Greetings.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
Some issues that are pending that we can just discuss here:
- Did we ever decide to make a epel-announce list? I think this might be good still to send important announcements about packages or other changes that end epel users should be notified of. I am not sure, but we could also send the package update announcements there (might be too much traffic tho, perhaps just the stable ones?)
- Orphans. We have the following orphan packages. Some of them are more 'retired', but we should look at trying to find owners for the ones that can still be maintained.
abcde aget cd-discid csync2 cvs2cl cvsps freetennis gkrellm gkrellm-volume gtkhtml38 libid3tag libmodplug mach otrs pytz redet redet-doc svn2cl
- Bugs. We are now just over 100 epel bugs. This is no good, IMHO. Would it be possible to get some interested folks to dig through these and see about fixing easy ones/poking maintainers/doing something to move them along. Especially in the case where it's a missing dep.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?product=Fedora EPEL&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&bug_status=POST&bug_status=FAILS_QA
- Do we need to do anything to prep for RHEL6? Do we just branch the things that are already in EPEL5? Or can we look at more than that?
- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a higher evr. ;(
- How can we get more packages branched for EPEL? Perhaps we could approach some of the sigs, like the perl-sig and ask them to consider their packages that work/make sense on EPEL (I have seen a bunch of new perl packages in fedora that were not branched for EPEL).
I'm sure there are other things, but those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. ;)
kevin
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:34:15AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a higher evr. ;(
Also have some questions on this one. I just submitted an EPEL only package (no Fedora branches and devel is dead.package'd). This package is included in Python 2.5 and newer already so it was suggested that I file bugs to have Obsoletes added to the python package in Fedora and RHEL6.
I assume there is a RHEL6 target in bz for internal folks, but I don't have access to it. How should situations like this be handled? I filed it against RHEL 5.5 and just mentioned what I wanted done. We'll see what happens. :)
I'll keep my eyes open for a meeting date...
Ray
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:34:15AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a higher evr. ;(
I assume there is a RHEL6 target in bz for internal folks, but I don't have access to it. How should situations like this be handled? I filed it against RHEL 5.5 and just mentioned what I wanted done. We'll see what happens. :)
On RHEL mailing lists it has been suggested that the only way to close the loop for organizational support is a Technical Account Manager (TAM). Perhaps if Red Hat wanted to show support for the EPEL effort they could assign a TAM to at least read the mailing list. This would be a person at Red Hat who has full access to inside information and so could at least say "hey, I'd hold off on that since it will be in 5.5" or maybe answer direct questions off-list.
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 09:52:04AM -0800, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Ray Van Dolson wrote:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:34:15AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a higher evr. ;(
I assume there is a RHEL6 target in bz for internal folks, but I don't have access to it. How should situations like this be handled? I filed it against RHEL 5.5 and just mentioned what I wanted done. We'll see what happens. :)
On RHEL mailing lists it has been suggested that the only way to close the loop for organizational support is a Technical Account Manager (TAM). Perhaps if Red Hat wanted to show support for the EPEL effort they could assign a TAM to at least read the mailing list. This would be a person at Red Hat who has full access to inside information and so could at least say "hey, I'd hold off on that since it will be in 5.5" or maybe answer direct questions off-list.
Hmm, I like that idea. Also, many of the companies we work for at $DAYJOB are RH customers. We could always start filing SR's for things that need done. :-)
Ray
Ray Van Dolson (rayvd@bludgeon.org) said:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:34:15AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a higher evr. ;(
Also have some questions on this one. I just submitted an EPEL only package (no Fedora branches and devel is dead.package'd). This package is included in Python 2.5 and newer already so it was suggested that I file bugs to have Obsoletes added to the python package in Fedora and RHEL6.
Why not file a bug against F11/rawhide to get it fixed there?
Bill
On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 09:23:02AM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
Ray Van Dolson (rayvd@bludgeon.org) said:
On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:34:15AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a higher evr. ;(
Also have some questions on this one. I just submitted an EPEL only package (no Fedora branches and devel is dead.package'd). This package is included in Python 2.5 and newer already so it was suggested that I file bugs to have Obsoletes added to the python package in Fedora and RHEL6.
