16:30:41 <dustymabe> #startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting
16:30:41 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jul 11 16:30:41 2018 UTC.
16:30:41 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:30:41 <zodbot> The chair is dustymabe. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:30:41 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:30:41 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_coreos_meeting'
16:30:47 <dustymabe> #topic roll call
16:31:03 <rubao> .hello rubaoredhat
16:31:04 <zodbot> rubao: rubaoredhat 'Ruixin Bao' <rubao@redhat.com>
16:31:06 <slowrie> .hello
16:31:07 <zodbot> slowrie: (hello <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "hellomynameis $1".
16:31:10 <cverna> hello
16:31:19 <geoff-> .hello
16:31:19 <zodbot> geoff-: (hello <an alias, 1 argument>) -- Alias for "hellomynameis $1".
16:31:28 <slowrie> .hello slowrie
16:31:29 <zodbot> slowrie: slowrie 'Stephen Lowrie' <slowrie@redhat.com>
16:31:32 <mnguyen_> .hello mnguyen
16:31:36 <zodbot> mnguyen_: mnguyen 'Michael Nguyen' <mnguyen@redhat.com>
16:31:41 <bgilbert> .hello2
16:31:42 <zodbot> bgilbert: bgilbert 'Benjamin Gilbert' <bgilbert@backtick.net>
16:31:43 <ajeddeloh> .hello2
16:31:45 <zodbot> ajeddeloh: ajeddeloh 'Andrew Jeddeloh' <andrew.jeddeloh@redhat.com>
16:31:54 <sayan> .hello sayanchowdhury
16:31:55 <zodbot> sayan: sayanchowdhury 'Sayan Chowdhury' <sayan.chowdhury2012@gmail.com>
16:32:09 <geoff-> .hello geoff-
16:32:10 <zodbot> geoff-: Sorry, but you don't exist
16:32:16 <dustymabe> #chair rubao slowrie cverna geoff- mnguyen_ ajeddeloh bgilbert sayan
16:32:16 <zodbot> Current chairs: ajeddeloh bgilbert cverna dustymabe geoff- mnguyen_ rubao sayan slowrie
16:32:24 <dustymabe> geoff-: do you happen to have a fedora fas account ?
16:32:26 <kaeso> .hello kaeso
16:32:27 <zodbot> kaeso: Sorry, but you don't exist
16:32:29 <jbrooks> .fas jasonbrooks
16:32:30 <zodbot> jbrooks: jasonbrooks 'Jason Brooks' <jbrooks@redhat.com>
16:32:34 <kaeso> .hello lucab
16:32:36 <zodbot> kaeso: lucab 'Luca Bruno' <lucab@redhat.com>
16:32:42 <dustymabe> zodbot uses that information for .hello
16:32:42 <geoff-> dustymabe: no, no account
16:32:48 <dustymabe> no worries :)
16:32:53 <lorbus> .hello2
16:32:54 <zodbot> lorbus: lorbus 'Christian Glombek' <c@petersen-glombek.de>
16:33:01 <dustymabe> just say "hi may name is ____ _____"
16:33:07 <dustymabe> .hello2
16:33:08 <zodbot> dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' <dusty@dustymabe.com>
16:33:34 <dustymabe> #chair kaeso jbrooks lorbus
16:33:34 <zodbot> Current chairs: ajeddeloh bgilbert cverna dustymabe geoff- jbrooks kaeso lorbus mnguyen_ rubao sayan slowrie
16:34:20 <geoff-> hi may name is 'Geoff Levand' <geoff@infradead.org>
16:34:36 <dustymabe> welcome geoff- !!
16:34:46 <bgilbert> hi geoff-!
16:35:14 * dustymabe heard rumors ed-packet was going to join us too
16:35:42 <ksinny> .hello sinnykumari
16:35:43 <zodbot> ksinny: sinnykumari 'Sinny Kumari' <ksinny@gmail.com>
16:36:05 <dustymabe> #chair ksinny
16:36:05 <zodbot> Current chairs: ajeddeloh bgilbert cverna dustymabe geoff- jbrooks kaeso ksinny lorbus mnguyen_ rubao sayan slowrie
16:36:16 <dustymabe> ok, let's get started
16:36:27 <dustymabe> #topic previous meeting action items
16:36:53 <dustymabe> good news :) - since last time was our first meeting we didn't have any action items
16:37:08 <dustymabe> However, there were a few things that happened since last time
16:37:36 <dustymabe> #info there was a community vote on GitHub/Pagure for an issue/feature tracker for Fedora CoreOS
16:37:51 <dustymabe> #info votes resulted in GitHub getting chosen
16:38:22 <dustymabe> #info we created https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker to house our dev related discussions and issue tracking
16:38:59 <dustymabe> If you want to add agenda items for us to discuss in future meetings please open an issue there and ask for the meeting tag to be applied to the issue
16:39:48 <dustymabe> any questions ?
