APAC FAms bi-weekly 2012-05-26 Meeting minutes logs
by Buddhike Kurera
Hello Folks,
Here is the notes for the APAC FAms Bi-weekly meeting on May 26th,
please refer to the full logs at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-26/apac-fam-biwee...
Next meeting June 9th, please add/ update the meeting agenda,
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:APAC_Ambassadors_2012-06-09
Thanks for the participation !
Meeting summary
(http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-26/apac-fam-biwee...)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:APAC_Ambassadors_2012-05-26
(bckurera, 03:58:47)
Ambassador Pinging (bckurera, 03:59:17)
Review *ACTION* items from the last meeting (bckurera, 04:01:33)
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-05/apac.2012-05-0...
(bckurera, 04:02:46)
F17 would be released in a couple days; so hurry up, post all
your planning release parties onto wiki and announce to everyone,
especially your participants (tuanta, 04:07:28)
F17 ISO images might be ready 2 days early to send to mirrors
(tuanta, 04:13:24)
ACTION: all we should update all upcoming F17 release parties
onto wiki (bckurera, 04:14:58)
APAC for FAmSCO (dramsey for you!) (bckurera, 04:15:07)
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2012-May/011613.html
(bckurera, 04:16:57)
APAC Events and Status of F17 Release Parties (dramsey) (bckurera, 04:18:38)
if you are planning for a F17 release party, please do not
forget to estimate for budget and request for funds to get approval on
APAC trac (https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-apac/) asap (tuanta,
04:22:12)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Release_Party_F17_Surakarta
(arifiauo, 04:23:52)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Events#FY13_Q1_.28March_2012_-_May_2012.29_4
and (dramsey, 04:26:52)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Events#FY13_Q2_.28June_2012_-_August_2012....
(dramsey, 04:26:52)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F17_release_events (dramsey, 04:26:53)
Review APAC trac tickets (bckurera, 04:30:04)
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-apac/ticket/27 (bckurera, 04:30:18)
Please use fedora-apac trac for all fund requests so that we
can supoprt your need (bckurera, 04:31:08)
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Reimbursements page need to be
updated. as India Trac is being closed down (maktrix, 04:36:14)
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Reimbursements page need to be
updated. as India Trac is being closed down (dramsey, 04:37:40)
pre-payments could be sometimes happened, First step is let
FAmSCo approve the amount, And mention pre payment with quote, Then
harish will do the rest. (tuanta, 04:40:56)
ACTION: arifiauo Update the
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Reimbursements page (dramsey, 04:42:08)
jurank_dankkal attach quotes and whatever info possible to
ticket. Will be discussed asap after that. (FranciscoD, 04:48:42)
ACTION: jurank_dankkal ping harish about pre-payments
(FranciscoD, 04:49:14)
Open Floor (bckurera, 04:52:59)
the FAmSCo elections this time are open for all contributors
in CLA+1 to vote (tuanta, 04:54:47)
ACTION: FranciscoD make text agenda draft for next meeting
(FranciscoD, 04:59:28)
ACTION: FAm APAC: update wiki page with FUDCon reports +
photos + presentations (FranciscoD, 05:00:23)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:KualaLumpur_2012/Reports_photos_and...
(FranciscoD, 05:00:36)
Meeting ended at 05:02:14 UTC (full logs).
Action items
all we should update all upcoming F17 release parties onto wiki
arifiauo Update the http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Reimbursements page
jurank_dankkal ping harish about pre-payments
FranciscoD make text agenda draft for next meeting
FAm APAC: update wiki page with FUDCon reports + photos + presentations
Action items, by person
arifiauo
arifiauo Update the http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Reimbursements page
FranciscoD
FranciscoD make text agenda draft for next meeting
jurank_dankkal
jurank_dankkal ping harish about pre-payments
UNASSIGNED
all we should update all upcoming F17 release parties onto wiki
FAm APAC: update wiki page with FUDCon reports + photos + presentations
People present (lines said)
bckurera (86)
dramsey (52)
tuanta (45)
FranciscoD (38)
maktrix (35)
kaio_ph (34)
arifiauo (33)
jurank_dankkal (30)
zodbot (21)
inode0 (7)
dan408 (5)
MarkDude (3)
hanthana (2)
Suresh (1)
bckurera_ (0)
--
Regards,
Buddhike Chandradeepa Kurera(bckurera)
Fedora Ambassador - APAC region
Event Liaison - Design Team
Email: bckurera@fedoraproject.org | IRC: bckurera
12 years
Fedora Kernel Meeting Minutes 05-24-2012
by Josh Boyer
==============================
#fedora-meeting: Fedora Kernel
==============================
Meeting started by jwb at 18:00:29 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-25/fedora-kernel....
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Release overview (jwb, 18:01:02)
* Release overview - F15 (jwb, 18:01:53)
* F15 to stay on 3.3.y until EOL (jwb, 18:05:24)
* bugs will be looked over and triaged one final time (jwb, 18:05:45)
* Release overview - F16 (jwb, 18:05:50)
* Release overview - F16/F17 (jwb, 18:07:33)
* F16/F17 moving to 3.4 once 3.3.7 moves to stable updates (jwb,
18:07:52)
* iwlwifi seems to have more issues. again. for like the 3rd kernel
release (jwb, 18:09:23)
* ACTION: jforbes to discuss 3.4 iwlwifi issues with linville before
rebase (jwb, 18:10:45)
* F17 Gold. Yay. 0-day kernel updates will be pending for all (jwb,
18:15:34)
* 3.4 rebase (iwlwifi issues aside) should close a number of f17 bugs
(jwb, 18:17:08)
* Release overview - rawhide (jwb, 18:17:41)
* rawhide rebased to 3.5 merge window (jwb, 18:20:21)
* uprobes merged and enabled (jwb, 18:20:26)
* Open Floor (jwb, 18:22:13)
* kernel-test regression test framework on fedorahosted now (jwb,
18:23:05)
* LINK: http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=kernel-tests.git (jwb,
18:23:15)
Meeting ended at 18:30:11 UTC.
Action Items
------------
* jforbes to discuss 3.4 iwlwifi issues with linville before rebase
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* jforbes
* jforbes to discuss 3.4 iwlwifi issues with linville before rebase
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* jwb (54)
* davej (26)
* jforbes (18)
* nirik (8)
* zodbot (3)
* brunowolff (3)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
12 years
Fedora 17 Final is declared GOLD!
by Robyn Bergeron
At the Fedora 17 Final Go/No-Go meeting today, the F17 Final Release
(RC4) was declared GOLD and ready for GA on May 29, 2012.
Thanks to everyone who came today, and to everyone who helped get the
Beefy Miracle ready for public devouring. :) Links to meeting minutes
and logs follow below.
Cheers,
-Robyn
Meeting Minutes:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2012-05-24/fedora_17_fi...
Log:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2012-05-24/fedora_17_fi...
