| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Meeting rules at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MeetingGuidelines -- Init process | ||
| bpepple | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, caillon, c4chris, dgilmore, dwmw2, f13, jeremy, jwb, notting, spot, nirik, tibbs, warren | |
|---|---|---|
| Hi everybody; who's around? | ||
| * tibbs here | ||
| notting is here | ||
| jwb is here | ||
| centosian is lurking | ||
| warren here | ||
| poelcat here | ||
| jeremy | ||
| dgilmore is present and accounted for | ||
| caillon | ||
| * nirik is here. | ||
| bpepple | ok, we probably get started.... | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: MISC - Proposal Template: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/FESCoProposalTemplateDraft - f13 | ||
| notting | whoa. meta. | |
| tibbs | I was going to use this, but then I realized that I don't actually understand what "Problem Space" and "Scope" mean in context. | |
| dgilmore | bpepple: that looks useful | |
| tibbs | I'm not really good with the newspeak. | |
| f13 | bpepple: here. | |
| bpepple | f13: we're just looking at your template so far. | |
| f13 | tibbs: problem space is "what problem are you seeking to solve" | |
| dgilmore | tibbs: whats your problem. and what is it going to effect | |
| f13 | tibbs: "scope" is "what all things will this proposal touch on and change" | |
| caillon | tibbs, see the "Active Ingredients" section | |
| tibbs | "## Describe the scope of what all things will be effected by the proposal" | |
| f13 | I'd love to see suggestions for clearer text in teh comments. | |
| * c4chris here now -- Hi folks | ||
| tibbs | I guess I'm just dumb, that that doesn't mean all that much to me. Sorry. | |
| nirik | how about adding 'Owner(s)' ? someone who is managing and pushing the proposal? | |
| caillon | tibbs, it might make more sense if you s/the scope of// | |
| f13 | nirik: good suggestion! | |
| notting | f13: *cough* affected | |
| * jeremy wonders if we're getting too tied up in our own bureaucracy | ||
| f13 | notting: I always get that wrong. | |
| jeremy: I'm not trying to add more bureaucracy. Using the template is optional. | ||
| caillon | tibbs, which is more clear i suppose (after you get past the "what all" ;-) | |
| bpepple | jeremy: I don't think we're going to force anyone to use this, but we would prefer them to. | |
| f13 | I'm just trying to provide an accepted template that folks cna use if they wish when bringing proposals to FESCo. It helps me personally with my proposals, I think it can help others. | |
| bpepple | f13: +1, I'm all for this. | |
| f13 | tibbs: I'll gladly replace the text with something that makes sense to you | |
| tibbs | I like the idea of a template. It's just that I think some corporate people have seen that terminology before but I'm a lowly academic. | |
| nirik | I'm fine with it being suggested, but not required. Not sure fesco needs to take any action other than say 'use this if you like'? | |
| * dwmw2_BOS appears | ||
| jeremy isn't against it, just thinks that something for us all to think about over the next little bit is what role we want fesco filling | ||
| f13 | tibbs: so, how about some language that makes sense to you? | |
| tibbs | Well, I have a proposal to propose later, so I'll try filling in the gaps and see where it gets me. | |
| f13 | k | |
| c4chris | looks fine to me. I'd maybe just add one topic like "decision seeked" or something to that effect | |
| f13 | c4chris: that's near the bottom | |
| bpepple | f13: where are you going to put this on the wiki? Somewhere in the development namespace? | |
| f13 | bpepple: I'm not really sure. THe FESCo namespace has some information about how to add topics for discussion right? It should be linked to there | |
| f13 | oh, as far as where the /template/ itself goes, | |
| bpepple | f13: that sounds good. | |
| * warren has no strong opinion on this. | ||
| f13 | bpepple: yeah, probably somewhere in Development/ | |
| f13 | ok, so I don't think anybody is against it,a nd we can tweak the template as we go. We can probably move on | |
| bpepple | f13: cool. | |
| moving on... | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: MISC - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/AwolRenameProposal - f13 | ||
| f13 | This should be pretty straight forward, just a s/AWOL/MIA/ | |
| tibbs | Fine by me. | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1. I don't have any problem with that. | |
