Log from last EPEL SIG meeting
Thorsten Leemhuis
fedora at leemhuis.info
Tue Mar 27 17:05:21 UTC 2007
= Meeting 20070325 =
[[TableOfContents]]
== Attending ==
* dgilmore
* mmcgrath
* nirik
* quaid
* stahnma
* thimm
* thl
== Summary ==
* RHEL5 final should be on the builders soon (maybe already when you
read this); thl will announce to Fedora contributors to actually start
to build for EPEL5 -- seems to him a lot of people wait for a "Go"
signal. The packages currently in EPEL5 probably need a rebuild; it was
discussed to simply delete the repo and build the packages again, but
between the meeting and writing the logs this issue was raised again on
the list
* repo layout -- outlined in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies/PackageMaintenanceAndUpdates
might need updates/modified tools; anyone willing to help?
* shortcut for branching ; dgilmore has something locally; for now
send him an email or irc ping and i can ping all of a owners packages ;
including a list of packages might be helpful in case you don't want all
of your packages branched
* we sooner or later need scripts that check upgrade paths,
repoclosure and similar stuff (like: making sure no packages enter the
repo that are part of the base); reuse the Fedora scripts? should work,
but they probably need adjustments and enhancements ; anyone willing to
help?
* EPEL Steering Committee proposal
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThorstenLeemhuis/EPELSteeringCommittee ;
small details were mentioned and added to the proposal; will get send to
fedora-maintainers (happened already) and then to FESCo for further
discussion and ratifying
* New meeting time -- it was agreed on to meet on Wednesday at 17:00
UTC in the future
== Full Log ==
{{{
00:00 < dgilmore> | thl, thimm, stahnma, mmcgrath, quaid, spot, jima.
EEPLE meeting ping
00:00 < mmcgrath> | pong
00:00 --- | thl has changed the topic to: EPEL meeting
00:00 < thl> | dgilmore, pong
00:01 < dgilmore> | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/Schedule
schedule
00:01 * | nirik is here too.
00:01 < thl> | dgilmore, what the RHEL5 on builder status?
00:01 < dgilmore> | sorry nirik forgot to ping you too
00:02 < nirik> | no worries. ;)
00:02 < dgilmore> | thl: Im going to make it happen today
00:02 < thl> | dgilmore, great
00:02 < thl> | well, that creates two questions afaics:
00:02 * | mmcgrath notes we still don't have clearence to
do that.
00:02 < nirik> | for testing is the centos beta pretty close to
the same as whatsa in el5?
00:02 < thl> | a) shall we tell everybody to actually start for
real?
00:02 < thl> | b) rebuild everything again?
00:02 --> | thim1 (Axel Thimm) has joined #fedora-meeting
00:02 <-- | thim1 has quit (Client Quit)
00:02 < thl> | nirik, centos beta is rhel5beta2
00:02 < mmcgrath> | I think b) would be good to do if for no other
reason then to help test koji.
00:03 < thl> | nirik, but that should be good enough; and the
final should be out soon afaics
00:03 --> | thim1 has joined #fedora-meeting
00:03 --> | thim1 is Axel Thimm
00:03 * | dgilmore has been stuck in koji for last couple
of days
00:03 < nirik> | ok. Does a rebuild mean bump release on everything?
00:03 < dgilmore> | nirik: yep
00:03 < thl> | nirik, yes, but we can use the script
00:03 < thl> | mmcgrath, -ECanFollow
00:03 < nirik> | also, only el-5? or el-4 as well?
00:04 < thl> | mmcgrath, do the builders use koji already?
00:04 < dgilmore> | nirik: only EL-5
00:04 < thl> | nirik, what dgilmore said
00:04 < nirik> | ok
00:04 < thl> | nirik, I can do that
00:04 < mmcgrath> | thl: not yet but they're close. When were you
thinking the rebuild would happen?
