<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:02:11
!startmeeting FESCo (2024-09-10)
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:02:13
Meeting started at 2024-09-10 17:02:11 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:02:13
The Meeting name is 'FESCo (2024-09-10)'
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:02:18
!meetingname fesco
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:02:19
The Meeting Name is now fesco
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:02:28
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, @decathorpe:fedora.im, @salimma:fedora.im
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:02:34
!topic Init Process
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:02:59
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:03:00
Tomáš Hrčka (humaton) - he / him / his
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:03:07
morning
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:03:23
!hi
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:03:23
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:03:25
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:03:25
Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:05:12
we are only 5/9, should we wait for a minute?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:06:40
Yeah, let's give a couple, but I know some people were expecting not to be here this week
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:07:53
While we're waiting, jednorozec any updates on gitforge research?
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:08:44
Howdy, yes, we sit down with the some of the Quality team members last week to look again at their requirements.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:09:13
I saw that some more items were added in the ticket…
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:09:21
I need to validate this but it seems that we have a nogo feature for gitlab CE, that is gitlabCE does not support dependencies between tickets
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:09:53
Does forgejo?
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:09:57
yes
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:10:26
ok, I'd say let's start. it's :10 now
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:10:33
I am currently writing script to get package data from pagure/BZ into gitlab/forgejo
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:10:42
Cool, thanks for the update.
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:10:53
If you have any interesting packages that have edge cases or are edge cases on their own please share
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:11:07
I am importing grub2,kernel,glibc so far
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:11:15
!topic #3264 Incomplete Changes Report for Fedora Linux 41
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:11:22
!fesco 3264
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:11:22
**fesco #3264** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3264):**Incomplete Changes Report for Fedora Linux 41**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:11:22
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:11:22
● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by amoloney
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:11:22
● **Last Updated:** 23 hours ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:11:22
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:12:02
I kind of lost track of which changes we still need to talk about, does anybody have a list? :)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:24
Taskwarrior 3
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:30
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:30
Owner: @ankursinha
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:30
Tracker Bug: #2304175
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:30
Status: ASSIGNED
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:30
Taskwarrior 3
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:30
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:12:46
I'm doing some package reviews as time permits
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:13:14
So it's "all good"?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:13:17
I think we said since this was self contained we would allow it to land after beta...
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:13:34
IIRC yes
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:13:48
!info Reviews for TaskWarrior 3 are in progress. The package can land after Beta.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:14:05
!topic Switch to dnf5
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:14:09
Tracker Bug: #2274810
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:14:09
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:14:09
Status: POST
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:14:09
Owner: @jkolarik @jmracek
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:14:29
It's ON_QA now actually.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:14:45
ah, now I see https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3264#comment-929545
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:14:55
> We've decided to postpone the dnf5daemon GNOME Software plugin delivery to the next Fedora version and now plan to release it during the Fedora 42 Rawhide cycle.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:15:01
> I am moving this to ON_QA, as the work for Fedora 41 is considered complete.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:15:36
so ... what does this mean for gnome-software? keep using PackageKit + libdnf 4?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:16:58
I mean, landing this stuff so late in the cycle would've been hairy anyway, so I don't complain about moving it to F42
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:17:54
yeah, it would keep using dnf4...