==========================================================
#fedora-meeting-1: Fedora 17 Final Go NoGo Meeting Round 2
==========================================================
Meeting started by rbergeron at 17:01:09 UTC. The full logs are
available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2012-05-24/fedora_17_fi...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Why are we here (rbergero, 17:05:46)
* The purpose of this meeting is to determine the "shippiness" of the
final release of F17 (RC4, to be specific). All blocker bugs must be
resolved, the test matrices need to be completed, we need to meet
final release criteria, QA needs to be on board. :) (rbergero,
17:06:54)
* Blocker Bugs (rbergero, 17:07:23)
* LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers
(tflink, 17:08:21)
* (824191) nfsiso install hangs during reboot (tflink, 17:09:32)
* LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824191 (tflink,
17:09:32)
* Proposed Blocker, NEW (tflink, 17:09:32)
* AGREED: - 824191 - RejectedBlocker - While this is a bug, it doesn't
directly violate any of the Fedora 17 release criteria (the install
completes, the installed system works). Given that it should only
affect a minority of users and could be fixed with an updates.img -
it doesn't need to block release. (tflink, 17:18:12)
* (824641) kernel 3.3 crashes with blk_dump_rq_flags+ when using a
file:/// backend instead of phy:// backend (tflink, 17:18:29)
* LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824641 (tflink,
17:18:32)
* Proposed Blocker, NEW (tflink, 17:18:35)
* AGREED: - 824641 - RejectedBlocker - This appears to be a Dom0 issue
instead of a DomU issue which does not violate any of the Fedora 17
release criteria. In addition, the use of file:// storage backends
is not recommended and phy:// storage backends do not seem affected
by this bug (tflink, 17:34:24)
* Release Criteria and Test Matrices (rbergero, 17:35:34)
* LINK:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_17_Final_RC4_Install
(tflink, 17:36:14)
* LINK:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_17_Final_RC4_Desktop
(tflink, 17:36:28)
* 813257 is waived as a blocker as the only options are to wait
indefinitely for a fix or drop kdepim entirely; we can't just drop
the offending application as it's part of kdepim, which we need
(adamw, 17:46:13)
* 819275 agreed not to be worthy of blocker consideration as it
affects fallback mode only, and fallback mode is niche now (adamw,
18:03:31)
* Ship or not to ship, that is the question (rbergero, 18:04:32)
* AGREED: We shall ship the Beefy Miracle (aka F17) on Tuesday, May 29
(rbergero, 18:05:56)
Meeting ended at 18:07:23 UTC.
Action Items
------------
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* adamw (90)
* tflink (56)
* rbergero (47)
* dgilmore (24)
* darnok (13)
* akshayvyas (7)
* nirik (6)
* red_alert (5)
* zodbot (5)
* kparal (3)
* mbroyles__ (3)
* ADSLLC (1)
* rbergeron (1)
* satellit_Tris55R (1)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
12 years
Summary/Minutes from today's irc support sig meeting (2012-05-24)
by Kevin Fenzi
=============================================
#fedora-meeting: IRC Support SIG (2012-05-24)
=============================================
Meeting started by nirik at 17:00:00 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-24/irc-support-si...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* init process (nirik, 17:00:00)
* Week in review (nirik, 17:02:54)
* LINK: http://fedora.theglaserfamily.org/ircstats/fedora-weekly.html
(nirik, 17:02:54)
* ticket 108 - Proposal for Ammendment to the IRC Support SIGPolicy
(nirik, 17:05:59)
* further discussion about a probation period for new ops (nirik,
17:12:23)
* ticket 107 - Mass Removal Of Stagnant Voting Members (nirik,
17:13:16)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/107 (nirik,
17:14:11)
* will collect up the votes in ticket and clarify. (nirik, 17:21:08)
* AGREED: will remove folks who no longer wish to be involved and say
so (nirik, 17:22:48)
* ticket 105 - #fedora-social and #fedora channel nomination N3LRX
(nirik, 17:26:57)
* ticket 112 - Improper use of zodbot op abilities in #fedora (nb)
(nirik, 17:30:11)
* ticket 110 - Release ban requested for user OzBorne in #fedora
(nirik, 17:36:22)
* AGREED: will wait and see if they require more banning for further
actions (nirik, 17:45:25)
* ticket 111 - Improve handling of unregistered users (nirik, 17:45:32)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/111
(EvilBob, 17:45:55)
* Open Floor (nirik, 17:48:25)
* AGREED: will stop feedback now and re-enable before release.
(nirik, 17:51:41)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/108 Work on
this week, vote on Thursday (EvilBob, 17:52:28)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/107 Vote next
week I will work on a wiki page for voting (EvilBob, 17:52:55)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/105 vote on
Thursday (EvilBob, 17:53:15)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/112 Handled
(EvilBob, 17:53:28)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/110 Let'em
swing (EvilBob, 17:53:51)
* LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/111 Closed,
Dead Horse (EvilBob, 17:54:10)
Meeting ended at 17:55:01 UTC.
Action Items
------------
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* nirik (113)
* EvilBob (108)
* Sonar_Gal (58)
* dcr226 (49)
* Khaytsus (9)
* FranciscoD (5)
* zodbot (4)
* N3LRX (3)
* cyberworm54 (3)
* Sonar_Guy (1)
* LetoTo (1)
--
17:00:00 <nirik> #startmeeting IRC Support SIG (2012-05-24)
17:00:00 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu May 24 17:00:00 2012 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:00 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:00 <nirik> #meetingname irc-support-sig
17:00:00 <nirik> #topic init process
17:00:00 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'irc-support-sig'
17:00:19 * N3LRX
17:00:23 * FranciscoD
17:00:24 <nirik> #chair EvilBob dcr226
17:00:24 <zodbot> Current chairs: EvilBob dcr226 nirik
17:00:25 * EvilBob
17:00:55 * nirik waits for folks to come in
17:01:08 <nirik> note that the go/no-go meeting for f17 is happening in #fedora-meeting-1
17:01:15 * dcr226 partys like its 1999
17:01:16 * FranciscoD is sitting in there too :P
17:01:19 * EvilBob hears the noon siren, time to get out of the mines...
17:02:07 * nirik will wait another minute for folks to wander in..
17:02:29 * Sonar_Gal is partially here but may have to leave quickly so get it started or cancel till next week!!!
17:02:41 <Sonar_Gal> To much to do
17:02:48 <nirik> ok, we can dive on in...
17:02:54 <nirik> #topic Week in review
17:02:54 <nirik> http://fedora.theglaserfamily.org/ircstats/fedora-weekly.html
17:02:59 <nirik> anything for week in review?
17:03:15 <nirik> bunch of f17 folks now... but otherwise pretty normal IMHO
17:03:28 <EvilBob> A lot of people chomping at the bit for F17 is all
17:03:55 <nirik> yeah.
17:03:55 <EvilBob> Oh...
17:04:02 <dcr226> f17 is pretty nice...nothing to report here
17:04:06 <FranciscoD> aye
17:04:13 <FranciscoD> a few bugs, but been taken care of
17:04:16 <dcr226> apart from lxpanel turning me over at every available opportunity
17:04:54 <EvilBob> New user from "downunder" He tries real hard and is not quite getting a few things. Lets try to give him a break as he is trying, he's been getting ganged up on a bit.
17:05:14 * FranciscoD notes that
17:05:40 <nirik> yeah, one of the things we need to keep trying to improve on
17:05:47 <nirik> ok, moving on.
17:05:51 <EvilBob> Yup
17:05:59 <nirik> #topic ticket 108 - Proposal for Ammendment to the IRC Support SIGPolicy
17:06:26 <nirik> I liked the last draft I looked at with a few nitpicks. I think EvilBob made some changes for those nitpicks, but haven't had a chance to look super closely.
17:06:45 <EvilBob> the current revision is here following nirik's input yesterday https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=User:Dp67/sandbox/irc-sig&old...
17:07:26 <nirik> EvilBob: yeah, N3LRX did a commit on the current page and backed it out so we could use diff on it. ;) But yeah, mostly looked good to me.
