Log from todays meeting
Thorsten Leemhuis
fedora at leemhuis.info
Wed Jun 13 18:04:59 UTC 2007
00:00 < knurd> | Meeting ping dgilmore, knurd, mmcgrath, nirik,
stahnma, quaid and everyone interested in EPEL -- EPEL meeting in
#fedora-meeting now!
00:00 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Sig meeting
-- Meeting rules at
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/MeetingGuidelines --
Init process
00:00 < knurd> | Hi everybody; who's around?
00:00 * | Jeff_S here
00:00 * | nirik is here.
00:00 * | dgilmore is here
00:00 --> | notting (Bill Nottingham) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:00 * | mmcgrath is here
00:01 < knurd> | no quaid yet, but let's start
00:01 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting --
repotags -- all
00:01 < knurd> | so, the never ending story :)
00:01 < knurd> | feelings?
00:01 < knurd> | opinions on the last proposal?
00:02 < nirik> | did you see axel's email to the list about it?
00:02 < knurd> | opinions on Axels mail where he said "but adding
repotags to epel will not help anymore in this - it's too late, repotags
are dead and the pain has been inflicted, in fact for me the revival of
repotags would imply the same transition pain again."
00:02 < knurd> | nirik, yeah, saw it
00:02 < knurd> | but I read it after I send the last proposal out
00:03 < nirik> | I really just want the issue to go away... I
would be fine with pushing the proposal forward or just dropping it (again).
00:03 < knurd> | I'm wondering if we should try a different route:
ask the FPC for a official statement if repotags are fine for them
00:03 < knurd> | (in general)
00:04 < knurd> | get that answer from their next week meeting
00:04 < knurd> | and we decide how to move on next week
00:04 < knurd> | I'm unsure
00:04 < knurd> | even I would likely vote "+/- 0" for my own
proposal currently
00:04 * | quaid is aqui
00:05 < knurd> | other opinions?
00:05 < nirik> | ok, anyone else? opinions? votes?
00:05 < mmcgrath> | knurd: we really need to just decide and move on.
00:05 < spot> | we're not going to give that statement.
00:05 < spot> | just as an FYI
00:05 < nirik> | I lean toward just dropping the subject... moving
on with our lives.
00:05 < knurd> | spot, ohh, I didn#t expect you would be around
00:05 < knurd> | spot, why?
00:05 < spot> | if you really want repotags vote on it, and we'll
figure out how to implement them.
00:05 < Jeff_S> | I support your proposal, but with the idea that
we can use that in the meantime and work on other (better?) ways of
co-existance with other repos going forward
00:06 < dgilmore> | knurd: all i can say is drop it
00:06 < spot> | its not our domain to decide whether they're ok
or not, thats FESCo
00:06 < dgilmore> | currently i would vote -100
00:06 < knurd> | spot, would you share your opnion on repotags?
00:07 < spot> | I don't know what technical problem they solve.
00:07 < dgilmore> | spot: none
00:07 < spot> | They clutter up the namespace.
00:07 < knurd> | dag tried to explain one two me, and it made a
bit of sense
00:07 < nirik> | they allow end users to trivially see what repo
packages are causing them conflicts/problems... or so the theory goes.
00:07 < knurd> | say there is clamav in both epel and dags repo
00:07 < dgilmore> | i dont know how any sane person can expect to mix
repos providing the same packages and get a consistent and sane result
00:07 < knurd> | with different sub-packages
00:07 --> | smooge (Stephen J Smoogen) has joined
#fedora-meeting
00:08 < spot> | i'd tend to agree that mixing repos with the same
packagesets == BOOM
00:08 < spot> | and repotags won't resolve that.
00:08 --> | Karl_le_Rouge (Karl) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:08 < knurd> | then it can happen that a clamav subpacakge from
epel tracks in the clamav main pacakge from dag
00:08 < Jeff_S> | knurd: yeah, repotags don't solve that issue
00:08 < knurd> | as long as there is no strict version-release dep
00:08 < spot> | all it will do is make the remains of your system
more identifiable
00:08 < knurd> | and a repotag could make that strong
version-release dep
00:09 < spot> | knurd: if the subpackages don't already have that
strict version-release dep, it won't matter.
