15:01:13 <smooge> #startmeeting Infrastructure (2019-09-05)
15:01:13 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Sep  5 15:01:13 2019 UTC.
15:01:13 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
15:01:13 <zodbot> The chair is smooge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:01:13 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:01:13 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'infrastructure_(2019-09-05)'
15:01:13 <smooge> #meetingname infrastructure
15:01:13 <smooge> #topic aloha
15:01:13 <smooge> #chair nirik pingou puiterwijk relrod smooge tflink cverna mizdebsk mkonecny abompard bowlofeggs
15:01:13 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'infrastructure'
15:01:13 <zodbot> Current chairs: abompard bowlofeggs cverna mizdebsk mkonecny nirik pingou puiterwijk relrod smooge tflink
15:01:28 <nirik> good morning everyone.
15:01:36 <relrod> morning
15:01:39 <tflink> morning
15:01:48 <cverna> Morning
15:01:55 <austinpowered> morning
15:02:14 <knstn> afternoon (it's 6pm here)
15:02:30 <smooge> hello knstn
15:02:35 <pingou> .hello2
15:02:37 <zodbot> pingou: pingou 'Pierre-YvesChibon' <pingou@pingoured.fr>
15:03:28 <smooge> #topic New folks introductions
15:03:28 <smooge> #info This is a place where people who are interested in Fedora Infrastructure can introduce themselves
15:03:28 <smooge> #info Getting Started Guide: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/GettingStarted
15:03:43 <mkonecny> .hello zlopez
15:03:44 <zodbot> mkonecny: zlopez 'Michal Konečný' <michal.konecny@packetseekers.eu>
15:05:37 <smooge> I am going to use this for apprentices to say hi to everyone. knstn and austinpowered have been looking for things to do
15:05:58 <nirik> welcome (again). :)
15:06:54 <smooge> #topic announcements and information
15:06:54 <smooge> #info smooge will be on PTO 2019-09-07 -> 2019-09-15
15:06:54 <smooge> #info smooge is looking for someone to take over meetings
15:06:54 <smooge> #info we are in F31 beta freeze
15:06:55 <smooge> #info pagure updates to 5.7.9 (pending FBR)
15:06:56 <smooge> #info Anitya 0.17.0 deployed on staging (0.17.1 in progress) - mkonecny
15:06:57 <smooge> #info We are looking for people to maintain Fedocal and Nuancier - mkonecny
15:06:59 <smooge> #info New blog post about release-monitoring.org (https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/stories-from-the-amazing-world-of-release-monitoring-org-7/) - mkonecny
15:08:46 <smooge> any other announcements?
15:09:03 <nirik> I can take the meeting next week...
15:09:10 <nirik> (unless someone else wants to)
15:09:49 <smooge> ok I have been doing the meetings for N years now and I think it would be good to have someone else take it over
15:10:11 <nirik> yeah, I did them for N years before that... ;)
15:10:30 <nirik> rotating around might be good (like we do for fesco now)...
15:10:58 <smooge> I agree
15:10:59 <nirik> ie, at the end of the current meeting, the next meeting chair is selected/volintold
15:11:38 <cverna> I can do next week
15:11:54 <smooge> thanks cverna
15:12:30 <nirik> cool.
15:12:33 <nirik> cverna++
15:12:34 <zodbot> nirik: Karma for cverna changed to 23 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
15:12:41 <smooge> I have added you to the doc as an admin for the time being
15:12:48 <cverna> \o/
15:12:54 <smooge> ok next up
15:12:58 <nirik> woah, I hadn't given you a cookie yet? I'm sure I would have. ;)
15:13:11 <smooge> #topic Oncall
15:13:11 <smooge> #info https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Oncall
15:13:11 <smooge> #info relrod is on call from 2019-08-29 -> 2019-09-05
15:13:11 <smooge> #info ?????? is on call from 2019-08-05 -> 2019-09-12
15:13:12 <smooge> #info Summary of last week: (from cverna )
15:13:15 <smooge> cverna++
15:13:26 <smooge> yeah nirik :)
15:13:42 <smooge> sorry that should have been relrod giving the summary
15:13:44 * relrod guesses that should be (from relrod) ;)
15:14:14 <relrod> so, lots of little pings as people are transitioning back into freeze
15:14:51 <relrod> Nothing too major stands out though
15:16:42 <nirik> we floated the idea of rotating oncall more through the list of sysadmin-mainers... I guess that should have a mailing list thread?
