#meeting-1:fedoraproject.org log

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:01:21

!startmeeting EPEL (2024-04-03)

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

18:01:22

Meeting started at 2024-04-03 18:01:21 UTC

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

18:01:22

The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2024-04-03)'

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

18:01:22

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:01:24

Pablo Sebastian Greco (pgreco)

<@nhanlon:beeper.com>

18:01:28

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:01:29

Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:01:30

!meetingname epel

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:01:36

!topic aloha

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:01:41

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:01:42

Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his

<@davide:cavalca.name>

18:02:12

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:02:14

Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:02:20

EHLO

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:02:21

morning.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:02:36

Hi Davide Cavalca Michel Lind 🎩 Neil Hanlon

<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>

18:02:41

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:02:42

Yaakov Selkowitz (yselkowitz)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:02:52

Morning nirik

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:03:08

Ehhlloo Stephen J Smoogen

<@nhanlon:beeper.com>

18:03:16

no STARTTLS? i dunno if i can trust you

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:03:31

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:03:34

Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:03:34

Hi Pablo Greco

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:03:56

Hi Diego Herrera and yselkowitz

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:04:18

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:04:21

Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:04:28

Hi Carl George

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:19

!topic End Of Life (EOL)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:24

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

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

18:05:25

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:05:26

Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:44

Hi Robby Callicotte

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:06:05

EOL for 8 is literally next month.

<@nhanlon:beeper.com>

18:06:25

twelve more weeks til 7 EOL

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:06:33

Sorry ... epel8-next ...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:06:41

Didn't mean to scare anyone too bad.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:07:20

Yep ... 7 is getting close too ... I'm starting to get a little antsy.

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

18:07:24

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:07:25

Jonathan Wright (jonathanspw)

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

18:07:45

All this room changing really throws me off :D

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:08:40

jonathanspw: What's really frustrating me is that the calendar keeps changing it back.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:08:52

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

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:08:59

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

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:09:47

We currently only have one issue set for the meeting - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/268

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:10:28

I have a pull request up, but I haven't gotten any comments yet.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:10:41

!link https://pagure.io/epel/pull-request/270

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:11:17

i have thoughts but haven't found the time yet to get them all written down as comments

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

18:11:18

pr seems reasonable to me

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:11:33

I think the pr looks good... I haven't looked super closely tho

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:12:20

Troy Dawson: do you want to interactively go over feedback here, or just keep it in one place in the pr comments?

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

18:12:59

`You will be able to branch`, has this changed recently?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:12:59

i don't know how full the agenda is today for open floor stuff

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:13:03

We talked a little bit in the last meeting. I asked what "Sponsors" were, since I didn't know what it was I had changed it to "SIG members" But now I know it meant "Group Sponsors"

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

18:13:14

AFAIR, we couldn't request an epel branch on an existing package

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

18:13:28

we could maintain it if the owner requested it though

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:13:58

Pablo Greco: If the epel-packagers-sig group is added to the package, then it can be branched. If it hasn't, then it can't.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:14:23

So yes, what you said. So, if what I wrote isn't clear, go ahead and make a change.

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

18:14:39

ok, so not on any package, got it

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:14:47

If you have some line by line stuff, put it in the pull request I think.

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:15:08

we did vote on a thing to allow epel-packager-sig members to request epelX-next branches if a package has a corresponding epelX branch, but it hasn't been implemented in fedpkg/fedscm-admin yet

<@pgreco:fedora.im>

18:15:12

that was my only concern, I'm good with the rest

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:15:24

blame me, i said i would do it and haven't gotten around to it yet

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:15:41

Oh, I forgot about that.

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:15:52

!link https://pagure.io/epel/issue/263

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:16:28

if anyone is interested in taking over the implementation of this, i'd love the help. otherwise i'll keep it in my to-do list.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:17:00

is this approved in principle?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:17:10

yes, we voted on it

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:17:14

oh right

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:17:22

sorry, I didn't see the "any EPEL package" part

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:17:37

soon I guess it will just apply to epel9-next. ;)

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:17:38

this will carry over to, in the future, being able to request epel10, epel11, etc. right?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:17:41

it's a relatively minor thing, but it will remove a road block in some scenarios

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:17:50

so "once it's branched for EPEL we can ask for other EPEL branches"

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:18:28

alternatively, we could avoid code changes, and just make it a policy only thing that requires the `--exception` flag and waiting for releng

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:18:51

right, which is why I'm hoping we extend that to cover epel10 too

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:18:53

no, this was explicit for same major version, i.e. epel9-next for a package with epel9

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:19:03

same principle, epel10 is basically the equivalent of a -next anyway, right

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:19:11

I don't think that's what we were voting/discussing. The problem was that many EPEL packagers are still confused by epel-next, and this would allow us to fix up packages on CentOS Stream 8/9 for them.

