meetingminutes October 2012

meetingminutes@lists.fedoraproject.org

19 participants
46 discussions

EMEA ambassadors meeting 2012-09-26 minutes
by Christoph Wickert 03 Oct '12

03 Oct '12

Seems nobody sent out last week's meeting minutes - or I cannot find them in my inbox. Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-09-26/emea_ambassadors… Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-09-26/emea_ambassadors… Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-09-26/emea_ambassadors… Meet you again on Wednesday, October 10th (two weeks from now) at 20:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting! Regards, Christoph ============================================ #fedora-meeting: EMEA ambassadors 2012-09-26 ============================================ Meeting started by cwickert at 20:02:35 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-09-26/emea_ambassadors… . Meeting summary --------------- * Roll call (cwickert, 20:03:10) * Announcements (sesivany, 20:06:20) * new respins available at http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/live-respins/ - use them, have fun, but please don't distribute them as *official* media (cwickert, 20:09:29) * ACTION: : all ambassadors who still have F17 media left, please add them to https://fedorahosted.org/emea-swag-tracking/wiki/Inventory (cwickert, 20:11:45) * There are only 200 F17 media left. If you need any, this is last call. Ask for them in EMEA trac. (sesivany, 20:12:52) * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/emea-swag-tracking/newticket (cwickert, 20:13:04) * Ambassadors Schedule (sesivany, 20:19:31) * LINK: http://jreznik.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-18/f-18-ambassadors-tasks.html (sesivany, 20:20:04) * ACTION: cwickert to call for more swag ideas on the mailing list (cwickert, 20:51:20) * Events (sesivany, 21:06:22) * LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Fedora_18_test_days - F18 test day schedule (sesivany, 21:21:39) * Action items from previous meetings (sesivany, 21:22:16) * openfloor (sesivany, 21:24:16) Meeting ended at 21:27:29 UTC. Action Items ------------ * : all ambassadors who still have F17 media left, please add them to https://fedorahosted.org/emea-swag-tracking/wiki/Inventory * cwickert to call for more swag ideas on the mailing list Action Items, by person ----------------------- * cwickert * cwickert to call for more swag ideas on the mailing list * **UNASSIGNED** * : all ambassadors who still have F17 media left, please add them to https://fedorahosted.org/emea-swag-tracking/wiki/Inventory People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * sesivany (84) * cwickert (78) * cmpahar (37) * gnokii (21) * twohot (15) * zodbot (15) * robyduck (14) * GeroldKa (3) * underscores|2 (2) * underscores (2) * thunderbirdtr (2) * jreznik (1)

1 0

Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2013-10-02)
by Marcela Mašláňová 03 Oct '12