00:09 --> | danieldk (Daniel de Kok) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:09 < spot> | and if they do, the likely hood of the same
e:n-v-r in both repos?
00:10 < spot> | I think you guys need to decide whether
third-party repo simultaneous operation is a goal.
00:10 < spot> | If it is a goal of EPEL, then repotags are only
part of a much bigger effort that needs to be undertaken.
00:10 < knurd> | third-party repo simultaneous operation is not a
goal afics
00:10 < spot> | If it isn't, then repotags don't really have a point.
00:10 --> | Foolish (Sindre Pedersen Bjordal) has joined
#fedora-meeting
00:11 < spot> | That's just my opinion. :)
00:11 < knurd> | thx spot
00:11 --> | stahnma (Michael Stahnke) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:11 < knurd> | I must say: I don't know how to move on
00:12 < mmcgrath> | knurd: After the in person meeting I thought we
were going to do repo tags but if axel himself doesn't want them now I'm
not sure what good we accomplish by turning them on.
00:12 < nirik> | ok, so can we move on now? or is there any more
dead horse beating we need to do?
00:12 < stahnma> | sorry, IM late
00:12 < knurd> | okay, so lets somehow vote
00:13 < knurd> | A=no repotags; B=investigate repotags further;
C=undecided
00:13 * | knurd votes C
00:13 --> | RemiFedora (Unknown) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:14 < mmcgrath> | B and C both imply that we're not moving on. I
strongly feel the repo tags discussion does more harm by continuing to
dicsuss it then either implementing it or disallowing it would.
00:14 < dgilmore> | A
00:14 * | quaid votes C with a clear statement, "Sorry,
didn't mean to piss in anyone's breakfast cereal, we pledge to be more
careful in the future."
00:14 < stahnma> | +1 quaid
00:14 <-- | rdieter_away has quit (Read error: 104
(Connection reset by peer))
00:14 < knurd> | in case anyone is wondering: I'm interest in all
opinions
00:14 --> | rdieter (Rex Dieter) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:15 < nirik> | mmcgrath: yeah, I want this to find a end... somehow.
00:15 < stahnma> | agreed
00:15 < quaid> | unless we can make "A=no repotags currently" or
something, so we aren't having to reverse even more decisions
00:15 < knurd> | so people not in the steering committee can share
their opinion by saying A, B or C, too
00:15 * | nirik votes A I guess.
00:15 < knurd> | quaid, "A=no repotags (as the case currently)"
00:16 < knurd> | quaid, so going for A would just end that topic
as long as nobody brings it up again
00:16 < stahnma> | A
00:16 < quaid> | knurd: yeah
00:16 < quaid> | Cheers, Jeff.
00:16 < stahnma> | if that's the case, A
00:16 --- | rdieter is now known as rdieter_away
00:16 * | quaid pastes strangeness from his buffer, sorry
00:16 < f13> | oh! it's the weekly repotag conversation again.
00:16 * | Jeff_S votes D - go ahead with the proposal and
start looking for alternatives as well
00:16 < quaid> | f13: don't kick a puppy when it's down!
00:16 < f13> | seriously, who do we have to shoot to get this
topic dropped like we do every week?
00:16 < Jeff_S> | quaid: cheers ;)
00:17 < nirik> | f13: yes, it's a standing item it seems anymore.
00:17 * | mmcgrath notes 15 minute mark
00:17 < knurd> | okay; thl and quaid voted C; stahnma dgilmore and
nirik A
00:17 < stahnma> | any other votings ? or move on?
00:17 < knurd> | mmcgrath ?
00:17 < quaid> | you have to ask/
00:17 < smooge> | ok now that I have typed all the stuff in the
wrong window
00:18 < Jeff_S> | everyone see #epel for smooge's ideas...
00:18 < smooge> | sorry
00:19 < f13> | I have no vote, but I"d vote A like always
00:19 < f13> | (and I'd vote that way in FESCo too FYI)
00:19 < smooge> | The main issues I deal on a volunteer support
level are people who have followed a lot of Howto's and have multiple
repo's or dont know they have multiple repos because their ISP was too nice
00:19 < nirik> | someone mentioned that this discussion did in
fact happen with fedora.us/early fedora-extras days and was shot down
there... just FYI...
