Log from yesterdays (20070705) EPEL SIG meeting
fedora at leemhuis.info
Thu Jul 5 16:55:33 UTC 2007
00:00:02 < knurd> | Meeting ping dgilmore, knurd, mmcgrath, nirik,
stahnma, quaid and everyone interested in EPEL -- EPEL meeting in
00:00:02 < knurd> | Hi everybody; who's around?
00:00:02 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Sig
meeting -- Meeting rules at
00:00:02 * | knurd likes to remind people that the schedule
and the topic list for todays meeting can be found on
00:00:28 * | dgilmore is kinda here
00:00:28 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
broken deps – nirik
00:00:37 < knurd> | any process in that area?
00:00:39 --> | stahnma (Michael Stahnke) has joined
00:00:48 < Jeff_S> | knurd: can you add my name to your 'ping' so
my client beeps at me when I'm not paying attention? :)
00:01:08 < nirik> | knurd: I posted a EL-4 broken deps report...
haven't done much else. ;(
00:01:25 < knurd> | Jeff_S, you can add yourself :) see
00:01:40 < nirik> | I think we need to spam maintainers... then I
would be happy to try and bug personally people who still have broken
deps after a while...
00:01:52 < Jeff_S> | I've meant to run repoclosure or something to
verify nirik's results on my EPEL mirror, but somehow haven't got to it yet
00:02:40 < knurd> | well, someone needs to poke maintainers
00:02:43 < nirik> | I finally have local kvm centos4/centos5
virtuals on my laptop, so I should be able to test things and run
repoclosure anytime someone wants.
00:02:55 < knurd> | seems otherwise stuff won't get fixed afaics
00:03:05 < knurd> | any volunteers?
00:03:17 < Jeff_S> | yes, I don't have any access to RHEL, but I
can run it against CentOS
00:03:38 < knurd> | Jeff_S, that should be enough for the start afaics
00:03:46 * | mmcgrath is looking at spam-o-matic right now
00:04:02 < knurd> | Jeff_S, I'll asign that job to you then? it
was nirik's until now
00:04:02 < nirik> | I think most people don't realize they have
broken deps... spamming them should help a lot.
00:04:14 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
spam o magic script – mmcgrath
00:04:18 < Jeff_S> | knurd: either way
00:04:20 < knurd> | mmcgrath, any progress?
00:04:31 * | mmcgrath is looking at it right now actually.
I'll commit to having this done by the next meeting.
00:04:43 < knurd> | mmcgrath, k, thx
00:04:46 < nirik> | I'd be happy to help, but have been very very
busy of late... so might be better if Jeff_S takes charge of it and I
00:04:54 < Jeff_S> | nirik: OK
00:04:57 < knurd> | nirik, Jeff_S, some manual poking will
probably thee best
00:05:11 < knurd> | nirik, k, I#ll note that on the schedule
00:05:17 < nirik> | sure, but if we can spam and wait a week I
think we will have a LOT less of them...
00:05:24 < knurd> | anything else regarding this?
00:05:26 < knurd> | nirik, +1
00:05:45 < Jeff_S> | I agree, spam, spam, spam, eggs and spam
00:06:01 < knurd> | :-)
00:06:06 < nirik> | could we start running a repoclosure before
push and not push anything with new broken deps?
00:06:25 < nirik> | I realize that makes it take longer, but we
don't want to add to the problem.
00:06:27 < knurd> | nirik, we'd need to modify the push script to
00:06:28 < dgilmore> | nirik: no
00:06:50 < dgilmore> | nirik: the scripts are not very smart
00:06:59 < knurd> | nirik, and it takes some time to run, so it
would likely take to long
00:07:12 < nirik> | ok, bummer. ;(
00:07:17 < dgilmore> | each time you find a problem they need to be
00:08:08 < knurd> | I'd assume most problems currently happended
due to new packages hitting the repo with missing deps
00:08:14 < knurd> | bodhi should help in the long run
00:08:20 < dgilmore> | seems to be the case
00:08:29 < knurd> | I#d say we wait and see for now and watch it
00:08:30 < nirik> | yeah, likely so... missing epel versions of
packages that are needed by that package
00:08:31 < knurd> | that okay?
