14:00:01 <mhroncok> #startmeeting FESCO (2020-09-30)
14:00:01 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Sep 30 14:00:01 2020 UTC.
14:00:01 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
14:00:01 <zodbot> The chair is mhroncok. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:01 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:00:01 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco_(2020-09-30)'
14:00:05 <mhroncok> #meetingname fesco
14:00:05 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco'
14:00:08 <mhroncok> #chair nirik, ignatenkobrain, decathorpe, zbyszek, sgallagh, mhroncok, dcantrell, cverna, Conan_Kudo, Pharaoh_Atem, Son_Goku, King_InuYasha, Sir_Gallantmon, Eighth_Doctor
14:00:08 <zodbot> Current chairs: Conan_Kudo Eighth_Doctor King_InuYasha Pharaoh_Atem Sir_Gallantmon Son_Goku cverna dcantrell decathorpe ignatenkobrain mhroncok nirik sgallagh zbyszek
14:00:11 <mhroncok> #topic init process
14:00:17 <decathorpe> .hello2
14:00:18 <zodbot> decathorpe: decathorpe 'Fabio Valentini' <decathorpe@gmail.com>
14:00:22 <nirik> morning
14:00:22 <mhroncok> .hello churchyard
14:00:25 <zodbot> mhroncok: churchyard 'Miro Hrončok' <mhroncok@redhat.com>
14:00:38 <bcotton> .hello2
14:00:39 <zodbot> bcotton: bcotton 'Ben Cotton' <bcotton@redhat.com>
14:01:00 * King_InuYasha waves
14:01:04 <King_InuYasha> .hello ngompa
14:01:05 <zodbot> King_InuYasha: ngompa 'Neal Gompa' <ngompa13@gmail.com>
14:01:49 <sgallagh> .hello2
14:01:50 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com>
14:02:10 <zbyszek> .hello2
14:02:11 <zodbot> zbyszek: zbyszek 'Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek' <zbyszek@in.waw.pl>
14:02:16 <dcantrell> .hello2
14:02:17 <zodbot> dcantrell: dcantrell 'David Cantrell' <dcantrell@redhat.com>
14:02:56 <mhroncok> 7 participants, missing cvernaand ignatenkobrain, right?
14:03:00 <zbyszek> mhroncok: Can we exchange #2477 and #2476? I think it'll easier to handle them in opposite order.
14:03:03 <mhroncok> *cverna and
14:03:10 <mhroncok> zbyszek: ack
14:03:37 <mhroncok> zbyszek: handle 2477 before 2476, right?
14:03:54 <mhroncok> #topic #2474 F34 System-Wide Change: Rust Crate Packages For Release Branches
14:04:09 <mhroncok> I was hoping to get ignatenkobrain here for the rist discussion
14:04:12 <mhroncok> *rust
14:04:29 * mhroncok is quite happy with the proposal as it stands, including the update policy exception
14:04:32 <King_InuYasha> I think he'd generally be satisfied with the exception that's included in the change proposal
14:05:18 <mhroncok> decathorpe: would you like to punt this, or count the votes?
14:05:23 <zbyszek> mhroncok: yes, 2477 first.
14:05:28 <mhroncok> zbyszek: ok
14:05:44 <decathorpe> if there's questions, I can answer them, but otherwise, I'm good
14:06:13 <mhroncok> decathorpe: does that mean waiting for next week or counting the votes?
14:06:22 <mhroncok> I see +5,1-1 in the ticket
14:06:56 <King_InuYasha> I think with that we can just approve it
14:07:06 <mhroncok> any additional votes here?
14:07:07 <dcantrell> I've read through the rust one and don't have any questions, +1 from me
14:07:09 <zbyszek> I'd be +1 if we vote today, though I was hoping to hear from ignatenkobrain.
