#meeting:fedoraproject.org log

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:00:28

!startmeeting EPEL (2023-11-15)

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

21:00:29

Meeting started at 2023-11-29 21:00:28 UTC

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

21:00:29

The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2023-11-15)'

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:00:35

!meetingname epel

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:00:43

!topic aloha

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:00:45

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:00:47

Carl George (carlwgeorge)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:00:56

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:00:57

None (tdawson)

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

21:01:00

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:01:01

Pablo Sebastian Greco (pgreco)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:01:13

Ah ... it still doesn't know me ... oh well.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:01:40

Hi Pablo Greco and Carl George

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

21:02:21

!hi ?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:02:22

!hi

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

21:02:23

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:02:24

Kevin Fenzi (kevin) - he / him / his

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:02:24

Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

21:02:28

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:02:29

Jonathan Wright (jonathanspw)

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:02:52

Troy Dawson: you likely have 'private' set on your account data... it thus can't get your name...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:05:01

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:05:02

None (tdawson)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:05:34

!topic End Of Life (EOL)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:05:41

RHEL 7 / epel-7 will go EOL on 2024-06-30 https://endoflife.date/rhel CentOS Stream 8 / epel-8-next goes EOL in 2024-05-31 CentOS Stream 9 / epel-9-next goes EOL in 2027-05-31 https://endoflife.date/centos-stream

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:05:56

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:05:57

Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:06:24

!topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:06:30

https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:06:52

Wow ... we haven't had a week without any open issues for a while.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:07:23

!topic Old Business

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:07:45

👴

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:08:03

Does anyone have any old business ... since I wasn't here last week, there might be some that I don't know about.

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

21:09:13

honestly, there wasn't much movement last week either.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:09:14

That looks so different between the web browser and Neochat. The browser shows and old man, and neochat shows what looks like a young kid.

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

21:09:41

i just wish the unread message counter would get fixed

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:09:53

i guess this one counts as old business, since i filed it 11 days ago

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:09:59

!link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11787

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:10:37

however i'm not sure i've brought it up at this meeting yet, so maybe not old for the context of this meeting

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:11:00

yeah, jednorozec was going to do this tomorrow or soon...

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:11:23

but I don't think per minor keys is a good idea really...

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:11:41

Conan Kudo: did you want to elaborate more on why you think we should do separate keys per minor version?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:12:24

i agree with nirik, it seems unnecessary, and el users would likely be surprised to have to accept a new epel key every six months

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:12:43

I wasn't advocating for it one way or another

<@michel:one.ems.host>

21:12:46

!hi

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:12:46

i agree with nirik, it seems unnecessary, and el users would likely be surprised to have to accept a new epel key every six months within the same major version

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

21:12:47

I'd argue against a key per minor as well

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:12:47

Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:12:53

!hi

<@michel:one.ems.host>

21:12:56

I'm still at lunch, will be sporadic

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:12:56

Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:13:08

The only reason I asked the question was because it would allow reuse of the same SOP as Fedora

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:13:48

that sop is going to have to diverge in several other ways anyways, i don't think reusing the fedora one verbatim would work anyways

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:13:56

okay, that's fine

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:13:57

I guess I thought this was the same SOP as Fedora, once per release ... it's just that the releases are very long.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:14:21

see, my confusion is whether we want to consider EPEL 10.Y as releases or not

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:14:50

in bodhi, yes. for package signing key, no. the nuance of major vs minor.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:14:59

I don't think it's actually worth it to do different keys for each minor version

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:15:00

Ah ... ok, I see what you were thinking ... for me, I'd say no ... EPEL 10 seems like a release to me.

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

21:15:35

yeah, worth bringing it up so it can be squashed properly

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:15:37

the only real benefit for it would be making key compromise less painful, but the downside would be that every gpg key would have to be added to the gpgkeys= in the repo file over time

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:15:40

that would very much suck

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:16:04

it was a fair question but i think we're all on board with keeping one key per major epel version

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:16:11

yeah

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:16:16

everything else can change independent of that

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:16:19

yup

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:16:29

I just figured it'd be worth asking now rather than later

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:16:36

since it's one of those "early design decision" things

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:16:43

it's hard to back out of once it's set

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:17:12

once we get the key id, i plan to send the initial epel10 prs to robosignatory and bodhi so they recognize it

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:17:30

cool

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:17:46

i think that's all i had on that one Troy Dawson, we can move on

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:17:50

Sounds settled then. Any other Old Business?