03 Oct '12

=================================== #fedora-meeting: FESCO (2012-10-03) =================================== Meeting started by mmaslano at 17:00:24 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-03/fesco.2012-10-03… . Meeting summary --------------- * init process (mmaslano, 17:00:44) * #946 Tracking of new upgrade functionality for F-18 (mmaslano, 17:04:05) * AGREED: short special meeting monday (2012-10-08) at 17utc about #946 (those that cannot attend vote in ticket). (mmaslano, 17:16:52) * ACTION: jreznik will take care about ticket and minutes from Monday meeting (mmaslano, 17:17:56) * #956 become co-maintainer on gradle (mmaslano, 17:18:23) * LINK: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/lkundrak?acls=owner (limburgher, 17:22:16) * AGREED: limburgher will handle reassignment of gradle. The list of other packages will be sent to -devel (mmaslano, 17:27:29) * #950 Cleanup of the default enabled services list (mmaslano, 17:28:09) * AGREED: those who have strong opinions will prepare list of services. The next discussion will be at 17 oct meeting (mmaslano, 17:48:31) * #953 Fedora i386 releases aren't really "i386" (mmaslano, 17:48:47) * AGREED: close this ticket with: sorry, this is right, sorry if it's confusing, help us improve docs. (mmaslano, 17:55:35) * #954 Need to plan and perform Fedora 18 C++ packages mass rebuild due to gcc fix for CVE-2002-2439 (mmaslano, 17:55:49) * LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850911 (nirik, 18:02:28) * AGREED: Get the gcc with fix in f18, but do no mass rebuild. Only packages with specific vulnerability should be rebuild. (mmaslano, 18:05:56) * Next week's chair (mmaslano, 18:06:25) * ACTION: nirik will chair next meeting (mmaslano, 18:08:04) * Open Floor (mmaslano, 18:08:14) Meeting ended at 18:24:16 UTC. Action Items ------------ * jreznik will take care about ticket and minutes from Monday meeting * nirik will chair next meeting Action Items, by person ----------------------- * jreznik * jreznik will take care about ticket and minutes from Monday meeting * nirik * nirik will chair next meeting * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * mmaslano (76) * nirik (74) * limburgher (40) * pjones (37) * notting (35) * jwb (22) * jreznik (18) * abadger1999 (17) * mjg59 (16) * adamw (14) * zodbot (11) * drago01 (8) * jlk (8) * tflink (2) * Martix (1) * wwoods (1) * rsc (1) * mitr (0) * t8m (0) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot 17:00:24 <mmaslano> #startmeeting FESCO (2012-10-03) 17:00:24 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Oct 3 17:00:24 2012 UTC. The chair is mmaslano. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:24 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:31 <mmaslano> #meetingname fesco 17:00:31 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fesco' 17:00:37 <mmaslano> #chair notting nirik mjg59 mmaslano t8m pjones mitr limburgher jwb 17:00:37 <zodbot> Current chairs: jwb limburgher mitr mjg59 mmaslano nirik notting pjones t8m 17:00:40 <pjones> morning. 17:00:42 * limburgher here 17:00:44 <mmaslano> #topic init process 17:00:45 <nirik> morning everyone. 17:01:00 <mmaslano> hi, t8m and mitr can't attend today 17:01:12 <adamw> i'm around to rep qa for #946 when we hit it, but splitting attention with blocker meeting, so ping me if i'm needed 17:01:22 <mmaslano> adamw: thanks, I'll do 17:01:23 <jwb> hi, i'm here 17:02:21 * jreznik is around for 946, conflict with another meeting... asking anaconda guys to join in 17:02:41 <mmaslano> notting: ? 17:02:43 <mmaslano> mjg59: ? 17:02:53 <mmaslano> well we have 5 people here, so we can start 17:03:58 * notting is here 17:04:01 <notting> sorry about that 17:04:05 <mmaslano> #topic #946 Tracking of new upgrade functionality for F-18 17:04:10 <mmaslano> .fesco 946 17:04:12 <zodbot> mmaslano: #946 (Tracking of new upgrade functionality for F-18) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/946 17:04:21 <mmaslano> adamw: ping 17:05:22 <nirik> so code exists... but not sure it's usable state yet. (Last I heard) 17:05:42 <nirik> wwoods: you around for a status update on fedup? 17:05:42 <drago01> wwoods: ^^ 17:05:42 <jreznik> for upgrades, yes, there should be some code, at least the cli one 17:05:43 <adamw> yo 17:05:58 <adamw> other qa folks also following. 17:06:03 <jreznik> there's also partitioning part as it's requirement for beta 17:06:41 <notting> partitioning part of ... upgade? 17:06:48 <jreznik> I was able to collect the status from anaconda work list -> pls take a look for an overview what's going to be in anaconda for f18 17:06:49 * Martix is here 17:06:53 <adamw> it looks like anaconda 18.12 ought to cover the partitioning requirements when it hits, from bugzilla (the main bug we're worried about is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855976 ) 17:06:54 <jwb> notting, yeah, makes no sense 17:06:54 <pjones> yeah, I don't see how that's related. 17:07:07 <jreznik> notting: no, but it's one of the release criteria for beta - so the same issue as with upgrades 17:07:11 <adamw> partitioning in general, not partitioning of upgrades. 17:07:20 <jlk> this ticket became a pile-on ticket apparently 17:07:31 <notting> ah, ok. two separate new-functionality-for-beta features. 17:08:03 <jreznik> notting: that beta depends on 17:08:09 <jwb> well, the ticket title is "Tracking of new upgrade functionality for F-18) so i'm just going to ignore everythign unrelated to upgrade. 17:08:25 <adamw> right, partitioning and upgrade are the two big areas where current code in the f18 repositories does not cover the beta release requirements. 