14:07:15 <dcantrell> I just added my vote to the ticket
14:07:18 * King_InuYasha expects the next items of business will eat all our time anyway
14:07:31 <mhroncok> that's +7,1-1
14:07:35 <sgallagh> I'll add my +1 to the ticket also
14:07:43 <sgallagh> Thought I already had, but must have forgotten
14:07:50 <mhroncok> sgallagh: you had
14:07:54 <sgallagh> oh ok
14:08:08 * nirik is +1 to it, but also would have liked to hear more from ignatenkobrain
14:08:32 <mhroncok> decathorpe: is this time sensitive at this point?
14:08:49 <mhroncok> decathorpe: I'd say it only gets sensitive when we approach branching, right?
14:08:55 <decathorpe> yes.
14:09:13 <decathorpe> I can prepare the releng PRs in the meantime.
14:09:28 <mhroncok> proposal: let's give ignatenkobrain a chance to discuss this next week
14:09:37 <zbyszek> mhroncok: +1
14:09:50 <nirik> mhroncok: +1
14:09:54 <decathorpe> +1
14:09:56 <King_InuYasha> mhroncok: +1
14:09:58 <sgallagh> Sure, +1
14:10:10 <dcantrell> +1
14:10:21 <mhroncok> #approved let's give ignatenkobrain a chance to discuss this next week
14:10:28 * King_InuYasha just poked ignatenkobrain via telegram
14:10:32 <mhroncok> I don't think a proper vote count matters here
14:10:49 <mhroncok> King_InuYasha: thanks, we can circle back to this topic later if needed
14:10:58 <King_InuYasha> yup sounds good
14:11:04 <mhroncok> #topic #2477 Fedora 33 schedule: Is it correct there is only one week between Beta and Final Freeze?
14:11:26 <mhroncok> any thoughts?
14:11:30 <King_InuYasha> this one surprised me, actually
14:11:37 <nirik> so we have done this either way over history.
14:11:40 <mhroncok> King_InuYasha: the ticket or the fact that it happened?
14:11:44 <King_InuYasha> the latter
14:11:46 <decathorpe> yeah, one week is definitely a short window :(
14:12:00 <nirik> sometimes taking from the buffer sometimes pushing out the final
14:12:02 <mhroncok> especially given the 7 days in testing policy
14:12:04 <King_InuYasha> I didn't realize we can easily wind up in a situation that nothing can really get done
14:12:18 <King_InuYasha> that makes beta -> RC essentially pointless
14:12:22 <nirik> thats a bit... strong
14:12:48 <mhroncok> King_InuYasha: well, it pushes hundreds of pending updates in after the beta freeze
14:12:51 <decathorpe> mhroncok: right. updates that don't get karma can't even go in during this time
14:12:54 <zbyszek> Yeah, I'm sure we already pushed 10k packages after the freeze was lifted.
14:13:33 <bcotton> so i'll note that moving the target back means 1 slip puts us on the same day as a major news event in the US, which mattdm has said "we're not doing" :-)
14:13:37 <decathorpe> zbyszek: pushing all those packages all at once after the freeze is lifted tends to cause new problems that can only be fixed during one week
14:13:48 <King_InuYasha> I think the problem here is the 7 day window for bodhi
14:13:53 <mhroncok> I am perfectly fine only spending this time in the schedule with fixing things
14:13:58 <bcotton> so essentially if we miss the first target, we'd slip two weeks  and be well into november
14:14:19 <mhroncok> bcotton: can we push the freeze, but not the target?
14:14:33 <bcotton> we could, but it's already only 2 weeks
14:14:38 <King_InuYasha> or can we shorten the hold period for bodhi?
14:14:40 <bcotton> so you might have QA very upset
14:14:51 <King_InuYasha> like 2 days instead of 7?
14:14:53 <mhroncok> King_InuYasha: the bodhi period is 7 days by policy but 3 days in practice
14:15:20 <decathorpe> I mean, if there's urgent updates, people can always ask for karma or for a FE
14:15:22 <sgallagh> mhroncok: What do you mean by "3 days in practice"?
