2025-04-08 16:59:43 <@fale:fale.io> !startmeeting FESCO (2025-04-08)

2025-04-08 16:59:48 <@fale:fale.io> !meetingname fesco
2025-04-08 16:59:53 <@fale:fale.io> Chairs: @conan_kudo:matrix.org, @ngompa:fedora.im, @nirik:matrix.scrye.com, @humaton:fedora.im, @zbyszek:fedora.im, @sgallagh:fedora.im, @fale:fale.io, @dcantrell:fedora.im, @decathorpe:fedora.im, @salimma:fedora.im
2025-04-08 16:59:58 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Init Process
2025-04-08 17:00:00 <@fale:fale.io> !hi
2025-04-08 17:00:15 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-04-08 16:59:43 UTC
2025-04-08 17:00:15 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-08 17:00:15 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'FESCO (2025-04-08)'
2025-04-08 17:00:17 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
2025-04-08 17:00:22 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now fesco
2025-04-08 17:00:29 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-08 17:00:35 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-04-08 17:00:36 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fabio Alessandro Locati (fale) - he / him / his
2025-04-08 17:00:45 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-08 17:00:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
2025-04-08 17:00:46 <@salimma:fedora.im> I wonder if you can combine the Chairs announcement with the group command
2025-04-08 17:00:48 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-08 17:00:49 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
2025-04-08 17:01:31 <@fale:fale.io> Michel Lind UTC-6: I hoped it accepted all the commands together :D
2025-04-08 17:02:11 <@fale:fale.io> We have the quorum :)
2025-04-08 17:02:29 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning
2025-04-08 17:02:50 <@fale:fale.io> it's a nice ping to everyone... could help people to remember to join?
2025-04-08 17:02:51 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> or we could just drop that, since it's not supported and doesn't matter.
2025-04-08 17:03:33 <@fale:fale.io> yeah, makes sense
2025-04-08 17:03:48 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, then just use the group zodbot command then
2025-04-08 17:03:53 <@salimma:fedora.im> that should be enough
2025-04-08 17:04:06 <@salimma:fedora.im> though personally I wonder if the chair command should be ported
2025-04-08 17:04:24 <@fale:fale.io> !topic  #3385 Change: Java25 And No More System JDK
2025-04-08 17:04:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> we'll see the first time we get a meeting hijacked I guess. we've already seen non members thinking they can vote in change tickets :)
2025-04-08 17:04:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> The group command is better actually.
2025-04-08 17:04:39 <@fale:fale.io> Do we have jiri vanek ?
2025-04-08 17:04:44 <@salimma:fedora.im> for what we do now, yeah
2025-04-08 17:05:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !fesco 3385
2025-04-08 17:05:58 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** 6 days ago
2025-04-08 17:05:58 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-08 17:05:58 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** a week ago by amoloney
2025-04-08 17:05:58 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** jvanek
2025-04-08 17:05:58 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3385** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3385):**Change: Java25 And No More System JDK**
2025-04-08 17:06:30 <@fale:fale.io> If we do not have any updates and not have jiri vanek we might want to park this one for next week
2025-04-08 17:06:38 <@fale:fale.io> does anyone have updates on it?
2025-04-08 17:06:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-08 17:06:48 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-04-08 17:07:37 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the Change document still confuses me, so I don't have anything new to say about it :)
2025-04-08 17:07:48 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> we could. It's a bit confusing, but I think it makes sense in the end. They just want to move to a model where latest is the actual latest one and they all provide java and you can more easily switch...
2025-04-08 17:08:14 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> that's how I read it
2025-04-08 17:08:29 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> the one thing I think makes *no* sense is that you need to adapt *all* Java packages for the switch, instead of making the switch on the jdk side
2025-04-08 17:08:54 <@fale:fale.io> @Fabio, I think the "all Java packages" is now a very short list
2025-04-08 17:09:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> it's definitely a lot less than it used to be. ;(
2025-04-08 17:10:00 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> it's still hundreds, not dozens
2025-04-08 17:10:37 <@emma:rory.gay> for a fun comparison, how many packages do you even have that depend on dotnet, i'd guess that'd be in the dozens instead
2025-04-08 17:10:38 <@ngompa:fedora.im> I think we should probably ask that "latest" is retired
2025-04-08 17:10:58 <@ngompa:fedora.im> that package should have never existed in the first place because we have a rule specifically against packages like that
2025-04-08 17:11:17 <@ngompa:fedora.im> because of docker-latest :/
2025-04-08 17:11:26 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> and I'm confused by the upgrade path for users from F42 -> F43
2025-04-08 17:11:31 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> is this handled by alternatives?
