#meeting-1:fedoraproject.org log

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:00:23

!startmeeting EPEL (2025-11-12)

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

18:00:26

Meeting started at 2025-11-12 18:00:23 UTC

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

18:00:26

The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2025-11-12)'

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:00:30

!meetingname epel

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:00:30

!topic aloha

<@meetbot:fedora.im>

18:00:31

The Meeting Name is now epel

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:02:31

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:02:32

Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:02:51

Hi Diego Herrera

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

18:03:17

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:03:20

Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:03:35

Hi Robby Callicotte

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:04:04

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:04:06

Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:04:23

Hi Carl George

<@elguero:fedora.im>

18:04:52

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:04:53

Michael Young (elguero)

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:16

Hi Michael L. Young

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:38

We're a little light today, but hopefully we don't have anything that needs a vote ...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:47

!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/epel/docs/pulls

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:47

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

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:05:47

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

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:06:25

The only thing still marked with meeting is 351

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:06:31

!epel 351

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:06:33

**epel #351** (https://pagure.io/epel/issue/351):**Beta Software Released On Main EPEL Channel**

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:06:33

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:06:33

● **Opened:** a month ago by scuttlefish42

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:06:33

● **Last Updated:** 2 weeks ago

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:06:33

● **Assignee:** rcallicotte

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

18:06:46

:( No update yet. I'm sorry

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:07:13

Are we ok taking the Meeting tag off, and when things happen, we can cover it in Old Business ?

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:07:25

Or put the tag back on at that time.

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

18:07:26

I'm ok with that

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:07:36

Sounds good.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:08:13

!topic Old Business

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:08:13

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:08:46

It's sorta new, but I think still fits in the Old category .... but thank you Diego Herrera for getting the Docs moved over to the new area.

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:09:43

yeah :) I think that everything it's already there ^^

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:09:57

Yep, I saw all the old pull requests.

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:10:56

we can wait a bit more for the issue tracker, I will be following the discussion in regard to redirection from pagure

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:11:49

also, something I want to mention about the migration. The new forge currently doesn't allow pushing changes through SSH

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:12:25

Wait ... what? What protocol does it use?

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:13:33

https://gist.github.com/grillo-delmal/e785a479a456926ed0d4ef320b4961d4

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:13:45

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/forge-documentation/using_http_auth/

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:14:02

here are the instructions on how things are being handled right now

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:15:24

from what I read from the issue tracker, it has to do with the fact that they are hosting the forge through openshift runners or something related to that

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:15:36

Interesting. Well ... I hope fedpkg still works when we're done.

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:15:53

https://forge.fedoraproject.org/forge/forge/issues/27

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:17:20

Anything else before we move on?

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:18:12

no, that would be it from me ^^

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:18:18

Does anyone else have any Old Business ?

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:18:53

i could summarize the epel10.0 retirement real quick

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:19:03

Carl George: Go for it.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:21:19

it's done as far as packagers and users are concerned. no more epel10.0 targets, so no more builds, no more updates, etc. i confirmed that it being marked archived in bodhi blocks pushing to epel10.0 branches in distgit. we've got some outstanding cleanup work to do still (moving the repo to the fedora archive, removing it in koschei, etc) that we'll handle later this week or next week.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:22:19

we've got lots of ideas about how to improve the process next time to speed things up, and thankfully already have the initial sop so it's just modifications to that.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:22:41

that's all from me, happy to take any questions related to it, otherwise we can move on.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:22:58

Thank you Carl George and all those that helped.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:23:33

I've noticed the usual grumblings about moving so fast ... but I think we expect that. We get grumblings wether we are fast or slow.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:23:58

I've noticed the usual grumblings about moving so fast ... but I think we expect that. We get grumblings whether we are fast or slow.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:24:34

yeah, hopefully the people who complained about too many branches are happy that we're back to just two

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:25:01

I don't think I complained, but I am happy about it.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:25:02

i've got a related topic but i'll save it for open floor

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:25:19

Sounds good .... does anyone have any other Old Business?