17:07:27 * Khaytsus
17:07:41 * Sonar_Guy
17:07:54 <EvilBob> One question I have on it
17:08:03 * nirik hasn't heard much feedback from others.
17:08:16 <EvilBob> In the past we had a probation for new ops, did we want to add that back in?
17:08:36 <Sonar_Gal> We should 90 days wasn't it
17:08:53 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: Yeah 3 months/90 days
17:09:10 <nirik> well, I'm not sure what that means... ?
17:09:19 <EvilBob> The problem being, what does it mean
17:09:23 <nirik> that their status can be removed by anyone for any reason? or ?
17:09:31 <EvilBob> What are the expectations and repercussions
17:09:35 <nirik> or at least removed more easily than voting them out?
17:09:41 <Sonar_Gal> nirik, sorry last week of school last week and this week so no time to reply to emails. Finished school yesterday and at school at 7am for rotc practice today
17:10:12 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: we have until next week to vote on and work on this.
17:10:14 * nirik notes he also has been swamped, and would be fine with further discussion on this draft. perhaps we can get it so everyone is happy with it. ;)
17:10:16 <Sonar_Gal> Before it was 90 days of bot-ops and if they couldn't handle the situations correctly they were removed.
17:10:41 <Sonar_Gal> This gives time to see if these people can be an op in the channels they have bot ops in
17:10:55 <Sonar_Gal> or of they need to go full op or just stay bot op
17:11:03 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: can we get together as a small group before next weeks meeting and work out the language for this?
17:11:34 <Sonar_Gal> EvilBob, Won't be till Tues or Wed with the holiday this weekend and graduation
17:11:36 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: I agree with the 90days as long as we have a meaning to it.
17:11:53 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: I can make myself available on Tuesday
17:11:55 <Sonar_Gal> ok
17:12:06 * nirik isn't sure it makes sense, but could be persuaded.
17:12:23 <nirik> #info further discussion about a probation period for new ops
17:12:26 * dcr226 prepares the persuasion equipment
17:12:32 * nirik runs for his life
17:12:35 <EvilBob> nirik: I think we can work on it in a small group and add it to the ticket for consideration
17:12:36 <dcr226> ;-)
17:12:46 <nirik> sounds good to me.
17:12:55 <Sonar_Gal> that works
17:12:57 <nirik> any other comments on this ticket? or should we move along?
17:13:03 <Sonar_Gal> next
17:13:09 <EvilBob> Next
17:13:16 <nirik> #topic ticket 107 - Mass Removal Of Stagnant Voting Members
17:13:36 <nirik> so, are we ready to tally here?
17:13:40 <nirik> or want more time?
17:13:58 <EvilBob> I'll make a comment on the other ticket about the probation item
17:14:01 <Sonar_Gal> I thought we were not removing op's unless they wanted to be removed
17:14:11 <nirik> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/107
17:14:26 <EvilBob> If they have not been heard from should they be kept?
17:14:34 <Sonar_Gal> some bounce in and out when they have time and other's just have no time right now
17:14:37 <nirik> Sonar_Gal: under the current rules ops can be removed if there are votes to do so.
17:14:44 <Sonar_Gal> oh ok
17:15:02 <Khaytsus> Some of those OPs might not even repond or pay attention anymore
17:15:19 <nirik> I'm fine with removing everyone who didn't reply to the ticket indicating that they wished to remain/stay involved.
17:15:35 <Sonar_Gal> -1 to kanarip as he is in fedora and social and does help or chat when he has time
17:15:42 <nirik> but I am -1 to any of those people who did reply saying they wanted to be involved.
17:15:44 <Sonar_Gal> He has a different nick in -social
17:16:06 <EvilBob> Also in the case jsmith he was never elected in to an ops position and in the past we have never had a provision for honorary special privs
17:16:06 <Khaytsus> Yes, if anyone wants to remain on the list, I say remove them from the cut
17:16:35 <EvilBob> He was only added to being an op as he was FPL
17:16:35 <nirik> EvilBob: we never had a clear process for adding people in the past...
17:16:52 <Sonar_Gal> He is the only one on the list that I see keeping
17:16:53 <EvilBob> nirik: we have always voted on ops
17:17:09 <EvilBob> nirik: Since the start of the SIG
17:17:10 * dcr226 is -1 for thomasj and mharris
17:17:24 <Sonar_Gal> most were given op's by spot cause it was needed and most are not around now
17:17:54 <Sonar_Gal> kanarip, got op's before the sig but is around and helps and chats in -social
17:17:58 <nirik> actually I don't see jsmith as an op anywhere
17:18:11 <dcr226> nirik, he's just a member of the sig afaik
17:18:12 <Sonar_Gal> he was only an op as the FPL
17:18:17 <EvilBob> I'm cool with keeping thomasj, if mharris wants to be an op still I'm fine with that also, if he just want's a voice thenthere is the "voting memeber" option in the proposed changes.
17:18:27 <nirik> Sonar_Gal: he's not in any of the access lists.
17:18:52 <Sonar_Gal> nirik, kanarip ?
17:18:56 <Sonar_Gal> or jsmith?
17:19:00 <nirik> jsmith:
17:19:14 <Sonar_Gal> ah ok
17:19:26 <EvilBob> nirik: So if jsmith not an op and only a "voting member" I am fine with that staying
17:19:32 <nirik> so, where are we here. It's a bit of a muddle with all the people in one ticket.
17:19:44 <nirik> EvilBob: that seems to be the case...
17:19:50 <nirik> from what I can see.
17:19:58 <EvilBob> nirik: How about I clean up the ticket and make it more clear who is what
17:20:16 <EvilBob> nirik: we can vote things next week I would think.
17:20:19 <nirik> EvilBob: could you add a running tally too?
17:20:37 <EvilBob> nirik: Yeah that was my plan, who voted and what they voted
17:20:44 <nirik> sounds great to me.
17:20:52 <nirik> any objections or further ideas?
17:21:00 <EvilBob> I'll try to work on that today
17:21:03 <dcr226> well....you can make it a bit easier:
17:21:04 <Sonar_Gal> We need to look at the -social list of op's also and remove a few that are inactive
17:21:08 <nirik> #info will collect up the votes in ticket and clarify.
17:21:31 <dcr226> there are a couple of members who have already intinated that they have no issue with their removal....surely these can just go, with a view to making the list smaller?
17:21:40 <dcr226> warren was one iirc
17:22:04 <nirik> sure, I'm fine with that... no reason to keep someone against their will
17:22:12 <EvilBob> dcr226: Agreed
17:22:16 <Sonar_Gal> agree
17:22:36 <nirik> I can clean those up as they appear.
17:22:48 <nirik> #agreed will remove folks who no longer wish to be involved and say so
17:22:51 <EvilBob> nirik: Is it OK if I go with the classifications of members as in the proposal?
17:23:06 <nirik> op vs voting ? or ?
17:23:10 <EvilBob> Yeah
17:23:24 <dcr226> I wonder if this would be better as a temporary page on the wiki? A table of members maybe?
17:23:29 <EvilBob> op <what channel> and/or Voting member
17:23:39 <EvilBob> dcr226: Damn good idea
17:23:57 <EvilBob> dcr226: I'll set up a sandbox to play in
17:24:01 * dcr226 avoids any wiki-wrangling usually
17:24:16 <EvilBob> dcr226: As long as I get input I can handle it
17:24:17 <nirik> EvilBob: so, folks who are not ops but have been invited to help out/provide feedback in the -ops channel, are voting members? or is there another state there/
17:24:51 <EvilBob> nirik: I think that invitees to -ops are different than the "voting upper class"
17:25:11 <Sonar_Gal> Thought we decided only Sig/Fas could vote
17:25:23 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: Right
17:25:26 <nirik> ok, so then there needs to be another state for that? invitee?
