13:00:38 <otaylor> #startmeeting Workstation WG
13:00:38 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Jun  4 13:00:38 2018 UTC.
13:00:38 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
13:00:38 <zodbot> The chair is otaylor. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:00:38 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
13:00:38 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'workstation_wg'
13:00:49 <otaylor> #meetingname workstation
13:00:49 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'workstation'
13:00:57 <otaylor> #topic Roll call
13:01:05 <otaylor> .hello otaylor
13:01:06 <zodbot> otaylor: otaylor 'Owen Taylor' <otaylor@redhat.com>
13:01:31 <otaylor> #chair otaylor mclasen
13:01:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: mclasen otaylor
13:01:49 * mclasen looks around
13:03:41 <ryanlerch> .hello ryanlerch
13:03:42 <zodbot> ryanlerch: ryanlerch 'Ryan Lerch' <rlerch@redhat.com>
13:04:19 * cschalle hi
13:05:02 <otaylor> juhp[m] ?
13:05:39 <otaylor> mcantazaro doesn't seem to be around. pfrields said he won't be here. Am I forgotting anybody?
13:05:54 <juhp> hi
13:06:12 <otaylor> #chair otaylor mclasen ryanlerch juhp cschalle
13:06:12 <zodbot> Current chairs: cschalle juhp mclasen otaylor ryanlerch
13:07:11 <otaylor> #topic pycharm repository
13:07:28 <otaylor> cschalle: any updates there beyond what's in the ticket?
13:07:48 <cschalle> otaylor, sorry no, I got sidetracked, so will have to come back to this next time
13:08:27 <linuxmodder> .hello2
13:08:28 <zodbot> linuxmodder: linuxmodder 'Corey W Sheldon' <sheldon.corey@gmail.com>
13:08:52 <rdieter> hi, sorry was a away a bit, here now
13:09:00 <otaylor> #topic vscode as 3rd party repository (https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/52)
13:09:25 <x3mlinux> .hello x3mboy
13:09:26 <zodbot> x3mlinux: x3mboy 'Eduard Lucena' <eduardlucena@gmail.com>
13:09:54 <otaylor> #chair otaylor mclasen ryanlerch juhp cschalle rdieter
13:09:54 <zodbot> Current chairs: cschalle juhp mclasen otaylor rdieter ryanlerch
13:10:47 <otaylor> what's the next step with the vscode repository?
13:11:41 <cschalle> otaylor, also on me, I need to follow up on it, but like the pycharm stuff I didn't get time in the last week. Will come back to this one too
13:13:00 <otaylor> Do we have a plan on how to handle "also available as a flatpak" ? Do we have a plan to get to a plan? :-)
13:14:03 <cschalle> I think the 'plan' is to have a chat with upstream :)
13:14:41 <otaylor> cschalle: which upstream? the vscode upstream?
13:14:45 <mclasen> having the same thing available from multiple sources is already a reality today, no ?
13:14:47 <cschalle> yes
13:15:00 <mclasen> of course, it will become much more common with flatpaks
13:15:46 <otaylor> mclasen: yes - but I think the question would be when would we want to have a 3rd party rpm repository vs. a 3rd party flatpak repository if both are available
13:16:23 <otaylor> ("both available" would mean having split out repositories on flathub if we want to be entirely available out of the box)
13:16:41 <mclasen> 3rd party flatpak repo != flathub, in that scenario ?
13:16:42 <cschalle> otaylor, the 3rd party policy basically makes it a judgement call for the working group
13:17:22 <cschalle> otaylor, giving guidelines that repos own by the creator(s) of the software are usually to be preferred over ones submitted by other parties as one guideline
13:17:29 <otaylor> mclasen: perhaps not "all of flathub" - though whether "all of flathub" is good enough woudl be a judgement call about how many fedora users we expect to have all of flathub installed
13:18:23 <otaylor> Obviously with eventually with silverblue there will be a strong preference for flatpaks - but on the other side for this case in particular, I'm not sure how well the flatpak is going to work because of separate /usr/bin
13:18:24 <mclasen> all else being equal, the flatpak repo has some advantages
13:19:39 <otaylor> OK - doesn't seem like we can or need to settle this now
13:20:09 <otaylor> #action cschalle will follow up on the pycharm and vscode 3rd party repositories and report back in 2 weeks
13:20:54 <otaylor> #topic  Need an end-user docs / wiki page for Third Party Repositories -  https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/41
13:21:07 <otaylor> is there anything remaining on this ticket?
13:22:08 <mclasen> I think we can close it
13:23:24 <otaylor> #topic open floor
13:23:40 <otaylor> Anything else to discuss today?
