| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Meeting rules at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MeetingGuidelines -- Init process | ||
| * dwmw2_BOS arrives | ||
| tibbs | dwmw2_BOS: I was thinking about raising the issue of adding ExcludeArch to a package in a stable release. | |
|---|---|---|
| bpepple | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, caillon, c4chris, dgilmore, dwmw2, f13, jeremy, jwb, notting, spot, nirik, tibbs, warren | |
| Hi everybody; who's around? | ||
| * jeremy is here | ||
| tibbs here. | ||
| nirik is here. | ||
| f13 is here. | ||
| caillon | ||
| * wolfy lurking | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | tibbs: is there an issue to be addressed? Hopefully it shouldn't be something we're tempted to do, except in exceptional circumstances | |
| tibbs | dwmw2_BOS: Well, we have no rules about it that I know of. | |
| tibbs | I don't know if ppc64 is somehow special enough that excluding it for some things isn't really an issue. | |
| bpepple | ok, we can probably start. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: Misc - Features - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/8/FeatureList - poelcat | ||
| * dgilmore is here | ||
| bpepple | poelcat wanted to go over the last couple of features that haven't been completed on the wiki. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: Features - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureLaptopImprovements | ||
| tibbs | The FeatureList page seems to be out of date. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | tibbs: yes, it's special -- because we didn't have it in F7 release for most packages. | |
| but we'll come back to that later (or offline) | ||
| tibbs | Laptop Support is at 100% now. | |
| bpepple | tibbs: yeah, your right. must have been completed earlier this morning. | |
| * poelcat here | ||
| tibbs | Looks like it. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: Features - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureNetworkManager | ||
| caillon | pinged dcbw to update the page | |
| just to make sure that accurate information is there. | ||
| bpepple | ok. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | did the backlight problem get fixed? | |
| caillon | will follow up | |
| bpepple | caillon: thanks. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: Features: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureVirtSecurity | ||
| jeremy | danpb just sent an update on that one | |
| one small libvirt patch outstanding for everything to be enabled for qemu/kvm (has to pass an option when running them iirc), but everything else is there | ||
| bpepple | jeremy: cool. | |
| jeremy | he said he'd update the page too | |
| tibbs | It was updated today. | |
| bpepple | poelcat: is there anything else you want to add regarding features? | |
| poelcat | bpepple: nope that's good :) | |
| poelcat | thanks | |
| bpepple | ok, we can move on then. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| f13 | I'd like to discuss some of the F9 changes | |
| bpepple | there was nothing else set on the agenda for today, so is there anything people need to discuss? | |
| * bpepple is to slow a typer. | ||
| caillon | I have an annoucement, too, after f13. | |
| f13 | since we should coordinate and make clear what all we'd like to change. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: F9 changes - f13 | ||
| jwb_gone | wait... | |
| f13 | First off, we're going to more aggressively bring back the "Rawhide". | |
| * f13 waits. | ||
| jwb_gone | if caillon's announcement is quick, maybe it would be better to do that first | |
| f13 | sure, caillon go for it. | |
| caillon | quick makes it easy to do whenever, but sure | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora - caillon | ||
| caillon | next week, and for the next 3 months, I'll be in Brno, CZ. I might miss next week's meeting depending on timing... | |
| dgilmore | mbonnet: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=199362 thats a bug with a patch that fixes the problem | |
| jwb_gone | dgilmore, wrong channel :) | |
| dgilmore | jwb_gone: opps | |
| jwb_gone | caillon, ok. have fun in CZ :) | |
| nirik | caillon: cool. You gonna have net access out there? or off line? | |
| caillon | one of the things I wanted to do is promote communication with those guys and the rest of fedora, and if there are any suggestions for mini presentations on fedora, i'd like to hear them | |
| nirik: I hope the Red Hat office there has net access :) | ||
| f13 | caillon: I'd like to see them get more involved in things which could benifit from round the clock manning, like cvs admins, releng stuff, security, etc... | |
| caillon: language is a pretty hard barrier though :/ | ||
| caillon | f13: good points. | |
| poelcat | f13: language? | |