17:25:29 <Sonar_Gal> that is something else we need to get worked out
17:25:36 <EvilBob> nirik: I think it is covered
17:25:49 <EvilBob> I will review the draft and make sure
17:26:12 <EvilBob> I think we can move on and work on this in the sandbox and on the ticket
17:26:22 <nirik> ok, so, clean up the current ticket and add a vote tally, I will remove people who want to be removed this week, and the rest we can finish up next week?
17:26:36 <EvilBob> Sounds fair to me
17:26:38 <Sonar_Gal> +1
17:26:43 <EvilBob> +1
17:26:47 <nirik> cool.
17:26:57 <nirik> #topic ticket 105 - #fedora-social and #fedora channel nomination N3LRX
17:27:10 <nirik> shall we vote on this? or do we want further discussion?
17:27:23 <EvilBob> THis is a discussion meeting on this ticket
17:27:36 * dcr226 +1, don't think this will need discussion
17:27:36 <EvilBob> as noted in the ticket
17:27:41 <dcr226> to clarify: I can't see anyone objecting
17:27:50 <dcr226> oh...ok, my bad...pre-emptive +1 then ;-)
17:27:59 * nirik is +1, but if we want to wait another week for voting I don't care.
17:28:12 <Sonar_Gal> I have no problems with N3LRX getting op's in those channels he is level headed and normally fun to be around
17:28:14 <EvilBob> from the ticket "I'm going to change the vote date to 2012-05-31 to allow discussion on 2012-05-24. Both the nominee and I can not make the meeting (discussion) this week, 2012-05-17."
17:28:35 <Sonar_Gal> ok
17:28:50 <EvilBob> I think it's fair that we follow that as I posted it last week
17:29:09 * dcr226 is cool with that
17:29:11 <nirik> sure, fine with me.
17:29:12 <Sonar_Gal> ok
17:29:17 <nirik> N3LRX: anything to add? ;)
17:29:21 <EvilBob> NEXT!
17:29:58 <N3LRX> I enjoy working with the sig and look forward to becoming more involved.
17:30:02 <nirik> ok, moving along. :)
17:30:08 <nirik> thanks N3LRX
17:30:11 <nirik> #topic ticket 112 - Improper use of zodbot op abilities in #fedora (nb)
17:30:22 <EvilBob> N3LRX: You are an asset
17:30:29 <nirik> I've removed zodbot from the autoop list, so it shouldn't have any op privs anymore.
17:30:37 <dcr226> EvilBob, you are an ass
17:30:40 <dcr226> asset*
17:30:45 <nirik> With that, I personally am fine saying 'don't do this' and closing the ticket.
17:30:46 <dcr226> damn you <enter> key
17:30:47 <dcr226> ;-)
17:30:48 <EvilBob> dcr226: Tell me something I don't know?
17:30:51 <dcr226> LOL
17:31:04 * dcr226 couldn't resist that one
17:31:28 <EvilBob> nirik: So zodbot can not get or give ops in any of our channels, correct?
17:31:44 <nirik> yep.
17:31:48 <nirik> it was set to 'auto op'
17:31:54 <nirik> so when it rejoined chanserv would op it
17:32:05 <nirik> that is no longer the case
17:32:05 <dcr226> it is still capable of getting +o on -ops
17:32:17 <nirik> oh? did I miss one?
17:32:19 * nirik fixes
17:32:38 <EvilBob> nirik: while we are on the access list item
17:32:52 <nirik> no, it was just voiced there.
17:32:56 <EvilBob> nirik: nb was given ops in the access list for -social
17:33:27 <nirik> yeah. and the bot.
17:33:36 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: You remember the probation bit better than most of us, would this be incorrect he should be on the bot only?
17:33:47 <Sonar_Gal> bot only for 90 days
17:34:02 <Sonar_Gal> Then if he is voted to be a full op after the 90 days
17:34:03 * nirik notes thats no where in our current policies. ;) but I don't care much
17:34:13 <EvilBob> I will vote +1 to agree with Sonar_Gal
17:34:23 <Sonar_Gal> That's what it was before the last write up
17:34:35 <Sonar_Gal> hopefully We can get all that fixed next week
17:34:40 <EvilBob> nirik: lets not get in to the lackings in the "current policies"
17:34:44 <EvilBob> ;)
17:34:50 <nirik> how about we wait on that until we approve the new stuff...
17:34:59 <nirik> then we can also apply it retroactively
17:35:02 <nirik> if we like
17:35:20 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: That good with you?
17:35:38 <Sonar_Gal> ok
17:35:53 <EvilBob> I'm cool with that
17:36:02 <nirik> ok, shall we move on then?
17:36:11 <EvilBob> Sorry for adding things to the ticket discussion
17:36:16 <EvilBob> NEXT!
17:36:22 <nirik> 2 more tickets. ;)
17:36:22 <nirik> #topic ticket 110 - Release ban requested for user OzBorne in #fedora
17:36:38 <EvilBob> I am naturally +1 to banning him
17:36:50 <nirik> I would be against the ban if the user would appologize or say they were going to improve or anything really...
17:36:51 <dcr226> EvilBob, that means you are -1 to the ticket
17:37:13 <nirik> he was trying to comment there this morning, but couldn't get logged in.
17:37:15 <EvilBob> nirik: they have done so in the past and gone back on it
17:37:22 <nirik> yep.
17:37:37 <nirik> so, I'm sadly +1 and hope next release they will be better.
17:37:43 <EvilBob> nirik: calling ops from the french channel on the phone is a perfect example
17:37:44 * dcr226 thinks the user isn't currently banned
17:37:55 <N3LRX> he isnt
17:37:55 <nirik> dcr226: they aren't. They had a week and it just expired.
17:37:59 <EvilBob> dcr226: no, the one week ban just expired
17:38:04 <dcr226> ok, let me break this down a sec
17:38:11 <Sonar_Gal> and if it happens they get banned for the remainder of the life cycle
17:38:20 <dcr226> the ticket is to request the removal of a ban, which has actually expired
17:38:22 <Sonar_Gal> He only had a week ban that was lifted this morning
17:38:32 <EvilBob> dcr226: no, it is for a Fedora™ release
17:38:32 <dcr226> so the ticket is null and void, close... WONTFIX
17:38:38 <dcr226> ahhhhh
17:38:50 <dcr226> ok ok, I grokked "Release" as, release the ban
17:38:55 <EvilBob> it is a release ban not a ban release
17:39:00 <nirik> I'll note the first thing they did this morning was to come in and complain about this ticket.
17:39:28 <EvilBob> I'm not sure what they said this morning
17:39:35 <EvilBob> I just know they said it to me
17:39:38 <dcr226> in the interests of "policy", I'm -1 to the ticket...and I'll explain why. The user has just expired a 1 week ban, and hasn't gotten themselves re-banned as yet
17:39:46 <dcr226> my shout would be, the next ban is a release ban
17:39:54 <Sonar_Gal> +1
17:39:56 * dcr226 hopes that made any sort of sense
17:39:58 <EvilBob> dcr226: They were release banned in the past
17:40:17 <EvilBob> It's a "preemptive strike"
17:40:20 <dcr226> yeah
17:40:31 <Sonar_Gal> has happened what 2 or 3 releases now
17:40:32 <dcr226> I'm not sure I'm personally +1 for a pre-empt
17:40:46 <dcr226> but obviously I won't loose sleep over it, just voicing an opinion :)
17:41:10 * nirik is ok either way. I'm sure they will mess up again and get the ban, but if we don't want to wait...