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:18:14

!topic General Issues / Open Floor

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:18:34

Anybody have anything for Open Floor?

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:18:35

I have one thing for open floor

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:18:47

Davide Cavalca Go for it.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:19:02

go for it

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:19:11

Just don't spill your lunch on your keyboard.

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:19:27

nom nom

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:19:45

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2251820 is another package from HA I'm trying to get branched in epel

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:20:06

oof

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:20:23

Just wanted someone to double check that I explained things correctly for the maintainer as they didn't seem familiar with the process

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:20:51

it seems right

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:20:54

lgtm

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:21:06

I assume the idea is to sync the RHEL/CS version to EPEL9?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:21:08

and build it?

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:21:49

Yep that was my plan

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:21:58

then that should be all gravy

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:22:17

I think you explained it better than I could have ... so LGTM

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:22:25

Perfect thanks

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:22:32

That's all for me

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:22:38

I had 2 small items.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:22:48

nirik: Go for it

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:23:17

first just wanted to note this request: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/11802 hopefully we can help them come up with a good solution.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:23:32

(basically they want to rebuild a thing in rhel with different compile time options)

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:23:54

this seems like something that doesn't belong in EPEL

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:24:07

i spoke with one of the maintainers from intel, ali, and he seems on board with doing it in hyperscale

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:24:37

it's the rhel maintainer pushing to do it in epel, and it's not clear to me why

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:24:39

yeah, Ali is already a member of CentOS Hyperscale and manages the -intel repo where this probably makes sense to be built

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:24:39

great. I was hoping we could come up with a solution for them, not just saying no. ;)

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:24:59

Davide Cavalca and I can reach out to him to get things going there

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:25:27

shipping rhel packages rebuild with different configure flags has never been in scope for epel, as far as i'm aware

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:25:33

Cool. Glad it's all looking to work out.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:26:06

if they can be done in a non-conflicting way, it's probably fine, but I don't know if that's even possible with this in a safe way, since it's loaded by OpenSSL as a plugin

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:26:17

and plugins are... weird

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:26:29

especially OpenSSL plugins

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

21:28:02

even if it's fine in that case, it would still would need to go through Fedora instead of requesting a special branch for EPEL IMHO

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:28:11

Second item: I created the archives for epel-8.8 and epel-9.2... delayed after the fact. We should try and make sure we track that and make them on the release day or something. Or at least someone files a ticket to track the work or something (I don't think it can easily be automated, but I could be wrong). If it's within 10 days it should be not too hard. Longer requires digging into snapshots and is not much fun.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:28:54

doesn't RHEL have some kind of public API or message bus thing that we could subscribe to?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:29:09

that way we could automate it and do it at the right moment

<@farribeiro:matrix.org>

21:29:17

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:29:19

Fábio Ribeiro (farribeiro) - he / him / his

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:29:23

not that I know of

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:29:37

I've tried to create a ticket, when Stephen J Smoogen doesn't beat me to it. But this release caught me by surprise and was at a really busy time.

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

21:29:43

even if it's fine in that case, it would still need to go through Fedora instead of requesting a special branch for EPEL IMHO

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

21:29:50

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:29:51

Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:30:05

sounds like we need that epel releng sop sooner than epel10

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:30:08

Hi Robby Callicotte

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

21:30:18

hello all

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:30:43

well, not an sop so much as a 'someone tracking releases and making sure it happens/is requested'

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:31:01

Is that a thing we can create? an "EPEL releng SOP"? if so, where?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:31:02

but I guess that could be part of a sop

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:31:41

Is there a Fedora SOP?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:31:44

probably alongside https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/infra/release_guide/sop_mass_branching/

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:31:52

well, there is a archive sop, but that is useless by itself.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:33:16

the existance of a sop doesn't mean someone knows when to follow it and do those things...