2025-04-08 17:11:38 <@fale:fale.io> +1 on dropping -latest packages in general (and specifically in this case)
2025-04-08 17:11:38 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Yeah, just naming the new latest one the version seems like it's a better plan
2025-04-08 17:11:44 <@ngompa:fedora.im> we also have made things significantly easier for shipping new versioned packages because full reviews are not required
2025-04-08 17:12:06 <@ngompa:fedora.im> and there's my other account finally working :P
2025-04-08 17:12:25 <@fale:fale.io> _1
2025-04-08 17:12:28 <@fale:fale.io> *+1
2025-04-08 17:12:37 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> anyhow, shall we try again next week with the change owner? and in the mean time communicate these concerns via list/discussion?
2025-04-08 17:12:47 <@ngompa:fedora.im> yeah
2025-04-08 17:12:50 <@ngompa:fedora.im> +1
2025-04-08 17:13:39 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> fine with me. maybe remind them of next week's meeting time?
2025-04-08 17:13:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, I don't think they acked last week... perhaps they are on vacation/pto?
2025-04-08 17:14:12 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> they did: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3385#comment-963800
2025-04-08 17:14:15 <@fale:fale.io> I'll add a message in the ticket and let's hope next week we can address it
2025-04-08 17:14:45 <@fale:fale.io> !topic  #3373 Change: Fix limitations in gpgverify
2025-04-08 17:14:50 <@fale:fale.io> !fesco 3373
2025-04-08 17:15:03 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ah, missed it.
2025-04-08 17:15:08 <@fale:fale.io> The new version is out. Do we agree on it?
2025-04-08 17:15:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** 2 hours ago
2025-04-08 17:15:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3373** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3373):**Change: Fix limitations in gpgverify**
2025-04-08 17:15:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-08 17:15:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 4 weeks ago by amoloney
2025-04-08 17:15:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** rombobeorn
2025-04-08 17:15:41 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I hadn't gotten to voting again in ticket, but +1 to the new plan
2025-04-08 17:15:44 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> +1 from me
2025-04-08 17:16:00 <@ngompa:fedora.im> +1
2025-04-08 17:16:04 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> +1
2025-04-08 17:16:10 <@fale:fale.io> I'm +1 as well
2025-04-08 17:16:29 <@fale:fale.io> !agreed APPROVED (+6, 0, -0)
2025-04-08 17:16:29 <@salimma:fedora.im> +1
2025-04-08 17:16:39 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Next week's chair
2025-04-08 17:17:19 <@fale:fale.io> any volunteers?
2025-04-08 17:18:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> next week is tax day for those in the US
2025-04-08 17:18:34 <@salimma:fedora.im> so... not me
2025-04-08 17:18:38 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I can do next week if there are no volunteers, though I just did last week so I'd rather not 
2025-04-08 17:19:08 <@fale:fale.io> Seems like you are the only one, Fabio Valentini 
2025-04-08 17:19:32 <@fale:fale.io> !action Fabio Valentini will chair next meeting
2025-04-08 17:19:37 <@fale:fale.io> !topic Open Floor
2025-04-08 17:19:44 <@fale:fale.io> anyone has topics?
2025-04-08 17:19:47 <@salimma:fedora.im> we can ask - who from the US plans to be there
2025-04-08 17:19:54 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> woohoo
2025-04-08 17:20:27 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I wanted to ask if this is too informal?
2025-04-08 17:20:29 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !fesco 3387
2025-04-08 17:20:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **fesco #3387** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3387):**Include fesco-docs issues / pull-requests in FESCo meeting prep / agenda**
2025-04-08 17:20:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Last Updated:** 36 minutes ago
2025-04-08 17:20:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> 
2025-04-08 17:20:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
2025-04-08 17:20:30 <@zodbot:fedora.im> ● **Opened:** 6 days ago by decathorpe
2025-04-08 17:20:52 <@salimma:fedora.im> I think it's fine
2025-04-08 17:21:03 <@fale:fale.io> I'm +1. Should we create a PR and vote for it with the process docuemnted in the PR?
2025-04-08 17:21:05 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I didn't think I needed to make it more explicit than "meeting prep wiki doc should contain looking at fesco-docs issues and PRs and including them in the agenda" 
2025-04-08 17:21:11 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> I have no problem including it
2025-04-08 17:21:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> this is when I wish it's not a wiki so we can just review a PR :P
2025-04-08 17:21:55 <@salimma:fedora.im> but wait is there no meeting process in the docs? I think there is
2025-04-08 17:22:00 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> sure... the only downside is then we would have to vote on obvious typo fixes? but sure...