17:41:18 <dcr226> nirik, I agree...it will be within days
17:41:29 <EvilBob> As they said in the movie industry, No redeeming social value, so it gets X and not R
17:41:29 <Khaytsus> We'll leave the rope out for them
17:42:14 <nirik> so... whats the consensus here then?
17:42:24 <EvilBob> So who here is +1 for the ban?
17:42:29 <dcr226> vote tally time :)
17:42:31 * dcr226 -1
17:42:38 <EvilBob> or -1 for not ban (yet)
17:42:38 <nirik> +1
17:42:43 <EvilBob> +1
17:42:44 <Sonar_Gal> -1 let him hang himself again
17:42:56 <dcr226> ooer...deadlock....lets wrestle!!
17:43:06 <Sonar_Gal> Khaytsus, ?
17:43:07 <EvilBob> Fair enough, let him swing
17:43:11 * dcr226 gets his clothes off....ready!
17:43:17 <Khaytsus> +1 why waste our time with it
17:43:24 <dcr226> its gold :)
17:43:31 <LetoTo> blind!
17:43:39 <dcr226> Heh
17:43:40 <EvilBob> at 3-2 we have not reached a "broad consensus" IMO
17:43:48 <dcr226> yep, good for me
17:44:28 <EvilBob> nirik: Add a final warning note to the ticket if you would please.
17:44:32 <nirik> so, close the ticket taking no action? ask for more voting?
17:44:55 <nirik> I can try... I don't suspect they will listen... ;)
17:44:58 <EvilBob> nirik: Just close it, time will handle it I think.
17:45:08 <nirik> ok.
17:45:09 * dcr226 doesn't think it will last long either fwiw
17:45:10 <EvilBob> Listen or not, we documented it
17:45:25 <nirik> #agreed will wait and see if they require more banning for further actions
17:45:32 <nirik> #topic ticket 111 - Improve handling of unregistered users
17:45:42 <nirik> so, I don't think there's much we can do here.
17:45:55 <nirik> technically speaking the ideas aren't really possible. ;(
17:45:55 <dcr226> agreed...close WONTFIX imho
17:45:55 <EvilBob> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/111
17:45:58 <Khaytsus> Can't fix stupid.
17:45:58 <Sonar_Gal> I actuallly helped 2 users get set up this week
17:46:10 <Sonar_Gal> No system is slow also
17:46:14 <EvilBob> Khaytsus: "Here's your sign"
17:46:25 <Sonar_Gal> They don't get the emails as fast as they think they should
17:46:52 <EvilBob> The user that filed the ticket that was not the case however
17:47:00 <Sonar_Gal> Correct
17:47:06 <EvilBob> their client was joining too fast
17:47:08 <Khaytsus> I too get dumped into unreg even with server password AND a delay. Annoys me too. But it's a freenode problem as far as I can tell. Some people have more trouble than others.
17:47:12 <Sonar_Gal> I helped 2 and neither or them filed a ticket
17:47:13 <EvilBob> I helped them with that
17:47:17 <Khaytsus> Can't fix it on our end, and I do _not_ want to remove the +r
17:47:40 <EvilBob> Khaytsus: from the channel topic "Depending on your client "/set irc_join_delay 10" to delay joining 10 seconds"
17:47:41 <nirik> yeah, we have gone over this.
17:47:49 <dcr226> and over.....and over
17:47:58 <EvilBob> nirik: close it "dead horse"
17:48:01 <EvilBob> ;)
17:48:03 <nirik> we could kill the redirect and make people not be able to speak until registered... but then they just get confused
17:48:16 <EvilBob> We need that as a ticket option
17:48:16 <nirik> anyhow, yeah, +1... sorry, not a way to fix.
17:48:22 <nirik> heh
17:48:25 <nirik> #topic Open Floor
17:48:29 <nirik> anything for open floor?
17:48:53 <Sonar_Gal> quick recap
17:48:57 <EvilBob> I really hope to get feedback on the amendment item
17:49:11 <Sonar_Gal> We are going to work on the sig this week.
17:49:18 <Sonar_Gal> Tuesday
17:49:22 <dcr226> hold up...weren't we going to do something with the feedback spammer?
17:49:29 <EvilBob> Yup the "probation" bit
17:49:43 <Sonar_Gal> EvilBob, and a few other things that need to be added
17:49:54 <EvilBob> dcr226: Yeah we were going to drop it two weeks ago IIRC until the release
17:50:05 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: Right
17:50:09 <nirik> dcr226: who?
17:50:21 <EvilBob> nirik: fedbot
17:50:22 <nirik> oh yeah.
17:50:24 <dcr226> nirik, the fedbot feedback spammer...we were going to switch it off for a bit
17:50:26 <nirik> we should do that now.
17:50:29 <cyberworm54> hello guys did the meting started yet?
17:50:29 <nirik> I just forgot.
17:50:30 <EvilBob> It's kind of late now
17:50:36 <nirik> cyberworm54: which meeting are you looking for?
17:50:46 <nirik> lets stop it now and turn it on release night eve.
17:50:54 <Sonar_Gal> nirik, +1
17:50:58 <cyberworm54> nirik infrastructure
17:50:58 <EvilBob> nirik: +1
17:51:05 <nirik> cyberworm54: in 9minutes here.
17:51:11 <EvilBob> cyberworm54: no this is the IRC SIG
17:51:12 <nirik> cyberworm54: so you are early. ;)
17:51:13 <cyberworm54> nirik thank you
17:51:30 <EvilBob> Sonar_Gal: back to your recap
17:51:41 <nirik> #agreed will stop feedback now and re-enable before release.
17:51:41 <nirik> Anything else?
17:52:06 <Sonar_Gal> EvilBob, the sig for op's powers
17:52:28 <EvilBob> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/108 Work on this week, vote on Thursday
17:52:35 <Sonar_Gal> correct
17:52:55 <EvilBob> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/107 Vote next week I will work on a wiki page for voting
17:53:15 <EvilBob> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/105 vote on Thursday
17:53:28 <EvilBob> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/112 Handled
17:53:34 <Khaytsus> Gotta run, meeting
17:53:49 <Sonar_Gal> that should cover it
17:53:51 <EvilBob> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/110 Let'em swing
17:54:10 <EvilBob> https://fedorahosted.org/irc-support-sig/ticket/111 Closed, Dead Horse
17:54:18 <EvilBob> Put a bow on it
17:54:33 <Sonar_Gal> yeah
17:54:37 <Sonar_Gal> Lots to do this week
17:54:47 <Sonar_Gal> ok that should cover it
17:54:55 <EvilBob> s/this/every
17:54:57 <EvilBob> ;)
17:54:58 <nirik> ok, thanks for coming everyone!
17:55:01 <nirik> #endmeeting
12 years
[KFI] Rangkuman Meeting 24 May 2012
by Prima Yogi Loviniltra
Hi Semua,
Terima kasih kepada teman-teman KPLI Padang, IBT Regional Padang, UNP, UPI
& UNAND yang telah bersedia hadir.
