path: root/meeting-logs/20220109.txt

[19:01:22] <marecki> Hear ye, hear ye! The *mumble mumble mumble*th meeting of the Gentoo Council shall now begin
[19:02:00] <marecki> Agenda: https://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/message/4b5b302770933c520107620f52f42da0
[19:02:55] <mgorny> we should start deduplicating empty agendas ;-)
[19:03:22] <marecki> Indeed
[19:03:26] <marecki> Anyway,
[19:03:28] <marecki> 1. Roll call
[19:03:33] * ulm here
[19:03:35] * marecki here, obviously
[19:03:38] * mattst88 here
[19:03:40] * sam_ here
[19:03:48] * gyakovlev here
[19:03:55] * mgorny here
[19:04:51] <marecki> Has anyone heard from dilfridge about him being absent today? I don't recall seeing anything like that
[19:04:56] <mattst88> dilfridge, dilfridge|mobile: around?
[19:05:07] <mattst88> I haven't seen him on IRC today, FWIW
[19:05:09] * dilfridge here
[19:05:16] <dilfridge> sorry
[19:05:16] <mattst88> ah, greata
[19:05:46] <marecki> OK, no absences then. Moving on: lazy agenda today, just the bugs
[19:06:01] <marecki> 2. Open bugs with Council participation
[19:06:24] <marecki> #821553
[19:06:36] <sam_> bug 821553
[19:06:38] <marecki> Bug #821553
[19:06:38] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/821553 "Document upgrade path policy"; Documentation, Devmanual; CONF; sam:devmanual
[19:06:38] <willikins> marecki: https://bugs.gentoo.org/821553 "Document upgrade path policy"; Documentation, Devmanual; CONF; sam:devmanual
[19:07:19] <sam_> i don't think we need to do anything there
[19:07:25] <marecki> Any news on having this implemented, though?
[19:07:26] <sam_> the best would be "making sure we're happy with any end result in devmanual"
[19:07:31] <sam_> but I think we could even drop us from CC
[19:07:38] <sam_> someone can raise an issue if they're unhappy
[19:08:01] <sam_> no, no news so far, although I'll see about working on it soon
[19:08:09] <sam_> (a draft is always better than a blank page)
[19:08:10] <marecki> OK.
[19:08:30] <ulm> draft would be nice, and we can go from there
[19:08:38] <sam_> yeah, agreed
[19:08:41] <sam_> ok i'll get on that
[19:08:44] <marecki> Any objections to dropping council from Cc here? Or shall we vote?
[19:08:57] <mgorny> just drop us
[19:08:59] <sam_> yeah
[19:09:00] <ulm> drop it
[19:09:33] <marecki> Done
[19:09:42] <dilfridge> ++
[19:09:53] <marecki> Next, Bug #823762
[19:09:56] <willikins> marecki: https://bugs.gentoo.org/823762 "[TRACKER] ~ only candidate arches"; Gentoo Council, unspecified; CONF; gyakovlev:council
[19:10:18] <marecki> Quick status report, sa... I mean, arch testers?
[19:10:27] <gyakovlev> sam and me monitoring that closely
[19:10:42] <gyakovlev> basically it's fine, we did some work on ppc and will drop more pkgs to ~
[19:10:52] <gyakovlev> only one that lags now is ~x86
[19:10:57] <mattst88> PA-RISC system delivered to OSUOSL. waiting on the rail kit to arrive before racking the system. rail hit has been ordered
[19:11:10] <gyakovlev> arthurzam and jsmolic helped a LOT with bugs
[19:11:16] <mgorny> gyakovlev: isn't jsmolic workng on x86?
[19:11:24] <marecki> mattst88: That's a different bug, innit
[19:11:43] <gyakovlev> mgorny: he does and things a better
[19:12:09] <gyakovlev> a lot better. just not same-day better =) I'm spoiled.
