16:00:55 #startmeeting FESCO (2017-03-24) 16:00:55 Meeting started Fri Mar 24 16:00:55 2017 UTC. The chair is dgilmore. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:55 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:55 The meeting name has been set to 'fesco_(2017-03-24)' 16:00:55 #meetingname fesco 16:00:56 #chair maxamillion dgilmore jwb nirik jforbes jsmith kalev sgallagh Rathann 16:00:56 The meeting name has been set to 'fesco' 16:00:56 Current chairs: Rathann dgilmore jforbes jsmith jwb kalev maxamillion nirik sgallagh 16:00:58 #topic init process 16:01:02 morning 16:01:03 .hello jsmith 16:01:03 .hello sgallagh 16:01:04 jsmith: jsmith 'Jared Smith' 16:01:06 jsmith: I believe its now 16:01:07 .hello jforbes 16:01:07 sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' 16:01:10 jforbes: jforbes 'Justin M. Forbes' 16:01:11 .hello kalev 16:01:13 kalev: kalev 'Kalev Lember' 16:01:18 dgilmore: Yeah, my body clock is still messed up :-/ 16:02:00 next week it's Europe changing the time zone as well 16:02:02 .hello maxamillion 16:02:04 maxamillion: maxamillion 'Adam Miller' 16:02:12 jwb said he might be late. He will either join late or follow up in the tickets 16:02:41 I'm still commuting and can't type too fast on my mobile 16:02:54 #topic #1688 Incomplete (non testable) Changes of F26 16:02:54 .fesco 1688 16:02:55 * nirik has a hard stop at :45... 16:02:55 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1688 16:02:55 dgilmore: Issue #1688: Incomplete (non testable) Changes of F26 - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1688 16:02:59 lets get moving 16:03:11 * threebean 16:04:28 the cflags change was reduced in scope 16:04:42 and was done prior to the mass rebuild 16:04:57 right, and with the reduced scope, it is testable/done 16:05:00 * nirik nods. 16:05:00 Yeah, I'm fine with that one, since it was reduced in scope 16:05:01 I think we can move that to modified 16:05:01 * kalev nods. 16:05:04 yep 16:05:09 though the change page may need updated 16:06:24 anyone disagree? 16:06:41 nope 16:06:56 no 16:06:56 okay :) 16:07:03 lets do the Modular changes 16:07:16 https://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/ModularCompose 16:07:24 https://fedoraproject.org//wiki/Changes/Modular_Server_Preview 16:07:51 * nirik is +1 to allowing them for all the reasons mattdm outlined in the ticket 16:08:00 so in the comments in pagure this one says it doesn't need to defer, but also that it's still waiting on baseruntime to be delivered ... the variable of baseruntime being an unknown concerns me 16:08:08 I'm +1 for the same reasons 16:08:13 +1 as well 16:08:30 I am +1 to both for Beta 16:08:36 I'll abstain due to conflict of interest. 16:08:38 maxamillion: they're at the point where they have a build we can use for some of the architectures, but not all. there's some missing uefi stuff they're still working out. 16:08:53 threebean: does it boot? I heard a few days ago it doesn't boot 16:09:08 maxamillion: maybe 16:09:14 huh. 16:09:24 maxamillion: I *think* the version building right now should have fixed that. 16:09:42 * threebean nods 16:09:44 pjones: they were missning shim from thier packagelist for instance 16:09:52 yeah, that's not gonna work. 16:10:05 alright, is there any estimate on a timeline where it will show up in working order to unblock the rest of the work? ... there's still a lot in-flight late in the cycle 16:10:11 I am +1 16:11:13 * threebean defers to sgallagh 16:11:15 maxamillion: We're hoping Monday. 16:11:32 hrmm 16:11:33 (Well, ideal would be *today*, but I assume there will be at least one more bug to work out) 16:11:51 threebean: you're confident that if unblocked soon that things can get done in time? 16:11:56 I'd rather be pleasantly surprised. 