| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Meeting rules at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/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? | ||
| * nirik is here. | ||
| dgilmore is here | ||
| notting is here | ||
| tibbs|h here | ||
| warren here | ||
| * bpepple waits another minute to see who else shows up. | ||
| bpepple | ok, let's go ahead and get started. | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- sponsor nominations -- Manuel Wolfshant - https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00689.html | ||
| tibbs|h | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 here also. | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| warren | the link is bad | |
| but =1 | ||
| +1 | ||
| nirik | link works fine here. | |
| spot | sure, +1 | |
| tibbs|h | The bugzilla link is bad. | |
| nirik | ah, that link. | |
| tibbs|h | But I've seen enough of wolfy's reviews to see that he knows what's up. | |
| notting | reasonable enough. +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| buggbot | <http://tinyurl.com/2zmf4m> (at bugzilla.redhat.com) | |
| nirik | yikes. | |
| sorry about that... but thats the correct link. | ||
| bpepple | ok, that's seven '+1', and no votes against him. so we've approved Manuel's request. | |
| I'll go ahead and upgrade him after the meeting. | ||
| moving on..... | ||
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- New Features - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Dashboard - poelcat | ||
| bpepple | is poelcat about? | |
| poelcat | bpepple: ready to ROCK | |
| bpepple | poelcat: you want to lead? | |
| * jwb is here now | ||
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: vote http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureDictionary | ||
| bpepple | +1 | |
| tibbs|h | Didn't we vote on the same thing pre-F8? | |
| +1 regardless | ||
| notting | +1 again. | |
| nirik | +1 again here too. | |
| spot | +1 | |
| nirik | is the firefox patch going to get in? hopefully so. | |
| tibbs|h | Says "upstream state now resolved", so I'd say yes. | |
| Only took, what, two years? | ||
| bpepple | dgilmore, jwb, warren? | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| notting | now all we need is for ff to use the system hunspell ;) | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| tibbs|h | notting: That's #3 in the "Optional" section. | |
| No patch, unfortunately. | ||
| poelcat | looks like the +1s have it.. move on? | |
| bpepple | poelcat: yup. | |
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: vote: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/XenPvops | ||
| nirik | +1 to the ideas... 10% done and not much status makes me wonder if it's going to make it for f9... but I suppose there is still time. | |
| spot | +1, i just hope they can pull it off | |
| warren | page isn't loading for me | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| tibbs|h | I recall at fudcon that it wasn't decided that F9 will have 2.6.25. | |
| * nirik wonders what that will mean for RHEL6... | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| tibbs|h | This feature seems to be predicated on that. | |
| warren | without being able to read the page, +1 to the name | |
| tibbs|h, that isn't our job to worry about. | ||
| bpepple | warren: agreed. | |
| tibbs|h | In some sense, you're correct, | |
| f13 | I'm here. | |
| tibbs|h | What I don't want to see is "FESCo accepted this feature, so we must have kernel 2.6.25 in F9". | |
| warren | Summary | |
| Replacing the current forward-ported XenSource code on kernel-xen by a paravirt_ops based implementation, including dom0 support. | ||
| poelcat | tibbs|h: wouldn't that be a "dependency" ? | |
| dgilmore | im saying +1 | |
| spot | tibbs|h: i trust davej and his team to make a sensible decision about the right kernel for F9 | |
| warren | Does this mean the standard fedora kernel can be dom0? | |
| spot | tibbs|h: i don't see this as forcing 2.6.25 | |
| jima | don't we backport stuff like this all the time? | |
| tibbs|h | We don't see it that way; my concern is that somebody else might see it that way. | |
| But in any case, getting rid of special xen crap and the forward porting pain is good for all. | ||
| So +1 | ||
| f13 | +1 from me. | |
