16:27:54 <ravanelli> #startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting
16:27:54 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Sep  6 16:27:54 2023 UTC.
16:27:54 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:27:54 <zodbot> The chair is ravanelli. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
16:27:54 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:27:54 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_coreos_meeting'
16:28:03 <ravanelli> #topic roll call
16:30:32 <travier> .hello siosm
16:30:33 <dustymabe> .hi
16:30:33 <zodbot> travier: siosm 'Timothée Ravier' <travier@redhat.com>
16:30:36 <zodbot> dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' <dusty@dustymabe.com>
16:30:39 <marmijo> .hello marmijo
16:30:40 <zodbot> marmijo: marmijo 'Michael Armijo' <marmijo@redhat.com>
16:30:58 <gursewak> .hi
16:30:59 <zodbot> gursewak: gursewak 'Gursewak Singh' <gurssing@redhat.com>
16:31:17 <jlebon> .hello2
16:31:18 <zodbot> jlebon: jlebon 'None' <jonathan@jlebon.com>
16:31:19 <jmarrero> .hi
16:31:20 <aaradhak> .hi aaradhak
16:31:21 <zodbot> jmarrero: jmarrero 'Joseph Marrero' <jmarrero@redhat.com>
16:31:24 <zodbot> aaradhak: aaradhak 'Aashish Radhakrishnan' <aaradhak@redhat.com>
16:31:36 <ravanelli> #chair siosm
16:31:36 <zodbot> Current chairs: ravanelli siosm
16:31:48 <aaradhak> .hello aaradhak
16:31:49 <zodbot> aaradhak: aaradhak 'Aashish Radhakrishnan' <aaradhak@redhat.com>
16:32:12 <ravanelli> #chair marmijo
16:32:12 <zodbot> Current chairs: marmijo ravanelli siosm
16:32:35 <ravanelli> #chair gursewak
16:32:35 <zodbot> Current chairs: gursewak marmijo ravanelli siosm
16:32:56 <ravanelli> #chair jlebon
16:32:56 <zodbot> Current chairs: gursewak jlebon marmijo ravanelli siosm
16:33:15 <ravanelli> #chair jmarrero aaradhak
16:33:15 <zodbot> Current chairs: aaradhak gursewak jlebon jmarrero marmijo ravanelli siosm
16:33:56 <ravanelli> let's get started
16:34:05 <ravanelli> #topic Action items from last meeting
16:34:14 <ravanelli> dustymabe or travier to file a fesco ticket to see if the change
16:34:14 <ravanelli> should be moved to F40
16:34:39 <ravanelli> dustymabe: travier We have some update on that?
16:34:50 <dustymabe> travier: want to update? or should I?
16:36:08 <dustymabe> #info travier opened https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3062 to request FESCO discuss at the next meeting
16:37:11 <ravanelli> Great. Thanks travier
16:37:14 <ravanelli> Let's move to our list so
16:37:22 <ravanelli> #topic Finalize cutover to Matrix
16:37:28 <ravanelli> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1566
16:37:57 <ravanelli> I think this is a good one
16:38:04 <dustymabe> This ticket might be putting the cart before the horse just a bit with its title "Finalize cutover to Matrix"
16:38:17 <jlebon> i can provide some context on this
16:38:23 <dustymabe> I guess we'd need to agree first that we prefer Matrix to IRC
16:38:41 <dustymabe> jlebon: yep, go ahead
16:40:22 <ravanelli> #proposed We prefer Matrix over to IRC as our official communication channel
16:40:28 <jlebon> i recently came back from some time off and noticed that discussion had moved exclusively to Matrix. i learned that it's because the matrix/IRC bridge was gone. i didn't realize it was an unintended outage so interpreted it as a more permanent state of things than it really was meant to be. indeed we'd need to decide first whether even if the bridge comes back up whether we want to "support" both
16:40:32 <ravanelli> Something like it first?
16:40:34 <jlebon> IRC and Matrix or just the latter.
16:41:10 <travier> I don't think we should do this
16:41:29 <travier> While I agree the situation is not ideal, we are not in a position to decide that
16:41:36 <dustymabe> travier: which part?
16:41:51 <travier> The Fedora project as a whole is not ready to be on Matrix
16:41:52 <travier> only
16:42:11 <travier> while we've effectively move eveything to Matrix, we're still here doing stuff on irc
16:42:19 <dustymabe> travier: I think the only missing piece for me is the meeting bot
16:42:32 <ravanelli> For those who monitor the channels, it's complicated to look in several places, that's a fact
16:42:36 <travier> so while I would really like to get rif of IRC, it's not happening until we have a bot
16:42:48 <dustymabe> right
16:43:23 <dustymabe> I think effectively right now here's the situation we are in (anecdotal evidedence from my side):
16:43:55 <dustymabe> I come back to IRC for the meeting on Wednesday. Otherwise I go to IRC channels when someone pings me OR when I can't find someone on Matrix.
