16:01:36 #startmeeting fpc 16:01:36 Meeting started Thu Sep 21 16:01:36 2023 UTC. 16:01:36 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 16:01:36 The chair is geppetto. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 16:01:36 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:01:36 The meeting name has been set to 'fpc' 16:01:36 #meetingname fpc 16:01:36 The meeting name has been set to 'fpc' 16:01:36 #topic Roll Call 16:01:54 Hey. 16:01:57 #chair tibbs 16:01:57 Current chairs: geppetto tibbs 16:02:45 Hey, I will point out that I have to leave in 25 minutes or so … but obv. the meeting can go on someone else just hit the endmeeting command on the way out 16:03:13 That's assuming we even go for 25 minutes. 16:03:20 Yeh, that too 16:03:38 .hi 16:03:40 carlwgeorge: carlwgeorge 'Carl George' 16:06:07 .hello ngompa 16:06:08 Son_Goku: ngompa 'Neal Gompa' 16:07:16 #chair carlwgeorge 16:07:16 Current chairs: carlwgeorge geppetto tibbs 16:07:20 #chair Son_Goku 16:07:20 Current chairs: Son_Goku carlwgeorge geppetto tibbs 16:07:45 #chair Open Floor 16:07:45 Current chairs: Floor Open Son_Goku carlwgeorge geppetto tibbs 16:07:51 Anything anyone wants to talk about? 16:09:37 We will need to address PR 1300 at some point. 16:11:51 We can ack 1303 now, I guess (or not). 16:11:53 As deca said "Are there any official Fedora SCLs?" 16:12:46 Thinking back to the reason for the initial ban on this, I am pretty sure the issue was flatpaks. 16:12:48 If we are going to have the problem, I can see how we should address it … so if flatpaks are going to hit it … fair enough 16:13:01 Otherwise I feel like "it sucks to do weird things" 16:13:22 SCLs were always horrible but some people just really like them. 16:13:36 .fpc 1303 16:13:37 geppetto: Issue #1303: Review exception request: Split kexec-tools into kexec-tools, kdump-utils and makedumpfile - packaging-committee - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1303 16:13:55 Seems fine to me … +1 16:14:05 I don't know how to work around the conflict except to carve out an exception like "Except as required by SCLs, macros aren't allowed...." 16:14:24 tibbs: yeh, I guess that feels fine. 16:15:01 We won't get +5 for 1303 … but it seems so minor if all four of us agree I'll just pass it. 16:15:25 Let me comment since I'll have to approve the exception in the SCM system. 16:15:38 ok 16:16:22 Alternately we could just review the packages. 16:16:45 Sadly both spec URLs are invalid. 16:16:49 do we usually approve review exceptions for packages that are splitting out from an existing package? 16:17:21 We have in the case of some big splits like some of the stuff that happened with X many years ago. 16:17:52 seems fine by me, especially if there is precedent 16:17:57 Individual applications got split out and I just sort of mass acked them. 16:18:19 Yeh, I was prety sure we've done it when people asked. 16:18:21 Seems a waste of time for two packages, and I would really like to actually see the intended specfiles, but.... 16:18:34 i would like to peek at the spec files for a quick once over, but as tibbs pointed out their review links 404 16:20:43 hmm, i interpreted this as moving existing subpackages out to their own spec files, but that doesn't seem to be the case 16:21:31 Oh, that's what I assumed too … what is happeneding then? 16:21:43 `/usr/sbin/makedumpfile` is just a binary in kexec-tools 16:21:50 Yeah, we should just hold off until we can see the specfiles. 16:21:58 i'm not sure what kdump-utils is supposed to be, as i can't see the new spec file 16:22:29 Ok … I guess we are probably done for this week then. Unless anyone has anything? 16:22:41 * geppetto points above that he has to leave in a couple of minutes 16:22:47 Not me. 16:23:12 i can reply on that kexec thing and ask to see the spec files 16:23:23 Cool, thanks. 16:24:37 #endmeeting