| nirik | MIA is still not ideal, but I can't think of anything better. ;) +1 | |
| notting | +1. awaiting POW/MIA packager bumperstickers | |
| f13 | nirik: how makes you feel that MIA isn't ideal? | |
| jeremy | sure. +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| caillon | does it have to be an acronym? | |
| non-responsive is the most accurate term, really. | ||
| nirik | still sounds miltary.. who are we at war with? Should we be sending a rescue team to look for our MIA packagers? | |
| caillon | (which I pointed out on a mailing list somewhere a while ago) | |
| * jeremy likes non-responsive too | ||
| warren | nirik, we never leave anyone behind. Except when we do. | |
| f13 | *shrug* I can easily call it 'non-responsive' | |
| warren | I think I prefer MIA | |
| f13 | anbody opposed to that term instead of AWOL/MIA? | |
| dwmw2_BOS | I think AWOL is easier | |
| I don't really care though | ||
| warren | does AWOL make sense to non-americans? | |
| caillon | i don't want to imply that our contributors need to request leave before going absent | |
| dwmw2_BOS | yes | |
| caillon | because that's not the case | |
| c4chris | warren: no | |
| f13 | right, AWOL is hostile | |
| * dgilmore has no strong opinion | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | caillon: one would have to be rather... strange.. to make that inference | |
| f13 | MIA isn't, but apparently still rubs people the wrong way? | |
| * bpepple doesn't really have a strong opinion either. | ||
| f13 | dwmw2_BOS: AWOL stands for Absence Without Leave... | |
| dwmw2_BOS | I think we're being silly | |
| smooge | I think any phrase is going to rub some people wrong | |
| dwmw2_BOS | f13: I know what it stands for | |
| sm|CPU SmootherFrOgZ smooge | ||
| tibbs | Do we have any examples of anyone who was actually offended by the current wording? | |
| SmootherFrOgZ smooge | ||
| * nirik doesn't care that strongly either... MIA is not ideal, but ok, non-responsive is fine. | ||
| bpepple | smooge: agreed. | |
| tibbs | If so, what would they find non-offensive? | |
| warren | AWOL implies that they did something wrong. MIA doesn't imply anything. | |
| f13 | tibbs: there were complaints on mailing lists, which led me to doing this proposal. | |
| dwmw2_BOS | tibbs: and can we take them out back and shoot them, thus solving the problem? :) | |
| f13: got references? | ||
| f13 | dwmw2_BOS: not handy | |
| smooge | I think MIA is better than AWOL. War Prisoner might be a third term | |
| f13 | ok, this is getting silly | |
| bpepple | f13: agreed. | |
| warren | +1 MIA | |
| f13 | does anybody feel strongly about MIA vs non-responsive? | |
| tibbs | I'm so difficult to offend that I can't tell what would be offensive. | |
| c4chris | no | |
| bpepple | f13: no | |
| dwmw2_BOS | I'm offended by the idea that we might need to change it just because some people are being stupid | |
| * caillon would much prefer non-responsive, but i'm not even sure why we're voting on these things, to begin with :) | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | Let's stick to AWOL | |
| smooge | dwmw2_BOS, when aren't you offended :) | |
| f13 | caillon: to avoid revert wars? | |
| jeremy | caillon: indeed | |
| f13 | tell ya what, I'll just change it and ya'll can deal with it. | |
| caillon | f13, i meant to imply this doesn't strike me as something that *fesco* should be dealing with ;) | |
| dwmw2_BOS | smooge: good point | |
| tibbs | The thing is, AWOL does have a defined meaning, as does MIA. Do either of those actually match with what we want to say? | |
| smooge | dwmw2_BOS, No offense meant of course :P | |
| MIA matches what we are trying to say | ||
| nirik | Missing in action is a status assigned to a member of the armed services who is reported missing following combat and may be injured, captured, or dead. | |
| f13 | nirik: it's applied to a lot more than the armed service | |
| but that's likely the origination | ||
| abadger1999 | Neither are perfect matches. I like non-responsive much better from that standpoint. | |
| * caillon votes to send this to our PR SIG | ||
| f13 | fine, non-responsive it is. Next? | |
| nirik | moveon++ | |
| bpepple | agreed. moving on.... | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: MISC - Automated MIA Proposal - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JesseKeating/AutomatedMIAProposal - f13 | ||
| tibbs | Sure, non-responsive +1. And if we really have a PR SIG, by all means give it to them. | |