16:43:57 <travier> so while I would really like to get rid of IRC, it's likely not happening until we have the bot
16:44:30 <dustymabe> what I would like to do is change the topic in the IRC channel to indicate the discussion is more active on matrix and a link where they can find more information
16:44:30 <ravanelli> What is missing for the bot to happen?
16:44:45 <dustymabe> ravanelli: see the link in https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1566#issuecomment-1707194085
16:44:46 <ravanelli> Is it something we can help/change? Or is it something is not up to us
16:44:53 <dustymabe> it's an initiative within CPE
16:45:38 <dustymabe> ravanelli: i think it's something where if you have time you can work together with them, otherwise we wait until they implement it
16:46:12 <travier> (sorry, internet connection issues again)
16:47:38 <travier> I'm +1 for nudging people and discussions to Matrix
16:47:50 <travier> and updating the IRC channel topic
16:47:50 <dustymabe> ok I think we are on the same page then
16:48:31 <dustymabe> I don't want to delete the IRC channel, but pointing people to a place where more people are likely to see their message is useful
16:48:31 <travier> We can de-emphasize the IRC channel in the docs as well
16:48:36 <jlebon> but to be clear, the expectation is still that we all are on IRC if some users do want to stay here?
16:48:50 <dustymabe> jlebon: "expectation" is a strong word
16:49:00 <jlebon> recommendation? :)
16:49:03 <dustymabe> I don't require anyone to be in any channel
16:49:07 <travier> I don't think so
16:49:24 <dustymabe> yeah, I think if people wnat to only use matrix they should be able to
16:49:35 <travier> the status quo has been that people moved to matrix
16:49:44 <dustymabe> i will personally hang around the IRC channel and try to point people "over there" if they drop in
16:49:46 <jlebon> well sure, but i think we should decide as a team so that we don't have some in one place and some elsewhere
16:50:09 <dustymabe> ahh I see
16:50:31 <dustymabe> my reco would be for "everyone" to be on matrix
16:50:42 <jmarrero> I am +1 on matrix only unless you want/need to be on irc
16:50:46 <travier> we can recommend people use matrix
16:51:29 <dustymabe> here's an example - the other day baude tried to ask a question to someone in IRC. I told baude about the split and that most people are over in matrix now including the person he was trying to reach. He joined matrix and asked the question there.
16:51:57 <ravanelli> #proposed We will enhance our documentation to encourage discussions on important matters within the Matrix, which has a substantial audience. During this transition, we will patiently await the setup of the Matrix bot before officially migrating there
16:52:13 <dustymabe> TL;DR for everyone working with this team it is probably more productive for you and everyone else if you are on matrix
16:52:16 <travier> important discussion happen in meetings :)
16:52:33 <travier> "should happen"
16:53:05 <ravanelli> travier: Yeah, it's true ;)
16:53:10 <dustymabe> travier: I agree. it's the one thing where we point people back over here and there is a clear reason why. Once meetbot goes matrix native, then poof. We're over there for the meetings too.
16:53:50 <travier> Once we have the bot, we can cut IRC
16:54:05 <travier> Before that, we can only recommend (from my perspective)
16:54:12 <dustymabe> how about "encourage day to day discussions within the Matrix channel"
16:54:17 <travier> +1
16:54:45 <travier> (and I'm saying that as someone that is not active on IRC anymore)
16:54:52 <jlebon> hmm in my mind, i see those as related but still separable. but cool with the recommendation too!
16:55:01 <dustymabe> ehh. cut IRC is tough too. honestly if they do ever add the bridge back i'm happy to have it enabled for our channel again. I'll just be standing on the Matrix side of the bridge now, when previously I was on the IRC side.
16:55:28 <ravanelli> #proposed We will enhance our documentation to encourage day to day discussions within the Matrix channel, which has a substantial audience. During this transition, we will patiently await the setup of the Matrix bot before officially migrating there
16:55:46 <jlebon> dustymabe: +1
16:55:50 <dustymabe> +1
16:55:52 <travier> +1
16:55:53 <jmarrero> +1
16:55:56 <aaradhak> +1
16:55:57 <marmijo> +1
16:56:06 <ravanelli> #agreed We will enhance our documentation to encourage day to day discussions within the Matrix channel, which has a substantial audience. During this transition, we will patiently await the setup of the Matrix bot before officially migrating there
16:56:18 <jlebon> dustymabe: i'd say there we'd just follow the rest of fedora re. when to fully abandon IRC
16:56:28 <dustymabe> SGTM
16:56:29 <ravanelli> volunteers for this doc update?