17:08:41 <mmaslano> imho the question is if we slip or not (again) 17:08:54 <nirik> so, the question here really is: Are we ready for going into freeze for F18Beta, or should we slip a week up front if things aren't in a ready state. 17:09:02 <jreznik> yep - before we freeze to avoid long freezes 17:09:15 <jlk> we'd have a better answer to that after a test compose with .12 17:09:16 <nirik> but it's not really until next tuesday that we need to determine this. Can we just visit it on monday? 17:09:30 <jreznik> nirik: I'd say so 17:09:57 <adamw> +1, as things stand we're not ready, but there is a high chance we may be by 10-08. 17:10:01 <nirik> proposal: special pre-freeze meeting monday next week to visit this. 17:10:08 <jlk> well a test cmpose with .12 and with wwoods' new code 17:10:10 <limburgher> +1 nirik 17:10:14 <pjones> nirik: +1 17:10:14 <mmaslano> nirik: no way 17:10:15 <drago01> do we even have it in the repos yet? 17:10:24 <mmaslano> mmaslano: could we just vote in ticket? 17:10:25 <tflink> drago01: I don't see anything in koji yet 17:10:28 <mmaslano> nirik: ^ 17:10:32 <adamw> drago01: afaik all anyone except wwoods has is the git repo. 17:10:36 <jreznik> drago01: the code is in git only now 17:10:46 <drago01> ok 17:10:47 <nirik> mmaslano: we could, but in the past we have had horrible luck doing that. 17:10:53 <mjg59> Hey sorry I'm here 17:11:05 <jlk> so wait, I'm a bit confused 17:11:11 <limburgher> mjg59: we're not. 17:11:12 <jlk> what is fesco voting on? 17:11:16 <drago01> honestly I don't expect that this could go without a slip 17:11:25 <pjones> jlk: not arguing about this right now 17:11:32 <mmaslano> nirik: let's propose what must be done to pass the criteria 17:11:41 <mmaslano> are we speaking about one feature or more? 17:11:46 <jreznik> jlk: when we should decide the slip is needed - we'd like to give you more time before the decision 17:11:46 <nirik> jlk: the idea that if we are not yet ready for beta, going into freeze is a bad idea and we should just slip up front. 17:12:06 <jlk> I see. ok. 17:12:06 <nirik> to avoid freezing everyone 17:12:12 <adamw> the basis i've been more or less operating on is that we shouldn't freeze until code is present to cover the major beta release requirements. 17:12:15 <pjones> nirik: and furthermore that we should decide that when it's important to decide it, not most of a week beforehand 17:12:27 <adamw> it doesn't have to be _100% working_ - that's what we test in the RCs - but it has to be _present_. 17:12:33 <jlk> yeah, I'd think you want results from a .12 build and test, as well as the blocker meeting that's currently ongoing, to have a better idea of the blocker scene 17:12:33 <tflink> and testable 17:12:55 <nirik> pjones: right. 17:13:05 <jreznik> jlk: yep, so we'd like to do final decision on monday 17:13:36 <jlk> worksforme 17:13:51 <drago01> jlk: .12 ? i.e anaconda? 17:14:00 <mmaslano> do you want to move the regular meeting to Monday? 17:14:02 <drago01> jlk: wheren't we talking about fedup? 17:14:02 <notting> do i think we'll end up slipping? history says 'probably'. that being said, i'd rather make that decision on the date when stuff needs to land by, *unless* the anaconda devs are specifically saying now that they'd need more 17:14:03 <nirik> folks who don't want to meet could vote in ticket? 17:14:05 * drago01 is confused 17:14:08 <jreznik> mmaslano: no, one special 17:14:17 <pjones> no, we're not talking about a regular fesco meeting. 17:14:18 <jreznik> quick one... 17:14:27 <nirik> it shouldn't take long. 17:14:27 <mmaslano> pjones: some are 17:14:28 <adamw> drago01: 18.12 will cover the partitioning requirements. 17:14:31 <adamw> drago01: 18.11 does not. 17:14:35 <pjones> mmaslano: who? nobody so far. 17:14:38 <limburgher> for one issue. 17:14:39 * jwb sighs 17:14:46 <drago01> adamw: ok so we are still mixing both issues ok 17:14:55 <jwb> then rename the damn ticket 17:15:09 <jwb> or create another one to cover anaconda 17:15:11 <jreznik> jwb: yep, it's now more generic topic 17:15:12 <limburgher> We're arguing about whether or not to argue and about the issue itself. 17:15:37 <pjones> limburgher: if you're trying to say that this is tedious... 17:15:39 <adamw> jwb: will do. 17:15:50 <nirik> proposal: short special meeting monday (2012-10-08) at 17utc (those that cannot attend vote in ticket). 17:16:02 <limburgher> pjones: Not at all. 17:16:06 <jreznik> nirik: +1 17:16:09 <limburgher> nirik: +1 17:16:12 <mmaslano> + 17:16:14 <pjones> nirik: +1 (still) 17:16:14 <mmaslano> +1 17:16:27 <mjg59> +1 17:16:29 * jreznik can own the meeting if fesco wishes :) 17:16:36 <pjones> sure, that's fine. 17:16:40 <jwb> +1 17:16:52 <mmaslano> #agreed short special meeting monday (2012-10-08) at 17utc about #946 (those that cannot attend vote in ticket). 17:17:21 <mmaslano> who will do the meeting (minutes) from Monday? 17:17:27 <notting> +1 17:17:28 <jreznik> mmaslano: I'll do 17:17:35 <nirik> jreznik: if you want to thats fine with me. ;) 17:17:45 <adamw> jwb: ticket summary changed and comment added. 17:17:49 <jwb> thank you 17:17:55 <jreznik> nirik: as it's more scheduling/pgm stuff, I can help here :) 17:17:56 <mmaslano> #action jreznik will take care about ticket and minutes from Monday meeting 17:18:13 <nirik> cool. 17:18:19 <mmaslano> jreznik: adamw: thanks 17:18:23 <mmaslano> #topic #956 become co-maintainer on gradle 17:18:28 <mmaslano> .fesco 956 17:18:29 <zodbot> mmaslano: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 17:18:53 <nirik> so, no answer still here. I'm surely +1 to adding them as co-maintainer, but do we also orphan all the maintainers other packages? 