2025-04-30 18:00:13 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !startmeeting EPEL (2025-04-30)
2025-04-30 18:00:14 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-04-30 18:00:13 UTC
2025-04-30 18:00:15 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2025-04-30)'
2025-04-30 18:00:19 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic aloha
2025-04-30 18:00:19 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !meetingname epel
2025-04-30 18:00:19 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now epel
2025-04-30 18:00:49 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning (here, but also doing other stuff)
2025-04-30 18:01:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Morning nirik
2025-04-30 18:01:25 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-30 18:01:26 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his
2025-04-30 18:01:38 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Robby Callicotte 
2025-04-30 18:01:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-30 18:01:57 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-04-30 18:02:06 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-30 18:02:07 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his
2025-04-30 18:02:17 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-30 18:02:18 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-04-30 18:02:26 <@salimma:fedora.im> Davide and I just came back from breakfast 
2025-04-30 18:02:32 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Conan Kudo Carl George and Michel Lind UTC-8 until 5/5 
2025-04-30 18:02:52 <@dherrera:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-30 18:02:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his
2025-04-30 18:03:14 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Diego Herrera 
2025-04-30 18:04:09 <@elguero:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-30 18:04:11 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (elguero)
2025-04-30 18:04:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Michael L. Young 
2025-04-30 18:05:00 <@davide:cavalca.name> !hi
2025-04-30 18:05:01 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his
2025-04-30 18:05:17 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hi Davide Cavalca 
2025-04-30 18:05:26 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic EPEL Issues https://pagure.io/epel/issues
2025-04-30 18:05:26 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/epel/issues?tags=meeting&status=Open
2025-04-30 18:05:47 <@tdawson:fedora.im> The only open issue we have is #328
2025-04-30 18:05:54 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !epel 328
2025-04-30 18:05:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-30 18:05:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by ngompa
2025-04-30 18:05:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** a week ago
2025-04-30 18:05:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **epel #328** (https://pagure.io/epel/issue/328):**Figure out getting selinux-policy-epel autoinstalled**
2025-04-30 18:05:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-04-30 18:06:26 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I believe we were waiting for Conan Kudo to do some testing, but I'm having a hard time remembering what.
2025-04-30 18:07:27 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> testing the weak dep stuff
2025-04-30 18:07:42 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I did test it, and the reverse weak dep works
2025-04-30 18:08:31 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> oh wait no it doesn't
2025-04-30 18:08:31 <@tdawson:fedora.im> So if the reverse weak dep works, what is the plan?
2025-04-30 18:08:44 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I mixed up my records
2025-04-30 18:09:04 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I tested two cases: forward from epel-release via upgrade and reverse purely from selinux-policy
2025-04-30 18:09:35 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the first case works, the second case doesn't
2025-04-30 18:09:56 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> can you rephrase/elaborate on those test cases, the words aren't parsing in my brain
2025-04-30 18:10:10 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> basically, we currently have two different weak dep cases in the repository right now
2025-04-30 18:10:21 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the forward case (epel-release recommends selinux-policy-epel)
2025-04-30 18:10:34 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and the reverse case (selinux-policy-epel supplements selinux-policy)
2025-04-30 18:10:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the forward case accidentally works because nobody updated epel-release in centos extras
2025-04-30 18:11:07 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> which only applies to centos, not rhel
2025-04-30 18:11:10 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yes
2025-04-30 18:11:32 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> and would be wiped on on the next rebuild in extras
2025-04-30 18:11:42 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yup
2025-04-30 18:11:49 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Hmm... I thought I did update it in centos-extras ... I must have missed a step.
2025-04-30 18:12:12 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the reverse case doesn't work and I don't know why
2025-04-30 18:12:34 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> reinstalling selinux-policy-targeted doesn't trigger it either
2025-04-30 18:12:55 <@salimma:fedora.im> is this a bug in DNF?
2025-04-30 18:13:18 <@salimma:fedora.im> this is with the repo containing the package enabled on the current system, presumably
2025-04-30 18:13:36 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> oh no
2025-04-30 18:14:02 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I just read carefully the description of exclude_from_weak_autodetect
2025-04-30 18:14:18 <@salimma:fedora.im> what happened?