00:08:41 < Jeff_S> | knurd: yes, at the very least it'll let us
catch things while still in testing/
00:08:48 < knurd> | Jeff_S, yes
00:08:53 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
move epel dirs on servers down below stable – knurd
00:09:00 < knurd> | dgilmore didn't like that
00:09:08 < dgilmore> |
00:09:16 < quaid> | wow, that's quite negative
00:09:17 < knurd> | see discussion in #epel from some hours ago
00:09:22 * | knurd still wants it
00:09:26 < stahnma> | it's so negative, it's like positive
00:09:29 < Jeff_S> | dgilmore just outvoted all of us I think
00:09:43 * | knurd still wants to have room on the server
for other stuff in EPEL, whatever we might do in the long run
00:09:48 < nirik> | we can always do it later can't we?
00:09:54 < dgilmore> | we can do that
00:09:57 < knurd> | nirik, no, I#d say either now or never
00:10:07 < dgilmore> | we should not diverge from what fedora has
00:10:08 < knurd> | such a move after annoucing EPEL would be
00:10:11 < mmcgrath> | :)
00:10:17 < quaid> | well, in this caes, dgilmore actually should
have more weight
00:10:36 < knurd> | where would we diverge from what fedora ?
00:10:39 < knurd> | I can't see that
00:10:47 < nirik> | knurd: true, but if we announce a 'rolling'
version or something weird we can just call it 'epel-rolling' or
00:10:51 * | quaid was not making a "big guy to another big
00:11:01 < knurd> | nirik, and it would be a mess on the servers
00:11:27 < nirik> | personally I like the plan we came up with for
updates, but then that fits the use case I have. I don't think epel can
be all things for all people, we just don't have enough resources to
meet all needs.
00:11:40 < dgilmore> | knurd: fedora has never put anything into a
stable/ dir stable has always been the main dir
00:11:58 < knurd> | dgilmore, I'm fine with giving it another name
00:12:13 < knurd> | dgilmore, and extras was below some others
dirs as well
00:12:15 < mmcgrath> | nirik: very true
00:12:21 < knurd> | that just what I want
00:12:29 < knurd> | mmcgrath, I just want to leave path open
00:12:41 < knurd> | for whatever we want to do
00:12:47 < knurd> | in the future
00:13:04 < knurd> | it a easiy move now
00:13:13 < knurd> | and we can't do it later anymore without big
00:13:17 < dgilmore> | nirik: extras was the product as is epel
00:13:24 < dgilmore> | knurd: ^^
00:13:41 < knurd> | knurd, yeah, but extras was a product of epel
00:13:50 < knurd> | we are noe epel the repo from epel the sig
00:13:58 < knurd> | so epel/epel/ would be fine as well
00:14:07 < dgilmore> | knurd: no
00:14:14 < dgilmore> | knurd: epel is a product
00:14:19 < dgilmore> | extras was a product
00:14:31 < knurd> | I still want this subdir
00:14:34 < nirik> | knurd: what sort of thing are you seeing that
might happen later? totally diffrent branches/repo with rolling release?
00:14:36 < dgilmore> | /epel/<release ver> is stable
00:14:43 < knurd> | nirik, yes
00:14:48 < dgilmore> | /epel/testing/<release ver>
00:14:57 < nirik> | couldn't that be under /epel/5-rolling/ or
00:14:58 < knurd> | nirik, some contrinutors indicated that they
might want that
00:15:22 < knurd> | nirik, we could, but I'd prefer a more cleaner
00:15:29 < knurd> | and I'm gettign more and more frustrated
00:15:37 < nirik> | or /epel/rolling/5/ /epel/rolling/4/ etc.
00:15:52 < knurd> | nirik, yes, and /epel/stable/5
00:15:55 * | mmcgrath thinks anything with the word
'rolling' in it will confuse the heck out of a sysadmin that doesn't
contribute to fedora.
