| --- jds2001 has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- init | ||
| jds2001 | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, dgilmore, dwmw2, jwb, notting, nirik, sharkcz, jds2001, j-rod | |
|---|---|---|
| * j-rod here | ||
| sharkcz here | ||
| notting is here | ||
| nirik is somewhat here. Dealing with a work issue as well. | ||
| jds2001 | hehe work tried to get me on a call with 10 minutes notice now. | |
| I said my 1PM was somewhat inflexible :) | ||
| jds2001 | jwb and bpepple won't be able to join us. | |
| jds2001 | dgilmore: you around? | |
| * jds2001 looking for reliable quorum :) | ||
| jds2001 | dwmw2: ping? | |
| well, i guess we can start with unreliable quorum :) | ||
| --- jds2001 has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting - agenda at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9 - tickets | ||
| jds2001 | .fesco 102 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #102 (Asking for sponsoring status (+ provenpackager): mcepl) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/102 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| j-rod | +1 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| jds2001 | I see six +1's, so we've approved mcepl's request for sponsorship. I'll upgrade him after the meeting. | |
| dwmw2 | sorry; distracted by electronics | |
| jds2001 | .fesco 109 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #109 (Sponsor self-nomination: Michel Salim) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/109 | |
| jds2001 | dwmw2: no problem :) | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| j-rod | +1 | |
| * jds2001 was looking for the mail thread, sorry | ||
| notting | +1 | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| jds2001 | OK, I see five +1's, so we've approved Michel's request. | |
| jds2001 | .fesco 114 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #114 (Sponsor self nomination: Nils Philippsen / nphilipp) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/114 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| j-rod | +1 | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| jds2001 | anyone else? | |
| notting | +1 | |
| jds2001 | there we go :). We've approved the request, I'll upgrade him after the meeting | |
| jds2001 | .fesco 118 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #118 (Asking for sponsoring status (+ provenpackager): mmaslano) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/118 | |
| jds2001 | i didnt put this on the agenda and haven't asked for feeback yet, sorry | |
| let's defer to next week. | ||
| jds2001 | .fesco 112 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #112 (Provenpackager request: oliver) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/112 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| j-rod | +1 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| jds2001 | I see five +1's, so we've approved oliver's request, I'll add him after the meeting | |
| jds2001 | .fesco 117 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #117 (Provenpackager request: oget) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/117 | |
| jds2001 | so there were some objections to this on the list. | |
| * jds2001 looks for thread to remember what they were. | ||
| jds2001 | so they were around him would have broken some packages. | |
| dwmw2 | like that's a reason to withhold it ;) | |
| you going to take mine away too? :) | ||
| +1 | ||
| jds2001 | if pathes were applied, and applying seemingly random version upgrades when not co-maintainer. | |
| * nirik is able to pay attention now. | ||
| j-rod | did the co-maintainers complain? | |
| or just ralf? | ||
| :) | ||
| dwmw2 | let's just ask him to be careful in future, and grant it | |
| nirik | I think many of the objections were that he needed more time to understand things... | |
| notting | 'seemingly random version upgrades when not co-maintainer' == bad | |
| nirik | and the other is that he wanted to bypass a maintainer thats not very active, but I would rather see him take over those packages. | |
| j-rod | I think oget is generally quite useful. perhaps a touch cavalier at times. still a bit on the fence. | |
| nirik | ie, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490398 was brought up. | |
| * nirik thinks he does good work though. | ||
| j-rod | the "seemingly random upgrades when not co-maintainer", its possible a maintainer gave the go-ahead | |
| dwmw2 | that bug is hardly a showstopper. He failed to spot that it could have arch-specific plugins? | |
| jds2001 | yeah, not sure what the story is behind that. | |
| nirik | dwmw2: agreed, just pointing out that he is a bit eager. ;) | |
| j-rod | I don't see any real issues w/that bug either | |