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:18:04
the only problem there would be history mismatch... ;(
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:18:14
And also duplicate caches, no?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:19:03
sure, but that's probibly much less of a real issue to users.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:19:20
This is not pretty… but not much we can do.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:19:40
separate histories / installreasons is going to be bad for debuggability
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:20:15
!info dnf5daemon was postponed to F42. Gnome-software will continue to use PackageKit + libdnf4. Tracker bug is ON_QA.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:20:37
I don't think it's bad enough to move dnf5 to f42 entirely though
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:20:49
so -ENOTHINGTODO?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:30
Yeah, let's leave it as is.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:49
!topic IPU6 Camera Support
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:56
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:56
LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/IPU6_Camera_support
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:56
(@sgallagh:fedora.im, 17:20:38)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:56
INFO: Ticket is in MODIFIED state. (@zbyszek:fedora.im, 17:20:52)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:56
INFO: Change is feature complete, but with some open bugs.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:56
(@sgallagh:fedora.im, 17:22:13)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:21:56
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:22:04
The state here is the same.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:22:10
I suggest we do nothing.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:22:59
yeah.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:23:16
of course updates on what bugs/etc to the change would be good before final
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:23:51
!info Change is feature complete, but with some open bugs.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:09
!topic Make Tuned the Default Power Profile Management Daemon
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:19
(@sgallagh:fedora.im, 17:46:03)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:19
ACTION: Conan Kudo to handle filing a blocker BZ for this Change
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:19
(@sgallagh:fedora.im, 17:59:34)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:19
AGREED: This Change blocks Beta for Fedora 41. (+6, 0, -0)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:19
LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/TunedAsTheDefaultPowerProfileManagementDaemon
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:33
It seems mostly done, but there's some integration work missing.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:25:07
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2293628#c5 says that the new daemon is not enabled on updates.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:25:58
I think we can sort that after beta probibly...
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:26:41
ironically, it looks like some of the "missing" features of p-p-d compared to tuned are now present in latest p-p-d? 😅
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:27:05
yeah, seems like upstream work has continued...
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:28:31
Anyway… -ENOTHINGTODO?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:28:58
looks like it (at least for now)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:29:16
yeah, fix the upgrade thing, but otherwise...
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:29:30
!info The change seems mostly done, but there's some integration work missing. We'll revisit after Beta.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:29:59
I think that's everything.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:30:27
Fabio Valentini: back to you
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:30:51
Stephen Gallagher: do you remember which things you wanted to follow up on?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:30:51
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3264#comment-930969
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:31:05
Just the DNF5 one as far as I remember
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:31:17
ok, and that one seems to be resolved
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:31:28
so we're good with reviewing incomplete changes?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:32:06
good, moving on
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:32:15
!topic #3266 Fedora 41 Beta Blocker: require the updates-testing repository
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:32:21
!fesco 3266
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:32:22
● **Last Updated:** 2 hours ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:32:22
● **Opened:** a week ago by sgallagh
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:32:22
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:32:22
**fesco #3266** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3266):**Fedora 41 Beta Blocker: require the updates-testing repository to be active**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:32:22
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:32:48
I think this is mostly resolved now for F41. does anybody want to to the work to make this an "normal" beta blocker?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:32:54
This is academic at this point.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:33:12
I think if anyone wants to make it a blocker, they could use the normal process for that.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:33:24
ie, propose it be added, discuss, vote, add to process.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:33:33
If this somehow regresses before Go/No-Go, I'll be mad, but otherwise I guess we can just move on.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:33:36
nirik: yes, that's what I was asking about. :)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:33:39
nirik: It came FROM the normal process
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:33:47
not that process.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:33:57
the process to amend the things that are blockers...
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:33:58
There's no criterion for it, but I considered it pretty critical, so i brought it to FESCo
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:34:35
sorry, release critera I mean
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:34:55
right, but if someone wants to make it a part of the critera moving forward, they can try and do so
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:36:13
Right
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:36:18
as a side note we talked about this in releng side of things and decided we would like to just enable it at branching...
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:36:25
proposal: The addition of the criterion via FESCo is rejected. People are encouraged to follow the normal process to update Release Criteria with the requirement if desired.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:36:27
I plan to do that once I find one of these "round tuits" I keep hearing about
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:36:46
ok, proposal: The request to designate enablement-by-default of the updates-testing repo in F41 Beta as a FESCo blocker is rejected. Interested parties are however welcome to add a criterion for Beta releases for it through the normal process.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:36:52
oops, sorry zbyszek
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:37:17
OK, I think Fabio's version is word-better-smithed. I withdraw mine.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:37:20
sure, +1 to either.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:37:23
+1 to Fabio
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:37:24
Proposals have to be made in the positive voice or it's ambiguous what happens if it fails.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:37:42
Please just vote -1 on my proposal in the ticket in that case.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:37:55
Since the outcome there is "it's not made a blocker"
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:38:08
Stephen Gallagher: your vote-counting rules are giving me headaches every time
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:38:25
I withdraw my proposal then
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:38:30
Proposals have to change the default state. Yours asserts that nothing happens.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:38:45
But it also gives guidance…
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:38:56
my proposal is to reject your open request. it *does* change something ...