16:12:16 sgallagh: +1 16:12:19 maxamillion: given that its all going to be unsupported on the side and is just a demo, so long as business as usual works I am less concerned over it. but delaying is kicking the can down the road 16:12:26 for beta? confident. for alpha? nope. not even with the slip. 16:12:45 sgallagh: talking about shim on monday? 16:12:55 * jkaluza just want to be sure :) 16:12:57 * dgilmore thinks even with the slip Alpha has sailed for it 16:13:15 here now, apologies for being late 16:13:25 hi 16:13:30 right 16:13:38 jkaluza: contyk was working on that intently, so I really hope so 16:13:56 as i said in the ticket, i'm +1 for both of these for beta 16:13:57 dgilmore: rgr 16:14:04 alright 16:14:08 I'm +1 to the change 16:14:26 sgallagh: ok, great :) 16:16:08 okay let me sumarise everything 16:17:20 #agreed the modular delieverables are okay for Beta delivery (+:8 0:0 -:0) 16:18:08 #info we did not vote on the cflag change but it has been completed in a reduced change set and was in place for mass rebuild 16:18:35 #info FESCo needs to ensure the change reflects reality 16:18:56 any one want to add anything else? 16:19:12 #topic #1690 F27 Self Contained Changes 16:19:12 .fesco 1690 16:19:13 dgilmore: Issue #1690: F27 Self Contained Changes - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1690 16:19:13 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1690 16:19:35 just FYI: The owner of cflag change is on PTO till end of the month 16:19:41 hrrm we approved them last week 16:19:46 and the issue was not updated 16:19:47 dgilmore: yeah, i thought we did 16:20:03 jkurik: i think that's OK. there's not much he needs to do at the moment :) 16:20:10 jwb: teach me to not look at the issue when setting up the agenda 16:20:25 #topic #1681 Proposed Fedora 27 schedule 16:20:25 .fesco 1681 16:20:26 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1681 16:20:27 dgilmore: Issue #1681: Proposed Fedora 27 schedule - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1681 16:20:34 lets go to the f27 schedule 16:20:50 Did this need revision, or is it still on the list because I forgot to close it last week? 16:21:06 sgallagh: matt updated it 6 days ago 16:21:22 * Rathann is back at his computer 16:21:24 but it may be that it was not updated 16:21:31 Only because we were 1.5 hours into the meeting and changing it 16:21:45 dgilmore: Yeah, looking at the time stamp, that was during the meeting 16:22:03 So, I think this is my fault. I forgot to process the #agreed after the meeting. 16:22:06 I think we were all ok with this one. 16:22:11 okay, can I ask you to update it then please sgallagh? 16:22:14 On it 16:22:21 thanks 16:22:25 oh good. i didn't really want to go over this again :) 16:22:41 yep, looks good to me too 16:22:46 #info sgallagh forgot to update the issue last week 16:22:48 #topic Next week's chair 16:22:59 who wants to run the ship next week? 16:23:02 * nirik can do it. 16:23:14 #action nirik to take next weeks meeting 16:23:18 thanks nirik 16:23:26 #topic Open Floor 16:23:50 anyone got anything? 16:23:58 I had one quick question... 16:24:09 got for it 16:24:14 go for it even 16:24:33 I'll be gone next week 16:24:42 but back the week after! 16:24:44 the no more alpha change... we approved it, but were fuzzy on the details. When do we expect gating and what kind? or is that waiting on alpha being done so adamw and dgilmore can work on it? 16:24:59 also, what happens if the gating doesn't land? 16:25:10 do we rework the schedule then? 16:25:24 kalev: we revert to the original schedule 16:25:31 ok 16:25:43 there is a deadline a month before Alpha would have been done 16:26:21 I plan to get with adamw post Alpha and start working on the change 16:26:27 ok 16:27:08 I have a question too 16:27:15 kalev: shoot 16:27:48 would it make sense to change the meeting time so that it's one hour earlier UTC, but stays at the same local time as two weeks ago and before? 