| people make mistakes, news at 11 | ||
| dwmw2 | as I said: grant it, ask him to be careful. | |
| jds2001 | yeah | |
| dwmw2 | we can always take it away again | |
| jds2001 | yeppers. | |
| +1, please be careful :) | ||
| j-rod | so here's my thing... | |
| approving someone w/a 'please be careful' caveat says maybe they haven't really fully proven themselves yet | ||
| notting | yeah, i'd still vote -1 | |
| * dgilmore is with j-rod | ||
| notting | if he wants access to fix some packages, apply for co-maintainership | |
| j-rod | and/or, the same nutters who wanted provenpackager reseeded might throw a shit fit | |
| * jds2001 agrees come to think of it. | ||
| jds2001 | yeah | |
| dwmw2 | it's hard to prove that he won't do things... while we prevent him from doing so :) | |
| j-rod | yeah, I know | |
| dwmw2 | I suppose you have a valid concern about nutters though | |
| can we at least set a time period after which he should reapply, if we're going to say no? | ||
| j-rod | that's what I was just kicking around in my head | |
| jds2001 | I'd like to see specific bugs with patches, too. | |
| nirik | a month? | |
| jds2001 | thats what i was thinking. | |
| dwmw2 | "To balance the concerns raised about overenthusiasm, as well as the concerns which led to re-seeding the provenpackager group in the first place, FESCo has decided not to grant this request for now. Please try again in a month's time, pointing to some specific bugs/patches demonstrating your work." | |
| jds2001 | dwmw2: sounds great :) | |
| next. | ||
| jds2001 | .fesco 120 | |
| j-rod | yeah, I like that | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #120 (Provenpackager request: mjakubicek) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/120 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | did we actually have concensus on that last one? | |
| consensus even | ||
| jds2001 | dwmw2: there was no way a positive vote could win. | |
| dwmw2: i guess we should be formal about it though | ||
| dwmw2 | fair enough | |
| notting | hrm. the examples given for s-c-cluster and s-c-vsftpd... won't those fixes be possibly overriden the next time an upstream release is made? | |
| j-rod | I don't remember seeing any feedback at all on the sponsors list. or did I just conveniently ignore it? | |
| jds2001 | possibly, but he should be pusing the same stuff upstream. | |
| j-rod: there was feedback :) | ||
| mejla | notting: well, in case of s-c-cluster, it might be, but the package is out of upstream interest at all :( They try to move everything to the web based tools (ricci, lucci...etc.) | |
| dwmw2 | notting: maybe. But hopefully not. | |
| he seems to be making sane fixes after reasonable notice in bugzilla, and not going wild | ||
| I'm inclined to say yes | ||
| jds2001 | and hopefully pushing fixes upstream whenever possible. | |
| notting | mejla: makes me wonder if the package itself should be dropped if there's no upstream | |
| but that's sort of neither here nor there | ||
| dwmw2 | jds2001: good point about upstream | |
| jds2001 | j-rod: two items of feedback, both on 3/15 | |
| both +1 | ||
| * nirik is +1 here. | ||
| mejla | notting: the upstream exists but plans to replace the package in the future | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| * notting is +1 | ||
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| j-rod | ok, I'll follow the crowd :) | |
| +1 | ||
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| jds2001 | i see seven +1's, so we've approved mejla's request. | |
| * mejla thanks | ||
| jds2001 | ok, done with sponsor/provenpackager stuff | |
| i promised j-rod last week I'd do this | ||
| :) | ||
| jds2001 | .fesco 65 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #65 (Fedora Creative Commons Content repository) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/65 | |
| jds2001 | so what's the deal here? | |
| dgilmore | we sent that to the board right? | |
| jds2001 | the board was sort of wondering why this had to be done under the Fedora umbrella aiui | |
| j-rod | I'm not particularly, like, "we MUST have this", I just think it would be kinda cool to provide | |
| jds2001 | stickster: ping | |
| j-rod | the board wanted to know more details on how it would be implemented, iirc | |
| stickster | jds2001: Yes, Mr Stanley! | |
| jds2001 | we're talking about the CC repo proposal. | |
| nirik | problem here is that the orig requester didn't provide any details, just that it would be nice to have something like that. | |
| jds2001 | Could you summarize the board's concerns if possible? | |
| nirik | so, we need to make up our own details or the like. ;) | |
| dgilmore | if we make a repo for it. then content would be packaged as noarch rpms that can be installed on all active fedora releases. | |