00:04 < dgilmore> | thl: today or toomoorow they will have koji and
plague
00:04 < nirik> | we also might want to make sure that everything
thats in el4 is also in el5, and/or was moved into core, or some other
good reason why it's not in there...
00:05 < thl> | mmcgrath, I'd say we should annouce it once, so
people that want to do the rebuild theirselfs can do; then we can script
the rest
00:05 < mmcgrath> | dgilmore: how close is it to actually being put
into a package build -> sign -> move to mirror.
00:05 < thl> | dgilmore, sounds fun :)
00:06 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: right now all id need to do is setup a
cron job to rsync results to buildsys
00:06 < mmcgrath> | Cool
00:06 < thl> | so, shall we tell people to actually start now?
Seems some fedora contributors are waiting for a "go"
00:06 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: I need to get on lmacken and get bohdi
working
00:06 < thim1> | I missed the first couple of minutes (irc kicked
me out)=> why rebuild?
00:06 * | quaid is a'lurking
00:06 < mmcgrath> | <nod>
00:07 < thl> | hi thimm thim1
00:07 < mmcgrath> | thim1: The current packages are built against betas.
00:07 < dgilmore> | thim1: to have things linked against RHEL5 final
00:07 < thl> | thimm, sopme people feared there might be
problems as we build against beta1 until now
00:07 < thl> | z00dax did, and he has a point afaics
00:07 < thim1> | I didn't know that, I thought we were riding on GA
00:07 < mmcgrath> | Personally I'm not worried about it, but I don't
want people coming up to us with "such and such package doesn't work.
Must be because it was compiled against the beta"
00:08 < thim1> | I agree with rebuilding against GA
00:08 < thim1> | That's why GA != beta
00:08 < thim1> | :)
00:08 < thim1> | But do we need to bump releases?
00:08 < thl> | I'll announce that; wait some days, and
script-rebuild the rest
00:08 < dgilmore> | so next on the list is final repo layout
00:08 < thim1> | Can we assume that EPEL was a sandbox and rebuild
on the same NVRs?
00:08 < dgilmore> | thats going to take some work to make it happen
00:09 < dgilmore> | thim1: we could if we delete everything first
00:09 < mmcgrath> | honestly since we're still not 'official' I'd be
fine deleting all the bin's we currently have.
00:09 < thim1> | Lots of specfiles are now in sync Fedora <->
EPEL, would be sad to frok them all
00:09 < thl> | dgilmore, I'd still like to know if should Fedora
controbutors to actually start now
00:09 < thl> | mmcgrath, +1
00:09 < thim1> | I'd go with deleting and rebuilding
00:09 < thim1> | w/o bumping releases
00:09 < mmcgrath> | it just seems less.... murky :-)
00:10 < thim1> | Well, we're not started yet
00:10 < thim1> | ;)
00:10 < dgilmore> | that can be done
00:10 < thl> | mmcgrath, but then you or dgilmore have to do it
afaics
00:10 < thl> | I don#t think i have the permissions everywhere
to do that
00:10 < thim1> | NExt time we should consider using a disttag of
el4.92 for example
00:10 < dgilmore> | thl: id like to wait until we have RHEL5 final
but then open the flood gates
00:10 < mmcgrath> | I'm not even sure I have permission to do that.
00:10 < mmcgrath> | I still don't have direct access to the main
mirror (I think I'm caught up in a ticket queue)
00:10 < thl> | dgilmore, sure, that what I mean; but if you
reall do it today, then we could annouce "go" soon
00:11 < dgilmore> | thl: sure
00:11 < dgilmore> | thl: what do you want me to do?
00:11 < thl> | dgilmore, k, then I'll annouce it when you
annouce the RHEL5 GA is in place
00:11 < thl> | dgilmore, well, the rebuild with delete
00:11 < dgilmore> | thl: deleting ok
00:11 < thl> | can you handle that?
