2024-03-18 19:30:17 <@humaton:fedora.im> !startmeeting FESCO (2024-03-18)

2024-03-18 19:30:18 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2024-03-18 19:30:17 UTC
2024-03-18 19:30:18 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'FESCO (2024-03-18)'
2024-03-18 19:30:23 <@humaton:fedora.im> !meetingname fesco

2024-03-18 19:30:35 <@humaton:fedora.im> Chairs: @conan_kudo:matrix.org, @ngompa:fedora.im, @nirik:matrix.scrye.com, @humaton:fedora.im, @zbyszek:fedora.im, @sgallagh:fedora.im, @jistone:fedora.im, @dcantrell:fedora.im, @mhayden:fedora.im, @tstellar:fedora.im
2024-03-18 19:30:39 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 19:30:41 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)
2024-03-18 19:30:41 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic Init Process

2024-03-18 19:30:48 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 19:30:49 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 19:31:03 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> sorry I've been out for a while, had a death in the family
2024-03-18 19:31:13 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 19:31:14 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 19:31:32 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning
2024-03-18 19:32:03 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> dcantrell: very sorry to hear that.
2024-03-18 19:32:24 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> thanks
2024-03-18 19:32:58 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> it has been a non-standard couple of weeks for me, so I'm ready to get back to it
2024-03-18 19:33:19 <@tstellar:fedora.im> !hi
2024-03-18 19:33:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Tom Stellard (tstellar)
2024-03-18 19:34:17 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> !hi
2024-03-18 19:34:18 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fábio Ribeiro (farribeiro) - he / him / his
2024-03-18 19:35:39 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> jednorozec: ?
2024-03-18 19:35:41 <@humaton:fedora.im> it seems we have a quorum
2024-03-18 19:36:02 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic #3178 Consider relegating ARM to non-blocking status

2024-03-18 19:36:08 <@humaton:fedora.im> !fesco 3178
2024-03-18 19:36:10 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3178** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3178):**Consider relegating ARM to non-blocking status**

● **Opened:** a week ago by sgallagh
● **Last Updated:** 4 hours ago
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2024-03-18 19:36:52 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'm fine with zbyszek proposal.
2024-03-18 19:36:52 <@humaton:fedora.im> so from the discussions we seem to have agrrement of not blocking the whole arch
2024-03-18 19:37:08 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> same, after reading through everything I agree with zbyszek's proposal
2024-03-18 19:37:35 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Should we make  quick vote here?
2024-03-18 19:37:57 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> We can do that. (vote)
2024-03-18 19:38:00 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> yeah, let's vote here
2024-03-18 19:38:25 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> PROPOSAL: Aarch64 images remain blocking.
2024-03-18 19:38:43 <@humaton:fedora.im> +1
2024-03-18 19:38:45 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> +1
2024-03-18 19:38:46 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I'm glad that the discussion was held. I think it was important to do so.
2024-03-18 19:38:46 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1
2024-03-18 19:38:47 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> +1
2024-03-18 19:39:06 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> more testing and people paying attention to it is of course good too...
2024-03-18 19:39:34 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Yes, I think it's good that Stephen raised the ticket.  I think it clarified the status for a lot of folks and also raised awareness of need for more people working on this.
2024-03-18 19:39:37 <@tstellar:fedora.im> 0
2024-03-18 19:40:13 <@humaton:fedora.im> so it +4 1 -0

2024-03-18 19:40:45 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> This is kind of an odd situation, because the proposal is actually to do nothing.
2024-03-18 19:40:56 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> So we may want to phrase it in the negative and have it fail.
2024-03-18 19:41:02 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> No, it's +5, 1, -0
2024-03-18 19:41:14 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> The proposal proposer is implicitly for the proposal.
2024-03-18 19:41:18 <@humaton:fedora.im> oh the proponent sis +1
2024-03-18 19:41:41 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Unless they explicitly say otherwise. This happens sometimes, but so rarely, that we made it an official rul a long time ago.
2024-03-18 19:41:57 <@humaton:fedora.im> !agreed Aarch64 images remain blocking (+5, 1, -0)
2024-03-18 19:42:12 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic 3177 NodeJS packaging guidelines clarification

