15:00:00 #startmeeting modularity 15:00:00 Meeting started Tue Jun 25 15:00:00 2019 UTC. 15:00:00 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 15:00:00 The chair is contyk. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:00 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:00:00 The meeting name has been set to 'modularity' 15:00:02 #meetingtopic Weekly Meeting of the Modularity Team 15:00:04 #topic Roll Call 15:00:06 #chair sgallagh langdon contyk ignatenkobrain 15:00:06 Current chairs: contyk ignatenkobrain langdon sgallagh 15:00:10 .hello psabata 15:00:11 contyk: psabata 'Petr Šabata' 15:00:29 .hello2 15:00:30 langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' 15:00:34 .hello2 15:00:36 ignatenkobrain: ignatenkobrain 'Igor Gnatenko' 15:00:59 .hello2 15:01:00 sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' 15:01:15 so last week we talked about going through the ticket queue 15:01:27 I don't know about you but I only went through it quickly this morning :/ 15:01:40 the good news is there are many actionable or re-assignable tasks, it just needs to be done 15:02:01 I labeled two tickets with the meeting tag but I don't expect to resolve them here, just to raise the awareness 15:02:03 \o/ 15:02:58 ok, so starting with this one... 15:03:02 #topic Redefine default for branch ref: 15:03:06 .modularity 142 15:03:07 contyk: Issue #142: Redefine default for branch ref: - modularity - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/142 15:03:32 the request here was to redefine the default value for component refs so that they are the same as the branch name of the module 15:03:53 the goal is to make modulemds simpler and easier to move between streams 15:04:12 I understand how it could benefit packagers but I wouldn't want to change the default in the format, personally 15:04:19 I don't like implicit defaults like that. 15:04:27 I think it would be a good idea to add an API call to MBS and define it in fedpkg 15:04:35 I'd be more inclined to drop defaults at all and make the field mandatory instead 15:05:36 I'd rather not do that, that would make the situation even worse 15:05:42 contyk: What do you mean by "define it in fedpkg" 15:05:52 it wouldn't address the problems the reporter is raising and would be an unnecessary format change 15:06:05 contyk: Well, the current situation is "if you don't specify it, you get `master`", which is at least consistent, but unexpected. 15:06:13 I mean that fedpkg could pass an argument to MBS, "if ref is undefined, make it this" 15:06:43 so if I fork a module and all its components, I don't have to change the modulemd 15:06:45 Hmm 15:06:48 and redefine the refs everywhere 15:06:58 which is something that happens in a certain distro every quarter 15:07:29 It's a reasonable idea, but I'd prefer to have an explicit reserved-word instead. 15:07:58 Since the spec *does* explicitly define what we expect from the field being not present. 15:08:24 so `ref: __BRANCH_SPEC__` or something would be better in my mind. 15:08:49 perhaps that could work 15:08:57 actually few days ago I wanted to build some module which would specify when it builds against platform:f29 to build package from f29 branch 15:09:09 so basically use "base" branches for the packages 15:09:28 that's quite different but achievable with keywords like sgallagh is proposing 15:09:34 so probably having some "variables" would be useful afterall in mmd 15:10:15 I'd prefer to discuss that idea as a separate topic though, since it is arguably producing entirely different content with the same stream name. 15:10:47 you could say the same for MSE, in a way 15:11:16 True, but the expectation of MSE is that it's still the same stream, just built against a different platform. 