00:12 < dgilmore> | thl: yes
00:12 < thl> | also queuing the rebuilds? Or do you need help
with that?
00:12 < mmcgrath> | dgilmore: how do we delete whats there? I'm not
that familiar with the actual sync script. do they just do a rsync
--delete?
00:12 < dgilmore> | thl: there are some scripts to do that
00:12 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: rm -rf on buildsys
00:12 < thl> | dgilmore, remember to keep the buildorder if
possible
00:13 < mmcgrath> | dgilmore:k
00:13 < dgilmore> | mmcgrath: the rsync to master mirror has a
--delete-after
00:13 <-- | thimm has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed
out))
00:13 < stahnma> | sorry im late
00:13 < mmcgrath> | I figured, didn't want to assume.
00:14 < thl> | k, move to "final repo layout"?
00:14 < thl> | hi stahnma ; thim1 still around?
00:14 < thl> | (just wondering)
00:14 * | thim1 is here
00:14 < dgilmore> | thl: i think what you have proposed is fine but
current tools can not work with it
00:14 < thl> | dgilmore, would it be hard to adjust? where is
the problem? push scripts?
00:15 < dgilmore> | current tools do do testing either
00:15 < dgilmore> | thl: pushscripts
00:15 < thl> | do do?
00:15 < dgilmore> | thl: bohdi may be better
00:15 < nirik> | what is the proposed repo layout?
00:15 < thl> | nirik,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies/PackageMaintenanceAndUpdates
00:15 < thl> | (near the end)
00:16 < thl> | dgilmore, so what do we do?
00:16 < dgilmore> | i need to get with lmacken and make sure it will
work for us
00:16 < thl> | dgilmore, can we have different build targets for
now, that get pushed to different directories?
00:16 < thl> | dgilmore, the stuff from lmacken supports testing
afaik
00:16 < dgilmore> | thl: we could but that will require work on
packagers
00:17 < dgilmore> | thl: it supports testing. Not sure about the sub
dir part
00:17 < thl> | dgilmore, can we simply use the testing repo for
now as in the layout
00:17 < dgilmore> | does anyone object to the layout?
00:17 < mmcgrath> | not me.
00:18 < thim1> | Where do security updates go into?
00:18 < dgilmore> | thl: for the tetsing part requires changes to
push scripts
00:18 < thl> | dgilmore, no, I meant just use testing for now
00:18 < dgilmore> | thim1: straight into the repo not testing
00:18 < thl> | and nothing else
00:18 < thl> | that makes it obvious that this stuff is not
ready for the public yet, too
00:18 < dgilmore> | thl: it would require me to for the extras push
scripts to do
00:18 < thim1> | OK, are we discussion rebuilds or layout?
00:19 < dgilmore> | s/for/fork/
00:19 < thl> | dgilmore, can't you just configure a different
target dir?
00:19 < thl> | thim1, layout
00:19 < dgilmore> | thl: not that im aware ill look see if i can
00:19 < thim1> | Why are push scripts a problem for the layout?
00:19 < nirik> | how far away is bodhi?
00:19 < dgilmore> | nirik: AFAIK close
00:20 < mmcgrath> | lmacken: ping?
00:20 < dgilmore> | hopefully we can switch to bohdi and koji at the
same time
00:20 < thl> | dgilmore, thx; let me know if I can help you with
them
00:20 < thim1> | We already have similar setup on the Fedora side
of the infrastructure, can't we reuse that?
00:20 < nirik> | cool. That would be ideal... then we have testing
support, security updates marking, etc.
00:20 < thl> | thim1, the fedora extras stuff does not handle
testing at all
00:20 < thl> | the new stuff from lmacken should
00:21 < thim1> | thl: Understand, thanks!
