From Fedora Project Wiki
(Redirected from Packaging/Minutes20080603)
Fedora Packaging Committee Meeting of {2008-06-03}
Present
- DenisLeroy (
delero) - HansdeGoede (
hansg) - JasonTibbitts (
tibbs) - RalfCorsepius (
racor) - RexDieter (
rdieter) - TomCallaway (
spot) - ToshioKuratomi (
abadger1999) - XavierLamien (
SmootherFrOgZ)
Writeups
No new guidelines this week.
Votes
No votes this week.
Other Discussions
The following additional items were discussed; see the logs for full details.
- Early discussion on possible packaging harmonization with SuSE.
- Issues with wiki ACLs
IRC Logs
| * spot looks around | 12:07 | |
| spot | racor, abadger1999, rdieter, SmootherFrOgZ, tibbs: ping | 12:09 |
|---|---|---|
| tibbs | yep | 12:09 |
| rdieter | here | 12:09 |
| spot | i don't see Rathann or hans | 12:10 |
| SmootherFrOgZ | here | 12:10 |
| --> delero has joined this channel (n=denis@nat/sun/x-dc1122e068355ed1). | 12:10 | |
| abadger1999 | pon | 12:11 |
| * delero is here | 12:11 | |
| abadger1999 | Yeah, here. | 12:11 |
| spot | i count 6 present and alive. :) | 12:11 |
| spot | So, looking at GuidelinesTodo, i don't see... anything. | 12:12 |
| spot | thus, i'll open the floor to any other items. | 12:12 |
| --> hansg has joined this channel (n=hans@ip32-174-211-87.adsl2.versatel.nl). | 12:13 | |
| abadger1999 | rdieter: What happened to the .dekstop stuff you and mclassen wanted to change? | 12:13 |
| hansg | A bit late but I'm here (thanks for the ping Xavier) | 12:13 |
| SmootherFrOgZ | ;) | 12:13 |
| SmootherFrOgZ | ls | 12:14 |
| spot | hansg: i had no todo items for today, so the floor is open to any topics people might have | 12:15 |
| rdieter | abadger1999: ah, I had almost forgotten about that. iirc, mclassen kinda wanted the the .desktop file --vendor recommendations changed to *not* recommend using --vendor=fedora | 12:15 |
| tibbs | We also need to discuss the ACL situation on the wiki | 12:15 |
| abadger1999 | Yeah, and to adjust all existing packages similarly. | 12:15 |
| spot | rdieter: realistically, shouldn't we work with upstream to nuke vendor out of that spec? | 12:15 |
| hansg | Well, if were doing free discussion I'm currently involved in a discussion with some opensuse people on synchronizing our guidelines | 12:15 |
| rdieter | it's just a recommendation (upstream at that), but many reviewers seem to consider it a MUST item. | 12:15 |
| tibbs | abadger1999: But we can't change existing packages without breaking things for users, if I understand correctly. | 12:16 |
| rdieter | spot: yep, and educate reviewers that it's not a blocker | 12:16 |
| hansg | We are in the process of setting up a mailinglist for this | 12:16 |
| spot | hansg: nice. | 12:16 |
| abadger1999 | Did it get stuck b/c mclassen was going to come up with ways to fix the existing package situation but didn't get back to the list with that? | 12:16 |
| * rdieter isn't sure where the discussion trailed off, honestly. | 12:16 | |
| abadger1999 | hansg: Nice. Is this more special purpose than distributions-list? | 12:17 |
| spot | rdieter: would you be willing to revive it with him? :) | 12:17 |
| abadger1999 | I now f13 was trying to do some synchronizing there. | 12:17 |
| rdieter | spot: sure. | 12:17 |
| abadger1999 | I'd love to drop vendor if it didn't hurt users. | 12:17 |
| spot | abadger1999: agreed | 12:17 |
| hansg | interesting with regards to the discussions so far is that we quickly focussed on differences in %pre / %post scripts, and from there to how we would like to see rpm enhanced todo things like run gtk-update-icon-cache once at the end of the transaction | 12:18 |
| f13 | hansg: using the freedesktop.org distributions list for this would be best I think. | 12:18 |
| tibbs | hansg: I don't think anyone would argue that getting rpm to take care of lcdonfig and icon caches is a bad thing. | 12:18 |
