| bpepple | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, caillon, c4chris, dgilmore, dwmw2, f13, jeremy, jwb, notting, spot, nirik, tibbs, warren | |
|---|---|---|
| Hi everybody; who's around? | ||
| * tibbs here | ||
| nirik is here. | ||
| mmcgrath notes dgilmore is on a train and probably won't be around. | ||
| notting is here | ||
| * spot is here | ||
| abadger1999 sits in the bleachers | ||
| warren here | ||
| jeremy is mostly here | ||
| jeremy | f13 says he's missing the meeting and to punt his stuff to after the new year | |
| bpepple | jeremy: ok. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: MISC - automate the mailings of multiarch conflicts, it is hard to test for people without biarch computers - from Patrice Dumas | ||
| bpepple | Patrice wanted us to discuss this. | |
| nirik | I think nagmail would be fine if someone can set it up... | |
| warren | and nagmail must be individual | |
| notting | the problem is automating the checks | |
| bpepple | nirik: agreed. I think it's a fine idea, we just need someone to implement it. | |
| tibbs | Do we have automatic detection of the conflicts, though? | |
| nirik | can we get mdomsch to add a check to the mass rebuilds? | |
| tibbs | Is it more than "install everything; see what conflicts"? | |
| bpepple | tibbs: didn't jeremy write a script to detect them? | |
| nirik | yeah, there is a script... | |
| jeremy | yes, there is a script | |
| it just need ssomeone to run it | ||
| nirik | http://katzj.fedorapeople.org/multilib-cmp.py | |
| warren | might one of the serverbeach boxes (or VM there) be useful for this? | |
| * nirik wonders if we shouldn't try and get a QA server setup... run this, run source check, run anything else thats automated qa tasks? | ||
| jeremy | warren: the problem is they don't have easy access to all the packages | |
| warren | grr | |
| jeremy | you don't want to have sync all of the bits across the 'net to do things like this really | |
| nirik | yeah, local mirror needed. | |
| notting | nirik: realistically, there's a lot of stuff we should be checking post-build | |
| nirik | agreed. | |
| bpepple | notting: definitely. | |
| tibbs | One thing at a time, though. | |
| nirik | I might be able to look over the holiday break at making a local mirror and tests against it... | |
| notting | yeah, i'm just saying rather than create another one-off, do we want to set up a framework for these sorts of things | |
| nirik | it shouldn't be hard to script once there is a local mirror to hit against. | |
| tibbs | I have a local mirror already set up, and some fast machines. | |
| nirik | yeah, thats why I was wondering if we shouldn't look at making a QA box somewhere | |
| warren | would broken dep tests be for both stable + updates (and testing?) and rawhide? | |
| is anyone still here/ | ||
| ? | ||
| * jeremy just doesn't really know what fesco as a group can do about this. we can say "yeah, that sounds great", but someone still has to actually *do* it | ||
| nirik nods at jeremy. | ||
| bpepple | jeremy: +10000 | |
| I think we need to ask for help from the mailing lists on implementing post-build checking. | ||
| nirik | I'd be happy to work on it... should I ask Infrastructure if there is any resource/good place for a qa machine that needs to run tests against packages? | |
| jeremy | nirik: can't hurt | |
| (not that I know of any spare resources right now) | ||
| nirik | yeah. | |
| bpepple | ok, I'll mention in the meeting summary that we agree that this is a good idea, but that someone is needed to implement it. | |
| tibbs | If someone feeds me code, I can provide the resources until we can get in-house machines. | |
| nirik | tibbs: would you have a machine with local mirror access we could try and test scripts on? | |
| cool. I can try and whip up some things for multiarch at least. | ||
| tibbs | Yeah, machines are no problem for me. | |
| bpepple | ok, anything else? or should we move on? | |
| nirik | move on | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: Status Update: Compat Policy http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JeremyKatz/DraftCompatPackages - jeremy | ||
| bpepple | have you had a chance to look at this at all? | |
| warren | Would a compat package have made the transition of openldap and openssl a lot easier? | |
| (live with compat for 2 weeks, remove it) | ||
| jeremy | bpepple: sadly, no | |
| bpepple | jeremy: totally understandable with you starting up school. | |
| jeremy | warren: a little. it also would have made it so that people wouldn't have done anything | |
| jeremy | bpepple: yeah, been trying to finish up high priority pre-beta things as I'm not going to have much time in january | |
| nirik | yeah, I expect it would have still resulted in breakage after the compat was removed. | |
| bpepple | jeremy: maybe we can have someone else run with this, since your probably going to be pretty busy in the next few months. | |
| tibbs | Yeah, I don't see this as a real problem early in the cycle. | |
| notting | well... if we had someone doing scripted mass rebuilds, this would have helped | |
| tibbs | Closer to Test1, though, and I think we'd have had a real problem. | |
| jeremy | if someone else wants to run with it, they can feel more than free. and I'll be glad to comment :-) | |
| notting | but it doesn't help with encouraging people to do rebuilds on their own | |
| tibbs | It didn't take us long to get everything built that would build, but several problem had (and still have) real problems. | |
| Erm, "several packages" | ||
| jeremy | a few of which still need to be built :) | |
| bpepple | does anyone want to work on the compat-packages draft? | |
| * bpepple expects to hear crickets. ;) | ||
| tibbs | I hate to say it, but you could always punt to FPC. | |