00:16:05 < nirik> | don't get frustrated... just trying to figure
out what you are trying to do... :)
00:16:06 < knurd> | mmcgrath, rolling is just a example
00:16:36 * | mmcgrath likes /epel/
00:16:38 < knurd> | nirik, just "mkdir stable; mv * stable/"
00:16:40 < dgilmore> | /epel/5/ is stable
00:16:57 < knurd> | or /epel/epel/
00:16:57 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: thats how it should be
00:17:08 < knurd> | some subdirectory
00:17:18 < knurd> | so we can do other stuff later
00:17:20 < knurd> | if we want to
00:17:22 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: that is consistent with the rest of
fedora. it is where people will expect it
00:17:34 < knurd> | it does not hurt if we don't want to do other
00:17:47 < knurd> | dgilmore, then it should be under fedora/
00:18:07 < knurd> | but we only have this epel directory
00:18:20 < knurd> | we need that for everything we might want to
do sooner or later
00:18:25 < knurd> | whatever that is
00:18:32 < dgilmore> | knurd: we a are fedora product regardless of
where its located on the tree
00:18:50 < dgilmore> | knurd: you are over complicating this
00:18:55 < knurd> | dgilmore, you are
00:00:01 < knurd> | the move is a easy thing now
00:00:03 < knurd> | later it's not
00:00:15 < nirik> | knurd: would rolling (or whatever) also depend
on stable? or be totally different?
00:00:17 < dgilmore> | by keeping things the same as fedora as users
00:00:24 < knurd> | nirik, not sure
00:00:34 * | mmcgrath wonders how centos does it?
00:00:50 < nirik> | if it depends on stable, then I think it would
make sense to have epel/rolling/ like epel/testing/
00:00:56 < nirik> | and leave the current dirs.
00:01:00 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: they work like fedora extras did AKAIK
00:01:04 < mmcgrath> | <nod>
00:01:16 < nirik> | but if it's seperate, then knurd's moving
things would make sense...
00:01:32 < knurd> | nirik, I#d say it could be both at the same time
00:01:35 < nirik> | it's hard to plan for something like this if
we don't know what it's going to be.
00:01:43 < knurd> | as I said; we don#t know what we'll do in one
or two years from now
00:01:52 < knurd> | a subdir leaves room for other things
00:01:56 < knurd> | whatever they look like
00:21:04 < knurd> | and I#d like to leave that path open
00:21:12 < mmcgrath> | why does leaving a subdir out mean we can't do
00:21:27 < knurd> | mmcgrath, it looks confusing on the server
00:21:40 < dgilmore> | knurd: no it doesnt
00:22:03 < knurd> | I thin kit will
00:22:09 < nirik> | I think epel/epel/ would confuse people...
epel/stable/ might not be too bad, but would as dgilmore says be different.
00:22:33 < quaid> | knurd: I'll point out that the EPEL guidelines
are to be "just like Fedora" unless there is a good reason not to, then
we document it, etc.
00:22:50 < dgilmore> | nirik: /epel/<release ver> for stable is the
00:22:52 < quaid> | so this is adding more than just directory
difference, it has to be recorded, taught, etc.
00:23:00 < knurd> | quaid, what has that to do with the guidlines
and the directory on the server?
00:23:18 < dgilmore> | knurd: you are wanting to diverge for no good
00:23:21 < quaid> | knurd: it sounds like you are asking for
something different than the way it is in the rest of Fedora, right?
00:23:25 < quaid> | dgilmore: well ...
00:23:28 < knurd> | quaid, no
00:23:28 < quaid> | dgilmore: he has a good reason
00:23:31 < dgilmore> | we can do what you want without diverging
00:23:34 < quaid> | dgilmore: but he needs to convince others :)
00:23:47 < dgilmore> | quaid: we can do what he wants without changing
00:23:54 < quaid> | ok
00:24:05 < knurd> | quaid, all I want is foo in the url
00:24:18 < quaid> | dgilmore: then what are you arguing against?
If it's not changing from Fedora ...
00:24:20 < knurd> | so we can do bar, baz, or whatever later
00:24:38 < knurd> | in one, two or fiver years from now
00:24:38 < mmcgrath> | knurd: why couldn't we do bar and baz later
00:24:48 < dgilmore> | quaid: moving stable elsewhere is diverging
00:25:02 < dgilmore> | there is no reason to do that
00:25:03 < mmcgrath> | even next week I don't see why /epel couldn't
contain 4, 5, and testing/
00:25:23 < knurd> | mmcgrath, if epele does foo, bar and baz, then
you would expect them in different dirs
00:25:33 < mmcgrath> | and they are.