16:39:50 <jlebon> .hello jlebon
16:39:51 <zodbot> jlebon: jlebon 'None' <jonathan@jlebon.com>
16:39:55 <dustymabe> welcome jlebon
16:40:00 <dustymabe> #chair jlebon
16:40:00 <zodbot> Current chairs: ajeddeloh bgilbert cverna dustymabe geoff- jbrooks jlebon kaeso ksinny lorbus mnguyen_ rubao sayan slowrie
16:40:06 <lorbus> o/ jlebon
16:40:19 <jlebon> howdy all! sorry I'm late!
16:40:19 * cverna saw a github bot that allow users to apply tags by leaving a comment in the issue
16:40:37 <dustymabe> that could be useful
16:40:55 <dustymabe> we should evolve over time
16:41:14 <cverna> I think it was https://github.com/zulip/zulipbot
16:41:18 <dustymabe> anything before I move to topics for today's meeting ?
16:42:01 <dustymabe> ok, topics will come from here: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/labels/meeting
16:42:07 <dustymabe> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/labels/meeting
16:42:16 <dustymabe> #topic rules for membership and voting
16:42:23 <dustymabe> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1
16:42:57 <dustymabe> this is carried forward from the atomic working group. at some point I'd like to establish some sort of governance structure for the project
16:43:17 <dustymabe> in practice we had to use strict voting very little in the atomic working group and we just used lazy concensus
16:43:31 <dustymabe> but having something written down is always useful
16:43:49 <dustymabe> I expect sanja to have input on this when she comes back from vacation
16:45:13 <dustymabe> any thoughts on this before I move to next topic?
16:45:40 <cverna> I think it looks good :)
16:46:00 <lorbus> sgtm too
16:46:22 <dustymabe> I encourage everyone to weigh in, in the ticket
16:46:29 <dustymabe> if they have any input
16:46:31 <mnguyen_> 👍
16:46:51 <dustymabe> mnguyen_: question?
16:47:09 <mnguyen_> no, just agreeing
16:47:14 <dustymabe> #topic should notifications from github issue tracker go to the mailing list?
16:47:21 <dustymabe> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/5
16:47:55 <dustymabe> I added my thoughts in the ticket. /me allows everyone some time to read.
16:48:39 <jbrooks> dustymabe, I agree, I prefer a less noisy list
16:48:44 <bgilbert> +1
16:48:45 <sayan> I agree with dustymabe
16:48:49 <cverna> I am in favour for leaving the mailing list alone
16:48:49 <slowrie> +1
16:48:49 <lorbus> +1
16:48:53 <ksinny> +1 for using subscribe if someone wants to get notifed
16:49:09 <kaeso> dustymabe: additional sub-item for that, travis and other CI may want to send notifications too for breakage on periodic jobs
16:49:33 <mnguyen_> +1
16:49:43 <dustymabe> kaeso: we should probably have individuals subscribe to those alerts too?
16:49:56 <dustymabe> or are you suggesting we create a separate list for alerts like that ?
16:49:57 <slowrie> kaeso: Individual subscriptions or a separate ML would work better IMO
16:50:35 <kaeso> I *think* you can't subscribe to a third-party repo on travis
16:50:36 <ajeddeloh> If we want a notifications list, seperate list++
16:51:14 <dustymabe> kaeso: got it. we can deal with this issue separately from #5 probably
16:51:39 <dustymabe> I'd say either go ahead and create and issue where we can discuss it, OR wait til we actually have notifications and then create the issue :)
16:51:55 <jlebon> +1 for me, we can always bring up GH issues on the list too if they warrant higher visibility
16:52:20 <kaeso> dustymabe: perhaps yes, it was mostly another point for "separate notification ML"
16:52:34 <dustymabe> #agreed we will allow individuals to subscribe to the GH tracker and not send notifications to the mailing list
16:52:41 <dustymabe> ^^ anyone opposed to that statement ?
16:53:44 <dustymabe> silence == agreement
16:54:02 <dustymabe> #topic flesh out use cases for Fedora CoreOS
16:54:12 <dustymabe> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/7
16:55:08 <geoff-> Has there been anything published that describes what Fedora CoreOS is?
