#fedora-meeting: EPEL (2011-05-16)
Meeting started by nirik at 19:32:00 UTC. The full logs are available at
* init process/agenda (nirik, 19:32:00)
* nirik has failed to figure out the things in rhel also in epel
again. Will try again this week. (nirik, 19:33:17)
* Broken deps (nirik, 19:35:54)
* Open Floor (nirik, 19:37:40)
* LINK: http://dag.wieers.com/blog/centos-devel-ml-feels-like-devnull
* LINK: http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/calendar
* LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_RHEL_Entitlements
* If you contribute to EPEL and want a RHEL entitlement, see:
is the link for that. (nirik, 19:53:35)
Meeting ended at 19:54:41 UTC.
Action Items, by person
People Present (lines said)
* nirik (38)
* stahnma (24)
* Jeff_S (6)
* derks (5)
* zodbot (4)
* smooge (2)
* Southern_Gentlem (1)
* jness (1)
* tremble (0)
19:32:00 <nirik> #startmeeting EPEL (2011-05-16)
19:32:00 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon May 16 19:32:00 2011 UTC. The chair is nirik.
Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot
19:32:00 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
19:32:00 <nirik> #meetingname epel
19:32:00 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
19:32:00 <nirik> #topic init process/agenda
19:32:00 <nirik> #chair smooge tremble
19:32:00 <nirik> EPEL meeting ping abadger1999 rsc stahnma tremble dgilmore smooge
nb maxamillion tremble Jeff_S
19:32:00 <zodbot> Current chairs: nirik smooge tremble
19:32:12 * derks is present for EPEL meeting
19:32:17 <nirik> anyone around for epel meeting?
19:32:23 * Jeff_S kind of here
19:32:25 <smooge> here sort of
19:32:26 <nirik> I don't have much of an agenda I'm afraid.
19:32:31 <smooge> that's cool
19:32:37 <Jeff_S> smooge: between the two of us, maybe we count as one person
19:33:17 <nirik> #info nirik has failed to figure out the things in rhel also in
epel again. Will try again this week.
19:33:21 * jness is here
19:34:02 <nirik> anyone have topics? I suppose we can hit on the regular broken deps
and bugs topics.
19:35:54 <nirik> #topic Broken deps
19:36:01 <nirik> The reports are running along.
19:36:12 <nirik> I haven't noticed too many people fixing things, but perhaps
19:36:32 <stahnma> yeah, same report, different day
19:36:45 <nirik> I suppose I could go on a unpushing rampage again (at least for the
19:37:24 <nirik> anything more on broken deps?
19:37:40 <nirik> #topic Open Floor
19:37:48 <nirik> anything at all for open floor?
19:37:54 * nirik really didn't have much agenda today. ;)
19:38:15 <stahnma> is anybody else concerned about the centos community struggles
19:39:03 <derks> stahnma I guess I'm not familiar with what the struggles are?
19:39:09 <stahnma> http://dag.wieers.com/blog/centos-devel-ml-feels-like-devnull
19:39:22 <stahnma> dag publicly resigned...again ?
19:39:32 <nirik> stahnma: well, resigned from the list...
19:39:38 <stahnma> well, and from the project
19:39:44 <nirik> he did that a long time ago. ;)
19:39:49 <stahnma> ah
19:39:56 <stahnma> I was confused on that
19:40:01 <stahnma> I was thinking that happened in 2009
19:40:06 <stahnma> hence the again
19:40:24 <stahnma> either way, I guess I am starting to doubt the real viability of
19:40:37 <stahnma> which is where EPEL got HUGE traction
19:40:42 <nirik> well, they have a plan up for 6, but who knows.
19:40:52 <stahnma> allegedlly the end of the month
19:41:09 <nirik> http://qaweb.dev.centos.org/qa/calendar
19:41:35 <nirik> well, not sure there is much we can do.
19:42:13 <stahnma> that's true
19:43:03 <stahnma> I do think it's the lack of a freely-usable EL that's
preventing broken dep fixes for 6
19:43:08 <stahnma> and lots of new package churn
19:43:27 <nirik> perhaps.
19:44:17 <derks> is there no program with RHEL to get fedora/epel contributors a
19:44:18 <derks> ?
19:44:24 <nirik> Yes.
19:44:34 <nirik> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_RHEL_Entitlements
19:44:40 <stahnma> you get one
19:44:58 <stahnma> and if you try to download the whole repo for alocal mirror you
get your account banned
19:45:00 <nirik> #info If you contribute to EPEL and want a RHEL entitlement, see:
19:45:00 <stahnma> ask me how I know
19:45:08 <nirik> stahnma: nasty.
19:45:16 <nirik> There is also SL.
19:45:23 <stahnma> yeah, I may start using that
19:45:40 <stahnma> but I don't know if their goal was to mirror upstream as
closely as CentOS really was trying to do
19:46:06 <nirik> it's not... but they have full time people maintaining it.
19:46:11 * nirik doesn't know.
19:47:12 <Jeff_S> stahnma: have you looked at http://qaweb.dev.centos.org?
attempt at getting some of the QA progress and tasks out in the open
19:47:36 * Jeff_S expects the centos qa team to have full package trees to test
19:47:37 <stahnma> I just checked that out
19:47:38 <stahnma> I like it
19:47:54 <stahnma> Jeff_S: you might want to note that on the centos homepage
19:48:30 <Jeff_S> stahnma: yeah, it's been announced on forums, mailing lists;
will discuss with them about getting a link on the main website, thanks
19:49:15 * Jeff_S understood that SL did some things on their own which would differ from
RHEL/CentOS, though I have never used it myself
19:49:32 * nirik isn't sure either. ;)
19:49:58 <Southern_Gentlem> IMHO i am iffy on SL6
19:49:59 <nirik> so, anything more to say here? I don't think epel can do much
except wish everyone the best so we can more easily fix up packages. ;)
19:50:12 <stahnma> nirik: true true :)
19:50:21 <derks> don't we have test VMs available for testing as well?
19:51:32 <nirik> yep.
19:52:25 * nirik will close out the meeting in a few if nothing else comes up
is the link
19:53:44 <nirik> (note that the access info has recently changed)
19:54:35 <nirik> thanks for coming everyone!
19:54:41 <nirik> #endmeeting