15:11:25 If they're vastly different content, I'd call that a bug. 15:11:41 But maybe that's the way to approach ignatenkobrain's idea too 15:11:44 we could have that discussion in the ticket 15:11:55 it feels like a major packager experience thing 15:12:03 (Assume good faith and file bugs if the streams are significantly different depending on the platform) 15:12:08 some of your concerns might be valid but we could explore that with examples 15:13:30 sgallagh: basically I was building an "RPM" as a module and since it was bumping soname I thought about rebuilding some other packages which depend on librpm... but I definitely did not want to pull rawhide versions everywhere 15:14:06 ignatenkobrain's example is basically taking it a bit further 15:14:24 and the original request was about forking a module with the same component list without changing anything 15:14:31 ignatenkobrain: Yeah, okay. That's a completely reasonable request. 15:14:40 so, should we have that discussion in the ticket? 15:15:01 It sounds like those present mostly agree it's sensible. 15:15:18 So maybe the discussion should proceed towards implementation? 15:15:44 perhaps the reporter would like to add some more input 15:15:51 but yes, I agree 15:15:56 ack 15:15:57 the variables are probably the way to go 15:16:23 #info We would propose solving the use case with special modulemd variables; we will discuss this more in the ticket 15:16:46 alright 15:16:49 #topic What is the process to change default profile name with zero down time? 15:16:54 .modularity 141 15:16:58 contyk: Issue #141: What is the process to change default profile name with zero down time? - modularity - Pagure.io - https://pagure.io/modularity/issue/141 15:18:02 I think the solution outlined in the ticket is valid 15:18:16 I don't like step 3 15:18:35 Within a release, I think we should disallow *dropping* a profile entirely. 15:18:53 Otherwise existing scripts may break 15:19:10 sgallagh: +1 15:19:13 So I think steps 1 and 2 are the right approach 15:19:30 and step 3 is valid for rawhide but disallowed within a stable release? 15:19:39 contyk: Yes 15:19:56 be nice if we could have synonyms though 15:20:06 we kinda can 15:20:21 you can include the contents from one profile in another 15:20:25 YAML 15:21:31 i meant add two "labels" to common one.... profiles: \n default, common: \n rpms: or something 15:21:38 Thinking about it, the process for Rawhide should probably be almost the reverse. 15:22:07 langdon: it works almost like that, just a little uglier :) 15:22:34 We don't really need to do two builds; just push the changed one to Rawhide and push the defaults update. If there's a disconnect, for a brief time DNF will just report "no such profile" 15:23:03 yeah, but that's ugly and if we have some CI, it might break 15:23:04 Although (sorry, thinking on my feet), this gets troublesome with MSE. 15:23:05 ha 15:23:11 and I hope we'll have some CI in place for this 15:23:38 I think you should not remove profiles in stream 15:23:41 Because I assume Jun wants to use the same YAML for FN, FN-1 and Rawhide 15:23:57 ignatenkobrain: That's kind of what I'm coming to, yeah 15:24:11 yeah, hm 15:24:25 Once a profile is specified, it remains for the life of the stream 15:24:38 sgallagh: +1 15:24:42 .hello2 15:24:43 x3mboy: x3mboy 'Eduard Lucena' 15:24:44 Well, maybe not. 15:25:07 We can document a Rawhide-only approach that allows dropping one, but it means not using MSE for a while. 15:25:07 sgallagh: it really should 15:25:23 I'd rather keep it for the life of the stream 15:25:31 Yeah, that's probably easier. 15:25:41 it's safer and is aligned with the disconnected life cycles idea 15:25:45 yeah.. once the stream is out of rawhide... the profiles should remain... 15:25:54 But we have this as an option if we *really* needed it. (Like we found out someone was naming their profiles profanely or something) 15:25:55 but defaults can change 15:26:08 langdon: You misunderstood, I think. 15:26:11 shoot sgallagh is on to me 15:26:21 sgallagh: where? 