| bpepple | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, caillon, c4chris, dgilmore, dwmw2, f13, jeremy, jwb, notting, spot, nirik, tibbs, warren | |
|---|---|---|
| * nirik is here. | ||
| rdieter | on to work on kde-3.93 (kde4beta2) | |
| linux_geek | bpepp .. is the meeting started ? | |
| bpepple | hi, everyone! who's around? | |
| linux_geek | iam IN | |
| jwb | here | |
| caillon | yo | |
| bpepple | is hadess about? | |
| * abadger1999 takes a seat in the bleachers | ||
| spot is here | ||
| notting is here | ||
| poelcat here | ||
| hadess | bpepple: he just joined :) | |
| bpepple | hadess: cool. ok, let's get started then... | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- MISC -- Bluetooth Feature http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureBluetooth - hadess, polecat | ||
| bpepple | Ok, hadess wanted us to reconsider pulling Bluetooth from the feature list. | |
| caillon | hadess: you have the floor. why is bluetooth awesomer? | |
| hadess | caillon: why do we need web browsers? :) | |
| caillon | hadess: porn | |
| * jeremy is here, sorry to be a few minutes late | ||
| hadess | caillon: well, same reason then :) | |
| jwb | bluetooth porn? | |
| really? | ||
| hadess | the main reasons why bluetooth was removed from the feature list, i believe, was: | |
| no %age completion, i explained that it wasn't relevant | ||
| * c4chris is here now | ||
| jwb | it is | |
| hadess | and because no huge progress seemed to have been made | |
| jwb | huge is a relative term | |
| hadess | i've updated the page with docs explaining what works now, and didn't before, and how to do it | |
| see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureBluetooth#head-5f18054be16b8498dd45b2361830046fdd9e6220 | ||
| poelcat | hadess: and because it looked liked a lot of stuff wasn't done | |
| hadess | poelcat: give me 48 hour days, and it still wouldn't be finished | |
| poelcat | hades: sorry i haven't been able to your email yet :( | |
| hadess: fair enough... make a feature page describes what is doable for a particular release :) | ||
| linux_geek | hadess .. thatz a pretty cool stuff ( gathering on wiki ) | |
| nirik | so the Documentation section is the items that are going to be new in f8? shouldn't that be the entire feature? | |
| hadess | poelcat: invent a process that makes long-lasting feature work not a pita :) | |
| c4chris | IIUC, none of this works in F7 ? | |
| jeremy | hadess: I think the key is to focus on "these specific bluetooth things are mo' bettah" rather than "bluetooth is fully rocking" | |
| hadess | c4chris: only printing, iirc, after i did an update | |
| poelcat | jeremy: +1 | |
| hadess | jeremy: saying bluetooth is fully rocking is just like saying USB is fully rocking, rhythmbox still doesn't sync my ipod :) | |
| poelcat | this also helps for testing and our release announcement | |
| mclasen | one thing to realize here is that a lot of features consist of a ton of incremental changes | |
| c4chris | I'm all for advertising what's new and works | |
| bpepple | hadess: I'm fine with keeping this as a feature, since it's an obvious improvement over prior releases, and something we should be advertising. | |
| nirik | yeah... although if we are touting something as a "Feature" we need specific things to say that are better/different or users won't care... | |
| hadess | if that helps, i can clone the page to be "this is f8", and do the same dance for f9 | |
| c4chris | maybe in a bit more precise terms, rather than in too broad terms | |
| poelcat | hadess: that would be great | |
| nirik | hadess: that sounds like a good plan to me... specific things that are going to be in f8... | |
| c4chris | hadess: sounds good to me | |
| spot | +1 | |
| linux_geek | hadess .. i would like to add a cent here .. in the wiki page.. the description about features is well and good. But if we can | |
| hadess | there's use cases that are only partially done... | |
| linux_geek | give a small heads up of its current functionality in F7 and why is it enhanced in F8 | |
| it might be good .. correct me if am wrong | ||
| hadess | linux_geek: see above, it's in the documentation part | |
| bpepple | Ok, could I get a quick vote on having this be a feature? | |
| +1 | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| hadess | linux_geek: but i can add a bit more details, as to why it's improved | |
| spot | +1 | |
| caillon | bpepple: +1 | |
| hadess | linux_geek: eg. "no UI for that feature in F7" | |
| * nirik just wants his bluetooth headset to work out of the box... someday perhaps it will. ;) | ||
| linux_geek | i can help if required .. as iam interested in fedora development | |
| sounds good to me :) | ||
| * dgilmore is here | ||
| hadess | nirik: the backend is there, i'm checking whether it actually works in f8, the work was done upstream for that | |
| bpepple | any other FESCo members want to vote on this? | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| nirik | hadess: if you need testers, let me know. Although my laptop is f7 right now. | |