Why not file a bug against F11/rawhide to get it fixed there?
Bill
Did that also.... :)
Ray
2009/2/9 Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com:
Greetings.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
Thanks Kevin.
Some issues that are pending that we can just discuss here:
- Did we ever decide to make a epel-announce list? I think this might
be good still to send important announcements about packages or other changes that end epel users should be notified of. I am not sure, but we could also send the package update announcements there (might be too much traffic tho, perhaps just the stable ones?)
It was tabled to be discussed on list. I am for it.
- Orphans. We have the following orphan packages. Some of them are more
'retired', but we should look at trying to find owners for the ones that can still be maintained.
abcde aget cd-discid csync2 cvs2cl cvsps freetennis gkrellm gkrellm-volume gtkhtml38 libid3tag libmodplug mach otrs pytz redet redet-doc svn2cl
Hmmm I though otrs just got put in.
- Bugs. We are now just over 100 epel bugs. This is no good, IMHO.
Would it be possible to get some interested folks to dig through these and see about fixing easy ones/poking maintainers/doing something to move them along. Especially in the case where it's a missing dep.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?product=Fedora EPEL&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&bug_status=POST&bug_status=FAILS_QA
Ok that sounds like something I can start on.
- Do we need to do anything to prep for RHEL6? Do we just branch the
things that are already in EPEL5? Or can we look at more than that?
Yes.
1) We need to get the build system to koji. David Gilmore says thats real soon now (like this month). 2) We need to have a branch where we will build 'everything' against the BETA when it comes out. That way we can keep track of where things break and see if we can get some loving to EL-6 sooner versus later. 3) We need a TAM at Red Hat to keep us in contact with what is going on with EL{4,5,6} so that we have better communication about changes.
- How can we get better communication between EPEL and RHEL? ie, the
recent packages they put in 5.3 without notifying or even providing a higher evr. ;(
Same old, same old. I think the issue is that inter departmental communication has never been a good strength at Red Hat. [As was once noted if it didn't happen on tech-list, it wasn't a technical decision.]
- How can we get more packages branched for EPEL? Perhaps we could
approach some of the sigs, like the perl-sig and ask them to consider their packages that work/make sense on EPEL (I have seen a bunch of new perl packages in fedora that were not branched for EPEL).
I'm sure there are other things, but those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. ;)
kevin
Thanks again kevin.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
The best time for me is late afternoon in the US. I know that's a pain to our European friends. In the morning I commonly am dealing with issues from work.
- Did we ever decide to make a epel-announce list? I think this might
be good still to send important announcements about packages or other changes that end epel users should be notified of. I am not sure, but we could also send the package update announcements there (might be too much traffic tho, perhaps just the stable ones?)
+1 for the list. It's a good idea, but I hate to be on more lists. However, epel users would probably like it.
- Orphans. We have the following orphan packages. Some of them are more
'retired', but we should look at trying to find owners for the ones that can still be maintained.
cvs2cl cvsps svn2cl
As much as we (maintainers) probably don't like CVS anymore, it's still used all over the place in companies. We should probably try to find somebody to keep those alive. I'd be happy to be a co-maintainer on the cvs packages, but I'd like help.
- Bugs. We are now just over 100 epel bugs. This is no good, IMHO.
Would it be possible to get some interested folks to dig through these and see about fixing easy ones/poking maintainers/doing something to move them along. Especially in the case where it's a missing dep.
Ouch. And I haven't filed any (that I remember).
- We need to get the build system to koji. David Gilmore says thats
real soon now (like this month).
Maybe Dennis Gilmore? David Gilmore is of Pink Floyd fame. I mean, if he is working on Koji, more power to him, but if not, I'll let him keep playing guitar.
- We need to have a branch where we will build 'everything' against
the BETA when it comes out. That way we can keep track of where things break and see if we can get some loving to EL-6 sooner versus later.
I agree. My biggest issues with EPEL are normally a package I *need* is missing.