2025-04-08 17:22:04 <@fale:fale.io> nirik: true, though it would be a quick +5 / 7 days vote in that case
2025-04-08 17:22:17 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> maybe ... move the page *from* the wiki to fesco-docs first, and then do a PR? :D
2025-04-08 17:22:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/#meeting-votes
2025-04-08 17:22:39 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> that's something different 
2025-04-08 17:22:48 <@salimma:fedora.im> we can put it there. so apart from entering new ticket, also add one for submitting docs PRs
2025-04-08 17:22:52 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC-6: I am talking about https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FESCo_meeting_process
2025-04-08 17:23:03 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, but it should be listed there too right
2025-04-08 17:23:08 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I think the reason it's not in docs is because it includes a bunch of things to be dynamic
2025-04-08 17:23:14 <@salimma:fedora.im> so people know what the process is for changing docs
2025-04-08 17:23:18 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> but if it's moved to docs it would be fully static?
2025-04-08 17:23:22 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> ah, you're right 
2025-04-08 17:23:39 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> well, I'll make a proposal in the fesco issue then, and once that's approved we can edit the wiki?
2025-04-08 17:23:43 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, I'm fine keeping that in the wiki, but we can also mention we vote on docs PRs in the doc itself
2025-04-08 17:23:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> sure. It might be possible to do in docs now, I don't know...
2025-04-08 17:24:28 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> unless Neal wants me to open a can of worms early :)
2025-04-08 17:24:28 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> that's all I had for Open Floor
2025-04-08 17:24:58 <@salimma:fedora.im> I have a bunch of stuff related to docs, funnily
2025-04-08 17:25:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yes do it
2025-04-08 17:25:33 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> here's the can opener
2025-04-08 17:25:36 <@salimma:fedora.im> 1. so the merge to the latest docs template happened last weekend. and when looking at my lightweight stalled package process, I noticed the numbering is now wrong
2025-04-08 17:25:37 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I had a random query/thought to mention...
2025-04-08 17:25:42 <@salimma:fedora.im> [start=N] no longer seems to work
2025-04-08 17:25:58 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh, Fabio go first
2025-04-08 17:27:26 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> we have some packages where it's (somewhere on the spectrum between hard and impossible) to contribute changes, mostly due to spec files being maintained upstream instead of Fedora, and / or non-standard forks being used for the package ... this is already explicitly forbidden by Packaging Guidelines, but what is the recourse against this?
2025-04-08 17:27:59 <@fale:fale.io> isn't it a similar situation to a packager not accepting PRs for other reasons?
2025-04-08 17:28:10 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yes, I know this is a "sensitive" topic since it mostly affects packages maintained by Red Hat 
2025-04-08 17:28:30 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> but there is no *real* reason why they should be "special" or locked down like that 
2025-04-08 17:28:31 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'm not sure there is much...
2025-04-08 17:29:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> spec files being maintained upstream - like source git? or something else
2025-04-08 17:29:22 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yes exactly like source git
2025-04-08 17:29:26 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> because it _is_ source git
2025-04-08 17:29:29 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC-6: like here: https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/blob/main/anaconda.spec.in
2025-04-08 17:30:12 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh god, a dynamically generated spec ... oof
2025-04-08 17:30:16 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I can't think of much of any solution here. It's either let them do it (as we do now) or what... tell them that the complex thing you maintain you can no longer package in fedora and someone else will and update from your spec?
2025-04-08 17:30:33 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the problem is that fedora fixes will get automatically blown away with source-git stuff
2025-04-08 17:30:38 <@fale:fale.io> since is forbidden by the Packaging Guidelines to have spec files mainted out of fedora (and built in Fedora), how comes source-git is allowed/ok?
2025-04-08 17:30:40 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I just don't understand the two-class system here
2025-04-08 17:30:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and in some cases, we have people tracking forks instead of upstream which makes things even slower
2025-04-08 17:30:53 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> any "normal" fedora contributor would get at least a slap on the wrist when doing this
2025-04-08 17:31:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> it would be an improvement to adjust our guidelines to not be... the way they are.
2025-04-08 17:31:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> notably, it's one of the issues that drags on my ability to work on modernize live media, because dracut is maintained in redhat-plumbers github, and not in fedora or upstream
2025-04-08 17:31:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and it's especially weird since I'm a member of dracut upstream
2025-04-08 17:31:53 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I think there has been various wrist slapping... but...
2025-04-08 17:32:41 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> wrist slapping should be *more* effective for people who get paid to work on this, not *less*
2025-04-08 17:33:21 <@fale:fale.io> with what lever?