16:56:54 <dustymabe> whoever does the doc update - feel free to tell me what to update the IRC channel topic to.
16:57:17 <jlebon> i can tweak the docs
16:57:30 <ravanelli> jlebon: ++
16:57:55 <dustymabe> jlebon++
16:58:00 <ravanelli> Should I add it as an action?
16:58:06 <jlebon> I've retitled the issue "Recommend Matrix over IRC"
16:58:23 <jlebon> sure :)
16:59:52 <ravanelli> #action jlebon to update our documents about encouraging people to use Matrix
17:00:37 <ravanelli> #topic F39 FCOS Test Week
17:00:48 <ravanelli> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1565
17:01:39 <dustymabe> The beta early target is next week - but I know there is a blocker bug that exists that hasn't been fixed yet. So I'm thinking we'll slip
17:01:54 <dustymabe> so let's assume beta ships on the 19th
17:02:40 <dustymabe> maybe our week can be the week after?
17:02:53 <dustymabe> Sept 25->29
17:02:58 <ravanelli> I helped with the last F38 Test Week. Honestly I don't remember the first steps from my head. However, I can volunteer to help again
17:03:21 <dustymabe> That's great!
17:03:37 <jlebon> ravanelli++
17:03:42 <dustymabe> I'd really like to get more people involved this time too. i.e. more people that will learn how to organize one of these
17:03:55 <dustymabe> if anyone would like to co-organize with ravanelli that would be useful
17:04:20 <ravanelli> Are we ok with Sept 25->29?
17:04:57 <jlebon> SGTM
17:05:04 <marmijo> I'd like to be involved this time around, but I might be OOO towards the end of that week
17:06:01 <dustymabe> marmijo: that's OK
17:06:10 <dustymabe> TBH more work happens the week before
17:06:26 <travier> ravanelli++ marmijo++
17:06:26 <zodbot> travier: Karma for ravanelli changed to 3 (for the release cycle f38):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:06:29 <zodbot> travier: Karma for marmijo changed to 1 (for the release cycle f38):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:06:34 <Guidon> Is there any way I can help with that too? fcos 38 introduced a breaking issue for me. How is it organized exactly and how to you guys expect feedback?
17:06:37 <marmijo> dustymabe: SGTM, count me in
17:06:44 <dustymabe> i.e. we usually take the test event as an opportunity to identify gaps in our tests (i.e. new platforms) and also add documentation that we find is missing
17:06:49 <ravanelli> marmijo: I can at least show the steps we need to do
17:07:00 <ravanelli> Guidon: Sure.
17:07:30 <dustymabe> Guidon: there are two parts to this test event
17:07:43 <dustymabe> one is organizing the test event and the other part is participating in the testing
17:07:58 <dustymabe> I imagine you are interested more in the latter?
17:08:03 <Guidon> Yes :)
17:08:09 <ravanelli> We normally run a bunch of tests during the week, try to update docs and try to add new tests
17:08:33 <dustymabe> perfect. we'll send out communications about that in the coming weeks - i'll try to make sure I tag you in IRC or matrix when we send out the communication
17:08:38 <Guidon> I cannot spend much time on this, but I have a real infra that I can replicate, and just change the version to the next or testing.
17:08:52 <dustymabe> Guidon: those are the best kind of tests
17:08:56 <ravanelli> Guidon: For our case, in your case what happened?
17:09:00 <Guidon> But I would need to know exactly what form of feeback you expect, besides obviously breaking stuff
17:09:11 <ravanelli> If you could help us to create a test for this case
17:09:30 <Guidon> Last time, Wireguard broke. change in SELinux default policies.
17:09:31 <dustymabe> ravanelli: he was booting on a specific AWS instance type
17:09:36 <Guidon> I think an issue is still open.
17:09:45 <dustymabe> ahh, yes. ok that was a different issue
17:09:48 <Guidon> No, not the RAM issue :D
17:09:53 <ravanelli> a ok.
17:10:05 <aaradhak> if there are more volunteers required, I would like to step in for the test week.
17:10:05 <dustymabe> Guidon: I think that is still an open issue: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1487
17:10:15 <Guidon> Yes, this one.