00:25:48 < knurd> | mmcgrath, it's like putting extras/ below core/
00:25:53 < mmcgrath> | /epel/4 /epel/5 /epel/testing/4
/epel/testing/5 /epel/baz/4 /epel/baz/5
00:25:58 < knurd> | mmcgrath, that would be confusing, wound't it?
00:26:19 < quaid> | knurd: why not leave stable in epel/ and if we
need a bar version later, do epel/bar/ ?
00:26:23 < knurd> | mmcgrath, it's like putting extras/ below
core/ that would be confusing, wounld't it?
00:26:37 < knurd> | quaid, it's like putting extras/ below core/
that would be confusing, wounld't it?
00:26:39 < mmcgrath> | knurd: not to me but whatever.
00:26:47 < quaid> | not me either
00:27:01 < quaid> | I think it's all convention and habit more
00:27:24 < mmcgrath> | knurd: look at this -
00:27:29 < dgilmore> | Lets move on because this is not going to get
00:27:39 < mmcgrath> | knurd: explain how that is confusing?
00:27:46 * | quaid suggests we take the contention to the
list where it belongs :)
00:27:48 < dgilmore> | I will not make the proposed changes so
someone else would have to do it and take over pushing
00:28:02 < knurd> | mmcgrath, imagine extras would be at
00:28:23 < mmcgrath> | knurd: I'm not talking about extras or any
other thing, core was a product, with versions. Epel is a product with
00:28:37 < mmcgrath> | how is http://fedora.mirror.iweb.ca/core/
confusing to you?
00:28:37 < Jeff_S> | quaid: +1
00:28:37 --> | has joined #fedora-meeting
00:28:49 < knurd> | mmcgrath, but foo or bar just like core and
extras might be differnet things ,standing for their ow
00:29:01 < knurd> | mising them in one dire would confuse people
00:29:09 < mmcgrath> | if its a different product, then it's not epel.
00:29:37 < nirik> | epel-hide! New packages every day. ;)
00:29:37 < knurd> | why do you guys suddenly don#t want to leave
room for the future?
00:29:47 < knurd> | last week you wanted it
00:29:49 < mmcgrath> | http://fedora.mirror.iweb.ca/core/
00:29:50 < mmcgrath> | http://fedora.mirror.iweb.ca/core/
00:29:51 < mmcgrath> | http://fedora.mirror.iweb.ca/core/
00:29:56 < mmcgrath> | Look at it there, seriously
00:30:02 < mmcgrath> | why couldn't epel look exactly like that?
00:30:02 < knurd> | mmcgrath, s
00:30:52 < mmcgrath> | its got development, test, updates.
00:30:57 < mmcgrath> | it could also have other things if it wanted.
00:31:06 < knurd> | mmcgrath, for me epel is like fedora; and core
and extras get different dirs in fedora; epel stable and rolling get
00:31:15 < knurd> | mmcgrath, http://fedora.mirror.iweb.ca/extras/
00:31:18 < knurd> | it's seperate
00:31:21 < mmcgrath> | for me epel is like core or extras.
00:31:41 < mmcgrath> | a fedora product.
00:32:10 --> | rastaman (purple) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:32:21 < rastaman> | irie bredas
00:32:37 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: +1
00:32:38 < knurd> | k, so let's forget about it
00:32:45 * | knurd is very very disappointed
00:33:09 < knurd> | just one subdir to leave room for other things
00:33:15 < knurd> | what's so complicated about it?
00:33:20 < mmcgrath> | other things like testing, development and
00:33:26 < knurd> | it doesn#t hurt anyone
00:33:36 < rastaman> | hi, this is rastaman
00:33:39 < mmcgrath> | lets move on.
00:33:45 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
signers group – dgilmore
00:33:51 < rastaman> | how are u doing?
00:34:09 < mmcgrath> | rastaman: we're having an EPEL meeting right
now, feel free to participate if you are interested in EPEL.
00:34:09 < knurd> | rastaman, this is a EPEL meeting, not a random
chat channel ;-)
00:34:21 < knurd> | dgilmore ?
