2025-03-12 14:00:01 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !startmeeting Fedora Council
2025-03-12 14:00:08 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-03-12 14:00:01 UTC
2025-03-12 14:00:08 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'Fedora Council'
2025-03-12 14:00:13 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !topic hellos and welcomes
2025-03-12 14:00:31 <@blc:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:00:33 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:00:37 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Hello everyone
2025-03-12 14:00:37 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Brendan Conoboy (blc)
2025-03-12 14:00:52 <@humaton:fedora.im> !Hi
2025-03-12 14:00:53 <@mattdm:fedora.im> As is traditional, we'll wait a few moments for people to actually show up.
2025-03-12 14:00:55 <@t0xic0der:fedora.im> Ok, this is awkward 🤔
2025-03-12 14:00:56 <@markrosenbaum:fedora.im> !hello
2025-03-12 14:00:59 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Matthew Miller (mattdm) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:01:01 <@markrosenbaum:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:01:03 <@bookwar:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:01:03 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Justin and Aoife are out today, so I am the secretary
2025-03-12 14:01:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Mark Rosenbaum (markrosenbaum)
2025-03-12 14:01:06 <@jbrooks:matrix.org> !hi jasonbrooks
2025-03-12 14:01:07 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Mark Rosenbaum (markrosenbaum)
2025-03-12 14:01:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Aleksandra Fedorova (bookwar) - she / her / hers
2025-03-12 14:01:11 <@t0xic0der:fedora.im> Might have to pivot the Forgejo Open meeting to #meeting-1:fedoraproject.org 
2025-03-12 14:01:15 <@ancarrol:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:01:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jason Brooks (jasonbrooks) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:01:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Anthony Carroll (ancarrol)
2025-03-12 14:01:24 <@markrosenbaum:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:01:29 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Mark Rosenbaum (markrosenbaum)
2025-03-12 14:01:44 <@jbrooks:matrix.org> UTC vs non UTC?
2025-03-12 14:01:47 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Oh, do we have a DST clash? Wheee!
2025-03-12 14:01:49 <@humaton:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:01:55 <@mattdm:fedora.im> That said, Forgejo _is_ our first topic here.
2025-03-12 14:01:56 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Tomáš Hrčka (humaton) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:02:07 <@bookwar:fedora.im> The meeting clash season
2025-03-12 14:02:38 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:02:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:02:46 <@bookwar:fedora.im> mattdm: i'd say let's move council meeting to the other room and let Forgejo folks to work here
2025-03-12 14:02:47 <@smilner:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:02:51 <@bookwar:fedora.im> We are a smaller team
2025-03-12 14:02:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (smilner)
2025-03-12 14:03:07 <@ralph:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:03:09 <@mattdm:fedora.im> yeah but I started the meeting already
2025-03-12 14:03:16 <@blc:fedora.im> Can all the konflux guest / first-timers move?
2025-03-12 14:03:32 <@cfreitas:matrix.org> !hi
2025-03-12 14:03:36 <@mattdm:fedora.im> I mean, I can close it and start a new one if that's the best
2025-03-12 14:03:56 <@mattdm:fedora.im> also I keep getting "Connectivity lost" messages. Anyone else?
2025-03-12 14:04:09 <@mattdm:fedora.im> (My network seems fine...)
2025-03-12 14:04:25 <@jbrooks:matrix.org> I'm not getting those messages, I agree we should move
2025-03-12 14:04:49 <@jbrooks:matrix.org> Oh, looks like git forge moved
2025-03-12 14:05:14 <@mattdm:fedora.im> something is laggy :(
2025-03-12 14:05:29 <@humaton:fedora.im> I do a lot today
2025-03-12 14:05:30 <@blc:fedora.im> I'm also losing messages, on my phone to send this one 
2025-03-12 14:05:38 <@markrosenbaum:fedora.im> Yep
2025-03-12 14:05:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Ralph Bean (ralph)
2025-03-12 14:05:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> No Fedora Accounts users have the @cfreitas:matrix.org Matrix Account defined
2025-03-12 14:05:48 <@smilner:fedora.im> I did but it's better now
2025-03-12 14:05:58 <@t0xic0der:fedora.im> We have moved over but let's not do it frequently I guess
2025-03-12 14:06:16 <@t0xic0der:fedora.im> @council - Please continue
2025-03-12 14:06:36 <@blc:fedora.im> OK, connectivity lost messages have stopped for me
2025-03-12 14:06:38 <@markrosenbaum:fedora.im> Akashdeep Dhar: Which room are we moving to for Forgejo?