2025-04-30 18:14:42 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it disables reverse weak for installed packages too
2025-04-30 18:14:59 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> > If enabled, DNF will autodetect unmet weak dependencies (recommends or supplements) of packages installed on the system. Providers of these weak dependencies will not be installed by dnf as weak dependencies any more (they will still be installed if pulled in as a regular dependency).
2025-04-30 18:15:27 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> `dnf rei --setopt=exclude_from_weak_autodetect=0 --exclude=epel-release selinux-policy-targeted` in a container triggers what I want
2025-04-30 18:15:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> but if we use supplement then it should never be unmet right
2025-04-30 18:15:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh it was alread considered unmet before from the forward path?
2025-04-30 18:15:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yes
2025-04-30 18:16:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> so basically for introducing a new package never ever use forward dependency when the package is still uninstallable
2025-04-30 18:16:04 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> basically, all weak relations are not processed, not just forward ones
2025-04-30 18:16:26 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so the global state by libsolv automatically factors out weak dependencies
2025-04-30 18:16:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> if we always use supplement, it will work just fine from now on? (for new packages)
2025-04-30 18:16:31 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> including reverse ones
2025-04-30 18:16:43 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-30 18:16:44 <@salimma:fedora.im> but I thought they are only ignored if they are unavailable once
2025-04-30 18:16:45 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jonathan Wright (jonathanspw)
2025-04-30 18:16:50 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> what a mess
2025-04-30 18:16:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we need a fix in libsolv to... erm... resolve this
2025-04-30 18:17:15 <@salimma:fedora.im> if there's a new package that's never ever asked for as a weak dep but was unavailable, reverse weak dep should work for that package right?
2025-04-30 18:17:20 <@salimma:fedora.im> it does not help us now, but for the future
2025-04-30 18:17:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that's what I thought too, but it appears to be more comprehensive than that
2025-04-30 18:17:43 <@salimma:fedora.im> so... it means the docs is a lie and weak deps never actually works?
2025-04-30 18:17:47 <@salimma:fedora.im> I'm confused now
2025-04-30 18:18:15 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> no, it means that when the solver computes the solution, it factors in installed state per package for weak influences
2025-04-30 18:18:16 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i wonder if we argue the fact that this is going to result in a whole lot of issues and cases being filed against selinux-policy that we can convince them to reverse course
2025-04-30 18:18:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> including reverse ones
2025-04-30 18:18:39 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> which... actually makes sense, but it means this split is completely unworkable
2025-04-30 18:19:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> so... what is a case right now where weak dep would work? and why is our current situation different from that case
2025-04-30 18:19:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> selinux-policy isn't initially installed
2025-04-30 18:19:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that is the only case where it works
2025-04-30 18:19:36 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> (aside from the image build case)
2025-04-30 18:20:05 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> wait, so if selinux-policy is already installed, and you install epel-release via url, will it pull in selinux-policy-epel?
2025-04-30 18:20:10 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> nope
2025-04-30 18:20:29 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> then i don't understand what "the only case where it works" is then
2025-04-30 18:20:38 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> selinux-policy, once installed, becomes ineligible for _all_ weak rules
2025-04-30 18:20:49 <@salimma:fedora.im> why?
2025-04-30 18:21:00 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> if you have epel-release _already_ installed, then you install selinux-policy, then -epel one will also be installed
2025-04-30 18:21:01 <@salimma:fedora.im> because it used to not have weak deps and now it does?
2025-04-30 18:21:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> my gosh
2025-04-30 18:21:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> because of https://www.mankier.com/5/dnf5.conf#%5BMain%5D_Options-exclude_from_weak_autodetect
2025-04-30 18:21:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> right, now I sort of get it, but I was hoping that's not the case for reverse dep
2025-04-30 18:21:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> me too
2025-04-30 18:21:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> that's dnf5, does dnf4 behave the same way I guess?