17:19:05 <jwb> yes 17:19:24 <nirik> ok, it will be a pretty vast pile. ;) 17:19:38 <limburgher> Who is it, and what's the ticket number? 17:19:43 <mmaslano> .fesco 956 17:19:44 <zodbot> mmaslano: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 17:19:57 <mmaslano> nirik: you are probably admin of bot? :) 17:20:06 <limburgher> 956 isn't there. 17:20:07 <pjones> nirik: hrm. I'm not so sure what we gain by that? 17:20:19 <nirik> mmaslano: I can look... 17:20:22 <limburgher> 952 17:20:23 <mmaslano> .fesco 952 17:20:24 <zodbot> mmaslano: #952 (become co-maintainer on gradle) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/952 17:20:27 <nirik> ah, thats it. 17:20:28 <pjones> nirik: might be better to just say they're "stalled" in the orphan process until somebody comes asking to help with them? 17:20:35 <nirik> pjones: more active people maintaining those packages? 17:20:48 <nirik> all 274 of them 17:20:53 <notting> wheeeeeeeee 17:20:54 <limburgher> Oh jeez. . . 17:20:57 <notting> how many of them have comaintainers? 17:21:09 <limburgher> I'll take some, I've been working with him in the past on many of them. . . 17:21:20 <nirik> not sure off hand. 17:22:16 <limburgher> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/lkundrak?acls=owner 17:22:20 <limburgher> It's only really 236. 17:23:08 <nirik> well, I think we do need to revamp our inactive maintainer process... 17:23:11 <limburgher> What do we want to do? 17:23:32 <notting> we've had issues with him being nonresponsive-or-close-to-it in the past, yes? 17:23:36 <limburgher> Deal with gradle now, put out a request for owners for the rest? 17:23:37 <jwb> yes 17:23:37 <limburgher> yes 17:23:52 <mmaslano> sounds fine 17:23:54 <limburgher> I have my eye on a few I need or do most of the work on. . . 17:23:57 <nirik> ok. 17:24:04 <pjones> limburgher: yeah, that's what I'd say 17:24:11 * nirik will try and find time to come up with a proposed better inactive maintainer process. 17:24:16 <jwb> i think pjones is just trying to avoid outright owning grub2 17:24:26 <mmaslano> yeah 17:24:28 <notting> limburgher: +1 to that 17:24:29 <pjones> jwb: heh. I had forgotten that he was still on that, actually. 17:24:30 <limburgher> jwb: WOuldnt you? 17:24:30 <nirik> ha 17:25:01 <limburgher> Ok, anyone object to my handling the reassignment of gradle, taking a few, and sending the email to -devel? 17:25:14 <mmaslano> limburgher: please, do so 17:25:16 <nirik> no objection here. 17:25:25 <jwb> i guess no 17:25:37 <limburgher> Makes me a bit sad, he's great when he's active. 17:25:50 <nirik> yeah, hope he's ok 17:26:10 <mmaslano> I didn't catch him, but he's probably ok 17:26:11 <notting> limburgher: please do so 17:26:21 <limburgher> Ok. I'll get to it today. 17:26:30 <pjones> limburgher: you can assign grub2 to me while you're at it, I guess. 17:26:34 <limburgher> nirik: Me too, isn't he in the Brno RH office? 17:26:50 <mmaslano> limburgher: no, but he works in Brno 17:26:50 <nirik> limburgher: dunno. I think he doesn't work for rh anymore... 17:26:52 <limburgher> pjones: Will do. 17:26:56 <limburgher> OIC 17:27:25 <pjones> nirik: he hasn't for quite some time 17:27:29 <mmaslano> #agreed limburgher will handle reassignment of gradle. The list of other packages will be sent to -devel 17:28:09 <mmaslano> #topic #950 Cleanup of the default enabled services list 17:28:13 <mmaslano> .fesco 950 17:28:14 <zodbot> mmaslano: #950 (Cleanup of the default enabled services list) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/950 17:28:45 <mmaslano> this ticket is old, but nothing happend there 17:29:01 * nirik re-reads it. 17:29:25 <jwb> i'm going to guess he wants more than just a wiki change here 17:29:38 <mmaslano> the presets 17:31:09 <mmaslano> I guess we should define what must maintainer do if he has service 17:31:12 <nirik> so, currently it looks like the list is the way he wants it... which seems kinda not very nice. 17:32:24 <notting> not nice in what way? 17:32:31 <nirik> I guess the two ways forward here are: do each service one at a time and vote, or have folks make proposals and vote on those with amendments. 17:32:47 <nirik> notting: asking fesco to change the list, but then just doing it while waiting to hear back? 17:34:06 <mmaslano> nirik: I would do "each service at a time and vote", then we can hear comments on what we did wrong a fix it 17:35:03 <nirik> ok. I'd prefer a bit of time to review this... I didn't do any prep work on this ticket before the meeting. ;) 17:35:10 <nirik> can we all look and revisit next week? 17:35:16 <limburgher> Ditto, and it could have huge effects. 17:35:21 <notting> next week's pretty busy, but sure 17:35:35 * wwoods lurks 17:36:00 <nirik> perhaps we could all come up with lists and all the ones that are on all the lists just get +1ed... then votes on the rest or something. 17:36:39 <mmaslano> nirik: I did this few years ago, it could take a lot of time, but yes that would be great 17:36:47 <nirik> yeah. 17:36:52 * mmaslano hopes at least someone will prepare list 17:37:12 <jwb> nirik, you want us to prepare a list of services enabled by default? 17:37:25 <notting> the list itself is a little odd now - it lists nfs-utils, which ships ~10 services, some of which might make sense but most of which don't 17:37:38 <nirik> jwb: per the wiki page, yeah: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Starting_services_by_default 17:37:51 <nirik> yeah, dropping dbus is fine, IMHO 17:38:06 <nirik> adding syslog-ng is probibly fine since we had the other 2 in there already 17:39:20 <mmaslano> proposal: everyone will try to prepare a list of services, which should be enabled by default 17:39:22 <nirik> a number of other ones in the systemd preset are covered by general clauses and shouldn't be listed 17:40:40 <notting> nirik: shouldn't be listed at all? seems wrong. 