[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Log from this weeks (20071010) EPEL SIG Meeting
- From: Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora leemhuis info>
- To: EPEL development disccusion <epel-devel-list redhat com>
- Subject: Log from this weeks (20071010) EPEL SIG Meeting
- Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 18:32:16 +0200
00:00:07 < knurd> | Hi everybody; who's around for the EPEL meeting?
00:00:07 * | knurd likes to remind everyone that the
schedule for todays meeting as well as a list of all open tasks can be
found on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Schedule
00:00:07 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Sig
meeting -- Meeting rules at
00:00:36 < knurd> | hi, who's around?
00:00:39 * | nirik is here.
00:01:01 * | Jeff_S
00:01:45 * | mmcgrath pongs
00:01:50 < knurd> | btw, sorry for the late report and the late
list of topics for todays meeting
00:01:58 < knurd> | rpmfusion keeps me a bit busy atm
00:02:01 < Jeff_S> | np
00:02:15 < knurd> | we just try to get it running by F8 ;-)
00:02:25 * | knurd starts with the first topic
00:02:27 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL SIG
Meeting | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/NextTestingStableMove
-- unassigned; nirik?
00:02:35 < knurd> | we should try to actually do this now
00:02:45 < knurd> | nirik, did you take a look at the repo?
00:02:53 < knurd> | is it in a good shape?
00:02:59 < stahnma_> | pong
00:03:06 < nirik> | I haven't had a chance to look at testing
lately. I can.
00:03:12 < knurd> | mmcgrath, btw, does the dep-checker script now
run for testing as well?
00:03:22 < nirik> | do you think we should move testing->stable
now before 5.1? or wait?
00:03:40 < knurd> | I'd say we should do it this month
00:03:47 < knurd> | regardless of 5.1
00:03:56 < mmcgrath> | knurd: It does, though I forgot to cron it.
I'll do a manual run now and add it to cron
00:04:07 < knurd> | mmcgrath, k, thx
00:04:17 < nirik> | mmcgrath: excellent. that should help fix
broken deps hopefully.
00:04:18 < knurd> | other opinions? do it soon or wait for 5.1?
00:04:26 < Jeff_S> | yes, it would be nice to get a push done soon
00:04:31 < nirik> | Do we have any eta on 5.1?
00:04:35 < stahnma_> | anyone have an eta on 5.1?
00:04:48 < stahnma_> | RH'ers say they know it, but can't disclose
00:04:51 < stahnma_> | :(
00:04:58 < Jeff_S> | heh
00:05:01 * | Jeff_S no idea
00:05:01 < jeremy> | "when it's done"
00:05:06 * | jeremy hasn't been able to say that in a while
00:05:12 < Jeff_S> | lol
00:05:13 * | knurd slaps jeremy
00:05:20 < stahnma_> | the help here is amazing
00:05:22 < stahnma_> | :)
00:05:26 < nirik> | how about we pick a date and try and get all
deps fixed before that and do a stable->testing push.
00:05:34 < stahnma_> | seems like a good plan
00:05:35 < nirik> | say the 19th?
00:05:51 < knurd> | nirik, I put the 21th on the task page
00:05:59 < knurd> | then we have saturday and sunday for the job
00:06:05 < nirik> | thats fine.
00:06:15 --> | mdomsch_ (Matt_Domsch) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:06:22 < skvidal> | stahnma_: not all of the rhers know it :)
00:06:33 < stahnma_> | fair enough
00:06:48 < knurd> | 21th fine for everyone?
00:06:57 < Jeff_S> | works for me
00:07:02 < knurd> | nirik, will you prepare it a bit over the next
00:07:19 < knurd> | if we find a big mess we can move the date
back by one week in hte next meeting
00:07:27 < nirik> | ok.
00:07:31 < knurd> | thx nirik
00:07:38 < nirik> | the big thing is that we want to get broken
deps fixed up in testing before any move
00:07:46 < stahnma_> | ++
00:07:49 --> | epithumia (Jason Tibbitts) has joined
00:07:54 <-- | tibbs|h has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection
reset by peer))
00:07:55 --> | tux_440volt (subhodip) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:07:55 < knurd> | nirik, well, we can leave some things in
testing if we want
00:08:21 < knurd> | but on the other hand: we should work towards
a proper testing repo without broken deps in general IMHO
00:08:31 < knurd> | as broken deps look bad even in testing
00:08:31 < nirik> | sure, but then it's much harder to make sure
we don't leave something in testing that is needed by something that got
00:08:39 < knurd> | agreed
00:09:08 < knurd> | the deps check script should help
00:09:11 < stahnma_> | so you want fubared -> testing -> stable ?