2025-04-30 18:21:42 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it's libsolv, so yeah
2025-04-30 18:21:44 <@salimma:fedora.im> (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻
2025-04-30 18:22:08 <@salimma:fedora.im> can we add it to epel-release instead
2025-04-30 18:22:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh we can't
2025-04-30 18:22:12 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I'd have to double check, but I don't think dnf4's version of the man page was so explicit
2025-04-30 18:22:21 <@salimma:fedora.im> we can't for existing users for the same reason
2025-04-30 18:22:35 <@salimma:fedora.im> e.g. epel-release Recommends: selinux-policy-epel if selinux-policy
2025-04-30 18:22:45 <@salimma:fedora.im> that would work on fresh installs but again not on upgrade
2025-04-30 18:23:01 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> oh nope same doc in dnf4 version
2025-04-30 18:23:14 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Why not on upgrade?
2025-04-30 18:23:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it doesn't work for fresh installs because the repo doesn't exist
2025-04-30 18:23:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it works on upgrades from a version without it to a version with it
2025-04-30 18:23:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and... that's pretty much it
2025-04-30 18:24:11 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there is no reasonable way to make this split work without all of us hating ourselves in the process
2025-04-30 18:24:16 <@tdawson:fedora.im> It works with this quarters CentOS Stream Live images, but that's because I forced the packages in there.
2025-04-30 18:24:20 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> this sounds so very confusing
2025-04-30 18:24:32 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> proposal: we file an issue describing the flaws with this and ask the selinux-policy maintainer to reverse the change
2025-04-30 18:24:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> +1
2025-04-30 18:24:42 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> please
2025-04-30 18:24:46 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> +1
2025-04-30 18:24:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> my brain hurts reasoning through this
2025-04-30 18:24:58 <@salimma:fedora.im> +1
2025-04-30 18:24:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1 indeed (but I don't suspect it will help much)
2025-04-30 18:25:02 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> and yet i think you understand it better than the rest of us
2025-04-30 18:25:17 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I'll put the details in the ticket after the meeting
2025-04-30 18:25:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I will _try_ to explain it
2025-04-30 18:25:37 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thank you.
2025-04-30 18:25:53 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> if you want to write up the issue i'm happy to help proof read it and shape the phrasing around the support angle
2025-04-30 18:25:59 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this is like the anaconda accessibility thing, actually thinking through the solution hurts my brain
2025-04-30 18:26:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> can we not just have selinux-policy Requires (not recommend) selinux-policy-epel if epel-release ?
2025-04-30 18:26:15 <@salimma:fedora.im> then it will work right? just avoid using weak deps but use conditional deps
2025-04-30 18:26:19 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> then the initial install we have documented doesn't work
2025-04-30 18:26:20 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> nope.
2025-04-30 18:26:32 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that results in a broken dependency in the world state
2025-04-30 18:26:32 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> because when you install epel-release you don't have the epel repos available
2025-04-30 18:26:44 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> since epel-release exists in the transaction, but the repo doesn't
2025-04-30 18:26:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Requires(repo): epel
2025-04-30 18:26:57 <@salimma:fedora.im> but the next dnf update will pull in selinux-policy-epel right?
2025-04-30 18:27:10 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> you can't install the repo package in the first place
2025-04-30 18:27:15 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it will be a broken dependency
2025-04-30 18:27:16 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> nope, that's what neal tested
2025-04-30 18:27:39 <@salimma:fedora.im> - selinux-policy installed. no epel-relese so selinux-policy-epel not pulled in
2025-04-30 18:27:39 <@salimma:fedora.im> - dnf update. now selinux-policy-epel is pulled in? or not I guess, until it's updated
2025-04-30 18:27:39 <@salimma:fedora.im> - install epel-release. still fine because selinux-policy is not being updated
2025-04-30 18:27:44 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah... I think it's not worth dealing with this mess
2025-04-30 18:27:53 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there is no functioning case except image builds where everything is available
2025-04-30 18:27:55 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I know, we can add the hard requires and tell people to --force --nodeps </joking, please don't do this>
2025-04-30 18:28:09 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> nfw am I going down that road
2025-04-30 18:28:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this is how we get epel blackballed by GSS
2025-04-30 18:28:26 <@salimma:fedora.im> cheat and have selinux-policy-epel provides selinux-policy at a higher version but require selinux-policy-core at the current version
2025-04-30 18:28:34 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'm going to put a timebox on this, so 3 more minutes.