16:27:55 undoing the timezone thing? 16:28:36 kalev: tit would still change for some 16:28:40 it even 16:29:04 * nirik is fine with either this time or an hour earlier 16:29:08 there is no way to have the meeting stay the same local time for everyone 16:29:16 I'm fine with either time as well 16:29:17 I can not do an hour earlier 16:29:20 I can do either time 16:29:36 my friday is meetings from 8am to 1pm 16:29:42 dgilmore: oof 16:29:48 ahh, if dgilmore can't do one hour earlier I guess that decides it 16:29:59 DST is such a suck of time and energy and causer of such pain. 16:30:03 I have three meetings before this on fridays 16:30:15 I would prefer no change in UTC 16:30:45 anything else? 16:30:50 oh, shoot. I thought of one other thing... 16:31:02 The webkitgtk/webkitgtk3 retirement. 16:31:03 go for it :) 16:31:18 This was discussed at length on list... has been planned for a year now or so 16:31:40 so they were retired, but someone unretired them. 16:32:01 can we/should we say that they should not be unretired? 16:32:13 I think we can 16:32:24 see, that's where my proposal comes in 16:32:25 They are both no longer maintained at all upstream and have hundreds of outstanding CVE's against them 16:32:39 Rathann: true, related for sure. :) 16:32:46 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1634 16:33:24 it would be against the rules to put it back in Fedora if that proposal passed 16:33:39 Rathann: Sure, but the rules right now are "FESCo can say no" 16:33:46 So I don't see a major problem here. 16:33:56 proposal: FESCo requires webkitgtk/webkitgtk3 packages be retired as planned and not readded to the collection due to their outstanding security bugs and the long communicated plan of retiring them. 16:34:00 I'd prefer if old webkitgtk stayed out of the distro, but at the same time this creates a precedent with throwing out old libs we haven't had before 16:34:06 nirik: +1 16:34:24 +1 from me as well 16:34:28 kalev: I'm perfectly comfortable with that precedent 16:34:31 nirik: +1 16:34:32 nirik +1, unless someone comes forward and fixes all the CVEs ;) 16:34:39 sgallagh: me too, just wanted to mention that :) 16:34:49 Rathann: If upstream is resurrected, that would be cause to reconsider. 16:34:51 +1 16:35:02 +1 16:35:08 they would sure have a hard road... 16:35:14 jwb: jsmith: ^ 16:35:34 side question: what's midori and epiphany using these days? 16:35:35 I wonder if with this precedent we would be able to get rid of gtk+ 1 and other seriously ancient stuff too 16:35:39 upstream dropped gtk2 support... years ago. and webkit is a very very large project. 16:35:43 +1 16:35:46 maxamillion: epiphany uses webkitgtk4 16:36:01 a bit confusingly named, it's still using gtk+ 3 16:36:02 +1 16:36:02 kalev: sure, if there is CVE's in them 16:36:03 maxamillion: so does midori (all be it on a branch) 16:36:04 kalev: ah, didn't realize they moved on to a version 4 16:36:15 nirik: +1 16:36:17 cool cool 16:36:28 the versioning is somewhat confusing due to our packaging. 16:36:38 webkitgtk4 is webkit2 and gtk3 16:36:52 and webkitgtk is webkit1 and gtk2 16:36:57 and webkitgtk3 is webkit1 and gtk3 16:37:03 #agreed FESCo requires webkitgtk/webkitgtk3 packages be retired as planned and not readded to the collection due to their outstanding security bugs and the long communicated plan of retiring them. (9:+ 0:0 0:-) 16:37:04 * nirik nods. yep. 16:37:19 ok, thats all I had 16:37:40 nirik: I assumed you were +1 to your proposal 16:37:48 yes 16:37:51 if nothing else I will wrap up 16:38:12 #endmeeting