00:09:34 < stahnma_> | s/fubared/brandnewstuff
00:09:39 < knurd> | stahnma_, me? no
00:10:00 < knurd> | but I'd like to kick everything from testing
again that has broken deps for mor then n days
00:10:04 < Jeff_S> | at least that would be useful for finding
broken deps, but it puts extra work on moving things around
00:10:06 < knurd> | n something like 7 - 14 maybe
00:10:09 < stahnma_> | well, the new builds have to start somewhere,
even if all the deps aren't ready yet. So where does that go>
00:10:47 < nirik> | wouldn't you wait until you had all the deps
before building new packages?
00:11:11 < knurd> | stahnma_, the 7 - 14 days should be enough
00:11:22 < knurd> | and what nirik said should be true as well
00:11:32 < stahnma_> | I think that's fine.
00:11:38 < knurd> | as you can't even test if your stuff works
without those deps
00:12:18 < knurd> | anything else regarding this topic?
00:12:43 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL SIG
Meeting | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Rhel51 -- knurd/nirik
00:12:53 < knurd> | that's related to the stable<-testing move
00:13:00 < nirik> | yeah.
00:13:08 * | knurd skips it therefor
00:13:14 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL SIG
Meeting | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/RhelMetaData -- stahnma
00:13:18 < knurd> | stahnma ?
00:13:47 < stahnma_> | not much moving here
00:13:54 < stahnma_> | I haven't had a lot of time for it lately
00:14:00 < knurd> | maybe ask on the list for use cases?
00:14:04 < stahnma_> | ok
00:14:07 < stahnma_> | sounds like a good plan
00:14:22 < stahnma_> | part of this has to do withmaking sure we
don't step on EL packages
00:14:31 < stahnma_> | so the 5.0 to 5.1 is kind of in scope here
00:15:09 < stahnma_> | that;s all I have
00:15:13 < nirik> | I was meaning to file bugs for those packages
in epel5 that need to be dead.packaged for 5.1 (since they moved to core)
00:15:14 < stahnma_> | I will send out a query on list
00:15:18 --> | ChitleshGoorah (Chitlesh GOORAH) has joined
00:15:24 < stahnma_> | nirik: please do
00:15:26 < knurd> | stahnma_, nirik sounds good
00:15:36 < nirik> | but of course all I have is the beta announce,
so not the final list.
00:15:43 < stahnma_> | true
00:16:11 < nirik> | should I wait for 5.1 final?
00:16:18 <-- | mdomsch has quit (Remote closed the connection)
00:16:30 < knurd> | nirik, we should dead.package those when
CentOS catches up
00:16:34 < stahnma_> | I would think we could start now
00:16:35 < knurd> | not earlier
00:16:58 < nirik> | right... so a week or two after 5.1 is out
00:17:18 < knurd> | yeah, something like that probably
00:17:31 < knurd> | this reminds me of something else
00:17:36 * | knurd moves on
00:17:55 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL SIG
Meeting | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc --
update.carefully file in CVS?
00:18:02 < knurd> | we had a problem with sqlite
00:18:07 <-- | henrix has quit (Remote closed the connection)
00:18:13 < knurd> | the Fedora maintainer updated the EL4 package
00:18:21 < Jeff_S> | doh
00:18:21 < knurd> | it would have replaced the CentOS package
00:18:22 < nirik> | oops.
00:18:26 < knurd> | which we try to avoid
00:18:33 < knurd> | he was not aware of that issue
00:18:41 < Jeff_S> | sounds like a good idea to have something there
00:18:41 < knurd> | should we put a warning file in cvs?
00:18:47 < Jeff_S> | maybe in all caps :)
00:18:47 < knurd> | like update.carefully or something like that
00:18:55 < stahnma_> | are we trying to maintain compat ability with
CentOS or RHEL?
00:18:57 < knurd> | Jeff_S, yeah, maybe
00:18:59 < stahnma_> | I mean they are different
00:19:10 < knurd> | stahnma_, RHEL, centOS if possible as well
00:19:20 < Jeff_S> | stahnma_: these are mostly packages which are
not in RHEL, but are in CentOS
00:19:23 < Jeff_S> | AFAIK
00:19:28 < stahnma_> | and next if we try to work with Sci, and
Oracle we'll make our lives difficult
00:19:31 < knurd> | Jeff_S, and that's only a handfull
00:19:42 < stahnma_> | I agree
00:19:42 < Jeff_S> | yeah, I think I own most of them ;)
00:19:52 < stahnma_> | I just think it's a hard line to maintain properly
00:19:55 < knurd> | stahnma_, if live becomes difficult we can
adjust our behaviour
00:20:01 < stahnma_> | fair enough
00:20:12 * | stahnma_ is glad my packages are not in that
00:20:23 < nirik> | not sure a update.carefully would help...