| j-rod | and rhel releases | |
| * stickster goes to consult the meeting notes so as not to misstate things | ||
| dwmw2 | is rpm the best way to 'package' such content? | |
| dgilmore | j-rod: right | |
| * nirik nods at dwmw2. I was just typing that. | ||
| dgilmore | so we would probably build on RHEL4 | |
| stickster | There was partial buy-in for the concept, because after all it is free content. | |
| jds2001 | where do we put it? | |
| dgilmore | so that everything EPEL/fedora supports should be covered | |
| dwmw2 | I like the idea, but shouldn't any such repository be done in a form that can be used from _all_ kinds of devices? And RPM doesn't really offer that | |
| j-rod | making it a multi-distro thing would also be cool though | |
| dgilmore | jds2001: /pub/fedora/cc/ | |
| * notting still isn't sure of the scope of what sorts of content should be covered, and doesn't feel comfortable approving it without that | ||
| stickster | One of the problems is that packaging content in a repo bypasses the originator's delivery channels, meaning they don't pick up whatever traffic helps them | |
| jds2001 | dgilmore: no, I mean on the installed filesystem :) | |
| j-rod | but how do we deliver !rpm content via yum? | |
| nirik | j-rod: does it need to be via yum? | |
| dgilmore | jds2001: oh right | |
| j-rod | nirik: not necessarily, but it'd be nice to have packagekit-alike integration so you can browse what's available | |
| dwmw2 | yeah | |
| j-rod | and do the same as 'yum search foo' | |
| notting | j-rod: at which point, i think we want a sponsor with a clear idea of what we should do. do we have that? | |
| dgilmore | notting: pdf's, images, ogg video and sound, mp3 mpeg4 etc content would not be ok | |
| jds2001 | stickster: isn't that sort of the point of CC - whatever distribution medium suits you? | |
| nirik | dgilmore: what exactly do you invision as ok content? | |
| * stickster refers to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-03 | ||
| j-rod | uh. yeah, what? pdfs are okay... | |
| jds2001 | stickster: not saying it's a good idea :) | |
| dwmw2 | I think this is a distraction from our core purpose | |
| notting | dgilmore: but pictures? replacing flikr? | |
| dgilmore | j-rod: thats probably a better option. packagekit like search app that puts things into ~/content/ | |
| jds2001 | ogg would be fine with me. | |
| non-porno, etc. | ||
| nirik | dwmw2: I am inclined to agree. I think also something like this would be nice to be cross distro. | |
| j-rod | one of the prime examples was distribution of the linux device drivers pdfs | |
| dwmw2 | it's a cute project -- providing hosting and collecting CC content. But I don't think it's Fedora | |
| dgilmore | nirik: books, music, | |
| * jds2001 wondered at the very beginning if this was Fedora fodder or not. | ||
| dgilmore | definetly no adult content | |
| j-rod | is there not CC porn? ;) | |
| jds2001 | j-rod: im sure there is :) | |
| dgilmore | the more i think of it i think it would be better to do in a distro agnostic way. and have it be its own thing. | |
| jds2001 | j-rod: we would want nothing to do with it, though :) | |
| stickster | The only other substantial objection raised was that some of the more propeller-heady folks on the Board (and I mean that in the fondest sense) are concerned about some of the tech. issues that haven't been resolved | |
| j-rod | true, true | |
| stickster | The Board seemed to be *generally* in favor of promoting free culture | |
| jds2001 | stickster: yep. | |
| stickster | But adding repos to the One True Repo wasn't an immediately popular idea. | |
| j-rod | the thing with waiting for a distro-agnostic thing is... who's actually going to do it? | |
| If there were a fedora-provided content repo, I'd be happy to dump a few things into it | ||
| but if I have to go set up this distro-agnostic thing... I just don't have the time | ||
| * stickster notes that both RH Docs and Fedora Docs, for example, are working on material that might be cross-distro | ||
| nirik | managing a repo like that also gets into further sticky questions, like: is there a quality bar? who is checking to see if it's not porn? offensive content ok? 10,000 things that are only slightly different ok? | |
| j-rod | well, I think you'd have to have package reviews for anything that went in | |
| nirik | ie, there would need to be very clear guidelines of what is what. | |
| notting | do we have a SIG that wants to take this up? | |
| dgilmore | i imagine it would end up with millions of items of content | |
| notting: i think we should ask for one to start up around it | ||
| jds2001 | j-rod: would you be interested in leading such a thing? | |