| f13 | this proposal has a bit more meat. | |
| caillon | tibbs, heh | |
| note to whoever's reading the minutes: start a PR SIG! :-) | ||
| * smooge puts on the list | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | I don't like MIA. The whole point is that there's _no_ action | |
| missing in inaction? | ||
| warren | isn't that the purpose of fedora marketing? | |
| f13 | dwmw2_BOS: They were in action at some point, they brought a package to Fedora. | |
| dwmw2_BOS: now they're missing. | ||
| tibbs | RE Automated*Proposal, I like it but do we have buy-in from the bugzilla admins since that runs into Red Hat territory? | |
| f13 | dwmw2_BOS: but we've moved on from that topic. | |
| nirik | I think the automated thing sounds great at this high level. We may need to adjust/provide feedback on specific things, but if people are willing to work on it, I say +1. | |
| f13 | tibbs: I haven't talked specifically with them, but so long as we're using the api provided and not inventing new bugzilla things we should be OK. | |
| nirik | also, I think the comment from the list is good that it should always take a human at the end looking over things before it orphans/removes maintainer... | |
| f13 | nirik: I personally think that just gums up the works. | |
| caillon | f13, the only concern i have is that people shouldn't have to keep emailing someone with "i'm not dead yet". fixing bugs and rebuilding packages should be sufficient. | |
| tibbs | I thougyht there was something about keywords or flags. Keywords, I guess, are unstructured and we can make them up, but flags require someone to program something, don't they? | |
| f13 | caillon: automation doesn't require responding to a mail. | |
| caillon: it requires commenting on a bug. | ||
| an already open bug for a specific reason. | ||
| caillon | any bug? or a specific bug | |
| f13 | caillon: specific bugs | |
| caillon: the proposal would only allow a specific class of bugs to be considered for automation | ||
| tibbs | Things like "your package failed to build in rawhide". | |
| f13 | caillon: bugs like broken deps, package conflicts, broken upgrade paths, etc... | |
| nirik | well, I suppose it depends on how good the detection is... at least at first it would be good to have a human check it over before it starts marking people gone. | |
| f13 | the type of bugs where we really do want a response of some kind in a reasonable manner | |
| nirik: I'm ok with a staged deployment | ||
| and FESCo would get another opportunity to review/etc.. before anything is turned on | ||
| warren | sounds good | |
| f13 | but this proposal will give people something to work from and a goal to get to | |
| bpepple | +1 to proposal. | |
| tibbs | +1 | |
| warren | +1 | |
| nirik | yeah, +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| * poelcat wonders what this will do to the already 13K open bug count | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | +1 | |
| can we cry about the word 'orphan' too, because it implies death? | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| dwmw2_BOS: it's a hard knock life | ||
| bpepple | dwmw2_BOS: ;) | |
| ok, I see nine '+1', so the proposal has been approved. | ||
| * c4chris passes a hanky to dwmw2_BOS | ||
| dwmw2_BOS sneezes into it | ||
| dgilmore | dwmw2_BOS: it just means your parents dont want you anymore | |
| bpepple | anything else? or should we move on? | |
| dgilmore | bpepple: move on | |
| * nirik is reminded of a place that got mad about dns 'slave' servers. | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JasonTibbitts/MergeReviews -- tibbs, nirik | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | heh. Didn't we have that idiocy about USB too? | |
| We have USB 'gadget' support in the kernel isntead of USB slave :) | ||
| f13 | I +1 their proposal. | |
| bpepple | +1 here also. | |
| tibbs | I don't pretend that the mandatory set in @base is actually a useful system, but it at least gives us a place to direct our efforts. | |
| f13 | nod | |
| jeremy | tibbs: I think this is a great way to start really making some progress | |
| and to have a defined target, etc | ||
| caillon | it's a small enough base to not be impossible even | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| dwmw2_BOS | +1 | |
| nirik | yeah, looks good. FYI, tibbs did the work on this... I slacked. ;) I can start doing some of the reviews tho. ;) | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| warren | +1 | |
| caillon | +1 | |