00:20 * | knurd still waits for mmcgrath's vote
00:20 < smooge> | Yes.. there was a lot of discussion back then
00:20 < mmcgrath> | knurd: we're just waiting on me?
00:20 < mmcgrath> | why?
00:20 < knurd> | I didn#t see a A, B or C (or something else)
00:21 < knurd> | or did I miss it?
00:21 < mmcgrath> | A
00:21 < nirik> | smooge: I understand that this would give you
more info, but I think that info can be gotten pretty easily other ways...
00:21 < knurd> | mmcgrath, k, thx
00:21 < smooge> | and it was put off of saying clearly that the
group then was working with the older packaging community or not.
Instead it was a sort of quiet no we are not while saying we will take
it up later
00:21 <-- | RedKarl has quit (Connection timed out)
00:21 < knurd> | that makes four A (continue with no repotags) two
C (undecided) and Jeff_S as potential steering committee member as "D"
(proposal by thl)
00:22 --- | rdieter_away is now known as rdieter
00:22 < Jeff_S> | knurd: if you want my vote in terms of A/B/C, I
suppose B would be the closest
00:22 < knurd> | Jeff_S, noted
00:22 < knurd> | so, that means no repotags
00:22 < nirik> | Jeff_S: splitter! :)
00:22 < f13> | for real this time?
00:22 < quaid> | smooge: as Axel said on list, maybe we need to
handle this stuff at a higher level -- agree to work together with other
repos, and work out shared scripts/tools that help in tech support.
00:22 < knurd> | or does anyone change his opinion after smooge's
comments?
00:23 < nirik> | f13: well, until next meeting I bet. ;)
00:23 < mmcgrath> | quaid: I don't know how we can do that though, I
think we need to work with axel and dag and co on much lower levels.
The manitainers.
00:23 < knurd> | f13, I suppose there will be cries on the list
00:23 < mmcgrath> | its the packages that are incompatible.
00:23 < stahnma> | I have agreed with his comments, but am so tired
of this, I just want to move on. Especially since Axel already said
they are not worth it anymore.
00:24 < f13> | there is clearly a need to better identify where
packages came from. repo tags aren't the solution IMHO
00:24 < smooge> | Ok, could there be a public reasoning statement
about this to make it final. Basically, that EPEL is not meant to work
with other repo's and that mixing/matching repo's is considered too much
of a support burden for EPEL volunteers.
00:24 < stahnma> | hopefully a better techincal solution will be
found soon and we can lead the way with that
00:24 --> | mdomsch (Matt_Domsch) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:24 < quaid> | smooge: +1
00:24 < mmcgrath> | smooge: don't confuse repo tags with
collaborating with other repos.
00:24 < f13> | making it easier to pick out the gpg key would be
best, hard to fake. %PACKAGER is a also usable, fakeable, but usable.
00:24 < knurd> | mmcgrath, +1
00:24 < smooge> | A web-page etc that says that will be a better
line than the silent treatment that came out of fedora.us
00:24 < mmcgrath> | smooge: would you ask axel to do the same? He's
not using repo tags.
00:25 < nirik> | perhaps we could get everyone to use
yum-priorities. ;) But thats for another day...
00:26 * | knurd waits for 1 minute idle time before moving
on to the next topic
00:26 < smooge> | mmcgrath, I could do so.. but his reasoning
statement is that EPEL told him to get stuffed
00:26 < smooge> | one more second please knurd
00:26 < knurd> | smooge, that's why I said "one minute idle time"
00:26 < lancelan> | I am surprised that you have listened to axel ...
00:26 < mmcgrath> | If we told him to get stuffed, why have we been
discussing it for 3 months?
00:27 < mmcgrath> | lancelan: he's the only one that bothered joining
the SIG. That means a lot (to me at least)
00:27 < lancelan> | I thought that Dag gave good reason for repotags ...
00:27 < lancelan> | but hey - if you guys dont intend for folks to be
able to mix repos then the discussion is pointless :)
00:28 < mmcgrath> | lancelan: I still didn't follow what he was
talking about but then Axel goes on the list and says he doesn't want
repo tags.
