13:00:03 <juhp> #startmeeting Workstation WG 13:00:03 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon May 7 13:00:03 2018 UTC. 13:00:03 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 13:00:03 <zodbot> The chair is juhp. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 13:00:03 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 13:00:03 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'workstation_wg' 13:00:11 <mclasen> .hello mclasen 13:00:12 <zodbot> mclasen: mclasen 'Matthias Clasen' <mclasen@redhat.com> 13:00:22 <juhp> #topic Roll call 13:00:36 <juhp> #meetingname workstation 13:00:36 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'workstation' 13:01:06 <juhp> #chair mclasen 13:01:06 <zodbot> Current chairs: juhp mclasen 13:01:22 <mclasen> thats ... not a quorum 13:01:24 <kalev> .hello kalev 13:01:25 <zodbot> kalev: kalev 'Kalev Lember' <klember@redhat.com> 13:01:37 <mclasen> hey kalev 13:01:44 <kalev> hey! 13:01:48 <juhp> #chair kalev 13:01:48 <zodbot> Current chairs: juhp kalev mclasen 13:02:06 <mclasen> not sure if we'll have cschaller today, me may be travelling 13:02:13 <juhp> I see 13:02:25 <juhp> Anyone else here? 13:02:53 * mclasen goes to hunt people down 13:03:00 <kalev> I didn't see any tickets with meeting tag when I checked yesterday, is there anything to actually discuss? 13:03:13 <juhp> There are 2 tickets 13:03:18 <kalev> ahh 13:03:26 <juhp> #agenda https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting 13:03:36 <mclasen> if not, we can talk about f29, maybe ? 13:03:43 <juhp> sure 13:04:57 <mcatanzaro> .hello catanzaro 13:04:58 <zodbot> mcatanzaro: catanzaro 'Michael Catanzaro' <mcatanzaro@gnome.org> 13:05:13 <juhp> #chair mcatanzaro 13:05:13 <zodbot> Current chairs: juhp kalev mcatanzaro mclasen 13:05:45 <mclasen> couldn't find owen 13:05:56 <kalev> owen just joined 13:06:04 <ryanlerch[m]> .hello ryanlerch 13:06:06 <zodbot> ryanlerch[m]: ryanlerch 'Ryan Lerch' <rlerch@redhat.com> 13:06:34 <otaylor> .hello otaylor 13:06:35 <zodbot> otaylor: otaylor 'Owen Taylor' <otaylor@redhat.com> 13:06:45 <juhp> #chair otaylor ryanlerch[m] 13:06:45 <zodbot> Current chairs: juhp kalev mcatanzaro mclasen otaylor ryanlerch[m] 13:06:58 <juhp> Okay I think we have quorum 13:07:13 <juhp> Just 2 tickets on the agenda so far today 13:07:40 <juhp> #topic Need an end-user docs / wiki page for Third Party Repositories 13:07:58 <juhp> #info https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/41 13:08:33 <mclasen> is what we have now not good enough ? 13:09:24 <juhp> kalev: any comment? 13:09:32 <ryanlerch_> while not "docs" we also have this magazine post too -- https://fedoramagazine.org/third-party-repositories-fedora/ 13:09:34 <mcatanzaro> I think we can close the ticket, since the work is done. 13:10:21 <juhp> Okay 13:10:38 <kalev> ankursinha asked for ways how we could promote free software ideas better during the third party software installation 13:10:52 <kalev> and I suggested that the wiki page might be a good place and he said he'd come up with a draft 13:11:06 <kalev> I didn't want to add more text to gnome-software 13:11:13 <juhp> Okay 13:11:39 <juhp> I forget it is linked from the gnome-software banner? 13:11:43 <ryanlerch[m]> we also have the magazine post too FWIW -- https://fedoramagazine.org/third-party-repositories-fedora/ 13:11:44 <kalev> yep 13:11:44 <juhp> is it 13:11:49 <juhp> okay 13:11:56 <juhp> ryanlerch[m]: nod +1 13:12:01 <mclasen> there's several gnome-software issues where we're haggling about putting philosophy in the ui, too 13:12:04 <kalev> "Find out more..." in gnome-software when prompting 3rd party repos links to that page 13:12:13 <mclasen> but also I think this ticket is done 13:12:46 <juhp> Okay I guess we can close it then - if there could be additional follow up we can have a new ticket 13:13:12 <kalev> is there a vote needed to add the edits or can ankur just go ahead with moving his edits to the main page? 13:13:47 <juhp> okay let's vote then just for completeness 13:13:52 <kalev> it's an open wiki so everyone should be able to edit :) but I think he was looking for some vetting by the Workstation WG 13:14:32 <ryanlerch> +1 for it being done 13:15:28 <juhp> #proposal publish Ankur's 3rd party repo changes on the main page 13:15:31 <mclasen> +1 13:15:34 <ryanlerch> +1 13:15:49 <kalev> +1, we can always change stuff there in the future if needed 13:16:19 <juhp> +1 13:16:32 <juhp> I guess the todo text will not be put on the final page 13:17:20 <kalev> I somewhat like the brevity of the previous page, short and straight to the point, but I also understand the need to promote fedora ideas 13:17:22 <juhp> otaylor, mcatanzaro: do you want to vote? 13:17:56 <otaylor> What's the proposal ? 