| notting | i dunno. they all seem to be able to do e-mail in english | |
| caillon | yeah, they do type english well, if not speak it | |
| * poelcat has nothing but great experiences working with the people there | ||
| * bpepple has a had good experiences with them also. | ||
| f13 | poelcat: I've had a hard time conversing with various folks from there | |
| * nirik isn't sure who all is out there... | ||
| caillon | f13: I've had issues speaking via phone with them, but in typing, they seem okay. | |
| f13 | poelcat: a lot of it is my inability to decypher their accent or tell if what I'm saying is being comprehended or washing over them. | |
| caillon | and some are better than many americans IMO at speaking. | |
| f13 | caillon: sure, in typing they're pretty good. | |
| caillon | just need to get the right ones :) | |
| f13 | nod | |
| caillon | anwyay, I'll talk to you offline about what I can talk about re: cvsadmin, releng | |
| f13 | and like I said, a lot of the problem is /me/ rather than them. | |
| jeremy | caillon: including the right americans? :) | |
| caillon | jeremy: the left leaning ones are better ;) | |
| bpepple | anything else regarding caillon's trip, or should we move on? | |
| dwmw2_BOS | caillon: I thought it was the ones around the edges, and not in the middle? | |
| caillon | heh | |
| notting | absinthe makes the heart grow fonder? | |
| f13 | we can probably move on. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- F9 Changes - f13 | ||
| f13 | First off, we're going to more aggressively bring back the "Rawhide". | |
| bpepple | f13: the floor is yours. | |
| f13 | This would involve changing bugzilla from having a 'devel' version to a 'rawhide' version | |
| changing the mirror directory from pub/fedora/linux/development/ to pub/fedora/linux/rawhide/ or even perhaps pub/fedora/linux/releases/rawhide (not real sure/comfortable on that) | ||
| f13 | and just about everywhere else you see things listed as Devel or Development to Rawhide, except for cvs. | |
| cvs... is special | ||
| caillon | i saw it riding the short yellow bus the other day | |
| f13 | also warren wants to change the cvs group from 'cvsextras' to 'cvspackagers' or some such | |
| at the same time, I'd like to change the number of test releases we do and freezes for them. | ||
| tibbs | More or less? | |
| notting | <garth> change? WE FEAR CHANGE> | |
| f13 | instead of doing three full test releases with full freezes involved cutting at least a month of development time, I'm proposing less, a beta, a release candidate, and then the final. | |
| jeremy | just packagers, not cvspackagers -- so that it's not tied to if we change VCS in the future | |
| f13 | between those we can do some snapshot releases, torrent only perhaps, that involve non-blocking package freezes. | |
| jeremy: oh right. | ||
| jeremy | f13: I think we have to somewhat commit to doing some form of additional snapshots in there | |
| f13: perhaps not the same full set of everything, but maybe a live image subset one week, installable images another ... | ||
| f13 | So around the normal test2 time I'd like to do a beta, that is a blocking freeze, and an RC at the final freeze point | |
| bpepple | f13: what does the QA guys think? | |
| wwoods | f13: still a month apart? | |
| poelcat | the delta between beta and RC will be huge? | |
| considering rawhide churn | ||
| f13 | jeremy: nod. details to be filled in. | |
| wwoods | how far between RC and final? | |
| f13 | wwoods: weeks? | |
| caillon | f13: is the RC at where test 3 normally is? or? | |
| f13 | wwoods: the idea woudl be RC is generated at final freeze time as soon as we can get a booting compose, and base all final fixes on thigns we find in the RCs | |
| wwoods | ah, so RC would fall between current test3 and final | |
| f13 | caillon: maybe halfway between current test3 and final freeze? | |
| caillon | ok | |
| wwoods | that idea I like | |
| f13 | the creation of the RC would essentially be the final freeze | |
| caillon | f13: how would that affect i18n, docs, etc? | |
| and are they signed on? | ||
| wwoods | I'm also open to the idea of dropping test1, since it's generally kind of.. raw | |
| half the features aren't even in yet | ||
| f13 | caillon: I haven't proposed it to anybody outside of this irc channel yet. | |
| caillon | k | |
| wwoods | it's kind of a waste to freeze/stabilize/release for something that doesn't even have the features we want tested | |
| f13 | wwoods: we'd want to do non-blocking snapshots around the test1 time frame. | |
| wwoods | right | |
| if we can properly mobilize people to make rawhide more stable and testable | ||
| f13 | caillon: they'd have to revise their schedules obviously | |
| THe motivation is to stop getting in developments way, have fewer blocking freezes | ||
| wwoods | then I'm happy to talk about this stuff some more | |