2025-04-08 17:33:22 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I mean we could make another try... identify them all at least and ask them to not do that... but I am not sure what kind of traction we will get.
2025-04-08 17:33:38 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> go to their managers and *make* them do it? :D
2025-04-08 17:33:58 <@salimma:fedora.im> also curious about the source-git back story
2025-04-08 17:34:04 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I have asked at least once for dracut to stop using source-git because the reason for them to fork dracut is no longer valid now that we have an active upstream
2025-04-08 17:34:20 <@salimma:fedora.im> was this allowed at some time? I recall there are Flock talks about it so it must be somewhat blessed at some point
2025-04-08 17:34:22 <@fale:fale.io> I start to wonder if we should re-evaluate source-git altogether since this is creating those issues
2025-04-08 17:34:26 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> no
2025-04-08 17:34:26 <@salimma:fedora.im> and now it's cursed
2025-04-08 17:34:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> so it's just people proposing things but never approved? ouch
2025-04-08 17:34:47 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> it was never formally allowed and then source-git as a project died
2025-04-08 17:35:13 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it started with the kernel package moving to CKI, and then others started doing it over time
2025-04-08 17:35:14 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> sure, we don't need a kernel. :)
2025-04-08 17:35:17 <@salimma:fedora.im> sounds like we don't need to reevaluate, we need to clarify that it's never approved :)
2025-04-08 17:35:45 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I'll file a ticket
2025-04-08 17:35:50 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> `</rant>`
2025-04-08 17:35:57 <@salimma:fedora.im> presumably these people use packit to do the fedora update too nowadays?
2025-04-08 17:36:53 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> in theory, packit is supposed to be able to respect the canonicity of the fedora dist-git, but in practice... 🤷‍♂️
2025-04-08 17:36:54 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'd suggest not filing a ticket. Open a discussion?
2025-04-08 17:37:18 <@fale:fale.io> ok, then. do we have other open floor topics?
2025-04-08 17:37:19 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> it *can* if you set it up that way 
2025-04-08 17:37:27 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> ok, even better.
2025-04-08 17:37:31 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> good to know
2025-04-08 17:37:35 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> note that the guideline just says that our git is the source of truth and you can maintain specs elsewhere, you just have to merge back changes... (but I don't know if any of those projects does that)
2025-04-08 17:38:20 <@salimma:fedora.im> me
2025-04-08 17:38:51 <@salimma:fedora.im> first - heads up - starting a numbered list not from one seems broken at the moment, haven't been able to triage where it starts - https://pagure.io/fesco/fesco-docs/issue/103
2025-04-08 17:39:07 <@salimma:fedora.im> it's only used in one document (the non responsive maintainer process) so it's not that big a deal at the moment
2025-04-08 17:39:28 <@salimma:fedora.im> related, https://pagure.io/fesco/fesco-docs/pull-request/94 is now updated to incorporate suggested changes. sorry for the delay
2025-04-08 17:40:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> it has the numbering issue still, which I think we should fix elsewhere. I don't remember if we came to an agreement re: whether we should trial this first or flat out replace the original process
2025-04-08 17:40:40 <@salimma:fedora.im> unrelated: i requested a permanent update exception for python-damo, but since it's last minute, just raising it for awareness here, don't feel obliged to vote today https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3389
2025-04-08 17:40:58 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I think a trial run makes sense with a big-ish change like this.
2025-04-08 17:40:58 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> though might might be good to also post to devel / discussion.fp.o for comments 
2025-04-08 17:41:10 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, agreed on both
2025-04-08 17:41:47 <@salimma:fedora.im> I think this change should be popular - since the old method is a sledgehammer - but idk, if we don't communicate it enough someone will likely get upset
2025-04-08 17:42:06 <@salimma:fedora.im> so I guess - see if the current version looks fine, and if it does, I'll announce it in devel and discourse?
2025-04-08 17:42:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I fear it's going to get used to bypass maintainers but we will see.
2025-04-08 17:42:38 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> nirik: well, hopefully not *more* than the similar "stalled EPEL request" process :)
2025-04-08 17:42:47 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> sounds good to me!
2025-04-08 17:43:37 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> well, it's a lot shorter... so you can wait until someone goes on vacation, file the issue, get added as co-maintainer, make all the changes you like and surprise them when you get back. ;) but thats a bad fath actor type thing, hopefully we don't have those sort of folks.
2025-04-08 17:43:54 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah... we had 4 weeks earlier, and Miro suggested making it shorter iirc?