| j-rod | if it has to go through review, that sets a bar for entry that people hopefully won't want to put in the effort to clear for utter crap | |
| dgilmore | j-rod: i think however delivered all content should be reviewed | |
| j-rod | jds2001: perhaps, but I'm severely lacking in time to put toward such a thing | |
| * abadger1999 takes a seat in the back | ||
| nirik | but then you need reviewers, etc... would this take away from our already small pool of package reviewers? | |
| notting | honestly,while it fits with our ideals, i don't think it fits with the idea of concentrating our (somewhat) scarce resources where they work best | |
| jds2001 | yeah, dunno | |
| nirik | isn't there a linux distros list somewhere for distro coordination stuff? perhaps someone interested could bring it up there and see if a community forms? | |
| notting | if it was a group of people coming saying "we'd like to do this, here's our plan", i'd be more in favor | |
| jds2001 | nirik: yeah, distributions@lists.freedesktop.org | |
| * nirik nods. | ||
| jds2001 | I can take it there and see what happens, or j-rod could :) | |
| j-rod | yeah, dunno that there's enough manpower at the moment for anything to actually happen, mostly just a few people who think its a neat idea | |
| j-rod | jds2001: I can try to write something up | |
| * nirik def thinks it's a neat idea. I would love a 'cc browser' thing that would let me browse/update/download cc content... but I have no time to work on such a thing. | ||
| j-rod | nirik: exactly. :\ | |
| nirik | perhaps the creativecontent community would like to work on something like that too? then we could package it for fedora. ;) | |
| jds2001 | :) | |
| so how are we going to leave this? | ||
| j-rod | I'll see if we can stir up any cross-distro interest | |
| that's a rather quiet list | ||
| jds2001 | yeah :/ | |
| ok, so I missed one sponsor request since i miscategorized it. | ||
| just noticed | ||
| j-rod | but yeah, let me see if I can drum up some cross-distro collaboration interest and get back to you/us | |
| jds2001 | .fesco 106 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #106 (ProvenPackager and/or Sponsor request: tuxbrewr) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/106 | |
| notting | and/or? | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| oh, and :) | ||
| provenpackager was already approve.d | ||
| anyone? | ||
| nirik | yeah, we approved him I thought. | |
| jds2001 | for provenpackager, not sponsor | |
| nirik | oh, sponsor... right. | |
| jds2001 | this is hte sponsor part :) | |
| nirik | I think he's been doing good work with kde packages... first triage, then reviews maintaining... I am +1 for him as a sponsor. | |
| oh, and sugar work too. He's reviewed a bunch of sugar packages. | ||
| rdieter | nirik: he has been a great help indeed | |
| notting | +1 | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| jds2001 | +1 in case it wasn't clear | |
| one more? | ||
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| jds2001 | I see five +1 | |
| so we've approved Steven's sponsor request. | ||
| jds2001 | .fesco 10 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #10 (Review list of non-provenpackager committable packages) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/10 | |
| rdieter | fedora | |
| jds2001 | rdieter: ? | |
| so the question here is one that came up a long time ago. | ||
| * nirik wonders if we can get a current list, or is that the current list? | ||
| jds2001 | what to do about packages that continue to be locked down. I figured that in light of hte reseed, this is the right time to discuss that. | |
| abadger1999: ? | ||
| abadger1999 | Let me see... I think the query was easy to run. | |
| rdieter | jds2001: doh, konversation notifier/autoresponder going mad, sorry. | |
| jds2001 | rdieter: np :) | |
| abadger1999 | And it's even in the ticket :-) | |
| * nirik suspects it means you need a psql query to the pkgdb... can anyone do that? | ||
| abadger1999 | yeah... running | |
| abadger1999 | 102 packages. I'll post to the ticket. | |
| * nirik is inclined to send email to all the maintainers/comaintainers here and say that we will be opening their packages to provenpackage next week unless they provide some justification to before next meeting. | ||
| nirik | to us rather. | |
| dwmw2 | nirik: +1 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | make that 'file a ticket with justification, so that it can be considered and voted on' | |
| jds2001 | I can draft and send such a mail. | |
| yeah | ||
| nirik | dwmw2: yeah, +1 | |
| dwmw2 | or 'file a request to remain closed' | |
| notting | didn't we do this once already? | |
| sharkcz | I think we already voted that fesco approval will be required to have closed acls | |
