16:31:14 <dustymabe> #startmeeting fedora_atomic_wg
16:31:14 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Dec 20 16:31:14 2017 UTC.  The chair is dustymabe. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:31:14 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:31:14 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_atomic_wg'
16:31:17 <dustymabe> #topic roll call
16:31:25 <dustymabe> .hello dustymabe
16:31:25 <jberkus> .hello jberkus
16:31:26 <zodbot> dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' <dustymabe@redhat.com>
16:31:26 <jlebon> .hello jlebon
16:31:28 <zodbot> jberkus: jberkus 'Josh Berkus' <josh@agliodbs.com>
16:31:32 <zodbot> jlebon: jlebon 'None' <jlebon@redhat.com>
16:31:38 <puiterwijk> sort of hi.
16:31:46 <ksinny> .hello sinnykumari
16:31:47 <zodbot> ksinny: sinnykumari 'Sinny Kumari' <ksinny@gmail.com>
16:31:52 <jbrooks> .hello jasonbrooks
16:31:53 <zodbot> jbrooks: jasonbrooks 'Jason Brooks' <jbrooks@redhat.com>
16:31:59 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: glad to have you here!
16:32:03 <dustymabe> hi ksinny!
16:32:11 <EsGee> .hello Esgee
16:32:12 <ksinny> dustymabe: Hey!
16:32:15 <puiterwijk> dustymabe: well, only partly. Most of my concentration is still in the thousands of lines of curl code
16:32:16 <zodbot> EsGee: Sorry, but you don't exist
16:32:39 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: fun
16:32:45 <strigazi> .hello2
16:32:46 <zodbot> strigazi: strigazi 'Spyros Trigazis' <strigazi@gmail.com>
16:33:01 <dustymabe> strigazi: woor!
16:33:03 <miabbott> .hello2
16:33:04 <dustymabe> woot!
16:33:04 <zodbot> miabbott: miabbott 'Micah Abbott' <miabbott@redhat.com>
16:33:23 <dustymabe> #chair jberkus jlebon puiterwijk ksinny jbrooks EsGee strigazi miabbott
16:33:23 <zodbot> Current chairs: EsGee dustymabe jberkus jbrooks jlebon ksinny miabbott puiterwijk strigazi
16:33:39 <dustymabe> anybody seen sayan lately?
16:34:23 <dustymabe> ok let's get started
16:34:24 <ksinny> Not me
16:34:28 <jberkus> EsGee: that means you're not registered with fedoraproject.org, that's all
16:34:41 <dustymabe> #topic previous meeting action items
16:34:57 <dustymabe> * maxamillion to confirm and close #376
16:34:59 <dustymabe> * jberkus to post a revised quorum proposal
16:35:01 <dustymabe> * cverna to talk to releng about doing a container release since we just
16:35:03 <dustymabe> released FAH
16:35:05 <dustymabe> * jberkus to review/merge the PR to update official docs from f25 to f27
16:35:09 <markllama> .hello markllama
16:35:10 <zodbot> markllama: markllama 'Mark Lamourine' <markllama@gmail.com>
16:35:38 <dustymabe> #info maxamillion confirmed and closed #376
16:36:33 <dustymabe> looks like cverna is not here but I can update that
16:36:35 <jberkus> you wanna take these in order?
16:36:39 <sayan> .hello sayanchowdhury
16:36:40 <zodbot> sayan: sayanchowdhury 'Sayan Chowdhury' <sayan.chowdhury2012@gmail.com>
16:36:42 <dustymabe> sayan: yay!
16:36:53 <dustymabe> jberkus: sure
16:37:00 <dustymabe> you can update on 2nd item
16:37:10 <jberkus> lemme find the issue
16:37:16 <jberkus> there's a revised proposal ...
16:38:33 <sayan> dustymabe: not keeping well lately :( this week has been better
16:38:49 <jberkus> https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/363
16:38:58 <dustymabe> sayan: that's unfortunate. I'm glad you're here though. wanted to discuss AMIs/fedimg later in meeting
16:39:06 <sayan> dustymabe: yes, sure
16:39:07 <jberkus> looks like we still need to set rules for how many people have to vote in pagure
16:39:25 <dustymabe> jberkus: ok.
16:39:28 <jberkus> I'll put a proposal on there
16:39:35 <dustymabe> we can discuss that in more depth when we are in tickets
16:39:40 <dustymabe> since this one has the meeting tag?
