17:03:13 #startmeeting fedora_atomic_wg 17:03:13 Meeting started Wed Jul 26 17:03:13 2017 UTC. The chair is jbrooks. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:03:13 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:03:13 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_atomic_wg' 17:03:19 #topic Roll Call 17:03:24 .fas jasonbrooks 17:03:25 .hello dustymabe 17:03:25 jbrooks: jasonbrooks 'Jason Brooks' 17:03:28 dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' 17:03:35 .hello miabbott 17:03:36 .hello jberkus 17:03:37 miabbott: miabbott 'Micah Abbott' 17:03:39 jberkus: jberkus 'Josh Berkus' 17:04:45 #chair dustymabe miabbott jberkus 17:04:45 Current chairs: dustymabe jberkus jbrooks miabbott 17:04:50 A select group 17:05:10 #topic action items from last meeting 17:05:34 jberkus to follow up with Fedora infra about moving pa.io MLs to Fedora infra 17:05:56 jberkus to write blog post for fedora magazine/pa.io on changes 17:06:09 jberkus to re-create issues in new repo 17:06:19 How'd you fare on those, Josh 17:06:23 in process. the Fedora Magazine mailing list had a bit of a meltdown last week 17:07:05 .hello sayanchowdhury 17:07:05 sayan: sayanchowdhury 'Sayan Chowdhury' 17:07:06 jberkus: meltdown? 17:07:16 Helloish 17:07:21 #chair sayan 17:07:21 Current chairs: dustymabe jberkus jbrooks miabbott sayan 17:07:23 yeah, the mailing list is the first step in pubication, and it wasn't working for 2 days 17:07:24 .hellomynameis jzb 17:07:25 jzb: jzb 'Joe Brockmeier' 17:07:32 #chair puiterwijk 17:07:32 Current chairs: dustymabe jberkus jbrooks miabbott puiterwijk sayan 17:07:48 #chair jzb puiterwijk 17:07:48 Current chairs: dustymabe jberkus jbrooks jzb miabbott puiterwijk sayan 17:08:06 jberkus, should we re-action any of those? 17:08:12 .hellomynameis kushal 17:08:14 kushal: kushal 'Kushal Das' 17:08:27 yes, although moving issues is jberkus & strigazi, since he's moved a bunch 17:08:30 and also make the action description be more verbose 17:08:42 as a warning, I'll miss next week's meeting 17:09:08 #action follow up with Fedora infra about moving pa.io MLs to fedora infra 17:09:13 #chair kushal 17:09:13 Current chairs: dustymabe jberkus jbrooks jzb kushal miabbott puiterwijk sayan 17:09:14 for moving the lists, we brought it up on atomic communtiy meeting on Monday, and it was approved 17:09:15 dang 17:09:20 cool 17:09:22 #undo 17:09:22 Removing item from minutes: ACTION by jbrooks at 17:09:08 : follow up with Fedora infra about moving pa.io MLs to fedora infra 17:09:39 jbrooks: pa.io? 17:09:59 I'm going to guess not literally http://pa.io, as that seems... an ad website? 17:10:03 #action jberkus strigazi to continue moving kube issues to new kube-sig tracker 17:10:10 puiterwijk, projectatomic.io 17:10:17 Ahh. Ack 17:10:19 projectatomic.io 17:10:34 Sorry, when I read "pa", my mind goes to "pulseaudio" for now 17:10:42 jbrooks: just ping me after the meeting and we can work things out 17:10:48 #action jberkus to write blog post for fedora magazine/pa.io on changes 17:11:06 Dusty's actions 17:11:08 dustymabe to get a new fedora calendar entry for the Fedora Atomic 17:11:09 Working Group meetings 17:11:16 dusty to put in place updating of last f25 ref automated via bodhi 17:11:22 dustymabe to write blog post about last f25 updates 17:11:31 dusty to write a comprehensive blog post on updating f25->f26 and will include update about f25 updates ref 17:11:41 dustymabe to create kubernetes-sig pagure repo and notify interested parties 17:11:52 #info atomic calendar created https://apps.fedoraproject.org/calendar/atomic/ 17:11:54 dustymabe jberkus to write doc on docs vfad with all resources linked 17:12:15 dustymabe: do you have time to work on that today? 