| poelcat | looks like the +1s have it.. move on? | |
| jwb | 0 | |
| warren | standard fedora kernel can be dom0, but only if it is booted that way? | |
| jwb | warren, ask the xen guys | |
| spot | warren: thats outside of the scope of this feature | |
| warren | just trying to understand the feature | |
| roccofrank|w | warren: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2007-12/msg00454.html | |
| dgilmore | warren: | |
| Make 'new-kernel-pkg' aware of HYPERVISOR setting in /etc/sysconfig/xen | ||
| looks configureable | ||
| warren | ok well, I already voted +1 | |
| dgilmore | poelcat: looks passed . whats next | |
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: vote: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GoodHaskellSupport | ||
| jwb | oh, another "more better" feature... | |
| tibbs|h | This is missing "haskell packaging guidelines" in the Dependencies section. | |
| I know he intends to submit some to FPC on Thursday. | ||
| notting | a haskell implementation of perl? whyyyy? | |
| tibbs|h | It would be nice to say "we have a bunch of nice haskell stuff in the distro" | |
| warren | OK well, I wouldn't see any harm in letting them try. | |
| jwb | for the 4 haskell users? | |
| * jwb shuts up | ||
| tibbs|h | There are really quite a few haskell users. | |
| dgilmore | ill say +1 it really cant hurt | |
| spot | ehh, i'd feel better about voting +1 with guidelines done, but i'll give it the benefit of the doubt. | |
| +1 | ||
| jwb | +1 | |
| tibbs|h | But I do recall that our "good ocaml support" wasn't really touted as a feature. | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| notting | +1-ish | |
| bpepple | +1, also thinks this can't really hurt. | |
| warren | +1 this is just PR | |
| tibbs|h | +1 | |
| dgilmore | spot: i trust that you will beat the guidelines into good shape | |
| tibbs|h | Oh, we beat the guidelines nightly. | |
| poelcat | looks like the +1s have it.. move on? | |
| bpepple | poelcat: yeah. | |
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: vote: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/CommonLispController | ||
| bpepple | +1 | |
| nirik | so this is standardizing the already shipped lisp implementations? | |
| notting | +1, seems harmless | |
| jwb | isn't this a packaging guideline? | |
| spot | install a script /usr/lib/common-lisp/bin/<impl>.sh | |
| i don't like that. | ||
| thats a terrible place to put scripts | ||
| tibbs|h | This is really sort of a "lisp packaging guidelines" thing. | |
| jwb | this isn't a feature | |
| tibbs|h | Shouldn't it go through FPC? | |
| jwb | tibbs|h, yes | |
| spot | and yes, this should be a FPC guideline | |
| nirik | yeah, should go thru the package comittee | |
| tibbs|h | Not that I really want to deal with it.... | |
| warren | +1 to the idea that it should be standardized, but FPC decides the standard | |
| tibbs|h | Spot, ack on the "terrible place to put scripts" thing. | |
| warren | terrible, but is it wrong? | |
| spot | i would say yes. | |
| dgilmore | i say -1 as a feature. push it to FPC and get it as a guideline | |
| jwb | what dgilmore said | |
| spot | same here. -1 as a feature, drive it through the FPC | |
| warren | OK | |
| f13 | -1 | |
| however | ||
| this could come back once the FPC approves the guidelines and all the packages fall in to conformity, this could be a feature for better Lisp whatever. | ||
| warren | I might agree that it is terrible, but it isn't wrong. | |
| f13 | a lineitem on release features. | |
| jwb | there is such thing as too much PR... | |
| spot | f13: i could see that, as an item on a list of other Lisp improvements done for F9 | |
| f13 | but our dozens of Lisp fans might want to feel special. | |
| * poelcat realizes we don't have a procedure for features that are voted down... how should we communicate this to the feature proposer? | ||
| poelcat | public/private mail? | |
| jwb | spot, can you get ahold of anthony green and tell him to go through FPC? | |
| poelcat, would have to be public to some degree. meeting minutes will reflect we nak'd it | ||
| poelcat | jwb: fair enough | |
| warren | Did we agree on the earlier idea that *somebody* would have to draw the line between features and minor features? | |