00:28 < smooge> | mmcgrath, the issue is that there is a big ego
and communication gap going on... and this is a layer 8 problem that
precludes any co-operation
00:28 < mmcgrath> | so I'm getting mixed signals from the other repos
and it pisses me off because I thought we came to an agreement.
00:28 < lancelan> | well the main point was in mixed repo - even with
stuff like priorities etc going on
00:28 < lancelan> | I th0ught anyway :)
00:29 < f13> | lancelan: Dag gave reasons why identifying where
a package came from would be handy. repodtags are a hacky way of
accomplising that goal (kind of), but not one that FEdora is willing to
use. We'd rather find a more robust solution to the problem.
00:29 * | notting is confused. we have repo tags already.
%{DISTRIBUTION} and %{PACKAGER}
00:29 < mmcgrath> | smooge: the problem is that in the dag and axel
world, the guys that run the show are also THEE packagers. Thats not
the case in EPEL. I firmly believe that to fix this problem the
packages have to change. And the EPEL SIG just can't do that.
00:29 < f13> | notting: +1
00:29 < smooge> | mmcgrath, and we get mixed signals from the EPEL
group and Fedora people.. some say that EPEL is doing this, others say that.
00:30 < lancelan> | well it seems to me that the fedora camp is
firmly entrenched against repotags ...
00:30 < mmcgrath> | lancelan: but would you say "the fedora camp is
firmly entrenched against 3rd party repos" ?
00:30 < lancelan> | and that something else _may- come along in the
future
00:30 < smooge> | mmcgrath, so we end up with everyone taking the
message that they want to hear or not to hear and just more and more
conflicts
00:30 < knurd> | smooge, one of the downsides of a real community
project with lots of volunteers afaics :-/
00:31 < quaid> | minute has passed
00:31 < lancelan> | mmcgrath, I thought that was said before ...
00:31 < smooge> | knurd, I agree but at some point an organization
has to take a stand and people have to fall to one side or the other..
otherwise nothing gets done
00:31 < mmcgrath> | smooge: but you're binding repo tags and
collaboration and thats a fallacy.
00:32 < knurd> | smooge, your have a point, but well, it's a quite
controversial topic....
00:32 < mmcgrath> | repo tags will not fix the clamav problems, dag
working with the clamav packager will. And that has nothing to do with
the SIG.
00:32 < mmcgrath> | or the clamav packager working with dag will.
00:33 <-- | rwmjones has quit ("Closed connection")
00:33 * | knurd will move on soon if nothing happens anymore
00:33 < smooge> | mmcgrath, since I have joined it has been
mentioned on both sides as being part of collaboration at some point or
another.
00:33 < lancelan> | I actually dont like repotags - and agree that
yum/rpm should be able to indicate repo - but they dont ...
00:33 < smooge> | I would like to see a definition in the end of
what is collaboration and what can be done if anything to meet it
00:33 < mmcgrath> | smooge: but collaboration does not mean "do what
the other guy says"
00:34 < lancelan> | unless of course you specifically ask
00:34 < f13> | lancelan: they can, but it requires more query
flags. Now whether or not those query flags are made more prominent, or...
00:34 < mmcgrath> | knurd: what else is on the schedule today?
00:34 < f13> | lancelan: (:
00:34 < lancelan> | f13, sure, some user tools to show stuff would be
good - and they are coming in to yum ...
00:35 <-- | londo has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed
out))
00:35 < knurd> | does anybody really think opinions will cahnge if
we discuss this further?
00:35 < wwoods> | rpm -qi isn't that hard
00:35 < lancelan> | I would actually like to see mixed repos - but
yum isnt clever enough yet IMHO
00:35 < f13> | smooge: working with 3rd party repos is going to
be pretty hard in any case. THe EPEL project cannot reference nor link
to these 3rd party repos for software, as those repos host illegal
content. SO we have to package everything we want in EPEL proper, which
immediatly creates 'conflicts' with these 3rd party repos.
00:35 < knurd> | otherwise I suggest we move on
00:35 < knurd> | f13, +1
00:35 < f13> | smooge: if these repos would just drop the
illegal content then it would be much easier.