| bpepple | thanks, jeremy. ;) | |
| linux_geek | i vote for testers if new testers are required | |
| iam using f7 , btw | ||
| bpepple | ok, that's more than 50% of FESCo. hadess, consider this approved. | |
| hadess | nirik: add yourself to the CC: on the page, i'll be updating it with info about the audio | |
| hadess | bpepple: yay! | |
| nirik | hadess: ok. I get the rss feed of all wiki changes, so I will see it. | |
| bpepple | anything else on this, or should we move on? | |
| poelcat | hadess: and clarified to focus on F8? | |
| caillon | hadess: cool. thanks for showing up. | |
| nirik | move on ++ | |
| hadess | poelcat: yeah | |
| bpepple | hadess: thanks. | |
| alright moving on.... | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- MISC -- obsoleting kmod proposal: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DavidWoodhouse/KmodProposal - dwmw2, f13 | ||
| bpepple | Is f13 about? | |
| jeremy | haven't heard him walk in yet | |
| nirik | he was going to be a bit late... driving in. | |
| bpepple | ok, we can come back to this when he shows up. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- MISC -- Automatic pushing of updates after 14 days? - nirik | ||
| bpepple | nirik: this was something you wanted us to discuss. | |
| nirik | yeah, there are a pile of old updates in bodhi... | |
| bunches in pending (never went to testing) then bunches in testing that never got pushed to stable. | ||
| caillon | do we have data on why they are in their current states? | |
| lmacken | i created an 'unpushed' state in bodhi, so the huge pile of "pending but not really" updates will go away soon | |
| nirik | Is there opposition to setting it to auto push testing->stable after 2 weeks? | |
| c4chris | do packagers get nagged somehow? | |
| nirik | there isn't currently any nagging that I know of. ;( | |
| caillon | nirik: it would be useful to know why they are stagnating | |
| f13 | I'm here now. | |
| bpepple | caillon: agreed. | |
| lmacken | I also implemented a stable_karma feature that will automatically push an update to stable after N positive comments... by default stable_karma=3.. anyone object ? | |
| nirik | yeah, agreed. I suspect some is just that they forget. | |
| caillon | but i suspect not all | |
| nirik | it's hard to remember you pushed an update 2 weeks ago and need to push it to stable | |
| caillon | and auto pushing them would be bad | |
| mclasen | we never got nagmail back, did we ? | |
| lmacken | nagmail will go out soon (probably this weekend) | |
| nirik | lmacken: oooh... good. I like that. | |
| bpepple | lmacken: I think that a good idea, though probably a lot of people aren't aware of karma voting. | |
| jeremy | I think nagmail plus the karma (... and advertising it, so that testers know to use it) might be better than auto-push | |
| lmacken | bpepple: they will be next week.. if all goes to plan, bodhi will get upgraded this weekend | |
| bpepple | jeremy: +1 | |
| caillon | nagmail and karma are probably better than auto pushing | |
| c4chris | I say let's start with nagmail and karma... | |
| lmacken | jeremy: +1 | |
| nirik | when does nagmail fire? I guess we can adjust it? | |
| lmacken | i haven't written it yet.. but probably weekly ? | |
| f13 | daily? | |
| lmacken | daily is fine too | |
| f13 | can do weekly | |
| I'm not tied to anything. | ||
| * lmacken neither | ||
| caillon | lmacken: how does the karma work? if say 2 people found an issue and 5 said it was awesome.... | |
| spot | daily, pls. :) | |
| nirik | or even after a week, then daily. ;) | |
| lmacken | caillon: then the updates karma would be 3 | |
| abadger1999 | lmacken: Is setting up a push date per package already implemented? | |
| lmacken | abadger1999: embargoes ? it used to support it, but bressers said we don't want to | |
| caillon | lmacken: i might think we need to have it be karma=3 AND no negative comments | |
| nirik | also would be nice for more often pushes. ;) We should clone f13 I guess. ;) | |
| caillon | lmacken: since the 5 people may not have noticed a big issue | |
| that the other 2 more thorough? testers did | ||
| lmacken | caillon: ok, that works for me... also, people can negate their original vote.. so if someone gave it a -1, then they could undo their vote once the update works | |
| jeremy | (note: I don't want to hold up the push of current bodhi to live for any new features; far better to get what we _have_ available and then start trying to do regular and quick devel/push cycles) | |
| abadger1999 | I was thinking of the -maintainers request to set a push date right after make build | |
| nirik | and I assume the maintainer could do whatever, right? | |
| lmacken | yeah, once I do this upgrade to the new db model, bodhi will go back to the release-early-release-often cycle :) | |
| caillon | nirik: +1 to wait a week, then daily | |
| nirik | ie, push or unpush. | |
| f13 | nirik: I plan to start work on the signing server after test2 goes out. Most my pungi work for F8 is done. | |