2025-03-12 14:06:55 <@t0xic0der:fedora.im> #meeting-1:fedoraproject.org 
2025-03-12 14:07:16 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Also here for the next few minutes
2025-03-12 14:07:35 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Akashdeep Dhar: This should settle out in a few weeks once the clocks re-sync 
2025-03-12 14:07:40 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !topic Agenda
2025-03-12 14:07:48 <@mattdm:fedora.im> 1. GitForge Initiative
2025-03-12 14:07:57 <@mattdm:fedora.im> 2. Konflux and Fedora
2025-03-12 14:08:17 <@mattdm:fedora.im> 3. Other Topics
2025-03-12 14:08:21 <@mattdm:fedora.im> 4. Announcements
2025-03-12 14:08:45 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Plan to timebox the first to 10 minutes so we have time for the second
2025-03-12 14:09:02 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !topic GitForge Initiative
2025-03-12 14:09:27 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/525
2025-03-12 14:09:39 <@mattdm:fedora.im> The other week, we asked for more detail.
2025-03-12 14:10:07 <@mattdm:fedora.im> now we have it
2025-03-12 14:10:18 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !info more detail on The Plan https://codeberg.org/fedora/forgejo-deployment/wiki/Home#phase-one-general-forge
2025-03-12 14:10:21 <@humaton:fedora.im> we added more deatails with Rayn 
2025-03-12 14:10:21 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:10:38 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Do we have anyone actually representing this initiative here today? ryanlerch ?
2025-03-12 14:11:09 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:11:18 <@mattdm:fedora.im> thanks jednorozec 
2025-03-12 14:11:19 <@humaton:fedora.im> we added more details with Ryan 
2025-03-12 14:11:21 <@humaton:fedora.im> me
2025-03-12 14:11:49 <@mattdm:fedora.im> The only question I have is the shutoff-of-new-projects on pagure.io. That's scheduled for Monday, two days ago. Did that happen?
2025-03-12 14:11:58 <@humaton:fedora.im> nope
2025-03-12 14:12:26 <@mattdm:fedora.im> ok. Is there urgency, or can that wait until after the sunset annoucement? Or at least, at the same time as?
2025-03-12 14:12:52 <@humaton:fedora.im> Well it would solve spam problem for infra
2025-03-12 14:13:13 <@mattdm:fedora.im> ah. okay, so sooner is better.
2025-03-12 14:13:31 <@mattdm:fedora.im> It feels out-of-order, but I don't think anyone should _really_ be surprised at this point
2025-03-12 14:13:52 <@mattdm:fedora.im> So, I'm +1 to this. Anyone have any objections?
2025-03-12 14:14:16 <@humaton:fedora.im> hm, you mean we should announce both at once? Sunset date and no new repos on pagure.io?
2025-03-12 14:14:50 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Justin is out -- shaunm, he had previously put a hold on this, but I think given the greater detail we can remove that?
2025-03-12 14:15:05 <@humaton:fedora.im> All the dates are extremely optimistic, we will aim for them. But things can go south...
2025-03-12 14:15:39 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Of course. The thing we need is for them to be updated and for the Council and community at large to be aware as they change.
2025-03-12 14:15:56 <@mattdm:fedora.im> With previous initiatives, we did a bad job of this and things just slipped and slipped and we didn't notice and therefore didn't help.
2025-03-12 14:15:56 <@jbrooks:matrix.org> Justin had put a hold on what?
2025-03-12 14:16:14 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Approving the initiative -- his vote was -1 in the meeting the other week
2025-03-12 14:16:33 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Because we wanted more dates and detail.
2025-03-12 14:17:01 <@jbrooks:matrix.org> I believe Justin wanted more details, primarily dates, I think that this plan provides that
2025-03-12 14:17:27 <@jbrooks:matrix.org> I'm +1
2025-03-12 14:17:46 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Yeah. So I'm going to consider that now a 0. With no -1s (and there has been plenty of time to register any!) and three +1s, this will be approved.