00:34:24 < rastaman> | ok
00:34:31 < rastaman> | sorry,, see u later
00:34:35 < knurd> | rastaman, np
00:34:39 < knurd> | rastaman, tanks
00:34:46 < rastaman> | yourwellcome
00:34:55 <-- | rastaman has left #fedora-meeting ( )
00:35:21 * | knurd sometime wonders if this channel should
be named fedora-groupmeetings or something
00:35:41 < knurd> | seem dgilmore left
00:35:43 < nirik> | doubt it would matter. ;)
00:35:46 * | knurd moves on
00:35:55 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
branch for EPEL if Fedora maintainer does not react – knurd, _blah_
00:36:09 < knurd> | _blah_ saind in EPEL that he supports the idea
00:36:13 < knurd> | no other reasction
00:36:17 < knurd> | is the current proposal fine?
00:36:26 < mmcgrath> | seems to have had support
00:36:26 < knurd> | +1 for the current proposal
00:36:41 < dgilmore> | sorry wife came home
00:36:50 < knurd> | dgilmore, np, we can go back to that soon
00:36:59 < nirik> | looks ok to me... +1 here...
00:37:01 < knurd> | other +1 / -1 0 for this?
00:37:20 < knurd> | come on
00:37:23 < mmcgrath> | +1
00:37:25 < knurd> | I#d like to see 4 +1 please
00:37:42 < dgilmore> | im ok with it +1
00:37:48 < knurd> | k, settled then
00:37:48 * | nirik had to go read the last version. ;)
00:37:56 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
signers group – dgilmore
00:38:05 < knurd> | dgilmore?
00:38:15 < knurd> | we had that on the list months ago, but it got
00:38:25 < knurd> | dgilmore, you are the only one with access to
the keys atm?
00:38:32 * | mmcgrath notes notting and jesse are creating
a whole signing server solution
00:38:42 < mmcgrath> | but it won't be ready for a while me thinks.
00:38:45 < knurd> | knurd, it#s not only signing, also pushing
00:38:52 < dgilmore> | knurd: mmcgrath has access
00:38:54 < mmcgrath> | ahh.
00:39:22 * | mmcgrath has access but hasn't actually pushed
00:39:24 < knurd> | dgilmore, well, is that enough or do we
want/need more pushsigners
00:39:29 < knurd> | ?
00:39:35 < dgilmore> | knurd: right now its enough i think
00:39:37 * | nirik would be happy to help if someone
described the procedure.
00:39:42 < knurd> | dgilmore, k
00:39:44 < mmcgrath> | dgilmore: how was extras done? Just with a
few people or did we have a fedora account group?
00:39:57 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: extras_signers group
00:40:06 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: we have epel_signers
00:40:24 < mmcgrath> | got'cha
00:40:28 < dgilmore> | there is only 4 people that do extras i think
00:40:29 < mmcgrath> | its all coming back to me now :)
00:41:11 < knurd> | I#d remove it from the schedule then?
00:41:21 < knurd> | I remove this topic from the schedule then?
00:41:39 * | knurd takes silence as support
00:41:42 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
finish the wiki docs and remove the warnings by end of may – quaid
00:41:50 < knurd> | quaid, everything ready?
00:42:36 < quaid> | well
00:42:41 < quaid> | probably, but I'll still make changes to some
00:42:47 * | quaid looks to see if all the warnings are removed
00:42:54 < quaid> | heh, the top page one ...
00:43:03 < knurd> | leave the top page one until we annouce
00:43:08 < knurd> | but remove the others
00:43:26 < knurd> | or what do the others think about it?
00:43:28 < quaid> | sure, I was actually working the guidelines as
the last one last night, so I'll remove it by the end of this meeting
00:43:51 < nirik> | knurd: +1. sounds good to me.
00:43:55 < stahnma> | yup
00:44:22 < knurd> | regarding annouce:
00:44:36 < knurd> | quaid, can you write a press relase and/or a
00:44:41 < quaid> | hmm, ok
00:45:03 < quaid> | I'll float a draft by the list, ok/
00:45:04 < quaid> | ?
00:45:09 < knurd> | quaid, yes, thanks
00:45:11 < knurd> | btw
00:45:24 < knurd> | I set "July 24" as date for the announcement
00:45:32 < mmcgrath> | sounds good to me
00:45:38 < knurd> | other opinions?
00:45:39 < quaid> | ok
00:45:50 < knurd> | do you guys think we are ready by then?