2025-04-30 18:28:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> and make selinux-policy provide this virtual core package :P
2025-04-30 18:28:49 <@salimma:fedora.im> GSS?
2025-04-30 18:28:58 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Red Hat Global Support Services
2025-04-30 18:29:04 <@salimma:fedora.im> I tell you this discussion makes me want to disable and remove selinux completely from my systems
2025-04-30 18:29:15 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Another thing to mention to them: selinux-policy and selinux-policy-epel have to be kept in sync... if they aren't one could be completely broken.
2025-04-30 18:29:17 <@salimma:fedora.im> it already is a PITA because any policy update seems to force a relabel and make the transaction crawling
2025-04-30 18:29:27 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah i wonder if we aren't getting more complaints just because of the number of people that outright disable it
2025-04-30 18:29:29 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that is _also_ not mandatory either
2025-04-30 18:29:44 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> forcing relabels all the time is expensive and not actually required
2025-04-30 18:29:53 <@salimma:fedora.im> right. but some packages do that
2025-04-30 18:30:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> including packages installed as a dependency that I don't directly care about
2025-04-30 18:30:23 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yeah it's because the docs on how to handle policy modules are not great
2025-04-30 18:30:34 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> they never left draft status and were never formally reviewed for sensibility
2025-04-30 18:31:18 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> maybe the best path forward is to push back to the maintainer as this seems unworkable?
2025-04-30 18:31:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> OK, I'm timeboxing this discussion.  I believe Conan Kudo was going to writeup his findings in the issue ... and we can discuss in the issue, or again next week.
2025-04-30 18:31:38 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I'll do a writeup, Carl George will push back on the existence of this
2025-04-30 18:31:50 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Sounds good to me.
2025-04-30 18:32:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thank you all for the work and discussion on this.
2025-04-30 18:32:10 <@salimma:fedora.im> ugh
2025-04-30 18:32:21 <@tdawson:fedora.im> That was the only issue marked with meeting, so I'm going to move to Old Business.
2025-04-30 18:32:29 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic Old Business
2025-04-30 18:32:38 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Does anyone have any old business they want to bring up?
2025-04-30 18:33:46 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> !epel 325
2025-04-30 18:33:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-04-30 18:33:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-30 18:33:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **epel #325** (https://pagure.io/epel/issue/325):**Add x86_64 macro to epel-rpm-macros**
2025-04-30 18:33:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** a month ago by naccyde
2025-04-30 18:33:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** a month ago
2025-04-30 18:34:33 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Oh ya ... hmm ... I wonder why nobody has marked that one with meeting.
2025-04-30 18:34:46 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> eh, meeting label, old business, whatever
2025-04-30 18:34:51 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Carl George: Do you want to elaborate for those that haven't read it.
2025-04-30 18:34:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> it's on my todo list... but my todo list is... long
2025-04-30 18:35:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> %x86_64 basically pulls in all the x86_64 variants
2025-04-30 18:35:51 <@salimma:fedora.im> it's available in Fedora but not in STream so it's a PITA for people who maintain a single spec and already started using it
2025-04-30 18:35:52 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> there is an x86_64 macro defined in fedora and el10, and it would help packagers to not need to know it isn't defined in el9/el8 if we define it in epel-rpm-macros
2025-04-30 18:36:18 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> it is in cs10, just not cs9
2025-04-30 18:36:29 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I thought it seemed pretty uncontroversal...
2025-04-30 18:36:48 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it's not controversial, someone just has to check it into epel-rpm-macros for el8 and el9
2025-04-30 18:36:58 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yeah it should be a straightforward thing once you have time to get to it, or if someone wants to take it off your hands
2025-04-30 18:36:59 <@salimma:fedora.im> yup
2025-04-30 18:37:19 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> if you like i can do that
2025-04-30 18:37:22 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Yep, now that I re-read, it looks like nirik said he would do it, but it looks like he is a bit swamped.