| |DrJef| | about nagmail... are there provisions to alert comaintainers? | |
| nirik | with karma + nagmail, I think we will be good... autopush can be revisited if need be later. | |
| bpepple | nirik: agreed. | |
| caillon | -1 autopush | |
| lmacken | |DrJef|: not until the pkgdb can tell us who the co-maintainers are | |
| nirik | lmacken: are many updates getting comments? | |
| f13 | I"ve noticed some | |
| |DrJef| | lmacken, nagmail will be far more effective when it can interact at the comaintain/sig level | |
| abadger1999 | |DrJef|: I need to implement something for pkgdb to enable that. Been busy getting co-installable python modules going for rawhide. | |
| lmacken | nirik: yes... bodhi's new frontpage will show the latest comments, and today I also made bodhi email everyone that had commented on an update when the update is modified/commented -- so people can easily keep up | |
| abadger1999 | So it's been lagging :-( | |
| bpepple | lmacken: cool. | |
| anything else on this, or should we move on? | ||
| caillon | lmacken: also pushing a newer update should autocancel the older update IMO | |
| nirik | also would be nice if bodhi allowed comaintainers to push/unpush even if a maintainer pushed it first... or an admin, etc. | |
| caillon | but that's other bugs :) | |
| |DrJef| | abadger1999, without co-maintainer notifications..we're sort of short circuiting the point of co-maintainers | |
| caillon | bpepple: i think we're good | |
| lmacken | caillon: yes, I added an 'obsoleted' state.. I'll have to write a prompt for devs when they try and do that | |
| |DrJef| | abadger1999, i can't help with package issues if I'm not being informed | |
| * nirik has nothing more on this. | ||
| lmacken | nirik: yep.. that's blocking on the pkgdb hooks | |
| bpepple | thanks for the update lmacken. | |
| ok, let's move on.... | ||
| lmacken | no problem | |
| abadger1999 | |DrJef|: Agreed. It's the third thing on my agenda to do. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- MISC -- obsoleting kmod proposal: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DavidWoodhouse/KmodProposal - dwmw2, f13 | ||
| nirik | lmacken: might drop a email to devel about upcoming enhancements and how they might work to get feedback from developers? | |
| lmacken | nirik: will do | |
| |DrJef| | abadger1999, the first better be.. tequila!!!! | |
| caillon | bourbon | |
| bpepple | f13: with dwmw2 not here, do you want to discuss this? | |
| f13 | dwmw2 is out. | |
| jwb | so? | |
| f13 | I'm not sure there is much more to discuss on our end. I had hoped |DrJef| had something to add. | |
| IIRC we've got two competing proposals up, and a chance to maybe merge them or let them duke it out. | ||
| I'm quickly losing interest though as other things are stealing my time. | ||
| |DrJef| | f13, i dont...we still need find a small backroom, light up some cigars..and decide | |
| f13 | heh | |
| jwb | f13, i don't see them as competing really | |
| they can almost compliment each other | ||
| but we can move on | ||
| |DrJef| | f13, the dkms stuff is orthogonal... if not the exact opposite of kmods :-> | |
| jwb | right | |
| bpepple | let's hold off until dwmw2 is here, since I haven't heard him weigh in on |DrJef|'s proposal. | |
| caillon | yeah | |
| sounds good | ||
| bpepple | anyone object to that? | |
| c4chris | nope | |
| * nirik thinks that sounds good. | ||
| bpepple | ok, let's move on then... | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- MISC -- Update on packages missing from buildroot - f13 | ||
| f13 | yeah, well there was discussion on the list, no real clear ya, or nay. I think I'm just going to do it, unless anybody objects | |
| * bpepple is fine with adding them. | ||
| f13 | the important part is getting the "missing" packages back in. We can play games with how much we explicitly list without actually changing content later. | |
| jeremy | +1 to Just Do It | |
| bpepple | Does anyone object to f13 adding them in? | |
| c4chris | no objection here | |
| abadger1999 | +1 | |
| spot | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| c4chris | +1 | |
| bpepple | ok, that's more than 50% of FESCo. | |
| f13 | will be done shortly after meeting. | |
| notting | +1 | |
| bpepple | f13: great, thanks. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: Status Update: Compat Policy http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JeremyKatz/DraftCompatPackages - jeremy | ||
| bpepple | is there any more progress on this? | |
| jeremy | saw you added it, saw some of the comments from abadger1999 and others. but have been doing test2 and pretty much nothing else this week | |
| as I'd kind of like to get out of frozen world :) | ||
| bpepple | jeremy: yeah, I figured you were fairly busy. | |
| |DrJef| | jeremy, so you include anything which provides the same API? | |
| jeremy | I'll try to look in some down time before next week | |
| bpepple | jeremy: that's fine. I was just giving a little nudge, so we don't let it slip through the cracks. | |