| tibbs | I will go through the 15, double check the flags and ping if necessary. | |
| jeremy | _1 | |
| +1 even | ||
| tibbs | Then should I post the final list of ungrabbed reviews to fedora-devel? Or indicate this by a keyword or something? | |
| notting | +1 | |
| nirik | I would think post would be good...and/or use the wiki page list... | |
| spot | +1 | |
| bpepple | tibbs: I think posting to the -devel list is a good idea. | |
| jeremy | tibbs: I'd just post a list (or post a link to the page) | |
| c4chris | I think a post would be good | |
| caillon | tibbs, add to F9Blocker/Target? | |
| (how badly do we want these reviewed for F9) | ||
| tibbs | I will also gather links to all of those reviews so you don't have to search for them. | |
| Finally, I can keep a list updated and post it periodically if folks would like that. | ||
| * jeremy is okay with sticking on F9Blocker for now. we can always re-evaluate based on the status before the feature freeze | ||
| caillon | or maybe file a generic "Review these packages for F9" bug so we can just look at the dependency list | |
| bpepple | jeremy: +1 | |
| caillon | and then stick THAT on the blocker list | |
| tibbs | Anyone disagree with caillon? | |
| c4chris | caillon: I like this | |
| tibbs | Seems reasonable to me. | |
| bpepple | I'm fine with it. | |
| notting | +1 | |
| * nirik thinks that sounds great. | ||
| dwmw2_BOS | makes snse | |
| nirik | fyi, the rpm review is just waiting for license checking. If anyone wants to help on that... ;) | |
| tibbs | OK, I'll do that and then post to fedora-devel-list. | |
| bpepple | tibbs: anything else on the merge reviews, or should we move on? | |
| tibbs | I'm done. | |
| bpepple | tibbs: great, thanks. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: MISC - FESCo meeting schedule over the holidays - all | ||
| * nirik personally should be around... so thursdays still work for me. | ||
| f13 | I'm around as well | |
| bpepple | ok, we've got meetings scheduled for dec. 27, and jan 3. is that going to work for people? or do we cancel or reschedule? | |
| warren | as-is, good for me. | |
| c4chris | 20 - ok; 27 - not sure | |
| * spot won't be around on the 27th. | ||
| caillon | I'm out dec 27 | |
| * notting is probably out for both | ||
| tibbs | I'm around on the 27th. | |
| jeremy | I suspect that skipping the 27th makes sense | |
| f13 | but I wonder if we have folks that aren't going to be around if we should delay voting on anything non-pressing sot hat we don't have the appearence of "sneaking" something in. | |
| warren | only meeting I can't make is Jan 3rd | |
| f13, require 7 votes to pass anything? | ||
| bpepple | how about we cancel the 27th meeting, and try to keep the one on the 3rd. | |
| c4chris | bpepple: +1 | |
| warren | Jan 3rd I wont be able to make. | |
| nirik | bpepple: +1 | |
| f13 | bpepple: +1 | |
| warren | but if the majority prefers that, then OK> | |
| caillon | bpepple, sure | |
| jeremy | sounds like a good plan. +1 | |
| tibbs | Either way is fine with me; I'll be online both days so if someone calls a meeting then I'll be there. | |
| notting | +1, sure | |
| spot | +1 | |
| bpepple | ok, it sounds like the majority is fine with that, so let's plan on cancelling the 27th meeting, and keeping the meeting on jan. 3rd. | |
| warren | let's move on? | |
| bpepple | ok, moving on.... | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- New Features - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Dashboard - poelcat | ||
| tibbs | warren: If you just want to chat on the 27th, I'm here for you man. | |
| bpepple | poelcat: you want to lead this? | |
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: Vote to accept http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/VirtAuthentication | ||
| f13 | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| f13 | (I reviewed ahead of time!!) | |
| notting | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| warren | +1 | |
| tibbs | "FreeIPA, and ActiveDirectory" but no plain kerberos? | |
| spot | +1 | |
| caillon | +1 | |
| tibbs | But +1 anyway; better kerberos integration is another proposal, I guess. | |
| f13 | tibbs: I think freeipa provides kerb | |
| jeremy | tibbs: plain kerberos doesn't have directory functionality... you always have to have kerberos+<something> | |
| * poelcat notes the +1s have it | ||
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: Vote to accept http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/VirtPolicyKit | ||
