15:00:53 #startmeeting FESCO (2018-06-01) 15:00:53 Meeting started Fri Jun 1 15:00:53 2018 UTC. 15:00:53 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 15:00:53 The chair is dgilmore. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:53 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:00:53 The meeting name has been set to 'fesco_(2018-06-01)' 15:00:56 #meetingname fesco 15:00:56 The meeting name has been set to 'fesco' 15:00:58 #chair maxamillion dgilmore nirik jsmith sgallagh bowlofeggs tyll jwb zbyszek 15:00:58 Current chairs: bowlofeggs dgilmore jsmith jwb maxamillion nirik sgallagh tyll zbyszek 15:01:00 #topic init process 15:01:03 so I am running another meeting now as well 15:01:16 it was the only time I could get everyone 15:01:25 morning. 15:01:34 .hello2 15:01:35 maxamillion: maxamillion 'Adam Miller' 15:01:48 .hello2 15:01:49 bowlofeggs: bowlofeggs 'Randy Barlow' 15:01:53 .hello2 15:01:54 zbyszek: zbyszek 'Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek' 15:02:51 .hello2 15:02:52 jsmith: jsmith 'Jared Smith' 15:03:51 .hello till 15:03:52 tyll: till 'Till Maas' 15:06:24 .hello2 Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN 15:06:25 tyll: Sorry, but you don't exist 15:06:28 #topic #1901 F29 System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN 15:06:32 .fesco 1901 15:06:34 tyll: Issue #1901: F29 System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1901 15:06:34 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1901 15:06:47 +1 15:06:50 I guess dgilmore is busy 15:07:00 did not check quorum, though 15:07:10 +1 15:07:16 +1 15:07:44 (imo this doesn't really need a change, but +1 anyway) 15:07:51 +1 15:08:32 +1 15:08:33 bowlofeggs: given the scope of work, I think it makes sense to get that level of visibility on it 15:08:37 sorry running another meeting also 15:08:44 * jsmith agrees with maxamillion 15:08:59 * zbyszek too 15:09:15 +1 15:09:43 #agree accept F29 System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN 15:09:48 #undo 15:09:48 Removing item from minutes: AGREED by tyll at 15:09:43 : accept F29 System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN 15:10:00 #agree accept F29 System Wide Change: Perl Move to MetaCPAN (+6, 0, -0) 15:10:54 #topic #1899 F29 System Wide Change: Move /usr/bin/python into a separate package 15:10:56 .fesco 1899 15:10:58 tyll: Issue #1899: F29 System Wide Change: Move /usr/bin/python into a separate package - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1899 15:10:59 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1899 15:11:46 I agree it would be good to have this in build roots but not necessarily on the actual repos 15:12:03 tyll: "this"? 15:12:24 that may well be confusing if it was in one and not the other. 15:12:41 the separate package 15:12:46 Oh. 15:13:01 IMHO it would be annoying for end users but I agree with the intention to get packager's attention 15:13:03 this one was pretty controversial 15:13:28 tyll: I don't it matters much for end users. The package will be pulled in by many things. 15:13:29 we *do* have taskotron tests that get angry if your package uses /usr/bin/python 15:13:41 but as pointed out in the discussion, that is after the build is done and not before 15:13:55 but imo, you can just fix it for th enext build when that happens 15:14:12 I guess the contention is that many people are ignoring those tests... 15:14:17 i don't see harm in this change, but i also don't think the benefit is huge 15:14:25 but it's hard to quantify 15:14:31 yeah 15:14:34 but maybe the recommends solution is good enough, I forgot about that 15:15:14 well, it lets us find things still using /usr/bin/python... anything doing that would fail the next mass rebuild unless they add the BuildRequires 15:15:30 nirik: we can also looks for who failed the tests though 15:15:43 nirik: i posted a link in the thread that queries that from resultsdb 15:15:53 so imo we already can do that without any change 15:16:02 The current approach doesn't seem to be strong enough 15:16:05 bowlofeggs: but who will do it? 15:16:24 zbyszek: in what regard? 15:16:28 bowlofeggs: will that work for rawhide tho? or anything not submitted as an update? 15:16:30 tyll: presumably the same person who would have queried for packages that BR'd the /usr/bin/python package 15:16:47 nirik: rawhide still gets taskotron tests in resultdb, so yes 15:16:53 maxamillion: it's too easy to ignore the taskotron checks and build warnings, and many many packages haven't been fixed 15:17:54 Proposal: Do this now at least for the mass-rebuild and revisit after branching 15:17:55 sorry free now 15:18:02 This new approach shifts the work to individual maintainers, who are best equipped to convert their own package to use /usr/bin/python2 or /usr/bin/python3 15:18:15 dgilmore: welcome back 15:18:35 Hmm, actually, I'd prefer to do this permanently 15:18:35 tyll: I'm reasonably OK with that proposal. I think it strikes a balance. 