16:55:09 <dustymabe> basically it would be good as we move forward to define what we are and what we are not so that we can more easily make decisions about the future of the project
16:55:25 <bgilbert> geoff-: primarily the mission statement on https://coreos.fedoraproject.org/
16:55:36 <bgilbert> which I think is a good start, but +1 to more detailed use cases
16:55:45 <dustymabe> bgilbert++
16:56:31 <dustymabe> I propose that a few of us try to write up a document and propose it as a starting point for the community
16:56:53 <kaeso> geoff-: the above plus discussions at https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/c/coreos
16:57:41 <ajeddeloh> imo it should fill the role CL does today: it's for running containers (with or without orchestration), and not much else
16:58:05 <lorbus> should other projects based on what previously was Atomic be mentioned there, too? (silverblue, IoT)
16:58:25 <ajeddeloh> i.e. not your laptop/desktop
16:58:33 <dustymabe> lorbus: maybe mentioned and referenced, but not included I don't think
16:58:57 <dustymabe> i.e. IoT should have it's own set of user stories
16:59:12 <dustymabe> otherwise it wouldn't be a separate effort IMO
16:59:30 <dustymabe> there is probably a fair amount of overlap, but that's ok
16:59:41 <lorbus> I agree. In this sense CoreOS, Silverblue and IoT will somewhat be siblings in the sense that they'll all be based off of OSTree
16:59:51 <dustymabe> ok how about this:
17:00:18 <dustymabe> #action dustymabe, bgilbert, sanja work on first draft of user stories for Fedora CoreOS
17:00:31 <geoff-> based on that mission statement it seems it is for server distro, not for a 'desktop' distro
17:00:33 <dustymabe> this will probably take a few weeks (as some of us have a work trip next week)
17:01:03 <dustymabe> geoff-: indeed, this is targeted towards servers, not user desktops
17:01:26 <lorbus> Silverblue would be the one for desktops
17:01:36 <dustymabe> anyone opposed to that action item?
17:02:21 <kaeso> dustymabe: I'm not a huge fan of user stories, wouldn't a short abstract or overview be better/reusable?
17:03:15 <dustymabe> kaeso: perhaps. in short we want some document that clearly helps us understand what Fedora CoreOS is and what it is not
17:03:28 <dustymabe> if user stories aren't the most appropriate way, then we'll do something else
17:03:30 <bgilbert> +1 to avoiding a decision on format for now :-)
17:03:47 <bgilbert> I don't think the format is the critical piece here
17:03:51 <dustymabe> agree
17:04:00 <dustymabe> moving on to next ticket in 30 seconds
17:04:07 <kaeso> ack
17:04:29 <dustymabe> #topic Containers building and delivery ?
17:04:35 <dustymabe> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/8
17:04:39 <dustymabe> ok some history here
17:04:57 <dustymabe> in the old Fedora Atomic Working group, we also helped bootstrap the container effort in Fedora
17:05:15 <dustymabe> so we would discuss app container or container build/infra issues in that issue tracker
17:05:27 <dustymabe> that is NOT what we have to do here
17:05:37 <dustymabe> but it's an option
17:05:52 <dustymabe> I discussed with cverna earlier if we should break out the container effort into it's own group
17:06:02 <dustymabe> so we may choose to do that
17:06:35 <dustymabe> so questions
17:06:51 <dustymabe> 1 - how do people feel about discussion fedora container issues here (might be distracting)
17:07:13 <cverna> I think it is mostly relevant for container like kubernetes etc ...
17:07:14 <dustymabe> 2 - depending on #1, who is interested in being part of a container group within fedora ?
17:07:27 <bgilbert> 1. seems out of scope?
17:07:33 <walters1> I would like to deliver the CoreOS build tools as a container
17:07:48 <lorbus> +1 for a dedicated container group
17:08:00 <walters1> I'm very much of the opinion our build process should use modern containers (not mock/koji)
17:08:22 <dustymabe> walters1: I agree, but I don't know if that is the question at hand?
17:08:29 <ajeddeloh> yeah, dedicated group, its related but seperable
17:09:00 <geoff-> +1 for build tools in a container
17:09:30 <lorbus> +1 for that, too
17:09:53 <dustymabe> ok - so sounds like some separation would be ideal
17:10:06 <dustymabe> how much separation may be a different story
17:10:30 <dustymabe> #action cverna work with dustymabe to try to figure out a good strategy for containers working group going forward
17:10:36 <dustymabe> cverna: what do you think ?
17:10:37 <kushal> walters1, modern containers like? Any example name?
17:11:05 <geoff-> Will fedora coreos be releasing app containers for end users, or is that out of the project's scope?
