EMEA ambassadors meeting 2012-09-26 minutes
by Christoph Wickert
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_ambassado...
Minutes (text):
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-09-26/emea_ambassado...
Log:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-09-26/emea_ambassado...
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_ambassado...
.
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)
11 years, 6 months
- 1
- 0
Summary/Minutes for today's FESCo meeting (2013-10-02)
by Marcela Mašláňová
===================================
#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-...
.
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
11 years, 6 months
- 1
- 0
FAmNA Meeting (03 October 2012)
by inode0
======================
#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-...
.
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) – 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) – 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) – 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) – 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)) – 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
11 years, 6 months
- 1
- 0
2012-10-01 - Fedora QA Meeting - recap
by Adam Williamson
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
11 years, 6 months
- 1
- 0
FAmSco meeting 2012-10-01 minutes
by Christoph Wickert
Minutes:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/famsco.2012-10...
Minutes (text):
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/famsco.2012-10...
Log:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/famsco.2012-10...
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...
.
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-septembe...
(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-septembe...
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)
11 years, 6 months
- 1
- 0
Docs meeting summary - 1 October 2012
by Ben Cotton
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/T...
(randomuser, 14:37:30)
* LINK:
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/T...
(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.20...
Minutes (text):
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/fedora_docs.20...
Log:
http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-10-01/fedora_docs.20...
--
Ben Cotton
Fedora Docs Leader
11 years, 6 months
- 1
- 0