[EPEL-devel] EPEL Steering Committee Meeting 2015-07-10
Stephen John Smoogen
smooge at gmail.com
Fri Jul 10 18:57:37 UTC 2015
8:03:30 <smooge> #startmeeting epel
18:03:30 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Jul 10 18:03:30 2015 UTC. The
chair is smooge. Information about MeetBot at
18:03:30 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea
18:03:38 <smooge> #meetingname epel
18:03:38 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'epel'
18:03:52 <smooge> #chairs nirik dgilmore Evolution bstinson avij
18:03:59 <nirik> morning everyone
18:04:02 <smooge> #chair nirik dgilmore Evolution bstinson avij
18:04:02 <zodbot> Current chairs: Evolution avij bstinson dgilmore nirik smooge
18:04:02 <bstinson> hi all
18:04:11 <smooge> #topic Meats and Greets
18:04:35 <smooge> hi I am your majordomo for the EPSCO meeting today.
18:04:43 <avij> hello, long time no see. I was travelling for the last
two weeks, back home today.
18:04:49 <smooge> hi avij
18:05:11 <nirik> yeah lots of folks have been out or traveling or the like
18:05:18 <nirik> tis the season
18:05:58 <smooge> ok current chimed in steering committee members:
avij, bstinson, and nirik. We have a bare quorum
18:06:07 <smooge> dgilmore, you available?
18:06:25 <smooge> #topic Outstanding Issues
18:06:46 <smooge> OK there has not been a meeting for a while so I am
not sure what topics are currently outstanding
18:07:17 <dgilmore> smooge: yeah
18:07:44 <smooge> Oh mirrormananger
18:08:21 <smooge> There were a lot of reports about bad mirrors a
while ago. puiterwijk worked on a script to try and determine what
mirrors and such were happening and also a script to fix broken
18:08:31 <dgilmore> smooge: ppc64le, i686, aarch64 support also
18:08:39 <nirik> as far as I know we have had no server side issues
since the ones a few weeks ago
18:08:56 <smooge> We didn't see any last week when I was pinging
people who complained on #centos.
18:09:08 <smooge> and on #epel so I think the issues are better now
18:09:43 <smooge> I don't know of any other issues...
18:09:48 <smooge> so time for new topics
18:09:53 <puiterwijk> dgilmore: secondary arches are supported by my
script and report as OK on my last daily run
18:10:02 <nirik> if anyoone has mirror issues, please report them. ;)
18:10:07 <smooge> #topic Secondary architectures (or whatever they
should be called)
18:10:17 <dgilmore> puiterwijk: nothing to do with mirrormanager
18:10:34 <dgilmore> puiterwijk: my point was to do with supporting
those arches in epel7
18:10:35 <smooge> There have been a couple of requests for building
architectures which aren't ones we cover
18:10:54 * nirik is still not sure of any good plan for some of these.
18:11:06 <dgilmore> nirik: me either
18:11:15 <nirik> aarch64 and ppc64le we could possibly have builders for.
18:11:17 <smooge> #info other arches: s390, ppc64le, i386, aarch64,
18:11:35 <nirik> i686 is centos only
18:11:53 <nirik> s390 we would likely have no local builders for
18:11:57 <smooge> and so would be arm32
18:12:23 <smooge> s/likely/definitively and absolutely/
18:12:46 <dgilmore> smooge: we should get a z series box in phx2
18:13:13 <smooge> dgilmore, we should also get a moon base. let me
tell you which one is more likely :)
18:13:22 <dgilmore> I do not know the best way to support the different arches
18:13:26 <markwkm> has the hercules emulator been considered for s390 builds?
18:14:04 <dgilmore> markwkm: it could be possible. but massively slow
18:14:04 <nirik> we don't normally allow emulated builds
18:14:18 <nirik> well, fedora doesn't anyhow
18:15:40 <nirik> perhaps we could try and come up with a plan for
these at flock? but not sure centos and other interested parties would
be there I guess.
18:16:08 <smooge> well someone from centos was going to be there from
the releng/centos meeting that sgallagh wanted to start
18:16:10 <bstinson> for sure kbsingh and I will be there
18:16:18 <markwkm> i have access to z hardware and would like to see
how i could help
18:16:33 <dgilmore> okay lets talk at flock on how to add other arches
18:16:35 <smooge> oh great.. I can't go to a fricking FLOCK and
finally kbsingh can come over
18:16:55 <dgilmore> smooge: I think you two are teh same person
18:16:59 <dgilmore> never seen together
18:17:03 <smooge> could be..
18:17:06 <bstinson> ^ this is true
18:17:23 <smooge> we even sound alike
18:18:19 <smooge> so there are a couple of issues here that I would
like to outline in this meeting so that people reading the mail later
have an idea WHY it has to be put off until Flock.