15:26:48 the "on to me" was in ref to profane profile names 15:26:52 no distinction between rawhide and stable 15:26:52 contyk and ignatenkobrain are saying that once a profile appears in a stream, it doesn't go away. 15:26:56 just keep the profiles forever* 15:27:12 yes.. i was agreeing with that.. when you seemed to be second guessing yourself 15:27:18 I'm suggesting that there *is* a way we could allow a stream to drop a profile in Rawhide only, but it means a lot of manual work 15:27:25 but which profile is default can change in any fedora release 15:27:31 So it's an option if we have great need of it 15:27:37 yeah, defaults are a different thing 15:27:42 sgallagh: ohh yes.. i see 15:27:48 or.. i agree.. 15:28:37 Essentially it means that you can't build the stream using MSE, you need to build it for stable and Rawhide independently, from different YAML. 15:28:43 Let's not document this now, though. 15:29:05 We'll default to "profiles must exist for the life of the stream" and worry about that case if we actually have a strong reason for it 15:32:10 +1 15:32:17 +1 15:33:18 proposed #agreed Profiles shouldn't be removed during the lifetime of the stream; if it's necessary, we can deal with it case by case 15:33:27 Patch 15:34:21 proposed #agreed Profiles cannot be removed during the lifetime of the stream in order to avoid breaking scripts. Options may exist for exceptional cases on an individual basis. 15:34:34 sgallagh: +1 15:34:44 i think it is too wordy 15:34:49 .fire langdon 15:34:49 adamw fires langdon 15:35:00 proposed #agreed Profiles cannot be removed during the lifetime of a stream. 15:35:18 I don't want to lose the justification. 15:35:23 why? 15:35:27 I am open to dropping the exception. 15:35:36 Because I don't want to have to re-explain it every three days. 15:36:22 ok.. i don't see why it shouldn't be "streams dont change" .. but it is fine with me then 15:38:45 * contyk grumbles about being in three meetings at the same time 15:38:51 ha 15:39:55 so I'm still +1 to sgallagh's wordy proposal 15:40:02 As am I 15:40:05 and me 15:40:57 okay 15:41:06 #agreed Profiles cannot be removed during the lifetime of the stream in order to avoid breaking scripts. Options may exist for exceptional cases on an individual basis. 15:41:13 alright 15:41:19 #topic Next week's chair 15:41:26 I won't be around next week 15:41:33 !!! 15:41:41 what will we do without you! 15:41:49 party 15:41:53 ha 15:42:33 so, no volunteers? 15:42:56 I can't commit to it, sorry. 15:42:57 i can do it 15:43:07 langdon++ 15:43:13 #action langdon will chair next week 15:43:15 * sgallagh unfires langdon 15:43:19 took me a while to check.. cause I keep signing up and then having a conflict i forgot about :/ 15:43:19 #topic Open floor 15:43:24 sgallagh: :P 15:43:37 we really need to go through that queue of tickets :) 15:43:44 but I can't see myself doing that this week :| 15:43:54 at least we can do something about the two we discussed today 15:45:15 Hi guys 15:45:37 * sgallagh nods 15:45:46 x3mboy: You have something you'd like to discuss? 15:46:18 As I stated before, I want to create an infographic about Modularity, 15:46:44 So, I want to ask if https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/modularity/ is the right place to create the base 15:47:02 And from there you can add, modify or remove content 15:47:12 x3mboy: "base"? 15:47:41 Yes, I mean, I create a ticket to design with the content I want to put IN the inforgraphic 15:47:49 And they create beatiful stuff 15:48:26 e.g.: https://pagure.io/design/issue/647 15:49:58 so.. im still confused about what "create the base" means.. like.. the docs you point to are accurate and current 15:50:00 x3mboy: you should totally talk to asamalik 15:50:04 but he's out this week 15:50:14 is he back next week? 15:50:17 should be 15:50:44 x3mboy: did you file a modularity ticket? lets just put it on the agenda for next week's meeting.. 15:50:54 maybe tag asamalik in the ticket itself 15:51:21 x3mboy: file a modularity ticket, too, so that langdon doesn't forget :) 15:51:35 [to put it on the agenda] 15:52:05 contyk: the design ticket is for server anyway.. 15:54:25 okaz 15:54:33 anything else for the open floor? 15:55:44 closing in 3 15:55:46 2 15:55:48 1 15:55:50 #endmeeting