2025-02-19 14:00:14 <@humaton:fedora.im> !startmeeting Git Forge Meeting
2025-02-19 14:00:15 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-02-19 14:00:14 UTC
2025-02-19 14:00:15 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'Git Forge Meeting'
2025-02-19 14:00:19 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic init
2025-02-19 14:00:19 <@humaton:fedora.im> !info this is meeting about the Fedora git forge replacement this meeting template can be found at https://codeberg.org/fedora/gitforge-migration
2025-02-19 14:00:20 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> !hi
2025-02-19 14:00:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Nils Philippsen (nphilipp) - he / him / his
2025-02-19 14:00:22 <@smilner:fedora.im> !hi
2025-02-19 14:00:24 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (smilner)
2025-02-19 14:01:32 <@humaton:fedora.im> How is it on your side of the cable? Its beautifully sunny here but -8C
2025-02-19 14:02:11 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi
2025-02-19 14:02:12 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2025-02-19 14:02:20 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> (just lurking today mostly)
2025-02-19 14:02:33 <@smilner:fedora.im> 23C ... we get a few nice days a year 😆
2025-02-19 14:02:36 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> !hi
2025-02-19 14:02:37 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Lenka Segura (lenkaseg)
2025-02-19 14:03:34 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> We had -7.5C this morning, but it’s up to +4C already and supposed to hit 18C in the next days
2025-02-19 14:03:56 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> (and it’s sunny 😂)
2025-02-19 14:04:36 <@humaton:fedora.im> so yeah its + on the sun it just does not shine over here :D
2025-02-19 14:04:58 <@dherrera:fedora.im> !hi
2025-02-19 14:04:59 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his
2025-02-19 14:05:51 <@humaton:fedora.im> its 5 after lets start with the agenda
2025-02-19 14:06:51 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic tracking of work 
2025-02-19 14:06:53 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Im here, but not really :/ In a talk/lab in Cork office 
2025-02-19 14:07:26 <@humaton:fedora.im> You might seen some tickets getting created by Ryan, he was playing with forgejo to dog-food it. 
2025-02-19 14:07:41 <@humaton:fedora.im> We met today and decided to continue using pagure.
2025-02-19 14:08:00 <@humaton:fedora.im> I would like to ask you to label your assigned tickets so we get it synced to jira
2025-02-19 14:08:28 <@humaton:fedora.im> Or they will be labeled by me to low later this week 😀
2025-02-19 14:10:28 <@humaton:fedora.im> mobing on
2025-02-19 14:10:29 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic Tickets and Updates
2025-02-19 14:10:47 <@humaton:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/forgejo-deployment/issues
2025-02-19 14:10:47 <@humaton:fedora.im> !info go over tickets and updates
2025-02-19 14:10:47 <@humaton:fedora.im> 
2025-02-19 14:10:47 <@humaton:fedora.im> 
2025-02-19 14:11:05 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic UI changes
2025-02-19 14:11:18 <@humaton:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/forgejo-deployment/issue/8
2025-02-19 14:11:42 <@humaton:fedora.im> Yaash did a good job documenting where he is in the ticket
2025-02-19 14:12:05 <@humaton:fedora.im> I am meeting with him tomorrow to sync up and publish the updated changes
2025-02-19 14:12:07 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> mmm...I seem not to have perms to change the tickets metadata in pagure/fedora-infra/forgejo-deployment
2025-02-19 14:12:57 <@humaton:fedora.im> huh try now? I have added fedora-infra group as colaborator
2025-02-19 14:12:58 <@Zlopez:matrix.org> !hi
2025-02-19 14:13:01 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michal Konecny (zlopez)
2025-02-19 14:13:24 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> now yes, thanks!
2025-02-19 14:13:38 <@humaton:fedora.im> back to the topic of UI changes
2025-02-19 14:14:11 <@humaton:fedora.im> I am thinking about how should we introduce the changes, should we apply patches to the source? 
2025-02-19 14:14:26 <@humaton:fedora.im> Or should we inject them during the container build?