Rangkuman meeting :
Minutes:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-id/2012-05-24/fedora-id.2012-05-2...
Minutes (text):
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-id/2012-05-24/fedora-id.2012-05-2...
Log:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-id/2012-05-24/fedora-id.2012-05-2...
==================
#fedora-id Meeting
==================
Meeting started by jurank_dankkal at 13:04:41 UTC. The full logs are
available athttp://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-id/2012-05-24/fedora-id.2012-05...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* Rencana FAD Padang (jurank_dankkal, 13:06:07)
* LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD (jurank_dankkal,
13:09:12)
* ACTION: Meminta bantuan KPLI Pdg, IBT Pdg & UNP untuk menguruskan
tempat FAD (jurank_dankkal, 13:11:14)
* ACTION: mencari sponsor tempat acara (jurank_dankkal, 13:19:07)
* IDEA: Graha Telkom Sumbar Free untuk acara2 komunitas
(jurank_dankkal, 13:22:09)
* ACTION: inibudi , arief , blankxys akan membantu menguruskan Graha
Telkom untuk FAD (jurank_dankkal, 13:24:54)
* fasilitas yang di perlukan, koneksi internet, projector, meja+kursi
untuk speaker dan peserta (jurank_dankkal, 13:29:21)
* ACTION: betefive, rocketsid , blankxys , inibudi , arief akan
mengkonfirmasi secepatnya mengenai gedung FAD (jurank_dankkal,
13:41:41)
* Biaya FAD Padang (jurank_dankkal, 13:42:02)
* ACTION: acara akan di adakan sekitar bulan agustus, selama satu hari
dari jam 10-5, tempat rencana Graha Telkom, UPI, Poltek Unand
(jurank_dankkal, 13:55:09)
* IDEA: memberikan sertifikat kepada yang mengahadiri FAD
(jurank_dankkal, 14:15:24)
* ACTION: konsumsi menggunakan katering Arief_ dengan harga Rp20000
per kepala (jurank_dankkal, 14:21:10)
* LINK: http://i.imgur.com/in9Lc.jpg (jurank_dankkal, 14:28:16)
* IDEA: target peserta 50 orang pertama yang akan mendapatkan snack
(jurank_dankkal, 14:42:18)
* IDEA: konsumsi cuma buat 50 orang pendatng yg hadir awal, bukan yang
register awal (jurank_dankkal, 14:48:01)
* LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/PoloShirt
(jurank_dankkal, 15:04:13)
* ACTION: budget yang di perlukan untuk saat ini adalah Rp.3.150.000
(jurank_dankkal, 15:23:31)
Meeting ended at 15:23:49 UTC.
--
*Best Regards,*
*PRIMA YOGI LOVINILTRA*
Fedora Contributor & Ambassadors
*Indonesian guy who live in and love Malaysia*
*M: (6)016 640 0385*
*W: *http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jurankdankkal* <http://numoss.org/>*
*B: **http://yogi.numoss.org/ <http://numoss.org/>*
*A: http://about.me/loviniltra*
*L: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/prima-yogi-loviniltra/44/517/148<http://about.me/loviniltra>
*
*
This message is a PRIVATE communication. This message and all attachments
are a private communication sent by a representative of me and may be
confidential or protected by privilege. If you are not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or use of the information contained in or attached to this
message is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender of the delivery
error by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system.
Thank you.*
12 years
i18n meeting summary (2012-05-24)
by Akira TAGOH
=====================
#fedora-meeting: i18n
=====================
Meeting started by tagoh at 05:03:00 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-24/i18n.2012-05-2...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* agenda and roll call (tagoh, 05:03:14)
* LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/I18N/Meetings/2012-05-24
(tagoh, 05:03:23)
* F17 (tagoh, 05:06:40)
* LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824307 (juhp,
05:12:10)
* F18 (tagoh, 05:17:28)
* Input Methods (tagoh, 05:26:42)
* LINK:
https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desktop-devel-list/2012-May/msg00286.html
(fujiwarat, 05:33:20)
* Fonts and Rendering (tagoh, 05:50:09)
* Open Floor (tagoh, 05:53:59)
Meeting ended at 05:57:07 UTC.
Action Items
------------
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* tagoh (51)
* epico_laptop (21)
* juhp (12)
* anish_ (10)
* fujiwarat (8)
* zodbot (3)
* dueno (2)
* paragan (1)
Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4
.. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
12 years
Summary/Minutes from today's EPEL sig meeting (2012-05-23 22:00 UTC)
by Kevin Fenzi
====================================
#fedora-meeting-1: EPEL (2012-05-23)
====================================
Meeting started by nirik at 22:12:26 UTC. The full logs are available at
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-1/2012-05-23/epel.2012-05...
.
Meeting summary
---------------
* init process/agenda (nirik, 22:12:27)
* RHEL overlaps (nirik, 22:13:35)
* LINK: http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/epel-clashes/ (nirik,
22:14:26)
* LINK:
http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/epel-clashes/epel-x86_64-clashes
(nirik, 22:39:54)
* LINK: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=140 (nirik,
22:56:31)
* Open Floor (nirik, 22:56:51)
Meeting ended at 22:57:40 UTC.
Action Items
------------
Action Items, by person
-----------------------
* **UNASSIGNED**
* (none)
People Present (lines said)
---------------------------
* nirik (86)
* dgilmore (34)
* stahnma (33)
* smooge (23)
* abadger1999 (11)
* rbergeron (7)
* zodbot (4)
* NiveusLuna (3)
* ktdreyer (2)
* misc (2)
* maxamillion (1)
* tremble (0)
--
22:12:26 <nirik> #startmeeting EPEL (2012-05-23)
22:12:27 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed May 23 22:12:26 2012 UTC. The chair is nirik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:12:27 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
22:12:27 <nirik> #meetingname epel
22:12:27 <nirik> #topic init process/agenda
22:12:27 <nirik> #chair smooge tremble
22:12:27 <nirik> EPEL meeting ping abadger1999 rsc stahnma tremble dgilmore smooge nb maxamillion tremble Jeff_S HackMan
22:12:27 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
22:12:27 <zodbot> Current chairs: nirik smooge tremble
22:12:34 <nirik> ok look, more meetings.
22:12:38 <nirik> see how productive we are. ;)
22:12:43 <abadger1999> hello goodbye. goodbye hello :-)
22:12:48 <nirik> quite
22:12:52 <maxamillion> o hai
22:12:54 <dgilmore> gday
22:12:59 <NiveusLuna> fancy seeing you all here
22:13:06 <nirik> anyhow, as I was saying... I will get the script setup somewhere and anyone who cares to poke at it can do so.
22:13:30 <nirik> ok, moving along.
22:13:35 <nirik> #topic RHEL overlaps
22:14:11 <nirik> ok, skvidal and smooge worked on coming up with a list of where we overlap with RHEL.
22:14:14 * stahnma strongly oppose pulling puppet+rubygems from EPEL
22:14:26 <nirik> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/epel-clashes/
22:14:44 <nirik> so, first the easy thing that I think we can all agree on:
22:14:50 <stahnma> (disclosure: I work at Puppet Labs)
22:14:51 <nirik> we should fix the overlaps in os/optional.
22:15:11 <nirik> and document the packages we are shipping due to arch needs.
22:15:11 * rbergeron pops in
22:15:33 <nirik> hey smooge and rbergeron
22:15:40 <smooge> sorry missed the transition.. was reading bjs's latest email
22:15:45 <smooge> and not replying anymore
22:16:10 * dgilmore thinks that unless a layered product asks us to remove packages they ship they should remain in epel
22:16:12 <nirik> yeah, so I was saying that we need to fix the overlaps in os/optional. Does anyone disagree with that?