18:18:30 <dgilmore> smooge: sure
18:19:08 <smooge> The first issue I see is what I would call 'Koji
fragility' but probably has a better name with releng
18:19:53 <smooge> If a builder/architecture is unavailable for a
particular release (epel-7, etc) all builds for that release are
18:20:36 <smooge> So if we have an s390 builder in amsterdam that we
can't get to for some reason... all of EPEL for that release are
18:20:56 <smooge> dgilmore, did I phrase that correctly?
18:21:17 <dgilmore> smooge: sure, I do not see that as a big issue though
18:22:31 <smooge> The second issue is that of chain of evidence. We
control all our builders for primary architectures so that if a
builder is tampered with we have outside control on it.
18:23:05 <dgilmore> smooge: that would need to happen for builders for
any architecture where a builder is remote
18:23:17 * nirik dislikes remote builders for that reason
18:23:17 <dgilmore> smooge: and the only possible remote arches is s390
18:23:49 <smooge> Several of the architectures would require us to
trust the outside s390 isn't tampering in the builder
18:24:11 <smooge> s/Several of the architectures/A remote s390/
18:25:33 <dgilmore> to me the trickiest thing is that the way koji
does its things we need the nvrs to match up exactly
18:25:51 <smooge> The third issue is koji and download disk space. The
number of packages for each platform would require us to budget for
more disk space than what we had
18:25:58 <dgilmore> and if we add 32 bit x86 we may have issues with
the builds CentOS has patched
18:27:04 <smooge> Fourth, koji has certain NVR needs for build
requirements. This may be affected by the way 32 bit x86 is patched by
18:27:26 <smooge> any other issues ?
18:27:56 <nirik> for rhel based ones, they may not have the same
package set as x86_64
18:28:10 <nirik> (this is a long ongoing issue with ppc64 and such,
but worth mentioning)
18:28:26 <smooge> There is another issue I just realized.
18:29:28 <smooge> Sixth, CentOS does not have seperate channels like
RHEL does for packages. This means that they have packages we don't
have in our build root due to the mixing of
Workstation/Server/Cluster/ etc while we only have Server
18:29:32 <dgilmore> nirik: less of an issue now but yeah
18:29:48 <smooge> Seventh, different arches have different package sets
18:31:24 <smooge> OK I think that covers the major issues with
18:31:50 <dgilmore> smooge: mostly yeah
18:32:07 <smooge> I expect there are other issues but those seem to be
the major stoppers
18:32:13 <smooge> are there others dgilmore ?
18:32:45 <dgilmore> smooge: likely. but right now I am not thinking of any
18:32:56 <smooge> ok cool. we can add them later.
18:33:30 <smooge> #info There are at least 7 major problems which need
to be worked through so that other architectures can be added to EPEL.
18:33:53 <dgilmore> smooge: I do not see a lot of them as problems
18:33:55 <smooge> #info there will be a meeting at FLOCK between
Releng/CentOS and others to discuss how to work on these
18:33:59 <dgilmore> but sure
18:33:59 <dgilmore> \
18:34:06 <bstinson> (CentOS hat on) I'll make sure we talk through
some of these on our end before FLOCK
18:34:47 <smooge> #info FLOCK is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Flock
August 12 -> 15 in Rochester NY
18:35:11 <smooge> ok any other items for the committee?
18:35:23 <smooge> #topic Open Flood
18:35:48 <nirik> I had a few things to mention...
18:35:55 <nirik> python34 is in epel7 stable now.
18:36:06 <nirik> epel-rpm-macros is in epel7 stable also.
18:36:40 <nirik> There's some movement to add it to el5/el6 too to
allow us to make macros more standard between fedora and epel
18:37:00 <nirik> thats all I had I think
18:38:24 <dgilmore> nirik: do we need to update comps to always
include epel-rpm-macros in buildroots?
18:38:43 <nirik> yes, that would be good.
18:38:50 <nirik> wasn't sure the status on that
18:38:52 <dgilmore> will get that done
18:39:17 <smooge> thanks nirik. that is big news on the python34 route
18:40:37 <dgilmore> nirik: koji is done
18:40:42 <bstinson> hrmm, was it not in the buildroots before?
18:40:42 <nirik> dgilmore: cool.
18:41:00 <nirik> bstinson: the srpm build root probibly not.
18:42:03 <bstinson> ah, that's probably why it didn't create the
/usr/bin/python3 symlink (just noticed that a couple of days ago)
18:42:33 <nirik> not sure thats related, but we can investigate.
18:42:42 <dgilmore> nirik: it was not
18:44:22 <dgilmore> comps is done
18:44:32 <dgilmore> will go out in the next push started after now
18:50:44 <smooge> ok I think we can close this meeting out.
18:50:47 <smooge> #endmeeting
møte: sources. © Copyright 2015 Chaoyi Zha, Ralph Bean, and others.
Stephen J Smoogen.
More information about the epel-devel