2025-03-12 14:17:51 <@bookwar:fedora.im> I think the key part for me to setup a feedback loop. The dates are checkpoints - we should know when we are not meeting them and how the plan is adjusted when that happens.
2025-03-12 14:18:23 <@mattdm:fedora.im> please put your votes in the ticket and I'll officially close it as approved after the meeting
2025-03-12 14:18:52 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !info We're going to formally vote on this in the ticket; expect it to pass and be approved in about 45 minutes 
2025-03-12 14:19:01 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Anything else on this?
2025-03-12 14:19:17 <@mattdm:fedora.im> We are at the time, so too late :)
2025-03-12 14:19:23 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !topic Konflux and Fedora
2025-03-12 14:19:40 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/526
2025-03-12 14:20:02 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/konflux-what-is-the-right-time/146722/
2025-03-12 14:20:09 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> oh good, an easy topic
2025-03-12 14:20:13 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/U2ID32XHWST52HLRGROEEIXLWVY6HLOY/
2025-03-12 14:20:18 <@mattdm:fedora.im> dcantrell LOL
2025-03-12 14:20:38 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !info Links to an ongoing discussion Brendan started
2025-03-12 14:20:50 <@mattdm:fedora.im> @blc How's the lag? You want to take the floor here?
2025-03-12 14:21:03 <@blc:fedora.im> I'm just now responding to "how's the lag" - you tell me
2025-03-12 14:21:18 <@mattdm:fedora.im> it's okay, then
2025-03-12 14:21:23 <@mattdm:fedora.im> people are just being quiet today
2025-03-12 14:21:25 <@blc:fedora.im> Cool, yes, let me do a quick intro.
2025-03-12 14:21:28 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Let's start some drama!
2025-03-12 14:21:35 <@blc:fedora.im> Let's start a productive conversation
2025-03-12 14:21:45 <@mattdm:fedora.im> oh, yes, that!
2025-03-12 14:22:18 <@blc:fedora.im> OK, first, I'm joined today by a few members of the konflux development team.  There are multiple teams!  The group here today is responsible for rpm builds, not everything.  But we have a good group here.
2025-03-12 14:22:42 <@mattdm:fedora.im> also I see Ralph Bean 
2025-03-12 14:23:01 <@blc:fedora.im> We also have cfreitas 
2025-03-12 14:23:25 <@mattdm:fedora.im> cool! welcome everyone.
2025-03-12 14:24:31 <@blc:fedora.im> OK, so to start things off, I want to say that we *know* we're showing up too early with this technology.  But we think it's better to show up early and get guidance than to show up late and be unmovable.  There's never a perfect time, so we're choosing the most open path which is early, but admittedly annoying.
2025-03-12 14:25:37 <@blc:fedora.im> Because we're showing up early, in the threads I've started, we're getting a class of feedback which amounts to "konflux can't do this thing I care about so I don't care about it" - and I think that's actually really healthy.  We *want* this kind of feedback, so that it can be considered for the roadmap.
2025-03-12 14:25:43 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Can you give us a scope for "we" there? Konflux team, Red Hat collectively, CLE?
2025-03-12 14:26:15 <@blc:fedora.im> Oh, sure, a quick rundown of the parties:
2025-03-12 14:26:41 <@blc:fedora.im> Red Hat Product Engineering: Has decided to make konflux a thing.  This affects all Red Hat products.
2025-03-12 14:27:01 <@blc:fedora.im> Secure Flow: A team in product engineering with overall management of Konflux development
2025-03-12 14:27:28 <@blc:fedora.im> SP-RHEL: This is Christine's team, they are responsible for the portions needed for RHEL.  Different reporting chain than Secure Flow.
2025-03-12 14:27:35 <@ralph:fedora.im> I'm on that Secure Flow team.
2025-03-12 14:27:47 <@cfreitas:matrix.org> I'm on that SP RHEL team
2025-03-12 14:28:17 <@sushma:fedora.im> I am with Christine in SP RHEL, Product owner
2025-03-12 14:28:18 <@blc:fedora.im> CLE: This is my team, we are community members who do system administration, infra development, quality engineering, and so forth.  The last mile, if you will.
2025-03-12 14:28:33 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Also me. :)
2025-03-12 14:28:53 <@bookwar:fedora.im> I do not think the timing is the problem, I think the problem is 1) having a clear goal for the conversation 2) having resources allocated to achieve that goal. There is no point in asking for a feedback, if you don't have resources to process it.