| tibbs | It would be a good idea to set dates for things like cleaning up depenency issues and such. | |
| * spoleeba makes a note to review this chat log | ||
| f13 | but still have the ability to get somewhat known good trees into people's hands | |
| caillon | f13: right. i guess i meant more of "does it impact them to the point where it's no longer possible for them to get things done" | |
| f13 | tibbs: right, we don't even really have that today. | |
| caillon | but i guess we need to talk to them first | |
| anyway, i'm not opposed. | ||
| f13 | caillon: I wouldn't think so, but their input is really wanted. | |
| caillon | nod | |
| f13 | I feel that if this subject is not immediately thrown out, it deserves it's own meeting with all interested parties welcome to join | |
| IRC of course | ||
| where we can discuss the idea, the schedule impact for each groups, etc.. and try to have something in place for the start of F9 planning | ||
| tibbs | Is it fair to ask people to let fedora-devel know if they're building something that has the potential to introduce significant instability in rawhide? | |
| caillon | sounds good to me | |
| wwoods | normally we do snapshots because rawhide churns so hard that it's infrequently installable/testable | |
| presuming that rawhide is constantly stable enough to install and test | ||
| freezing for snapshots becomes mostly unnecessary | ||
| if that's the goal, then I say HECK YEAH | ||
| tibbs | rawhide has been pretty good throughout the F8 cycle. | |
| f13 | wwoods: I don't think we can assume that rawhide won't be unstable. | |
| wwoods: that said, we can still make use of koji's freeze tags, we just don't have to compose rawhide from them. | ||
| bpepple | tibbs: agreed. | |
| wwoods | f13: right, but I think we can change the assumption that it's OK if rawhide is completely hosed | |
| dgilmore | wwoods: weekly rawhide installable snapshots? | |
| f13 | wwoods: we can still have mini-freezes for compose purposes but not distruptive ones. | |
| caillon | i'd argue that rawhide should never really be unstable. the mozilla guys have gotten this part right. | |
| wwoods | it's still gonna be unstable at times, but we want to aim for "occasionally", not "usually" | |
| caillon | they back stuff out without hesitation if something breaks shit, and is unplanned. | |
| f13 | caillon: I'd agree if there weren't so many moving parts and interdependant stacks maintained by different people on different schedules. | |
| wwoods | well. we want to aim for "never" and hit "rarely" or "infrequently" | |
| nirik | mini-freeze each week so friday/monday people strive for more stable? | |
| * poelcat votes for a separate meeting + a proposed schedule or two to illustrate the proposal | ||
| tibbs | We have difficulty backing things out, though. | |
| Unless you like to see epochs tend towards infinity. | ||
| caillon | f13: but we can get them to say "hey, guys, i'm gonna be breaking this shit" | |
| for the most part, people know when they are about to do that | ||
| tibbs | nirik: The problem with things like that is the community doesn't follow a work-week. | |
| Some people only have the weekends to spare for Fedora work. | ||
| jeremy | like "here comes python 2.6. batten down the hatches, it's going to be a rough week" (not sure if python 2.6 matches our schedule off-hand, but it's a good example case) | |
| spoleeba | tibbs, amen | |
| notting | i mean, you're always going to have the 'oops, policy broke today' moments | |
| f13 | caillon: yes, we could certainly do with more heads ups. | |
| caillon | jeremy: right. that type of breakage should be allowed if we have notification | |
| nirik | true, but if there was some schedule about major possibly braking things changes, and when to stablize it might help | |
| wwoods | especially now that koji is public and we can say "policy broke, you can get the hotfix straight from here" | |
| things are a lot nicer in rawhide-land | ||
| f13 | and if we get some multilib yum love we could make the static-repos more consumable. | |
| jeremy | wwoods: yeah, that's a huge help. if we can get to where static-repos is done more often, that'll help even more | |
| f13 | IE multilib calculation done on the client at install time rather than in the repo at compose time. | |
| * nirik would really really really like to see multilib revisted in f9... and early in the cycle too. | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | indeed | |
| f13 | I keep starting and stopping a proposal to get people together for that. | |
| I'm having a hard time putting the problem space into words. | ||
| wwoods | nirik: yeah, we're moving the multilib tracker to F9Target. Maybe F9Blocker | |
| f13 | but that's a discussion for another time. | |
| caillon | (yes please) | |