00:20:39 < knurd> | nirik, if you have a better idea: shoot
00:20:41 < stahnma_> | I would read it the very first time I did a cvs up
00:20:50 < stahnma_> | but after that, I would probably dismiss it
00:21:08 < knurd> | stahnma_, that might be enough already
00:21:12 < nirik> | well, nothing aside from educating
maintainers... but that requires noticing the change and blocking it first
00:21:35 < knurd> | in this case both I and mmcgrath noticed it afaik
00:21:52 < knurd> | we told the fedora maintainer and blocked the
00:22:10 < knurd> | then he came up with the idea to put a file in CVS
00:22:18 < knurd> | that has some informations about the fact
00:22:32 < Jeff_S> | I think it's worth a shot...
00:22:33 < nirik> | ok, I guess it can't hurt... just for these
00:22:38 < knurd> | it might not be perfect, but better then nothing
00:22:47 < knurd> | nirik, yeah, just those
00:22:57 < knurd> | e.g. yum and deps in el4
00:23:13 < nirik> | ok, sounds fine to me.
00:23:15 < knurd> | and maybe yum-cron (once that's solved) in El5
00:23:24 < knurd> | update.carefully?
00:23:30 < knurd> | or UPDATE.CAREFULLY
00:23:33 < nirik> | UPDATE-CAREFULLY ?
00:23:35 < knurd> | or something else?
00:23:37 < Jeff_S> | either way worksforme
00:23:48 < stahnma_> | will that be in only certain packages or all
00:23:49 < Jeff_S> | I kinda like the caps though
00:23:50 < nirik> | I think the yelling might get better notice.
00:23:53 < Jeff_S> | makes me notice it more
00:24:10 < knurd> | stahnma_, what I mentioned above; e.g. yum +
deps in EL4
00:24:16 < stahnma_> | just making sure I understood
00:24:17 < knurd> | only four packages or so
00:24:19 --> | mclasen (Matthias Clasen) has joined
00:24:19 < stahnma_> | +1
00:24:28 < knurd> | maybe a few more
00:24:31 < nirik> | ok, can the maintainer check that in then?
00:24:44 < knurd> | nirik, sure
00:24:49 < Jeff_S> | I can for the ones I own
00:24:55 < knurd> | Jeff_S, thx
00:25:00 * | Jeff_S makes note
00:25:02 < knurd> | I#d say use UPDATE-CAREFULLY
00:25:09 < knurd> | that's likely the best one
00:25:19 < Jeff_S> | ok
00:25:23 < knurd> | Jeff_S, can you put a note about that file in
the wiki somewhere?
00:25:31 < knurd> | and put some informations into the file please
00:25:42 < knurd> | (about the issue and why to update carefully)
00:25:53 < Jeff_S> | yep
00:25:56 < knurd> | great
00:25:58 * | knurd moves on
00:26:02 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL SIG
Meeting | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- yum-cron -- knurd
00:26:13 < knurd> | as I said on the list
00:26:21 < knurd> | I'm trying to reach the CentOS maintainer
00:26:22 < Jeff_S> | I think we can follow our example from other
00:26:30 < knurd> | hope to get that fixed over the next few days
00:26:40 < knurd> | Jeff_S, for yum-cron?
00:26:42 <-- | zoeloelip has quit (Read error: 110
(Connection timed out))
00:26:45 < Jeff_S> | knurd: yes
00:26:50 < knurd> | Jeff_S, yes and no
00:27:09 < knurd> | in general: yes
00:27:17 < knurd> | but the EPEL package contains bugfixes
00:27:27 < knurd> | and the EPEL maintainer would like to see them
in CentOS as well
00:27:33 < knurd> | as they used his package as base
00:27:40 < knurd> | I can understand that
00:27:53 < knurd> | I hope centos can update to a newer version in 5.1
00:28:05 < knurd> | and we afterwards ship a version with a lower EVR
00:28:14 < knurd> | that should make everybody happy
00:28:41 < knurd> | (afaics)
00:28:49 < Jeff_S> | knurd: yep, just should discuss with ie. those
in #centos-devel and figure out a sane solution that they are also happy
00:28:59 < knurd> | that's my plan
00:29:06 < Jeff_S> | your proposal sounds fine to me
00:29:12 < knurd> | Jeff_S, the yum-cron maintainer tried via email
00:29:18 < knurd> | but didn#t get a reply
00:29:26 < Jeff_S> | or even have EPEL host the higher EVR package
if the maintainer wants that...