2025-03-12 14:28:57 <@blc:fedora.im> And you :-) And Aoife :-)  Not meant to be a comprehensive list, just who the players are for the sake of this conversation.
2025-03-12 14:29:11 <@blc:fedora.im> Suffice it to say, this is organizationally complex.  And that's just the inside-Red Hat part.
2025-03-12 14:29:16 <@asamalik:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:29:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Adam Samalik (asamalik) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:29:38 <@asamalik:fedora.im> apologies for being late, DST madness and overlapping meetings and all that! 
2025-03-12 14:29:48 <@fale:fale.io> "
2025-03-12 14:29:48 <@fale:fale.io> Brendan Conoboy: "Red Hat Product Engineering: Has decided to make konflux a thing.  This affects all Red Hat products." <-- what do you mean exactly with "Red Hat products"?
2025-03-12 14:29:48 <@pfrields:fedora.im> !hi
2025-03-12 14:29:50 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Paul W. Frields (pfrields) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:29:56 <@mattdm:fedora.im> I have a specific interest here, which is: as FPL, it's important to help Fedora and Red Hat stay reasonably well-aligned technically and culturally.
2025-03-12 14:30:05 <@blc:fedora.im> I agree bookwar, the timing isn't a problem, but it does shape the class of conversation we have.
2025-03-12 14:30:45 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Also, I see this as literally (actual literally) a once-in-a-generation opportunity to take advantage of a huge investment in the "software factory" -- build systems and the whole pipeline
2025-03-12 14:31:13 <@blc:fedora.im> Fale: I mean that the goal of konflux-ci is that eventually it becomes the sole software development pipeline for all of Red Hat's product development, replacing the many build, test, and distribution systems that each product has created for itself.
2025-03-12 14:31:57 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Red Hat is investing a lot in this, and has _great_ people working on it (present company definitely included!), and _I want Fedora to reap the benefits of that investment_.
2025-03-12 14:32:13 <@blc:fedora.im> Ralph Bean:  you can probably express this more eloquently than me, since clearly each product will have some tie-ins for its own technology
2025-03-12 14:32:41 <@ralph:fedora.im> No, Brendan Conoboy I think you got it just right.
2025-03-12 14:32:49 <@fale:fale.io> Brendan Conoboy: is this about the Red Hat's productization phase or is there a strong push to onboard all the upstream communities as well?
2025-03-12 14:35:09 <@bookwar:fedora.im> Are we talking about orchestration engine, artifact storage, the implementation of the pipelines themselves, or all of the above? Last time I asked who will own the definition for the schema for artifacts used in the distribution pipeline, and I didn't get a definite answer. Has it been clarified?
2025-03-12 14:36:03 <@blc:fedora.im> Fale: That's a great question.  Clearly we would like it if our nearest upstreams used the same technology.  In the Fedora/CentOS Stream/RHEL case, a lot of RHEL package maintainers are also Fedora package maintainers.  Providing a consistent workflow irrespective of distribution would mean less burden for them.  At the same time, we do expect there to be differences.  We're already split on git forges and bug tracking systems.  Konflux might be a place where we can have unity, and that make it easier on Red Hatters to contribute to Fedora.  This isn't decisive, but it's background on where we're coming from.
2025-03-12 14:38:23 <@blc:fedora.im> Rather than get too deep into the technical details, I'm hoping we can stick to the purpose of joining the council today.  We're not asking for any sort of decision on konflux, it would be waaaaay too early for that.  But we would like official guidance on how to best engage with the Fedora community at this stage in its development.
2025-03-12 14:39:02 <@blc:fedora.im> (I See Ralph typing so I'm holding back)
2025-03-12 14:39:09 <@ancarrol:fedora.im> tl;dr - help us to help you :) 
2025-03-12 14:39:22 <@fale:fale.io> I'm happy to hear that there is no decision already made on the topic. I think it will be critical to understand if this is the right tool for the community, more that the right tool for the Red Hatters that are part of the community, just to be sure to not replicate the Modularity experience, which was a great idea by itself, but was not the right solution for the Fedora community and in the end did not become the success that the proponents hoped for it to become
2025-03-12 14:39:57 <@mattdm:fedora.im> So, I think that goes right to the heart of something bookwar said above. How much _weight_ will our feedback have?