| hansg | abadger1999, f13, we are talking a lot of rpm related stuff, so our plan was to set up an rpm-packaging list somewhere (freedesktop.org for example) and then invite people from the fedora and opensuse packaging lists and also for example the mandriva and pld devel lists. | 12:19 |
| tibbs | But that's more an issue for the rpm folks at this stage. Do we even know if they have interest in doing that? | 12:19 |
| spot | tibbs: can't hurt for someone to ask. | 12:19 |
| spot | hansg: you're the closest to this atm, willing to take this to the rpm devel mailing list? | 12:19 |
| spot | (this, being the rpm enhancements) | 12:20 |
| rdieter | I think most of it is just getting %pre/post trans(un) to work, sanely. | 12:20 |
| hansg | tibbs, spot, our (opensuse people and mine) idea is to write a draft how it would work (seen from the .spec file and what would happen when installed) and then when we have an idea how this would look from the outside which is seen as good by both the suse people and us take it to panu | 12:20 |
| spot | hansg: ok, thats fair enough. | 12:21 |
| tibbs | Too bad we don't have panu around. | 12:21 |
| spot | tibbs: yep. | 12:21 |
| spot | ok, lets talk about ACLs in the wiki. | 12:21 |
| rdieter | panu has commented in the past that he's interested in helping make that (kind of) stuff work. | 12:21 |
| tibbs | The wiki folks are grumbling that we shouldn't have any acls at all. | 12:22 |
| spot | yeah, well, they can grumble. | 12:22 |
| tibbs | They're a bit more difficult to manage than they used to be. | 12:22 |
| tibbs | And they want restricted content moved off of the wiki entirely. | 12:22 |
| rdieter | must... not... relinquish... power. (wait, did I say that out loud?) | 12:22 |
| spot | Honestly, i think we need the ACLs to prevent people from writing arbitrary guidelines which are then enforced blindly by others. | 12:22 |
| spot | The wiki engine makes it easy to structure the guidelines without say, learning TeX | 12:23 |
| f13 | hansg: well, distros also has PLD on it, and %post type tasks aren't just rpm specific, other packaging tools make use of them. I would just hate to see further splintering off of cross distro communication. | 12:23 |
| tibbs | Our options are to handle reverts when necessary, to ask for some kind of moderation capacity, or to just ignore the requests for getting rid of acls. | 12:23 |
| spot | it also keeps this information centralized. | 12:23 |
| spot | tibbs: afaik, you can't put a watch on Packaging/* | 12:23 |
| tibbs | Actually, you can't watch regexps in mediawiki as far as I know. | 12:24 |
| spot | so we can't effectively prevent someone from adding Packaging/RealJava | 12:24 |
| spot | (where RealJava is new) | 12:24 |
| spot | nor would we be aware of it until damage is done | 12:24 |
| tibbs | Unfortunately that's the case. | 12:24 |
| rdieter | Packaging/Mp3 | 12:24 |
| spot | likely? eh, i don't know. | 12:24 |
| spot | but I could see some rather... um... opinionated folks abusing. | 12:25 |
| spot | *cough* | 12:25 |
| hansg | f13, well since the freedesktop.org distributions list is low trafic sofar I guess we could use that and start a new list when the dpkg users start grumbling :) | 12:25 |
| f13 | nod | 12:25 |
| abadger1999 | If we could moderate (anyone can add to talk pages but only moderators can change the actual page) that would work for me. | 12:25 |
| spot | abadger1999: assuming that worked for the entire Packaging/ section | 12:26 |
| hansg | abadger1999, moderating +1 | 12:26 |
| tibbs | I don't know what the answer is. I would have thought that the justification for ACLs on those pages would be obvious. | 12:26 |
| spot | i dont have any problem with people editing on the talk pages | 12:26 |
| spot | but we need to lock down (moderate, acl, whatever) the actual pages in Packaging | 12:26 |
| spot | and prevent new pages from being created outside of this committee | 12:27 |
| tibbs | I don't really see that the wiki is the wrong tool for this. | 12:27 |
| spot | tibbs: neither do i. | 12:27 |