17:10:37 <dustymabe> aaradhak: there will be plenty of opportunity to volunteer for adding new content/docs
17:10:40 <Guidon> If we know it, we can circumvent before stable switches, that avoid dirty downtimes
17:10:43 <dustymabe> all will be invited to those sessions
17:10:58 <dustymabe> Guidon: exactly. That's the idea
17:11:08 <dustymabe> I guess we should go ping in that SELinux BZ
17:11:35 <dustymabe> if anyone could answer the open questions in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188714 that would be great
17:11:54 * dustymabe stops discussing that so we can get back on topic
17:11:59 <ravanelli> #proposed Our test week is scheduled to take place from September 25th to September 29th
17:12:19 <dustymabe> ravanelli: +1 - Hopefully Sumantro is good with this time as well
17:12:55 <ravanelli> I will double check it with him too.
17:13:04 <marmijo> +1 to proposed
17:13:04 <ravanelli> In any case we can change it
17:13:13 <jlebon> +1
17:13:38 <ravanelli> #agreed Our test week is scheduled to take place from September 25th to September 29th
17:14:18 <ravanelli> #action ravanelli will work with Sumantro to organize it.
17:15:16 <ravanelli> The next ticket is about sshd.socket, where we already talked about the FESCo ticket created.
17:16:11 <ravanelli> I will skip it. Is there anything else we want to look in  Fedora 39 changes considerations?
17:16:45 <dustymabe> I think there were a few that we haven't discussed yet
17:17:15 <ravanelli> dustymabe: Do you recall where we stopped?
17:17:30 <dustymabe> ravanelli: basically any item without an emoji in front
17:17:40 <dustymabe> if you want to switch the topic I'll drive this section
17:17:44 <ravanelli> ok
17:18:06 <ravanelli> #topic Fedora 39 changes considerations
17:18:16 <ravanelli> #link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1491
17:18:59 <dustymabe> ok a few here let's go through them
17:19:09 <dustymabe> subtopic 135. Color Bash Prompt
17:19:19 <dustymabe> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Color_Bash_Prompt
17:20:10 <dustymabe> I think it's safe to say this doesn't affect us
17:20:36 <jlebon> it looks like it requires opting in by adding a package
17:20:55 <jlebon> so by default, nothing will change for us
17:21:09 <dustymabe> ahh - good catch
17:21:10 <jlebon> we should discuss whether we want it?
17:21:22 <dustymabe> yeah I guess.
17:21:51 <dustymabe> taking a step back.. I'm still of the opinion that we shouldn't reject proposed changes to Fedora for FCOS unless there is really good reason
17:21:59 <jlebon> i think the argument for is simply to match the rest of Fedora
17:22:20 <dustymabe> so even if I don't like a change (i.e. I hate the default text exitor = nano change) I think it's still the right thing for us to do
17:23:14 <jlebon> agreed. it should be the default stance
17:23:24 <dustymabe> does anyone want to argue for not making this color bash prompt change for FCOS ?
17:23:54 <travier> if it's for all editions we should take it as well
17:24:29 <jlebon> silverblue should get it via comps. i'm not sure if iot uses the comps scripts goop. if so, it would get it too
17:24:39 <dustymabe> ok we'll need to add it to our package list
17:24:49 <dustymabe> anyone want to volunteer to do that add?
17:24:50 <travier> iot won't get it via comps afaik
17:25:27 <jlebon> yeah, i don't see the comps scripts in https://pagure.io/fedora-iot/ostree/tree/main
17:25:52 <travier> https://pagure.io/workstation-ostree-config/c/3b39e83dae21e8b8628cc4e467fbbf3b0ee24dc7?branch=main > silverblue
17:25:54 <jlebon> so we should probably let someone there know that they'd need to take an active action if they want it to apply to them too
17:27:03 <dustymabe> ehh. I do think we should be helpful, but I think that has a limit. I simple ping or email/ticket should be plenty.
17:27:55 <jlebon> i don't think i'm implying more than that :)
17:28:07 <dustymabe> +1 - volunteers for adding the bash-color-prompt package to FCOS for F39+ ?
17:28:29 <dustymabe> #info we'll need to add the bash-color-prompt to our package lists to pick up this change.
17:28:37 <jlebon> could be good practice for anyone who hasn't added a package yet, if there is someone
17:28:58 <dustymabe> #action dustymabe to open a tracker issue for the bash-color-prompt change
17:29:27 <aaradhak> I would like to volunteer for this
17:29:33 <dustymabe> subtopic 228. Haskell GHC 9.4 and Stackage LTS 21
17:29:43 <dustymabe> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Haskell_GHC_9.4_and_Stackage_21
17:30:06 <dustymabe> #info IIUC we don't ship any haskell based code. Nothing for us to do here.