2025-03-12 14:40:00 <@blc:fedora.im> @fate
2025-03-12 14:40:24 <@mattdm:fedora.im> How much room is there to work on Fedora needs which may not be the same as RHEL needs?
2025-03-12 14:40:42 <@asamalik:fedora.im> Do you expect Fedora community members to participate in the development of Konflux? Or are you looking for feedback, and rather providing Konflux as a service to Fedora? 
2025-03-12 14:40:59 <@ralph:fedora.im> Regarding the schema definition for artifacts used in the distribution pipeline, I think that should be written in konflux architecture documentation, upstream of both Fedora and Red Hat (it isn't currently written there). I hope to see engineers from cfreitas 's team propose it and I'd want to see feedback on it from the rest of the konflux community and any fedora contributors who are interested.
2025-03-12 14:41:06 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi
2025-03-12 14:41:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2025-03-12 14:41:23 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Hi Neil!
2025-03-12 14:41:48 <@blc:fedora.im> Yes, the discussion on list and in discourse so far has highlighted some areas where konflux doesn't have a good solution yet, and even koji isn't great, e.g., dependency management.  By conversing early I hope we can determine if there are ways to include things like this in the future roadmap and if so, when.
2025-03-12 14:41:52 <@ralph:fedora.im> If we fail to reach consensus on what that schema should look like, I think we'd use the konflux governance committee to make a decision.
2025-03-12 14:42:01 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> heya Matthew 🙂 Hope your week is going well (and everyone else's, too!)
2025-03-12 14:42:51 <@blc:fedora.im> I think it would be better for Ralph and Christine to answer this.  I of course want community involvement and see the obstacles to be largely structural.
2025-03-12 14:43:52 <@ralph:fedora.im> I think it would be great if Fedora community members participated in the development of Konflux.
2025-03-12 14:44:03 <@cfreitas:matrix.org> I am with Ralph on that.
2025-03-12 14:44:25 <@cfreitas:matrix.org> I'm new here, don't know how to make it happen but willing to listen and learn.
2025-03-12 14:44:49 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !link https://konflux-ci.dev/architecture/
2025-03-12 14:45:09 <@mattdm:fedora.im> in case anyone is curious to know more on that side of things :)
2025-03-12 14:46:35 <@mattdm:fedora.im> I talked (without anything concrete yet) with Emma Kidney (UX designer) about a possible project gathering workflow feedback from packagers, releng, quality, etc.
2025-03-12 14:46:36 <@ralph:fedora.im> I think *at present* there's a tiny SIG of interested konflux people who are trying to provide the Konflux cluster as a service to Fedorans to experiment with and learn about. Long-term, I don't think we want to provide that as a service, but instead hope that if the community decides to adopt it, that the fedora infrastructure and CLE teams will take over that responsibility.
2025-03-12 14:46:55 <@mattdm:fedora.im> With the user stories from the gitforge research as a starting place
2025-03-12 14:46:59 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> I have a question that needs not be answered immediately, but: Have any rather complex or big packages been built yet under konflux? As someone with a rather large of experience dealing with.. a-hem.. bespoke build failures inside kubernetes pods--there's a subset of just RHEL that doesn't play nice at scale (across multiple architectures), in my experience
2025-03-12 14:47:23 <@mattdm:fedora.im> This is different from what we discussed before....
2025-03-12 14:47:41 <@smooge:fedora.im> So one of the major problems I see with the Fedora community being able to help is that many of the people who usually contribute are of the 'individual hacker who focuses on one thing' This is how koji, bodhi, pagure, etc etc were basically written and updated over the years. You can run anyone of them by themselves without needing to stand up a lot of infrastructure. Konflux as it is generally presented comes across as the opposite approach. You need to set up OpenShift, You need to stand up Kubes->Tekton->etc.. before you get to any of the components inside which the community members would be interested in. I don't know how accurate that assessment is though or how much can be done without a large cluster of systems
2025-03-12 14:47:42 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> I have a question that needs not be answered immediately, but: Have any rather complex or big packages been built yet under konflux? As someone with a rather large amount of experience dealing with.. a-hem.. bespoke build failures inside kubernetes pods--there's a subset of just RHEL that doesn't play nice at scale (across multiple architectures), in my experience
2025-03-12 14:48:06 <@ralph:fedora.im> mattdm: it is?