| tibbs | Certainly for the kind of stuff I do at every meeting, I don't want to have to learn docbook. | 12:27 |
| spot | tibbs: if anything, i think this might be a place for us to improve the mediawiki acl code if it is so unbearable. | 12:28 |
| spot | one has to assume that wikipedia has gotten through this issue. :) | 12:28 |
| spot | is anyone in disagreement here? | 12:29 |
| jeremy | spot: wikipedia just has an army of people that watch changes and then admins lock pages that get into "wars" | 12:29 |
| jeremy | (fwiw) | 12:29 |
| mmcgrath | Seriously guys, if you have highly controlled content thats important it goes through revisions and can't just be edited by everyone follow a docs process. | 12:29 |
| spot | mmcgrath: i think that we generally disagree with that., | 12:30 |
| mmcgrath | yeah, because it adds process and is inconvenient. | 12:30 |
| mmcgrath | but think about it from the point of view of another group. | 12:30 |
| spot | honestly, we probably have too much process involved with guidelines as is | 12:30 |
| mmcgrath | If that content isn't supposed to be open to everyone the wiki is a poor choice. If its so important that it can't be edited by people why not put it somewhere where it can be properly controlled, translated, etc? | 12:31 |
| spot | if people had to follow a docs process to submit a guideline, then approve it, then take it to life? | 12:31 |
| mmcgrath | Why wouldn't you put it at docs.fedoraproject.org ? | 12:31 |
| spot | mmcgrath: because its a living document, not a one time revision drop | 12:31 |
| spot | its just controlled | 12:31 |
| hansg | OT: talking about my discussions with opensuse, here is the plan / dream I have which I've started my discussion with them with: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/spec-sharing.txt | 12:31 |
| spot | it can (and is edited) by people. just not by _ALL_ people. | 12:32 |
| mmcgrath | Its just that as far as the wiki goes no one else is doing that. They either revert a change they don't want to have done. | 12:32 |
| mmcgrath | or they don't put it there at all. | 12:32 |
| spot | mmcgrath: Licensing has to do that. | 12:32 |
| f13 | pardon, would it not be enough to be able to send notifications of all wiki edits to the Packaging/ space to say the packaging list? | 12:32 |
| spot | Legal/* has to do that | 12:32 |
| rdieter | is guidelines translations really something to be concerned about? (if it is, then maybe a change is warranted). | 12:32 |
| mmcgrath | then it shouldn't be there. | 12:32 |
| mmcgrath | it should be somewhere it can be properly controlled. | 12:32 |
| spot | mmcgrath: i disagree with you | 12:32 |
| * mmcgrath understands this. | 12:32 | |
| hansg | I wonder what the FPC thinks of this esp of step 1b (which IMHO is a necessary evil) | 12:32 |
| spot | i think the wiki is an excellent mechanism for delivering and maintaining this content | 12:32 |
| spot | and also for people to suggest new content | 12:33 |
| rdieter | hansg: necessary evil +1 | 12:33 |
| spot | (if anything, the talk pages make this even better) | 12:33 |
| mmcgrath | Its nothing personal but your packaging stuff just isn't _that_ special compared to the rest of the content on the wiki is all. | 12:34 |
| mmcgrath | the legal stuff, yes, and again probably shouldn't be on the wiki at all. | 12:35 |
| spot | the rest of the content on the wiki doesn't define what can and cannot be done in Fedora. | 12:35 |
| rdieter | mmcgrath: re "properly controlled" content, are you suggesting that our wiki is not suited to that? | 12:35 |
| mmcgrath | spot: sure it does. | 12:35 |
| mmcgrath | I mean, there's more to fedora then packaging. | 12:35 |
| mmcgrath | granted, its the flagship stuff but whatever. You guys have the tool do as you will with it. | 12:35 |
| spot | mmcgrath: these are the fundamental rules of the road here. | 12:35 |
| mmcgrath | spot: sort of. | 12:36 |
| mmcgrath | spot: not for me, art, docs, ambassadors, l10n, etc. | 12:36 |