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:26:00

!topic General Issues / Open Floor

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:26:10

Carl George: Go for it.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:26:24

!link https://github.com/fedora-infra/bodhi/issues/5988

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:28:22

decathorpe asked in #devel:fedoraproject.org if it was possible to have a near-eol warning in bodhi like fedora does. that is currently dependent on setting the eol date, which we can't do because it depends on the rhel schedule which isn't public. mattia asked if it would be possible to defer the epel minor retirement to a little bit after the rhel minor release. i have mixed feelings on it, and was curious what others thought.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:28:26

Interesting discussion.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:31:27

I really have nothing constructive to say that you haven't already said and know. Are you bringing it up just so we know it's being looked at?

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:31:50

gathering feedback mainly, seeing how others feel

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:32:30

I think it would be great, but I also fear that we'll get more "when is soon" traffic than we want.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:34:14

my main concern is giving users the impression they're getting updates for everything on say 10.0, when they're no longer getting os updates

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:34:33

!hi

<@zodbot:fedora.im>

18:34:36

Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:34:54

Hi Conan Kudo 🌴

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:35:13

Oh, I was thinking this would only affect maintainers .... let me re-read.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:36:13

I don't love this idea so much, I don't want to harp too much about the RHEL release dates thing

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:36:15

but...

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:36:28

Oh, you are talking about the comment where they are talking about keeping the repo around for a few weeks / months.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:36:42

I really don't like that we keep trying to make weird workarounds for this problem and we should push this back toward RHEL PM folks

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:37:26

I had a larger rant about this in another space, and I don't want to copy that into here, but I really would like to push back on that. That being said, if we can't, then I think 2 weeks after new minor release is reasonable

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:37:52

it gives enough breathing room for the overwhelming majority of packagers and package stacks to land before freezing

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:37:58

i'm skeptical any amount of push back will make a difference, and for now we need to do work with the state of things how they are

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:38:11

So, something similar to how Fedora keeps the EOL release alive for a few weeks.

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:39:14

another idea would be to set the EPEL EOL at the begining of the suposed month, just so we can have more control on the retirement date

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:39:22

another idea would be to set the EPEL EOL at the begining of the suposed month, just so we can have more control on the retirement process

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:39:31

So, in theory, I think it would be great to keep epel 10.0 for a few weeks (no more than a month). But that is in theory. I can imagine the amount of work that would require, and what I, as a maintainer, would be doing. And I say "It isn't worth it"

<@dherrera:fedora.im>

18:39:58

we would decouple from the RHEL release though

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:40:16

Correct.

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

18:40:46

I like Diego's idea

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

18:40:56

leave no room for error

<@rcallicotte:fedora.im>

18:41:02

or very little

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:41:40

Putting on my package maintainer hat. Unless some crazy bad CVE comes up, I wouldn't touch anything after the RHEL release happens. Thus, the amount of benefit I get out of your work, is going to be very minimal.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:41:59

But maybe others are not like me. I don't currently know.

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:42:06

we probably can't do this

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:42:19

because it breaks the RHEL users until the next minor is out

<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>

18:42:36

because of the 10-z thing

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:44:03

i hope the "i won't touch this unless absolutely necessary" attitude is how maintainers are thinking for like a month or more before the eol

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:45:24

Yep. That is the time to ramp things down, at least for me.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:47:08

Does anyone have anything else for this topic? Or anything else for Open Floor?

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:48:38

If there is nothing else, I'm ok ending a little early today.

<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>

18:49:26

yeah we don't need to solve the eol specifics today, please leave feedback in that github issue if you have it

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:49:38

Well do.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:49:46

Will do.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:50:08

Thank you all for the good discussions. And thank you for all you do for EPEL and it's community.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:50:17

I'll talk to ya'll next week.

<@tdawson:fedora.im>

18:50:38

!endmeeting