16:40:29 * dustymabe thinks jberkus is writing the proposal right now
16:40:32 <dustymabe> so moving to next AI
16:40:40 <dustymabe> * cverna to talk to releng about doing a container release since we just released FAH
16:40:58 <dustymabe> #info dustymabe opened ticket to request new container release https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7217
16:41:06 <dustymabe> I talked to mboddu maxamillion and puiterwijk
16:41:38 <dustymabe> mainly this is waiting on automation to be moved to prod, which according to puiterwijk should be pretty easy to do and EOD yesterday was the target
16:41:42 <puiterwijk> Oh, yeah, I had intended to finish setting everything up yesterday, I need to fix one more thing and then hand it over to Mohan
16:41:45 <dustymabe> I imagine that got held up
16:41:58 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: do we think we can do that today?
16:41:59 <puiterwijk> Yeah, sorry. Curl really got me annoyed
16:42:03 <puiterwijk> dustymabe: yes.
16:42:13 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: yeah curl is a rat hole for sure
16:42:16 <dustymabe> :(
16:42:27 <dustymabe> #info hoping to have a new container release later today!
16:42:40 <dustymabe> ok last action item from last meeting for jberkus
16:42:41 <puiterwijk> HTTP/2 is a really nice protocol. But if you ignore the server saying "Please reconnect" and instead error out... weird things happen
16:42:49 <dustymabe> * jberkus to review/merge the PR to update official docs from f25 to f27
16:43:02 <jberkus> merged
16:43:16 <dustymabe> #info jberkus merged PR  to update official docs from f25 to f27
16:43:22 <jberkus> so if there's still f25 stuff in the site, it needs updating
16:43:35 <dustymabe> jberkus: does that mean our docs are updated and shouldn't have old content?
16:44:12 <jberkus> also, a big thank you to contributor Fabaff for doing that!
16:44:31 <jberkus> dustymabe: that means that if you see docs that have f25 or older stuff, you need to add a new PR
16:44:54 <jberkus> that's Fabian Affolter
16:44:58 <dustymabe> jberkus: nice
16:45:09 <dustymabe> does he hang out in the channel much /
16:45:15 <jberkus> I love me some drive-by contributors
16:45:25 <jberkus> dustymabe: we actually get lots of one-off contribs to the web site
16:45:48 <dustymabe> cool good to know.. EsGee if you find anything during your exploration that needs updating please let us know
16:45:53 * cverna waves
16:45:56 <dustymabe> ok moving on to tickets
16:45:59 <dustymabe> hiya cverna :)
16:46:16 <dustymabe> #topic Using buildah in Atomic Host
16:46:23 <dustymabe> #link https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/402
16:46:44 <cverna> dustymabe: o/
16:47:03 <dustymabe> this is a topic that came up recently. Basically trying to find out if there is a use case for having buildah inside the base ostree
16:47:20 <dustymabe> please weigh in on the ticket if you have input
16:47:43 <dustymabe> we can also have discussion here if anyone is inclined
16:48:49 <dustymabe> ok moving to next ticket
16:49:10 <dustymabe> #topic Overhaul list of members, Quorum Rules
16:49:15 <dustymabe> #link https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/363
16:49:25 <jberkus> see last comment for proposal
16:50:03 <dustymabe> proposal in https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/363#comment-485513
16:51:08 <dustymabe> jberkus: question
16:51:24 <dustymabe> mainly about number of votes
16:51:30 <dustymabe> At least 5 people must vote, or 51% of the WG membership, whichever is less.
16:51:55 <dustymabe> so if the WG membership is 6 members then the number is 4
16:52:13 <dustymabe> but if WG membership is 12 it is 5 ?
16:52:41 <jberkus> correct
16:52:44 <dustymabe> ok
16:52:57 <dustymabe> sounds good
16:53:07 <jberkus> yah, now we just need membership rules
16:53:10 <dustymabe> only other question is Ad-Hoc votes must be open for at least three working days (see below) after the announcement.
16:53:36 <dustymabe> my question there is about time sensitive issues (if we ever encountered that situation)
16:54:00 <dustymabe> so for example in previous iterations you mentioned ad-hoc IRC votes
16:54:22 <dustymabe> which to me typically denotes we're in iRC and something is most likely time sensitve that we're discussing
16:54:51 <jberkus> I thought about that, but I couldn't come up with a likely time-sensitive situation
16:54:55 <dustymabe> my suggestion was that we create an issue in pagure for those instances and still have people vote in the ticket (transparency)
16:55:14 <dustymabe> but I don't know about blocking for 3 days
16:55:59 <jbrooks> What would be an example of a time sensitive item
16:56:52 <dustymabe> jbrooks: we are scheduled to release tomorrow, but CVE X came out. CVE X is medium severity. Should we release tomorrow or push release til fix is in place
16:57:07 <jberkus> hmmm, point
16:57:13 <dustymabe> I've mostly just been using my judgement on these things
16:57:25 <dustymabe> which is fine and I don't know if I want to bog down all of this with 'process'
16:57:38 <dustymabe> but someone may demand more transparency on that in the future
16:57:45 <dustymabe> which would require tickets/voting etc..