| tibbs | I don't recall hearing these arguments when we were using moin. Are we hearing them now because ACLs aren't part of the page text? | 12:36 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: with the wiki as is, do we have a way of actively monitoring every new page that would be created under Packaging/ ? | 12:36 |
| mmcgrath | tibbs: no one asked me when the acl's were implemented in Moin. | 12:36 |
| spot | mmcgrath: they don't have rules in the same context that we do | 12:36 |
| mmcgrath | f13: we have an extension for that yes, but I don't remember if its implemented and stuff. | 12:36 |
| spot | if i add art to the wiki, it doesn't automatically become accepted as the new art for Fedora. | 12:37 |
| spot | if i add an event to the ambassadors table, it doesn't mean Fedora will be there. | 12:37 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: ok, /if/ we had that, /then/ we'd at least have the ability to notice new pages created and edits done that shouldn't be. | 12:37 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: until then, we don't. | 12:37 |
| mmcgrath | and if I create /wiki/PackagingGudelinesForFedora, that does become the new method for packaging? | 12:37 |
| spot | if someone adds a list of things for say, oh, i don't know, java packaging... | 12:37 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: If it was linked to from PackageMaintainers, perhaps yes. | 12:38 |
| mmcgrath | sorry guys, but we have a process for creating official managed content. Other teams use it with great success. | 12:38 |
| spot | mmcgrath: nope, because we say that Packaging/ is where the rules live. | 12:38 |
| mmcgrath | Its totally fine if you don't want to use it but won't (and don't have to) convince me of it. | 12:38 |
| spot | and we have for several YEARS Now | 12:38 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: if you created /wiki/Packaging/Silverlight you've suddenly created live and "legal" guidelines. | 12:38 |
| mmcgrath | f13: I can. | 12:38 |
| mmcgrath | so can lots of wiki admins. | 12:38 |
| mmcgrath | so can anyone in sysadmin-web. | 12:38 |
| spot | mmcgrath: you could have done so with the old wiki too | 12:39 |
| mmcgrath | yep | 12:39 |
| spot | we trust our admins not to be asshats. | 12:39 |
| mmcgrath | and it was the wrong tool to use then as we.. | 12:39 |
| spot | if you're saying we can't... | 12:39 |
| mmcgrath | er well | 12:39 |
| mmcgrath | I'm not saying you can't. | 12:39 |
| spot | i'm not worried about our admins | 12:39 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: we could also have watches on entire namespaces with the old wiki | 12:39 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: so that if you were an asshat, we could catch that | 12:39 |
| spot | i am worried about joe random who decides our guidelines are crap and "fixes" them for me. | 12:39 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: but you're saying now that A) we can't do ACLs, and B) we can't watch an entire namespace. Where does that leave us? | 12:39 |
| spot | or adds his own guidelines. | 12:40 |
| mmcgrath | f13: I could implement that tonight but that wouldn't drop the acl requirement I suspect for the rest of you guys. | 12:40 |
| spot | mmcgrath: why are you opposed to acls? | 12:40 |
| f13 | spot: /IF/ we had namespace watching capability, and had those diffs delivered to the packaging-list or packaging-commits-list, would that suffice? | 12:40 |
| spot | because they are hard to implement? | 12:40 |
| abadger1999 | hansg: How many virtual provides are we talking? A few or one for every current devel package? | 12:40 |
| mmcgrath | f13: I'm saying ACL's are a huge pain in the ass, they were with moin as well, I'm saying if you google for reaons not to use ACLs in wiki's you'll find tons of examples, I'm saying we have proccesses in place that lots of people use for official special content. | 12:40 |