| nirik | do we have any high level "should really get done for f9" list? make sure we don't forget to do some of these things? I guess the blocker bugs. | |
| f13 | anyway, since there seems to be general agreement in here with the schedule change, then I'll move forward with it. | |
| caillon | f13: sounds good | |
| wwoods | nirik: NM by default, Multilib..? | |
| f13 | also I wanted to hear feedback on the 'branch early' option we introduced this release, if people think it's going well or is useful. | |
| jeremy | nirik: I'd like to see some sort of "let's get together feature ideas" phase... where people actually write up and take ownership of feature pages | |
| caillon | jeremy: *cough*fudcon*cough* | |
| * mclasen really likes the branch early option | ||
| nirik | wwoods: yeah, those 2 for sure... | |
| f13 | caillon: too late to be relevant. | |
| nirik | jeremy: agreed. | |
| bpepple | f13: seems good to me, I haven't head anyone complain about it. | |
| wwoods | YARLY. I wish for a pony and a post-release FUDCON every 6 months. | |
| f13 | caillon: to be relevant fudcon needs to happen pretty much at a fedora release time. | |
| nirik | I think it's helped a few people... not many are taking advantage of it tho | |
| tibbs | Some people don't really understand the branch-early thing, but those who actually need it have it now and are happy. | |
| f13 | good. | |
| caillon | f13: maybe we should start having relevant fudcons then instead of the irrelevant ones :) | |
| f13 | caillon: yeah, I've suggested this. gregdek is rolling the dice on an early Dec fudcon which would be pretty Fedora 9 relevant. | |
| caillon: but he gives it a 20% chance. We have a better chance at a Fedora 10 relevant fudcon in May | ||
| * caillon should have fudcon.cz | ||
| f13 | caillon: you should also host a Fedora 8 release party.cz | |
| bpepple | f13: are there any other F9 changes you wanted to bring up? | |
| caillon | f13: good plan | |
| f13 | I think that's it from a high level. | |
| bpepple | f13: cool. thanks. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| f13 | I'll work more on a proposal for a "town meeting" of sorts. | |
| bpepple | anything else people want to discuss? | |
| nirik | would it be worthwhile to have a post f8 release irc thing in #fedora or the like... get input from what people liked/didn't like about the release? Just a thought. | |
| caillon | you typically find that out without doing that | |
| tibbs | Was there any more discussion about fudcon? I recall mention of one in December. | |
| jwb_gone | sorry, had to step away. did we figure out _why_ we're doing the rawhide renaming thing? | |
| caillon | the moz guys do this though with the people involved in the release. e.g. rel-eng, qa, engineering, planning, etc. | |
| f13 | tibbs: I haven't seen an update from gregdek on it yet. | |
| wwoods | jwb_gone: because we want rawhide to be more stable and we want more people to use it | |
| caillon | we figure out what we could do better with getting the next release out | |
| nirik | I suppose. I think it would be nice to get more community input... but yeah, a lessons learned post release for developers would be nice too. | |
| bpepple | jwb_gone: to be more consistent for one. | |
| * jwb_gone sighs | ||
| jwb_gone | ok | |
| caillon | fwiw, i think that rawhide has already gotten a bad rap as the unstable thing | |
| f13 | jwb_gone: because we want to stregthen the brand of rawhide, stop the confusion between rawhide vs development, etc.. | |
| tibbs | Some of us need to request travel allowances early. Governments move slowly, after all. | |
| caillon | we might consider using a newer, cooler name | |
| wwoods | I still think it would be cool if we named the releases at the *start* of the cycle | |
| f13 | wwoods: we could certainly consider that. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | with utf-8 in :) | |
| nim-nim | bpepple: I'm creating a fonts SIG do I need it approived somewhere? | |
| wwoods | rather than just reusing "rawhide" as the codename for every release | |
| f13 | wwoods: there is no real reason why we name it late, other than things are slower later and we cna get more eyes on the name and such. | |
| wwoods | up until the point at which we bless it with a name | |
| jeremy | wwoods: yeah. we used to have the per-release internal codename (more of a project name) and then the external final codename | |
| dwmw2_BOS | wwoods: actually, giving it the name early and calling it that instead of rawhide does make a lot of sense | |
| notting | what won, anyway? | |
| f13 | notting: warewolf. | |
| wwoods | f13: right, so we'd just have to double-step to name F9 early. and then | |
| bpepple | nim-nim: nope. | |
| nim-nim | bpepple: ok, just wanted to be sure | |
| wwoods | err. and then we'd have an actual name for the thing we're developing. which might help branding a bit. | |
