21:12:06 #startmeeting EPEL meeting 2010-03-26 21:12:07 Meeting started Fri Mar 26 21:12:06 2010 UTC. The chair is smooge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:12:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 21:12:11 ok here we go 21:12:17 #topic roll call 21:12:22 * maxamillion is here 21:12:22 smooge is here 21:12:28 cool. You might do a '#meetingname epel' too 21:12:31 * nirik is here. 21:12:49 * hydh is here 21:13:06 #meetingname EPEL (Extra Packages for Enterprise Linux) 21:13:07 The meeting name has been set to 'epel_(extra_packages_for_enterprise_linux)' 21:13:12 * MerlinTHP here 21:13:21 MerlinTHP: o hai :) 21:13:24 j0 21:13:26 hi guys.. sorry for my delay.. was trying to catch up on internal email 21:13:45 #topic orders of business 21:13:52 Meeting should be short and to the point. 21:14:11 1) jds2001 sent out an email to various SIGS for needs from engineering 21:14:22 2) RHEL-6 sometime before the next ice age 21:14:27 3) package conflicts 21:14:38 4) helping mspevack help us on th ewiki 21:14:44 5) Open Floor. 21:14:54 0) Old business 21:15:01 anything else? 21:15:30 I have updates on a few items... can do in open floor tho 21:15:37 #topic Old Business 21:15:45 Updates from the nirik and me 21:15:52 you first while I search for an email from dgilmore 21:16:01 sure... just a few random things: 21:16:26 Xfce is still waiting on perl-Glib. Once that gets fixed I should be able to make better progress at getting it into epel finally. 21:16:42 ok cool 21:16:46 transmission in epel needs love. It was orphaned a while back and the current version we have has security issues. 21:17:01 ouch what requires it 21:17:06 If someone wants to take it over, talk with mether about it. Also, I am going to post more info to the mailing list. 21:17:18 if no one claims it by next week, we should probibly just nuke it. 21:17:42 I have been swamped this week and haven't yet reviewed python26. 21:17:47 I hope I can this weekend. ;) 21:17:50 thats all I had. 21:18:11 nirik: transmission the torrent client? 21:18:28 yeah 21:18:41 oh ho... 21:18:46 ok I can help on python26 21:18:56 I need it for RHEL-39 21:19:14 nirik anything else? 21:19:24 stahnma took it over apparently. Need to bug him about fixing it. ;) 21:19:33 nirik: I'll try to get around to doing some test builds for it in mock and see if there's anything wildly outstanding that would prevent me from taking it over 21:19:35 nope. nothing else here. 21:19:42 nirik: oh ok, nvm 21:20:35 ok from last meeting which I was sure was last week, we had a list of things from Dennis Gilmore to answer: 21:21:12 1) adding some global options to EPEL builds to get rid of file providings 21:21:46 Dennis said it should be easy to do, but wanted to wait on it. I think we would also have to do a rebuild to clean up the repo 21:22:22 what is this to fix? 21:22:24 2) perl-Net-Telnet is in both repos. He was going to block/remove it after a ticket was filed. 21:22:54 nirik, basically the way builds are done means that every RPM will say it provides xyz even though they are not really provided 21:23:13 huh. weird. 21:23:28 so if you have something in a /usr/libexec/funkytown/libass.1.so everyone who wants libass will see it when you do a rpm --provides 21:23:44 that was wholy inappropriate choice of library names 21:23:56 * MerlinTHP chuckles. 21:23:59 does this really affect much tho? 21:24:54 smooge: we appreciated the awesomeness factor though 21:25:18 yeah.. some EL packages require things and EPEL's packages will replace the needed EL pakcage 21:25:25 because NEVR is less. 21:26:30 someone on the list pointed out that our problem was 'fixed' in later mocks with something like # Don't "provide" our private libs, or generate doc-file dependencies (and a bunch of %global afterwords) 21:28:06 3) repository redesigns (slipstream, etc). most of those are major undertakings and would require a lot of work. Would require a mandate etc to do it. 21:28:56 4) keeping more older copies of the older packages for people to roll back. not currently possible with mash. 21:29:06 ok thats what I got from the email.. 21:29:14 nirik, did I answer your question? 