16:58:04 <jbrooks> There should be room for discretion
16:58:05 <dustymabe> so there is my contrived time sensitive example
16:58:12 <dustymabe> jbrooks: right
16:58:25 <jberkus> dustymabe: ok, sounds like more discussion is required on the ticket
16:58:36 <jberkus> do other WGs have quorum rules?
16:58:45 <dustymabe> jberkus: i think we can just add a point that we can override the 3 day rule for issues we deem time sensitive
16:59:01 <dustymabe> but it all must still be done in a ticket so it's transparent
16:59:16 <dustymabe> jberkus: not sure
16:59:39 <jberkus> anyway, I'd like to close this with "more discussion required in the ticket"
16:59:45 <dustymabe> sure
16:59:51 <dustymabe> but we are pretty close I think
16:59:58 <dustymabe> thanks for working at this jberkus
17:00:04 <dustymabe> moving on to next ticket
17:00:14 <dustymabe> #topic  Decide strategy for including container runtimes in Atomic Host
17:00:21 <dustymabe> #link https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/360
17:00:57 * dustymabe is expecting that jberkus will discuss survey results
17:01:22 <jberkus> survey results link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aC8uthOMrTLiYK3l5muUVKDnOO7Rich2JxJ0sd4LJ6o/edit?usp=sharing
17:01:46 <dustymabe> #info survey results link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aC8uthOMrTLiYK3l5muUVKDnOO7Rich2JxJ0sd4LJ6o/edit?usp=sharing
17:02:07 <jberkus> so, questions/comments about the results?
17:02:40 <dustymabe> jberkus: it seemed like there were a large number of people who use the builtin docker and who like it baked in
17:02:47 <dustymabe> but there were a fair number that were like
17:02:52 <dustymabe> please let me use anything other than docker
17:02:56 <jberkus> yah
17:03:04 <jberkus> I was hoping that the survey would be more conclusive
17:03:14 <jberkus> but you could use those results to argue either way
17:03:53 <dustymabe> yeah. I have my own opinions but neglected to participate in the survey
17:04:00 <dustymabe> as requested
17:04:12 <jberkus> good, because I would have had to scrub your responses (as I did several others)
17:04:29 <jbrooks> I'm not confident about our container image delivery right now
17:04:40 <jberkus> jbrooks: for system containers?
17:04:49 <jbrooks> For any fedora container images
17:05:07 <jberkus> jbrooks: here's another question: if we have alternate container runtimes in a system container, how difficult is it to install them "over" the built-in one?
17:05:10 <dustymabe> jbrooks: yeah I hear your concerns on that
17:05:28 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: and mboddu should be making that better today
17:05:28 <jbrooks> jberkus, It's easy
17:05:34 <dustymabe> based on maxamillions automation work
17:06:14 <dustymabe> and then there is work to have bodhi be able to promote container content as well
17:06:45 <jbrooks> We can use override to allow for layering
17:07:01 <jbrooks> It's more complicated, but still doable
17:07:27 <dustymabe> yes. i'm hoping we can make it easier in the future too
17:07:37 <dustymabe> i need to talk to jlebon about possibilities there
17:07:38 <jbrooks> I don't think the benefits of changing from the status quo outweigh the negatives
17:07:53 <dustymabe> jbrooks: I agree
17:08:04 <dustymabe> my thoughts are
17:08:14 <dustymabe> 1 - leave docker in (for now anyways)
17:08:28 <dustymabe> 2 - make cri-o easily installable/usable
17:08:39 <dustymabe> 3 - make newer versions of docker easily installable/usable
17:08:46 <jberkus> I'm OK with that
17:09:08 <dustymabe> 4 - possibly include cri-o in base in the future if we want (and hopefully we get the size down a bit)
17:09:49 <jberkus> I would love us to start on creating an alternate OStree "minimal" image for the IoT userbase, and strip docker out of it, and also a lot of other stuff
17:09:58 <jberkus> but that's a bigger project
17:10:02 <jbrooks> It'd be cool if we could have another ref, yeah
17:10:09 <dustymabe> jberkus: you should set up some time to talk to pbrobinson
17:10:27 <dustymabe> he's been talking about that for a while, but haven't seen him chat in #atomic about it much
17:10:30 <jberkus> dustymabe: yah, the problem is that everyone thinks this is a good idea, but nobody has time to work on it
17:10:30 <dustymabe> would love to hear his plans
17:11:15 <dustymabe> jberkus: do you mind making a ticket in our pagure for this?