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:39:15
Fine, how about I just withdraw it and we get on with our lives?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:39:24
That also works.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:39:32
┬──┬ ノ( ゜-゜ノ)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:39:38
OK, I formally withdraw my proposal.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:40:23
!info The request to designate active state of updates-testing repo in F41 Beta as a FESCo blocker is withdrawn.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:40:35
moving on?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:41:06
!topic #3267 wolfssl imported to Fedora after skipping MUST policy requirements for new crypto libraries
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:41:13
!fesco 3267
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:41:14
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:41:14
● **Last Updated:** 2 hours ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:41:14
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:41:14
**fesco #3267** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3267):**wolfssl imported to Fedora after skipping MUST policy requirements for new crypto libraries**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:41:14
● **Opened:** 6 days ago by decathorpe
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:41:45
Stephen Gallagher posted a proposal in the ticket, but nobody voted on it, AFAICT
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:41:48
(sorry for sounding grouchy; I've got three fires burning around me at the same moment)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:41:57
> WolfSSL is immediately retired from Fedora. The maintainers may file a new package review request when WolfSSL respects the crypto system policy. This review request must be presented to the FPC, who must approve it before it is added back to the repositories.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:41:57
I voted +1 in the ticket to Stephen Gallagher's proposal:
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:42:16
ah, that was after I last looked that the ticket, sorry
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:42:38
I don't really want to cast a vote on this, since I filed the ticket
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:42:58
Then we cannot approve it, because we're at 5.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:43:07
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:43:09
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:43:24
Interesting timing.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:43:28
Conan Kudo: Your timing is impeccable
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:43:53
Is the maintainer not willing to do those things?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:44:05
nirik: Upstream is not
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:44:16
The maintainer is willing, but it's certainly not a trivial process.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:44:19
+1 to the proposal
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:44:31
there's an open feature request for wolfssl upstream. but it will certainly take time to make this happen (if at all)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:44:51
ok, fair. +1 to proposal
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:45:06
(somebody signed me up for their zendesk instance without my knowledge, so ... I was CCd on it)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:45:09
I support removal of the package now, because we don't want other packages to grow dependencies on it in the meantime. It took us a long time to arrive at the point where we have configurable crypto policies… Let's not go back.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:45:42
Oof
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:46:04
So, I count +4 so far.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:46:15
I just got back to my hotel from Akademy today
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:46:32
Fabio Valentini: Why does bringing the ticket forward prevent you from voting?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:46:47
it doesn't, but I don't want to appear biased here
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:47:12
but if it comes down to "we don't have enough votes" (+4, 0, -0) then I'll be +1 too I guess just to make it move
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:47:38
is jednorozec still with us?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:48:18
looks like no
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:48:26
+1 to Stephen Gallagher 's proposal then.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:49:26
Well, Conan Kudo could ease your conscience, if he agrees
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:49:36
that makes it approved if I count correctly?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:49:55
⬆️
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:50:06
Oh, I might have missed that
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:50:37
Right, I miscounted. OK we are at +5 now.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:50:40
!agreed WolfSSL is immediately retired from Fedora. The maintainers may file a new package review request when WolfSSL respects the crypto system policy. This review request must be presented to the FPC, who must approve it before it is added back to the repositories. (+5, 0, -0)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:51:01
Hmm,
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:51:10
who's the fifth person?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:51:51
Me
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:51:55
Did Stephen Gallagher vote?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
17:52:09
I made the proposal, so implicit +1
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:52:32
Oh, OK. Apologies.
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:52:37
sorry my connection dropped
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:52:47
I assume that this means we need releng help for retiring the package from stable branches?