2025-02-19 14:14:41 <@humaton:fedora.im> Any ideas?
2025-02-19 14:14:52 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> maintaining a branch of the source to cherry-pick / rebase from seems more transparent
2025-02-19 14:14:57 <@Zlopez:matrix.org> What is more transparent?
2025-02-19 14:15:07 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> easier to follow for contributors
2025-02-19 14:15:27 <@humaton:fedora.im> well that depends on the devel it will be container build for some and code for others
2025-02-19 14:15:56 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> perhaps I'm just showing my bias then 🙂
2025-02-19 14:15:56 <@humaton:fedora.im> Both are equally transparent if we document the process 
2025-02-19 14:16:14 <@humaton:fedora.im> the thing about injecting is that we dont have to maintain fork at all...
2025-02-19 14:17:20 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> is there an effect on testing changes?
2025-02-19 14:17:40 <@humaton:fedora.im> we will have "just" repo with assets and templates that will be copied in during container build
2025-02-19 14:17:57 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> I mean that from either path - trying to be objective, or we'll all just argue for our own defaults 🙂
2025-02-19 14:18:33 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Mhm if we want to test UI, the container probably should be that test target
2025-02-19 14:18:33 <@humaton:fedora.im> actually this is interesting question
2025-02-19 14:18:47 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Mhm if we want to test UI, the container probably should be the test target
2025-02-19 14:19:16 <@humaton:fedora.im> I prefer targeting the service for testing i.e the container 
2025-02-19 14:19:27 <@humaton:fedora.im> testing on the source level is done by upstream 
2025-02-19 14:19:35 <@humaton:fedora.im> or should be done :)
2025-02-19 14:19:50 <@humaton:fedora.im> but forgejo folks do good job with testing what is covered
2025-02-19 14:20:46 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> sure, but sooner or later we'll have a conflict between upstream and our patches, presumably that would be easy to catch too? Obviously it's easy when rebasing, as the rebase fails 😉
2025-02-19 14:21:07 <@humaton:fedora.im> hopefully we will not carry on patches
2025-02-19 14:21:31 <@humaton:fedora.im> The UI changes are done transparently by adding new theme 
2025-02-19 14:21:37 <@humaton:fedora.im> and configuring it in UI
2025-02-19 14:21:51 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> you said patches here 🙂
2025-02-19 14:22:17 <@humaton:fedora.im> ok my bad i mean code changes, 
2025-02-19 14:22:17 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> if it's just themes and assets then I have far less worries
2025-02-19 14:22:32 <@humaton:fedora.im> I read you patches as RPM style patches on the side of the source
2025-02-19 14:23:31 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> so if we're just adding net-new files that cannot conflict with upstream, then I will shut up, either way can work 🙂
2025-02-19 14:23:59 <@humaton:fedora.im> Ok, we will look into both and see. Because as you said later on we might have more changes...
2025-02-19 14:24:46 <@humaton:fedora.im> Avoiding source conflicts and easiness of maintenance will be the criteria. 
2025-02-19 14:25:30 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic Explore current Forgejo deployment methods 
2025-02-19 14:25:33 <@humaton:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/forgejo-deployment/issue/2
2025-02-19 14:25:58 <@humaton:fedora.im> ah I see David around
2025-02-19 14:26:14 <@dkirwan:fedora.im> hey, we have the instance available now, and you can sign in via FAS
2025-02-19 14:26:29 <@dkirwan:fedora.im> https://forgejo.apps.ocp.stg.fedoraproject.org/
2025-02-19 14:26:54 <@humaton:fedora.im> !link https://forgejo.apps.ocp.stg.fedoraproject.org/explore
2025-02-19 14:27:02 <@dkirwan:fedora.im> feel free to log in, poke around, but dont expect too much atm, I might need to tear it down and redeply multiple times as we're figuring out how to deploy with custom configurations
2025-02-19 14:27:53 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> a few of us in commops had a good time doing some testing a week ago or so. excellent job!
