14:01:35 <pwhalen> #startmeeting Fedora IoT Working Group Meeting
14:01:35 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Feb  5 14:01:35 2020 UTC.
14:01:35 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
14:01:35 <zodbot> The chair is pwhalen. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:01:35 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:01:35 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_iot_working_group_meeting'
14:01:36 <pwhalen> #chair pwhalen pbrobinson bcotton tdawson puiterwijk
14:01:36 <zodbot> Current chairs: bcotton pbrobinson puiterwijk pwhalen tdawson
14:01:47 <pwhalen> good morning folks, who's here today?
14:01:50 * puiterwijk waves hello
14:02:11 <dressedfez> dressedfez
14:02:20 <tdawson> .hello2
14:02:21 <zodbot> tdawson: tdawson 'None' <tdawson@redhat.com>
14:02:21 <bcotton> .hello2
14:02:24 <zodbot> bcotton: bcotton 'Ben Cotton' <bcotton@redhat.com>
14:02:47 * pwhalen gives it a minute for others to join
14:06:19 <pwhalen> #topic 1) ==== Working Group process and admin  ====
14:06:19 <pwhalen> #link https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/iot/
14:06:53 <pwhalen> I dont have anything for admin, does anyone else?
14:06:56 <bcotton> o/
14:07:02 <pwhalen> nice :)
14:07:05 <pwhalen> floor is yours
14:07:33 <bcotton> #info The Fedora Council approved promoting IoT to an Edition, so we're working on that to coincide with the F32 release
14:07:42 <bcotton> there's an epic for it in Taiga
14:07:44 <bcotton> #link https://teams.fedoraproject.org/project/fedora-iot/epic/72
14:08:06 <bcotton> there's not a whole lot in this epic at the moment
14:08:29 <bcotton> it's basically just the list of things I wrote down when talking to pbrobinson after DevConf
14:08:42 <pwhalen> as I understand it will also be release blocking.. which is fun
14:08:43 * pbrobinson is here
14:08:46 <bcotton> so if anyone else has things that should be a part of this, please feel free to create cards and add them to the epic
14:08:50 <bcotton> EOF
14:09:51 <bcotton> pwhalen: yep. sumantrom said he has release critera, but they haven't been added to the wiki pages yet
14:11:22 <pbrobinson> nothing from me
14:12:11 <pwhalen> bcotton, I saw your email about release blocking deliverables, will IoT need a fesco ticket or already accepted?
14:12:35 <bcotton> pwhalen: that's sort of an interesting policy question, isn't it?
14:13:17 <bcotton> pwhalen: since the council promoted it to edition, i'd say it doeesn't require a FESCo ticket. but future changes would
14:14:16 <pwhalen> Ok, and which deliverables- the disk images?
14:14:23 <pwhalen> or iso as well
14:14:42 <sgallagh> So, that’s going to be up to the IoT WG to decide.
14:14:45 <bcotton> (this is an underspecified area of Fedora policy, so i'm making this up a bit as a i go)
14:15:07 <pwhalen> sgallagh, right. so we should :)
14:15:24 <bcotton> yeah, i'd say that's an IoT group decision. if an ISO makes sense as a primary deliverable, then it should be on the list. if not, then not
14:15:49 <sgallagh> Generally, the right balance is “block on the media that people are most likely to use” and don’t block on less common ways of installing
14:16:19 <pbrobinson> the disk images and the installers
14:17:41 <pwhalen> ok, sounds good. Anything else for WG/admin?
14:18:07 <pwhalen> #topic 2) ==== Fedora 31 status ====
14:18:53 <pwhalen> #info Latest compose available for testing
14:18:59 <pwhalen> #link https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/iot/latest-Fedora-IoT-31/
14:19:34 <pwhalen> has anyone hit any issues with the latest f31 compose?
14:19:44 <pwhalen> Fedora-IoT-31-20200201.0
14:21:07 <pbrobinson> I need to deploy a few images in the next couple of days to do more testing
14:23:11 <pwhalen> disk image looks ok on basic tests, we do have a bug with podman, but its not iot specific
14:23:33 <pwhalen> #info Pull fails with: Image architecture mismatch: image uses "aarch64", expecting "arm64"
14:23:40 <pwhalen> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1793927
14:24:36 <pwhalen> anything else for f31?
14:25:37 <pwhalen> #topic 3) ==== Fedora 32 status ====
14:27:29 <pwhalen> we've been hitting some compose issues in f32 and folks were travelling.
14:28:32 <puiterwijk> I recently found out that Anaconda is sorta broken for f32 iot. I still need to file a bug after figuring out what exactly is the right fix.  (basically, if you don't tell it to do auth setup, it says the user spoke isn't completed, if you do, it crashes at the end because no authconfig or authselect). That, together with travel, is what has been holding up the provisioning release the lsat two weeks basically.
14:29:55 <pbrobinson> should we add authselect back in for a short term work around?