17:11:12 <cverna> dustymabe: sounds good to me, I agree a container wg or sig would be better :)
17:11:30 <dustymabe> geoff-: i think "fedora" will be releasing app containers for end users
17:11:49 <cverna> geoff-: based on the above I would say that it is out of scope
17:11:50 <lorbus> dustymabe, cverna: IMO this should also include the Modularity Containers peeps
17:11:53 <dustymabe> and fedora coreos members can help with that effort, but i don't think it will be the responsibility of the WG
17:12:17 <dustymabe> cverna: yes, let's get ttomacek and asamalik involved
17:12:32 <lorbus> dustymabe +1
17:12:34 <dustymabe> ok, that's all the tickets with meeting tag for today
17:12:40 <dustymabe> moving to open floor next
17:12:41 <ajeddeloh> regarding what walters1 was talking about: I want FCOS's build process to be distro independent
17:12:46 <cverna> flock might be a good time to start this :)
17:12:57 <dustymabe> cverna: indeed
17:13:01 <dustymabe> #topic open floor
17:13:07 <lorbus> cverna: I'm going to be there! Who else is?
17:13:07 <dustymabe> anyone with anything for open floor
17:13:31 <kushal> Anything the old Atomic WG members can do to help the new coreos wg?
17:13:34 <kaeso> dustymabe: process question - are you going to remove all meeting tags and link minutes afterhand?
17:13:58 <kushal> I am asking for myself, as a Fedora volunteer contributor.
17:14:01 <kaeso> lorbus: I'll
17:14:19 <lorbus> kaeso: nice!
17:14:39 <dustymabe> kushal: mainly just be involved in discussions. we don't have any bits yet, but there will definitely be work to do on that soon
17:14:58 <dustymabe> kaeso: if meeting issues can be resolved we'll close them with an explanation
17:14:59 <walters1> ajeddeloh: distro...like fedora vs centos, or support being run from an e.g. Ubuntu host?  both?
17:15:05 <dustymabe> if they can't be closed then they stay open
17:15:28 * asamalik reads
17:15:45 <kaeso> dustymabe: ack
17:15:56 <ajeddeloh> both, like I want to be able to dev FCOS from gentoo, even if that means doing it out of some kind of chroot/container type environment
17:16:01 <asamalik> .hello2
17:16:03 <zodbot> asamalik: asamalik 'Adam Samalik' <asamalik@redhat.com>
17:16:29 <walters1> ajeddeloh: yep agreed
17:16:31 <asamalik> dustymabe: I'm happy to get involved and help with Modularity
17:16:36 <dustymabe> ajeddeloh++
17:16:41 <kaeso> walters1: historically, we had a good variety of linux distros and the SDK never enforced hard constraints on the host
17:16:50 <lorbus> asamalik++
17:16:53 <dustymabe> asamalik: more specifically modularity+containers, cverna will likely reach out
17:17:21 <asamalik> dustymabe: cool
17:17:38 <lorbus> dustymabe, asamalik: I'm definitely interested in helping out with that, too!
17:17:49 <ajeddeloh> another thing I'd like to see: something like cros_workon for FCOS
17:17:52 <dustymabe> geoff-: do you have any topics for open floor? want to intro yourself ?
17:17:58 <jlebon> as someone only mildly familiar with the SDK, I really like the concept
17:18:17 * dustymabe googles cros
17:18:47 <ajeddeloh> for those unfamiliar with cros_workon, it lets us toggle from saying "I want to build the latest 'release' for some package" to "I want to build the source sitting in my local directory"
17:19:00 <kaeso> dustymabe: tldr building an image with all official bits, except for something taking from a local dir/git
17:19:19 <dustymabe> got ya
17:19:22 <jlebon> would be interesting if the FCOS SDK was something you deploy in `oc cluster up`
17:19:27 <kaeso> s/taking/taken/
17:19:30 <ajeddeloh> so if I'm testing a change in say systemd, I can make my changes locally, and build a new image with that change that's sitting on my host
17:19:53 <geoff-> well, I'm interested in having arm64 support...