17:41:18 <nirik> well, see mitr's comment about libvirtd... 17:41:28 <nirik> or iptables (example of 'one shot') 17:41:57 <notting> i think likely the whole policy needs some rethink 17:42:08 <nirik> could be 17:42:29 <limburgher> probably holdovers from RHL 17:42:30 <notting> but the goal (IMO) should be to get the policy out of the packages, so the packagers don't have to worry about it period 17:42:47 <pjones> notting: yes, absolutely. 17:43:07 <nirik> well, with presets it should be moved out? (although to systemd which I don't know if thats ideal) 17:43:12 <mmaslano> yeah, I would put it on agenda for 17 oct (next week after review of features) 17:43:38 * jwb steps away for a second 17:43:43 <pjones> nirik: moving to one place is a good start. It'll probably be worth emulating the tzdata split at a later date. 17:44:00 <notting> nirik: we could put it somewhere else; that's just a start. in any case... +1 to discuss at 17 oct meeting 17:44:19 <nirik> yeah, having to update systemd to change it seems excessive... but yeah. 17:44:22 <mmaslano> +1 to my proposal 17:44:30 <nirik> sure, +1... come with proposals or lists. ;) 17:44:31 <limburgher> probably holdovers from RHL+1 17:45:06 <mmaslano> more votes? 17:46:11 <rsc> nirik: if libvirtd is not started by default, the rhn-virtualization-foo packages must be fixed. Their poller.py jells every few minutes, if libvirtd is not running... ;-) 17:46:36 <pjones> meh. Not really sure everybody doing it is the best use of time. (Or any more likely to work out than everybody voting in tickets does...) 17:47:08 <mmaslano> pjones: do you have counter proposal? 17:47:10 <pjones> rsc: sounds like it needs to be fixed anyway 17:47:12 <nirik> rsc: sure 17:47:29 <pjones> mmaslano: those that have strong opinions can make a list... 17:47:51 <mmaslano> ok, so I postpone this ticket 17:48:31 <mmaslano> #agreed those who have strong opinions will prepare list of services. The next discussion will be at 17 oct meeting 17:48:44 <mmaslano> new business 17:48:47 <mmaslano> #topic #953 Fedora i386 releases aren't really "i386" 17:48:52 <mmaslano> .fesco 953 17:48:53 <zodbot> mmaslano: #953 (Fedora i386 releases aren't really "i386"... they should be called "i686") – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/953 17:48:56 <nirik> wheee 17:49:07 <jwb> just no 17:49:23 <pjones> closed->ohnonotagain 17:49:31 <mmaslano> +1 17:49:35 <nirik> i386 confuses people. 17:49:44 <nirik> but then... anything confuses people 17:49:57 <limburgher> #bikshed 17:49:58 <limburgher> e 17:50:02 <notting> wasn't there a ticket about this already? 17:50:07 <pjones> If we change it, we should strongly consider changing it to "don't do 32-bit" 17:50:08 <notting> that's waiting on some releng work? 17:50:15 <nirik> notting: yeah, and thats where we changed it to use i386. ;) 17:50:22 <limburgher> I say keep it until we drop 32-bit, which I'm not advocating. 17:50:31 <nirik> proposal: drop 32bit intel. </joke> :) 17:50:36 <jwb> limburgher, spoil sport 17:50:41 <limburgher> :) 17:50:42 <notting> pjones: 31-bit only! wait, no, never that. 17:50:53 <pjones> notting: doing it wrong 17:50:54 <limburgher> notting: Splitter! 17:51:33 <nirik> we could change it to x86_32. But that would require changes in at least: rpm, yum, our repos, mash, bodhi, mirror scripts, etc etc. 17:51:45 <mmaslano> um 17:51:47 <mjg59> And be confused with x32 17:51:50 <nirik> yeah 17:51:54 <mjg59> So, no 17:51:54 <mmaslano> I'd rather wait for end of 32b :) 17:52:22 <notting> if you are intentionally trying to run anything we produce these days on hardware that is i386-ish instead of i686-ish, i admire your commitment to retrocomputing, and posit that you already Know Enough To Figure Things Out 17:52:28 <nirik> so, I fear: proposal: close this ticket with: sorry, this is right, sorry if it's confusing, help us improve docs. 17:52:44 <mmaslano> +1 17:53:33 <mjg59> +1 17:53:34 <pjones> notting: atom is retrocomputing? neat. 17:53:39 <pjones> nirik: +1 17:53:41 <notting> pjones: atom works. 17:53:43 <mjg59> pjones: Atom is i686 17:53:47 <pjones> oh right. 17:54:01 <notting> the lowest supported CPU is original gen OLPC 17:54:06 <pjones> yes. 17:54:12 <notting> which is i586-and-a-half, or something 17:54:20 <mjg59> notting: It's i686 enough to have cmov 17:54:23 <pjones> charitable. 17:54:34 <pjones> yeah, it meets gcc's definition but that's about it. 17:54:38 <mjg59> It just doesn't have one of the other optional features 17:54:47 <notting> nirik: +1 17:54:48 <limburgher> +1 17:55:25 <notting> i am curious as to who is both confused by the i386 naming, and actually has i3/4/586s they're trying to run with it 17:55:35 <mmaslano> #agreed close this ticket with: sorry, this is right, sorry if it's confusing, help us improve docs. 17:55:49 <mmaslano> #topic #954 Need to plan and perform Fedora 18 C++ packages mass rebuild due to gcc fix for CVE-2002-2439 17:55:50 <jwb> notting, i am violently not curious about that at all 17:55:56 <mmaslano> .fesco 954 17:55:58 <zodbot> mmaslano: #954 (Need to plan and perform Fedora 18 C++ packages mass rebuild due to gcc fix for CVE-2002-2439) – FESCo - https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/954 17:56:22 <mmaslano> I was told the gcc fix is not in F-18 17:56:25 <mmaslano> yet 17:56:30 <notting> jwb: i'd say 'here's a nickel, get a better computer.' but they can scrap gold it themselves and get far more than an nickel 17:56:33 <nirik> so, do we really need a mass rebuild here? whats the ill effect? 