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:53:18
i can do that
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:53:24
well, or any provenpackager.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:53:36
thanks jednorozec
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:53:40
welp, I didn't know that.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:54:02
well, I think that's it for this topic, thanks
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:54:06
!topic Open Floor
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:54:19
or, rather
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:54:27
!topic Next Week's Chair
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:55:07
I'll be at LPC next week. I might miss the meeting.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:55:21
Lead Pipe Conference?
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:55:42
yup lead plummers are meeting in vienna
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:56:04
yup lead plumbers are meeting in Vienna
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:56:36
Various *lead*ing topics will be discussed.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:56:44
I've not done it in a while I guess I can...
<@humaton:fedora.im>
17:56:44
I will be most probably traveling between brno and home
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:57:14
nirik: thank you
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:57:30
if nobody is here, feel free to cancel the meeting instead of being alone :)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:57:38
!action nirik to chair next week's meeting
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:57:46
now really:
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:57:49
!topic Open Floor
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:59:01
if anyone has thoughts on https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/12152 feel free to add them to the ticket (basically bootc work and when/if it should have an approved change before being in official registries, etc)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:59:52
I think a change proposal makes sense
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:00:18
if only for better visibility of stuff that's added to Fedora infra
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:01:50
anything else? otherwise I'll throw you all out in 2 minutes
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:02:24
I agree on a Change proposal
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:02:39
Yep, that'd be nice.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:03:02
I'm personally not in favor of images being produced outside of fedora infra that is designated as "official" though
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:04:07
frankly I'd vote down a Change that implies or explicitly states that
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:04:47
!topic Create fedora/fedora-netboot repo on quay.io
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:04:53
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/12152
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:05:23
I'm not sure we have enough people still here to make a formal vote
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:05:38
but general sentiment here seems to be in favor of making a change proposal?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:05:48
I'm not sure I meant this to be a topic... especially since folks here haven't had time to read the entire thing I suspect?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:06:06
nirik: no !undo, I'm afraid
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:06:17
reading this ticket further, I think I also disagree with adamw that `fedora-testing` in quay.io is fine... because it sounds like official test artifacts
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:06:19
no worries...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:06:30
feel free to bikeshed a name!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:06:40
fedora-experimental ?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:06:43
let's have a Change document be required for the whole bikeshed
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:06:44
fedora-eatsyourbabies ?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:06:56
fedbootc-exp
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:07:38
wel, we do need a testing thing too... but yes, experemental could be different too.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:07:42
in my head it sounds like "bootsie"
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:07:52
that's apparently on purpose
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:07:53
or a way to tag things appropriately.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:08:10
but I haven't had any time to ponder much on it.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:08:16
at least based on what I heard at devconf.us anyway
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:08:35
Proposal: FESCo would like to see a Change Proposal for better visibility of the change and to invite public discussion.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:09:07
+1
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:09:07
+1
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:09:12
sure I guess that sounds reasonable.
<@humaton:fedora.im>
18:09:15
+1
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:09:25
+1 (explicit)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:10:13
looks like we lost sgallagh in one of the fires he's been fighting
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:10:42
nirik: explicit vote?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:10:52
we have +5 by my count
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:11:04
+1 to the proposal. +1 to end this meeting.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:11:08
further suggestion: designate someone to keep an eye on anything else this maintainer is doing?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:11:20
nirik: me too.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:11:28
me three :P
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:11:42
!agreed FESCo would like to see a Change Proposal for better visibility of the change and to invite public discussion. (+5, 0, -0)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:11:45
I fourth this message.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:11:54
yikes, sorry, that message got backed up from forever ago somehow. matrix!
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:11:57
adamw: anything in particular that we should keep an eye on?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:12:05
old message, it was about the wolfssl thing
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:12:15
oh, yeah
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:12:21
phew
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:12:33
adamw: we'll just assume you fell asleep for a short spell
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:12:38
!topic Open Floor
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:12:41
anything else?
<@humaton:fedora.im>
18:13:03
just update that wolfssl is retired
<@humaton:fedora.im>
18:13:22
oh forgot to do the epel branches so not fully
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:13:47
thanks!
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:13:56
3️⃣
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:14:04
2️⃣
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:14:12
1️⃣
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:14:26
💥
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:14:30
!endmeeting