2025-03-12 14:49:37 <@mattdm:fedora.im> At the Fedora booth at Red Hat Summit last year, I talked to a lot of people about Konflux. Some of the people who were most excited were not current Fedora contributors, but live as SREs in the cloud-native world, and were interested in this as an avenue to get involved. So I think that has great potential for community growth
2025-03-12 14:49:38 <@bookwar:fedora.im> I think my main issue is that Konflux jumps between too high-level and too low-level conversations. The high level conversations are too hand wavy, the lower-level conversations are not yet interesting. 
2025-03-12 14:49:45 <@blc:fedora.im> Since Aoife isn't here, I'd like to do a time check - I think we have 10 minutes before this meeting is meant to end and it would make sense for us to talk about future actions.
2025-03-12 14:50:31 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Yeah... we talked about your team owning it, with joint admin access to Fedora Infrastructure people 
2025-03-12 14:50:37 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> One of the biggest lessons we (Rocky) learned from our Kubernetes-based build system experience was that it's always harder than you think. The other key takeaway, as Smooge just pointed out, is that the tooling makes all the difference. That’s a big reason why our rework of that system will have a Koji-compatible API—because Koji works really well for what it does, and its value extends beyond being “just” a build system.
2025-03-12 14:50:54 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Thanks Brendan Conoboy . Time check is not my strength :)
2025-03-12 14:51:10 <@bookwar:fedora.im> I don't see a Fedora Contributor to be a persona to whom the current Konflux project talks.
2025-03-12 14:51:38 <@bookwar:fedora.im> Fedora Contributor is not a devops engineer and they are absolutely not interested in Openshift and Tekton
2025-03-12 14:52:10 <@bookwar:fedora.im> Fedora contributor is not interested in the product vision for Konflux to take over the world of product pipelines
2025-03-12 14:52:35 <@davide:cavalca.name> I second this concern. Unless we're expecting to say sponsor EKS credits for contributors to just run test deployments in a cloud provider (which doesn't seem tenable), we absolutely need a developer and contributor story for folks that won't necessarily want or care to manage their own k8s/openshift/etc
2025-03-12 14:52:42 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Because of the time, we do need to wrap up soon. I think we should plan on a video meeting in 2 or 3 weeks, and possibly some other followups.
2025-03-12 14:52:56 <@blc:fedora.im> Matters are perhaps complicated in that the number of people who will care about this in a can-contribute kind of way is limited- for many it may merely be an implementation detail.
2025-03-12 14:53:14 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Yeah, "deploy k8s" can't be step one of any of our get-involved documentation
2025-03-12 14:53:31 <@mattdm:fedora.im> . _Plus_, let's keep the conversation going on https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/tag/containers-sig (currently the official home for konflux in Fedora, although maybe it's time for it to have its own tag?)
2025-03-12 14:53:32 <@bookwar:fedora.im> We need a story how exactly my Fedora processes (aka creating a new package, making a complex update of 25 interdependent packages, etc) are envisioned by the Konflux team
2025-03-12 14:53:34 <@fale:fale.io> IMHO the risk of video meetings is that they highly reduce the accessibility
2025-03-12 14:54:09 <@blc:fedora.im> I would suggest having that conversation as a one-off so it doesn't interfere with regular fedora council business.  There's clearly enough to talk about here that we'll swamp any meeting.
2025-03-12 14:55:19 <@asamalik:fedora.im> Sort of connects to my question about whether we expect Fedora to actively participate, or rather give feedback to the development done by people who are interested and have expertise in that.
2025-03-12 14:55:19 <@asamalik:fedora.im> Yeah I kinda agree here...
2025-03-12 14:55:19 <@asamalik:fedora.im> 
2025-03-12 14:55:19 <@asamalik:fedora.im> 
2025-03-12 14:55:19 <@asamalik:fedora.im> We in Fedora know what problems we'd love to get solved, like automating all those various mass rebuilds.
2025-03-12 14:55:19 <@asamalik:fedora.im> 
2025-03-12 14:55:20 <@mattdm:fedora.im> cfreitas: Do you have anything from the research into RHEL rpm workflow needs which can be shared?