00:35 < lancelan> | f13 - define illegal for me please :)
00:35 < smooge> | f13, but it might not be illegal where they are
00:36 < f13> | smooge: and that doesn't matter to us
00:36 < Jeff_S> | f13: kbs extras has something RH would consider
"illegal"?
00:36 < dgilmore> | lancelan: illegal in the US mp3 dvd etc
00:36 < f13> | Jeff_S: what is 'kbs' ?
00:36 < dgilmore> | Jeff_S: he only built Fedora Extras for RHEL
00:36 < Jeff_S> | sorry, centos.karan.org
00:36 < f13> | ah.
00:36 < Jeff_S> | dgilmore: yes, exactly
00:36 < f13> | in that case, it would be obsolete
00:37 < f13> | as we want to use the same infrastructure
framwork and people to do the builds.
00:37 < Jeff_S> | I'm just saying that you're making quite a
blanket statement
00:37 < dgilmore> | Jeff_S: AFAIKT he has not updated any packages
since we dropped FC-3 support
00:37 < f13> | Fedora Packager Joe can't get to the source
control for kbs, to fix things, or whatever.
00:37 < smooge> | Jeff_S, its ok.. this I have learned is f13's
normal mode of talking in meetings.
00:37 * | Jeff_S ignores it then
00:38 < notting> | actually, speaking of centos, do we have
whomever's doing the /extras/ stuff on the main centos mirrors working
in epel?
00:38 < f13> | Jeff_S: the people that are complaining loudly
about 'interoperability' with 3rd parties are the ones that are carrying
things we can't reference.
00:39 < nirik> | notting: not the Xfce people at least.... They
are using my Xfce specs tho, so if I push Xfce for EPEL it should be
fine as long as we keep the centos-extras in step.
00:39 < knurd> | notting, I don't think there are much people that
are working in Fedora and Centos Extras
00:39 < f13> | Jeff_S: so yes, I'm blanket stating that working
with "3rd party" is going to be difficult on many levels. As we found
with FEdora itself, just having an official 3rd party was a lot of
unnecessary trouble.
00:39 < Jeff_S> | notting: it is a small group of people AFAIK, and
I think the answer is no to most or all of them
00:39 < smooge> | notting, no. I understand that there are
contractual issues with them signing the Fedora License stuff
00:39 < notting> | *sigh*
00:39 < mmcgrath> | notting: we tried though.
00:40 < Jeff_S> | f13: well if it is necessary or not is debatable IMO
00:40 < nirik> | smooge: if you know who the people(s) that are
doing the Xfce for centos-extras are, I would love a contact email... I
haven't been able to figure out who it is.
00:40 < Jeff_S> | f13: but, yes, it is trouble, that much is clear
00:40 < stahnma> | I think I have to get to a work meeting
00:40 < stahnma> | so, I am parting early
00:41 < Jeff_S> | bye stahnma
00:41 < knurd> | shall we move on with the other topics of the
EPEL meeting?
00:41 < knurd> | by stahnma
00:41 < Jeff_S> | knurd: I would like that
00:41 < smooge> | knurd, I have spoken my piece on this
00:41 < knurd> | smooge, thx for your input
00:41 --> | donavan (CtrlProxy User) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:41 < knurd> | so let's move on
00:41 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting --
EPEL mock configs in Fedora's mock package
00:42 < knurd> | seems it has happened
00:42 < knurd> | does anyone know if the EPEL4 configs have been
updated?
00:42 * | mmcgrath hasn't done it
00:42 < mmcgrath> | dgilmore: ?
00:42 < Jeff_S> | I haven't gotten around to figuring out git yet...
00:42 < knurd> | s/mirror.centos.org/mirrorlist.centos.org/
00:42 < quaid> | Dennis fell asleep
00:42 < Jeff_S> | knurd: I think that has been fixed, but I'm not
positive
00:43 < knurd> | Jeff_S, okay, can you keep an eye on it if it
really has been fixed when the new package comes out?