- We need a TAM at Red Hat to keep us in contact with what is going
on with EL{4,5,6} so that we have better communication about changes.
++ a lot. I really like this idea. Karsten, any thoughts on your end? This would be most excellent. I'll see about bringing it up to my sales rep, to see if maybe we can get traction on two fronts. I am sure my sales reps will somehow see $$$ from $DAYJOB, but whatever, I'll deal with it.
- How can we get more packages branched for EPEL? Perhaps we could
approach some of the sigs, like the perl-sig and ask them to consider their packages that work/make sense on EPEL (I have seen a bunch of new perl packages in fedora that were not branched for EPEL).
The ruby-sig (like all 5 of us) are working pretty hard to get a lot of the packages into EL5. EL4 is pretty much a lost cause since rubygems can't really be installed. At $DAYJOB I have ripped out the entire ruby stack on RHEL4 and replaced it with a newer one. That's probably not recommended.
I was working with the perl sig a while back on at least generating a report of what perl modules where in EPEL and what was missing. I forgot who I was working with, but it's in the archives and I'll look again when I get back to it. Anybody is welcome to help there. I can tell you that about 60% of the 'missing' packages in EPEL from my server team's perspective is perl modules.
Thanks, stahnma
Michael Stahnke wrote:
I was working with the perl sig a while back on at least generating a report of what perl modules where in EPEL and what was missing. I forgot who I was working with, but it's in the archives and I'll look again when I get back to it. Anybody is welcome to help there. I can tell you that about 60% of the 'missing' packages in EPEL from my server team's perspective is perl modules.
Perhaps you're thinking of this (from Chris Weyl):
http://perl.biggerontheinside.net/packages/
Paul.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Michael Stahnke mastahnke@gmail.com wrote:
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
The best time for me is late afternoon in the US. I know that's a pain to our European friends. In the morning I commonly am dealing with issues from work.
I think for a global group we have to do as much on the list and then have a meeting as a catchup but in truth.. if its not on the list, it didn't happen/doesn't matter.
- Did we ever decide to make a epel-announce list? I think this might
be good still to send important announcements about packages or other changes that end epel users should be notified of. I am not sure, but we could also send the package update announcements there (might be too much traffic tho, perhaps just the stable ones?)
+1 for the list. It's a good idea, but I hate to be on more lists. However, epel users would probably like it.
I agree.
- Orphans. We have the following orphan packages. Some of them are more
'retired', but we should look at trying to find owners for the ones that can still be maintained.
cvs2cl cvsps svn2cl
As much as we (maintainers) probably don't like CVS anymore, it's still used all over the place in companies. We should probably try to find somebody to keep those alive. I'd be happy to be a co-maintainer on the cvs packages, but I'd like help.
I know that I am using it here.. but I haven't used any of them to see what it would mean.
- Bugs. We are now just over 100 epel bugs. This is no good, IMHO.
Would it be possible to get some interested folks to dig through these and see about fixing easy ones/poking maintainers/doing something to move them along. Especially in the case where it's a missing dep.
Ouch. And I haven't filed any (that I remember).
Hmmm I wonder if we could have an email sent to the list for each one opened. It would help me know when new ones are open.
- We need to get the build system to koji. David Gilmore says thats
real soon now (like this month).
Maybe Dennis Gilmore? David Gilmore is of Pink Floyd fame. I mean, if he is working on Koji, more power to him, but if not, I'll let him keep playing guitar.
That is what I get for listening to Echoes and typing at the same time.
- We need to have a branch where we will build 'everything' against
the BETA when it comes out. That way we can keep track of where things break and see if we can get some loving to EL-6 sooner versus later.
I agree. My biggest issues with EPEL are normally a package I *need* is missing.
Agreed. Most of the time.. I need something like a rawhide for EPEL.. I am not expecting it to be stable for anyone just to see if it will work.. Then there are the packages I need to be very stable and those I try to help maintain.
- We need a TAM at Red Hat to keep us in contact with what is going
on with EL{4,5,6} so that we have better communication about changes.