13:18:00 <juhp> #info current page is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Third_Party_Software_Repositories 13:18:10 <mcatanzaro> otaylor: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha/Third_Party_Software_Repositories is the proposed new text 13:18:11 <mcatanzaro> +1 from me 13:18:31 <juhp> Okay the probably to replace https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Third_Party_Software_Repositories with https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha/Third_Party_Software_Repositories 13:18:32 <otaylor> We're voting to finalize that text and link to it from a "find out more..." in gnome-software? 13:19:01 <juhp> It is already linked 13:19:20 <juhp> s/probably/proposal/ 13:19:34 <juhp> otaylor: yes 13:20:09 <juhp> I presume the "todo" video doesn't exist? 13:21:26 <otaylor> I'm going to abstain on this. I really think the new version has readability issues, but I do understand the desire to actively promote free software 13:22:01 <juhp> okay 13:23:08 <juhp> #agreed update https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Third_Party_Software_Repositories with https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha/Third_Party_Software_Repositories (+1:5 0:1, -1:0) 13:23:33 <juhp> Maybe someone wants to take an additional pass over it? 13:24:33 <x3mboy> .hello2 13:24:34 <zodbot> x3mboy: x3mboy 'Eduard Lucena' <eduardlucena@gmail.com> 13:24:39 <juhp> Not sure who does the final move? 13:25:31 <kalev> FranciscoD can do it himself I would say 13:25:36 <juhp> okay cool 13:26:18 <juhp> #topic Add the VS Code Repo as an External Repo (fedora-workstation-repositories) 13:26:31 <juhp> Another 3rd party repo 13:27:00 <juhp> https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/52 13:28:15 <juhp> Btw how big is the hurdle to get vscode into Fedora? 13:28:35 <mclasen> how do we proceed with this ? I forget the details about the 3rd party repo process 13:29:10 <mcatanzaro> It looks like it's open source. So it should probably go into Fedora proper, right? 13:29:30 <mclasen> as fyi, visual studio code is available on flathub, too 13:29:43 <juhp> Well it could yes, though I imagine it could be a lot work to package 13:29:43 <kalev> I'd like to have Christian here as he's the one who was leading the 3rd party effort 13:29:52 <juhp> mclasen: right - I have tried it :) 13:30:12 <ryanlerch> IIRC, the microsoft repo is covered by an EULA of some sort 13:30:19 <juhp> aha 13:30:43 <kalev> does anyone know if that repo has appstream metadata so it's actually searchable in gnome-software? 13:30:43 <ryanlerch> have not seen any other packaging effort to get it packaged in fedora proper 13:31:24 <mclasen> good point, kalev 13:32:16 <mclasen> we can ask the reporter in the ticket. thats a prerequisite for adding the repo, right ? 13:32:18 <ryanlerch> is there a SOP or something that lists the steps for adding a thrid party repo? 13:32:28 <kalev> mclasen: I just asked in the PR 13:32:31 <juhp> good question 13:32:37 <juhp> cool 13:33:00 <juhp> So maybe we can revisit this next time when we get more info? 13:33:02 <mclasen> ryanlerch: we should ask cschaller to create that if it doesn't exist yet 13:33:13 <juhp> +1 13:35:02 <juhp> any other comments? 13:35:56 <juhp> Alright then let's revisit this in a coming meeting 13:36:17 <kalev> sounds good 13:36:51 <juhp> Okay 13:37:21 <juhp> #topic Open Floor 13:37:34 <mclasen> I have two things 13:37:53 <juhp> mclasen: please 13:38:13 <mclasen> lets start with this, filed against atomic workstation recently: https://pagure.io/fedora-atomic-workstation/issue/22 13:38:24 <mclasen> do we plan any boot loader changes for f29 ? 