17:56:51 * nirik looks again 17:57:08 <jwb> nirik, the original reporter was worried about RHEL7, not fedora. 17:57:12 <limburgher> Seems late for a mass rebuild. 17:57:17 <jwb> i take it we're ignoring that aspect of the ticket 17:57:20 <mjg59> We only need a mass rebuild if we care about this CVE 17:57:34 <mjg59> Which, it should be noted, dates from 2002 17:57:34 <nirik> or ones like it I guess is the implication. 17:57:42 <pjones> jwb: seems like the original reporter can deal with RHEL release engineering instead of fesco then... 17:57:43 <notting> nirik: it 's a bug in handling of the new[] operator, so it ends up in compiled code, not linked in code 17:57:48 <jwb> pjones, indeed. 17:58:06 <mjg59> I think this is arguably a feature rather than a bug 17:58:23 <mjg59> A rebuild would block certain vulnerabilities 17:58:25 <nirik> there were security bugs related to this in 2009/2010/2011 too 17:58:44 <limburgher> Sounds like a good reason to rebuild. 17:58:47 <mjg59> So would we take a mass rebuild to enable some new gcc feature that blocked certain vulnerabilities? 17:58:56 <mjg59> I think at this point, the answer would be no 17:59:15 <mjg59> And the only reason a fesco ticket was filed at all was because the submitter thought that RHEL took Fedora binaries 18:00:07 <notting> i mean, we obviously would take maintainer-done rebuilds; it's a matter of whether we want to do it as a project at this stage 18:00:15 <nirik> right, so I would propose we try and get the gcc with fix in f18, but do no mass rebuild... only rebuild as those packages need to unless a specific vulnerability is found. 18:00:30 <mmaslano> nirik: +1 18:00:33 <pjones> nirik: +1 18:00:44 <mjg59> +1 18:00:51 <nirik> oh, hum. 18:00:52 <jwb> +1 18:01:21 <limburgher> +1 ok. 18:01:40 <nirik> reading the bug, it seems the 'fix' in gcc just spews warnings for this? or is it error... 18:02:18 <notting> nirik: where are you seeing this? 18:02:28 <nirik> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=850911 18:02:35 <nirik> the actual gcc bug 18:03:10 * nirik wonders how many fedora maintainers ever look at build warnings. 18:03:46 <nirik> I bet it's very low. ;) 18:04:02 * limburgher sheepishly raises one nerdy hand 18:04:46 <nirik> anyhow, I'm still fine with the above... 18:05:56 <mmaslano> #agreed Get the gcc with fix in f18, but do no mass rebuild. Only packages with specific vulnerability should be rebuild. 18:06:25 <mmaslano> #topic Next week's chair 18:06:27 <notting> nirik: i think that's only part of the fix - the warnign is for the cases where it can't check at runtime 18:07:02 <nirik> yeah, it's not clear, but that sounds likely 18:07:30 <nirik> I can do next week if no one else wants to 18:08:04 <mmaslano> #action nirik will chair next meeting 18:08:12 <mmaslano> thanks 18:08:14 <mmaslano> #topic Open Floor 18:10:53 * nirik has nothing 18:11:09 <abadger1999> In today's FPC meeting we briefly discussed a security issue with libiberty 18:11:21 <abadger1999> which was granted an exception to bundle back in the mists of time 18:11:45 <pjones> abadger1999: because that is how it's designed to be use. 18:11:47 <pjones> used 18:11:49 <abadger1999> I'll open a fesco ticket if we're out of time today but the gist of it will be 18:12:14 <abadger1999> someone needs to audit our package set and find all the places that are bundling libiberty 18:12:20 <abadger1999> update the bundled copy 18:12:33 <abadger1999> and also add the Provides: bundled(libiberty) 18:12:43 <abadger1999> so that we can find them more easily next time. 18:12:50 <pjones> maybe we should change the bundling policy so that there's a wiki page that needs to be kept up to date listing which libraries are bundled where. 18:13:02 <pjones> so we don't have to play hunt-the-wumpus every time this happens. 18:13:09 <abadger1999> pjones: that'll just get out of date... Virtual Provides are better. 18:13:18 <pjones> Eh, fair enough. 18:13:46 <abadger1999> It's just that when ajax looked through the package set for the bundled copies, nobody then followed through and actually added the Virtual Provides once they were identified. 18:14:28 <nirik> also, it has no version right? so checking for the bug would have to be mostly manual? 18:14:47 <abadger1999> there's currently two packages with the virtual provides. 18:14:53 <notting> that seems low 18:15:25 <notting> nirik: the version is whatever version they pulled out of the massive gnu source control archive, right? i don't think they have a good versioning to put in the provide 18:15:25 <abadger1999> it's definitely not a reflection of the reality. 18:15:33 <abadger1999> ajax had found 24 in f13 I think 18:15:52 <nirik> right, and I think they specifically say "No, we never put versions on this" 18:16:45 <abadger1999> If we can put even a date of checkout on the virtual provide that would help for the future. 18:17:14 <mmaslano> abadger1999: could you prepare a proposal and create a ticket for it? 18:17:15 <abadger1999> or, you know, just getting the virtual provide would be a help :-) 18:17:53 <abadger1999> mmaslano: I will -- warning though, it's a request for help/fesco to give a cattle call rather than a request with someone lined up to do the work :-( 18:18:13 <mmaslano> abadger1999: sure 18:18:31 <abadger1999> cool. 18:18:49 <abadger1999> I'lll have it ticketed for your next meeting. 18:19:15 <mmaslano> thanks 18:19:20 <mmaslano> anything else? 18:20:10 <mmaslano> I'll close the meeting in 3 minutes! 18:20:57 <limburgher> nothing here 18:21:05 <nirik> thanks for running things mmaslano 18:22:56 <limburgher> Thanks! 18:23:07 <notting> thanks all 18:24:16 <mmaslano> #endmeeting

