16:00:58 <geppetto> #startmeeting fpc
16:00:58 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Apr 27 16:00:58 2023 UTC.
16:00:58 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:00:58 <zodbot> The chair is geppetto. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
16:00:58 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:58 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fpc'
16:00:58 <geppetto> #meetingname fpc
16:00:58 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fpc'
16:00:58 <geppetto> #topic Roll Call
16:01:15 <Eighth_Doctor> .hello ngompa
16:01:17 <zodbot> Eighth_Doctor: ngompa 'Neal Gompa' <ngompa13@gmail.com>
16:01:23 <geppetto> #chair Eighth_Doctor
16:01:23 <zodbot> Current chairs: Eighth_Doctor geppetto
16:03:09 <tibbs> Hello.
16:03:16 <geppetto> #chair tibbs
16:03:16 <zodbot> Current chairs: Eighth_Doctor geppetto tibbs
16:05:27 <Eighth_Doctor> so is that it?
16:05:43 <Eighth_Doctor> hey folks :)
16:07:08 <geppetto> #topic Open Floor
16:07:12 <geppetto> Hey
16:07:20 <mroche> .hello mroche
16:07:21 <zodbot> mroche: mroche 'Michael Rochefort' <mroche@omenos.dev>
16:07:29 <geppetto> So … tibbs have you had a look at https://pagure.io/fork/berrange/packaging-committee/c/cf7a8d2758ccb4dd8dee2b000acecfb500574693
16:07:50 <geppetto> Which is the main patch for "PR: #1260 mingw: document approach for integrating mingw with native packages"
16:08:05 <geppetto> There's an issue too …
16:08:13 <decathorpe> hey, sorry, busy day today
16:08:13 <geppetto> .fpc 1259
16:08:14 <zodbot> geppetto: Issue #1259: Update mingw guidelines to document integrated packaging approach - packaging-committee - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1259
16:08:17 <geppetto> #chair decathorpe
16:08:17 <zodbot> Current chairs: Eighth_Doctor decathorpe geppetto tibbs
16:08:28 * danpb was just going to mentions his mingw proposal :-) looks like we don't have quorum again today, but happy to receive any feedback here or on the pull request  ?
16:08:57 <Eighth_Doctor> danpb: I might want to talk to you separately because me and someone else are trying to implement this for dxvk and it's not going so well
16:09:12 <decathorpe> I left some comments but am happy with the PR otherwise
16:09:17 <Eighth_Doctor> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2152207
16:09:25 <geppetto> Yeh, but unless anyone complains at the meeting I'm just going to merge it … things can always be changed after.
16:09:38 <tibbs> I had looked at it a bit but my main problem with it was the large amount of exposition in what's supposed to be a prescriptive document.  I'm afraid that just gets us to "TLDR".
16:09:40 <Eighth_Doctor> I think the doc is basically fine
16:09:52 <Eighth_Doctor> though tibbs point is probably worth fixing
16:09:54 <tibbs> But technically it seemed fine.
16:10:02 <Eighth_Doctor> we can fix that post-merge though
16:10:25 <danpb> tibbs: i'm happy to take suggestions for things to change.... being rather verbose is somewhat my nature and its hard to resist :-)
16:10:43 <geppetto> tibbs: Would you prefer some bits split out into a "reasoning behind why we say XYZ" type page, or just delete things?
16:11:53 <tibbs> I do agree we could fix it after merging.
16:12:37 <geppetto> Ok, well that's now then because I just clicked merge :)
16:12:41 <tibbs> Unfortunately I can't offer truly constructive criticism because I'm just not sufficiently familiar with the subject matter to know what really needs to be said there.
16:13:16 <tibbs> But generally I don't think we need to have whole documents explaining the reasoning, and certainly not directly within the guidelines.
16:13:25 <geppetto> Yeh, I think most (all?) of FPC are in that boat with you.