00:43 < f13> | we have a mock update coming out soon
00:43 < knurd> | that would be enought for now afaics
00:43 < f13> | I _think_ it has epel configs
00:43 < f13> | you can check the git tree though
00:43 < f13> | git://git.fedoraproject.org/git/hosted/mock
00:43 < Jeff_S> | knurd: yes, I'll check to see if he's sent it
through koji yet
00:43 < knurd> | Jeff_S, thx
00:43 < f13> | well, there was some bugs found, so we're fixing
those
00:43 < Jeff_S> | f13: can that be accessed via http somehow?
00:43 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting --
comps.xml for EPEL -- dglimore
00:43 < f13> | yes
00:44 < Jeff_S> | f13: yeah, Michael mailed the epel list earlier today
00:44 < f13> | git clone
http://git.fedoraproject.org/git/hosted/mock
00:44 < f13> | or jsut browse http://git.fedoraproject.org
00:44 < Jeff_S> | f13: yes, the 2nd option is what I meant, thanks
00:44 < knurd> | dgilmore, are you still around?
00:44 < dgilmore> | knurd: yeah sorry
00:45 < knurd> | dgilmore, np
00:45 < knurd> | any progress on teh compx.xml stuff?
00:45 < dgilmore> | knurd: there was a post that epel configs will be
in mock 0.7.1
00:45 < smooge> | ok on mock configs.. will EPEL just be focusing
on EL4 and EL5? Will it be doing anyting for EL-BRIC?
00:45 < knurd> | smooge, BRIC?
00:45 < dgilmore> | knurd: i started i need to clean up some of the
packages not in EPEL
00:46 < Jeff_S> | knurd: the updated EL4 configs look good in the
git repo, so they should get pushed w/ the newest mock package
00:46 < smooge> | RHEL-BRIC a 2 year desktop offering that RH is
supposed to be doing
00:46 < dgilmore> | smooge: we are only looking at EL4- and 5
00:46 < dgilmore> | we have no current plans to do 2.1 or 3
00:46 < knurd> | smooge, ohh, that one, sorry, i didn#t know that
acronym yet
00:46 < f13> | smooge: that's not RHEL
00:46 < dgilmore> | but if there is demand and people to do work
there is no reason we cant
00:46 < f13> | rather, that's Red Hat Global Desktop
00:46 < f13> | and no, I don't think RHGD is a good target for EPEL
00:47 < f13> | (yet)
00:47 < smooge> | f13, sorry.. the RH marketing literature put them
together
00:47 < f13> | well, RHGD is based on RHEL, but we're not
calling it RHEL (:
00:47 < smooge> | so I was confused
00:47 < f13> | tell me about it
00:47 < f13> | *sigh*
00:47 < knurd> | dgilmore, shall we talk about the comps.xml stuff
fiurther next week?
00:47 < quaid> | smooge: if you have a pointer to that marketing
lit, let me know
00:48 < knurd> | dgilmore, or do you need help with it?
00:48 < smooge> | quaid, sorry it was in the Summit stuff I was
reading. They were mentioning about the offerings and I must have
mixed/matched in my head like a bad techie
00:48 < quaid> | smooge: no worries, you weren't the only person
00:48 < smooge> | on the mock/build infrastructure, I have a
question focused for 3rd party groups
00:48 < smooge> | is this a good time for it or another section?
00:49 < knurd> | please wait until the free discussion section
00:49 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting --
bodhi/testing repo/final repo layout/ koji for epel
00:49 < knurd> | did anybody ( dgilmore ? ) talk to mbonnert?
00:49 < dgilmore> | knurd: well part of it is making sure the groups
are sane and that we have the packages
00:50 < dgilmore> | Ill check something into cvs soon and then post
to the list asking people to look over it
00:50 < knurd> | dgilmore, thx
00:50 < dgilmore> | knurd: i spoke to him
00:50 < dgilmore> | no timeframe yet
00:50 * | dgilmore does not have the cycles to work on it
00:50 < knurd> | k, I suppose we have to live with that for now
00:50 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting --
finish the wiki docs and remove the warnings by end of may
00:51 < knurd> | quaid, ?
00:51 < knurd> | lala
00:51 < knurd> | I sometimes think we need to make the status
updates mail based
00:51 < quaid> | *sing*
00:51 < knurd> | they take to much time in the meetings
00:51 < quaid> | eek, that was end of May?