15:16:53 * nirik can take the next rota tho
15:17:02 <smooge> ok will start the thread after meeting
15:17:04 <pingou> +1
15:17:19 <pingou> I'd even recommend we make an "app" for that
15:17:38 <pingou> just schedule for X weeks in one go and let people swap as they need
15:17:41 <nirik> well, a calendar would do I would guess?
15:17:49 <pingou> sure
15:18:03 <smooge> we could put it in fedocal
15:18:11 * smooge sees himself to the door
15:18:20 <pingou> app could be just a script that randomly assign people to weeks/slots :)
15:18:35 <smooge> well shuffles them
15:19:07 <smooge> because https://xkcd.com/221/
15:19:18 <pingou> lol
15:19:23 <nirik> well, an app seems overkill, but sure...
15:19:24 <smooge> ok anyway
15:19:49 <dustymabe> nothing else to maintain!!!
15:19:52 <dustymabe> haha
15:19:54 <pingou> by an app I meant something automated
15:20:09 <pingou> for all I care, we could do alphabetical order
15:20:36 <nirik> zodbot: oncalltakeus
15:20:37 <zodbot> nirik: Kneel before zod!
15:20:59 <nirik> yeah, we can bikeshed in the list thread. ;)
15:21:26 <cverna> +1 for the list thread
15:21:52 <dustymabe> any thoughts about having two oncall people?
15:22:06 <dustymabe> 1 us based and 1 eu based at any given time
15:22:21 <dustymabe> and then they wouldn't have to be oncall "all day"
15:22:31 * dustymabe goes into hiding
15:22:48 <smooge> we would need some people for the 8 hours in asia
15:22:51 <pingou> not enough people for this
15:22:51 <smooge> so no
15:23:08 <pingou> and it would reduce the purpose which is to have few people interrupted
15:24:04 <smooge> ok next item
15:24:07 <smooge> #topic Monitoring discussion
15:24:07 <smooge> #info https://nagios.fedoraproject.org/nagios
15:24:07 <smooge> #info Go over existing out items and fix
15:24:07 <smooge> #
15:24:30 * nirik takes a look
15:24:47 <cverna> osbs is me trying to move stg to rhel7 and OCP
15:24:51 <nirik> the osbs ones are cverna reinstalling...
15:24:53 <nirik> yeah
15:25:34 <cverna> nirik I might need a bit of your time later today or tomorrow for that. :)
15:25:39 <nirik> I am not sure at all what the notifs ones are about... it's working as far as I can tell.
15:25:47 <nirik> cverna: sure, just let me know
15:27:37 <cverna> Cool thanks ,:)
15:28:53 <nirik> I guess on notifs we can wait for after freeze and try and figure it out.
15:30:31 <smooge> any other notifications?
15:30:41 <smooge> #topic Tickets discussion
15:30:42 <smooge> #info https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/report/Meetings%20ticket
15:30:42 <smooge> #info https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8142
15:30:42 <smooge> #info https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/7884
15:31:11 <dustymabe> #7884 has been discussed in ticket
15:31:33 <dustymabe> turns out abompard did some work on it but we didn't know
15:31:38 <nirik> 8142 is not done.
15:31:55 <nirik> In the mean time perhaps we can schedule a time to work throu the permissions needed...
15:32:08 <dustymabe> nirik: +1
15:32:22 <dustymabe> if you can give us a dump of our current permissions we'll send you back a proposed edit
15:32:46 <nirik> sure. There was also a ticket about launching instances for tests? is that related to this?