2024-03-18 19:42:18 <@humaton:fedora.im> !ticket#3177 NodeJS packaging guidelines clarification
2024-03-18 19:42:34 <@humaton:fedora.im> !fesc 3177
2024-03-18 19:42:40 <@humaton:fedora.im> !fesco 3177
2024-03-18 19:42:41 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3177** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3177):**NodeJS packaging guidelines clarification**

● **Opened:** a week ago by ankursinha
● **Last Updated:** 4 hours ago
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2024-03-18 19:43:17 <@humaton:fedora.im> this is complicated, are we really not supposed to ship anything that has compiled js?
2024-03-18 19:43:23 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> This is a complex topic. I didn't have time to dig into the details.
2024-03-18 19:44:01 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> me likewise
2024-03-18 19:44:24 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> is this something we can/should ask FPC to clarify?
2024-03-18 19:44:43 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> I think this is worthy of a clarification in the packaging guidelines, yes
2024-03-18 19:44:51 <@humaton:fedora.im> I  did a little bit but didnt get through the devel discussion 
2024-03-18 19:44:56 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Sorry, stepped away for a moment.
2024-03-18 19:45:41 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> So, JS is a bit "special" where "generated code" is concerned.
2024-03-18 19:46:19 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> especially with the 'minimize' stuff.
2024-03-18 19:46:32 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Unlike pre-generated ELF binaries, they're completely introspectable. But indeed, there are valid questions related to the "preferred format for making changes" required by some licenses.
2024-03-18 19:48:12 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Honestly, I think it's not too dissimilar from how we don't mandate that packages run autotools in `%build`.
2024-03-18 19:48:24 <@tstellar:fedora.im> What is compiled js anyway?
2024-03-18 19:48:41 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> In most cases it's JS that's transformed from another language, like TypeScript
2024-03-18 19:48:58 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> But in some cases it's pre-minified stuff for use in browsers to reduce download times
2024-03-18 19:49:17 <@humaton:fedora.im> mostly obfuscated JS
2024-03-18 19:49:35 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> The latter (minimized JS) we have had long-term exceptions in the packaging guidelines for.
2024-03-18 19:49:40 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> (e.g. jquery)
2024-03-18 19:49:41 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> or the result of webpack, etc
2024-03-18 19:50:47 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> webpack adds a new dimension to the problem, sure.
2024-03-18 19:51:51 <@humaton:fedora.im> so it would be nice to have a general guidence for that in the packaging guidelines
2024-03-18 19:52:30 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Well, the reality is that I doubt we can realistically hope to dictate that the code must be regenerated in Fedora infrastructure.
2024-03-18 19:53:03 <@humaton:fedora.im> there is this already https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/JavaScript/#_compilationminification
2024-03-18 19:53:05 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> With the amount of bundling that occurs in JavaScript, the reality would either be 1) the packager ignores the requirement or 2) the packager abandons the package.
2024-03-18 19:53:50 <@humaton:fedora.im> yeah its not really doable to regenerate everything
2024-03-18 19:54:48 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Maybe the best we can do is require that the non-minimized sources be present in the source RPM?
2024-03-18 19:55:17 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I think this described the situation very well.
2024-03-18 19:55:54 <@humaton:fedora.im> There already is this in the guidelines: Additionally, the uncompiled/unminified version MUST be included alongside the compiled/minified version.
2024-03-18 19:56:40 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> That's not the same thing. IIUC, the guidelines require the non-minified js to be in the "binary" rpm.
2024-03-18 19:56:41 <@humaton:fedora.im> But its forbidden to ship minified code few lines above that 
2024-03-18 19:56:56 <@humaton:fedora.im> Oh
2024-03-18 19:57:22 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> jednorozec: It means shipping code that was minified/compiled outside of Fedora is banned... which I don't think is enforceable, honestly.
2024-03-18 19:57:48 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> (In the specific case of JS, I mean)