++ a lot. I really like this idea. Karsten, any thoughts on your end? This would be most excellent. I'll see about bringing it up to my sales rep, to see if maybe we can get traction on two fronts. I am sure my sales reps will somehow see $$$ from $DAYJOB, but whatever, I'll deal with it.
- How can we get more packages branched for EPEL? Perhaps we could
approach some of the sigs, like the perl-sig and ask them to consider their packages that work/make sense on EPEL (I have seen a bunch of new perl packages in fedora that were not branched for EPEL).
The ruby-sig (like all 5 of us) are working pretty hard to get a lot of the packages into EL5. EL4 is pretty much a lost cause since rubygems can't really be installed. At $DAYJOB I have ripped out the entire ruby stack on RHEL4 and replaced it with a newer one. That's probably not recommended.
In some ways, it is pretty much what people have to do. I am having to find how to get Python-2.5 to work with RHEL-3 because project requires both. Its one of those things that I know a number of people do... but we just don't like to talk about it.
I was working with the perl sig a while back on at least generating a report of what perl modules where in EPEL and what was missing. I forgot who I was working with, but it's in the archives and I'll look again when I get back to it. Anybody is welcome to help there. I can tell you that about 60% of the 'missing' packages in EPEL from my server team's perspective is perl modules.
Thanks, stahnma
epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 16:49:20 -0700 Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
2009/2/9 Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com:
Greetings.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
Thanks Kevin.
No problem. I think meetings are good if only for bringing issues up...
Some issues that are pending that we can just discuss here:
- Did we ever decide to make a epel-announce list? I think this
might be good still to send important announcements about packages or other changes that end epel users should be notified of. I am not sure, but we could also send the package update announcements there (might be too much traffic tho, perhaps just the stable ones?)
It was tabled to be discussed on list. I am for it.
Yeah, I think I am too. Perhaps I should just go request one.
- Orphans. We have the following orphan packages. Some of them are
more 'retired', but we should look at trying to find owners for the ones that can still be maintained.
abcde aget cd-discid csync2 cvs2cl cvsps freetennis gkrellm gkrellm-volume gtkhtml38 libid3tag libmodplug mach otrs pytz redet redet-doc svn2cl
Hmmm I though otrs just got put in.
I think it was orphaned, someone else picked it up, but then I don't know if they have done much with it. Perhaps they only picked up the non EPEL branches.
- Bugs. We are now just over 100 epel bugs. This is no good, IMHO.
Would it be possible to get some interested folks to dig through these and see about fixing easy ones/poking maintainers/doing something to move them along. Especially in the case where it's a missing dep.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?product=Fedora EPEL&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&bug_status=POST&bug_status=FAILS_QA
Ok that sounds like something I can start on.
That would be excellent.
- Do we need to do anything to prep for RHEL6? Do we just branch the
things that are already in EPEL5? Or can we look at more than that?
Yes.
- We need to get the build system to koji. David Gilmore says thats
real soon now (like this month). 2) We need to have a branch where we will build 'everything' against the BETA when it comes out. That way we can keep track of where things break and see if we can get some loving to EL-6 sooner versus later. 3) We need a TAM at Red Hat to keep us in contact with what is going on with EL{4,5,6} so that we have better communication about changes.
Yeah, all those would be nice.
kevin
Kevin Fenzi (kevin@tummy.com) said:
- Do we need to do anything to prep for RHEL6? Do we just branch the things that are already in EPEL5? Or can we look at more than that?
While I'd echo what was said earlier about communication, I would say it's definitely too early for you to be doing mass branching for RHEL 6.
Do you feel you need to have packages ready *by* beta, or are you OK with determining the package set at that time?
Bill
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:22:22 -0500 Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com wrote:
Kevin Fenzi (kevin@tummy.com) said:
- Do we need to do anything to prep for RHEL6? Do we just branch the things that are already in EPEL5? Or can we look at more than
that?
While I'd echo what was said earlier about communication, I would say it's definitely too early for you to be doing mass branching for RHEL 6.