15:33:09 <nirik> .ticket 8064
15:33:14 <zodbot> nirik: Issue #8064: Please provide EC2 launching capabilities for FCOS - fedora-infrastructure - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8064
15:33:20 <dustymabe> no, this is separate, but let me read that one again real quick
15:33:50 <nirik> ah, you might have solved that with another account. :)
15:33:53 <dustymabe> AFAIK that one isn't urgent - we can use the other account for now
15:34:05 <nirik> which seems to be the way people solve aws seperation issues. ;(
15:34:10 <dustymabe> but if you solve the "tagging resources" problem then that will probably solve that ticket too :)
15:34:27 <nirik> yeah, but so far I haven't... and it's sucked a vast amount of time too. ;(
15:35:01 <nirik> anyhow... for the perms...
15:35:14 <nirik> later today? tomorrow? monday?
15:35:28 <dustymabe> today would be great
15:35:35 <dustymabe> meet up in admin after this meeting
15:35:56 <nirik> I have some things to do right after this meeting... give me an hour or two?
15:36:27 <dustymabe> sure i'll put something on your calendar
15:36:49 <nirik> super.
15:38:15 <bowlofeggs> .hello2
15:38:16 <zodbot> bowlofeggs: bowlofeggs 'Randy Barlow' <rbarlow@redhat.com>
15:38:18 <bowlofeggs> (sorry, had a conflict)
15:38:26 <dustymabe> .hello2
15:38:27 <zodbot> dustymabe: dustymabe 'Dusty Mabe' <dusty@dustymabe.com>
15:38:31 * dustymabe forgot to do that
15:39:59 <smooge> ok any other items for today?
15:40:07 <squishedlunch> smooge nirik any update on getting docs updated or other initiatives to help new contributors onboarded?
15:41:02 <dustymabe> smooge: we had some interesting ideas that kevin and a few others floated during my request for sysadmin-main email thread
15:41:29 <dustymabe> was wondering if the infra team had discussed any of those?
15:42:11 <smooge> squishedlunch, I have been swamped so have had no time to do so. I am taking a week off and will put it on my task list when I get back
15:42:15 <nirik> squishedlunch: not that I know of... we do need to go over our onboarding docs...
15:42:46 <smooge> dustymabe, as far as I know if we haven't had the time or energy to discuss anything outside of what was on the thread
15:43:00 <smooge> #topic Open Floor
15:43:06 <dustymabe> smooge: ok
15:43:10 <smooge> but I guess this would be where those things would be discussed
15:43:35 <dustymabe> i think the "scheduled blocks of time" that people could reserve one day a week could be useful
15:43:49 <dustymabe> it would more define the infra teams time
15:44:13 <nirik> yeah, +10 to scheduling vs irq.
15:44:25 <nirik> we could also just start trying to do this more in tickets...
15:44:29 <cverna> We discussed having every request via tickets
15:44:52 <dustymabe> ehh. I think tickets vs scheduled blocks of time are different topics
15:45:03 <dustymabe> tickets don't help the IRQ load
15:45:21 <cverna> No because a ticket as an assigned person
15:45:24 <dustymabe> it just makes it so that person A pings you, opens a ticket, then pings you to tell you they opened the ticket
15:46:03 <cverna> If I assigned myself a ticket I become the primary point of contact for that ticket
15:46:14 <dustymabe> cverna: sure, then people are pinging you directly
15:46:29 <dustymabe> you may respond, you may not, they don't know, maybe you're on vacation
15:46:33 <cverna> Which is fine since I work on that ticket
15:47:12 <cverna> It is on me to let the person that opened the ticket if I am off or not
15:47:13 <nirik> really I guess the only way to stop that behavior is to just stop answering pings...
15:47:22 <dustymabe> if I ping you and you don't respond, but I have a 30 minute session on thursday then I feel much better
15:47:22 <cverna> At least that my opinion
15:47:54 <dustymabe> ok let's use an example: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/7884
15:48:11 <dustymabe> there's a project request that was opened 3 months ago
15:48:19 <dustymabe> no assignee
15:48:24 <dustymabe> no communication in the ticket
15:48:30 <dustymabe> but the work was done a month ago
15:48:33 <dustymabe> apparently
15:48:44 <cverna> Yes no assigned means nobody works on it
15:49:01 <nirik> yeah, thats a bad case for sure...