17:11:18 <dustymabe> it will start the discussion
17:11:21 <jberkus> sure
17:11:36 <jberkus> so, if we're not removing docker, do we need to take a vote?
17:11:37 <dustymabe> another thing. we should start announcing some tickets we create on the atomic-devel list
17:12:00 <dustymabe> i.e. I just created this ticket which we'd like input on. please discuss there
17:12:08 <dustymabe> since those notifs don't go to that list
17:12:31 <dustymabe> jberkus: i think we should put forth a proposal in the ticket
17:12:37 <jberkus> ok
17:12:53 <sanja> .hello2
17:12:54 <zodbot> sanja: sanja 'Sanja Bonic' <sanja@redhat.com>
17:13:02 <jberkus> hey, made it!
17:13:05 <dustymabe> i don't know if we need a vote persay, but we should say what we're thinking and allow others to input
17:13:26 <sanja> Sorry guys, only now managed to collect the remaining water from my flat.
17:13:42 <jberkus> sanja: we're just concluding that we don't want to remove docker from the base image in f27-28 cycle
17:13:43 <dustymabe> jberkus: it might be good to follow up reply to your email about the survey as well with the results link and a link to this ticket and the proposal we came up with
17:13:54 <sanja> water pipe broke while I had to rush for my social security number appointment so sorry for that, back to business
17:14:03 <jberkus> fun
17:14:20 <sanja> kk I'll have to read up how we came to that conclusion
17:14:22 * dustymabe imagines sanja with a bucket
17:14:28 <sanja> lol
17:14:45 <dustymabe> jberkus: what do you think of what I wrote?
17:15:06 * sanja definitely didn't have that on her bucket list today.
17:15:25 <dustymabe> #action jberkus to follow up reply to atomic-devel email about survey with results link and a link to pagure ticket with the proposal we came up with
17:15:28 <dustymabe> ^^
17:15:50 <jberkus> dustymabe: wrote where?
17:16:07 <dustymabe> jberkus: what's the q?
17:16:20 * jberkus is confused
17:16:26 <dustymabe> you sent an email to atomic-devel asking people to fill out the survey, correct?
17:16:32 <jberkus> sanja: sounds like you needed a "bucket" list
17:16:42 <jberkus> dustymabe: right.  and with the results
17:16:47 <dustymabe> ahh, you did?
17:16:54 <jberkus> yeah, check the list
17:16:59 <dustymabe> indeed. I missed that
17:17:02 <dustymabe> #undo
17:17:02 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: ACTION by dustymabe at 17:15:25 : jberkus to follow up reply to atomic-devel email about survey with results link and a link to pagure ticket with the proposal we came up with
17:17:09 <dustymabe> ok new action
17:17:11 <jbrooks> Yeah, it was a good post, jberkus
17:17:14 <jberkus> well, we still need to make a proposal
17:17:25 <jbrooks> I liked the cah love ;)
17:17:36 <jberkus> and apropos of nothing, I love Jupyter Notebook
17:17:41 <dustymabe> #action jberkus to add proposal to pagure ticket and link atomic-devel mail thread to proposal for potential discussion
17:17:52 <dustymabe> jberkus: better?
17:17:53 <jberkus> jbrooks: yeah, that survey really shows that just because CAH users are invisible doesn't mean they don't exist
17:18:05 <jbrooks> typical centos users
17:18:17 <dustymabe> jberkus: i'm sure there are a lot of people who participate in this community who primarily use CAH
17:18:35 <dustymabe> they know alot of what we do flows down
17:18:54 <dustymabe> and I'm happy to have them around
17:19:30 <dustymabe> ok more topics
17:19:47 <dustymabe> #topic open floor
17:19:55 <dustymabe> hey sayan - i'm hoping to get an update on fedimg
17:20:17 <dustymabe> would like to be able to upload to new AWS regions sooon!
17:20:30 <sayan> dustymabe: hey
17:21:01 <sayan> dustymabe: I am working on the comments by pingou on the PR
17:21:15 <sayan> before I can merge the PR
17:21:38 * sayan digs the link to the PR
17:22:05 <sayan> #link https://github.com/fedora-infra/fedimg/pull/62#discussion_r156349603
17:22:11 <dustymabe> sayan: thanks
17:22:16 <dustymabe> do you know an ETA for this work?