00:45:56 < knurd> | deps soleved, wiki ready?
00:46:01 * | mmcgrath thinks so
00:46:07 < nirik> | sounds ok, I wish we had koji/bodhi, but oh
well, we will make due with what we have.
00:46:09 < stahnma> | I am worried about lack of actual packages
00:46:18 < quaid> | how about ...
00:46:25 < stahnma> | in my daily work, I still download and build a
LOTS of srpms from extras
00:46:26 < quaid> | an early internal announcement
00:46:27 < stahnma> | for RHEL
00:46:40 < knurd> | stahnma, well, we need to poke maintainers
00:46:49 <-- | Jeff_S has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to
00:46:50 < knurd> | especially those with lots of packages
00:46:54 < nirik> | stahnma: yeah, I think there are some people
who are waiting for offical open, or don't know about it.
00:46:57 < quaid> | we can do an announcement on 10 July
00:46:57 < stahnma> | can we do that for while before you
00:47:02 < nirik> | we are getting close to 1000 packages.
00:47:04 < quaid> | saying we're opening the doors on 24 July
00:47:13 * | stahnma would like all perl modules plz :)
00:47:30 < quaid> | the 10 July would go to maintainers,
00:47:41 < knurd> | 10 July?
00:47:58 < knurd> | ohh, sorry, missed that line
00:48:17 < knurd> | quaid, yeah, sounds fine
00:48:35 < nirik> | that sounds ok, but will mean we will need to
really get working on fixing broken deps...
00:48:39 < knurd> | we likely should adjust the push target to
testing before 24 July
00:48:46 < quaid> | 07 July - early announce draft to epel-devel-l
00:48:46 < quaid> | 10 July - early announce to maintainers
00:48:46 < quaid> | 14 July - first draft of real announcement to
00:48:46 < quaid> | 20 July - real announcement complete
00:48:47 < quaid> | 24 July - announcement
00:48:47 < knurd> | so the new stuff lands in testing
00:48:55 < quaid> | use that as a skel
00:48:57 < knurd> | quaid, +1
00:49:01 < quaid> | for when to fix stuff by
00:49:11 < stahnma> | +1
00:49:33 < dgilmore> | quaid: id like to announce on Jul 19
00:49:58 * | knurd is fine with that as well
00:50:17 < knurd> | dgilmore, just wondering: why?
00:50:56 < dgilmore> | knurd: its a thursday whihc matches fedora
release policy and i think the 26th is too long
00:51:36 < knurd> | dgilmore, I thought Fedora only announces
Tuesdays to Thursdays?
00:51:38 * | nirik doesn't much care, as long as we have a
clean repo ready. :)
00:51:48 < knurd> | and hta maily due to mirrors be able to sync?
00:51:53 < knurd> | which is not important for us
00:52:35 < dgilmore> | knurd: only Thursdays
00:53:25 < dgilmore> | tuesday freeze for a release the following
00:53:31 < dgilmore> | its cosmetic
00:53:40 < knurd> | dgilmore, FC6 was a tuesday
00:53:47 < quaid> | rockin', np
00:53:48 < knurd> | 20061024
00:53:55 < knurd> | btu whatever
00:54:00 * | quaid recalls there was a reason for that one
00:54:01 < knurd> | I'm fine with Thursday
00:54:04 < dgilmore> | knurd: yes but its been refined since then
00:54:05 < quaid> | but I don't remembe what :)
00:54:47 < knurd> | quaid, is 19 July fine for you as well?
00:55:15 < knurd> | quaid, I'd like to offload the annouce mail
and press relase to you because you are a native english speaker
00:55:51 < quaid> | knurd: 19 July is fine, I just adjusted the dates
00:55:56 < knurd> | quaid, k
00:55:57 < quaid> | that means I'll send drafts this weekend to th
00:56:02 < quaid> | as for press release...
00:56:11 < quaid> | we really don't have that as part of Fedora stuff
00:56:26 < quaid> | that is, we don't have a way to e.g. release
something on Business Wire
00:56:43 < knurd> | some kind of document somewhere would be
neough I#d say
00:56:52 < quaid> | just curious if we wanted that level of attention
00:56:59 < knurd> | good question
00:57:00 < quaid> | and I don't think we can get it easily :)
00:57:24 < quaid> | one thing that we can do is write the
announcement using the 'press-release' module, so it can easily be
00:57:39 < quaid> | ok, I'm good from here, just being semantic :)
00:57:47 < knurd> | wk
00:57:48 < knurd> | k
00:57:57 <-- | No5251 has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection
reset by peer))
00:58:02 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting –
RHX and EPEL – quaid
00:58:13 < knurd> | quaid, f13 said you know about that stuff?