00:21 < dgilmore> | lets move on
00:21 < thl> | dgilmore, +1
00:21 < dgilmore> | Next on teh list is shortcut for branching
00:21 < mmcgrath> | thim1: 'bohdi' is a whole updates system, its
more robust then just our current scripts. Its a good thing :-)
00:21 < thim1> | I know, looking forward to it :)
00:21 < dgilmore> | for now send me an email or irc ping and i can
ping all of a owners packages
00:21 --- | thl has changed the topic to: EPEL meeting --
shortcut for branching
00:22 < thl> | dgilmore, is there a way to say "don't branch foo"?
00:22 < dgilmore> | thl: not in what i currently have
00:22 * | nirik needs to branch another of his packages
soon... but needs to get the maintainer of the prereqs to branch first.
00:22 < thl> | I for example have several packages that got
moved to core
00:22 < thl> | (and thus to RHEL5)
00:22 < dgilmore> | i could quite easily pass a list of packages and
branch them
00:23 < thim1> | branch and delete superfluous branches?
00:23 < thl> | dgilmore, maybe something like that would be nice
00:23 < dgilmore> | thl: ill add tho my script the ability to exclude
a list
00:23 < thl> | dgilmore, sounds sane, too
00:23 < nirik> | we do need to make sure if something was branched
for epel-4 that it's still in epel-5 or rhel-5 core...
00:23 < dgilmore> | nirik: indeed
00:23 < thim1> | We can't control RHEL5 core :)
00:24 < nirik> | sure, but we shouldn't drop a package on upgrade
if we can at all avoid it.
00:24 < dgilmore> | nirik: though AFAIK upgrades fron RHEL4 ->RHEL5
are unsupported
00:24 < thim1> | That's not true anymore
00:24 < nirik> | really? wow. ok.
00:24 < dgilmore> | thim1: im wrong? i konda hope so
00:25 < thim1> | Yes, it was an important discussion topic between
customers/partners and RHEL
00:25 < thim1> | But maybe not all subscribtion models support it,
though
00:25 < dgilmore> | no idea
00:25 < thim1> | Ask you local RHEL representatiove for a detailed
product view ;)
00:25 < dgilmore> | but regardless we want to make sure the same
functionality exists
00:26 < thim1> | We must make sure that upgrades are not
obstructed by EPEL
00:26 < thl> | scripts?
00:26 < thim1> | Otherwise what RHEL and partners have agreed is a
different thing
00:26 < dgilmore> | all the branching needs to happen on the cvs
server so an admin has to handle it
00:26 < thim1> | thl: scripts?
00:26 < thl> | scripts could check if the upgrade path are fine
00:27 < thim1> | thl+++
00:27 < thl> | or if a pacakge accidentally enters EPEL5, even
if it is part of RHEL5
00:27 < thl> | someone would just need to write them
00:27 < thim1> | Like for FC6+FE6 currently
00:27 < thl> | yeah, but they probably need some adjustments for
RHEL
00:27 < thim1> | Reuse the Fedora scripts?
00:27 < thim1> | Sure, depends also on layout
00:27 < thim1> | And testing the testing repo, too
00:28 < nirik> | I think also bodhi does some checking on newly
built packages...
00:28 < nirik> | ie, EVR, broken deps, etc.
00:28 < thim1> | About the layout: Do we really want
/epel/5/5.0/... or epel/5/5/....?
00:28 < thl> | nirik, yeah, I think so, too
00:28 < dgilmore> | nirik: its supposed to not push packages if it
breaks deps
00:28 < thl> | thim1, the reasons for that are in the proposal
00:29 < thl> | I'd say we should keep those scripts in mind, but
they are no high priority for the start
00:29 < nirik> | well, if we can start with bodhi they shouldn't
be needed...
00:30 < dgilmore> | thl: Tell contributors to start | as sson as
RHEL5 is sorted out
00:30 < thl> | dgilmore, will do
00:30 < dgilmore> | moving to next areas
00:30 < thl> | nirik, I don#t want to be a testbed for new stuff
;-)
00:30 < thim1> | thl: I reread the proposal, where is the reason
for "5/5.0" ?