| warren | we need to be very anti-compat package | |
| bpepple | warren: I tend to feel the same way also. | |
| warren | it should be a huge PITA to get approval to introduce a compat package | |
| tibbs | So, how huge? | |
| Must go through FESCo? | ||
| warren | FESCo needs to approve a compat package on an individual basis | |
| that should be high enough of a hurdle | ||
| notting | well | |
| some of the idea for compat packages is easing the burden for things *not* in fedora | ||
| do we care about those? | ||
| warren | grr | |
| like? | ||
| notting | pick-your-isv-software here | |
| warren | grr | |
| notting, what if we provide only runtime, not -devel | ||
| notting, discourages buliding against it | ||
| notting | that's how we've normally done it | |
| warren | how do we draw the line of what is worthwhile to ship as compat and what is not? | |
| python(oldversion for zope)? | ||
| nirik | no on that case, as the maintainer is against it. ;) | |
| notting | i'd be more worried about libraries used by third-party apps, (openssl, etc) | |
| warren | Isn't that arbitrary? We provide compat libs for arbitrary binary-only apps but not a FOSS one? | |
| Dgilmorebb | Warren what about opera. It needs compat-c++ | |
| notting | right, we've always shipped compat-libstdc++ | |
| warren | We provide compat libs for arbitrary binary-only apps but not a FOSS one? | |
| Seems a little mixed up. | ||
| spot | FWIW, i think the meat of Jeremy's proposal is enough of a bar for compat packages: If there is a willing maintainer and the maintainer of the non-compat version signs off on it, its OK. | |
| warren | and discourage building against the compat version? | |
| spot | Sure. | |
| i don't think we need more bureaucracy than that. | ||
| tibbs | Do we need tracker bugs for builds against compat packages? | |
| spot | tibbs: thats a good idea | |
| Dgilmorebb | We should not be police | |
| bpepple | spot: yeah, the less bureaucracy the better. | |
| tibbs | And do we need some guidelines for how many releases the compat packages should be kept around for? | |
| spot | do we need to? if there is a willing maintainer, then why not let them stay? | |
| tibbs | Well, the prevailing attitude in the discussion until recently was that we wanted to limit them as much as possible. | |
| * spot isn't opposed to reviewing them after a set number of releases (maybe after each release) to determine if they are still useful | ||
| spot | but i don't think we want to do a "2 releases and its gone" | |
| tibbs | Can we all agree that we don't want to carry then around if nothing needs them? | |
| * spot nods | ||
| notting | nothing... in fedora? in existence? | |
| nirik | although if they are for 3rd party junk it's hard to tell. | |
| spot | if the maintainer can't present a compelling case for its inclusion, either of Fedora bits or other bits | |
| then it goes | ||
| bpepple | spot: +1 | |
| ok, how about I work on tweaking jeremy's compat policy based on some of the discussion here over the holiday's, and try to have something to present here after the New Year. | ||
| spot | the tracker bugs will help us track the Fedora dependant packages | |
| spot | bpepple: sounds good to me. | |
| abadger1999 | My only complaint about the policy is that it only addresses the easy question -- has a willing owner, primary package owner agrees. It's pretty much common sense. | |
| jeremy | bpepple: sounds good to me | |
| tibbs | People could note in the tracker bugs which non-Fedora applications need the compat package so we could at least have some record of them. | |
| abadger1999 | What do you do in the hard case? Someone wants a compat package but primary package owner doesn't? | |
| bpepple | abadger1999: They bring it to FESCo to decide. | |
| abadger1999 | k. Add a sentence and that's fine. | |
| bpepple | abadger1999: cool. anything else? or should we move on? | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| bpepple | ok, anything else people wish to discuss? floor's open. | |
| nirik | are we going to have a fesco meeting and/or "talk to fesco" session at fudcon? | |
| bpepple | how many members of fesco are going to be there? | |
| * jeremy is not going to be there | ||
| nirik just got his flight/hotel info... will be there. | ||
| notting will | ||
| spot will be present | ||
| bpepple | if a majority of member are there, it probably makes sense to get together like we did at the last FUDCon. | |
| tibbs | I'll be there. | |
| * Dgilmorebb will be there | ||
| warren | I will be at fudcon | |
| * bpepple won't be/ | ||
| notting | we can certainly conf people in | |
| at least if we're in the RH office. dunno what ncsu uses for phone conf | ||
| tibbs | One problem with those meetings is that we have no log. | |
| warren | It can be both voice with real-time IRC summaries | |
| notting | asterisk! | |
| tibbs | I recall some annoyance that we met last fudcon but had no independent record of the meeting. | |
| Dgilmorebb | We have it we should use it | |
| tibbs | BTW, I'm making my way through the chosen merge reviews. | |
| bpepple | ok, so I think we can plan on having a FESCo meetup at FUDCon, the logistics just need to be worked out. | |
| bpepple | tibbs: yeah, I saw your tracker bugs being opened earlier. | |
| ok, anything else? or should we call it quits for today? | ||
| tibbs | Nothing from me. | |
| * nirik has nothing. | ||
| warren | notting, there is one trouble with asterisk | |
| notting, due to the time delay, it is VERY confusing to both hear someone next to you and their delayed voice in a headset | ||
| anyway, that's all. | ||
| * 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! | ||
| Dgilmorebb | Warren we should have a speaker phone that we use for the prole there | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!