14:15:40 <mhroncok> sgallagh: I mean if you create an update in f33 bodhi, it gets pushed in 3 days
14:15:56 <mhroncok> sgallagh: the policy says 7 days after beta, but it ha snot been done yet
14:15:58 <sgallagh> Oh, the default push time is 3 days for Branched. Right
14:16:21 <nirik> hum, that should have been fixed.
14:16:24 <King_InuYasha> we should probably not fix that
14:16:36 <King_InuYasha> (the bug, I mean)
14:16:49 <mhroncok> King_InuYasha: well if we want this to be 3 days, we need to ack that
14:17:12 <King_InuYasha> I think reducing it to 3 days and making that actually *known* is probably enough to help deal with this
14:17:20 <mhroncok> I think it's perfectly fine to requests FE for stuff instead of generally allowing naything in
14:17:22 <King_InuYasha> because then at least you can get 2 update cycles
14:17:42 <King_InuYasha> yeah, but adamw doesn't particularly want to pull in FEs post beta freeze
14:17:46 <zbyszek> mhroncok: yeah, either FE or ask people for karma on important updates.
14:17:47 <mhroncok> people tend to do big breaking changes between beta and final, this should teach them :D
14:17:52 <nirik> well, more, since we unfroze updates last friday
14:17:57 <sgallagh> mhroncok++
14:17:57 <zodbot> sgallagh: Karma for churchyard changed to 16 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:18:31 * sgallagh sometimes feels like he's the only one who tries to honor the Change Freeze.
14:18:59 <King_InuYasha> I try as well, but I mostly spend the entire post-change period fixing FTIs and FTBFSes
14:19:13 <mhroncok> ok... so there are several things we can do
14:19:25 <King_InuYasha> and few people care about giving karma for those things
14:19:32 <mhroncok> 0) do nothing
14:19:52 <mhroncok> 1) keep the bodhi time limit on 3 days on purpose for this cycle
14:20:12 <mhroncok> 2) postpone the freeze only and overwhelm QA
14:20:33 <mhroncok> 3) postpone the freeze and the release and make the pope sad
14:21:04 <zbyszek> My preference: 1, 0, 3, 2 (in decreasing order)
14:21:14 <bcotton> :-D
14:21:19 <bcotton> my preference is for #1
14:21:23 <zbyszek> #info https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?search=&status=pending&status=testing&releases=F33
14:21:29 <nirik> I'd be ok with 0, sort of ok with 1 and -1 to 2 and 3
14:21:37 <zbyszek> 193 updates.
14:21:42 <King_InuYasha> preference for #1
14:21:42 <mhroncok> I'd like to say that 2 is bad because QA is one very active contributor short now
14:21:53 <dcantrell> my preference is #1, but generally speaking I never have a problem postponing a release
14:21:56 <nirik> mhroncok: agreed
14:22:11 <decathorpe> I'm with zbyszek (1, 0, 3, 2)
14:22:26 <mhroncok> I'm torn between 1 and 3
14:22:36 <nirik> FWIW: bodhi has not yet been changed to post beta (ie, it's still set for 3 days)
14:22:38 <sgallagh> I am 0, then 1 and -1 to 2 and 3
14:22:39 <zbyszek> dcantrell: The problem is that we effetively we can't postpone it just 1 week, and we don't want to postpone it 2 or 3 weeks.
14:22:52 <dcantrell> why do we not want to postpone it 2 or 3 weeks?
14:23:07 <nirik> then we start getting into the us thanksgiving.
14:23:17 <nirik> so, it's 2 more weeks...
14:23:23 <dcantrell> that's fair
14:23:30 <mhroncok> and suddenly, it's winter holiday season
14:23:30 <sgallagh> And also with a longer gap between Freezes, people tend to make bigger changes
14:23:31 <bcotton> yeah, the end of the year starts to get tight with holidays, fedora elections, etc
14:23:48 <King_InuYasha> I don't particularly want to slip the schedule
14:23:50 <bcotton> also, it's better PR to ship in the month we said we would
14:24:13 <mhroncok> we can always slip if we have blockers
14:24:16 <dcantrell> I do like adhering to schedules, but it's also a creation of our own.  So if adhering to a schedule is going to overwhelm a team, I don't like that approach.