00:30 --> | stahnma_ (Michael Stahnke) has joined
#fedora-meeting
00:30 < thl> | nirik, at least not more then strictly needed
00:30 < nirik> | thl: sure, but we already are to some extent...
koji, etc. ;)
00:31 < dgilmore> | koji will happen for all soon
00:31 < thl> | thim1, below it; starts with "This layout may
looks complicated, but has one major benefit:..."
00:31 < thim1> | That explains 5.0, 5.1 etc
00:31 < thim1> | not 5/5.0
00:32 < dgilmore> | thim1: can we talk about the layout on the list
please
00:32 < thl> | thim1, you mean the extra 5/ in it?
00:32 < thl> | dgilmore, +1
00:32 < thim1> | thl: yes
00:32 < dgilmore> | lets move on for now and discuss it on the
list and come to an agreement
00:32 < thl> | thim1, makes everything a bit easier IMHO
00:32 < thl> | dgilmore, +1
00:32 < dgilmore> | I want to talk about thl's EPEL Steering
Committie proposal
00:33 < stahnma_> | +1
00:33 < thl> | dgilmore, I just modified it a small bit
00:33 < thl> | as requested by thim1 on the list
00:33 < thl> |
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThorstenLeemhuis/EPELSteeringCommittee?action=diff&rev2=4&rev1=3
00:34 --- | thl has changed the topic to: EPEL meeting --
EPEL Steering Committee
00:34 < thl> | I'd say I post it to fedora-maintainers tomorrow
00:34 < dgilmore> | thl: ok
00:34 < thl> | and then FESCo can look at it on Thursday, people
agree that this is the way forward
00:34 * | mmcgrath is apathetic about SIG vs Steering
Committee.
00:35 < thim1> | thl: I like it +1
00:35 < dgilmore> | does anyone have anything to say for or against
the propossal
00:35 < mmcgrath> | just as long as progress continues to get made.
00:35 < thl> | mmcgrath, +1
00:35 < thl> | mmcgrath, we probably need to use the wiki a bit
more for votings
00:35 < nirik> | it's fine with me, I don't much care either, but
if we need to vote on hard things and make decisions, thats fine.
00:35 < dgilmore> | thl: wiki or mailing list
00:36 < thl> | dgilmore, +1
00:36 < thl> | and we should annouce votings beforehand if possible
00:36 < thl> | to make sure people can send in their opinions,
even if they can't make the meeting
00:36 < mmcgrath> | thl: +1, yeah people get very picky about that
type of voting.
00:36 < thl> | I'll add a note to the proposal
00:37 < thl> | mmcgrath, I know, I'm one of those people
sometimes (see FAB list, even if it was no voting) ;-)
00:37 < thl> | other stuff that is missing?
00:38 < dgilmore> | OK time to moveon thl send the propossal out
today or toomoorw
00:38 < thl> | k
00:38 < stahnma_> | me fear about the SC is that if we want to get
companies and customers involved in EPEL, the SC seems to close them out
00:38 < thim1> | New meeting time?
00:38 --- | dgilmore has changed the topic to: EPEL Meeting
-- Free Chat
00:38 < stahnma_> | it's like they have to jump through hoops to get
a voice
00:39 < stahnma_> | (my isp will probabl drop during this meeting, so
just keep talking if I die)
00:39 < thl> | stahnma_, primary discussion channel is the list
00:39 < thim1> | http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/NewMeetingTime
00:39 < thim1> | Only thl and myself added some time slots
00:39 < nirik> | I think we should strive for reaching a consensus
on issues, and only vote when there is some kind of deadlock... so
normally they would have a voice I would think.
00:39 < thl> | IRC is always just a add on, as not all people
can do / like IRC
00:39 < dgilmore> | thim1: all the available times i cant attend
00:40 < thim1> | dgilmore: Which weekday time slots are free for you?