2024-03-18 19:58:31 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I don't like this requirement. "alongside" means that the files must be renamed or installed in a separate hierarchy, and this is always going to be a lot of fiddly packaging work. Having the original js in the srpm should be enough. Nobody needs in the binary rpm.
2024-03-18 19:59:12 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> zbyszek: ehhh, not necessarily true. It can aid in debugging.
2024-03-18 19:59:19 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> But I agree it shouldn't be *required*
2024-03-18 19:59:42 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Meh, how often do you debug the js that is bundled with fedora packages?
2024-03-18 19:59:57 <@humaton:fedora.im> Ok so are we going to vote? What actually can we do? propose change to packaging guidelines? move this to nodejs SiG if it exists?
2024-03-18 20:00:02 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> zbyszek: Maybe don't ask the Node.js maintainer that question? :)
2024-03-18 20:00:33 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> jednorozec: At present, the active Node.js SIG is... me.
2024-03-18 20:00:34 <@humaton:fedora.im> Hapilly not much but was a lot while doing nodejs
2024-03-18 20:01:09 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'd love to hear fpc's take on this... and if we want to adjust guidelines they should process thru it anyhow.
2024-03-18 20:01:51 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> (For the record, I'm just keeping the lights on; I don't even use Node.js much. I'm in a daily struggle not to just orphan it.)
2024-03-18 20:04:44 <@humaton:fedora.im> Ok do we need vote on this? Or I can just bring it to FPC and update the ticket once we get some feedback?
2024-03-18 20:04:48 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Proposal: Packages containing JavaScript should make a best effort to regenerate any precompiled/pre-minimized JS wherever possible, as this leads to more maintainable packages. This does not eliminate the requirement to validate licenses of bundled code.
2024-03-18 20:05:12 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Sorry, that got mangled a bit in edits; let me try again.
2024-03-18 20:06:03 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Proposal: Packages containing JavaScript should make a best effort to regenerate any precompiled/pre-minimized JS wherever possible, as this leads to more maintainable packages. Where this would result in a significant hardship, the bundled pregenerated JS may be shipped. This does not eliminate the requirement to validate licenses of bundled code.
2024-03-18 20:06:25 <@tstellar:fedora.im> +1
2024-03-18 20:06:29 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Sounds good to me. +1
2024-03-18 20:06:33 <@humaton:fedora.im> +1
2024-03-18 20:06:43 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> +1
2024-03-18 20:07:22 <@humaton:fedora.im> !agreed  Packages containing JavaScript should make a best effort to regenerate any precompiled/pre-minimized JS wherever possible, as this leads to more maintainable packages. Where this would result in a significant hardship, the bundled pregenerated JS may be shipped. This does not eliminate the requirement to validate licenses of bundled code. (+5, 0, -0)
2024-03-18 20:08:05 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> jednorozec: We should probably open a ticket with FPC to notify them of this and request that the guidelines be adapted accordingly.
2024-03-18 20:08:26 <@humaton:fedora.im> I will do that
2024-03-18 20:08:31 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Thanks!
2024-03-18 20:09:08 <@humaton:fedora.im> I think that was it
2024-03-18 20:09:26 <@humaton:fedora.im> there is one ticket about SPDX that people are voting in so if you didnt please do so 
2024-03-18 20:09:39 <@humaton:fedora.im> !fesco 3180
2024-03-18 20:09:39 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3180** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3180):**Change: SPDX License Phase 4 (The last one)**

● **Opened:** 9 hours ago by msuchy
● **Last Updated:** 3 hours ago
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2024-03-18 20:10:10 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic Next week's chair

2024-03-18 20:10:22 <@humaton:fedora.im> any volunteers?
2024-03-18 20:10:30 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> I can do it.
2024-03-18 20:10:54 <@humaton:fedora.im> !action zbyszek  will chair next meeting
2024-03-18 20:11:01 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor

2024-03-18 20:14:52 <@humaton:fedora.im> ok it seems there is nothing to talk about
2024-03-18 20:14:58 <@humaton:fedora.im> or maybe?
2024-03-18 20:15:09 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Not from me.
2024-03-18 20:15:17 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> (my side?)
2024-03-18 20:15:30 <@humaton:fedora.im> thank you everyone!
2024-03-18 20:15:33 <@humaton:fedora.im> !endmeeting