00:58:25 * | knurd sill does not fully understand RHX
00:58:54 < mmcgrath> | knurd: I'm not sure anyone fully understands
it yet :)
00:58:59 < knurd> | :-)
00:59:17 < mmcgrath> | knurd: I think the point is trying to get
those RHX applications that could be in EPEL space, in EPEL space.
00:59:22 < knurd> | but I tend to say tha apps that are in RHX
should be able to be in EPEL as well
00:59:23 < dgilmore> | knurd: its a place for people to make there
software available for rhel with paid support
00:59:38 < quaid> | sorry, back
00:59:38 < knurd> | mmcgrath, +1
00:59:52 < quaid> | ok, here's the status ...
00:59:56 < mmcgrath> | Its mostly just that some of those groups will
want to release software somehow and we already have systems in place to
01:00:02 < dgilmore> | we should try to work it so that Free and open
source software in RHX is available in EPEL with community support
01:00:14 * | quaid reads opinions
01:00:20 < nirik> | dgilmore: +1
01:00:29 < stahnma> | +1
01:00:35 < knurd> | dgilmore, +1
01:00:42 < quaid> | I doubt we'll have any problem with that idea
01:01:00 < quaid> | I think the RHX folks feel the same; they have
no need to duplicate what we do for no reason, and lose the gain of the
01:01:16 < quaid> | it's going to be a few weeks until we can get
a formal set of guidelines between the two groups
01:01:48 < quaid> | mainly it's about the messaging, making sure
that it's easy to know the difference between a package from EPEL and
one from RHX
01:02:06 < quaid> | I made the point that ISVs can control that
best if the ... actually own the package in Fedora :)
01:02:13 < knurd> | :-)
01:02:15 < quaid> | so, I think it's all mainly details
01:02:20 < knurd> | quaid, I just leave it on the schedule
01:02:27 < quaid> | cool
01:02:31 < knurd> | quaid, should we discuss it on the list?
01:02:35 < knurd> | or was this discussion enough?
01:02:46 * | mmcgrath thinks the list would be good so we
have something to point isv's at when they come around.
01:02:50 < quaid> | I'll update next week, but it will be a few
until we have guidelines
01:02:51 < knurd> | mmcgrath, +1
01:02:52 < mmcgrath> | some might be around now and just not speaking
01:03:05 < quaid> | ok, I can send an update to the list at some
01:03:09 < knurd> | quaid, thx
01:03:18 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting
-- Free discussion around EPEL
01:03:22 < mmcgrath> | quaid: are you in a position where you could
contact the RHX ISV's and ask them to join th eepel list?
01:03:24 < knurd> | it's getting late
01:03:36 < knurd> | anything else that can't wait till next week?
01:03:46 * | stahnma needs to leave
01:03:48 * | mmcgrath has nothing
01:03:49 < quaid> | mmcgrath: that's for Huff to do, ultimately
01:03:58 * | dgilmore has to travel for work July 16-26 any
probably wont be available much during that time
01:04:04 < quaid> | mmcgrath: but also, I am going to hook up with
the ISV partner marketing people, so we are hitting them from all angles
01:04:20 < quaid> | I expect actual ISV communication to be slow
01:04:29 < quaid> | we might want to make a wishlist of who to
talk to first
01:04:33 < mmcgrath> | cool
01:04:34 < quaid> | I know dgilmore wants Zimbra :)
01:04:40 < dgilmore> | quaid: zimbra :)
01:04:56 < mmcgrath> | heh
01:04:56 --> | llaumgui (LLaumgui) has joined #fedora-meeting
01:04:57 * | quaid has Alfresco on his wishlist
01:05:14 * | knurd will close the meeting in 30
01:05:29 * | knurd will close the meeting in 15
01:05:44 < knurd> | -- MARK -- Meeting end
More information about the epel-devel-list