| poelcat | warren: we said there would be a line, we didn't say who | |
| i'd assume that is FESCo | ||
| poelcat | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy#head-2f8da702f8ab153647862bc942d9b0e28a080206 | |
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: vote: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/IMDesktopIntegration | ||
| tibbs|h | This is a little sketchy on details for something that's 30% complete. | |
| notting | +1. watching discussions of IM UIs should be entertaining | |
| dgilmore | this is very vague | |
| spot | this is a good idea, but painfully vague. | |
| jwb | i'd say defer the vote | |
| spot | "build an infrastructure to bring up the input method on demand" "make things happen, magically" | |
| nirik | yeah, more details would be good. Also, anything that has the string 'gnome' should also mention what that means for KDE and other DE's | |
| jwb | nirik, it does sort of | |
| "apply to the QT applications" "apply to the X applications" | ||
| dgilmore | we would need to carry the qt3 patch i think | |
| qt4 could get upstream | ||
| jwb | :( | |
| tibbs|h | Yes, qt3 is closed for that kind of thing. | |
| JuanCarlosLin | Hi all! | |
| tibbs|h | I'd be surprised if qt4 doesn't already have something of this nature. | |
| dgilmore | it quite possibly does | |
| tibbs|h | But, still, +0 from me without at least some additional detail. | |
| bpepple | poelcat: could we have the owner of this feature provide a bit more information to us before we vote on it? | |
| dgilmore | we would need to look at wx-widgets and all the other gui tool kits more so than desktops | |
| +0 for now | ||
| poelcat | bpepple: okay | |
| dgilmore | id like to see something more concrete | |
| bpepple | poelcat: great, thanks. | |
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: vote: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/freeIPA | ||
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| spot | does this involve any customization to make sso to the freeIPA server easier for Fedora clients? | |
| warren | wait!! | |
| tibbs|h | I'm doing python-tgexpandingformwidget, so that's another dependency down. | |
| spot | as is, it just looks like "put freeipa packages in Fedora." | |
| notting | +1 | |
| warren | oh, nevermind. I thought this was the crack ideas to integrate the *other* IM to the desktop | |
| +1 | ||
| dgilmore | all of fedora-ds has been approved now | |
| jds2001 | ||
| f13 | warren: telepathy? | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| * nirik wonders if he is the only one who sees IPA and thinks of a nice hoppy beverage. :) | ||
| tibbs|h | I think that's sort of the point. | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| bpepple | nirik: nah, I was thinking the same thing. | |
| dgilmore | nirik: you might need one after looking at it | |
| warren | tibbs|h, knowing details of this particular integration, it only makes it better without changing parts that it cannot integrate. | |
| jds2001 | nirik: no :) | |
| poelcat | we need one more "+1" to move on | |
| tibbs|h | What I really want is some documentation for migrating a home-rolled configuration to this. | |
| nirik | I think they should get packages in asap so we can get testing done before f9. | |
| tibbs|h | But that's way out of scope here. | |
| +1. | ||
| spot | +1 | |
| warren | I must highly suggest approving this feature, it really is harmless if they fail. | |
| dgilmore | nirik: i can yell at them to do so | |
| --- poelcat has changed the topic to: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/AddingCrossCompilers | ||
| spot | this is missing packaging guidelines, and I wouldn't even think of approving it without them. | |
| f13 | same here | |
| tibbs|h | Haven't we been there before? | |
| spot | also, the targeted cross toolchains are vague, i'd rather see specific combinations targeted | |
| f13 | and I think we've been down the packaging guidelines many times before, with stalemates. | |
| dgilmore | this will need some big disclaimers that the cross comilers cannot be used to create a secondary arch | |
| tibbs|h | Stalemates as in Ralf says it's bad; Ralf won't say what's good. | |
| spot | tibbs|h: i bet if someone wrote guidelines based on ralf's existing packages, he'd think they were good. | |
