <nirik> I am working on fixing download-ib01. I'm syncing archive to it... once thats done it should be ready to put back in service.
20:38:19 <jonathanspw> Ok happy to hear you're on it :)
20:38:30 <nirik> download-cc-rdu01 is dead. We are ordering a replacement machine, but I have no idea how long that will take to grind thru the process. ;(
20:38:48 <nirik> it's been approved, but it still needs PO, ordering, assembly, etc etc.
20:39:05 <jonathanspw> Hopefully with some NVMe :D
20:39:08 <nirik> So, hopefully we will be in a better place in a few weeks
20:39:22 <nirik> SSDs actually, but a bunch of them. :)
20:39:42 <jonathanspw> Ok that's still a big step up from what I understand!
20:40:07 <nirik> oh yes. The old one was a ibm system-x box.
20:40:22 <neil> https://www.anandtech.com/show/18826/asustor-launches-flashstor-nas-up-to-12-m2-slots-10gbe-connectivity :D
20:41:11 <Eighth_Doctor> nirik: xSystems?! jeez that's old
20:41:18 * nirik guesses we are degressing. :)
20:41:22 <tdawson> Oooh ... shiny ... and black at the same time.
20:41:28 <tdawson> Ya ... I think we are.
20:41:29 <nirik> yes, ancient.
20:41:31 <jonathanspw> I'm sure you've looked into it before but for good cost to performance ratios I've had insanely good luck with giant spinning rust arrays being cached by just a little bit of NVMe with LVM caching/tiering.
20:41:35 <tdawson> Anything else before we close up?
20:41:49 <Eighth_Doctor> oh man that box looks like a Playstation
20:41:56 <nirik> oh, actually this is 10k sas drives for the most of the storage...
20:42:35 <neil> Eighth_Doctor: that was my thought too heh
20:42:39 <carlwgeorge> tdawson: what do you think about bringing https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Steering_Committee over to the docs overhaul branch?
20:42:53 <carlwgeorge> i don't believe it's in our current docs
20:42:57 * nirik has nothing else. If anyone has HW questions, feel free to ask in admin. ;)
20:43:30 <neil> only thing from me is I guess there was a round of packages that got orphaned in the last couple days, I saw at least a few epel-tangential things there
20:43:37 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: Really?  I missed that on the first doc round ... oops.
20:43:50 <carlwgeorge> double check me in case i missed it of course
20:44:08 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: No, I think you are right, I don't remember it anywhere, but yes, bring it over.
20:44:43 <tdawson> neil: Ya ... I saw a few of those too ...
20:45:31 <tdawson> I just realized.  One of those orphan ones was only orphaned for an hour or so before being picked up ... I need to make sure the epel didn't get orphaned as well.
20:46:50 <carlwgeorge> one thing i'm noticing missing from the steering committee wiki page, is what is our quorum?
20:47:33 <carlwgeorge> it's seven members, but how many of those have to be present (or vote by proxy) for us to vote on something?
20:47:44 <tdawson> carlwgeorge: Does that mean how many have to be here to have a meeting?
20:48:03 <tdawson> Ah ... well ... that's a good question.
20:48:18 <jonathanspw> there's also no mention of how the committee is selected going forward, ala fesco voting type thing
20:48:19 <carlwgeorge> i think that is another aspect of it, although i'm pretty sure we typically just do the meeting and if it's shorter than normal oh well
20:49:22 <tdawson> That's also a good question.
20:49:40 <carlwgeorge> i don't have answers for this, but wanted to put it on folks radar
20:50:01 <carlwgeorge> maybe we want to mirror fesco rules as much as possible, maybe not
20:50:07 <smooge> ok who wants a histor lesson?
20:50:24 <tdawson> Oh ... look at the time ...
20:50:25 <nirik> we used to...oh, smooge can do it.
20:50:29 <tdawson> :)
20:50:39 <tdawson> Just kidding.  Go for it.
20:50:51 * carlwgeorge grabs popcorn for smooge story hour
20:51:13 <smooge> when EPEL was first started we had a formal system which required people to vote in to be on the committee and had rules for quorum (3/4 I believe).
20:52:37 <smooge> I believe if you go through the first couple years of epel-devel you will see various people running for seats and meeting notes. After a while, it was mainly the same people running but smaller sets running each time
20:53:08 <smooge> meetings were also not hitting quorum and someone who was playing Alexander Haig a lot was running things by fiat.
20:53:09 * nirik notes this is where some of the 'project' vs 'sig' discussion came about.
20:54:40 <smooge> at some point we decided to move to just being a SIG. That meant we didn't need to do regular elections, regular reports to the Council and FESCO, and could just have the 3-4 people who were doing all the work *hi nirik and dgilmore * just do the work
20:55:35 <smooge> move ahead a bunch of years, this Alexander Haig person took over the committee for his own use for a while until Troy Dawson came to rescue things.
20:55:38 <nirik> I personally am a fan of less process... but I understand that sometimes it's needed. Or perhaps we can do a middle ground somewhere.
20:55:59 * jonathanspw googles Alexander Haig
20:56:11 <jonathanspw> doh, i just got memed lol
20:56:32 <smooge> there I did the history in 6 minutes
20:56:40 <carlwgeorge> tada
20:56:46 <smooge> versus my normal 60 minutes
20:56:48 <tdawson> smooge: Thanks
20:56:50 <jonathanspw> 4 minutes to spare
20:56:51 <salimma> oh... that guy
20:56:55 <tdawson> That was helpful and informative.
20:56:59 <salimma> (Haig I mean, idk who the Haig of EPEL was)
20:56:59 * dherrera claps
20:57:28 <smooge> salimma some person who shows up in meetings still and gives history lessons
20:57:52 <tdawson> We're getting a little low on time (for real this time) ... how about we get a pull request, and various questions about the committee together for next week.
20:57:57 <salimma> I see :P
20:58:02 <carlwgeorge> i for one welcome our past and future smooge overlords
20:58:44 <Eighth_Doctor> sgtm
20:58:50 <tdawson> I personally like the more informal committee structure, but I think a few clarifications on things like quorum would be good.
20:59:09 <tdawson> And with that, our time is up.
20:59:31 <smooge> [The Alexander Haig reference was one I made back a long time ago when Thorsten and Mike McGrath I think couldn't run a meeting.. so I took the nuclear football and ran.]
20:59:50 <tdawson> Thank you all for the good discussions, and especially for the nice history lesson.  And thank you all for all you do for EPEL and it's community.
21:00:05 <neil> thanks tdawson, smooge, all :)
21:00:05 <tdawson> I'll talk to you all next week, if not sooner.
21:00:16 <tdawson> #endmeeting