18:00:11 <ajax> #startmeeting FESCO (2015-05-20)
18:00:11 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed May 20 18:00:11 2015 UTC.  The chair is ajax. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:11 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
18:00:11 <ajax> #meetingname fesco
18:00:11 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco'
18:00:11 <ajax> #chair ajax dgilmore jwb mitr nirik paragan rishi thozza sgallagh
18:00:11 <zodbot> Current chairs: ajax dgilmore jwb mitr nirik paragan rishi sgallagh thozza
18:00:15 <ajax> #topic init process
18:00:20 <nirik> morning
18:00:34 <sgallagh> .hello sgallagh
18:00:35 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com>
18:00:42 <ajax> (waiting a moment for people to join)
18:01:16 <paragan> Hi
18:02:05 <thozza> hi all
18:03:16 <mattdm> hi!
18:03:18 * mattdm lurks
18:03:54 <ajax> i count five, which is a majority, but perhaps not quorum?
18:04:22 <sgallagh> ajax: five is quorum
18:04:29 <ajax> oh indeed
18:04:39 <sgallagh> Though it means that any decision made has to be unanimous
18:04:42 <mattdm> it just becomes concensus :)
18:04:54 <sgallagh> Which we always strive for anyway
18:05:06 <ajax> well, let's start and people can catch up
18:05:10 <ajax> #topic #1441  Packaging: Practices for Migration of cron jobs to systemd timer units
18:05:17 <ajax> .fesco 1441
18:05:18 <zodbot> ajax: #1441 (Packaging: Practices for Migration of cron jobs to systemd timer units) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1441
18:05:36 <dgilmore> hey
18:05:39 <jwb> hi
18:06:09 <thozza> The bottom line is if we want to handle timer units any different from other types of units
18:06:36 <thozza> it makes migration from cron jobs more painful, but it keeps the defaults more consistent
18:06:36 <nirik> I guess the conclusion we came to was... no?
18:06:41 <sgallagh> So, the only problem with the centrally-managed presets is third-party software. Are such packages just expected to manage themselves in %post?
18:07:23 <thozza> I think as long as they are not included in Fedora repos, do we care?
18:07:30 <lnykryn> they should ship their own preset file
18:07:37 <sgallagh> thozza: Well, COPR makes the question fuzzy
18:08:18 <sgallagh> lnykryn: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1441#comment:17
18:08:19 <thozza> sgallagh: right, but those packages can do stuff that does not completely comply to packaging guidelines
18:08:42 <sgallagh> thozza: Right, but I'd still like to have recommendations exist on how to behave
18:09:13 <thozza> ok, I'm not opposed to that, however I was more concerned about the packages included in Fedora repos
18:09:14 <sgallagh> lnykryn: Short version: a package shipping its own preset is fundamentally identical to managing itself in %post
18:09:21 <nirik> I'd say they handle it in %post yeah
18:09:25 <lnykryn> sgallagh: it is not
18:09:27 <sgallagh> Because the admin can't configure it before the package is installed
18:09:57 <lnykryn> admin can still deny for all unit files to enable themselfs
18:10:16 <sgallagh> lnykryn: No, because %post can just call 'systemctl enable'
18:10:26 <sgallagh> It's running as root
18:10:39 <thozza> sgallagh: I think lnykryn means the situation with own presets
18:10:43 <lnykryn> I was speaking about the case where package ship its own unit file and calls preset
18:10:57 <sgallagh> lnykryn: Can that be restricted?
18:11:15 <lnykryn> sgallagh: sure we are looking for the first match
18:11:27 <lnykryn> so you can ship conf with lower number and some glob
18:11:35 <thozza> lnykryn: the package can install preset that will be first
18:11:45 <lnykryn> sure it can
18:12:05 <lnykryn> but that is a corner case
18:12:12 <nirik> I'm not sure that helps too much really.
18:12:24 <thozza> so in the end it depends how the preset file is named
18:12:33 <lnykryn> yes they are numbered
18:12:37 <sgallagh> Also, putting a glob early in the process will likely break everything else :(
18:12:51 <lnykryn> if you know what you are doing ...
18:13:45 <nirik> well, if we are talking about packages not in fedora, who knows... they can do anything at all.