14:24:20 <zbyszek> On the list I linked there's 193 updates... We should ask people to test them and give karma.
14:24:22 <bcotton> (which is why the preferred target is the 3rd tuesday of october/april)
14:24:26 <sgallagh> OK, does someone want to set up a ranked-choice vote for the four options?
14:24:42 <mhroncok> sgallagh: thta might be pointles
14:24:57 <mhroncok> it seems that 0 and 1 have the biggest support
14:25:20 <dcantrell> given the options, I'm still on board with #1
14:25:36 <mhroncok> Proposal: keep the bodhi time limit set for 3 days until the freeze
14:25:41 <zbyszek> mhroncok: +1
14:25:47 <decathorpe> +1
14:25:48 <dcantrell> +1
14:25:57 <nirik> +0.5
14:26:08 <King_InuYasha> mhroncok: +1
14:26:08 <sgallagh> +1 for that or the seven-day version
14:26:18 <mhroncok> sgallagh: I'll get to that
14:26:44 <mhroncok> +-0
14:27:33 <mhroncok> now. Proposal: set the bodhi time limit to 7 days as it was supposed to be, keep the "de jure" status quo
14:27:44 <nirik> +1
14:27:46 <mhroncok> +1
14:27:56 <zbyszek> +0
14:28:01 <decathorpe> ±0
14:28:17 <dcantrell> +1
14:28:41 <sgallagh> +1
14:28:59 <mhroncok> if my math skills are good, the previous proposal has more support
14:29:20 <King_InuYasha> -1
14:29:44 <mhroncok> King_InuYasha just made sure
14:29:45 <mhroncok> so
14:30:22 <mhroncok> #agreed Keep the bodhi time limit set for 3 days until the freeze (for this release cycle) +5.5,0.5,-0
14:31:09 <mhroncok> nirik: anything that needs to be done to prevent bodhi adjusting the limit to 7?
14:31:15 <mhroncok> I've closed https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9302
14:31:52 <nirik> I'll add a comment with a pointer to this decision so no one changes it.
14:32:17 <mhroncok> #action nirik will add a comment with a pointer to this decision so no one changes it
14:32:20 <mhroncok> nirik++
14:32:31 <mhroncok> #topic #2476 systemd-resolved by default should be deferred to a future release
14:32:39 <mhroncok> and now the easy one
14:32:46 <nirik> ha
14:33:04 <mhroncok> I must admit I have not read the entire discussion
14:33:16 <zbyszek> So... effectively how much time do we have to make adjustments?
14:33:40 <mhroncok> zbyszek: 3 days + freeze exceptions
14:34:00 <mhroncok> zbyszek: or, 5 days + karma
14:34:19 <nirik> or more with blockers
14:34:28 <zbyszek> I don't think it should be postponed or delayed.
14:34:30 <decathorpe> I think freeipa already pushed an update with resolved fixes?
14:34:34 <King_InuYasha> I am not convinced that we should defer the resolved feature
14:34:41 <mhroncok> I know you are heroes, but this seems a bit tight
14:34:49 <zbyszek> The problem is that people decided to test some rather special features very very late in the cycle.
14:35:04 <bcotton> honestly, the main concern on server and even though it's still nominally an edition, i'm not entirely sure we should care about it much anymore
14:35:23 <zbyszek> And the work-arounds are fairly trivial, so even if some issues remain, I think a good Common Bugs entry will be enough.
14:35:25 * King_InuYasha was looking forward to resolved in Fedora Server actually
14:35:33 <mhroncok> bcotton: joke proposal: We don't care about the server any more
14:35:37 <King_InuYasha> :(
14:35:44 <bcotton> mhroncok: +1
14:35:47 <nirik> -1
14:36:09 <decathorpe> -1. I'm running fedora on my servers too :)
14:36:35 <bcotton> in seriousness, i think we need to have a talk about how we de-edition an edition, but that's a matter for council to tackle
14:36:42 <mhroncok> so, how mch broken this actually is?