17:19:58 <ajeddeloh> jlebon: you mean can deploy like that or need to deploy like that
17:20:27 <kaeso> jlebon: I'm actually looking for something closer to local, i.e. just a containerized build environment
17:20:30 <dustymabe> geoff-: +1
17:20:59 <dustymabe> like almost everything in Fedora. We'll certainly try make FCOS available on aarch64
17:21:08 <jlebon> ajeddeloh: I guess need to? the idea being that it matches exactly how production images are created
17:21:22 <ajeddeloh> hmmmmmm I'm not sold on that
17:21:28 <dustymabe> if this makes you feel any better we offer Fedora Atomic Host on x86_64 aarch64 and ppc64le today
17:21:53 <bgilbert> jlebon: requiring OpenShift to do FCOS development seems like a layering violation :-)
17:22:03 <ajeddeloh> jlebon: I don't want the build process to be dependent on external tools
17:22:15 <ajeddeloh> s/tools/services
17:22:43 <dustymabe> this is a bit of a rathole discussion, but... `oc cluster up` runs on your laptop
17:22:50 <ajeddeloh> like I want to be able to run the build locally, fetching cached builds if necesarry
17:22:56 <dustymabe> i'm not for requiring it, just noting
17:23:06 <jlebon> i'm thinking more higher level. if the production pipeline is fully described by a set of openshift resources you can run locally, that's pretty powerful
17:23:25 <dustymabe> jlebon: yeah, alignment is nice
17:23:38 <ajeddeloh> With CL all of the build tools run locally, and the official release process is basically those same tools running in jenkins
17:24:12 <ajeddeloh> which is something I'd like to see with FCOS
17:24:20 <dustymabe> ok mostly rathole, maybe we can discuss in an issue ?
17:24:29 <jbrooks> It's easy to compose an ostree locally
17:24:29 <bgilbert> +1
17:24:38 <jbrooks> You'll need to build the rpms
17:24:49 <dustymabe> jbrooks: i think the point is not having to build the rpms
17:25:01 <dustymabe> i.e. the SDK picks up those changes you made to local changes on your FS
17:25:05 <walters1> sort of tangentially related to this is that i really, really dislike the one-git-repo-per-package model fedora has and I think it's an impediment to better tools (related to cros_workon)
17:25:07 <dustymabe> and then composes the full artifact
17:25:09 <ajeddeloh> I mean the _whole_ process, from source > rpms > ostree > bootable image
17:25:10 <kaeso> dustymabe: just as a note, this is the same kind of topic we were discussing yesterday (re imagefactory+anaconda)
17:25:26 <jbrooks> dustymabe, but it'll still be based on rpms, right?
17:25:47 <dustymabe> jbrooks: yes, it's the in between steps that would need to be optimized
17:26:00 <dustymabe> kaeso: yes
17:26:17 <jbrooks> It seems that a process like what Colin worked out for centos continuous would work
17:26:38 <jbrooks> rpmdistro-gitoverlay
17:27:00 <jbrooks> And the tree and images can be built w/ those rpms, all locally
17:27:17 <kaeso> jbrooks: that's what is currently used, the point of discussion is containerizing and the UX for OS developers
17:27:18 <dustymabe> ok 3 minutes left in meeting
17:27:27 <bgilbert> oh yeah, I wasn't here last time.  hi all, I'm Benjamin Gilbert.  I work on Container Linux and now Fedora CoreOS.
17:27:29 <dustymabe> any last minute topics ?
17:27:44 <dustymabe> COLLECTIVE: "hi benjamin"
17:27:49 <lorbus> bgilbert++
17:28:01 <lorbus> dustymabe is in a hurry^^
17:28:05 <kushal> bgilbert, hello
17:28:10 <dustymabe> bgilbert: is awesome FYI
17:28:14 <kaeso> bgilbert: that looks like a pretty bad addiction ;)
17:28:27 * bgilbert waves
17:28:29 <jlebon> bgilbert: hi! nice to meet you
17:28:32 <ajeddeloh> re: arm support: we should _actually_ test arm from the start
17:28:50 <ajeddeloh> like as a first class citizen
17:29:01 <bgilbert> ajeddeloh: +1
17:29:06 <kaeso> geoff-: mind joing #fedora-coreos?
17:29:10 <kaeso> *joining
17:29:13 <slowrie> ajeddeloh: yes
17:29:38 <geoff-> I'd like to see a proposal for the build tooling/build system.  Maybe start something in the issue tracker.
17:29:39 <ajeddeloh> especially since fedora's arm packaging is better than gentoos in general (from what I understant)
17:29:52 <ajeddeloh> geoff- ++
17:30:09 <lorbus> geoff- +1
17:30:11 <dustymabe> yes, arm is generally a first class citizen in Fedora (for Server)
17:30:35 <ajeddeloh> maybe start with what we want out of our build system / tooling, ignoring what we have already
17:30:35 <dustymabe> but I will note that we will probably start with x86_64 and while we are experimenting with build pipeline
17:30:51 <dustymabe> then add aarch64
17:30:57 <ajeddeloh> then figure out what bits we already have, what bits need work, what bits need to be build
17:31:31 <dustymabe> ok we're over time. I'm going to close this out
17:31:40 <lorbus> thanks for hosting dustymabe!
17:31:40 <dustymabe> if anyone has any outstanding topics please add to the issue tracker
17:31:44 <dustymabe> #endmeeting