22:16:26 <dgilmore> nirik: no that needs fixed
22:16:28 <smooge> no i think those should get pulled.
22:16:51 <nirik> and we need to document the ones we are shipping for special arch needs that fit into that bucket.
22:16:51 <stahnma> +1
22:16:58 <smooge> dgilmore, what steps would I need to put in something in various trees to help make sure it doesn't happen again
22:16:58 <dgilmore> nirik: anything thats in the channels we use to populate the buildroots should not be replaced
22:17:00 <stahnma> that's been how it worked since EL6 shipped
22:17:03 <abadger1999> +1
22:17:22 <nirik> dgilmore: right. Unless we are allowing it because we need it for 32bit.
22:17:33 <dgilmore> nirik: absolutly
22:17:35 <smooge> eg something like branch glibc/el6 and put a dead.package in it?
22:18:09 <nirik> for preventing, I think perhaps we could try and get RHEL folks to be better about letting us know when something is added?
22:18:13 <nirik> so we can remove it...
22:18:22 <nirik> it's not like it happens all the time, only at releases...
22:18:31 <smooge> basically if there are steps needed to block builds I cand do so to take it off of someones list
22:18:31 <dgilmore> smooge: ideally we have some kind of api we can query when making epel branches that can tell us if its in rhel or not
22:18:44 <smooge> dgilmore, ah ok
22:18:50 <nirik> dgilmore: that would be nice too.
22:18:53 <dgilmore> smooge: then we can also periodically query it to see if things have been added we need to remove
22:19:30 <dgilmore> smooge: base os in there checklists they have steps to check with epel and communicate to epel maintainers
22:19:49 <dgilmore> but layered producst dont have the same things
22:20:12 <dgilmore> im starting some discussions to make sure layered products consider epel in the work they do
22:20:28 <nirik> so, I can try and work on the os/optional overlaps... does anyone else want to help out? if so, we might be able to make short work of it...
22:20:37 <nirik> dgilmore: excellent.
22:20:39 <ktdreyer> dgilmore: that's great
22:20:59 <smooge> well I have a list of the base os overlap already
22:21:06 <stahnma> we've been trying to get the RHEL developers to let us know when stuff changes since the inception of EPEL, and I think that's happened in very minimal ways only
22:21:24 <stahnma> the only communication I ever saw was when RHEL6 was close to shipping, and told us what to pull
22:21:26 <nirik> smooge: yeah, skvidals list is good there, but we still have to check each one and see if we are shipping it for the 32bit
22:21:39 <dgilmore> stahnma: with rhel6 they are supposed to do it, it is in the list of tasks when adding a package
22:21:55 <smooge> well actually I was going to say.. just compare the overlap in i386 channels. If it overlaps there it is a problem.
22:22:01 <stahnma> dgilmore: cool. So the layered product are not that way?
22:22:11 <nirik> smooge: yeah.
22:22:19 <smooge> that is the list I had done.
22:22:32 <nirik> smooge: do you have that list handy?
22:22:41 <dgilmore> stahnma: no they are not
22:22:53 <stahnma> dgilmore: ok
22:22:57 <dgilmore> stahnma: im starting on a path to fix that
22:23:16 <nirik> I see 11 packages in base.
22:23:21 <stahnma> well, if we pulled things that some of the layered products use from EPEL, I would find EPEL infinitely less helpful
22:23:41 <NiveusLuna> just to clarify: what are layered products?
22:24:01 <nirik> I see 30ish some in optional, and most of those are perl packages.
22:24:01 <smooge> nirik, http://fpaste.org/aMAM/
22:25:25 <nirik> right, ok.
22:25:31 <dgilmore> NiveusLuna: layerd products are things that Red Hat ships that are add on things, Satellite is one for instance
22:25:33 <nirik> we can work on nuking those and blocking them.
22:25:50 <misc> NiveusLuna: or directory server, iirc
22:25:56 <dgilmore> nirik: i bet most/all of the perl ones are because they ship on x86_64 only
22:26:14 <nirik> dgilmore: well, perhaps they once did, but they also overlap in 32bit too.
22:26:18 <smooge> dgilmore, those perl ones are in the i386 channel now
22:26:18 <nirik> now at least
22:26:44 <misc> NiveusLuna: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#What.27s_the_diff...
22:26:50 <nirik> NiveusLuna: stuff under: ftp.redhat.com:/pub/redhat/linux/enterprise/6Server/en
22:27:34 <nirik> so, our current policy is:
22:27:46 <nirik> " "EPEL6 will not ship any packages that have src.rpms on public mirrors under 6* directories with the following exception: If the binary rpm is only shipped in some arches in RHEL, EPEL may ship a package as close as possible to the RHEL version with a leading package Release of 0. (ie, libfoo-1.2-0.x) (note that EPEL maintainer must keep up exactly with the RHEL src.rpm where possible)."
22:28:27 <nirik> so, how would people want to amend that?
22:28:38 <nirik> if we don't amend it, it means removing a great deal of stuff from EPEL.
22:29:39 <nirik> I'll note that we have overlapped with some of those channels for quite a while... and have heard not much feedback about it.
22:30:09 <smooge> I would like to amend it to enterprise/6*/en/os/
22:30:10 <nirik> the discussion on the list started with glusterfs.
22:30:28 <dgilmore> nirik: maybe add that if a package ships in a layered product we will removeit if asked to but otherwise its ok, ideally shipping with the same or a lower nvr than shipped in RHN
22:30:35 <nirik> but it turns out the RHS channel glusterfs is in is pretty obscure...
22:30:43 <stahnma> and then I think z00dax said they would just move gluster into centos-plus or something?
22:31:01 <stahnma> what will happen is if EPEL pulls the software people want, another repo will put it in
22:31:09 <stahnma> making the EL world less fun to deal with all the way around
22:31:15 <ktdreyer> stahnma: agreed
22:31:23 <rbergeron> stahnma: yup
22:31:40 <nirik> well, ideally we want to not mess up anyone...
22:32:13 <nirik> including: other oses that use epel and have no layered products and rhel customers who do use layered products
22:32:16 <stahnma> the easiest technical solution would be to have the RH layered products use same versions we ship in EPEL, but I realize that's a bit backwards for the flow
22:32:54 <NiveusLuna> at the same time, the more that's in epel, the less people think they have to use repos that aren't up to our standards
22:32:55 <stahnma> and/or not charge for layered products; but I imagine that is combative with business goals somewhere
22:33:16 <nirik> some of the channels seem very specific to me... and I am having trouble seeing where someone would enable epel on a appliance like thing that uses that specific channel.
22:33:30 <stahnma> nirik: nod
22:33:40 <dgilmore> nirik: i dont think they would
22:33:44 <smooge> and if they do, well they loaded the gun and aimed at their foot.
22:33:46 <nirik> ie, if you are running a Red Hat storage appliance, why would you enable epel on it, it does one thing...
22:33:56 <nirik> or a cloud controller node
22:33:57 <stahnma> there are also cases where tools are used to do setup, but not actually what Red Hat is saying is the value-prop
22:34:08 <stahnma> e.g. MRG using Puppet to set things up (if it still works that way)
22:34:09 <nirik> but I could well be missing use cases.