| tibbs|h | But, yeah, +0 without some guidelines. | |
| nirik | yeah, needs guidelines. I would love to see things like tools for rockbox devel, or openwrt devel available tho. ;( | |
| warren | openwrt would be cool | |
| f13 | or the n800 devel | |
| tibbs|h | And n810 devel. | |
| warren | How to approach this? | |
| f13 | somebody needs to create packaging guidelines that don't suck | |
| tibbs|h | People who want it should talk and work something out. | |
| warren | Ask them to suggest a packaging standard and review that standard? | |
| dgilmore | warren: better than openwrt would be a fedora for wrt but openwrt would be cool | |
| notting | fedowrt? | |
| dgilmore | notting: yup | |
| tibbs|h | So that's it for features? | |
| poelcat | Acceptance of this feature is gating on someone else creating packaging guidelines? Is that fair to the feature proposer? | |
| warren | dgilmore, but cross compilers are not for secondary arches? | |
| poelcat | or is there a better way to put it? | |
| jwb | well | |
| dgilmore | warren: they are not permitted | |
| f13 | this feature has no chance of acceptance without existing packaging guidelines. | |
| warren | I would suggest, people who care about it must 1) write a proposed standard 2) implement that proposed standard 3) ask FPC to review the standard and implementation | |
| tibbs|h | We don't care who provides those guidelines. | |
| dgilmore | for cross compilers i say we ask the leaders of it to propose packaging guidelines when they are through we can re evaluate | |
| tibbs|h | The feature proposer could do it, or he could get someone else to do it, or he could coordinate an effort. | |
| poelcat | fair enough | |
| Note: I'm also maintaining a list of proposed features with incomplete feature pages in the middel/bottom of the Dashboard page. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Dashboard | ||
| dgilmore | tibbs|h: sure but he should drive it forward | |
| poelcat | I don't think it is a fair use of FESCo time to bring these up for a vote if all the requested information on the template is not present or has not been marked N/A or TBD. | |
| bpepple | poelcat: seems reasonable. anything else on Features? | |
| poelcat | that's all for today | |
| warren | we already spent too much time discussing possibly minor features like lisp | |
| bpepple | poelcat: great, thanks. | |
| tibbs|h | We need to decide on gcc43 soon, though. | |
| jwb | why isn't that in the buildroots yet | |
| notting | and xulrunner seems to be happening even without our decision :) | |
| tibbs|h | It sort of is, just not the default tag. | |
| f13 | jwb: because jakub is on vacation | |
| jwb: and putting it in the buildroots now is a terrible idea. | ||
| warren | they are trying to discover + fix gcc43 issues even before it goes in? | |
| jwb | why | |
| tibbs|h | warren: Yes, they are. | |
| f13 | His plan is to have it in the buildroots once he's back and can handle questions and debugging build issues. | |
| warren | jwb, because jakub can very rapidly FIX issues created by the new compiler | |
| poelcat | f13: when is he back? | |
| f13 | plus we didn't want it to be in the way of getting buildfixes in for the alpha | |
| tibbs|h | Jakub did a mass rebuild, and it's easy to get test builds with it by scratch building against a different release tag. | |
| jwb | warren, fix the compiler or fix other packages? | |
| f13 | poelcat: should be later this week or early next week. | |
| jwb: both | ||
| warren | jwb, both | |
| jwb | i find the latter to be horseshit | |
| _maintainers_ should fix their packages | ||
| warren | jwb, well, he's good at both. | |
| jwb | oh, i'm not doubting that | |
| tibbs|h | Some of the needed fixes are nontrivial and nonobvious. | |
| jwb | so what happens if jakub dies? | |
| tibbs|h | It is an act of extreme courtesy to do things the way he's doing it. | |
| warren | and he of course can prioritize his own time | |
| jwb | fedora just withers? | |
| don't get me wrong, jakub rocks | ||
| but progress should not hinge on one guy | ||
| warren | jwb, compiler martyr? | |
| tibbs|h | How is it depending on just one person? | |
| f13 | jwb: not at all, but with jakub around things can be fixed much faster | |