[19:12:16] <mgorny> in other words, i don't think we have any ~arch candidates at this point
[19:12:28] <mattst88> marecki: hppa is listed in comment #0 of that bug
[19:12:35] <sam_> i think overall we're doing well
[19:12:36] <mgorny> plus we seem to be increasing the bus factor
[19:12:37] <marecki> Do we want to discuss the x86 situation any further?
[19:12:47] <gyakovlev> no it's not critical
[19:13:03] <gyakovlev> or not even bad
[19:13:53] <marecki> OK, so: how many more month do we want to keep this tracker open?
[19:14:02] <sam_> the only thing I'd like a volunteer for is someone to write a mail to gentoo-dev or something asking if anyone cares about ia64
[19:14:09] <sam_> not necessarily to kill it right now, but just to see if anyone is interested at all
[19:14:19] <mgorny> i'd wait till we manage to get one hppa box running
[19:14:35] <gyakovlev> also I need to get dedicated ppc32 box up
[19:14:39] <dilfridge> in principle this is a routine question, which we should ask ourselves independent of the bug every now and then
[19:14:46] <gyakovlev> it's installed, just need to configure and boot it up
[19:14:53] <sam_> (fwiw the HPPA C8000 I was donated died in transit and another one is coming tomorrow)
[19:15:11] <gyakovlev> you got ebay one madman?
[19:15:18] <sam_> yes :)
[19:15:20] <gyakovlev> nice
[19:15:20] <sam_> unopened!
[19:15:25] <gyakovlev> uff
[19:15:30] <gyakovlev> bet it smells like a new car
[19:15:42] <sam_> can't wait to give it a good ol sniff
[19:15:48] <sam_> i quite like doing this sort of overview anyway
[19:15:56] <sam_> I think it's important for us to just check on how everything is doing like dilfridge says
[19:16:09] <marecki> OK, so while things are overall better now there is still some work in progress, so let's keep this bug open until at least the aforementioned two action items have been taken care of
[19:16:15] <mattst88> sure
[19:16:18] <sam_> yeah
[19:16:21] <gyakovlev> agreed, let's keep at least 1-2 cycles.
[19:17:21] <marecki> While on the subject on exotic hardware, unfortunately the Alpha I thought I might be able to commandeer for Gentoo work has already been scrapped but as mentioned in #gentoo-dev, I should get my hands on some MIPS boxes in the spring.
[19:17:53] <sam_> ah, I forgot about mips too, which also dearly needs love.
[19:18:13] <mgorny> alpha is ~arch, mips is exp, so outside the bug
[19:18:26] <marecki> Yup. Just a tangent.
[19:19:17] <marecki> Anyway, regarding periodic reviews, how about we add a note to the Council Wiki page reminding us that we want to discuss this e.g. once per quarter, so that we needn't keep this bug open forever?
[19:19:41] <marecki> It does feel like we should make this a full-fledged agenda point, if not one to be brought up every month.
[19:19:51] <sam_> that sounds reasonable
[19:20:08] <gyakovlev> but let's open a bug for quaterly review
[19:20:10] * gyakovlev hides
[19:21:41] <marecki> In that case, motion: the Council must review the status of Gentoo arch activity during the last meeting of each calendar quarter, at least.
[19:22:19] <mattst88> I don't think it's that critical
[19:22:39] <NeddySeagoon> That puts it in the last meeting of an old council
[19:22:45] <sam_> once every 6 months then but I don't think 4 times a year is bad
[19:22:57] <sam_> especially given it can be quite frustrating for developers
[19:23:01] <sam_> "why isn't my keywording getting handled"
[19:23:25] <marecki> I'm with sam_ on this one, every 6 months feels like too infrequently
[19:24:22] <ulm> maybe found an arch activity project :)
[19:24:24] * ulm hides
[19:24:38] <marecki> And then a project activity project
[19:24:39] <mgorny> a committee
[19:24:50] <ulm> task force!
[19:24:53] <dilfridge> lol
[19:24:57] * marecki glances at mgorny with appreciation
[19:25:04] <marecki> You have mastered the CERN way, grasshopper!