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:19:48

with epel10 we won't have this problem, because the leading branch will be epel10, and minor version branches will be done in bulk

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:20:13

I think giving the sig the power to branch for EPEL10 (unless it already has permissions) is starting to over-reach it's power.

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:21:05

well there is some nuance there, if the sig is on a package they can request branches

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:21:23

Correct

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:21:30

which is different than this request about the sig having an implied permission on packages it's not explicitly listed on

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:21:58

oh i think that's what you were getting at with the part in parenthesis

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:22:28

agreed in that case

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:22:33

Yep

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:22:44

ah ok. this is constrained to epelX -> epelX-nest

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:22:52

to fix Stream issues, fair enough

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:23:26

yeah. I guess the nice part is, if we ever want to be proper "provenpackager for EPEL" with blanket branching request, once this issue is implemented that part won't be too hard

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:23:51

I think we've gotten a little off topic. It sounds like some people still have some changes they want to my pull request (including me) ... so it wouldn't be right to vote on it this week.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:23:51

but that should be a different vote

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:24:37

I'm not really in favor of 'blanket branching' power... if you want to branch something you should be a maintainer/collaborator. Otherwise you are just driving by...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:25:03

Moving on ...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:25:22

That was our only "Meetings" issue.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:25:31

!topic Old Business

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:25:47

Does anyone have any Old Business they want to bring up?

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:26:28

My joints ache today

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:26:31

yeah, I think any implementation of blanket branching should auto-add epel-packagers-sig to collaborator. so maybe just revisiting the existing stalled policy and tweak the thresholds / automate the processing to be more consistent

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:27:20

for old business, we have an epel10 related pr up for releng to review https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/1878

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:27:33

That's cuz your Old ... and that's your own Business.

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:27:48

well you asked

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:28:18

AMAZON YOU GET OFF MY LAWN

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:28:36

Carl George: Very nice

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:29:01

do note that we are in freeze right now for f40...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:29:13

Is that going to staging? Or is this just creating a repo in general?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:29:17

(but this seems easy to get an exception for, I can't see how it would affect anything else)

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:29:37

just syncing the repo IIRC

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:30:18

yup, syncing the repo to batcave, which is what we'll point staging koji to

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:30:35

Cool, it's a nice start.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:30:54

Any other Old Business?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:31:59

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/infra/sysadmin_guide/fedora-releases/#_change_freeze

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:32:24

I have one quick Old Business ... doesn't have to be today, we still have three weeks, but take a look at the election questions - https://pagure.io/epel/issue/269

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:32:49

thanks, googling got me to an old wiki page

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:33:05

thanks, googling got me to an old wiki page, this is better of course

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:33:15

Moving on ...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:33:35

!topic General Issues / Open Floor

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:33:40

Michel Lind 🎩: You said you had something for open floor?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:34:04

i concur on dropping the irc questions on the questionnaire

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:35:19

ah yes

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:35:21

Yep. Those original questions I just cut and pasted from Fedora ones. Some make sense, but the IRC/Matric ones didn't.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:35:40

so - for EPEL updates Bodhi does not run installability tests, while it does for Fedora

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:36:08

I've been informed it's because Bodhi does not have access to RHEL repos - is that true, and can we ask to get that sorted out?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:36:29

uh, you mean fedora-ci?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:36:32

or ?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:36:39

testing farm i think

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:36:58

probably fedora-ci, yeah. from the user/packager POV the results show up in Bodhi :)

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:36:59

yeah, so to my understanding that was actually fixed.

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:37:07

we've asked the team that added the checks, but basically got blown off

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:37:20

also the tests don't run consistently on fedora either

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:37:35

https://pagure.io/fedora-ci/general/issue/454

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:37:47

oh, interesting. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-b64b18fabe runs tests while https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-cdf27e2aa6 does not

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:37:52

same package, same spec, just different build targets

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:37:56

thats zuul tho, so perhaps not what you meant?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:38:29

is https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/83074824-7f7d-46b7-b8f2-9a646495a6ee/ zuul?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:39:01

(linked from the "automated tests" tab in bodhi)

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:39:22

no... there's zuul (mostly testing pr's, upstream projects), fedora-ci/testing-farm testing updates and openqa testing updates.