13:23:53 <mclasen> do we need to talk about the grub menu ?
13:24:53 <otaylor> I was wondering - since it's been proposed as a system-wide change, it's not really in our jurisdiction to make the decision, though obviously it's by far most relevant to the workstation
13:25:43 <cschalle> I guess the WG could issue a statement of support or something like that if we wanted to
13:26:34 <ryanlerch> is there a link to the proposed change?
13:27:20 <otaylor> ryanlerch: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/HiddenGrubMenu
13:27:39 <mclasen> well, we can certainly say that we want this change for the workstation
13:27:49 <cschalle> ryanlerch, there is also a 62 message thread on -devel
13:27:51 <mclasen> and we don't care if servers boot in text mode
13:28:39 <otaylor> ryanlerch: I think the proposal changed a bit since that page - hans discussed adding failure-detection to f29 - something that he was initially planning only for f30
13:28:55 <ryanlerch> cschalle: otaylor: thanks!
13:29:48 <otaylor> "The changes are in the /etc/default/grub file which is generated at install time. Users upgrading from a previous Fedora version will keep the old behavior" - one of those
13:30:40 <otaylor> that definitely doesn't help the support equation if experienced fedora users don't see this behavior
13:31:11 <otaylor> (Multiple times I've discovered that my fedora grub configuration is some hybrid of things from 4-5 releases ago...)
13:31:50 <mclasen> yeah, thats not helpful
13:32:14 <otaylor> mclasen: Are there any particular silverblue issues here? Do we consider it important if you have multiple different OS's (stable and rawhide, say) installed as ostrees?
13:32:23 <ryanlerch> is it too risky (or impossible) to regenerate teh grub conf on an upgrade?
13:33:02 <mclasen> colin spoke up in the discussion to point out that the "ui" for rollback is currently the grub menu
13:33:24 <juhp> ah
13:34:15 <mclasen> but I think the failure detection should handle this, mostly
13:34:40 <juhp> I think I read the thread when it started and there was a suggestion to add more keys to trigger the menu
13:36:08 <otaylor> juhp: currently somewhere in the thread there is discussion about bios key handling - I'm somewhat unsure of a lot of the details at this point :-)
13:36:20 <juhp> okay
13:37:06 <otaylor> ryanlerch: perhaps the work to move to the boot loader spec will make it easier to regenerate the grub config - since it conceptually splits out "what to boot" from the rest of the config
13:38:31 <otaylor> Do we want to vote on a statement of support?
13:38:54 <mclasen> sounds good to me
13:39:21 <cschalle> I am fine with us issuing such a statement, so +1 from me
13:40:00 <otaylor> proposed: the workstation working group supports the move to hiding the grub menu by default
13:40:05 <otaylor> +1
13:40:08 <mclasen> +1
13:40:52 <cschalle> +1
13:41:13 <otaylor> juhp ryanlerch ?
13:41:25 <ryanlerch> +1
13:41:27 <otaylor> rdieter ?
13:42:14 <juhp> +1
13:44:20 <otaylor> #agreed  the workstation working group supports the move to hiding the grub menu by default (+5;0;0)
13:44:38 <otaylor> anything else for today?
13:45:43 <otaylor> OK, I think that's all. Thanks everybody!
13:45:43 <mclasen> just one informational item
13:45:55 * otaylor holds off on endmeeting...
13:46:12 <mclasen> silverblue will show up in gnome boxes list of install options soon, fabiano is adding it to libosinfo as a separate item
13:47:38 <otaylor> mclasen: Do you know what the text/branding will be there?
13:47:39 <mclasen> thats all from me
13:47:56 <mclasen> I assume it will use the silverblue logo, but I haven't seen a screenshot
13:48:53 <otaylor> mclasen: I was wondering if it would be "Silverblue" or "Fedora Silverblue"
13:49:04 <mclasen> i'll find out
13:49:55 <mclasen> https://www.redhat.com/archives/libosinfo/2018-June/msg00007.html
13:50:04 <mclasen> looks like it currently says "Team Silverblue"
13:50:20 <mclasen> we can change it to Fedora Silverblue. would make sense to me
13:51:49 <otaylor> it might be less surprising
13:52:02 <otaylor> (I don't have a huge opinion on the matter however)
13:52:28 <otaylor> #info silverblue will show up in gnome boxes list of install options soon, it is being added to libosinfo as a separate item
13:52:29 <juhp> Well it's either Fedora or it's not :-)
13:55:02 <otaylor> juhp: I think Silverblue is pretty clearly Fedora :-)
13:55:23 <juhp> okay
13:55:26 <otaylor> OK - I think that's it then
13:55:35 <otaylor> #endmeeting