2025-04-08 17:44:05 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> it still needs fesco approval, right? I'd assume we'd reject a "malicious" request like that
2025-04-08 17:44:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah
2025-04-08 17:44:32 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> nope,
2025-04-08 17:44:40 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> releng ticket to process
2025-04-08 17:45:05 <@salimma:fedora.im> we can add the vacation case as a known exception, but ... that reminds me we don't have a good vacation workflow either. many people don't seem to know about the vacation calendar, and some who knows find it a privacy violation
2025-04-08 17:45:21 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh... I can update it to say request fesco rather than releng, if we think that helps
2025-04-08 17:45:28 <@fale:fale.io> do we know how frequent this happens per week/month?
2025-04-08 17:45:35 <@salimma:fedora.im> but idk how much of our time will get inundated processing changes
2025-04-08 17:45:53 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> if this gets used a lot... thats bad.
2025-04-08 17:46:03 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> there isn't *that* many unresponsive maintainer tickets, so hopefully not much more than that
2025-04-08 17:46:06 <@fale:fale.io> if it stays as frequent as the current process, I do not think it is an issue to add it to FESCo weekly meetings
2025-04-08 17:46:23 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> but yes, making this a fesco ticket first that needs an ACK from us before it gets sent to releng makes sense, I think
2025-04-08 17:46:33 <@fale:fale.io> +1
2025-04-08 17:46:49 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah, and if we find it too much we can tweak the process
2025-04-08 17:47:21 <@salimma:fedora.im> ok so... I'll add a step to do fesco first before releng. do people want to look at it again before I announce it in devel?
2025-04-08 17:47:42 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I think it should be fine then
2025-04-08 17:47:46 <@salimma:fedora.im> presumably we vote on that ticket under the normal rules (e.g. fast track it if you want, otherwise wait until +7 or the weekly meeting)
2025-04-08 17:47:50 <@salimma:fedora.im> and then they can file in releng
2025-04-08 17:47:52 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'd really like to see it discussed before we approve it, but perhaps I am in the minority.
2025-04-08 17:48:01 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh this can wait
2025-04-08 17:48:16 <@salimma:fedora.im> so I'm perfectly happy discussing the new text next week before announcing it widely
2025-04-08 17:48:21 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> no, that was what I meant too :)
2025-04-08 17:48:21 <@salimma:fedora.im> what's another week :)
2025-04-08 17:48:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> well, I meant... discussed with maintainers/community
2025-04-08 17:49:03 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I think some people might have strong feelings about this. I know the non responsive maintainer process got tons of feedback before it was adopted.
2025-04-08 17:49:26 <@salimma:fedora.im> ah.. right
2025-04-08 17:49:44 <@salimma:fedora.im> I think we do want to discuss this before deciding whether to adopt it or not
2025-04-08 17:50:01 <@salimma:fedora.im> just wanted to ask if y'all want to see the modified text before I socialize it outside the group
2025-04-08 17:50:52 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I trust you ;)
2025-04-08 17:51:03 <@salimma:fedora.im> famous last words
2025-04-08 17:51:07 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, feel free to modify/propose/whatever
2025-04-08 17:51:21 <@salimma:fedora.im> alright, nothing else from me then, thanks
2025-04-08 17:51:33 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> thank you for working on this!
2025-04-08 17:51:48 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I was just going to note that we have a 'meet your fesco' panel at flock (hopefully many of us will be there!), but elections happen just before that... so some folks currently on fesco may not be and others may be added... kinda poor that they might not be included or might plan to go but not be in fesco anymore. Not sure what we can do about it, just wanted to raise awareness.
2025-04-08 17:52:17 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> oh, right, flock in June instead of August ...
2025-04-08 17:52:31 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> yeah, we used to have better alignment when Flock was in August
2025-04-08 17:52:32 <@salimma:fedora.im> hmm yeah
2025-04-08 17:52:43 <@salimma:fedora.im> do people really plan going to flock only contingent on being in fesco though?
2025-04-08 17:52:46 <@fale:fale.io> I'll be in person there
2025-04-08 17:53:05 <@salimma:fedora.im> speaking of that, if we're keeping track of who's going to be there in person, I won't, regretfully. can't make the travel logistics work
2025-04-08 17:53:40 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> hopefully we won't have flock in june again
2025-04-08 17:53:45 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'll be there...
2025-04-08 17:53:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it's really awkward timing
2025-04-08 17:54:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> especially in between Red Hat Summit and DevConf.cz
2025-04-08 17:54:30 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'm not sure. Just wanted to raise the issue in case someone might be in that boat.
2025-04-08 17:54:35 <@fale:fale.io> any other topics?
2025-04-08 17:55:17 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> thats it from me.
2025-04-08 17:56:24 <@fale:fale.io> !endmeeting