17:30:10 <jlebon> +1
17:30:22 <dustymabe> subtopic 229. LibreOffice 7.6
17:30:26 <travier> let's follow the usual process to add a package but in a light way
17:30:45 <dustymabe> travier: oh, good point.
17:31:13 <dustymabe> travier: want to open that ticket?
17:31:15 <dustymabe> :)
17:31:26 <travier> ok, will open the ticket
17:31:45 <dustymabe> #action travier to open a ticket for the bash-color-prompt package add for the change
17:32:08 <dustymabe> #info for libreoffice 7.6: we don't ship libreoffice, nothing to do here
17:32:19 <dustymabe> subtopic 230. Enable fwupd-refresh.timer by default on IoT, CoreOS & Server editions
17:32:26 <dustymabe> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableFwupdRefreshByDefault
17:32:54 <dustymabe> We already have this work done for us in https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-config/pull/2562
17:32:59 <dustymabe> #info We already have this work done for us in https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-config/pull/2562
17:33:22 <dustymabe> ok that's the end of the new changes
17:33:36 <ravanelli> dustymabe: thanks for helping with the list
17:34:00 <jlebon> travier: nice. does the MOTD part of it also work fine for FCOS?
17:34:01 <dustymabe> there are a few with a warning emoji in front of them
17:34:19 <dustymabe> subtopic 115. RPM 4.19
17:34:26 <dustymabe> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/RPM-4.19
17:34:49 <dustymabe> we previously said: This should be mostly transparent, but there is some interested sysusers.d parts of the proposal. @jlebon and @travier are going to discuss and we'll bring it up next meeting.
17:34:50 <travier> jlebon: have not checked. I don't have hardware at hand to checl
17:34:53 <travier> check*
17:35:30 <jlebon> travier: ack. might be good for us to check somehow since we have special motd-related goop
17:35:51 <travier> jlebon: +1
17:36:18 <dustymabe> #action travier/jlebon to check the fwupd timer to make sure the motd message displayed when there are updates found works properly
17:36:18 <jlebon> dustymabe: travier and I have not discussed this but it was xref'ed in the sysusers upstream discussions
17:36:41 <dustymabe> I guess the question is: do you think further discussion and/or action needs to happen?
17:36:53 <jlebon> i'm not sure if it's worth discussing in a future meeting
17:36:53 <travier> +1 for next meeting. We're over time
17:37:05 <jlebon> it's just a part of the sysusers effort
17:37:19 <dustymabe> travier: ahh - sorry about the time. I'll relinquish control back to ravanelli
17:37:38 <ravanelli> Let go to the open floor
17:37:42 <ravanelli> #topic open floor
17:37:54 <ravanelli> anyone with anything for open floor?
17:37:57 <dustymabe> I have one question.. is the Audit stuff ready to go in to F39?
17:38:05 <dustymabe> I know there was a flurry of activity there
17:38:17 <dustymabe> and I think Adam is going to be AFK for a week
17:38:27 <travier> it's getting close
17:38:33 <dustymabe> wondering if we want this in before beta ships (and next stream gets rebased to F39)
17:39:20 <travier> we need audit-3.1.2-3.fc39
17:39:32 <dustymabe> also on that vein of f39 beta getting closer.. should we cutover `next-devel` soon to F39 and disable the branched stream?
17:39:55 <dustymabe> travier: it's built right? we can fast-track
17:40:49 * dustymabe will start the switch of next-devel unless someone has objections there
17:40:50 <travier> yes
17:40:55 <jlebon> dustymabe: SGTM
17:40:58 <travier> https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1362#issuecomment-1708824847
17:41:16 <ravanelli> +1
17:41:17 <dustymabe> travier: do you think we need to block on the docs?
17:41:23 <dustymabe> before the package can go in
17:41:56 * dustymabe is done with his list of open floor items
17:43:24 <ravanelli> I will end the meeting so.
17:43:26 <travier> Given that the commands that users will have to user to manage / restart the daemons are documented almost nowhere and we won't be including service, I think it's better to have docs before we merge it
17:43:32 <travier> to user*
17:43:35 <travier> to use*
17:44:15 <dustymabe> ok maybe we can talk more in the ticket or offline
17:44:17 <dustymabe> thanks all
17:44:29 <ravanelli> Thanks all!
17:44:33 <ravanelli> #endmeeting