| jwb | jeremy, when you have it "ready" can you send it to -devel? | |
| jeremy | bpepple: thanks, appreciated as it kind of had slipped through the cracks for me | |
| jwb: when I have an actual proposal, yeah | ||
| jwb | right | |
| jeremy | (or -maintainers, but that's probably next ;-) | |
| bpepple | jeremy: thanks. | |
| yeah ;) | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- MISC -- keep maintainers list? - all | ||
| f13 | ugh. | |
| bpepple | Ok, time for an issue were we probably don't agree. ;) | |
| nirik | I'd like to drop it, and invite everyone on it to fedora-devel-announce | |
| f13 | this one just pisses me off to no end. | |
| jeremy | okay, let me try to give the historical background just for those that have forgotten | |
| In The Beginning, there was just fedora-devel-list | ||
| fedora-extras-list was added as Extras got off the ground | ||
| there was a desire to have a list that reached both sets of people and would be low-traffic, announcement type mail | ||
| thus, -maintainers was born with the intent that all package maintainers would be subscribed and announcements, etc could be sent there | ||
| discussion started happening there and especially as we merged and more discussion moved to -devel instead of -extras, there started to also be more discussion on -maintainers | ||
| making it too high traffic; people wanted an announce only list | ||
| thus, we got to -devel-announce | ||
| and I think that's the big picture at least | ||
| linux_geek | jeremy .. you mean to say .. that devel corresponds only to the core modules .. | |
| forgive my ignorance.. if am | ||
| jeremy | linux_geek: once upon a time, yes. -ish. | |
| bpepple | my probably with getting rid of the -maintainers list is the signal to noise of the -devel list. | |
| jeremy | bpepple: I'd agree, except that I don't think that -maintainers has a substantially different one | |
| f13 | nope | |
| caillon | which is the problem most people on maintainers have with it | |
| * c4chris is subscribed to all 3, and do not really care if one stays or goes... | ||
| f13 | also, there is a good many of us who are on /both/ lists anyway and have to consume both message sets. | |
| jwb | let's step back for a second | |
| 1) NO MORE NEW GOD DAMN LISTS | ||
| f13 | heh | |
| linux_geek | hehe | |
| caillon | which is unfair to new SIGs | |
| jwb | caillon, i'm not talking about those | |
| i'm talking about lists "for everyone" | ||
| |DrJef| | jwb, :-( i was going to propose a list just to discuss features tomorrow | |
| nirik | I'd like to see knurd's reorg happen someday, but for now, I would be happy if maintainers went away. :) | |
| jwb | right now, we have 3 overlapping lists | |
| caillon | yeah | |
| jwb | -devel and -maintainers overlap drastically in purpose | |
| * knurd maybe sooner or later might find the energy and the interest to take care of it -- but for now he has lost interest | ||
| jwb | -devel-announce covers the "low-traffic" part of -maintainers | |
| jeremy | bpepple: I think the answer to people who want lower traffic and just "necessary" bits is that we make sure stuff is getting sent to -devel-announce. and -devel-announce avoids devolving like -maintainers did because it's moderated | |
| * knurd votes for killing maintainers as well, in case anybody wonders | ||
| f13 | indeed | |
| * nirik suggests a list to talk about what lists we should have. fedora-list-list. :) | ||
| f13 | that's why I want to make this change now, as we have devel-announce, we have it going to -devel so it won't be missed by people who aren't on the announce list. | |
| linux_geek | jeremy .. one question.. if we are maintaining mainters list .. which will have new packages list ( both core and extras ) ./. then why to have -devlist again ? | |
| f13 | and discussions can happen in one place. | |
| bpepple | Hmm, sounds like I'm alone on this. Could I get a quick vote on who wants to get rid of maintainers? | |
| * knurd suggested to have a public review phase for new lists, but Board decided something different | ||
| caillon kicks maintainers in the pants, and votes to get rid of it | ||
| nirik | +1 get rid of maintainers and invite everyone on it to devel-announce. | |
| linux_geek | +1 | |
| f13 | linux_geek: mostly because the topics concerning development of Fedora and development /on/ Fedora bleed together quite a lot. | |
| bpepple | -1, keep maintainers. ;) | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| c4chris | 0 | |
| nirik | maintainers is also a closed list. You must be a maintainer to post. | |
| f13 | linux_geek: please don't vote if you're not in FESCo, it just confuses things. | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| spot | +1, maintainers serves no useful purpose anymore, devel-announce fits the need. | |
| linux_geek | oops .. sorry.. f13 | |
| f13 | linux_geek: that's ok, just letting you know (: | |
| dgilmore | -1 i think we need maintainers | |
| notting | +1 | |
| jwb | dgilmore, why? | |
| caillon | dgilmore: i'd like to hear why | |