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:39:23

https://docs.testing-farm.io/Testing%20Farm/0.1/index.html

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:39:35

ah. so yeah this one is for fedora-ci/testing-farm

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:39:44

(at least thats my understanding)

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:39:56

There is a #fedora-ci:fedoraproject.org room where they hang out, could ask there?

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:40:08

so this is more needed on EPEL than on Fedora - on Fedora if you mess up and publish an update where some subpackages don't install, eventually you get a bugzilla FTI issue

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:40:27

on EPEL we don't have that yet, so being able to get a "hey, this does not install" automated check is extra useful

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:40:53

zuul's pages are at https://zuul-ci.org/docs/zuul/8.1.0/ and it looks to use the testing farm for part of its work

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:41:05

if the folks in fedora-ci have some backchannels to get the testing farm folks to fix this, that would be great

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:41:30

I'd say definitely talk and see if we can get some testing working or fix issues...

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:42:05

I can follow up with Adam in the QA channel

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:42:08

there shouldn't be a blocker to getting rhel, but it's easy to see how that can get unnecessarily complicated

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:42:17

but it's a separate issue from #454 right?

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:43:13

I also have a more ambituous proposal of asking if we can check if the update would make /something else/ FTI, but that's also something for discussion with QA anyway

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:43:17

I think they just don't run epel updates thru testing right now? but I don't know if thats just because no one asked or if they have resource issues or what.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:44:11

right, maybe it will just work and it's just not turned on yet

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:44:35

It would be nice. My "will it install" was always meant to be a temporary fill in. Getting something official would be nice.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:45:08

yeah, having both the fedora-ci check and FTI tasks filed will be great

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:45:21

(me cries in Hyperscale where we don't even have Bodhi)

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:45:42

just in the last few weeks Stephen J Smoogen brought up another epel package that was added and didn't install, dante

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:46:42

Is anyone going to be following up on this? I see lots of good discussion, but I might have missed someone taking some action.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:47:05

oh, I'll follow up with QA. do we need an issue, or just an action?

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:47:36

Michel Lind 🎩: If you need an issue, we can make one. Up to you.

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:48:16

oh wait... CI != QA?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:49:02

yes, they are completely different groups of people...

<@salimma:fedora.im>

18:49:21

!action salimma to follow up with CI on enabling installability checks for EPEL

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:49:56

Michel Lind 🎩: Thank you

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:50:21

nirik: You said you had something for Open Floor as well?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:51:09

oh yeah, there's a discussion on the mirror-admin list about increase in repodata requests.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:51:21

It's starting to sound like people are thinking it's rhel7 eol traffic...

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:51:38

but we may never know. :) but if anyone has insights, take a look.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:52:04

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/mirror-admin@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/37HFTJPW2ELUEZCSPW5RSF3GFS2BHQ5P/

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:52:06

Doesn't it show in the logs?

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:52:37

it does seem to be epel7... but it's _all_ the repodata...

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:52:42

EL7 yum does not give a strong 'key' to say what is being requested by whom

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:53:33

and the tooling for leaapp etc may use slightly different variations

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:53:58

Ah ... ok.

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:54:54

in any case if it's 7 it will go away in a while. ;)

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:55:24

hahahahah

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:55:27

hahahahahahha

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:55:38

sorry I remember us saying that about EL6

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:55:49

Twelve more weeks ...

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

18:55:54

I guess leapp *might* explain it?

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:55:56

the thread mentions 8 as well

<@carlwgeorge:matrix.org>

18:56:30

in fact the examples given for requests "every few minutes" are epel8

<@jonathanspw:fedora.im>

18:56:33

would have to be either RH leapp or alma elevate. for the latter I could try to correlate it to logs on our end for the elvate repo, hold on

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:56:50

It is a guess on my part. I am seeing a lot of people asking about upgrading from 7 in various places starting around when the person said 'I started seeing bad traffic in March'

<@smooge:fedora.im>

18:57:39

'bad traffic' being more EPEL traffic asking for a lot of files

<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>

18:57:44

I'm not sure whats going on, but we can look for more patterns, or just see if it goes away.

<@nhanlon:beeper.com>

18:59:01

definitely wonky; i'm gonna look at the primary mirror logs for rocky and see if I see any patterns that stand out. obviously it's not EPEL directly, but it should give some indication

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:59:12

Our time is almost up. Is there anything else urgent people want to bring up before we close?

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

19:00:00

Thank you all for coming, and thank you for the very good discussions.

<@nhanlon:beeper.com>

19:00:14

Thanks for chairing Troy Dawson !

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

19:00:14

I'll talk to ya'll next week, if not sooner.

<@nhanlon:beeper.com>

19:00:19

take care, folks

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

19:00:30

!endmeeting