[19:25:40] <marecki> Anyway, unless someone wants to alter or rephrase the motion, a quick vote?
[19:25:56] <marecki> We really should have at least one voting per meeting, you know ;-)
[19:27:00] <marecki> I see no comments, so
[19:27:03] * marecki yes
[19:27:06] <ulm> what's the motion to vote on? 3 or 6 months?
[19:27:13] <marecki> ulm: 3
[19:27:26] * ulm abstains then
[19:27:38] * mgorny abstains
[19:27:39] <dilfridge> I'd prefer 6 months
[19:27:42] * dilfridge no
[19:28:02] * mattst88 no
[19:28:15] * gyakovlev no (for 6)
[19:28:20] <sam_> haha
[19:28:23] <gyakovlev> I mean I'd prefer 6
[19:28:26] <sam_> ok
[19:28:27] <gyakovlev> no for 3
[19:28:30] <mgorny> i don't think we need to add some explicit cyclic checks like this at all
[19:28:32] <dilfridge> I mean, we can still do it more frequently, but forcing it every 3 months is too much
[19:28:48] <sam_> I dare say we're worrying a bit much and can just adjust it upwards if needed, but fine
[19:29:00] <sam_> (it's easier to say "we're doing this too often" than "oh yeah I forgot about that, let's do it more")
[19:29:09] * sam_ yes
[19:29:38] <marecki> 2 yes, 3 no, 2 abstain. Motion rejected.
[19:30:32] <marecki> That said, since we've now got clear expressions of preference in favour of biannual:
[19:31:27] <marecki> Actually, never mind. Let's discuss this on the ML so that if we do have it every 6 months, we can think of which months might be best.
[19:31:42] <marecki> Moving on! Bug #824018
[19:31:44] <willikins> marecki: https://bugs.gentoo.org/824018 "media-libs/libpng: dropping "apng" patches"; Gentoo Linux, Current packages; CONF; juippis:base-system
[19:32:18] <sam_> so the only interesting thing there was we forgot to tag that bug so I needed to do some explaining of the situation to a user
[19:32:28] <sam_> (we tagged the FF bug specifically)
[19:32:40] <gyakovlev> unCC? it's been received quite calmly
[19:32:40] <mgorny> i think everything's done there
[19:32:46] <sam_> I don't think there's anything else interesting there, other than the fact that for some reason, the ::mozilla overlay has been resurrected immediately after our council decision, and undid our changes
[19:32:54] <sam_> but that probably doesn't matter in reality, even if it's a very odd decision to make
[19:33:24] <marecki> mgorny: My thought too, we've made a decision and it has been implemented.
[19:33:27] <dilfridge> it's a hobby of someone
[19:33:28] <gyakovlev> we did not remove patch, but png was forged to overlay
[19:33:34] <gyakovlev> probably in panic mode
[19:33:47] * mattst88 shakes his head
[19:33:52] <gyakovlev> there was no talk about removing patch =) just disabling by default
[19:34:04] <gyakovlev> s/forged/forked/
[19:34:11] * marecki imagines the certain someone sitting on APNG patches muttering "my precioussss"
[19:34:49] <marecki> ...ahem. Council removed from Cc.
[19:34:53] <marecki> Bug #828113
[19:34:56] <willikins> marecki: https://bugs.gentoo.org/828113 "Proposal to ship donated HPPA development system from Europe to OSUOSL"; Gentoo Foundation, Proposals; IN_P; mattst88:trustees
[19:35:20] <marecki> Anything beyond what's been said above?
[19:35:48] <sam_> no, already noted that sadly my machine got beaten up in transit, hopefully new one will work better. Shipped version to OSUOSL not yet setup, pending rails, hopefully news on that by next meeting.
[19:35:50] <ulm> what happened there? died in transit?
[19:36:08] <sam_> (my one died in transit, but the one shipped to OSUOSL is a different machine, but it did arrive there with some dents.)
[19:36:51] <marecki> Will we still have to approve anything else here, or is it all in the Trustees' hands now?