Totally agreed. I was just wanting to bring up the subject of how we want to do it down the road. I guess the easy way is to mass branch EL-5, but there will be some things there that don't build/work. Also, there will be a bunch more things that now DO work that didn't with EL-5.
Do you feel you need to have packages ready *by* beta, or are you OK with determining the package set at that time?
Thats fine, I just want to get folks thinking about it...
Bill
kevin
Kevin Fenzi wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 09:22:22 -0500 Bill Nottingham notting@redhat.com wrote:
Kevin Fenzi (kevin@tummy.com) said:
- Do we need to do anything to prep for RHEL6? Do we just branch the things that are already in EPEL5? Or can we look at more than
that?
While I'd echo what was said earlier about communication, I would say it's definitely too early for you to be doing mass branching for RHEL 6.
Totally agreed. I was just wanting to bring up the subject of how we want to do it down the road. I guess the easy way is to mass branch EL-5, but there will be some things there that don't build/work. Also, there will be a bunch more things that now DO work that didn't with EL-5.
any chance that for that time also epel can use koji?
On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 2:30 PM, Farkas Levente lfarkas@lfarkas.org wrote:
any chance that for that time also epel can use koji?
Changes to Koji are being put into place this weekend that will allow EPEL builds to happen in Koji. How soon the switchover happens is anyone's guess.
On Feb 9, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
Yes, I think it's important for us to meet more frequently than we have been, at the very least to keep things fresh in our minds :)
Can we setup a Doodle poll or something similar to find a time that would work for people? I'd like to get at least the steering committee members decided on a time, and others that are interested are of course welcome to participate.
-Jeff
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Jeff Sheltren jeff@osuosl.org wrote:
On Feb 9, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
Yes, I think it's important for us to meet more frequently than we have been, at the very least to keep things fresh in our minds :)
Can we setup a Doodle poll or something similar to find a time that would work for people? I'd like to get at least the steering committee members decided on a time, and others that are interested are of course welcome to participate.
I am usually good in the afternoons. Mornings have become problematic.
On Feb 25, 2009, at 18:08, Stephen John Smoogen smooge@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Jeff Sheltren jeff@osuosl.org wrote:
On Feb 9, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
Yes, I think it's important for us to meet more frequently than we have been, at the very least to keep things fresh in our minds :)
Can we setup a Doodle poll or something similar to find a time that would work for people? I'd like to get at least the steering committee members decided on a time, and others that are interested are of course welcome to participate.
I am usually good in the afternoons. Mornings have become problematic.
Me too. I'd like something after lunch and before dinner given an absolute choice. CST.
-- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"
epel-devel-list mailing list epel-devel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel-list
Sorry I have slacked and not replied on this until now. ;(
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:40:06 -0800 Jeff Sheltren jeff@osuosl.org wrote:
On Feb 9, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Greetings.
Since we haven't had an epel meeting in quite a while, I would like to revisit the idea of a new meeting time. Perhaps we could setup a table in the wiki for people to fill in and choose the best time that way? Or perhaps someone would like to suggest a time?
Yes, I think it's important for us to meet more frequently than we have been, at the very least to keep things fresh in our minds :)
Can we setup a Doodle poll or something similar to find a time that would work for people? I'd like to get at least the steering committee members decided on a time, and others that are interested are of course welcome to participate.
Can you set that up? I haven't used that tool, but it's worth a shot.
I'm ok with most times, with the exception of when I am in another fedora meeting. :)
-Jeff
kevin
On Mar 9, 2009, at 11:31 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
Can you set that up? I haven't used that tool, but it's worth a shot.
Done: http://doodle.com/k9bu99fzkgwsd87q
Please everyone interested in participating in EPEL IRC meetings fill out your times.
Thanks, Jeff
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Bill Nottingham -
Farkas Levente -
Jeff Sheltren -
Jeffrey Ollie -
Joshua Daniel Franklin -
Kevin Fenzi -
Kevin Fenzi -
Michael Stahnke -
Paul Howarth -
Ray Van Dolson -
Stephen John Smoogen