00:40 < nirik> | thim1: almost anytime is ok for me...
00:40 < stahnma_> | just curious, do we a have a US west-coasters?
00:40 < thl> | stahnma_, yes, quaid is
00:40 < mmcgrath> | stahnma_: just quaid
00:40 < mmcgrath> | AFAIK
00:40 < quaid> | but
00:41 < stahnma_> | I thought most were out of Eastern and Central
00:41 < quaid> | I'm very flexible
00:41 < quaid> | like, i was going to approve some Midnight PDT times
00:41 < dgilmore> | thim1:
00:41 < dgilmore> | 23:00-3:00 UTC or
00:41 < dgilmore> | 11:30-12:30 UTC
00:41 < quaid> | and others :)
00:42 < quaid> | there are some early mornings PDT I can do, like
Noon UTC
00:42 < dgilmore> | basicly i cant do it doing work time $DayJob wont
allow me any more time
00:42 <-- | stahnma has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection
timed out))
00:42 < thim1> | The how about a noon UTc slot?
00:42 < thl> | bad for me
00:42 * | stahnma_ has a similar situation... I am normally
on IRC at work, but can't promise a time
00:42 < quaid> | hmm
00:43 < dgilmore> | 11:30UTC is when i get up
00:43 < quaid> | I usually don't have this problem with just East
Coast/Europe
00:43 < quaid> | like, what about 2200 UTC?
00:44 < thim1> | That's 0:00 in main parts of Europe
00:44 * | thl heads to bead at around 01:00 UTC
00:44 < quaid> | ah, early to bed, early to rise :)
00:44 < thl> | bed
00:44 < thl> | quaid, yes :)
00:44 < dgilmore> | quaid: i finish work at 23:00UTC
00:44 * | stahnma_ too or 0:00
00:45 < quaid> | evil bosses!
00:45 < thl> | I think the sunday meeting time still seems to
match most people best
00:45 < thl> | I know it's not ideal
00:45 < thim1> | I won't be able to come on Sundays
00:45 < thl> | but for now it seems the best afaics
00:45 < dgilmore> | quaid: i hope to have a new one soon but dont
want to assume i will
00:45 < quaid> | dgilmore: yeah, i hear dat
00:46 < stahnma_> | I can probably do a day meeting---but I might be
unresponsive if I have "real work" to do :)
00:46 < dgilmore> | the only time i could possibly commit to is lunch
00:47 < nirik> | would sat be any better than sunday?
00:47 < dgilmore> | which is when FESCo meeting happens
00:47 < thl> | nirik, thim1's times are
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/NewMeetingTime
00:47 < thl> | (mine, too, but no one else used it)
00:48 < thim1> | dgilmore: lunch: when is that in UTC?
00:48 < nirik> | thl: so wed at 00:00UTC wouldn't work for you?
00:49 < thl> | a bit critical now with the dst switch...
00:49 < thl> | (often it's a bit earlier than 01:00 UTC when I
seitch of the computers)
00:49 < thim1> | dgilmore: lunchtime=fesco: How about fesco slot
on Wed?
00:50 < thl> | btw, FESCo is back to 17:00 UTC iirc, isn#t it?
00:50 < thl> | now with the DST change?
00:50 < dgilmore> | thim1: i added to the list
00:50 < dgilmore> | i cant guarantee my availablility
00:50 < dgilmore> | thl: i cant remeber
00:50 < thim1> | thl: DST changes in the US were two weeks ago
00:50 < thl> | I'd say we give this another week, and try to
sort out the details on the list
00:50 < thim1> | So it wn't change agin
00:51 < thl> | thim1, they already switched FESCo last time iirc
00:51 < thim1> | That's what I mean
00:51 < thim1> | They won't switch again
00:51 < thl> | thim1, but it's wrong in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/NewMeetingTime then
00:51 < thim1> | Currently it is 00:00 UTC, that's what it will
stay for the summer time
00:52 < thl> | thim1,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/SteeringCommittee
00:52 < thl> | "Affectionately known as FESCo. Currently meets
every Thursday on the Freenode IRC Network in #fedora-meeting at 17:00
UTC."