15:18:58 I don't see any benefit of revisiting 15:19:13 zbyszek: It is a compromise 15:19:13 If anything, this is going to be painful during the mass rebuild 15:19:17 tyll: +1 15:19:18 yeah a change like this would be permanent i think 15:19:22 well, if we change it after mass rebuild it would shift the sands on people... 15:19:46 ie, they would fix a bunch of packages to have the BR and then... we drop it so they have to change them all back? 15:20:15 nirik: I think the idea is to fix the packages to use a versioned python as the preferred approach 15:20:19 I'm +1 to the change as it stands, I think given the upstream preference on how that's handled the proposal does a good job trying to manage that large of a change ... I'm curious how dist upgrades will go though 15:20:30 zbyszek: yeah, true. 15:20:33 nirik: so even if the change was reverted, most packages wouldn't have to be (just saying) 15:20:36 maxamillion: +1 15:20:45 well, ideally they would move to python3... but yeah 15:21:23 tyll: -1 15:22:34 I suppose also BuildRequires: /usr/bin/python would just pull in python2 again if we reverted it, so there's not too much work to drop it... 15:22:43 zbyszek: because of the revisting? 15:22:44 yeah, I'm -1 to revisiting also, I think once we go for it there's not really any going back 15:23:11 tyll: yeah, I want to just accept the change as is 15:23:15 we will always revisit something if there will be major problems because of something... 15:23:29 I guess I could go either way on the "revisiting" piece, but I think we should move forward in the short term 15:23:41 ftr, it's very easy to know what packages use /usr/bin/python today without this change: https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/resultsdb/results?testcases=dist.python-versions.python_usage&outcome=failed 15:23:41 sure, so there's no need to underline it ;) 15:23:44 so I am also +1 as it is, the idea was to get to a decission soon 15:24:13 IMHO this is a detail that we do not need to discuss too much about 15:24:23 though i agree that the packagers don't always pay attention to those tests 15:25:05 bowlofeggs: we can ask the people driving the change to give packagers a heads up and they have time until the mass rebuild to fix it 15:25:06 the other advantage is that users could remove /usr/bin/python if they choose... 15:25:11 bowlofeggs: I agree -- some of us live in "Rawhidetopia" and never venture back to released versions :-) 15:25:30 so, I guess I am +1 to the change... 15:25:41 there will be major pain in undoing it 15:25:59 dgilmore: nope, it's a one line change in python2.spec 15:26:08 i think i am +1 - i do not think the change is harmful, though i do think one of its claimed benefits isn't true - the one about knowing which packages use /usr/bin/python 15:26:18 zbyszek: that is not the pain point 15:26:29 but I do not think it is worth arguing over 15:26:29 so what is? 15:26:43 i think it does have the benefit of getting people to take some action though, which is good 15:26:54 zbyszek: at this point it does not really matter 15:27:14 i bet many will just take the action of adding the BR and not fixing their package :/ 15:27:16 do we have an agreement for the change as it is? 15:27:24 then we can move on :-D 15:27:25 dgilmore: OK, we can talk some other time 15:27:33 I realise that this is an effort to ease removing python2, something that has to happen in the next two years. 15:27:34 i'm a mild +1 to the change as is 15:28:02 but I also do not necessarily think its going to really help. but I am not going to oppose the change 15:28:29 if the change breaks pkgs we will retire them sooner :-) 15:29:00 i kind of agree with dgilmore that this won't do much, imo 15:29:07 but i also don't oppose 15:29:17 bowlofeggs, zbyszek, nirik, tyll, maxamillion were +1 15:29:23 indeed 15:29:55 #agree accept F29 System Wide Change: Move /usr/bin/python into a separate package (+7, 0, -0) 15:30:02 unless I miscounted 15:30:16 dgilmore: will you take over? 15:30:21 tyll: sure 15:30:26 tyll: thanks 15:30:50 #topic #1898 F29 System Wide Change: The tzdata transition to 15:30:53 'vanguard' format 15:30:53 tyll: looks about right :) 15:30:55 .fesco 1898 15:30:57 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1898 15:30:57 dgilmore: Issue #1898: F29 System Wide Change: The tzdata transition to 'vanguard' format - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1898 15:31:02 +1 15:31:04 +1 15:31:20 +1 15:31:33 +1 15:31:35 +1 15:31:43 +1 15:31:49 I worry what this might break unintentionally, but I'm +1 since upstream is going that direction 15:32:11 maxamillion: that's what makes the change exciting! :) 15:32:45 #agree accept F29 System Wide Change: The tzdata transition to 'vanguard' format (+7, 0, -0) 15:32:53 #topic #1897 F29 System Wide Change: Perl 5.28 15:32:56 .fesco 1897 15:32:58 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1897 15:32:58 dgilmore: Issue #1897: F29 System Wide Change: Perl 5.28 - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1897 15:33:04 +1 15:33:19 +1 15:33:26 +1 15:33:34 +1 15:33:38 +1 15:33:49 +1 15:34:04 can we make some perl jokes now too? 15:34:19 maxamillion: ? 