14:36:51 <King_InuYasha> in practice, not very
14:36:51 <nirik> so, would DNSSEC=allow-downgrade placate the issues? I guess not?
14:36:52 <mhroncok> *how much
14:37:27 <nirik> from the last comment in the ticket: "Either don't enable systemd-resolved on servers, or enable it in a way that does not break servers (eg configured to not drop DNS queries with the DO bit set)"
14:37:40 <zbyszek> nirik: no, that's not the issue. The DO-bit issue is unrelated.
14:37:57 <nirik> yeah, see that now. Had not read the last comment yet.
14:38:15 <mhroncok> .fesco 2476
14:38:16 <zodbot> mhroncok: Issue #2476: systemd-resolved by default should be deferred to a future release - fesco - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2476
14:39:09 <mhroncok> any ideas?
14:39:49 <zbyszek> proposal: Add #1879028 as FE, close 2476.
14:40:16 <King_InuYasha> zbyszek: +1
14:40:16 <mhroncok> .bug 1879028
14:40:18 <zodbot> mhroncok: 1879028 – systemd: Caching DNS resolver is not DNSSEC-aware - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1879028
14:40:36 <mhroncok> zbyszek: is it likely to be fixed?
14:41:00 <zbyszek> Yes.
14:41:04 <dcantrell> this is noted as being reported upstream 1.5 years ago
14:41:18 <mhroncok> my point is, if we only approve FE, it might end up not being fixed
14:41:29 <zbyszek> dcantrell: it wasn't a priority. It's the kind of thing that only very select people care about.
14:41:36 <nirik> yeah, perhaps it should be a blocker? but thats a lot of pressure on it
14:41:37 <mhroncok> a stronger option might be to have a blocker (fix or defer)
14:41:57 <dcantrell> I know, but if it's been ignored that long then is there enough time for upstream to address it and get it working for release?  My gut tells me no.
14:42:23 <King_InuYasha> I would trust zbyszek to do the right things here for fixing and pulling it into Fedora
14:42:25 <mhroncok> I am worried howeever that if we revert this change on last minute, it might be even more broken, as it would receive very little QA
14:42:43 <dcantrell> that's a concern I have as well
14:42:56 <nirik> dcantrell: yes, but now we are making this default... so the issue is a lot more pressing
14:43:06 <zbyszek> So... I'd say people who care about DO propagation would not use the resolver on localhost anyway, so to a large extent we'd be working on something that would see very little use anyway.
14:43:13 <decathorpe> exactly how niche are the use cases that are broken right now?
14:43:33 <mhroncok> zbyszek: what's the real pain point of deferring this to f34?
14:43:34 <dcantrell> nirik: not disagreeing there, but issue classification doesn't impact the amount of time it takes to fix something
14:43:42 <decathorpe> in other words, would it be terrible if those only get fixed after GA?
14:43:46 <nirik> indeed.
14:44:32 <zbyszek> decathorpe: I think it's totally fine to fix it after GA.
14:44:33 <King_InuYasha> we also *don't* have any criteria for evaluating this for QA anyway
14:44:34 <dcantrell> if this was partially fixed and/or still had bugs in GA, would the majority of users care?  would it fuck up their use cases?
14:44:48 <dcantrell> King_InuYasha: true
14:45:01 <King_InuYasha> I think it'd probably be fine as a post-GA fix
14:45:04 <nirik> the majority of fedora users are desktop users, so no... ;)
14:45:17 <King_InuYasha> hence why I'm okay with it being an FE
14:45:23 <King_InuYasha> if it's fixed earlier, great, if not, welp
14:45:35 <mhroncok> let's vote on the FE proposal please
14:45:38 <dcantrell> yeah, so there we go
14:45:38 <zbyszek> dcantrell: nobody knows for sure, but I think that assuming that it's a super-tiny minority of people is justified.