00:52 < thl> | that what I'm trying to tell you ;-)
00:52 < mmcgrath> | heh
00:52 < thim1> | OK, one of the wiki pages is wrong :)
00:52 < thim1> | Anyway, we should just pick another day than
fesco to not collide
00:52 < mmcgrath> | s/one/many/ s/is/are/ :)
00:53 < thl> | thim1, no, it was 00:00 until one or two weeks
ago iirc
00:53 < dgilmore> | anyone else have anything else to talk about
00:53 < nirik> | I have one quick Q...
00:53 < mmcgrath> | not I
00:53 < thim1> | dgilmore: when is your lunch time in UTC?
00:53 --> | FrancescoUgolini (Francesco Ugolini) has joined
#fedora-meeting
00:54 < nirik> | centos has a 'extras' repo... do we know if they
are going to keep doing that? or get those things in epel? do we have
any centos contacts?
00:54 < mmcgrath> | don't ask him to give up his lunch. he's a busy
guy as it is :P
00:54 < thl> | z00dax in #epel should know
00:54 < nirik> | The main reason I ask is that they have Xfce in
there... but it's the old version. I have gotten several requests for
4.4 for epel, but I don't want to step on their toes.
00:54 < dgilmore> | thim1: 17:00:00 UTC
00:54 < thim1> | mmcgrath: dgilmore offered, I'm wouldn't ask
otheriwse
00:55 < dgilmore> | nirik: i think they are dropping it not sure
00:55 < mmcgrath> | oh :)
00:55 < thl> | nirik, I'd say asz z00dax
00:55 < nirik> | ok, can check with him. thanks.
00:55 < dgilmore> | thim1: i usually only take lunch one or two days
a week
00:56 < stahnma_> | dgilmore: that is a sad state of affairs
00:56 < dgilmore> | stahnma_: it is but i usually dont ahve time to
take it
00:56 < dgilmore> | thursdays i take it for fesco
00:58 < dgilmore> | lancelan: ping
00:59 < thim1> | thl: Wed 00:00 UTC?
00:59 < thl> | Wed 17:00 UTC?
01:00 <-- | FrancescoUgolini has quit ("Leaving")
01:00 < dgilmore> | thl: i cant guarantte but i could try
01:00 < mmcgrath> | both WORKSFORME
01:00 < mmcgrath> | as long as I remember :D
01:01 < stahnma_> | please send out a notice on list, and I will try
to attend
01:01 < stahnma_> | also a reminder in #epel will help :)
01:01 < thl> | stahnma_, sorry, forgot about it this week
01:01 < stahnma_> | thl it's ok, that's not why I was late today
01:01 < thl> | quaid, wed 17:00 UTC?
01:02 < thim1> | thl: Wed 17:00 UTC OK with me :)
01:02 < dgilmore> | ok So next meeting will be at 17:00 UTC on wednesday
01:03 < dgilmore> | im going to close this meeting in 60
01:03 < thl> | this wednesday?
01:03 < thl> | e.g. in three days?
01:03 < thl> | or in 10 from now?
01:03 < dgilmore> | yes unless you want to wait 10 days
01:03 < thl> | unsure; I'm fine with both :)
01:03 < dgilmore> | lets make it 10 days
01:04 < thl> | dgilmore, +1
01:04 < dgilmore> | probaly wont have much to report in 3
01:04 < stahnma_> | +1
01:04 < dgilmore> | closing in 30
01:04 < dgilmore> | closing in 20
01:04 < dgilmore> | closing in 10
01:05 < dgilmore> | --- Meeting closed --
}}}
More information about the epel-devel-list
mailing list