| f13 | wwoods: does that mean we do away with "rawhide" all together then? | |
| wwoods | but I'm no marketing guy. | |
| jeremy | nim-nim: thanks for stepping up to drive that, btw | |
| caillon | notting: you thought kvass had a chance? | |
| * caillon expected werewolf to landslide win | ||
| f13 | it was less than a 50% win | |
| * bpepple agrees with caillon | ||
| nim-nim | jeremy: thanks but I'll expect more victims to help soon | |
| notting | caillon: not really. but i figured i'd ask | |
| wwoods | f13: I dunno? I suspect people will keep using it out of habit, but.. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | f13: there were spoiled ballots? I thought there were only two choices? | |
| caillon | f13: as in 70/30? | |
| wwoods | it'd certainly help if there was a "werewolf" version in bugzilla | |
| tibbs | I was pulling for a non-ascii name. | |
| f13 | caillon: yeah, closer to 70/30 | |
| wwoods | and everyone knew the next release was going to be called "werewolf" | |
| dwmw2_BOS | ok, rawhide installed. | |
| f13 | wwoods: do you really want to use the codename in bugzilla? | |
| caillon | wwoods: it would really help if bugzilla would look at people's useragents and just maybe, if they are using one with a fedora version in it, actually pre-select it. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | sweepstake on how long before I have to disable selinux this time? :) | |
| wwoods | f13: we already do! even worse, we use the same code name every time! | |
| f13 | dwmw2_BOS: try using it in permissive mode, it stays on much longer and you identify problems. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | f13: yeah, good idea | |
| wwoods | caillon: there's a lot of information we'd want to pull from the client machine, which is why I want to make a bugzilla client, based on python-bugzilla | |
| f13 | wwoods: that's because rawhide is rawhide is rawhide... | |
| bpepple | ok, is there anything else, or should we wrap up? | |
| wwoods | caillon: but, yeah | |
| f13 | I think we should wrap. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | tibbs: did you want to discuss... er.. something? | |
| oh, arch exclusions | ||
| tibbs | Well, there was some consternation over it earlier in the week. | |
| Someone added an excludearch to a library package and didn't announce it anywhere. | ||
| That broke consumers of the library. | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | what library package? What was the problem which led to the excludearch? | |
| jima | shocking, that. | |
| tibbs | I wasn't sure if it was remotely OK to add an excludearch to a package within a stable release. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | hopefull there was at least a bug filed? | |
| in general, it shouldn't be needed. | ||
| tibbs | It was one of Ralf's package; osgcal or something like it. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | stable updates aren't supposed to be massively intrusive and break stuff | |
| tibbs | Well, yeah. I don't know the circumstances. | |
| f13 | it hadn't been built for that arch prior to | |
| so it wasn't as if a package went away. | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | f13: ah, right | |
| f13 | it just continued not to be there. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | fine, so it just shouldn't be an issue | |
| f13 | so it's a bad example to a real issue | |
| tibbs | Then how did it break things that weren't broken before? | |
| dwmw2_BOS | packages going _away_ when they used to build would be something we care about | |
| bpepple | dwmw2_BOS: agreed. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | tibbs: probably because those things hadn't been built for ppc64 before either | |
| nirik | tibbs: the packages hadn't been rebuilt since ppc64 appeared | |
| dwmw2_BOS | they hadn't been rebuilt since we added ppc64 to Extrass | |
| f13 | tibbs: it didn't actually break things, chris just blew up again like he always does | |
| tibbs | Now you know why I was somewhat reticent to discuss this. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | and I've been a lot slower with the ppc64 ExcludeArch tracker than I am with the ppc one, because ppc64 userspace just isn't interesting, for the most part. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | :) | |
| anyway, the best answer is for all affected packages to file a bug, put them on the ExcludeArch tracker | ||
| and forget it until someone makes osgcal build | ||
| bpepple | tibbs: anything else on this? | |
| tibbs | Nope. | |
| bpepple | ok, let's wrap up then. | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 60 | ||
| bpepple will end the meeting in 30 | ||
| bpepple will end the meeting in 15 | ||
| bpepple | -- MARK -- Meeting End | |
| Thanks, everyone! | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!