| jds2001 | notting: it was talked about, but we never retroactively applied it. | |
| nirik | yeah, we just deffered this until the provenpackager was reseeded. | |
| abadger1999 | https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/10#comment:8 | |
| sharkcz | +1 to nirik | |
| nirik | abadger1999: is 'b' a legit package? | |
| abadger1999 | nirik: I was just checking that... | |
| nirik | or 'Common documentation files for oVirt' :) | |
| notting | abadger1999: " Perl extension for portable daemons" | |
| ? | ||
| abadger1999 | There's definitely two bogus ones in there. | |
| * nirik is probibly to blame. | ||
| jds2001 | nirik: you broke it :) | |
| nirik | probibly typoed adding some package... ;( | |
| nirik | anyhow, shall we do that then? and have a deadline of next meeting? | |
| jds2001 | yep, I'll get that out this weekend. | |
| +1 | ||
| i guess we probably should vote on that :) | ||
| notting | nirik: i'd say 2 weeks, but *shrug* | |
| sharkcz | +1 for the email & reseed | |
| nirik | we could do that to allow for vacationing people... I don't much care. | |
| jds2001 | yeah, 2 weeks is cool with me. | |
| nirik | +1 for email and 2wks deadline. | |
| jds2001 | i see no objections, so moving right along.... | |
| jds2001 | .fesco 110 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #110 (Policy on Flags) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/110 | |
| nirik | whats the issue here? | |
| spot: you around? | ||
| notting | he's in a phone meeting | |
| nirik | ok. I'm unclear what problem this is solving off hand... | |
| jds2001 | so reading this, it appears that this came from legal. I'm fine with this policy. | |
| nirik: i think a legal one. | ||
| notting | it's documenting the existing policy of "Flags? NO." better | |
| nirik | so we can have installs that don't install -flags subpackages? | |
| dwmw2 | if we ship a Taiwanese flag, we get banned from China | |
| etc. | ||
| so we choose not to ship any flags at all. | ||
| jds2001 | well, there can be exceptions if they're "substantively essential" to the program | |
| according to this policy. | ||
| abadger1999 | I'd love to see more information about the why's. | |
| dwmw2 | abadger1999: because there are some flags we can't ship to certain places, and we don't want to get involved in the politics. | |
| dwmw2 | we certainly don't want to drop _just_ those flags | |
| nirik | ok, if it's legal I'm fine with it... I assume there are packages that will need to be updated to meet this policy already in... | |
| jds2001 | let's defer this til next week when spot can educate us more. | |
| notting | so we discriminate against everyone equally. or somesuch. | |
| jds2001 | i assume this isn't a standing meeting spot's in, notting? | |
| abadger1999 | dwmw2: Sure... but I want that on the page. | |
| jds2001 | because then we'd defer forever :) | |
| notting | jds2001: ... somewhat | |
| dwmw2 | abadger1999: ok | |
| abadger1999 | It would be useful for deciding things like: is freeciv's use of flags essential to the program? Will we get in trouble even though it is essential? | |
| jds2001 | OK, well maybe spot can provide more detail and context in the ticket. | |
| * jds2001 feels fairly uninformed on this. | ||
| notting | jds2001: basically, leaving the fesco meeting in UTC runs into this meeting | |
| * notting knows b/c he's in the same meeting ;) | ||
| jds2001 | notting: ouch | |
| sorry bout that :( | ||
| jds2001 | anyhow, I don't feel comfortable voting on this without all the details. | |
| all for deferring? | ||
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| dgilmore | i think its silly but some govt's policies are silly. rather than appeasing some we remove all flags. I think its ok. not ideal but ok. | |
| j-rod | +1 for deferring | |
| nirik | +1 to deferr, but we should note our questions in the ticket so spot can get back to us there. | |
| jds2001 | yeah | |
| ok, next | ||
| jds2001 | .fesco 115 | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #115 (making fluid soundfont the default) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/115 | |
| dwmw2 | why is FESCo being asked? | |
| * j-rod doesn't know wtf a soundfont is | ||
| jds2001 | not enitrely sure | |
| * jds2001 assumes someting similar to a theme? | ||
| jds2001 | oget: you around? | |
| dwmw2 | the set of samples which gets used for midi playback? | |
| mharris | wave samples | |
| oget | can I explain what a soundfont is? | |
| jds2001 | sure thing. | |
| nirik | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoundFont :) | |
| oget | it is a collection of many banks of instruments, for use of midi applications | |
| mharris | wavetable synthesis IIRC | |
| oget | General Midi is one standard of these collections. Think of it like UTF8 | |