1 0

FAmNA Meeting (03 October 2012)
by inode0 02 Oct '12

02 Oct '12

====================== #fedora-meeting: FAmNA ====================== Meeting started by inode0 at 01:00:28 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-03/famna.2012-10-03… . Meeting summary --------------- * Roll Call (inode0, 01:00:54) * Announcements (inode0, 01:02:33) * November 11 is the 10th anniversary of the Fedora community - can we do something cool to celebrate? (inode0, 01:07:01) * LINK: https://fedorahosted.org/famna/report/9 (inode0, 01:11:34) * Tickets (inode0, 01:11:46) * Ohio LinuxFest 2012 (inode0, 01:12:35) * #26 (Ohio LinuxFest 2012, Sep 28-30, Columbus, OH) â€“ FAmNA general trac - https://fedorahosted.org/famna/ticket/26 (inode0, 01:12:47) * PuppetConf, San Francisco, September 27-28 2012 (inode0, 01:14:22) * #43 (PuppetConf, San Francisco, September 27-28 2012) â€“ FAmNA general trac - https://fedorahosted.org/famna/ticket/43 (inode0, 01:14:31) * 2012 Fedora Merchandise Order (inode0, 01:17:09) * #33 (2012 Fedora Merchandise Order) â€“ FAmNA general trac - https://fedorahosted.org/famna/ticket/33 (inode0, 01:17:20) * LINK: http://kitall.blogspot.com/2012/09/fedora-pins.html (rbergeron, 01:26:02) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Artwork/T-Shirt#Fedora_Splatter (nirik, 01:37:03) * organize the amount of media still in-house a dsitrute according (inode0, 01:46:05) * #42 (organize the amount of media still in-house a dsitrute according) â€“ FAmNA general trac - https://fedorahosted.org/famna/ticket/42 (inode0, 01:46:15) * Fedora Ambassador Day North America (FADNA) (inode0, 01:50:15) * #36 (Fedora Ambassador Day North America (FADNA)) â€“ FAmNA general trac - https://fedorahosted.org/famna/ticket/36 (inode0, 01:50:27) * Open Floor (inode0, 02:01:08) * LINK: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jds2001/8041710849/in/photostream/ (rbergeron, 02:01:17) * LINK: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jds2001/8041709086/in/photostream/ (rbergeron, 02:01:31) * LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/OLPC_San_Francisco_Community_Summit_2012 is event page (MarkDude, 02:01:36) * LINK: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jds2001/8041687615/in/photostream/ (rbergeron, 02:01:44) Meeting ended at 02:10:20 UTC. Action Items ------------ Action Items, by person ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * inode0 (107) * rbergeron (57) * MarkDude (36) * award3535 (34) * zodbot (11) * grantbow_ (6) * Sonar_Gal (4) * nirik (1) * graphite6 (1) John

1 0

2012-10-01 - Fedora QA Meeting - recap
by Adam Williamson 01 Oct '12

01 Oct '12

As always, minutes and IRC transcript available on the wiki at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20121001 Next meeting is scheduled for 2012-10-08 at 1500 UTC in #fedora-meeting. If you have topics you think we should bring up at the meeting, please add them to the Wiki page at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Meetings/20121008 . Thanks! TOPIC: Previous meeting follow-up ======================================================================= * "adamw to refine alpha partitioning criterion" - this was done and would be discussed later in the meeting * "adamw to draft new partitioning criterion for Beta once we know what will be in anaconda" - this was done and would be discussed later in the meeting * "adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion" - not yet done * "tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team, fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down" - not yet done, tim was waiting for the criteria proposals before sending it out TOPIC: Release criteria: Partitioning ======================================================================= * Pre-meeting proposals were on the mailing list[1] * The proposed Alpha criteria were approved without modification * The proposed Beta criteria were approved with minor modifications to make the intent clearer and add a requirement that custom partitioning be able to destroy partitions * Possible further criteria were discussed, including one covering the re-use of an existing /home partition, but it was agreed to propose this on the mailing list for further revision TOPIC: Release criteria: Upgrade ======================================================================= * Pre-meeting proposals were on the mailing list[2] * The proposed criteria were approved, but with the agreement that the use of the word 'or' is ambiguous and should be improved to clarify the meaning * To avoid confusion it was agreed that the intent of the criteria is that _all three cases_ for upgrading - minimal package set, GNOME package set, and KDE package set - must work, not just _any one of the three_ TOPIC: Fedora 18 Beta freeze readiness ======================================================================= * FESCo will be determining this week if the F18 codebase, especially anaconda, is complete enough to enter freeze for Beta, which was planned for 2012-10-09 * The code for the new upgrade tool was available[3], but it had not had any official release and we did not believe it was yet in a testable state * The partitioning code in the latest available anaconda release at time of meeting did not yet support non-destructive automatic partitioning into free space * wwoods affirmed that the new upgrade tool would be testable by the freeze deadline * dlehman affirmed that the partitioning code would meet the Beta requirements by the freeze deadline * We agreed that the state of Fedora 18 as of time of meeting was not good enough to freeze for Beta, but if the upgrade tool was testable and the partitioning code met the Beta requirements by the freeze date, then freezing would be acceptable * We agreed to pass this evaluation on to the FESCo ticket[4] TOPIC: Open Floor ======================================================================= N/A ACTION ITEMS ======================================================================= * adamw to propose a criterion covering basic (not advanced) re-use of /home for Beta 1. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2012-October/110494.html 2. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2012-October/110512.html 3. http://github.com/wgwoods/fedup 4. http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/946 -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net