13:38:53 <mclasen> this ticket suggests that we should use systemd-boot for atomic 13:39:26 <otaylor> I'm not clear if it's suggesting replacing or making it optional 13:39:43 <mclasen> do we really want to be in the business of boot loader options ? 13:39:54 <kalev> do we have anyone pushing for systemd-boot in fedora who could make this happen? 13:39:57 <otaylor> I really think that Fedora Workstation needs only a single bootloader - if we change ,it needs to be _better_ 13:40:06 * kalev agrees. 13:40:27 <juhp> right 13:40:39 <mclasen> yes 13:40:50 <mclasen> we do have work towards using a form of BLS 13:40:53 <juhp> mclasen: you mentioned BLS? 13:41:13 <mclasen> which aruiz' group is working on 13:41:31 <mclasen> I think it can be enabled in f28, I've been meaning to investigate that 13:41:31 <otaylor> So we would need to do some serious work to figure out a) what we're looking to improve on vs. grub b) whether some alternative provides that and keeps whatever grub functionality we consider important 13:41:43 * mclasen wonders if thats already the 'boot loader options' I just dissed... 13:42:45 <mclasen> ok, I'll update the ticket with these points 13:42:45 <otaylor> even if we don't do boot loader options, it's possible that BLS would allow us to smoothly try out a new boot loader during a Fedora cycle. Also, anything that can improve on grubby... 13:42:57 <mclasen> I agree! 13:43:22 <mcatanzaro> I think Fedora QA is going to have some opinions on changing the bootloader, I would run this by them at least 13:43:36 <mclasen> and i'll ask alberto about bls details 13:43:55 <mclasen> any more comments on tihs ? 13:43:56 <juhp> mcatanzaro: right 13:44:26 <juhp> There is not much detail about why it is better etc 13:44:31 <mclasen> I'll ask for that 13:45:33 <mclasen> I'll move on to my second point then ? 13:45:51 <juhp> okay 13:46:26 <mclasen> I wanted to give a quick update on the faw rebranding 13:46:52 <mclasen> we've made progress on that since the last meeting 13:47:01 <mclasen> we've chosen a name: Silverblue / Team Silverblue 13:47:21 <mclasen> sent an update on this to the Fedora council 13:47:38 * kalev nods. 13:47:38 <mclasen> and created a website: www.teamsilverblue.org 13:47:51 <juhp> Should we think of Silverblue as the upstream name? 13:48:31 <mclasen> I think of "Team Silverblue" as the name to use for the project and "Silverblue" as the name for the product 13:48:44 <juhp> I see 13:48:48 <mclasen> I don't think it is 'upstream' in any meaningful way though 13:49:00 <juhp> Fedora Silverblue? 13:49:07 <mclasen> and it may end up being "Fedora Silverblue" in more formal contexts 13:49:14 <juhp> ok 13:49:44 <mclasen> there has been some questions about 'why rebranding ?' or 'is this not fedora anymore?' 13:49:51 <juhp> Or it may eventually become Fedora Workstation? 13:50:08 <mclasen> we've tried to answer those - the website has some answers for that too 13:50:34 <mclasen> but one of the main reasons for the rebranding will become apparent today at the summit 13:51:34 <juhp> Okay 13:51:42 <mcatanzaro> I think it has to become Fedora Workstation, Fedora Desktop, something like that... because Fedora Silverblue or Team Silverblue just sounds so meaningless, like an internal codename 13:51:56 <juhp> right, also my feeling 13:51:57 <mcatanzaro> Well, /has/ought to/, idk 13:52:27 <mcatanzaro> It just seems like quite a step backwards from Atomic Workstation, from a marketing/branding perspective... anyway, /$0.02 13:52:32 <juhp> I feel silverblue is the technology 13:52:32 <mclasen> I ... don't really want to have a naming discussion right now :-) 13:52:45 <juhp> alright 13:52:46 <mclasen> and I think marketing people might disagree with you 13:53:10 <juhp> Anyone have any other topics today? 13:53:43 <juhp> mclasen: thanks for sharing the updates 13:54:13 <mclasen> feedback on the website and anything else around silverblue is highly appreciated, of course 13:55:49 <juhp> okay let's close the meeting here 13:55:55 <juhp> thanks everyone! 13:56:00 <juhp> #endmeeting