20:00:06 #startmeeting EPEL (2023-08-16) 20:00:06 Meeting started Wed Aug 16 20:00:06 2023 UTC. 20:00:06 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 20:00:06 The chair is tdawson. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 20:00:06 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 20:00:06 The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(2023-08-16)' 20:00:07 #meetingname epel 20:00:07 The meeting name has been set to 'epel' 20:00:09 #chair nirik tdawson pgreco carlwgeorge salimma dcavalca dherrera gotmax23 smooge 20:00:09 Current chairs: carlwgeorge dcavalca dherrera gotmax23 nirik pgreco salimma smooge tdawson 20:00:10 #topic aloha 20:00:13 morning 20:00:15 yo 20:00:16 .hi 20:00:17 carlwgeorge: carlwgeorge 'Carl George' 20:00:20 .hello ngompa 20:00:21 Son_Goku: ngompa 'Neal Gompa' 20:00:22 .hello robert 20:00:27 rsc: robert 'Robert Scheck' 20:00:28 .hi 20:00:29 Morning nirik 20:00:30 jonathanspw: jonathanspw 'Jonathan Wright' 20:00:37 Hi carlwgeorge and jonathanspw 20:00:47 Yo Son_Goku 20:00:50 howdy troy, and neal on yet another new name lol 20:01:01 .hi 20:01:02 jcpunk: jcpunk 'Pat Riehecky' 20:01:07 hopefully this is temporary and we get back to Matrix 20:01:32 Hi jcpunk 20:02:03 jcpunk: Haven't seen you for a while here. Always good to see you. 20:02:17 I was free today so I figured I'd drop in 20:02:26 I don't actually have any content for today 20:02:51 Thanks for asking the question I was planning on asking. :) 20:04:55 #topic End Of Life (EOL) 20:04:56 RHEL 7 / epel-7 will go EOL on 2024-06-30 20:04:58 CentOS Stream 8 / epel-8-next goes EOL in 2024-05-31 20:04:59 CentOS Stream 9 / epel-9-next goes EOL in 2027-05-31 20:05:20 #topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues 20:05:21 https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open 20:05:41 We actually have something today ... 20:05:56 .epel 241 20:05:57 tdawson: Issue #241: Proposed incompatible security update for llhttp in EPEL9 - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/241 20:06:05 Still +1 from me 20:06:24 +1 here (forgot to add to the ticket) 20:06:39 "The same incompatible update was approved by FESCo for Fedora 37" == +1 from me to do the same in epel9 20:06:57 +1 from me also 20:07:45 There wasn't any negative votes last week either when we talked about it. 20:08:28 So, although smooge isn't here this week, I'll consider him for this. 20:09:03 I'll give it one more minute for anyone to give a negative vote, even if you aren't on the committee. 20:10:06 #info Proposed incompatible security update for llhttp in EPEL9 passed unanamously - no negative votes. 20:10:06 +1 20:10:30 Hi dherrera 20:10:53 hi ^^ 20:10:55 .hi 20:10:56 neil: Something blew up, please try again 20:10:59 neil: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 20:11:00 well, hi :) 20:11:05 Hi neal 20:11:08 :) 20:11:15 +1 late from me 20:12:56 Sounds good. Thank you. 20:12:56 stupid meetings at work scheduled during more important meetings like this one! 20:12:56 +2 late form me... 20:12:56 Hi pgreco_ 20:12:56 wait how come pablo get's a +2?! ;) 20:12:57 I managed to escape from the conflicting meeting today ;) 20:13:17 *laughs* Well ... cuz he's pablo 20:13:23 yeah, fair 20:13:50 tdawson: wrong spelling of neil :) 20:14:17 just mix them together, nail 20:14:19 for halloween i'm gonna dress up as Son_Goku's IRL personality 20:14:25 Hi neal, and neil 20:14:28 oh geez 20:14:34 (joking) 20:14:34 my IRL self? 20:14:53 since people sometimes think I'm you, anyways (at least online) 20:14:57 lol 20:14:59 a consequence of you being _everywhere_ 20:15:05 big shoes to fill :) 20:15:07 I'm not... everywhere... 20:15:15 * Son_Goku shifts eyes 20:15:28 :) 20:15:37 OK, so this proposal passed. There will be another proposal to vote on next week. - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/CDNDAKTIAQTFTNDHOIHKQJ4B2LAV5ZSS/ 20:15:57 yay my thing 20:16:06 That is carlwgeorge's proposal. 20:16:07 ugh, carl. -1 20:16:14 * neil ducks 20:16:15 ouch :)\ 20:16:42 also related (but doesn't need a vote) https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/JZRLEWOCX5QX3XZ7INLUZIB7LPAMDUZC/ 20:17:03 carlwgeorge: Did you want to make an issue for it? or are you ok with us just remembering? 20:17:19 i was actually going to ask if an issue is required 20:17:27 it's not specifically required 20:17:33 i don't mind making one just for reminder purposes 20:17:43 the announcement and lack of objections is usually sufficient 20:17:58 I think the change makes sense (both retiring EL7 and updating EL9 in an incompatible way) -- the 'breaking' changes seem security related and people shouldn't rely on broken security 20:18:36 and the incompatibilities are essentially resolvable 20:18:38 see the emails for the full thing, but tldr is i'm retiring caddy in epel7, adding caddy to epel8, and incompat upgrading caddy in epel9 (to match the version i'm putting in epel8) 20:18:59 and though it's semi-off topic here, I'm assuming this is synchronizing with what's in Fedora, right? 20:18:59 carlwgeorge: The only question I have ... cuz I'm not sure if you said it or not ... is if people will have to do anything with their configuration files. ... and I can send that in an email if it would be better. 