| j-rod | hrm, okay. and why does FESCo care? | |
| nirik | oget: how do we switch the default here? I don't see it in comps... is the old one a dependency? is the old one going to be obsoleted? | |
| j-rod | seems like something the Audio SIG should sort out themselves | |
| oget | It needs modification of the existing soundfont (PCLite). That's why I asked FESCo. Also people on #devel told me to file a ticket here. | |
| jds2001 | ok, but PCLite is nonfree if I read the ticket right | |
| which means it needs to be blocked anyhow. | ||
| oget | yes, PCLite is nonfree | |
| jds2001 | ok, seems like a no-brainer then. | |
| dwmw2 | although it'd be nice if it wasn't so much larger. | |
| +1 | ||
| * nirik is fine with it, +1 | ||
| jds2001 | yeah, it's of higher quality if i understand correctly | |
| +1 here | ||
| j-rod | meh. presumably its more complete and/or better quality. | |
| notting | +1, but "aaargh that's big" | |
| j-rod | and its not on the media. | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| j-rod | +1, Just Do It | |
| oget | hmm, what about the stable branches? | |
| jds2001 | I would think that if PCLite is non-free, it needs to be eliminated there as well. | |
| j-rod | probably wouldn't bother with those | |
| except, its already there | ||
| so you can't eliminate it w/o yanking it from the base repos | ||
| jds2001 | well, yeah, buyt you can update and obsolete. | |
| j-rod | true | |
| nirik | would be a lot of download for stable releases... | |
| j-rod | I'd still say its not really worth worrying about at this point | |
| * sharkcz agrees with j-rod | ||
| jds2001 | yeah, and I'm wondering about compatibility too. | |
| OK, so let's do this in rawhide only until someone tells us differently :) | ||
| j-rod | +1 to that | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| * nirik nods. Just devel for now. | ||
| oget | one last question: Should I submit it to stable as a regular non-default package anyways? | |
| jds2001 | oget: then folks will get it when they yum update | |
| j-rod | not if it doesn't carry Obsoletes | |
| jds2001 | yeah, true | |
| yeah, you can submit it without the obsoletes, if you want. | ||
| j-rod | but then I wouldn't see the point in adding 200M to the repos | |
| jds2001 | that might be good. | |
| oget | well, I can rename the conflicting file (like timidity.cfg.fluid). Folks can use that one if they chose to | |
| jds2001 | j-rod: people can switch if they want to. | |
| j-rod | meh. | |
| they can upgrade if they want to switch. :) | ||
| oget: is it noarch? | ||
| oget | yes noarch | |
| j-rod | so f9 and f10 users who really want it could just grab the f11 version... | |
| oh, wait. | ||
| haha. rpm fail for the f9 users. | ||
| jds2001 | yeah :) | |
| j-rod | but then I'm somewhat of the mind that adding a new package to f9 at this stage in the game isn't the best idea to begin with | |
| nirik | well, it's currently allowed until f11 release day... | |
| jds2001 | maybe not, but is that our job to legislate? | |
| i mean, it's allowed like nirik said :) | ||
| j-rod | not really, no. | |
| * nirik thinks this is up to the maintainers best judgement in this case... keeping in mind the size of the packages for our users. | ||
| jds2001 | nirik: +1 | |
| j-rod | up to oget, I'm just running my mouth | |
| as a package maintainer myself though, I'd only put it in f11 | ||
| jds2001 | j-rod: we have one more thing to get to that you can run your mouth on :) | |
| j-rod | :D | |
| nirik | oget: so, do what you think is best. Do you think there are lots of users of this? perhaps let it sit in f11 for a while to make sure there are no issues? | |
| j-rod | yeah. I mean if only 5 people are really likely to install this for f9, I see no point in adding 200M to all mirrors | |
| oget | mainly audio production people. I don't know the size of the user base. | |
| nirik | oget: you could also put it in f11 now, and wait and see if you get requests for it in stable releases. | |
| j-rod | the case is easier to make for f10 | |
| * nirik wonders if we should move on. | ||
| dgilmore agrees | ||
| jds2001 | yeah, i'd like to :) | |
| just one more thing | ||
| j-rod | yeah, I'd put in f11, shake out bugs, then put into f10, hold off on f9 unless people actually say something | |
| jds2001 | .fesco 116 | |
| oget | ok, I'll work with hdegoede and see what packages might be affected. I'll keep it in devel for now | |
| zodbot | jds2001: #116 (figure out what to do about deactivated maintainers) - FESCo - Trac - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/116 | |
| nirik | thanks oget! | |
| jds2001 | so this is a tough one, but I think enough time has passed to say anyone deactivated is non-responsive :/ | |
| j-rod | deactivated maintainers: shoot first, ask questions later? | |