14:45:47 <mhroncok> the proposal was: Add #1879028 as FE, close 2476.
14:45:52 <dcantrell> zbyszek: yeah, seems reasonable to assume
14:45:59 <decathorpe> mhroncok: +1
14:46:02 <dcantrell> mhroncok: +1
14:46:05 <nirik> +1, we could always revisit if needed
14:46:37 <mhroncok> zbyszek: I count you as +1
14:46:41 <zbyszek> ... and people who care about this, are most likely carying local configuration anyway.
14:46:47 <zbyszek> mhroncok: +1
14:46:48 <King_InuYasha> mhroncok: +1
14:47:14 <dcantrell> can we make sure the release notes for GA contain an explanation about this known issue and what to do now?
14:47:25 <mhroncok> dcantrell: common bugs
14:47:29 <dcantrell> I know zbyszek originally noted this was more of a docs issue anyway
14:47:33 <dcantrell> sounds good
14:47:46 <mhroncok> sgallagh: ?
14:48:19 <zbyszek> FWIW, I want to work on a blognote-style explanation for how resolved configuration works (with the VPNs and domain routing).
14:48:34 <dcantrell> that would be cool
14:48:47 <mhroncok> we are at +5. I'll abstain - it doesn't really make a difference and I don't feel comfortable voting on the topic as I've missed most of the discussion
14:48:50 <bcotton> zbyszek: i heard you want to write a Fedora Magazine article about this
14:49:09 <mhroncok> #agreed Add #1879028 as FE, close 2476. (+5, 1, -0)
14:49:18 <zbyszek> bcotton: I do? Oh, indeed.
14:49:29 <mhroncok> #action zbyszek to mark 1879028 as a fesco accepted FE
14:49:45 <bcotton> i'm good at volunteering other people to do work, too :-)
14:49:50 <mhroncok> #action zbyszek to write a Fedora Magazine article
14:50:11 <mhroncok> #action zbyszek to make sure this gets into common bugs if it is not fixed
14:50:28 <mhroncok> :)
14:50:30 <bcotton> zbyszek: proposal workflow in case you're not familiar https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora-magazine/writing-a-pitch/
14:50:33 <mhroncok> poor zbyszek
14:51:03 <mhroncok> #topic Next week's chair
14:52:27 * mhroncok has dentist and depending on how good the painkillers are, might not attend
14:52:40 <decathorpe> next week might be slightly chaotic for me (first week of new semester), so I'd rather not volunteer for next week, but I can do the week after that
14:54:52 <mhroncok> anybody?
14:55:05 <sgallagh> I'll do it.
14:55:18 <sgallagh> (Sorry, I got a phone call from the NSA and had to take it.)
14:55:22 <King_InuYasha> :o
14:55:26 <dcantrell> don't tell us!
14:55:34 <sgallagh> (Background check for a friend of mine)
14:55:39 <mhroncok> #action sgallagh will chair next meeting
14:55:44 <nirik> via phone? or neural implat? ;)
14:55:57 <dcantrell> just tell them your friend is great, but cheated off you in math all through school
14:56:15 <mhroncok> #topic Open Floor
14:57:49 <mhroncok> any chance ignatenkobrain is here?
14:58:24 <mhroncok> sgallagh: any followups on some of the topics you've missed?
14:58:53 <sgallagh> I think I only missed the resolved one and I haven't been following it closely enough to have an opinion
14:59:40 <King_InuYasha> ignatenkobrain didn't respond to my message in telegram, so I dunno
14:59:41 <mhroncok> sgallagh: thanks for checking
15:00:02 <mhroncok> ok
15:00:06 <mhroncok> thanks all
15:00:09 <mhroncok> see you next week
15:00:22 <decathorpe> mhroncok++
15:00:22 <mhroncok> and go break something before the freeze
15:00:26 <sgallagh> Thanks for chairing mhroncok
15:00:28 <dcantrell> mhroncok++
15:00:30 <sgallagh> mhroncok--
15:00:41 <mhroncok> #endmeeting