2025-03-12 14:55:43 <@smooge:fedora.im> bookwar: So I think we are actually talking about 2 different Konflux teams. There is a team who builds the overall pipelines and the factory which builds the factories.. and then there are the teams using those premanufactured parts to build a factory which builds a 'distribution' of some sort. The outer team doesn't really care about that.. the inner teams could have multiple different ways of envisioning this
2025-03-12 14:55:47 <@mattdm:fedora.im> That is generally the way we do video meetings -- single topic, except maybe a few quick announcements.
2025-03-12 14:56:13 <@pfrields:fedora.im> I suspect a lot of the people that Konflux speaks to currently are in the CLE group. That should (and I believe will) change over the course of this year, and is a consequence of "too early."
2025-03-12 14:56:14 <@blc:fedora.im> One other piece of information I'd like everybody to come away with for today is the there is a konflux channel if you want to talk to some of the devs between now and the next time we get together: https://chat.fedoraproject.org/#/room/#konflux:fedora.im
2025-03-12 14:56:56 <@mattdm:fedora.im> This is an opportunity!
2025-03-12 14:57:10 <@cfreitas:matrix.org> mattdm: we do have a prototype rpm build pipeline we're working on getting out there to you. I can also chat with the architect to figure out how to get info in your hands.
2025-03-12 14:57:53 <@mattdm:fedora.im> I'd love to see that info directly onto https://discussion.fedoraproject.org, if possible!
2025-03-12 14:57:56 <@bookwar:fedora.im> This is an opportunity the same way like contributing to OpenSTack is an opportunity to learn Gerrit.
2025-03-12 14:58:01 <@mattdm:fedora.im> I can talk to you more about that :)
2025-03-12 14:58:09 <@bookwar:fedora.im> Sorry for using trigger words :)
2025-03-12 14:58:20 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> don't you speak badly about gerrit 🔪
2025-03-12 14:58:29 <@mattdm:fedora.im> LOL -- which you did! But no, I mean the other way around. An opportunity to interest a new generation of infrastructure folks.
2025-03-12 14:58:30 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> (jk <3)
2025-03-12 14:58:58 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> Matthew we're not trying to give the new generation trauma...
2025-03-12 14:59:25 <@bookwar:fedora.im> Yes, and I actually mean. I did, and I like it, but it can not be used as a selling point
2025-03-12 14:59:27 <@mattdm:fedora.im> is there a konflux community meeting people can join? 
2025-03-12 14:59:28 <@davide:cavalca.name> Yeah, I don't really see how any potential contributor to Fedora would be attracted by the fact that the build system is based on $buzzword. It's an implementation detail. At best they won't care. At worst they'll find it an annoyance if it gets in their way.
2025-03-12 15:00:01 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> Precisely. Does `fedpkg build` work? No? Well...
2025-03-12 15:00:10 <@ralph:fedora.im> * https://github.com/konflux-ci/community/blob/main/sigs/fedora.md
2025-03-12 15:00:10 <@ralph:fedora.im> * https://github.com/konflux-ci/community/tree/main?tab=readme-ov-file#meetings
2025-03-12 15:00:10 <@ralph:fedora.im> 
2025-03-12 15:00:10 <@ralph:fedora.im> At least two meetings:
2025-03-12 15:00:12 <@smooge:fedora.im> I think the problem is again we are talking about 2 to 3 different types of infrastructure people.
2025-03-12 15:00:16 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Some people care deeply about implementation details. :)
2025-03-12 15:00:41 <@mattdm:fedora.im> anyway, we're at time. get in any last words :)
2025-03-12 15:01:03 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> *has said too much already probably*
2025-03-12 15:01:22 <@smooge:fedora.im> there are at least 3 levels of implementation before even the 'packager' gets involved. We have talked about the top and end parts but not much about the middle
2025-03-12 15:01:55 <@blc:fedora.im> FYI: A few of us Red Hatters have unrelated meetings we need to jump to about now
2025-03-12 15:02:02 <@smooge:fedora.im> good luck
2025-03-12 15:02:15 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> I appreciate you all taking the time to come talk with us!
2025-03-12 15:02:27 <@mattdm:fedora.im> as I said, last words. meeting ending once I see no one is typing :)
2025-03-12 15:02:46 <@mattdm:fedora.im> ok!
2025-03-12 15:02:47 <@mattdm:fedora.im> thank you all!
2025-03-12 15:02:49 <@mattdm:fedora.im> !endmeeting