14:30:34 <puiterwijk> That'd be a temporary workaround, sure. But I don't know what the dep stack on that looks like
14:31:36 <puiterwijk> If it's too large, I might just see if I can work around it
14:32:55 <pbrobinson> it's not too bad, lets to that to move forward. Is there an anaconda bug by chance?
14:33:13 <puiterwijk> I didn't file one yet, no. This was on my todo list
14:33:56 <pbrobinson> if you could do that it would be fab, this was/is working with f31 I think do it seems like a regression
14:33:56 <pwhalen> I'll try to reproduce today and file one, I didnt hit when I did an install recently on the fitlet2
14:34:14 <pwhalen> or if you beat me puiterwijk, drop it in channel
14:35:41 <pwhalen> anything else for f32?
14:36:22 <pwhalen> #topic 4) ==== Open Floor ====
14:36:51 <pbrobinson> I probably should have a bunch of things for here
14:36:59 <pbrobinson> or more for the other topics
14:38:00 <tdawson> I have a question about the IoT name change ... was there any progress on it?  Or are we leaving it as IoT?
14:38:08 <pwhalen> great question
14:38:24 <pbrobinson> tdawson: we need to work out how to come up with a new name
14:38:37 <pbrobinson> do we hold a poll or a competition or something else
14:38:45 <pbrobinson> suggestions welcome
14:38:59 <pbrobinson> I've been told Edgy McEdgeface isn't appropriate :-P
14:39:11 <tdawson> I'd like to give a suggestion ... except I don't have any
14:39:13 <pwhalen> heh, too bad
14:39:23 <tdawson> *laughs*  That one would have been good. :)
14:39:41 <puiterwijk> pbrobinson: you mean we weren't going for an online, publicly available, name suggestion with voting? :D
14:39:43 <pbrobinson> I have some ideas around themes but haven't managed to go from theme to a suitable name
14:40:26 <pbrobinson> puiterwijk: yea, I mean what could possibly go wrong.... besides I bet bcotton could come up with some bangers of bad names to compete with all of the other worst ones :-P
14:41:33 <bcotton> who me? 😇
14:42:10 <tdawson> Hmm ... since it's very similar to silverblue, except without the graphics and all that, what about SilverGrey ... something that sounds like it.
14:42:11 <pbrobinson> tdawson: while I think of it I think Moz IoT might be dead, one of the lead developers who was working on it at Moz was made redundant recently, there's been no official announcement though
14:42:46 <pbrobinson> tdawson: SilverGrey makes it sound like I've named it after myself... may as well go SilverFox and be done :-D
14:42:54 <tdawson> *laughs*
14:43:04 <pwhalen> LOL
14:43:45 <dressedfez> pbrobinson have you had a chance to look at the mozilla-iot-gateway. I have added a TODO file.
14:43:50 <pbrobinson> tdawson: also given the packaging up of a pile of nodejs bits how hard would it be to do the same for node-red? https://nodered.org/
14:43:59 <pwhalen> lets all try to think of cool names and come back to it next week
14:44:01 <dressedfez> Concerning the other comment I don't know anything of.
14:44:06 <pbrobinson> dressedfez: got a link to that PR or git repo?
14:44:08 <tdawson> pbrobinson: Bummer about Moz IoT ... but I also know they are having financial problems.
14:44:55 <dressedfez> just a second
14:44:57 <tdawson> *doh* That totally dropped off my todo list ... the Moz Iot container.
14:45:35 <dressedfez> https://pagure.io/mozilla-iot-gateway-container
14:45:44 <dressedfez> #link: https://pagure.io/mozilla-iot-gateway-container
14:45:54 <tdawson> pbrobinson: if we bundle the nodejs bits, it's alot easier.  Hardest part of that is figuring out all the licenses.
14:46:39 <pbrobinson> tdawson: yes, I think bundling like we did with moz gw is likely the best, the only binary node deps needed is already packaged
14:47:18 <pbrobinson> so it should end up as one noarch package, or a core one with various sub packages for functionality
14:50:50 <pwhalen> Last call for open floor..
14:51:11 <tdawson> Hmm ... cool ... and I see it already has some work for docker/containers
14:52:12 <tdawson> pbrobinson: I've put nodered on my to-do list.  I've got some high priority things on there right now, so I probubly won't be able to start on it until next week.
14:52:47 <tdawson> dressedfez: I have re-added looking at the container on my to-do list.  Like node-red, I probrubly won't be able to look at it until next week.
14:53:37 <tdawson> pwhalen: And, that's all I have for open floor.
14:53:45 <dressedfez> That's fine. I would like to join in on the node-red stuff including the packing. Please ping me if you have time.
14:54:01 <tdawson> dressedfez: OK, I will
14:54:32 <tdawson> I think talking about the sub-packages and/or package layout would be good, so I don't do things in a weird way.
14:55:31 <pwhalen> perhaps take this over to iot if you guys want to chat some more
14:55:35 <pwhalen> #endmeeting