15:49:05 <dustymabe> I assumed patrick was going to do the work. but when he switched roles I figured I'd probably have to do the work myself
15:49:09 <cverna> If was done for another project rawhide gating
15:49:51 <cverna> I think we need to be better at assigning tickets we work on
15:50:02 <dustymabe> I'm just saying "tickets" don't solve all the problems
15:50:08 <dustymabe> I think blocks of time would help
15:50:12 <nirik> ideally, it would have been: ticket, ack in ticket that we are discussing it, assigned when someone was working on it, and poiter to pr when they finished
15:50:21 <dustymabe> this is an outsiders opinion, so just a suggestion
15:51:01 <nirik> well, we do have this meeting to discuss tickets too... but yeah, communication is hard and we need to do better.
15:51:04 <puiterwijk> That specific ticket has been finished from our side, and is awaiting you to start sending messages so we can start to test it. Also, Evolution told me he communicated back to you about the scheduled timeline
15:51:07 <cverna> I am all for block of time it just should be discussed planned in the ticket
15:51:37 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/7884#comment-580046
15:51:44 <dustymabe> "We'll plan for the week of July 22"
15:51:52 <cverna> I think the communication was not great here :(
15:52:07 <cverna> Too many different channels
15:52:09 <puiterwijk> dustymabe: yes. And then during that week we have finished implementing it, and talked with people from the CoreOS team about it
15:52:24 <dustymabe> puiterwijk: hmm. I admin I was out that week
15:52:26 * nirik waves to puiterwijk
15:52:42 <dustymabe> admit*
15:52:54 <dustymabe> I was just following the ticket for updates
15:53:01 <dustymabe> anywho. that was just an example
15:53:11 <puiterwijk> I can look up the logs if you want, but it got implemented on https://pagure.io/robosignatory/pull-request/25
15:53:24 * dustymabe guesses puiterwijk has a notification set up for 'patrick'
15:53:28 <nirik> cverna: conversly we also have a bunch of tickets assigned where we shouldn't. IMHO we should have them assigned when that person is actively working on them (or about to), not that they someday might
15:53:33 <bowlofeggs> +1 to ignoring IRC pings
15:53:47 <bowlofeggs> +1 to "file a ticket or what you want doesn't happen"
15:53:49 <cverna> nirik: agreed
15:53:57 <bowlofeggs> also, filing a ticket doesn't mean what you want will happen ☺
15:54:14 * smooge sees we have 1 minutes left on open floor
15:54:14 <dustymabe> bowlofeggs: I don't think that "file a ticket or what you want doesn't happen" will help that much
15:54:17 <dustymabe> I agree we should do it
15:54:23 <dustymabe> i've been operating in that mode for some time now
15:54:28 <nirik> I think scheduling time on a ticket with the assignee is a good plan, depending on the type of thing
15:54:42 <bowlofeggs> not all tickets are guaranteed to get done
15:54:53 <dustymabe> nirik: right. but I don't think scheduling time in the ticket will ever happen
15:55:01 <nirik> why?
15:55:01 <bowlofeggs> bodhi has ~300 open tickets - most of them will never get done
15:55:08 <bowlofeggs> and that's ok
15:55:11 <cverna> yes and it up to us to be better with assignee and communicating progress on the ticket
15:55:23 <dustymabe> it would help if the 'blocks of time' were already a structured thing where someone could just go sign up
15:55:31 <smooge> bowlofeggs, that is a software project and we are a service project. there are different expectations
15:55:47 <bowlofeggs> i don't think people should be able to schedule other people's time however they see fit
15:55:49 <dustymabe> smooge: good clarification
15:56:03 <smooge> in any case.. I am going to close this meeting down because FPC will be wanting this room in 3 minutes
15:56:04 <dustymabe> bowlofeggs: my suggestion is not that we do that
15:56:05 <bowlofeggs> smooge: true, but i still think that "not all tickets need to get done by us" is true
15:56:09 <cverna> dustymabe: then you will end up with a block of time with someone that has no context about the tixket
15:56:12 <smooge> please move this to #fedora-admin
15:56:29 <nirik> bowlofeggs: we should own up to those also. ;)
15:56:36 <smooge> #endmeeting