| jds2001 | I'd like to send them e-mail once again stating what's going to happen, though | |
| nirik | again, could we update the query? abadger1999 ? | |
| * nirik mailed a few of the top package holders who said they changed their password. The list should be shorter now. | ||
| abadger1999 | nirik: That query takes a good chunk of time to run. I can update the ticket after the meeting. | |
| nirik | ok, no worries. | |
| * abadger1999 starts query running now | ||
| j-rod | awjb seems quite prevalent in that list... | |
| nirik | j-rod: he should be ok now. | |
| j-rod | good | |
| nirik | he was moving and didn't have good net access, but my email prompted him to at least reset his password. | |
| j-rod | I see a mildly alarming # of @redhat.com people... | |
| jds2001 | do they no longer work for RHT? | |
| or are they just busy with $DAYJOB? | ||
| j-rod | so far as I know, they all still work here | |
| notting | we're handling the RH stuff | |
| at least, we've already started contacting/poking/etc people | ||
| jwb | heh, drepper | |
| nirik | so, perhaps we should wait a bit longer and then mail, and then orphan? | |
| jds2001 | notting: cool. | |
| nirik: yeah, say wait til next week, mail, wait 2 weeks, then orphan? | ||
| j-rod | drepper, davidz, ssp, mpg, dmalcolm, jparsons ... | |
| * nirik thinks having people who are unresponsive maintaining packages isn't all that good a thing. | ||
| nirik | in any poking we should also mention that they might really want to consider co-maintainers. | |
| jds2001 | maybe some already have them..... | |
| nirik | some do, many don't. | |
| jds2001 | but i guess the query filters out those that do? | |
| nirik | no, they are at the end... listing the comaintainers. | |
| abadger1999 | jds2001: The latest query lists the comaintainers on those that have them. | |
| jds2001 | abadger1999: awesome. | |
| nirik | +1 to wait a week, mail, wait a week, mail again, orphan. | |
| notting | +1 | |
| sharkcz | +1 | |
| jds2001 | +1 | |
| dgilmore | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | +1 | |
| jds2001 | alrighty, that's the plan then. | |
| jds2001 | that's all I had, anything else? | |
| wwoods | oh fesco, I have a question for you | |
| jds2001 | wwoods: what's that? | |
| wwoods | it's kind of a thought experiment. | |
| let's say we were going to lengthen the Fedora *development* cycle | ||
| while keeping the *release* cycle the same | ||
| i.e. we still branch rawhide every 6 months, but we don't release at the same time as we branch | ||
| we do a couple months' worth of stabilization and testing and bugfixing first. | ||
| to accomodate such a schedule shift, we have two choices: | ||
| a) skip a release to realign the schedules to may day / halloween, | ||
| b) do a bunch of short releases (with overlapping rawhides) to realign the schedules | ||
| notting | i think the result of that is just rawhide would get neglected a couple more months | |
| nirik | well, its an interesting idea... has some pros and cons... | |
| jds2001 | we're already looking at a compressed F12. | |
| wwoods | (this assumes that we want to keep the may day / halloween schedule, which is useful because it avoids collisions with xmas / summer holidays) | |
| no, we'd still branch rawhide every 6 months - I'm not lengthening any rawhide freezes / feature freezes | ||
| jds2001 | F10 sort of killed that for us for a bit. I think F12 will get us back on track the way things are now iirc. | |
| we agreed to give F11 more time and rob it from F12. | ||
| nirik | so, essentially there would be a fN and then after a few months of stablizing a fN.1 ? | |
| wwoods | yes, but that's irrelevent to the current discussion, where I'm talking about introducing an extra 1-3 month stabilization phase | |
| wwoods | http://wwoods.fedorapeople.org/images/fedora-ideal-schedules.png might help visualize it | |
| * nirik moves that we all ponder on this and bring it up in another meeting were we are not already 5min over. ;) | ||
| jwb | need color key | |
| what do the colors mean? | ||
| wwoods | red: merge window (pre-feature freeze). orange: post-feature freeze. blue: release. | |
| green: new post-Beta stabilization period. | ||
| notting | so, essentially: fork rawhide at beta | |
| jwb | wwoods, put it in the png | |
| wwoods | jwb: yeah, working on it | |
| notting | i'm not sure that helps one way or another | |
| we already allow early branching after beta, and no one (*) does it | ||
| j-rod | mandatory branching | |
| wwoods | notting: I think it would - also we don't produce rawhide from the early branch | |
| j-rod | er, make branching after beta mandatory | |
| jds2001 | so in green we're branched and rawhide moves on? | |