2025-04-30 18:37:53 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Carl George: that would be lovely.
2025-04-30 18:38:40 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thank you Carl George 
2025-04-30 18:38:41 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i'll try to knock it out later today
2025-04-30 18:39:04 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Anything else for this?  Or any other Old Business?
2025-04-30 18:39:17 <@salimma:fedora.im> I have a timeline question about the election
2025-04-30 18:39:23 <@salimma:fedora.im> when is the close of the nomination period?
2025-04-30 18:39:43 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> May 8
2025-04-30 18:39:52 <@salimma:fedora.im> and when do we do interviews?
2025-04-30 18:40:03 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !link https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-41/f-41-elections-tasks.html
2025-04-30 18:40:06 <@salimma:fedora.im> do we have to update our questions or is the question from last time still ok
2025-04-30 18:40:07 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Aoife is supposed to poke us with a stick
2025-04-30 18:40:41 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Unless anyone objects, I think the questions from last time will do.
2025-04-30 18:40:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> what _was_ the questions?
2025-04-30 18:41:15 <@salimma:fedora.im> let me look them up
2025-04-30 18:41:33 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !link https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-42/f-42-elections-tasks.html
2025-04-30 18:41:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/epel-steering-committee-election-interview-with-robby-callicotte-rcallicotte/
2025-04-30 18:41:42 <@tdawson:fedora.im> This time with the correct link.  :)  Sorry about that.
2025-04-30 18:41:46 <@salimma:fedora.im> that was Robby's interview, so the questions are valid
2025-04-30 18:43:18 <@tdawson:fedora.im> For those that don't want to follow the link the questions are:
2025-04-30 18:43:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Q: Why are you running for EPEL Steering Committee member?
2025-04-30 18:43:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Q: What is your background in EPEL? What have you worked on and what are you doing now?
2025-04-30 18:43:50 <@tdawson:fedora.im> And to answer previous questions:
2025-04-30 18:44:02 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Nomination period ends May 8, 2025
2025-04-30 18:44:18 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Interviews start: May 8, 2025
2025-04-30 18:44:32 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> oh snap, next week
2025-04-30 18:45:16 <@tdawson:fedora.im> The interviews end on May 15, 2025
2025-04-30 18:45:50 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Voting starts on May 19, 2025
2025-04-30 18:46:03 <@salimma:fedora.im> looking at when I'm flying out for devconf
2025-04-30 18:46:15 <@salimma:fedora.im> ah, Summit I mean
2025-04-30 18:46:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> Summit is May 19, so I guess the timing works out
2025-04-30 18:47:15 <@rcallicotte:fedora.im> wow May got here super fast
2025-04-30 18:47:30 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Yep, May is tomorrow.
2025-04-30 18:47:50 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Yep, let's move to open floor.
2025-04-30 18:47:55 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !topic General Issues / Open Floor
2025-04-30 18:48:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Go for it nirik 
2025-04-30 18:48:28 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Are any epel folks going to be at flock? are there any epel talks or panels?
2025-04-30 18:48:37 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> yes
2025-04-30 18:48:39 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> I'll be at flock
2025-04-30 18:48:43 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I guess I could just look at the scheule for the second part
2025-04-30 18:48:51 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> there is an epel hackfest i'm running
2025-04-30 18:49:03 <@davide:cavalca.name> I won't be at flock but I'll be at devconf
2025-04-30 18:49:09 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> looks like a state of epel and a hackfest. yeah
2025-04-30 18:49:10 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I just found out that I'll be there.  Carl and I are doing the "State of EPEL" and an "EPEL Workshop"
2025-04-30 18:49:26 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> oh yeah, state of epel too
2025-04-30 18:49:28 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> cool. I should be there if anyone needs me for anything.
2025-04-30 18:50:02 <@tdawson:fedora.im> nirik: awesome.  Always good to see you in person.
2025-04-30 18:50:09 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i'm open to suggestions for hackfest topics.  i don't have a firm plan, other than i want to carve out 15-20 minutes specifically for newcomers to ask questions and get onboarded.