| jwb | (and bpepple) | |
| caillon | bpepple: also, what's with the |lt? :) | |
| caillon | (curious) | |
| jwb | laptop | |
| bpepple | lt = laptop | |
| jeremy | +1 for death to -maintainers at this point. although I also want to hear dgilmore and bpepple's reasoning | |
| jeremy | (so that we can see if there's a better way to address it than more lists :) | |
| caillon | hrm. then in that case /nick caillon|pc-thru-ssh-via-lt+vpn | |
| ;-) | ||
| bpepple | one of the reasons for creating the maintainers list was to have a low traffic list for maintainer discussions. -devel doesn't really meet that requirement. | |
| just looking about august's stats it has about 5x the traffic. | ||
| jwb | bpepple, give me an example of a "maintainer discussion" | |
| * spot wonders if the irony of "low traffic maintainer discussions" is apparent to anyone else | ||
| bpepple | packaging guideline changes. | |
| they pretty much only affect maintainers. | ||
| jwb | bpepple, discussion on those happens on the packaging list | |
| f13 | bpepple: I would venture to say that the stats are less as more has been shoved over to -devel instead of -maintainers. PLus the discussion that was happening on -maintainers before that wasn't nearly "low traffic" enough for folks, hence -announce. | |
| spot | bpepple: to be fair, what they want are "low traffic announcements" | |
| caillon | bpepple: neither does -maintainers, according to real complaints from the "little man". the warriors who are on both -devel and -maintainers are fine with it, afaict, and that's about it | |
| jwb | let's not all kill bpepple at once | |
| bpepple | jwb: it's alright. ;) | |
| |DrJef| | bpepple, im swamped in lists | |
| bpepple, i'm honest not keeping up with maintainers | ||
| jwb | my point is, if it's a _discussion_, then i don't see why it can't happen on -devel | |
| jeremy | jwb: that's where I am at this point | |
| bpepple | jwb: but do maintainers want to sift through discussions that don't affect them? | |
| |DrJef| | bpepple, what i'd prefer to see.. is policy proposal discussions..start as an annoucement and discussion picks up in one of the other lists | |
| bpepple, i'm simply not catching as much of the drafting discussion as i should | ||
| nirik | yeah, but lots of people don't want to see the proposal announcement, only the result. | |
| caillon | nirik: +1 | |
| |DrJef| | nirik, i think the call for a discussion period is important | |
| bpepple | also, it's not going to hurt my feelings if the majority of FESCo of want to kill maintainers. Not everything has to have 100% FESCo support. ;) | |
| nirik | I agree, but if we start posting those to announce people will get mad I suspect. | |
| |DrJef| | nirik, how do maintainers know their feedback is needed.. unless you..announce..a discussion process? | |
| jwb | bpepple, well... we have a slight problem there | |
| |DrJef| | nirik, one announcement..per draft..to be voted on | |
| caillon | well, nirik is right... | |
| nirik | they subscribe to -devel ? and skim looking for [PROPOSAL]: or something? | |
| caillon | some people want to be made aware of this stuff | |
| and some people don't | ||
| many people don't | ||
| they just want to package | ||
| using whatever rules whoever has made up | ||
| and go | ||
| jwb | bpepple, all the FESCo people are already subscribed to -devel | |
| |DrJef| | nirik, its called..responsible..governance communication | |
| caillon | one of the beauties of being a fedora contributor is it's low entry barrier | |
| jwb | bpepple, so, representative-wise, we're a bit biased :) | |
| nirik | well, from my count we don't have enough to kill maintainers I don't think... or did I miscount votes? | |
| caillon | we NEED to keep it low if we want to entice e.g. upstream maintainers from helping out | |
| bpepple | jwb: yeah, but I'm trying to support those maintainers that don't want to join the high traffic -devel. | |
| jwb | hang on | |
| abadger1999, you here? | ||
| |DrJef| | nirik, every proposal should see two annoucements... at the beginning of the public discussion and then after the vote | |
| bpepple | nirik: I think we were at 5 '+1', and 2 '-1'. | |
| abadger1999 | jwb: Yes | |
| caillon | i count 7 +1 | |
| f13 | caillon: did you count linux_geek ? | |
| jwb | abadger1999, how hard would it be to whip up a quick poll for this? | |
| caillon | f13: no | |
| jwb | wait a sec | |
| abadger1999 | Not too hard. | |
| jeremy | jwb: given our feedback rate with polls, I don't really think they're representative | |
| nirik | |DrJef|: I'd be fine with that, but just pointing out that many people don't want to see the inital suggested thing... and those that do, probibly would already be on devel anyhow. | |
| caillon | i count caillon, f13, jwb, notting, nirik, jeremy, spot | |
| jwb | jeremy, better than 13 people subscribed to a billion lists already | |
| f13 | I really don't want to drag this out much longer. At some point we as a body need to make a decision and stick with it. I'm prepared to do so here. | |