1 0

FAmSco meeting 2012-10-01 minutes
by Christoph Wickert 01 Oct '12

01 Oct '12

Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/famsco.2012-10-0… Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/famsco.2012-10-0… Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/famsco.2012-10-0… Meet you again next week Monday October 8th at 17:00 UTC in #fedora-meeting! Regards, Christoph ================================== #fedora-meeting: FAmSCo 2012-10-01 ================================== Meeting started by cwickert at 17:00:37 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/famsco.2012-10-0… . Meeting summary --------------- * Roll call (cwickert, 17:00:49) * sesivany is busy today with the opening of the new Red Hat office in Brno (yay!) (cwickert, 17:03:12) * aeperezt cwickert herlo and nb present (cwickert, 17:12:18) * Budget review guidelines (cwickert, 17:13:50) * LINK: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/famsco/2012-October/001169.html (herlo, 17:16:25) * AGREED: regions can not only define their own rules for approval but also their own limits. The only hard limit we have is $ 2000, this is both the PO limit as well as the FAmSCo limit (cwickert, 17:42:49) * AGREED: FAmSCo will revisit the progress of regional budget policies in 2 weeks, give them a peer review and address them with the relevant region(s). In 4 weeks from now, every region should have a policy in place. (cwickert, 17:55:49) * ACTION: sesivany and cwickert to work on the Policy for EMEA (cwickert, 17:56:49) * ACTION: herlo and nb to work on the policy for NA (nb, 17:57:18) * ACTION: aeperezt to work on the policy for LATAM (cwickert, 17:57:29) * ACTION: bckurera to work on the APAC policy (almost done) (cwickert, 17:58:03) * open floor (herlo, 18:01:09) * LINK: http://sexysexypenguins.com/2012/09/30/fedora-ambassadors-update-september-… (herlo, 18:02:35) * FAMA (Fedora Ambassadors Membership Administration) is now done by herlo. more on that at http://sexysexypenguins.com/2012/09/30/fedora-ambassadors-update-september-… and thanks to kital for his hard work over the past years (cwickert, 18:03:03) Meeting ended at 18:03:06 UTC. Action Items ------------ * sesivany and cwickert to work on the Policy for EMEA * herlo and nb to work on the policy for NA * aeperezt to work on the policy for LATAM * bckurera to work on the APAC policy (almost done)

1 0

Docs meeting summary - 1 October 2012
by Ben Cotton 01 Oct '12

01 Oct '12

Meeting summary --------------- * Roll Call (bcotton, 14:00:13) * Follow up on last week's action items (bcotton, 14:05:26) * ACTION: Sparks to add relevant git commands to QA procedures (bcotton, 14:05:39) * Fedora 18 schedule (bcotton, 14:10:55) * LINK: http://jreznik.fedorapeople.org/schedules/f-18/f-18-docs-tasks.html (bcotton, 14:11:04) * Guides scheduled to be branched 2 October (bcotton, 14:11:09) * POT files for guides due 2 October (bcotton, 14:11:14) * ACTION: bcotton to set up strawman schedule to propose slip for guides due dates (bcotton, 14:27:01) * we will decide the future of the guides schedule at the 8 October meeting (bcotton, 14:27:47) * Release Notes (bcotton, 14:30:36) * wiki freeze 2 October (bcotton, 14:30:43) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Beats (bcotton, 14:31:39) * HELP: There are a lot of beats not marked as good yet. If you have time today, please write a few (bcotton, 14:32:25) * randomuser pushed a draft technical notes that could help beats writers with focus (bcotton, 14:35:02) * LINK: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Tec… (randomuser, 14:37:30) * LINK: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/Tec… (bcotton, 14:37:52) * Outstanding BZ Ticket (bcotton, 14:39:44) * LINK: http://tinyurl.com/lbrq84 (bcotton, 14:39:54) * Open floor discussion (bcotton, 14:41:04) * HELP: Volunteer needed to lead the 8 October meeting (bcotton will not be available) (bcotton, 14:41:23) Meeting ended at 14:48:54 UTC. Action Items ------------ * Sparks to add relevant git commands to QA procedures * bcotton to set up strawman schedule to propose slip for guides due dates Action Items, by person ----------------------- * bcotton * bcotton to set up strawman schedule to propose slip for guides due dates * **UNASSIGNED** * Sparks to add relevant git commands to QA procedures People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * bcotton (63) * pkovar1 (28) * randomuser (9) * iambryan (5) * zodbot (5) * jjmcd (5) * jreznik (4) * LoKoMurdoK (2) * Capesteve (2) * jhradilek (1) Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/fedora_docs.2012… Minutes (text): http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/fedora_docs.2012… Log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/fedora_docs.2012… -- Ben Cotton Fedora Docs Leader

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

meetingminutes October 2012