2025-04-30 18:50:28 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, looking forward to seeing you all too! (who are there)
2025-04-30 18:51:14 <@salimma:fedora.im> are we doing anything EPEL related in Summit and DevConf?
2025-04-30 18:51:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> I guess there'll be the community booth at Summit
2025-04-30 18:51:54 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i'm doing a talk about epel (combined with amy's talk about centos), and will have a designated q&a "ask the expert" thing tied to the talk at the booth
2025-04-30 18:52:17 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> brian stinson told me he also wants to be present at that, for $reasons
2025-04-30 18:53:20 <@tdawson:fedora.im> ^^ That's at summit
2025-04-30 18:53:30 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> oh good clarification
2025-04-30 18:53:36 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I won't make it to DevConf
2025-04-30 18:53:41 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> same
2025-04-30 18:53:46 <@jonathanspw:fedora.im> same
2025-04-30 18:53:48 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> me either. ;(
2025-04-30 18:53:48 <@salimma:fedora.im> it's getting harder and harder to get everyone in the same place
2025-04-30 18:54:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> Davide and I will be at Summit and DevConf but not Flock
2025-04-30 18:54:36 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i'd be happy to host an epel birds of a feather session at texas linux fest if folks feel like visiting austin in october
2025-04-30 18:55:01 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Has it cooled off in October?
2025-04-30 18:55:14 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> compared to july/august?  absolutely
2025-04-30 18:55:33 <@salimma:fedora.im> https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/usa/austin/climate
2025-04-30 18:55:40 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> compared to october in washington, not so much lol
2025-04-30 18:55:43 <@salimma:fedora.im> 61-83 - I'm definitely not taking my family
2025-04-30 18:56:06 <@davide:cavalca.name> Haven't planned that far ahead yet, but September/October is usually fairly busy
2025-04-30 18:56:07 <@salimma:fedora.im> (not sure I can make it anyway, can't keep traveling every month)
2025-04-30 18:56:40 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Anything non-travel related that people wanted to bring up in Open Floor before we close?
2025-04-30 18:57:01 <@dherrera:fedora.im> I got something small
2025-04-30 18:57:17 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Diego Herrera: Go for it
2025-04-30 18:57:55 <@dherrera:fedora.im> I've been working into turning some of the minor branching scripts that we use in infra into ansible playbooks :) I have a first draft of that work now ^^
2025-04-30 18:58:00 <@dherrera:fedora.im> https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/ansible/pull-request/2593
2025-04-30 18:58:27 <@dherrera:fedora.im> I also implemented Davide Cavalca 's pr from last meeting into them :)
2025-04-30 18:58:45 <@davide:cavalca.name> Thanks!
2025-04-30 18:59:18 <@dherrera:fedora.im> if you want to check 'em there is the link ^^, first time doing this on fedora, so I might ask releng help on reviewing them
2025-04-30 18:59:33 <@dherrera:fedora.im> that's it from me ;)
2025-04-30 18:59:49 <@carlwgeorge:fedora.im> i'm in the middle of reviewing, but agree that releng feedback will be more important
2025-04-30 18:59:53 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Diego Herrera: Thank you very much for working on that.
2025-04-30 19:00:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> salimma gave a cookie to dherrera. They now have 25 cookies, 1 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle
2025-04-30 19:00:37 <@zodbot:fedora.im> tdawson gave a cookie to dherrera. They now have 26 cookies, 2 of which were obtained in the Fedora 42 release cycle
2025-04-30 19:00:59 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Looks like our time is up.
2025-04-30 19:01:23 <@tdawson:fedora.im> Thank you all for the very good discussions.  And especially thank you all for all you do for EPEL and it's community.
2025-04-30 19:01:54 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I look forward to seeing some of you at Flock, and possibly my odd visit to Boston in May.
2025-04-30 19:01:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> thanks Troy!
2025-04-30 19:02:06 <@tdawson:fedora.im> I'll talk to you next week, if not sooner.
2025-04-30 19:02:11 <@dherrera:fedora.im> ( ... ┬─┬ノ( º _ ºノ) )
2025-04-30 19:02:46 <@tdawson:fedora.im> !endmeeting