17:23:09 <sayan> dustymabe: this would be done by tomorrow, and then ping pingou for the final review of the PR
17:23:20 <dustymabe> ok thaks
17:23:21 <dustymabe> thanks
17:23:26 <dustymabe> anyone else with anything for open floor
17:23:57 <dustymabe> sanja: jlebon: am i correct in my understanding that you *both* have talks accepted at devconf to talk about atomic workstation?
17:24:52 <jlebon> dustymabe: that is correct
17:25:02 * jlebon checks schedule
17:25:33 <dustymabe> that's cool that we got two talks accepted on that topic.
17:25:37 <sanja> Yes, Devconf and FOSDEM for me.
17:25:42 <sanja> About Atomic Workstation.
17:25:46 <dustymabe> I wonder if we shouldn't have you two collaborate on the talk
17:25:49 <jberkus> so the Atomic BOF and Retrospective was accepted
17:26:08 <jberkus> I proposed this, but by devconf sanja will be MC'ing it
17:26:27 <sanja> I think he meant jlebon and me?
17:26:54 <dustymabe> right. jlebon got a talk accepted on FAW and sanja did too
17:27:07 <jlebon> to add to the confusion, there's also "Atomic Workstation" by klember
17:27:13 <dustymabe> sanja: FAW == Fedora Atomic Workstation
17:27:28 <sanja> yep, figured that out :D thanks
17:27:30 <dustymabe> whoa 3 atomic workstation talks?
17:27:36 <jberkus> for the BOF, we need various folks to do 2-minute "state of" presentations for various atomic projects
17:27:41 <jlebon> i'm surprised they were all accepted!
17:27:41 <dustymabe> sanja: :)
17:27:46 <sanja> well, looks like that Atomic Workstation is big in 2018 :P
17:27:48 <jlebon> sanja: what's your talk called?
17:28:00 <jberkus> jlebon: voting for devconf was a bit total chaos this year
17:28:05 <sanja> "You want a clean desktop OS? Containerize it."
17:28:21 <jberkus> jlebon: the voting system broke down and the committee had to finish with spreadsheets
17:28:31 <jberkus> sanja: as it should be!
17:28:32 <sanja> sounds great...almost as good as my water pipe
17:28:42 <jlebon> oh wow, and there's also "Desktop OS of the future: ostree + flatpak"
17:28:43 <jberkus> sanja: strikingly similar
17:28:45 <dustymabe> should we reach out to klember about his talk?
17:28:50 <dustymabe> does anyone know who that is ?
17:28:55 <jlebon> i think that's from the endless folks
17:29:14 <jlebon> dustymabe: i reached out during the voting process, but hadn't heard back
17:29:44 <dustymabe> hmm. he must be from the workstation side
17:29:46 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: may know
17:29:50 <dustymabe> ok we are mostly at time
17:29:54 <puiterwijk> Hmm?
17:30:03 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: klember submitted a talk on FAW
17:30:04 <jlebon> it's Kalev Lember, he works on Gnome stuff
17:30:05 <jberkus> anyway, for the BOF I need folks to participate, look for an email from me & sanja
17:30:09 <dustymabe> ahh ok
17:30:15 <dustymabe> jberkus: you know I'll be there
17:30:22 <dustymabe> i had one more item for open floor
17:30:59 <dustymabe> ksinny submitted a patch to cloud-utils rpm in fedora and got it accepted
17:31:09 <dustymabe> it was a huge patch to move to newer version of cloud-utils
17:31:20 <dustymabe> the maintainer reviewed it and they got some fixups in and now it's merged
17:31:25 <dustymabe> great job ksinny !!!
17:31:27 <dustymabe> ksinny++
17:31:32 <ksinny> cloud-utils-0.30 build is alaso available in F27 and rawhide
17:31:38 <ksinny> dustymabe: Thanks!
17:32:10 <dustymabe> ksinny: sweet. did we get an update submitted for it?
17:32:31 <dustymabe> ksinny: do you mind updating the atomic wg ticket we have ?
17:32:43 <ksinny> dustymabe: Last I checked it wasn't. Maybe I will ping mainatiner tomorrow if it is still not done
17:32:51 <ksinny> dustymabe: sure, will do
17:33:04 <dustymabe> ok thanks everyone for coming today!
17:33:10 <dustymabe> great meeting right before the holiday
17:33:17 <dustymabe> I assume we won't be meeting next week
17:33:36 <dustymabe> I'll send an email letting people know
17:33:46 <dustymabe> #info no meeting next week due to holidays
17:33:53 <dustymabe> #endmeeting