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:33:29

especially when release dates are not exactly known in advance

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:33:38

maybe we should ask the RHELeng folks for some help here?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:33:42

i could probably peek at the rhel schedule and set up calendar reminders, i just can't share those publicly

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:33:54

i could probably peek at the rhel schedule and set up calendar reminders to myself, i just can't share those publicly

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:34:11

it's not ideal, but better than nothing

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:34:21

I don't think it's unreasonable to maybe have some kind of message fired into our message bus from RHEL folks to trigger the process

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:34:48

or have some kind of public message thing we could subscribe to

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:34:55

something of some sort

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:35:32

in general, we're trying to have less human-centric processes because we have too many of them as it is :(

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:35:40

That might be nice, but I'd settle for just a ticket when a release happens. ;)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:35:50

Have a RHEL machine try to update redhat-release every six hours. And when it succeeds, trigger all of our SOP stuff.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:36:02

machine formatted ticket? :P

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:36:09

* a rhel machine for each major version

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:36:26

that is actually not a terrible idea, it could even be done with a container, right? since ubi and stuff is public

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:37:07

we also have packaged rhel-ubi repo configs in rpmdistro-repoquery that could be used simply to check whether the redhat-release version has changed

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:37:14

yes, lets build the best rube roldberg we can. :(

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:38:22

anyhow, we don't need to solve it today, but we should try and do better next release(s)...

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

21:38:48

possibly a releng toddler?

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:39:17

``` ngompa@fedora~> rpmdistro-repoquery rhel-ubi 9 --provides redhat-release Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:36 ago on Wed 29 Nov 2023 04:38:24 PM EST. base-module(platform:el9) config(redhat-release) = 9.3-0.5.el9 redhat-release = 9.3-0.5.el9 redhat-release(x86-64) = 9.3-0.5.el9 redhat-release-client redhat-release-computenode redhat-release-server redhat-release-workstation system-release = 9.3-0.5.el9 system-release(releasever) = 9 ```

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:40:10

``` ngompa@fedora ~> rpmdistro-repoquery rhel-ubi 9 --qf "%{VERSION}" redhat-release Last metadata expiration check: 0:01:34 ago on Wed 29 Nov 2023 04:38:24 PM EST. 9.3 ```

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:40:38

``` ngompa@fedora ~> rpmdistro-repoquery rhel-ubi 9 -q --qf "%{VERSION}" redhat-release 9.3 ```

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:41:12

it's not much of a rube goldberg machine :)

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

21:41:39

it doesn't even need to trigger the task, just send an email to us

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

21:41:59

or ideally, file the issue 🤔

<@davide:cavalca.name>

21:42:11

Yeah this seems reasonable

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:42:23

If it can file the issue, that would be best.

<@robert:fedora.im>

21:42:34

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

21:42:36

Robert Scheck (robert)

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:42:44

it works for 8 too :)

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:43:14

yeah, I'd be ok with it notifying or filing an issue.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:43:28

since 8 and 9 don't release at the same time, they'll need to be separate toddlers so things don't get too goofy

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:43:34

anyhow, it needs all the work to set it up and check things and such. but we don't need to do it right here. ;)

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:43:47

at least we know how we can :)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:45:00

I get enough random other indications (all the bugs I opened get closed) that I know the release has happened, it's the remembering to create the issue that I have a hard time remembering. So, scripting that part would be very nice.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:45:40

Before we get too into the weeds of this, does anyone else have anything for Open Floor?

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:47:19

We can end early if nobody has anything else.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

21:48:03

I don't have anything.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:48:17

OK, let's call it a meeting.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:48:57

Thank you all for coming and for the good discussion. And thank you all for all your work on EPEL and for the EPEL community.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:49:04

Talk to you next week.

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

21:49:06

see you next week, bye!

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:49:24

!endmeeting

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:49:55

!endmeeting

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

21:50:23

bot says no!

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

21:50:34

thanks Troy Dawson

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

21:50:43

Not again. 🙃

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

21:50:52

!endmeeting