21:29:23 I think so, yeah. 21:31:00 ok next topci 21:31:14 #topic jds2001 sent out an email to various SIGS for needs from engineering 21:31:41 ok jds2001 sent this to a couple of lists and blogged about it. I was wondering what we needed to help on this 21:32:15 engineering? ... rel-eng? 21:32:26 well, the goal here was this: 21:33:16 Find out if various sigs are still active (which EPEL is). Get someone to mail a little update note monthly to the devel list with whats been going on and how to join up. Note if there are things that the sig could use that would help them with their area. 21:33:43 so, what we need to do is get someone to do monthly updates, and also discuss if there are things we could use that would help us. 21:33:48 ok cool. so we need to send a monthly email. 21:34:05 yeah, nothing fancy or anything... 21:34:05 I choose (spins a bottle)... 21:34:21 ah crap me. 21:34:21 something like https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIG_Update_Email_Template 21:34:44 ha. ;) 21:34:45 ok will send that out this weekend. 21:34:54 smooge: you're the man 21:34:57 (stupid kid spinner top) 21:35:08 I had maxamillion on every other slot 21:35:13 smooge: and set a calendar/alarm to do it every monthly or so) 21:35:26 ok will do so after meeting 21:35:37 so as far as stuff we could use: more maintainers? 21:35:39 what is the #thing to say I am going to do that 21:35:54 should be #action nick stuff to do 21:35:56 #action Smooge will send a monthly email saying we need stuff 21:36:03 #action smooge will send a monthly email saying we need stuff 21:36:14 oh yeah #action doesn't echo 21:36:21 confuses me 21:36:23 yeah. 21:36:41 smooge: I know! that happened to me on monday in the Fedora QA meeting 21:36:51 I was confused as hel 21:36:57 +l 21:37:03 ok, what's next on the list? 21:37:06 we need more maintainers, we need a list of packages people want to see in RHEL-6. we need to guidance on multipackage layout 21:37:19 anything else? 21:37:34 #topic 2) RHEL-6 sometime before the next ice age 21:37:50 ok dgilmore put out an email on EL-6 and his plan of action 21:37:55 hurray rhel6. ;) 21:38:08 someday.. before I lose all my teeth hopefully 21:38:16 yeah, I heard rumors of an internal Beta for RHEL6 ... very exciting 21:38:42 there are no such rumours. any such rumours are propaganda made by enemies of the state 21:38:55 lol 21:38:58 hrhr 21:39:13 dgilmore's plan all makes sense to me 21:39:17 I note that mdomsch said we already have people hitting MM with rhel6 epel mirror requests. ;) 21:39:22 yeah, same here. 21:39:38 anyway, please read dennis's email and see how we can help as much as possible. I would like to get a set of EPEL packages ready as soon as EL-6beta is warm on the mirrors 21:39:53 nirik: lol 21:39:54 My only query about it is regarding rwmjones' email 21:40:05 okie dokie 21:40:13 He asked about us building kvm. 21:40:25 I fear until/unless there is a centos6 beta ready it may be harder for many maintainers to test things. 21:40:25 oooooh kernel stuff 21:40:27 That has a kernel module component. Are we allowing kernel modules? 21:40:28 MerlinTHP: I thought kvm was already part of RHEL? 21:40:46 I think we were, but haven't had any takers after the kmod came out 21:40:49 no to kernel modules, we follow Fedora guidelines 21:41:00 or at least I thought we did 21:41:01 maxamillion, only for x86_64.. for the mythical ARM port no 21:41:02 maxamillion: rwmjones asked about building software in RHEL6 for arches that RHEL doesn't build it for 21:41:13 ohhhhhhhhhhhhh 21:41:18 So KVM for !x86_64 21:41:21 yeah, I read that email 21:41:37 Sounds a bit dodgy to me in general, but I'm happy if other folks want to do it 21:41:44 I think it would be something in the EPEL PPA 21:41:50 I was more curious about the kmod aspect :) 21:41:54 the mythical ARM port would be awesome ... buy me a smartbook and install RHEL6 on it ... all day battery life and RHEL6 awesomeness, would own face 21:42:33 kmods should be a lot easier in EPEL, as we have the kabi to target and weak-modules support. 21:42:57 EPEL doesn't allow kmods. 21:43:03 Right-o 21:43:17 nirik, I thought we changed that after kmod got into the EL-5.4 set 21:43:36 we could revisit that policy, but as far as I know it's still the case. 21:43:42 kmod? which kmod? 21:43:48 perhaps you are thinking of fuse? 21:43:55 ack 21:43:59 yes I am thinking of fuse. 21:44:06 OK, no kmods in EPEL :) 21:44:06 I need more coffee 21:44:19 no kmods and no inode's either 21:44:29 hi inode0 21:44:36 :P 21:44:39 Right, so, we should probably point out the no-kmods to rwmjones. 