00:52 < quaid> | sorry for the delay
00:52 < knurd> | quaid, that once was the plan :-)
00:52 < quaid> | I actually have it up in my to-do list as a high
priority, so I should be able to by end of week
00:52 < knurd> | quaid, k, thx
00:52 < quaid> | yeah, well, plan and then the wind blows
00:52 --- | knurd has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting --
Free discussion around EPEL
00:52 < knurd> | quaid, happens :-)
00:52 < quaid> | question on that is -- we are generally ready to
be all announced?
00:52 < knurd> | smooge, shoot
00:53 < nirik> | we need bodhi I think before that... which needs
koji.
00:53 < smooge> | Ok is the infrastructure done in a way that can
be duplicated by 3rd parties. When I worked for US Government.. we could
not directly pull stuff from any non-RH RHN provided repo without
rebuilding the packages ourselves
00:54 < smooge> | So basically Ihad a small mock system that
rebuilt various extras items that were needed on the RHEL system
00:54 < knurd> | smooge, it should be possible to duplicate it
00:54 < knurd> | smooge, we just use open souce tools for it
00:54 < dgilmore> | smooge: right now its all done in plague
00:54 < nirik> | yeah, everything should be available...
00:54 < Jeff_S> | smooge: yeah, it's all just mock under the hood
anyway
00:54 < knurd> | plague (soon koji) with mock and stuff like that
00:55 < quaid> | there however is no guide/how-to yet, right?
00:55 < smooge> | the issues are the build parameters and such that
can be fed underneath the cooker
00:55 < mmcgrath> | smooge: I'll put it this way, anyone that can't
duplicate it should come talk to us so we can correct that :)
00:55 < dgilmore> | smooge: one of our goals is the same as fedora.
use only open source tools
00:55 < knurd> | smooge, it's all in the spec files afaik
00:55 < knurd> | smooge, we don#t use magic "--with foo" stuff
00:55 < dgilmore> | smooge: standard mock settings
00:55 < smooge> | Ok from experience with the RHEL rebuild there
were various things that needed to be fed to get packages to 'match' via
libraries and such
00:56 < smooge> | I wanted to make sure that if these were done..
it was documented in 'meta-spec' files or some such
00:56 < f13> | smooge: well you're going to run into the same
things that centos and oracle run into
00:56 < f13> | the public RHEL binaries aren't the result of
every package built against the GA package
00:56 < knurd> | smooge, it should be possible without to much
hassle (you know, there are always some bugs on the way....)
00:57 < f13> | so the GA packages were built against packages
that may have been older than what is in GA
00:57 < f13> | to extend this...
00:57 < smooge> | f13, I know with the RHEL that is the case.. but
RH-EPEL I wanted to know if that was the case or if I needed to tell my
Gov replacement he was cool with what was there
00:57 < f13> | if EPEL builds using RHEL binaries, the results
may actually be different than EPEL packages built against CentOS binaries.
00:58 < mmcgrath> | smooge: I'm actually writing a RHM article right
now about how people can duplicate our environment.
00:58 < f13> | and EPEL builds built against "GA" epel builds
may be different than the GA epel builds.
00:59 < f13> | it's just due to how build systems work, well
sane ones (although some people will differ). Building a package
doesn't automatically make every package that is associated with it
rebuild as well, ad infinium.
00:59 < f13> | you're always going to have cases where the
"released" package wasn't built with the "released" tree
00:59 < smooge> | Ok thanks.. the guys at LANL will be happy about
that.. they need to build stuff against 1.0,2.1,3,4,5 (1.0 being RHL6.2)
00:59 < knurd> | k, anything else?
01:00 * | knurd will close the meeting in 30
01:01 * | knurd will close the meeting in 10
01:01 < knurd> | -- MARK -- Meeting end
01:01 --- | knurd has changed the topic to:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/FedoraMeetingChannel --
Meetings often get logged -- see schedule in the wiki for next meeting
01:01 < knurd> | thx everyone
01:01 <-- | RemiFedora has quit ("A bientôt...")
More information about the epel-devel-list
mailing list