2025-02-19 14:28:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> neil has already given cookies to dkirwan during the F41 timeframe
2025-02-19 14:28:38 <@humaton:fedora.im> We need to look into how to seed the deployment
2025-02-19 14:28:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> nphilipp gave a cookie to dkirwan. They now have 13 cookies, 5 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-02-19 14:28:56 <@zodbot:fedora.im> lenkaseg gave a cookie to dkirwan. They now have 14 cookies, 6 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-02-19 14:29:21 <@zodbot:fedora.im> dherrera gave a cookie to dkirwan. They now have 15 cookies, 7 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-02-19 14:30:37 <@dkirwan:fedora.im> currently just looking inside the helm chart weve forked, presumably we'll use the fedora branch
2025-02-19 14:31:20 <@dkirwan:fedora.im> build an image containing these charts, and we can pass in any variables to customise anything else needed then
2025-02-19 14:31:52 <@humaton:fedora.im> David Kirwan: sync with lenkaseg she did the image builds from source last week.
2025-02-19 14:32:27 <@dkirwan:fedora.im> will do! 
2025-02-19 14:32:54 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> Here one of the images: https://quay.io/repository/konflux-fedora/fedora-infra-tenant/forgejo-oci-images?tab=tags&tag=latest
2025-02-19 14:33:09 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic  Package Forgejo as vendored golang RPM
2025-02-19 14:33:12 <@humaton:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/forgejo-deployment/issue/7
2025-02-19 14:33:23 <@humaton:fedora.im> did you have any progress nils ?
2025-02-19 14:33:34 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Any? Yes
2025-02-19 14:33:51 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Meanwhile I got it to build, but it was reluctant
2025-02-19 14:34:20 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> I restarted my effort, starting with another attempt of go2rpm
2025-02-19 14:34:48 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> I.e. first I tried to get the make/Makefile route to work (how upstream builds it). That was a lot of pain
2025-02-19 14:35:25 <@humaton:fedora.im> are you ready to share your efforts? should we create ti repo on codeberg?
2025-02-19 14:35:28 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Now I’m building things using go generate/build/... and it works better – probably this will bite me in the behind on packaging assets
2025-02-19 14:36:43 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> We can do that, but my efforts are very chaotic… at least have been so far. Perhaps I should put each in a separate branch? I don’t want to have that chaos as a constant reminder of past failure 😁
2025-02-19 14:37:11 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Anyway, I can do that, somehow 😉
2025-02-19 14:37:32 <@humaton:fedora.im> oh I understand that, its ok to wait and share something that you are more sure about...
2025-02-19 14:38:11 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> 🎶 rebase your sorrows away 🎶
2025-02-19 14:38:20 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> I’m fine sharing things, just don’t want the depressing history
2025-02-19 14:38:35 <@gwmngilfen:fedora.im> (only works in your own repos ofc)
2025-02-19 14:38:36 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Gwmngilfen: yeah, that’s what I was trying to prepare the audience for
2025-02-19 14:39:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> jflory7 gave a cookie to dkirwan. They now have 16 cookies, 8 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-02-19 14:39:50 <@humaton:fedora.im> nils: do you have account at codeberg?
2025-02-19 14:39:59 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> So I can upload the spec file with comments (e.g. how to create the vendor tarball)
2025-02-19 14:40:01 <@humaton:fedora.im> I can add you to the org and you should be able to add new repo 
2025-02-19 14:40:05 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> I have, yes
2025-02-19 14:40:38 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> I’d like to keep it under my name for the time being, and move it to the org once I’ve gotten it into shape
2025-02-19 14:41:52 <@humaton:fedora.im> nils: if you can give me your username I will add you and you can do that whenever you want....
2025-02-19 14:42:09 <@zodbot:fedora.im> t0xic0der gave a cookie to dkirwan. They now have 17 cookies, 9 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-02-19 14:42:30 <@humaton:fedora.im> ha found you!