| |DrJef| | nirik, the people who don't want to see proposals.. i'll have my uncle Nikko talk to them politely in the alley | |
| jwb | f13, as am i. but i was just trying to come up with a way the community itself could decide | |
| spot | jwb: the community elected us to decide. :) | |
| bpepple | f13: agreed. sometimes we need to make the hard decisions, even if I don't agree with them. | |
| f13 | they decided by voting us a body to decide. | |
| spot | its a representative system. ;) | |
| jeremy | bpepple: if we're tyring to have a way for lower-volume discussion between maintainers, I think we just need to identify the things that they're wanting to discuss and come up with better avenues | |
| jwb | like wiki discussions! | |
| jeremy | and I think that we (fesco) should decide because we're the deciders ;) | |
| * jwb vomits | ||
| |DrJef| | nirik, i look at it this way... expecting people to already be watching -devel-list as proposals come up is expecting people to got to every town meeting to discover that the city just decided to re-zone your house as industrial | |
| caillon | jeremy: no, bush is the decider | |
| jeremy | jwb: discussions on a wiki page, discussions on irc, ... it all depends on _what_ is being discussed | |
| caillon | but yes, we should make this call | |
| spot | -maintainers list isn't the solution to any problem addressed here, IMHO. | |
| nirik | |DrJef|: we could hide the proposal in the basement behind the door marked "beware of lepard" | |
| spot | i'm not opposed to solving those problems. :) | |
| jwb | ok, CALL FOR VOTE: kill maintainers | |
| +1 | ||
| |DrJef| | nirik, we need an easily consumable..notice board for proposals and voting results | |
| spot | +1, kill it. | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| caillon | w+1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| bpepple | jwb: -1 | |
| nirik | |DrJef|: agreed | |
| notting | |DrJef|: that was displayed at the local planning office in alpha centauri | |
| jwb | notting, vote? | |
| abadger1999 | |DrJef|: I agree with you there. | |
| c4chris | 0 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| jwb | that's 7 | |
| |DrJef| | nirik, let -devel or -maintainers or whatever be the mire of 40 billion discussion but there's but something low traffic has to drive people to discussion as they are happening..not after | |
| bpepple | jwb: yup. it's decided. we're killing maintainers. | |
| nirik | |DrJef|: maintainers is not the solution you are looking for. | |
| |DrJef| | nirik, and not just for contributors...but for PR | |
| f13 | hurray. | |
| jwb | my $deity have mercy on our souls | |
| caillon | told you i counted 7. :) | |
| bpepple | caillon: ;) | |
| f13 | ./topic <bpepple> jwb: yup. it's decided. we're killing maintainers. | |
| f13 | with blunt objects. | |
| bpepple | ok, let's move on.... ;) | |
| notting | f13: and roasting their bodies on spits to feed the masses | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| caillon | notting: yuck, who'd want to eat that crap? | |
| bpepple | anything else people want to discuss before wrapping up for this week? | |
| * c4chris doesn't | ||
| spot | nothing from me. | |
| |DrJef| | jeremy, how broad is your definition of compat in your proposal? | |
| linux_geek | bpep .. how can i join the current ongoing projects ? | |
| poelcat | bpepple: yes.. feature question :) | |
| bpepple | poelcat: goa head and shoot. | |
| poelcat | Question to FESCo :: Do NM, XULrunner and generic-logos remain approved features for F8? | |
| Notting reports: generic-logos feature has no progress since last week | ||
| Caillon reports: | ||
| 1) NM is built but not tagged because it causes a few breakages, so it won't make the test2 cut, but it will be available in the first update after it. | ||
| 2) xulrunner has been fighting issues with the build system to prevent it from being built--e.g. policykit was broken over the weekend so i couldn't build, then that got fixed and someone broke openssl. that got fixed and now nss is broken. | ||
| bpepple | I'd like to keep NM in, since I think it's a fairly import feature. | |
| notting | caillon: you want bugs on new NM in bz? | |
| * spot would also like to keep XULrunner in, that makes updates easier for mozilla-based apps | ||
| f13 | spot: if only we recompile everythign against it. | |
| bpepple | spot: yeah, but it's going to affect a lot of packages that need to be built against it. | |
| jeremy | can we do them one by one rather than having everything tied up together in a jumbled mess of discussion? ;) | |
| f13 | sure! | |
| bpepple | jeremy: yeah, let's start with NM. | |
| * spot wonders when NM hasn't had a few breakages | ||
| jeremy | I want NetworkManager in, but I'm a little worried about the degree of changes and losing one of our big chances of having exposure on it | |
| this isn't just the normal NetworkManager update with some little breakage, it might as well be a rewrite of it from scratch | ||
| mclasen | we could do a one-off spin once a working snapshot is there, and ask people to test it | |