20:19:53 tdawson: most of the time no, unless they are using one of the two removed directives 20:21:02 Son_Goku: no, f39/rawhide is on 2.7, and f37/f38 is on 2.5. after these changes are done epel8/9 will be on 2.6. 20:21:31 Ah okay 20:21:33 it's messy and heavily dependent on what golang version is available. also that's why future incompat updates of caddy in epel are likely. 20:21:43 lets all repeat the non conformists oath... 20:21:52 it would be worth making a ticket for an incompat exception then 20:22:23 nirik++ 20:22:23 neil: Karma for kevin changed to 30 (for the release cycle f38): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 20:22:27 nah, i don't need an exception, i plan to only do it when forced to to fix cves. i still see value in announcing it each time. 20:24:22 other than v1 to v2, the breaking changes this project does are pretty small impact 20:24:22 Sounds good. Thank you carlwgeorge. 20:24:51 sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off if you are/were saying more. 20:25:05 no that was it, i'm good. we can move on. 20:25:27 OK, moving on. 20:25:36 #topic Old Business 20:26:07 Does anyone have any old business they want to bring up? 20:28:00 https://pagure.io/epel/issue/240 is a good discussion to have i think 20:28:40 Since it was brought before, I'm going to say it's old business ... Son_Goku has a pull request for the openh264 repo for epel-release - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-release/pull-request/28 20:28:45 yeah, I've marked that to comment on, but haven't yet... I'm not sure I am in favor of too much process... but perhaps it's fine 20:28:59 iirc epel steering is an extension of fesco, so i'd definitely like the fesco members here to weigh in 20:29:02 Sorry ... I had that all typed out ... didn't mean to bring two things up at once. 20:29:27 pick one and we'll put a pin in the other to keep the convos separate, either order is fine 20:30:00 Let's keep going with the Steering Committee process. 20:30:10 .epel 240 20:30:11 tdawson: Issue #240: Formalizing the EPEL Steering Committee member process - epel - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/240 20:31:34 on the first point of number of members, i don't see any justification to raise or lower it from the current count of seven 20:31:37 * nirik would prefer more pondering time on it 20:31:41 I really like Smooge's comments. 20:32:18 at times in the past we have done various things... but usually the people who show up and do things just gradually get added... 20:32:24 i kinda like the idea of hitching our wagon to the fedora election process 20:32:26 nirik: definatly. More time is needed to think and discuss. But, today seems like a good day to discuss. 20:33:13 i agree with smooge's point about feeling obligated, and having terms makes it easy for folks to just not run again, guilt-free 20:33:15 we could, but I am not sure there would be that many voters... it's hard getting people to vote for fesco/council. 20:33:59 that's why we'd ideally do it at the same time as fesco, so people are motivated to get a badge 20:34:18 synchronizing it with fesco would be nice yes 20:34:23 fedora release cycles don't really match up to rhel / el ones tho 20:34:29 I agree on the first point ... 7 seems like a good number. 20:34:33 they match up to minor versions at least 20:34:43 nirik: if people don't want to vote that's on them, then they have no right to complain :) voting is a bit more "community" than just having it have people basically appointed 20:34:53 7 seems like a good number, I'd agree 20:35:07 the only trouble for me is figuring out what I'd say different for fesco vs epsco 20:35:09 and we don't necessarily need them to match with anything, it's just a marker 20:35:33 I mostly do the same thing in both places 😅 20:35:48 there's just a lot less voting here 20:35:51 * nirik wonders how much we formally vote on things. Seems we reach consensus usually? 20:35:53 Need to figure out how long the terms are too, and if they'll be half offset like fesco where not all seats are up for reelection at the same time 20:35:59 speaking of, i think we should discuss if it's allowed to be on both, as epel steering is supposed to be an extension of fesco 20:36:14 i'm not necessarily against it, but think we should have the discussion 20:36:35 while that is true, fesco has largely taken the opinion that they should have little opinion on epel matters unless they impact fedora as a whole 20:37:05 the last few times I recall from fesco about epel matters was that fesco bounced it back to epsco 20:37:15 which lends credence to my point i think 20:37:30 Although voting has it's merits, there is also some downside. And that's making this, EPEL, more formal and less fuzzy. As nirik said, usually we go for consensus. 