17:12:39 #info patch sent to infra for f25 atomic ref https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/303#comment-450097 17:12:53 still waiting on infra team to review/merge the patch 17:13:21 #info kubernetes sig pagure repo created https://pagure.io/atomic/kubernetes-sig 17:13:22 dustymabe: that was merged about an hour ago, just before today's mash 17:13:39 On the upgrade directions, I'll send you that blurb about kube today -- I just figured out the etcd migration bit this am 17:13:40 #link http://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ansible.git/commit/?id=39b719c 17:13:41 puiterwijk: cool didn't see an email from anyone about it (though I haven't checked in an hour) 17:13:43 dustymabe, ^ 17:13:54 jbrooks: thanks 17:13:58 dustymabe: didn't send an email yet, sorry 17:14:07 #action dusty to write a comprehensive blog post on updating f25->f26 and will include update about f25 updates ref 17:14:23 #action dustymabe jberkus to write doc on docs vfad with all resources linked 17:14:32 Cool 17:14:41 ksinny to update wiki 17:14:43 jberkus: yeah I can try to work on that today with you 17:14:47 What was that one about? 17:14:54 jbrooks: ksinny did that 17:15:05 Sweet 17:15:06 it was related to the mailing list/IRC changes 17:15:20 Then there was kubernetes-sig to discuss version tagging for kube system containers 17:15:37 Which, I don't think we did this -- I'll take an action to start a discrete ticket about it 17:15:48 jbrooks: +1 17:15:56 #action jbrooks to create kube-sig ticket about versions discussion 17:16:04 OK, to the ML! 17:16:10 I mean issue tracker 17:16:21 jbrooks: :) - looks like we don't have any meeting tickets for today 17:16:28 but I do know jberkus has something and I do as well 17:16:28 Oh yeah? 17:16:29 Nice 17:16:33 OK 17:16:39 #topic open floor 17:16:48 btw, we need to get something in there for updating atomic wiki page and pagure homepage to explain where to contact us ... 17:16:48 jberkus, go ahead, then dusty 17:17:04 dusty first, I'm double-timing until :30 17:17:04 jbrooks: ksinny updated the atomic wiki page 17:17:09 ah, ok! 17:17:35 ok i'll go 17:17:46 shoot 17:18:21 #info atomic qcow/vagrant images from yesterday's release are set to update from the wrong ref (the updates ref) - we are fixing this, but we need to communicate this out to users 17:18:46 we need to let people know how to switch back to the right ref 17:19:42 dustymabe, your upgrades post? 17:19:43 i'm guessing email - but I can also open an issue that we can point people to in the future 17:19:48 And email 17:20:09 jbrooks: yeah - but maybe in the upgrades post I'll just mention it and link to the issue, rather than that being the focus of the post 17:20:17 Sure 17:20:18 actually. no 17:20:27 probably shoulnd't mention it in the upgrades post at all 17:20:34 because this is only an issue with 'new media' 17:20:42 if someone upgrades they won't have a problem 17:21:02 so probably not relevant for an upgrades post, right? 17:21:19 I guess not 17:21:28 either way: 17:21:48 #action dustymabe to communicate out issue with ref in atomic cloud images 17:21:58 Sounds good 17:22:04 jberkus, You have an item as well? 17:22:07 ok jberkus has something for open floor but he is in another meeting for the next 8 minutes 17:22:12 Ah 17:22:15 does anyone else have something they would like to bring up? 17:22:20 sorry ... 17:22:25 no prob 17:22:58 well, laggy discussion: docker in a container 17:23:16 i.e. as a system container? 17:23:21 I wanted to check is anyone is working on this actively 17:23:22 yes 17:23:27 The problem w/ it is our versioning 17:23:38 ?? 17:24:07 If you can't say, I want version X of this container, then there's little point in being able to run a different version of docker 17:24:27 so, why can't we? 17:24:33 The container image will always be a the same version as what we ship in the ostree 17:24:46 We need to solve the manual versioning vs auto versioning deal 17:25:11 And really, we could use releases of rawhide images, too 17:25:25 I thought that was already solved? IIRC, maintainers can put in a manual version if they want 17:25:40 Is that where it settled? 