| * jwb points out the freeze is preventing the rawhide hordes from testing it | ||
| mclasen | to get some test exposure before test3 | |
| spot | well, if we let it drop, we can just let ubuntu take the credit for it in their next release. | |
| nirik | I suppose it's way way too late to tag it now? | |
| * c4chris needs to head out, sorry. see ya all later. | ||
| bpepple | c4chris: later. | |
| notting | nirik: wireless doesn't work | |
| f13 | which is something of the point. | |
| mclasen | nirik: a working snapshot is not going to be there before next week | |
| nirik | ah, ok. | |
| f13 | I would really really like to get it in. | |
| f13 | (in F8 that is) | |
| jeremy | I suspect we take it, we just suck it up and need to make sure to spend some real time beating on it | |
| as well as trying to get more interim snapshots out for people to test | ||
| f13 | nod | |
| nirik | mclasen: +1 to a working version snapshot... possibly a special livecd release? | |
| bpepple | jeremy: agreed. | |
| f13 | nirik: we've been trying to do weekly rawhide live images, when the tools allow for it. | |
| linux_geek | nirik f13 jeremy .. sorry to ask the same question. is there any scope/gap in the current ongoing projects that i can contribute ? | |
| jwb | linux_geek, ask in #fedora-devel | |
| jeremy | hopefully it gets easier to do rawhide live images weekly as we approach release (as things should be changing less and causing less to break) | |
| linux_geek | ok | |
| f13 | jeremy: I hope that too | |
| jwb | f13, are we good for test2? | |
| f13 | jwb: define "good". | |
| nirik | ok, so NM is in or not? vote? or just do it? | |
| f13 | we've got a release candidate spun, it needs beating on | |
| bpepple | anyone against keeping NM? otherwise we can move on to xulrunner. | |
| jwb | ok | |
| f13 | I'm trying to rsync the Fedora tree up to phx | |
| lets move on | ||
| bpepple | f13: agreed. | |
| I'm sort of torn on xulrunner, since a bunch of packages are dependent on it. | ||
| f13 | for xul I think there are a couple different scenarios. | |
| 1) xul lands, we don't explicitly build anything against it, but provide it as a "tech preview" sort of thing. | ||
| 2) xul lands and we try to rebuild as much as possible against it | ||
| 3) xul does a fly by but doesn't actually land, we try again for F9 | ||
| jwb | f13, how are we going to prevent 1 from happening? | |
| notting | what's the point of #1? | |
| jwb | yeah, that's a better way of phrasing it | |
| caillon | notting: yes | |
| sorry, i dropped out not realizing we were still going | ||
| bpepple | caillon: no worries. | |
| f13 | there isn't much point to #1 other than "hey look, we have xulrunner" | |
| caillon | right, so... | |
| spot | the point of #1 is to make it easier for mozilla-derived maintainers to start working on integration | |
| caillon | spot: no | |
| jwb | f13, we aren't ubuntu. fsck that | |
| abadger1999 | Would #1 become #2 over the course of F8 updates (with notable exceptions like firefox)? | |
| f13 | and people can try building against it. | |
| abadger1999: that could possibly happen yes. | ||
| caillon | spot: mozilla derived packages already support xulrunner | |
| for the most part | ||
| i'd say that like 80% of them do | ||
| jeremy | abadger1999: likely, yes | |
| f13 | so then, we should be easily get to #2 in short order? | |
| spot | caillon: if they do, then #2 should be rather simple | |
| bpepple | caillon: yeah, liferea supports xulrunner though I haven't tested how well. | |
| jwb | i like #2 | |
| caillon | and they work and are tested with the upstream builds | |
| spot | at least for 80% of the stuff out there | |
| jeremy | proposal: let's try for 2, but apps that don't work upstream with xulrunner aren't "compelled" to switch | |
| caillon | bpepple: i've talked to the upstream guys of that and various other projects. they are supporting firefox only because we do | |
| jwb | jeremy, +1 | |
| nirik | jeremy: +1 | |
| spot | i say we push for #2, those that don't work have a very easy fallback. :) | |
| jeremy: +1 | ||
| caillon | spot: right | |
| bpepple | jeremy: +1 | |
| f13 | jeremy: +1 | |
| caillon | spot: except it's hard to do the fallback.... | |
| poelcat | so it stays as an approved feature? | |
| f13 | poelcat: I believe so. | |
| bpepple | poelcat: yeah. | |
| jwb | wait... | |
| we only had 5 +1s | ||
| f13 | caillon: when could we expect a xul to land that people can start building against? | |
| caillon | f13: as soon as people stop fucking me | |
| each time i try and build some new package breaks me in some weird fashion | ||
| f13 | nod | |
| * spot stops fucking caillon | ||
| caillon | today's nss added a new hewader with a variable named "template" | |
| for the latest bit of fun | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| nirik | caillon: the version you have is pretty much the same as the OLPC branch? or different? | |
| jwb | caillon, you a +1 on jeremy's proposal? | |