[19:37:51] <marecki> If the latter we can unCc council here too
[19:38:08] <sam_> i don't think we need to approve anything more there
[19:38:16] <sam_> if i want to request anything for the box I ordered that would be a separate bug anyway
[19:38:21] <mattst88> I think everything that needs to be purchased has been purchased. nothing more for council to do
[19:38:22] <sam_> so fine with uncc
[19:38:41] <dilfridge> ++
[19:40:09] <marecki> Done. Which means that the ~arch-candidate tracker is currently the ONLY open bug with Council participation!
[19:40:12] <marecki> 3. Open floor
[19:41:14] <ulm> just a heads up, the PMS team may ask for EAPI 9 feature preapproval on the next meeting
[19:41:27] <ulm> the plan is to have a quick EAPI 9
[19:41:42] <ulm> list of features is quite short: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Future_EAPI/EAPI_9_tentative_features
[19:42:01] <ulm> plus maybe unexporting some variables, which is somewhat controversial
[19:42:20] <dilfridge> the root of all evil
[19:42:30] <ulm> "some" = all listed in the table at https://projects.gentoo.org/pms/8/pms.html#x1-109001r1 except HOME and TMPDIR
[19:42:54] <sam_> (the motivation for this being bug 721088 and similar issues involving Go ebuilds)
[19:42:54] <willikins> sam_: https://bugs.gentoo.org/721088 "[Future EAPI] Don't export A"; Gentoo Hosted Projects, PMS/EAPI; CONF; ulm:pms
[19:43:04] <sam_> there's not much for us to do yet but it's worth the heads up, thanks ulm
[19:43:17] <marecki> ulm: If it's a "quick" EAPI, is it planned not to deprecate EAPI 7 when EAPI 9 comes out?
[19:43:20] <ulm> right, some ebuilds want to have more than 128 KiB of distfiles :/
[19:43:39] <ulm> marecki: we don't have to decide that right now
[19:43:59] <marecki> ulm: I know, just curious. And thanks for the heads-up
[19:43:58] <mattst88> we would not export variables except for HOME and TMPDIR, or did I misunderstand?
[19:44:02] <ulm> mattst88: right
[19:44:05] <mattst88> okay
[19:44:19] <ulm> maybe ROOT as well, but that's the controversial part
[19:44:22] <marecki> Another thing. I've mentioned it in passing in #gentoo-dev but perhaps it's worth mentioning here as well: shall we consider buying an Alpha server for Gentoo? Seeing as we currently haven't got ANY such machines.
[19:44:54] <sam_> https://www.islandco.com/hp-alphaserver looks nice and interesting (noticed here: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Matoro#alpha)
[19:45:01] <sam_> obviously would welcome/need matt's opinion though
[19:45:11] <mattst88> I can look into that. I've got a number of alphas, and I've been doing all of the keywording for at least the last year
[19:45:47] <marecki> mattst88: Thoughts? I mean, it's great that you are letting us use your hardware for this but it feels like we could make it somewhat more official, or at least spread the load.
[19:45:55] <mattst88> I actually had two AlphaServer DS10Ls at OSUOSL, but they didn't want to hook them up because they didn't have rails (and the rails are unobtainium)
[19:46:58] <mattst88> yeah, let me think about what we can do
[19:47:23] <sam_> \o/
[19:47:38] <marecki> mattst88: Okay, in that case it would be great if you could indeed think about it and post a summary to the ML, preferably in time to have it discussed before the next Council meeting
[19:47:38] <mattst88> I'd intended to provide access to my large alphaserver es47 (https://mattst88.com/computers/es47/) but it's unstable -- I think there's an RCU bug in the kernel :(
[19:48:14] <mattst88> sure
[19:49:18] <marecki> Anything else to discuss today?
[19:49:40] <marecki> Going once... going twice...
[19:49:40] <sam_> all good here
[19:49:55] * marecki bangs the gavel
[19:50:11] <marecki> Meeting closed! Thanks, everyone.