18:13:48 <thozza> so to make use of own presets in comparison to %post, the admin would have to do things, that would most probably break his system
18:13:50 <sgallagh> Yeah
18:14:20 <thozza> I think that his is kind of out of scope to decide
18:14:21 <lnykryn> no there is still the use-case that admin wants to have every new service disabled by default
18:14:38 <thozza> lnykryn: which we just discussed
18:15:00 <sgallagh> lnykryn: Right, but I don't think it's actually possible to do that (reliably) just with presets.
18:15:02 <nirik> unless everyone agrees to some convention there, it's not likely to work
18:15:10 <sgallagh> I think that would need to be a different systemd feature\
18:15:29 <ajax> i mean, systemd controls the world, it could shove rpm into a cgroup where systemctl enable didn't work.
18:15:36 <ajax> right?
18:15:54 <ajax> but failing that i think some spec convention and qa assurances are the best we can do
18:15:57 <nirik> or you could install your new stuff with --noscripts. ;)
18:16:09 <nirik> but I think we are going far afield
18:16:11 <sgallagh> nirik: No one would do that.
18:16:16 <thozza> so back to timer units ;)
18:16:17 <sgallagh> I like ajax's idea though
18:16:37 <ajax> right.  is there a concrete proposal we should be debating for timer units?
18:17:16 <thozza> personally I don't think that it would be that bad to allow to ship own preset for timer unit in some cases is bad thing... however since we moved presets to fedora-release things may work better now
18:18:01 <sgallagh> OK, so first proposal:
18:18:05 * thozza reading what I wrote... I think I changed the idea in the middle of sentence
18:18:06 <thozza> :)
18:18:17 <sgallagh> Proposal: Timer units' default state should be managed by the system presets
18:18:26 <sgallagh> (Not by the packages installing them)
18:18:51 <nirik> ok. +1ish
18:19:17 <sgallagh> +1
18:19:17 <thozza> I agree to some extent
18:19:29 <sgallagh> Let me rephrase
18:19:59 <sgallagh> Proposal: For packages in the Fedora collection, the default state of their timer units should be managed by the system presets and not by the packages that contain them.
18:20:40 <nirik> sure. +1
18:20:49 <thozza> in case it will not take a month to get unit into presets ;)
18:20:57 * nirik is hoping adding to presets will be reasonably responsive
18:20:57 <ajax> +1
18:20:59 <nirik> yeah.
18:21:36 <paragan> sorry if I missed in above discussion but can someone tell what is problem if individual packages allowed to change default state?
18:21:49 <sgallagh> dgilmore: Did you end up making that its own repository or as part of fedora-release/generic-release?
18:22:03 <ajax> paragan: consistency of expectations for the admin, aiui
18:22:07 <sgallagh> paragan: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1441#comment:17
18:22:36 <paragan> ah okay
18:23:05 <paragan> +1 to sgallagh proposal
18:23:37 <sgallagh> dgilmore: s/that/presets/ and s/repository/package/
18:24:18 <sgallagh> I think that we may want to have that be its own package with multiple maintainers rather than fedora-release which is painful to keep updated.
18:24:31 <sgallagh> (Also, probably a dist-git hosted package rather than an upstream)
18:24:37 <thozza> sgallagh: I think that would speed up the process
18:24:54 <lnykryn> (by the way we already have this process in rhel and redhat-release)
18:25:31 <thozza> lnykryn: I think we are talking about completely separate component
18:25:45 <ajax> i count 4 votes (me, nirik, paragan, sgallagh implicitly transferring his +1 to his clarification)
18:25:53 <dgilmore> sgallagh: its just in fedora-release
18:25:58 <lnykryn> thozza: that was just a mention
18:26:10 <dgilmore> sgallagh:  I am going to duplicate into generic-release
18:26:26 <thozza> I will be +1 if we make the process reasonably easy
18:26:27 * nirik notes we should get anything we decide codified/approved by FPC too.
18:26:38 <sgallagh> nirik: Agreed
18:26:43 <thozza> moving presets to fedora-release is a good step
18:27:15 <ajax> well, i'm not a fortune teller, but i expect products to actively participate
18:27:15 <dgilmore> I am +1 to having timers default state in system wide preset files
18:27:17 <sgallagh> dgilmore: My recommendation is that we split it out of fedora-release and make it into fedora-presets where we can have a number of maintainers with access (without risking the stability of fedora-release_
18:27:55 <sgallagh> Maybe give commit privilege to fedora-presets to FESCo and WG liasons
18:28:01 <dgilmore> sgallagh: honestly do not really care. as is I think it is fine, it should be very manageable upstream will pull requests
18:28:12 <sgallagh> ok
18:28:30 <nirik> we can split it if it turns out to be better long term?