| caillon | nirik: same as OLPC updated to a newer version, and a few minor changes | |
| jwb | and bpepple? | |
| caillon | but nothing drastic | |
| what's jeremy's proposal? | ||
| * caillon reads up | ||
| nirik | cool. Might see if changes can flow back and forth... would be good to share as much as we can from/to them. | |
| jwb | and nirik? | |
| bpepple | jwb: Yeah, I was a +1 for jeremy's proposal. | |
| jwb | ok, that's 7 | |
| caillon | bpepple: actually, i think that we should fix the ones that don't. | |
| caillon | -1 sorta from me on that | |
| nirik | +1 from me... | |
| caillon | it's hard to have 2 gecko versions providing the same libraries, the same headers, etc. | |
| we had this problem with mozilla and firefox in the tree at the same time | ||
| bpepple | caillon: have we identified the packages that don't support xulrunner? | |
| caillon | and notting disabled the auto provides stuff in mozilla because it broke things | |
| caillon | bpepple: as far as i know, there aren't any that i've seen. the upstreams all have moved over, but i expect there to be some incompatibilities with whatever alpha version i'm using at the time | |
| bpepple: and maybe some new packages that have been recently added | ||
| bpepple | caillon: do we have enough time to fix the ones with incompatibility problems? | |
| caillon | i'll have another look though | |
| caillon | bpepple: yes, i imagine if we have to fix any they are easily done by regular expressions and/or makefile tweaking | |
| bpepple | caillon: ok. | |
| caillon | the one notable exception is firefox/thunderbird itself | |
| jwb | bah, who cares about that | |
| caillon | exactly | |
| bpepple | ok, we've got 7 '+1' so we can probably move on the the generic logos. | |
| caillon | they ship gecko internally so we can deal with that | |
| if it comes down to | ||
| caillon | bpepple: what happened with NM? did i miss that? | |
| * spot needs to go afk for a bit | ||
| bpepple | yeah, we discussed it right before xulrunner. | |
| caillon | and the outcome? | |
| jeremy | caillon: we're going to try to put some stuff in place to help get it the testing it's going to need | |
| caillon | jeremy: okay. we're going to try to push out a livecd after test2 since it looks like it's going to miss that | |
| and we are getting more resources to help fix issues | ||
| jeremy | caillon: yes, that's one part of it | |
| caillon | cool | |
| okay, we can move on then. | ||
| bpepple | Ok, let's discuss the generic-logos quick, so that we can wrap up the meeting. | |
| notting: what's the status on that? | ||
| jeremy | generic logos I think we have to continue to track no matter what | |
| even if we're not "done" for Fedora 8, it'll be helpful if we know the holes | ||
| notting | bpepple: we have a list of what needs done in general, just haven't done it | |
| caillon | especially since it was given down as a board mandate :) | |
| notting | some of it is artwork generation, some of it is code bits | |
| jeremy | caillon: that too | |
| bpepple | caillon: ok, so that's really something we have to complete then. | |
| poelcat | caillon: it wasn't a mandate... they volunteered to do it :) | |
| caillon | poelcat: the board said it needed to get done. i dont think they said who needed to do it. :) | |
| nirik | right, so it stays as a feature and hopefully notting can finish it soon? :) | |
| poelcat | caillon: so if "the board" says a feature has to get done it stays on the approved list even if it breaks the stated policies? | |
| bpepple | Is there anything we can do to help get it completed in time? a call for help maybe? | |
| * poelcat is just trying to be consistent in the way we handle each feature | ||
| notting | 'maybe'. i'll try and update the feature page tomorrow | |
| caillon | poelcat: i don't think the baord specified a timeline other than it would be super fab if it was done for F9. wink wink. but its something we should consider. | |
| poelcat | bpepple: thanks. looks like all 3 stay on the approved list | |
| caillon | poelcat: if it cant get done, it cant, but i think we can get a lot of it done and it is important because it will make respinning easier | |
| so yeah i think its good if it stays approved | ||
| poelcat | caillon: i don't disagree; as the feature wrangler I'm just trying to follow the policy we all agreed on :) | |
| caillon | poelcat: *cough* the policy was agreed on by the old fesco. | |
| i didn't agree to it, just for the record. | ||
| :) | ||
| bpepple | poelcat: yeah, once F8 is out the door, we probably need to look at the policy and see if anything needs to be adjusted. | |
| poelcat | bpepple: sounds good :) | |
| bpepple | ok, anything else or can we wrap up? | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 60 | ||
| caillon | poelcat: not saying that i wouldn't have or anything, just stating the fact :) | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 30 | ||
| bpepple will end the meeting in 15 | ||
| bpepple | -- MARK -- Meeting End | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!