22:34:59 <stahnma> if we pull nothing, will it encourage collaboration between RH product groups and EPEL maintainers?
22:35:09 <rbergeron> I would expect that there are other projects that use puppet that would be adversely affected.
22:35:33 <stahnma> rbergeron: I would agree =)
22:35:46 <stahnma> on the upside, I would lose like 60 packages that I maintain
22:35:54 <nirik> there are other things too that are popular... mogodb, etc.
22:36:07 <stahnma> yeah, mongo seems again seems somewhat general purpose
22:36:14 <rbergeron> mmhmm
22:36:46 <smooge> ruby-augeus would pull out all the other configuration management tools
22:36:59 <nirik> so the most difficult one I see is the cloudforms channel.
22:37:13 <nirik> as a loophole, I note they only ship 64bit. ;)
22:37:28 <stahnma> having split arch on that stuff isn't fun
22:37:36 <stahnma> esepcially since many of those packages are actually noarch
22:37:41 <nirik> yep.
22:39:19 <rbergeron> what stuff from cloudforms is in epel other than puppet?
22:39:31 <rbergeron> it seems like a crock to have to remove it when aeolus isn't even in EPEL
22:39:39 <nirik> proposal: EPEL6 will not ship any packages that have src.rpms under enterprise/6*/en/os/ with an exception for packages not shipped on one arch. Channels under enterprise/6/en/ may request EPEL remove any overlaping packages, and may be queried by EPEL about such overlaps from time to time.
22:39:41 <rbergeron> unless it used to be and is now disappeared since a few days ago :)
22:39:54 <nirik> http://skvidal.fedorapeople.org/misc/epel-clashes/epel-x86_64-clashes
22:40:10 <nirik> looks at the rhel-x86_64-server-6-cf-ce-1 section
22:41:08 <smooge> rbergeron, many of the items that puppet depends on to work are also used by other configuration management tools either directly or indirectly. Doing a loop of requires grows out to a LOT of packages
22:41:52 <stahnma> yeah, the rubygem stuff is more than half the reason I use EPEL (and maintain those packages)
22:42:22 <nirik> perhaps before deciding anything we could try and open a dialog with those channel owners...
22:42:29 <nirik> ask them what they want us to do...
22:42:58 <nirik> because if the use case doesn't make sense for epel being enabled, they may well not care about overlaps on specific targeted channels.
22:43:07 <stahnma> true
22:43:30 <dgilmore> nirik: i have started a dialog
22:43:38 * nirik is also not sure what makes a channel appear as a src.rpm download on ftp.redhat.com...
22:43:44 <nirik> dgilmore: cool. thanks.
22:43:49 <abadger1999> smooge: Errr --- wouldn't we start building with those layered products repos as part of our epel builder repos?
22:44:16 <abadger1999> (If we don't decided to exclude layered products from our no-overlap policy by default)
22:44:44 <smooge> abadger1999, we may not have access to them
22:44:47 <nirik> abadger1999: we could I suppose. Note that some of them also overlap with base os I think in some places.
22:45:04 <smooge> and our users wouldn't so if they could not download the repository would be broken for them
22:45:15 <abadger1999> smooge: If we don't have access ot them, then it seems like a bo brainer that we can't do a no-conflicts policy with them.
22:45:21 <abadger1999> *no brainer
22:45:46 <nirik> I think we could enable them. I'd just rather not.
22:45:53 <smooge> except their src.rpms are in the sub-trees we said we were going to not conflict with.
22:45:57 <abadger1999> smooge: yeah, there is that other aspect too :-)
22:46:02 <dgilmore> some of the layered products are designed to be standalone and you dont get support mixing and matching
22:46:12 <dgilmore> those we should not worry about
22:46:24 <nirik> so for example, we could drop mongodb because it overlaps, and add that channel so we could build against/use it, but that leaves all the epel consumers in the cold.
22:47:18 <dgilmore> nirik: down the road we may have a different answer
22:47:28 <dgilmore> not sure how much of it i can talk about
22:47:38 <nirik> ok.
22:47:57 <abadger1999> <nod> unless centos-plus pick it up or we decide to do a secondary repo ourselves... I don't know if centos-plus is intended to work with RHEL as well as with centos, though.
22:48:03 <nirik> in the mean time I don't know how much we want to decide today. I think we might want to collect more data...
22:48:49 <nirik> oh man, I just thought of something...
22:48:50 * abadger1999 is generally in favor of the proposal to restrict the products that we check for conflicts.
22:48:56 <stahnma> +1
22:49:18 <nirik> abadger1999: to base os/optional?
22:49:30 <stahnma> that's what seems logical to me
22:50:00 <abadger1999> nirik: that seems like a good semi-historical dividing line. don't know if there's other sane dividing lines as well.
22:50:11 <abadger1999> or if we care to look for other possible lines :-)
22:50:21 <dgilmore> nirik: sounds ok to me. what did you think of?
22:50:24 <nirik> well, in rhel5, we used "advanced platform" which was more stuff/channels.
22:51:22 <nirik> smooge: we also need to look at ppc64. ;)
22:51:34 <smooge> I did.. very few overlaps
22:51:37 <dgilmore> nirik: right but that doesnt exist in el6
22:51:48 <nirik> smooge: xerces-c is one.
22:51:59 <dgilmore> a lot of layered products dont support ppc64
22:52:01 <nirik> it doesn't exist in rhel ppc64.
22:52:18 <nirik> sure, I am talking baseos/optional.
22:52:52 <dgilmore> right
22:53:21 <nirik> ok, so back to the question, do we want to vote on/or agree we have consensus on only avoiding conflict with base os/optional?
22:53:34 <nirik> or wait a week and get more feedback from channel owners, etc?
22:53:41 <stahnma> I like the proposal and will vote for it ;)
22:54:00 <dgilmore> i think baseos/optional ha/lb that we build against are good lines in the sand
22:54:10 <dgilmore> lets get some feedback
22:54:22 * nirik thinks there's at least one person on the list who will hate that, but hard to say. ;)
22:54:45 * nirik is fine with feedback for a week.
22:55:09 <dgilmore> nirik: afaik no one on the list are channel owners
22:55:11 <stahnma> is this the time we're using from now on?
22:55:17 <smooge> dgilmore, ha/lb?
22:55:22 <stahnma> I just note that our european friends probably hate this time...
22:55:26 <nirik> dgilmore: yeah.
22:55:38 <nirik> well, famsco apparently has the main meeting channel at this time.
22:55:45 <dgilmore> smooge: high availablinty and load balancing i believe, they are what we use to populate the build roots
22:55:49 <nirik> I'm open to other times... wed and friday are mostly non meeting days for me...
22:56:07 <smooge> dgilmore, ah sorry was thinking half pound for some reason
22:56:09 * dgilmore would like to avoid fridays
22:56:18 <stahnma> arlight, discuss timing on list?
22:56:24 <dgilmore> probably best
22:56:26 * stahnma has a hard stop at top of the hour
22:56:31 <nirik> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taginfo?tagID=140
22:56:44 <nirik> we can... I got crickets last time I tried, but we can try again.
22:56:51 <nirik> #topic Open Floor
22:56:51 <dgilmore> stahnma: ok, we should start to wrap up
22:57:00 <nirik> any open floor items or shall we close out?
22:57:17 * dgilmore has nothing
22:57:20 <smooge> has nothing.
22:57:23 * stahnma nothing
22:57:37 <nirik> ok, thanks for coming everyone!
22:57:40 <nirik> #endmeeting
12 years