17:25:40 hmmm, no maxamillion 17:25:43 yes 17:25:55 ideally, we want auto versions for docker too 17:26:00 but this would be a short-term fix 17:26:09 the other question is getting the packages for more advance docker 17:26:10 OK, so we can do that, so ppl can run older dockers if they want 17:26:22 No solution for newer-than-stable dockers 17:26:33 Because we aren't releasing non-stable images 17:26:35 baby steps then 17:26:53 jbrooks: could people pull from the candidate registry? 17:27:05 i don't really know what that means, but figure I should ask 17:27:06 Yeah, I guess that works for most images 17:27:11 Not my kube ones though 17:27:27 Because the build system itself can't see the candidate registry 17:27:44 ahh, I see- so basically because your images are 2nd order images 17:27:46 But I guess that's not a problem for the docker pkg, so that's actually a good use case 17:28:18 It's annoying, because 1.7 is the current latest kube 17:28:22 We have it in rawhide 17:28:26 FYI, one reason this is coming up now is that the CRI-O people are making system contianers to run CRI-O, and want the ability to NOT have docker on the host 17:28:30 And system containers would be perfect 17:28:47 are there any action items we can come up with for this? 17:28:50 But we can't do it -- I could remake them to not share images, but it'd be wasteful 17:29:08 jbrooks: so we need to bring up rawhide containers, then, but we need maxamillion for that discussion 17:29:10 jberkus, the new ostree lets us remove 17:29:23 jberkus: we've already brought it up 17:29:36 jberkus, That ticket I'm going to create on the kube-sig list will touch on this 17:29:37 it's under his mound of work, so it will come in time 17:29:46 yah 17:29:55 jbrooks: i was supposed to create a ticket on the atomic-wg issue tracker for this 17:29:59 and I never did 17:30:28 #action dustymabe to create ticket to track RFE for rawhide based containers to be made available from registry.fedoraproject.org 17:30:48 dustymabe, did we ever get a new docker image in the container registry 17:31:10 Oh, I see container-engine 17:31:21 http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/container/container-engine.git/ 17:31:57 jberkus, Another cool thing would be to build a f25 copy of that image, so ppl could run an older docker 17:32:06 1.13 is technically not supported for kube 17:32:13 although it seems to work fine 17:32:26 f25's docker on f26 via system container 17:32:34 ok we are starting to get detailed - any meeting related stuff surrounding this conversation? 17:32:41 action items? 17:32:47 or anyone else with anything for open floor 17:32:57 walters: I think you guys just found an issue with atomic workstation? 17:33:13 in it not shipping updates? yes 17:33:14 we should probably start tracking those issues in the atomic-wg issue tracker - do you mind opening one? 17:33:18 are we officially calling it Atomic Workstation? 17:33:43 jberkus: I haven't heard otherwise 17:33:56 lots of folks had objections 17:34:09 the other open question was whether it belongs to us or Workstation team 17:34:09 jberkus: I've been told to use that name until a better one emerges 17:34:13 I thought them, but no? 17:34:25 jberkus: i actually don't know 17:34:44 dustymabe: funny thing: the latest rawhide tree won't mount luks devices :). (haven't had time to debug yet) 17:34:57 All right, I think we may be ready to close 17:35:03 i know the people who have been owning it are mostly a small group of individuals 17:35:07 who are mostly here in this meeting 17:35:21 jbrooks: +1 17:35:29 #endmeeting