| mmcgrath | I'm also saying its your choice if you chose to ignore all of that and do it anyway. | 12:40 |
| * rdieter thinks we should at least consider mmcgrath's suggestion, long-term anyway. | 12:41 | |
| spot | i think if we move to a "watch people make changes at will" approach, we've circumvented this committee. | 12:41 |
| f13 | mmcgrath: in our opinion, managing the content in the same place we manage all the other content outweighs the conceptual issues of "locking | 12:41 |
| spot | i think we invite revert wars. | 12:41 |
| f13 | " people out of wiki pages. | 12:41 |
| hansg | abadger1999, I have no idea, not one for each devel package, but I think atleast one for half of all the devel packages think things like (fake example, dunno if this is real) libxml2-devel versus libxml-devel, caps differences, etc. | 12:42 |
| f13 | spot: are you willing to give it a trial? | 12:42 |
| mmcgrath | spot: we have an elected comittee in epel, with rules. Never once do I recall a revert war. People respect the decisions of the sig. | 12:42 |
| spot | mmcgrath: people often disagree pretty vocally with our decisions | 12:42 |
| spot | f13: honestly? not really. | 12:42 |
| mmcgrath | sorry guys, I've got to get back to cabling. You've got the tools, really, feel free to use them as you will. | 12:43 |
| spot | we have several years of evidence that ACLs works well for us. | 12:43 |
| abadger1999 | hansg: Hmm.. If you get a ballpark figure we should run it by skvidal. vitrual provides aren't entirely free. | 12:43 |
| abadger1999 | rdieter: +1 | 12:43 |
| mmcgrath | sort of, you have years of evidence that your pages haven't been altered... whether or not thats the acl's or not... | 12:43 |
| spot | mmcgrath: no, i get emails since my name is on most of them | 12:43 |
| hansg | abadger1999, true (not being entirely free) | 12:44 |
| spot | when people try to make changes and cannot | 12:44 |
| spot | 95% of the time, people are trying to add things they think are "obviously correct", which are not. | 12:44 |
| spot | often times, these items are politically motivated | 12:44 |
| spot | or things like making dist tags mandatory | 12:45 |
| * spot feels like he's talking to himself here | 12:45 | |
| * hansg can't help getting the feeling he is watching the spot & mmcgrath show, which seems to be family of the Tom en Jerry show | 12:45 | |
| tibbs | I just don't get the moral argument that "wikis should be free". If the ACL arrangement is a pain in the rear, then perhaps we need to figure out how to fix the software. | 12:46 |
| spot | tibbs: yeah, i really don't get that one either. | 12:47 |
| spot | tibbs: it has a login/account mechanism for a reason. | 12:47 |
| rdieter | I thought we were only talking about "acls are a pain" issues. | 12:47 |
| spot | rdieter: well, we're really hearing "acls are hard, why can't you just use docbook" | 12:48 |
| rdieter | could be cool, to have translated, nice-looking, potentially printed/published guidelines. | 12:48 |
| spot | rdieter: sadly, they'd be about as current and relevant as most printed books on Fedora. | 12:49 |
| rdieter | ha, true. | 12:49 |
| spot | thats really the point, the concept of the living online document | 12:49 |
| spot | the Fedora docs are almost entirely point release driven | 12:50 |
| hansg | FWIW, I believe that a locked down (using ACL)'s wiki, as we have is much better then using something like docbook | 12:50 |
| spot | they're not living documents, per se | 12:50 |
| spot | a much more interesting idea to me is if we can un-ACL the talk pages | 12:50 |
| spot | as there is no merit in locking them down | 12:50 |
| tibbs | Yes, that could be quite useful. | 12:50 |
| hansg | +1 to not locking down the talk pages | 12:51 |
| spot | okay, any other items for discussion? | 12:53 |
| spot | aside from buying mr. mcgrath a beer at fudcon for having to suffer with our odd wiki needs? :) | 12:53 |
| hansg | Well abadger1999 and rdieter have alreayd responded, but if possible I would like a quick opinion from the others to on this: | 12:53 |