21:44:59 yes. it would require us to relook at ourselves... very deeply 21:45:00 I'll knock out a reply to epel-devel 21:45:17 which brings us to the next topic (if this one is played through?) 21:45:21 * nirik looks to see what rjones was looking for 21:45:36 smooge: I'm done 21:45:37 #topic 4) helping mspevack help us on the wiki 21:45:37 if rhel6 beta is public, then contributors can get it too 21:45:55 ah, kvm there is the userspace package. 21:46:07 mdomsch, yes if it is public we all get to share the goodies. If it isn't.. well I don't us doing much 21:46:53 nope 21:47:25 We potentially could, but we'd have a pretty small audience. 21:47:37 Anyway, wiki? 21:47:59 yes 21:48:13 this weeks MS project was cleanup of the EPEL wiki. 21:48:25 I don't think anyone volunteered and I ran out of time to do stuff myself. 21:48:30 nirik: there is? 21:48:58 I am asking for some help on this.. maybe throw it all away, and put up the bare essentials. 21:49:02 maxamillion: in el5 21:49:02 this week was insane for me, I barely slept as it was 21:49:05 nirik: ah 21:49:33 smooge: I posted a blog post on it... basically I have looked at lots of those pages, but can't really see what to change, and will be willing to help anyone with info that wants to change them. 21:49:51 so, if someone who wants to edit the wiki, but doesn't know anything about epel needs info, I am happy to help 21:50:00 ok cool 21:50:04 what exactly needs cleaning? 21:50:15 maxamillion, the page hasn't been touched in a long time. 21:50:50 smooge: nothing has really changed 21:51:04 it probably needs some marketing magic. Does it talk too much, does it say what we do, etc 21:51:15 http://spevack.livejournal.com/102377.html 21:51:17 smooge: there were a couple changes made and those were reflected on the wiki after a meeting where we hashed out some stuff ... 21:51:26 smooge: ah, yeah ... I see what you mean 21:52:10 I could poke someone like threethirty who might enjoy doing that 21:52:26 inode0: that'd be awesome 21:52:27 its like a committee of engineers came up with a wiki page to describe something they wanted to do 21:52:36 who dabbles in marketing and likes small projects 21:53:08 I want something stylish.. something oooooow more than used car salesman that I would do 21:53:16 inode0, sounds great 21:53:28 well, don't get your hopes too high 21:53:30 #action inode0 will ask threethirty to help us on that. 21:53:40 there I set my expectations about right :) 21:53:56 ok anything else? 21:54:15 #topic Open Floor 21:54:24 ok 6 minutes to go til the buzzer 21:54:31 lol 21:54:34 go go go!!! 21:54:43 fuse-encfs hitting epel this week, woot 21:54:54 cool. congrats jokajak 21:55:04 rhel betas are never really public ... if that was a question back there 21:55:24 they are public-esque 21:55:36 they are customer only 21:55:38 Historically, the initial beta is public. 21:55:41 inode0, beta's for the .0's have been public 21:55:49 4.0 beta, 5.0 beta, 21:55:53 Update betas aren't. 21:55:57 What smooge said. 21:56:06 * inode0 thinks they are customer only, not public 21:56:13 nope on ftp.redhat.com 21:56:24 MerlinTHP, no idea about whether the kmod will be in !x86_64 or not ... 21:56:25 smooge: really? 21:56:28 hrm, ok, maybe I never noticed 21:56:33 impressive 21:56:37 +1 RH 21:56:44 inode0, when I was with CentOS we only took stuff that was on ftp.redhat.com and thats how we got the beta code for 4.0 and 5.0 21:57:11 I ran the RHEL5.0 beta, got it from ftp.redhat.com 21:57:26 thats srpms tho, right? not isos, etc. 21:57:47 rwmjones: OK, just be aware that if it isn't, EPEL won't (currently) build it 21:58:01 rwmjones: so it may be that KVM is of limited utility in EPEL. 21:58:13 right, ok ... (not my problem really :-) 21:58:17 * MerlinTHP grins. 21:59:46 * nirik has nothing else for meeting. 21:59:48 I've just double-checked my email archive. The RHEL5.0 beta was public. The ISOs were on ftp.redhat.com. 21:59:50 nirik, no it was bootable ISOs and stuff. kbsingh used that to build enough to recompiled CentOS beta 21:59:57 MerlinTHP: nice 21:59:59 cool. I don't remember that... 22:00:18 anyway.. that was 2+ years ago back when many were still in high school 22:00:31 Yeah, it's all academic right now. 22:00:31 lol 22:00:42 RH might do stuff differently this time. 22:00:43 ok, that's the buzzer ... any more business? 22:00:48 Not from me. 22:00:53 ok anyway, if it happens, it happens. if not #endmeeting 22:00:58 #endmeeting