00:29:38 < knurd> | maybe yes
00:29:48 < knurd> | I#d prefer the solution I outlined
00:29:50 < Jeff_S> | of course I don't know how the centos ppl
would feel about that
00:30:07 < Jeff_S> | fine by me
00:30:08 < knurd> | remains to be seen
00:30:13 < knurd> | it's a small package
00:30:29 < knurd> | and the new version contains bugfixes afaik
00:30:38 < knurd> | so updateding might be in centos interest
00:30:50 * | knurd moves on
00:30:54 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL SIG
Meeting | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Tasks/Misc -- permission to
use spec files in other projects
00:31:08 < knurd> | I said on hte list already
00:31:11 < knurd> | let's wait for F8
00:31:18 < knurd> | and then discuss this further
00:31:23 < knurd> | that fine for everybody?
00:31:28 < nirik> | sure, although in the case of dag's clamav, he
said it was fine...
00:31:42 < nirik> | I just haven't had time to move forward with
00:31:51 < Jeff_S> | I'm fine with waiting
00:31:51 < nirik> | would anyone else be interested in working on
00:32:06 * | knurd never used clamav
00:32:10 < Jeff_S> | nirik: that pkg scares me ;)
00:32:26 < nirik> | the dag spec is much more sane than the fedora
00:32:48 < nirik> | just need to make sure it matches all the
guidelines ok, and then test against upgrades of the old one in epel now.
00:33:23 < nirik> | I guess I can try and move forward on it soon.
00:33:30 < knurd> | nirik, maybe ask on hte list if somebody is
00:33:37 < nirik> | there are 14 outstanding CVE's against the
clamav in epel right now.
00:33:57 < knurd> | :-/
00:34:08 < nirik> | ok.
00:34:40 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL SIG
Meeting | Free discussion around EPEL
00:34:44 < knurd> | anything else?
00:34:56 < Jeff_S> | nothing here...
00:35:20 < stahnma_> | nothing
00:35:24 < stahnma_> | oh meeting times
00:35:27 < nirik> | nothing I can think of.
00:35:29 * | mmcgrath has nothing
00:35:32 < stahnma_> | turns out, I like the daytime better
00:35:41 < stahnma_> | after all my complaining
00:35:42 < stahnma_> | :)
00:35:47 < Jeff_S> | lol
00:35:57 < stahnma_> | I have a better chance of being able to make
it during the day
00:36:04 < stahnma_> | the night is too unpredicatable
00:36:33 < stahnma_> | anyone else have thoughts on meeting times?
00:36:36 < knurd> | maybe we should try to find a more dynamic
00:36:44 < knurd> | maybe once a month a later time
00:36:47 < knurd> | or something like htat
00:36:53 < stahnma_> | ok
00:36:55 < knurd> | and hte general target: do more on hte list
00:37:08 < stahnma_> | ++
00:37:09 < Jeff_S> | this time should work for me
00:37:10 < nirik> | yeah.
00:37:25 < knurd> | maybe meetings at 17:00 utc only every second
00:37:38 < stahnma_> | sounds ok to me
00:37:39 < knurd> | e.g. next meeting on 20071024?
00:37:49 < mmcgrath> | knurd: +1
00:37:54 < nirik> | sure, sounds ok to me.
00:38:01 < Jeff_S> | +1
00:38:09 * | knurd just noticed he won't be around on
20071024 as it looks like
00:38:21 < knurd> | I'm travelling then
00:38:30 < knurd> | but maybe one of you guys can run the meeting
00:38:35 < knurd> | stahnma_?
00:38:51 < stahnma_> | not sure
00:38:58 < stahnma_> | I will probably be able to make it
00:39:02 < stahnma_> | but can't guarentee it
00:39:03 < stahnma_> | :)
00:39:07 < stahnma_> | i'm good like that
00:39:10 < Jeff_S> | I *should* be able to make it :)
00:39:20 < knurd> | we'll see
00:39:30 < knurd> | maybe my travelling schedule changes
00:39:33 < knurd> | and I can make it
00:39:40 < knurd> | k, so no meeting next week then?
00:39:51 < knurd> | just a status update on the list?
00:39:54 --> | shadowarts (Andrew Alm) has joined
00:40:01 < Jeff_S> | yeah
00:40:12 < stahnma_> | ok
00:40:25 * | knurd hears nobody yelling "hell, no"
00:40:31 < knurd> | so I consider it accepted
00:40:35 < knurd> | anything else?
00:40:52 < Jeff_S> | nope
00:40:57 * | knurd will close the meeting in 30
00:41:25 * | knurd will close the meeting in 10
00:41:35 < knurd> | -- MARK -- Meeting end
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]