20:37:52 it's an odd look for someone to say in one meeting "we defer to epsco" and then in the other meeting have an opinion 20:38:04 well... I always have an opinion :P 20:38:17 not wrong per say, and if everyone else is good with it then i'll shut up about that point 20:38:29 many people in fedora wear multiple hats. ;) 20:38:39 I think I could fill a room with my hats :P 20:38:41 or at least a closet 20:38:57 anyhow, I think we should have just enough process to get things done, but no more. :) 20:39:02 certainly a hat rack? 20:39:05 (and you say you are not everywhere) 20:39:14 Son_Goku: do you have a sombrero? :) 20:39:17 ;) 20:40:03 like tdawson, i think i'm largely (entirely?) in agreement with what smooge wrote up 20:40:20 question, say we come up with some answers to those questions in the ticket... how do we... vote to approve it? 20:40:21 * nirik runs 20:40:29 lol 20:40:50 *laughs* 20:41:06 as troy said, the fuzzy voting is a separate elephant to eat (paraphrasing) 20:41:15 nirik: have you read Lord of the Flies? 20:41:22 heh 20:42:02 in case anyone missed the reference, how do you eat an elephant? one bite at a time. 20:42:36 Looks like the discussion has slowed down. I know for me, the thing I want/need to think about is "lifelong" vs "Yearly vote" ... I can see reasons for both and I want to think about it. 20:42:37 I'm trying to use myself as an example for the process, because I know that I haven't been around lately, and thought I'm expecting my situation to change soon-ish, it's been longer than what I was expecting 20:43:16 I like what smooge wrote, at this point I know I'm not pulling my weight 20:43:17 i generally try to defer to doing things like fedora, because epel is part of fedora, so i'd like to see the voting get more solidified and work like fesco voting 20:43:23 tdawson: still gotta consider what i said above in that I think. How long will terms be, and how often will votes be, and will some seats have offset voting. 20:43:26 but stepping down seems too permanent 20:43:34 I'm not sure about setting a hard number... I mean, we may have 7 folks now, but at times it's been... like 3-4... 20:43:35 but staying out for a couple of cycles makes it easier 20:43:41 Very true 20:44:00 and yeah, smooge's point about being able to step back easily is good. 20:44:01 currently stepping down would be permanent-ish, but with regular elections that would be different 20:44:14 What's going through my mind is "who will organize the voting" ... and my mind goes ... uggg 20:44:34 tdawson: you will, of course. everyone else can be elected but you're stuck forever 20:44:41 *laughs* 20:44:56 we already vote on stuff, so we can just vote on the new voting rules the same way we vote on stuff now (as the last vote that way) 20:45:21 Yep 20:45:29 sure, but can't we just keep doing that? :) (sorry, playing devils advocate some here) 20:45:58 anyhow, lots of things to ponder on here. 20:46:17 not being able to easily explain to outsiders how we vote is a bug, imo 20:46:34 we also don't really do it that often compared to fesco though 20:46:35 Nope, it's a documented feature. 20:47:21 isn't it only documented in an old wiki page? 20:47:21 Unfortunately, it's documented on the wiki ... so needs to get moved over. 20:47:31 :) 20:48:00 and i'll be frank, it's pretty convoluted iirc 20:48:07 * carlwgeorge looks for said wiki page 20:48:20 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Steering_Committee 20:49:06 I volunteer to help tdawson organize stuff 20:49:16 * neil joins tdawson in purgatory 20:49:24 nah there was another page that went into more detail, and talked about when voting escalated to "members-only" 20:49:54 Anyway, I'm going to timebox this before we run out of time. 20:50:19 good call, you had another thing, i think 20:50:19 I'll put it on next week's Old Business. 20:50:22 #topic General Issues / Open Floor 20:50:35 Does anyone have anything for Open Floor? 20:50:40 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Steering_Committee ? 20:50:44 oh right 20:51:16 Oh yes. Son_Goku has a pull request for the openh264 repo for epel-release - https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/epel-release/pull-request/28 20:51:20 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Archive:EPEL/SteeringCommittee/Voting ? 20:52:01 yeah, +1 on that... just haven't gotten to merge/build. I can or anyone else who can can go ahead... ;) 20:52:15 I didn't really want to discuss it much other than thank Son_Goku for getting that done. 20:52:25 indeed! 20:52:32 agreed, thanks Son_Goku! 20:52:38 +1 20:52:44 Son_Goku++ 20:52:44 dherrera: Karma for ngompa changed to 6 (for the release cycle f38): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 20:52:46 it's been a long slog 20:52:51 Son_Goku++ 20:52:57 almost two years :) 20:53:09 Son_Goku++ 20:53:09 jonathanspw: Karma for ngompa changed to 7 (for the release cycle f38): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 20:54:53 That's all I had for Open Floor. 20:55:42 so we can merge it now? :) 20:55:46 oh i was wrong, this main epsco wiki page does have the part i was thinking about, i was just doing ctrl+f for "voting" when i needed to do "vote" 20:56:48 Wha ... merge it ... but ... it's a shining example of greatness ... merging it would change the color scheme. ;) 20:58:00 Any other items ... we've got just a couple minutes left. 20:58:01 Son_Goku: sure. you want to? or shall I? 20:58:23 go for it! 20:58:34 k 20:59:54 Thank you all for coming and participating in the meeting. And thank you all for the work you do for EPEL and it's community. 21:00:14 #endmeeting