| jeremy | freeipa and activedirectory are both kerberos+ldap. you could also do nis or hesiod ;) | |
| caillon | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1, seems like a no-brainer. | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| warren | +1 | |
| spot | +1 | |
| f13 | _1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| f13 | +1 even. | |
| * poelcat notes the +1s have it | ||
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: Vote to accept http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureMoreNetworkManager | ||
| caillon | +1 | |
| spot | +1 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| warren | before adding a vote, one question | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| warren | I see no mention of ifup/ifdown compatibility. Are we just going to drop that? | |
| There was prior mention of ifup/ifdown compat in the past. | ||
| caillon | warren, "more" not "all" | |
| nirik | so would this include making NM default on all installs? | |
| warren | oh. | |
| Yes, would this be default on all installs? | ||
| caillon | but we're not supposed to be shooting down features on whether we like a feature or not. if its a good marketing thing, we should be accepting it, AIUI. | |
| nirik | I guess it depends on how far it gets... | |
| yeah, so +1... | ||
| warren | caillon, I don't plan to shoot it down, was just asking for clarification. | |
| +1 | ||
| caillon | warren, ah. i'd ask dcbw after the meeting | |
| * poelcat notes the +1s have it | ||
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: Vote to accept http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/K12Linux | ||
| caillon | isn't the board supposed to be approving spins? | |
| dgilmore | caillon: its not a spin | |
| f13 | I didn't think this was a spin | |
| pjones | -1 | |
| what are we talking about? | ||
| ;) | ||
| f13 | just an effort to improve some Fedora infrastructure so that it can be used in K12LTSP scenarios easier. | |
| caillon | f13, the first thing in "contents" makes me believe otherwise :) | |
| nirik | yeah, I see no spin mentions. | |
| tibbs | warren: Did all of the reviews pass? I saw that some of them were problematic. | |
| warren | pjones, you are a fucking ass. | |
| tibbs, none of the new packages were submitted yet | ||
| dgilmore | warren: thats really inappropriate in a meeting | |
| warren | tibbs, the existing packages sititng there are being thrown out | |
| dgilmore, I'm sorry. | ||
| nirik | so again, I think this is good and we will see how far the feature gets... +1 | |
| warren | The feature request is not about the spin, but rather the feature itself. | |
| dgilmore | +1 from me | |
| spot | does this require a mkinitrd rewrite? | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| warren | The spin comes later if the feature pans out. | |
| spot, no. | ||
| bpepple | +1 | |
| spot | +1 | |
| pjones | spot: not a rewrite, but significant changes. | |
| f13 | +1 from me, I'd like things to work better for the LTSP folks. | |
| warren | spot, I implemented a few patches for mkinitrd that are necessary | |
| f13 | it'll make my Linux Fest Northwest event a lot more fun | |
| warren | pjones, did you even review what I asked you to look at? they are not significant at all. | |
| tibbs | warren: So that bash-initrd work you were doing is orthogonal? | |
| warren | tibbs, yes | |
| tibbs | Cool. Just trying to untangle everything in my head. | |
| warren | tibbs, I backported the network boot features to minimal patches for upstream | |
| pjones | warren: I was under the impression, since you told me so, that you'd need more changes than just what you'd sent me so far? | |
| warren | pjones, that's the minimum to get it to work. | |
| pjones, git clone http://fedorapeople.org/~wtogami/mkinitrd-upstream-proposed/ | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| tibbs | +1 in any case, although I'd advise those new package review requests to get in soon. | |
| warren | tibbs, that's the plan, likely to submit before Christmas | |
| pjones | (btw, my -1 up above was entirely a joke) | |
| warren | tibbs, spent most of the past 2 months unfscking upstream | |
| caillon | +1 i guess | |
| poelcat | is that 7 +1s ? | |
| caillon | pjones, oh bah, you're changing your vote? i only voted +1 since you were voting -1 :p | |
| * pjones falls over laughing | ||
| caillon | ;) | |
| warren | pjones, I would really appreciate it if you could review the proposed changes for upstream, they are a lot less invasive than bash-branch and heavily tested. | |