| jwb: because you and I know full well that /many/ of our maintainers are /not/ programmers. | ||
| as much as that sucks, that's the way it is. | ||
| jwb | yeah, i'm on a tangent | |
| ignore me | ||
| notting | that being said, i think 'waiting until after alpha' is a perfectly fine reason | |
| nirik | next topic? | |
| bpepple | notting: +1 | |
| --- bpepple has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| bpepple | anything people need to discuss before wrapping up for today? | |
| jds2001 | k - cna we get some traction on my bug workflow proposal? | |
| * nirik was just going to mention that. | ||
| bpepple | jds2001: I was going to add that to the schedule for next week. | |
| jds2001 | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JonStanley/BugWorkflow | |
| ok, we can table til then. | ||
| jwb | notting, not to be an ass but i think it would have been better to get it in before alpha | |
| oh well. not everything works out nicely | ||
| bpepple | jds2001: yeah, I figured we should give it at least a week to give folks to weigh in before bringing it here for a vote. | |
| tibbs|h | So we are making slow progress on merge reviews. | |
| warren | How is cooperation from RH engineers? | |
| tibbs|h | Spotty. | |
| * f13 looks at spot | ||
| tibbs|h | Some folks are right on it and those get closed out quickly. | |
| From others you get no response. | ||
| * nirik was lucky and got good responses back from the last 2 he did. | ||
| tibbs|h | I have considered just making trivial fixes like fixing non-utf8 or improper directory ownership. | |
| f13 | tibbs|h: I wouldn't stop you | |
| dgilmore | nirik: did you re-review that package | |
| f13 | "that" package? | |
| nirik | dgilmore: which one? | |
| dgilmore | nirik: the odd one | |
| f13 | gnome-settings-daemon? | |
| if so, I did the re-review | ||
| dgilmore | yeah that one | |
| f13 | it was fine | |
| nirik | f13 reviewed it | |
| dgilmore | f13: :) thanks ifigured it was fine but found the review odd | |
| tibbs|h | So how many packages are we adding per day? | |
| tibbs|h | It seems like it's more than ten, which is crazy growth. | |
| f13 | oof, too many | |
| dgilmore | where is the list of merge reviews outstanding? | |
| nirik | I hate to call people on that kind of thing, but we do need more than one person in a review. | |
| tibbs|h | dgilmore: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html | |
| has all of the reviews; just search for "Merge". | ||
| jds2001 | btw, as of last night we had 790 package reviews in new state | |
| tibbs|h | https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=426387 | |
| buggbot | Bug 426387: low, low, ---, Jason Tibbitts, NEW , Merge reviews to be completed for F9 | |
| jds2001 | oh, you already got something :) | |
| tibbs|h | That has the hitlist for F9. | |
| dgilmore | f13: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226493 | |
| buggbot | Bug 226493: medium, medium, ---, Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it, NEW , Merge Review: tix | |
| JuanCarlosLin | Ok, can we start the meeting for North & South America Ambassador? | |
| * nirik wonders if we have any stats graphed from bugzilla... would be nice to see trends. reviews closed, reviews added, bugs added, etc. | ||
| jwb | JuanCarlosLin, we still have 1 minute :) | |
| bpepple | tibbs|h: that looks better than I thought it would. | |
| jwb | oops no more | |
| * jds2001 working on that | ||
| warren | That's a great way to limit meeting length =) | |
| tibbs|h | bpepple: Yeah, we're not doing too bad. | |
| dgilmore | bpepple: lets wrap up | |
| bpepple | JuanCarlosLin: yeah, just give me a minute to wrap up. | |
| warren | (It isn't like we can't possibly have multiple meeting channels.) | |
| tibbs|h | And there are still several easy tickets on the hitlist. | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 60 | ||
| warren | "Sorry, we can't build more meeting rooms here." | |
| JuanCarlosLin | Ok...Hi all, please state your names | |
| nirik | jds2001: let me know if you need anything... great that you are taking on the bugzilla beast. ;) | |
| * bpepple will end the meeting in 30 | ||
| bpepple will end the meeting in 15 | ||
| rMenezes | sorry, I'm late | |
| bpepple | -- MARK -- Meeting End | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!