| hansg | OT: talking about my discussions with opensuse, here is the plan / dream I have which I've started my discussion with them with: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/spec-sharing.txt | 12:54 |
| hansg | I wonder what the FPC thinks of this esp of step 1b (which IMHO is a necessary evil) | 12:54 |
| spot | i'm not really sold on 1b | 12:54 |
| tibbs | Me neither. | 12:54 |
| spot | thats a lot of extra provides to slow down dependency ops | 12:54 |
| tibbs | How do they name their -devel packages? | 12:55 |
| spot | i think it would be more interesting to try to standardize naming between the two as a onetime merge | 12:55 |
| mmcgrath | you guys have normal cms needs, just bad wiki needs :) I haven't touched the talk stuff but IIRC that should be pretty easy to open up if its not already open. | 12:55 |
| hansg | If we want to make sharing specfiles possible without to much %if stuff, 1b is a necessary evil I'm afraid | 12:55 |
| mmcgrath | I also don't know how watching talk stuff goes, anyone know if notifications go out about that? | 12:55 |
| rdieter | spot:most definitely, long term, but what about short-term? | 12:55 |
| spot | mmcgrath: if you need me to open a ticket for that, i can. | 12:55 |
| tibbs | Again: how do they name their -devel packages? | 12:55 |
| tibbs | Are the differences regular so that we can just macro-ize the devel dependencies? | 12:56 |
| mmcgrath | spot: please do, ricky or I will get to it pretty soon. I'm working with galgoci to find 16 free ports :) | 12:56 |
| spot | rdieter: well, if we're collaborating, we can consult the other before new packages go in | 12:56 |
| rdieter | sure, and existing packages with naming differences? | 12:56 |
| hansg | same as we, but there are differences think thinks like libxml versus libxml2, sometimes we have choosen to put a version number in the %name, sometimes they have when things were / are parallel installable | 12:56 |
| rdieter | just live with the pain? | 12:56 |
| spot | what do we gain by providing the OpenSUSE name? | 12:57 |
| hansg | I'm not sure how large the list of affected packages is, I think this discussion is easier to have when we have some numbers | 12:57 |
| rdieter | being compatible pkgname-wise. | 12:57 |
| spot | hansg: that would be worthwhile to see | 12:57 |
| spot | if this is 30, 50 provides, maybe. | 12:57 |
| spot | 500, 1000? nah. | 12:57 |
| hansg | spot, people can take an opensuse srpm, do an rpmbuild and have an rpm | 12:58 |
| spot | hansg: maybe, i'd wager that things will never be that simple for anything complicated. | 12:58 |
| hansg | spot, well there is willingness on the opensuse side to strife towards this | 12:59 |
| spot | hansg: we'd need to also look into matching up configuration options | 12:59 |
| spot | if we're serious about that as a goal | 12:59 |
| hansg | I spend quite a lot of time sharing fixes with other distro's, for things like a simple game which needs just SDL, it would be a blessing to have a single srpm for all rpm based distros | 13:00 |
| f13 | gpackage.org! | 13:00 |
| * f13 hides | 13:00 | |
| spot | hansg: if you can generate some numbers on how many provides/name changes we'd be looking at... | 13:00 |
| hansg | spot, yes we need numbers so lets leave it at that for now | 13:01 |
| spot | hansg: okay. | 13:01 |
| spot | we're right at one hour now, so i think i will close this meeting | 13:01 |
| spot | any objections? | 13:01 |
| tibbs | Did we actually resolve anything? | 13:01 |
| hansg | f13, gpackage.org is available :) | 13:01 |
| spot | tibbs: no, but we didn't actually have anything on the agenda. :) | 13:02 |
| tibbs | Going to be a short summary, then. | 13:02 |
| spot | tibbs: "spot and mmcgrath argued. spot agreed to buy mmcgrath a beer." | 13:02 |
| spot | ok folks, thanks, we'll see you in two weeks | 13:03 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!