| wwoods | anyway, yeah, I don't want to make this a long, long discussion | |
| jds2001: yes | ||
| in the green sections we'd be using bodhi etc. as normal to push updates | ||
| except they'd be getting pushed into the beta | ||
| rather than into the release | ||
| notting | oh, the pain | |
| j-rod | people can continue to throw crap at rawhide if we branch early, and have to think harder before they put stuff into the beta branch | |
| wwoods | anyway, it's mostly a discussion topic, but the actual question is: | |
| if we needed to realign schedules for a fairly large change like this, is it better to rush-rush-rush and have multiple rawhides going at once | ||
| or to, say, skip the spring '10 release | ||
| notting | i suspect you'd still have your two groups of maintainers - those busy developing & bugfixing, who won't have time to look at the earlier rawhide, and the "build everything for all branches", who will just end up building *more* stuff | |
| wwoods | and have a long F13 cycle | |
| jwb | making bodhi do more update pushes will make me cry | |
| wwoods | (this also brings up the question: do we still want to target may day and halloween?) | |
| mharris | That'll be interesting.. F13 coming out on Halloween... even better if it is a Friday the 13th | |
| jds2001 | so we're over for the meeting, this is a really interesting discussion. | |
| Let's table and put it on the agenda for next week? | ||
| wwoods | right - I'm trying to summarize most of the obvious questions and answers before I put together a full proposal | |
| mharris | wwoods: I like the May 1 release schedule... it's my birthday :) | |
| wwoods | but doing a proposed schedule required me to answer those two questions | |
| abadger1999 | It looks like 9 month development scheduling overlapping with FedoraN+1's development. | |
| j-rod | personally, I'd say skip a release rather than rush the hell out of things | |
| abadger1999 | With all of the benefits and drawbacks that entails. | |
| jds2001 | I would rather skip a release than rush things to align the schedule. | |
| wwoods | abadger1999: exactly so. it's essentially the same as the current schedule, except where we now do the release.. we call that "beta". and after N (cur=3) months of kicking it around and pushing fixes through bodhi, *then* we compose a release. | |
| jds2001 | Might be a PR issue, though. | |
| wwoods | doing an extra-long devel cycle for Fedora N implies supporting Fedora (N-2) for an extra-long time | |
| so that's something else to consider.. later | ||
| so, okay, avoid the trainwreck schedule | ||
| wwoods | but we *do* think it's worthwhile to go so far as to skip a release to realign to may 1 / oct 31? | |
| j-rod | I do | |
| notting | i'm still not convinced of the original proposal. which makes the rest of the discussion.... | |
| jds2001 | I think the community expects that alignment, and it was very deliberatly chosen, so yes. | |
| dgilmore | wwoods: right but current policys would cover that | |
| wwoods | notting: right - I'll try to address that stuff as best I can | |
| (3 months might also be a little long - could be 2 months. I think 1 might be too short.) | ||
| f13 | I'd rather spend a release doing nothing but polish and very few invasive features than skip a release. | |
| notting | wwoods: i don't understand you saying 'where we now do the release, we call that "beta"' with respect to your branching | |
| jwb | flow chart required | |
| notting | as the point where rawhide is branched is *NOT* the release date | |
| currently | ||
| f13 | its well before it | |
| jds2001 | notting: right, but when rawhide starts rolling again is release date. | |
| wwoods | notting: we retain some schedule features: 4 months from branch to feature freeze | |
| then two months from feature freeze to a release | ||
| dgilmore | f13: i think i agree | |
| wwoods | currently that's the final release | |
| f13 | is this being discussed for vote today? | |
| jwb | no | |
| f13 | ok. I'm not able to pay much attention | |
| jds2001 | just food for thought. | |
| wwoods | nope, this is just a post-meeting thought-experiment | |
| f13 | ok. | |
| notting | in fact, i think it was tabled 15 minutes ago, and people kept talking :) | |
| jds2001 | :) | |
| wwoods | yeah. if there was a watercooler in here, we'd be standing around it | |
| jwb | we need beer coolers | |
| notting | jds2001: are we officially closing the meeting? | |
| abadger1999 | f13: We could have a four month polish release for F13.5 (Eamon) ;-) | |
| notting | (and who's our lucky summarizer today?) | |
| jds2001 | notting: yeah, let's do that. Great conversation we can take to #fedora-devel or whereever. | |
| -- MEETING END -- | ||
| 2.33 hours is enough for me :) | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