15:34:25 bowlofeggs: always 15:34:39 +1 15:34:39 sorry 15:35:08 Since it's national donut day today, we shoud ask "Does Perl have a donut operator?" 15:35:19 haha 15:35:44 🍩 + 🍩 = ? 15:35:56 #agree accept F29 System Wide Change: Perl 5.28 (+7, 0, -0) 15:36:16 #topic #1893 Non-responsive maintainer for libinvm-i18n,libinvm-cli, 15:36:18 libinvm-cim 15:36:20 .fesco 1893 15:36:21 dgilmore: Issue #1893: Non-responsive maintainer for libinvm-i18n,libinvm-cli, libinvm-cim - fesco - Pagure - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1893 15:36:22 https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1893 15:36:39 this was a failure on my part 15:36:47 i was supposed to write devel list about it and i forgot to do that 15:36:49 did we actually start the documented process? 15:36:57 i thought i had put it in task warrior and it turned out i had not 15:37:03 #actions bowlofeggs to follow up on devel@ 15:37:08 it is in my task warrior now though 15:37:12 #action bowlofeggs to follow up on devel@ 15:37:13 i propose we skip another week 15:37:18 Yep. 15:37:20 +1 15:37:29 +1 15:37:36 and i apologize :( 15:37:38 +1 15:37:46 +1 15:37:54 +1 15:38:11 +1 15:38:16 +1 15:38:26 #agree bowlofeggs to buy everyone 🍩, followup on devel@ and then look at again next week 15:38:33 #undo 15:38:45 haha 15:38:54 #agree bowlofeggs to buy everyone 🍩, followup on devel@ and then look at again next week (+7, 0, -0) 15:39:10 #agreed bowlofeggs to buy everyone 🍩, followup on devel@ and then look at again next week (+7, 0, -0) 15:39:17 okay should be covered 15:39:20 jsmith: for what it's worth ... this apparently doesn't work in perl 15:39:21 $ perl -e '🍩+🍩' 15:39:22 Unrecognized character \xF0; marked by <-- HERE after <-- HERE near column 1 at -e line 1. 15:39:24 >.> 15:39:25 Can I have my � with raspberry jam? 15:39:30 #topic Elections 15:40:10 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/SteeringCommittee/Nominations 15:40:18 we now have 5 nominations 15:40:18 Looks like we have enough nominations now, right? 15:40:25 Elections can go ahead 15:41:02 WORKSFORME 15:41:34 Cool. Can someone remind us all about the dates the voting starts and ends? 15:41:41 #info do not forget the interviews 15:41:41 #info there is now the required minimum number of candidates, elections can move forward 15:41:45 jsmith: 🍩+🍩 also doesn't work in python 15:42:09 #info intervie stage can now proceed 15:42:14 #undo 15:42:14 Removing item from minutes: INFO by dgilmore at 15:42:09 : intervie stage can now proceed 15:42:20 #info interview stage can now proceed 15:42:25 jsmith: ruby at least gives a reasonable error message :) -> -e:1:in `
': undefined local variable or method `🍩' for main:Object (NameError) 15:42:29 maxamillion: what about ansible 15:42:39 #topic Next week's chair 15:42:49 who wants to go next week? 15:43:09 i can do it 15:43:21 assuming i'm not voted out :) 15:43:23 I will be absent next week... speaking at a conference 15:43:33 bowlofeggs: yeah, ansible supports unicode/emoji https://asciinema.org/a/ua4X9QYXKNI3Ari08s8w6Iw9o 15:44:02 bowlofeggs: you can't add emoji together though without assigning them a value 15:44:17 oh, I'll be absent next week also ... traveling home from a conference 15:44:19 #action bowlofeggs will chair next meeting 15:44:21 #topic Open Floor 15:44:40 anyone have anything to bring up? 15:44:51 just a reminder, that the Flock CfP is open 15:44:56 and who is coming? 15:45:05 #info Flock CfP is open 15:45:11 tyll: I will be there 15:45:14 * zbyszek will be there 15:45:16 * nirik hopes to be 15:45:38 https://flocktofedora.org/#cfp 15:45:51 #info Flock 2018 will be in Dresden, Germany this August 8-11 15:45:59 awesome, me, too :-D 15:46:16 i want to be there but am not sure i'll have funding 15:48:24 tyll: thanks for the FTBFS bugs, I now know I need to fix some of my own packages ;) 15:49:28 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=1555378&hide_resolved=1 15:49:43 #info about 891 open FTBFS bugs 15:50:21 * jsmith has been slowly working through a bunch of the NodeJS packages in that list 15:50:54 I'll either be at Flock or DevConf.us ... not sure which just yet 15:51:42 anything else? 15:51:51 if not I will close in 45 15:52:59 #endmeeting