<@james:fedora.im>
16:00:31
!startmeeting fpc
<@james:fedora.im>
16:00:34
!topic Roll Call
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
16:00:35
Meeting started at 2025-04-17 16:00:31 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
16:00:35
The Meeting name is 'fpc'
<@james:fedora.im>
16:01:09
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:01:10
James Antill (james)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:01:17
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:01:18
Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:02:54
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:02:56
Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:05:55
🦗
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:06:41
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:06:44
Gwyn Ciesla (limb) - she / her / hers
<@salimma:fedora.im>
16:08:24
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:08:27
Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
<@james:fedora.im>
16:11:22
!topic FPC#1456 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1456
<@james:fedora.im>
16:11:41
This seems like an easy one, although slightly annoying it's not a PR
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:12:59
Yeah. I'm good with it.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:13:00
yeah hard to parse without a visual diff
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
unless strictly required.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
```diff
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
--- v1.txt 2025-04-17 18:13:40.207957029 +0200
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+++ v2.txt 2025-04-17 18:14:07.586094088 +0200
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
-Desktop applications MUST NOT depend
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
-on other desktop applications
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+Packages MUST NOT depend
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+on desktop applications
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
In particular,
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
-packages that contain a visible .desktop file
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
-(a .desktop file that does not contain the line NoDisplay=true)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
-SHOULD NOT have a Requires, Recommends, or Supplements
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
-on any other package containing a visible desktop file,
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
-directly or indirectly.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+packages SHOULD NOT have a Requires, Recommends, or Supplements
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+on any package containing a visible desktop file
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+(a .desktop file that does not contain the line NoDisplay=true),
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+directly or indirectly,
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
+unless the dependency is strictly necessary.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
```
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:14:49
does this work in Matrix?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:15:00
oh, it does. nice
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:15:02
oooHOoOOOOOOhhh.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:16:58
ok so the only change seems to be
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:16:58
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:16:58
> packages <del>that contain .desktop files</del> SHOULD NOT depend on packages that contain .desktop files
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:17:00
the diff highlighting works in the element flatpak, but not on element android
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:17:16
oh of course the clients are different :D
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:17:31
fwiw I think the change makes sense
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:21:08
hmmm
<@james:fedora.im>
16:21:31
Fabio Valentini: Did you want to do a PR?
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:21:41
in my gnome shell extension packages i have them recommend gnome-extensions-app, and it sounds like that wouldn't be allowed by this
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:22:06
without that installed, there isn't a graphical method to enable the extension
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:22:20
I'd say that this is covered by "strictly required"
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:22:28
because without it the package is useless
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:22:38
want? no. can? yes :)
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:22:39
but it's not strictly required, because you can do it on the cli, hence the recommends
<@james:fedora.im>
16:23:31
I would put those under the same exception as plugins
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:23:52
hum ... yeah that sounds like an edge case. and it's still a SHOULD NOT, not a MUST NOT guideline
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:24:08
the text change doesn't mention plugins, it's in the issue but i fear that nuance will be lost over time
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:25:00
honestly this text is confusing to me, since it's "MUST NOT depend" and "SHOULD NOT require/recommend/supplement", which seems contradictory
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:25:22
right. so you volunteer to wordsmith something better?
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:25:55
i can provide this feedback on the issue comments, or on pr comments if we just want to refine the language there
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:26:07
or would just making it less strict than "strictly necessary" be enough?
<@james:fedora.im>
16:26:39
To be fair I'm not sure I agree with the hplip example either
<@james:fedora.im>
16:28:17
I can add a comment and ask them to think a bit more and submit a PR
<@james:fedora.im>
16:28:53
!topic FPC PR#1455 https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1455
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
16:29:10
!hi
<@ngompa:fedora.im>
16:31:08
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:34:07
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
16:34:07
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:34:35
oh, Matrix is back 👀
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:35:33
(or is it?)
<@james:fedora.im>
16:36:03
I think so
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:36:43
fwiw I agree with the hplip-gui thing, I was very surprised to see it suddenly getting installed on my system
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:36:55
almost Windows-esque
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:37:35
What's next Adobe Type Manager?
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:37:44
What's next, Adobe Type Manager?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:37:59
Candy Crush?
<@limb:fedora.im>
16:38:35
ask.com toolbar for IE6
<@james:fedora.im>
16:38:37
Eh. I can see how a bunch of people who want minimalism might object (turn recommends off?) ... but if you have printer software and the GUI the printer GUI uses, it doesn't seem like a terrible idea off hand.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:39:38
sure, still doesn't make sense to install GUI software for *every kind of hardware out there* by default
<@james:fedora.im>
16:41:48
Also hplip-gui could still Supplements?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:42:14
that would be effectively the same
<@james:fedora.im>
16:42:24
yeh, but allowed by policy
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:42:55
Supplements is already in the SHOULD NOT list
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:43:13
arguably it's the wrong way round the way it's currently written
<@james:fedora.im>
16:44:02
Right. It's not a dep on a package with a desktop file ... so it's fine?
<@james:fedora.im>
16:44:43
I'll add another comment.
<@james:fedora.im>
16:44:45
!topic Open Floor
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:45:14
Supplements are reverse dependencies, if hplip-gui Supplements hplip, that's equivalent to hplip Recommending hplip-gui, which is what we don't want
<@carlwgeorge:fedora.im>
16:46:31
i feel like this messages i can see here are very out of order after the matrix hiccup
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:46:50
possibly 😬
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:46:55
anyway I have something for open floor
<@salimma:fedora.im>
16:47:00
is there a week without matrix hiccups now
<@james:fedora.im>
16:47:16
Not sure how many people we lost with matrix
<@salimma:fedora.im>
16:48:02
I just use my fedora.im account for all Fedora stuff now, less risk of dealing with federation issues
<@james:fedora.im>
16:48:05
Fabio Valentini: Just go for it, we might be slow/OOO for the rest of the meeting anyway
<@salimma:fedora.im>
16:48:12
but double-booked in meetings all morning today
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:48:20
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:48:20
the aspell / deprecated package exemption got escalated to fesco, where I suggested making it explicit that some kinds of "new" packages (that aren't ***actually*** new) should be exempted from rules that only apply to *new* packages:
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:48:20
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3391#comment-965897
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:49:03
these kinds of things are mentioned all over the place but I don't think in any coherent list anywhere
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:49:37
or sometimes it's almost *implied* but not explicit
<@james:fedora.im>
16:49:50
Yeh, that looks good.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:50:58
still unsure *where* this should be documented. I thought the "Package Review Guidelines" page would make sense, but maybe not.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:52:07
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:52:07
though that page would be in need of a refresh in general
<@james:fedora.im>
16:52:27
Yeh, anywhere generic seems fine. Not sure if we want to backreference it from everywhere that talks about new packages?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
16:53:39
maybe? but more links -> more possibilities for link rot :)
<@james:fedora.im>
16:54:52
true. finding all of them is the first problem. finding future ones is the second (and bigger) problem ;)
<@james:fedora.im>
16:55:31
Anyway ... unless anyone has anything else, I'll close the meeting and give matrix a bit of a rest ;)
<@james:fedora.im>
16:56:15
!endmeeting