2025-02-19 14:42:38 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> jednorozec: https://codeberg.org/nilsph
2025-02-19 14:42:40 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> heh
2025-02-19 14:44:14 <@humaton:fedora.im> if there are no questions about the rpm build lets move on
2025-02-19 14:44:30 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> I’m adding a couple comments to the spec file and upload it
2025-02-19 14:44:38 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> I’m adding a couple comments to the spec file and will upload it later
2025-02-19 14:44:46 <@nphilipp:fedora.im> Yeah, move on 
2025-02-19 14:45:36 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic  OCI images 
2025-02-19 14:45:39 <@humaton:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/forgejo-deployment/issue/1
2025-02-19 14:46:08 <@humaton:fedora.im> as lenkaseg pointed out in previous comment there are OCI images build by konflux that she did
2025-02-19 14:46:42 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> yup, it's the forgejo-oci-images app in our konflux tenant
2025-02-19 14:46:48 <@humaton:fedora.im> any updates questions notes?
2025-02-19 14:47:16 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> there are two components now, one builds from our fedora/forgejo fork and another one builds from the upstream forgejo
2025-02-19 14:47:30 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> there was some back and forth with konflux
2025-02-19 14:47:38 <@humaton:fedora.im> Are you building the stable branch as well?
2025-02-19 14:47:44 <@humaton:fedora.im> we deploy v10 now
2025-02-19 14:48:19 <@humaton:fedora.im> I would suggest to build v10 from upstream
2025-02-19 14:48:42 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> when I fixed the containerfiles to work with fedora:rawhide and buildah, konflux built it, but  because of some reported vulnerabilities in gitea version or so, it looked like the build failed...
2025-02-19 14:49:09 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> yeah, it builds from the v10 branch
2025-02-19 14:49:43 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> btw I noticed our fork had the main branch as default, so changed it to "forgejo" to match the upstream
2025-02-19 14:49:49 <@humaton:fedora.im> so it build from v10 sources from upstrema and main branch from our fork?
2025-02-19 14:49:55 <@humaton:fedora.im> nope!
2025-02-19 14:49:57 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> exactly
2025-02-19 14:49:59 <@humaton:fedora.im> It should be main
2025-02-19 14:50:13 <@humaton:fedora.im> Our main differs from forgejo branch
2025-02-19 14:50:53 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> ah, ok! so that means I synced the upstream forgejo branch into fedora fork forgejo branch....and it should be main then?
2025-02-19 14:51:22 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> ok, I will return the main branch then as a default
2025-02-19 14:51:54 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> then we probably want to cherrypick stuff from the forgejo branch to main?
2025-02-19 14:52:25 <@humaton:fedora.im> we can rebase it
2025-02-19 14:52:34 <@humaton:fedora.im> actually it can be done automatically
2025-02-19 14:52:57 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> I think there were some merge conflicts when I tried...
2025-02-19 14:53:30 <@humaton:fedora.im> then something went wrong, I was rebasing it for about month and it was building in the other pipeline in konflux
2025-02-19 14:54:11 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> that will be most probably me getting tangled in git :) 
2025-02-19 14:54:51 <@humaton:fedora.im> untangle yourself :)
2025-02-19 14:54:55 <@humaton:fedora.im> lets move on
2025-02-19 14:55:02 <@humaton:fedora.im> !topic Open floor
2025-02-19 14:55:39 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> continuing on this, merging the konflux-proposed pull requests fixed that so now it's all green and building and stuff :)
2025-02-19 14:56:04 <@humaton:fedora.im> did you really merge them?
2025-02-19 14:56:11 <@humaton:fedora.im> or created patches and applied?
2025-02-19 14:56:30 <@humaton:fedora.im> because merge on GH will be overridden by the next sync...
2025-02-19 14:56:37 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> the latter
2025-02-19 14:57:21 <@humaton:fedora.im> cool
2025-02-19 14:57:39 <@lenkaseg:fedora.im> :) 
2025-02-19 14:57:42 <@humaton:fedora.im> Lets close the meeting and save 3mins
2025-02-19 14:57:48 <@humaton:fedora.im> !endmeeting