| bpepple | poelcat: yeah, I see eight '+1' | |
| nirik | poelcat: 8 looks like. | |
| pjones | I'm +1 on the idea. | |
| bpepple | poelcat: anything else? or should we move on? | |
| warren | move on | |
| poelcat | That is it for features today... http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Dashboard contains some others not quite ready | |
| bpepple | poelcat: great, thanks. | |
| nirik | thanks poelcat | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| caillon | who's going to fudcon? | |
| bpepple | ok, anything else people wish to discuss before wrapping it for today? | |
| notting | me! | |
| jima | -1 | |
| tibbs | I had something... | |
| * nirik hopes to... is the hotel code finalized yet? | ||
| f13 | caillon: I'm there. | |
| tibbs | While working on the minimal package set, I noticed that @base and @core aren't really well defined any more. | |
| pjones | caillon: not determined yet, budget for travel is on paulc's desk. | |
| caillon | nirik, i know we have rates, not sure about the code | |
| bpepple | caillon: unlikely. | |
| * caillon will try to be there via TV | ||
| nirik | yeah, my work wants all the hotel info before they book anything... ;( | |
| tibbs | What I'm thinking of doing is coming up with one minimal package group; the mandatory packages are the absolute minimum required to boot a system, and the default packages are just enough to download and install packages. | |
| c4chris | tibbs: that would be good I think | |
| warren | nirik, talk to spevack | |
| nirik | tibbs: sounds great, but might need some poking to get the set not to be huge... I am sure there are still some nasty dependencies and pull in too much still. | |
| tibbs | Well, @base is pretty small (114 packages + kernel) | |
| jeremy | tibbs: @core should be enough to get to a login prompt (and there's not much "fat" there... I've been doing a lot of @core live cds) | |
| tibbs | But @base and @core have almost exactly the same package footprint. | |
| jeremy | tibbs: @base should add bits to be a little bit more .. umm... useful | |
| f13 | tibbs: I like hte idea. Merging the two into one group and making it less confusing would be nice | |
| jeremy: the reality of @core depsolved and @base depsolved results in not that much difference. | ||
| or so it seemed from conversations with tibbs | ||
| jeremy | tibbs: I'll have to try an @base in a little bit... but there was a substantial different the last time I looked | |
| (eg, you actually have things like dhclient in @base :) | ||
| and yum | ||
| f13 | anywho, is it really necessary to have two groups for that though? | |
| instead of mandatory / default split? | ||
| I suppose it is if you want to just hide one group and it's always selected | ||
| jeremy | right | |
| and also, there are plenty of docs, etc that refer to the current way | ||
| f13 | does kickstart /always/ select @core though? | |
| tibbs | No, it always selects @base unless you do %packages --baseonly. | |
| c4chris | dunno, but it looks different to me to 'just boot' and to 'get an environment wheer you can download more packages and do stuff' | |
| tibbs | Sorry, %packages --nobase | |
| f13 | which seems odd to me. | |
| jeremy | @core always gets selected | |
| @base gets selected unless you do --nobase | ||
| f13 | I bet I don't handle that right in pungi | |
| jeremy | (because of hystorical reasons) | |
| tibbs | That would explain my confusion; I'm just working from what pungi gathers. | |
| At the very least there's a need to document and rationalize this. | ||
| f13 | jeremy: that's an anacondaism outside of pykickstart isn't it? | |
| jeremy | f13: yes | |
| * f13 files pungi ticket. | ||
| poelcat | RE: feature pages on the wiki... would there be any objections to moving all F9 pages to the wiki/Features namespace (if they aren't there already) | |
| to keep thing tidy and organized | ||
| c4chris | poelcat: fine | |
| * poelcat wasn't sure how much visibility something like this needed | ||
| caillon didn't know that fesco controlled the wiki | ||
| caillon | i dont care really, though | |
| bpepple | anything else? or should we wrap it up for today? | |
| caillon | bpepple, <badpun> let's make like a gift and wrap it up </badpun> | |
| bpepple | caillon: ;) | |
| * 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! | ||
| nirik | thanks bpepple | |
| c4chris | thanks bpepple | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!