16:13:36 <GwynCieslasheher> sorry, here but distracted
16:13:45 <geppetto> #chair GwynCieslasheher
16:13:45 <zodbot> Current chairs: Eighth_Doctor GwynCieslasheher decathorpe geppetto tibbs
16:14:06 <geppetto> GwynCieslasheher: That's good because we then technically had 5 for the merge :)
16:14:10 <tibbs> Now, saving discussions and such for posterity in case someone needs to research why something was chosen isn't a terrible idea, which is why there are tickets.
16:14:45 <tibbs> So maybe posting reasoning into the PR ticket or whatever, if there's no archived mailing list discussion that covers it, would seem to be fine to me.
16:14:46 <GwynCieslasheher> I read back so it's like I was here. :)
16:16:47 <geppetto> Anyway … anything else anyone wants to talk about?
16:18:30 <tibbs> Not really.  Sorry for the last couple of weeks; my house has been under an endless renovation.
16:19:11 <geppetto> Ok, going to give you all 40 mins back
16:19:13 <GwynCieslasheher> Good times!
16:19:36 <danpb> thanks for merging it folks !
16:19:46 <tibbs> I'm actually on vacation now so maybe I'll have a bit of time to go over some tickets.
16:20:04 <decathorpe> I would appreciate it if I got feedback on my simple PR from today
16:20:10 <decathorpe> (yesterday? I forget)
16:20:18 <tibbs> I saw it and was typing something up.
16:20:27 <GwynCieslasheher> Linky?
16:20:40 <tibbs> Seemed fine but sadly more complicated than you would hope with the package name changing.
16:20:55 <decathorpe> https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1275#
16:21:04 <geppetto> Pretty sure I can just click the merge button on that too
16:21:07 <tibbs> I was wondering if it's possible to at least get a consistent name for the dependency.
16:21:08 <decathorpe> well no. the new package provides the old name ...
16:21:25 <GwynCieslasheher> Fine by me.
16:21:50 <decathorpe> backwards compatibility was top priority since I can't change all 2500 Rust packages in one go :D
16:22:02 <tibbs> More like the old package providing the new name so that you can at least depend on various versions of cargo-rpm-marcos consistently.
16:22:24 <decathorpe> hm ... that might work.
16:22:44 <decathorpe> at least in Fedora. not in EPEL :(
16:22:52 <tibbs> But it's far from a big deal; just something that I think everyone would want to be simpler, since one line turned into nine.
16:22:57 <decathorpe> since that package is in RHEL at an ancient Version
16:23:08 <tibbs> Ah, this is something in base RHEL?  If so, then never mind.
16:23:47 <decathorpe> (I'm working on a big simplification of the Rust guidelines anyway, which should make you happy then :))
16:24:12 <tibbs> Though you can still fix that with a dummy epel package under the new name that just pulls in the old package.  We used to do that with the dummy python2-* packages.
16:24:36 <decathorpe> I'd rather forget RHEL 8 exists
16:24:49 <decathorpe> RHEL 9.2 will have the same Rust stack as Fedora ... finally
16:24:56 <decathorpe> well, packaging stack at least
16:24:58 <tibbs> Just imagine what it was like when we still supported RHEL4.
16:25:12 * Eighth_Doctor shudders
16:25:13 <decathorpe> :D
16:25:19 <Eighth_Doctor> the systemd macros were also a pain for RHEL 7
16:25:41 <tibbs> Anyway, I'll merge that PR if it hasn't been merged already.
16:25:48 <geppetto> I did it
16:25:53 <Eighth_Doctor> and I did the CMake macros too, which required me to come up with three separate implementations for RHEL 7, RHEL 8, and Fedora :o
16:26:05 <tibbs> One less button to click, then.
16:26:07 <Eighth_Doctor> (technically there were four, since I also wrote a port for Debian packaging too...)
16:26:57 <decathorpe> :( gray hair production++
16:27:37 <tibbs> Too late for me; I went significantly grey before 30.
16:30:09 <geppetto> 👴🏻📣☁️
16:30:26 <geppetto> #endmeeting