18:28:35 <sgallagh> Sure, I'm okay with leaving it as-is and revisiting if the process becomes bogged down
18:28:53 <ajax> #agreed packages in fedora have their default timer unit settings managed by system presets and not by their providing package (+6, -0)
18:29:07 <thozza> I'm also OK with revisiting if needed and keeping it as is for now ~ in fedora-release
18:29:25 <ajax> #info timer unit settings recommendation to be double-checked with fpc
18:29:31 <ajax> someone want to handle taking this to fpc?
18:29:41 <sgallagh> /me volunteers
18:29:47 <zbyszek> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Starting_services_by_default also should be updated to reflect new reality. Apart from the obvious s/systemd/fedora-release/, both services and timers which require or not FESCo exception need to go through the global presets file.
18:30:04 <sgallagh> zbyszek: Yes, thanks. I'll open an FPC ticket for that as well
18:30:13 <ajax> #info sgallagh to bring timer unit issue to fpc
18:30:16 <ajax> sgallagh: thanks
18:30:17 <sgallagh> #action sgallagh to work with FPC on updating https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Starting_services_by_default
18:30:29 * nirik has a timer to submit too. ;)
18:30:38 <thozza> zbyszek: I think we could generalize to any type of unit
18:30:39 <sgallagh> nirik: Is it the end-of-meeting-timer?
18:30:44 <ajax> just about!
18:30:48 <ajax> #topic Open Floor
18:30:59 <nirik> ha. :) spamassassin's sa-update... but sure. ;)
18:31:26 <ajax> there were a couple of other fesco tickets more recent than 1441
18:31:35 <zbyszek> thozza: yes, it applies to .sockets and anything else which can activate services...
18:31:47 <ajax> which mostly look like they can be handled in the ticket
18:31:52 <thozza> zbyszek: lnykryn mentioned e.g. path units and so on...
18:32:01 <nirik> ajax: we need a next weeks chair selection too.
18:32:09 <ajax> so, if'n people can take a look at the fesco trac, that'd be super
18:32:16 <ajax> nirik: indeed. volunteers?
18:32:54 <nirik> I've not done it for a bit, I can.
18:33:08 <ajax> #action nirik to chair next week
18:33:13 <ajax> nirik: thanks
18:33:33 <ajax> if there are no other open issues i'll close out in a couple minutes
18:34:13 <sgallagh> Just a general note: RC1 looked quite good, but we had one blocker necessitating a respin tonight.
18:34:29 <nirik> hopefully RC2 will be a keeper.
18:34:40 <sgallagh> So this is a general request for people to help test RC2; we expect it to be Go tomorrow at the meeting.
18:34:44 <sgallagh> Here's hoping.
18:36:46 * mattdm hopes that the ext4 issue making the blog rounds turns out to be not a serious thing
18:37:14 <nirik> yeah. Infomation on it is so sketchy.
18:37:28 <sgallagh> I have trouble caring. I run XFS :-D
18:37:52 <sgallagh> (I'm kidding of course; I hope this doesn't bite us, but the timing is suboptimal)
18:38:08 <sgallagh> We probably won't know for certain how bad this is until it's too late to stop the machinery.
18:38:42 <nirik> yeah
18:39:05 <nirik> it's not super common or we would have seen more reports... or... well, almost any
18:39:18 <dgilmore> RC2 is well underway
18:39:28 <dgilmore> it should be out this evening US time
18:39:39 <mattdm> afaik it affects mdadm raid — that just might not have been common enough, or in the right triggering config — to get enough exposure
18:40:16 <jwb> or people who are testing f22 are already running 4.0.4 from updates-testing and it's already fixed
18:40:19 <jwb> WHO KNOWS
18:40:20 <nirik> mattdm: I have a machine using raid with the 'affected' kernel with 0 problems
18:40:29 <jwb> talking about it more isn't going to result in anything useful at this point
18:40:36 * nirik nods. stops
18:40:42 <ajax> hey, we're running off the rails!
18:40:55 * mattdm is sorry
18:41:00 <nirik> does that make this a crazy train? ;)
18:41:01 <dgilmore> so please be testing RC2 when it is out
18:41:03 <ajax> if you want #fedora-devel you know where to find it ;)
18:41:13 <ajax> #info Please test RC2!
18:41:26 <ajax> thanks all
18:41:28 <ajax> #endmeeting