Spins SIG Meeting 2009-01-19

From FedoraProject

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Agenda

  1. Finalizing Spins Process, vote
    • Writing up details on the Wiki, where necessary
    • Writing our Spins_SIG_Review_Checklist, and what to do if something isn't covered
    • Maintainer responsiveness and responsibilities for current releases
    • Checklist of DOs and DONTs, SHOULDs and SHOULD NOTs
    • Defining permanent vs. non-permanent spins, the procedure to change status, and the consequences for the Spins Process.
  2. Set our final meeting time and schedule, vote
  3. Determine our workflow (using the spin-kickstarts Trac instance?)
    • Branching and tagging (based on milestones to be determined)
    • Creating daily spins for compose tests and reporting results
    • Having maintainers (re-)create spins regularly for tests and collecting results
  4. Determine our process for recurring releases and reviewing current spins for the upcoming release
  5. Current Spins Requests:
  6. Review of all current spins
    • Who's the maintainer of each spin, and where can we reach them?
    • Fedora AOS
    • Fedora BrOffice.org
    • Fedora Developer
    • Fedora Education Math
    • Fedora Electronic Lab
    • Fedora Games
    • Fedora Sugar
    • Fedora XFCE

Meeting Minutes

Attendees

Spins Process

  • User:Kanarip: Q&A
  • bkearney: Accepted means "will be composed and released through Release Engineering"?
    • kanarip: Accepted means it'll be handed off to Release Engineering to be composed and released, and get a torrent and page on spins.fedoraproject.org
    • poelcat: If it does not fail testing
  • bruno: No wiki name space described for the Spins pages
    • kanarip: /Foo_Spin or SIGs/Education/Education_Live_Spin
    • nirik: $name_Spin would be better as wiki hates /'s
  • bkearney: If trademark is not accepted, it is not a spin?
    • kanarip: then it's a "Fedora Remix", and goes back to category Incomplete_Spin, yes
  • kanarip: Take the process up for vote now, get people to draft up the details and review in 2 weeks
  • kanarip: Vote is: Do you agree with the process set forth in the Spins_Process wiki page, bearing in mind some of the details still need to be filled out?
    • kanarip, bkearney, nirik, bruno, notting, huff, igorps, poelcat: +1
    • Vote passed
  • kanarip: i need 1-3 volunteers who can take on the details on the process, the 5 sub-items for agenda item #1
    • bryan, bruno, kanarip taking on the details on Spins_Process, up for review and voting during our next meeting in two weeks

Action Items

  • Create details pages up for review in our next meeting (bkearney, bruno, kanarip)

Meeting Time and Schedule

  • kanarip: Does the current time and schedule work for most of us?
    • SIG: Yes
  • kanarip: Meeting time and schedule set until someone brings it up again

Determining the Spins SIG workflow

  • kanarip: i'd like to see a more formalized set of tasks to be performed by the Spins SIG and the spin maintainers, so that we know when to branch off GIT, what to branch, what to compose(-test), what to expect from spin maintainers, etc.
    • huff, bruno; since the process details are not there yet, part of the timeline and such isn't available to formalize

Process of recurring releases

  • The question is whether Spins that have been approved for Fedora N-1 need to get trademark approval again
  • The question also is what to do with the Wiki pages?
    • nirik: How about they have to add a page for each release, but can automagically pass some steps? board approval? spins sig approval?
    • kanarip: poelcat and myself have thought of a way to maintain the same page for different releases, linking to the release-specific revision of that page.
    • poelcat: Overview pages would have to be modified
    • kanarip: Category: package are overview pages
    • ianweller chimes in but since there's only 10 minutes left, we need to take this to the fedora-wiki mailing list

Action Items

  • kanarip to take the recurring releases process wiki tracking discussion to the fedora-wiki mailing list

Media larger then 4GB

  • A vote was started, but due to the time constraint it didn't pass nor fail
  • kanarip suggested bruno strips the Games spin to under 4GiB for now, so that it is not an issue, and revisit for Beta

Action Item

  • kanarip to put the 4GiB limit on the Agenda for the next meeting

Current Spins

  • Call for volunteers to check the current spin pages and add them to the appropriate category is moved to mailing list.

Meeting Log

* kanarip has changed the topic to: Fedora Spins SIG meeting - Agenda at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Spins_SIG_Meeting_2009-01-19
kanarip Alright, let's get started
kanarip who's here?
* bryan_kearney waves
kanarip Max is making dinner for me so this should be a very nice and quick meeting ;-)
bryan_kearney can max cook?
brunowolff I am here as an interested party, but not a member.
* huffd is here
* stickster is now known as stickster_afk
kanarip brunowolff, that's ok, thanks for attending
* itamarjp (n=itamar@189-015-207-177.xd-dynamic.ctbcnetsuper.com.br) has joined #fedora-meeting
* poelcat here
kanarip hi poelcat ;-)
kanarip so, the agenda is in the topic, does somebody have something to comment on that agenda?
* nirik is here as well.
kanarip if not, i'll start running down the topics one by one and specify some of the tasks that need to get done to really finalize the process
poelcat the agenda looks like it could cover 3 meetings :)
* sol1708 (n=solviter@190.152.56.12) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip poelcat, i guess you've not seen me run meetings yet ;-)
* giallu has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
kanarip First of all; Finalizing the Spins Process - this means there's several parts of the Spins process that need more details, more verbose descriptions
kanarip the general skeleton is set up, and needs to be voted upon/for
bryan_kearney question on the process:
bryan_kearney I read it, and assume that accepted means it will be created by release engineering
bryan_kearney is that correct?
* sol1708 (n=solviter@190.152.56.12) has left #fedora-meeting
* cmpahar_afk has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
kanarip accepted means it is going through the "to be officially released by the Fedora Project" chain of events, yes
bryan_kearney clarification: which may or may not include release engineering publishign it?
* neverho0d has quit (Read error: 113 (No route to host))
kanarip which may or may not include the spin being on the mirrors, but accepted means that at the very least, it's going to get a torrent and page on spins.fedoraproject.org
* poelcat thinks it would be good to have a section that explains what needs to happen to spins that have been done before or already in process... IOW do they have to create a "spins page" following the new template, go through the process, etc.
poelcat kanarip: unless it fails testing?
brunowolff As I commented on the discussion page it doesn't give (or link to) any naming guidelines for creating a spin page. As a relatively new contributor,
bryan_kearney poelcat: in general.. that case is "I have a spin in Fedora x, what happens in x+1"
kanarip poelcat, yes, that's item #6 on the agenda actually, see what needs to be done for each current spin
brunowolff I am not sure what name to use in the wiki.
kanarip brunowolff, noted, but either /Foo_Spin or something in the SIG namespace like SIGs/Education/Education_Live_Spin
kanarip brunowolff, our tracker is the category the page is, or is not, in
* notting (n=notting@redhat/notting) has joined #fedora-meeting
nirik I think $name_Spin would be better.
nirik mediawiki hates /'s
* igorps (n=igor@201.17.170.211) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip nirik, agreed, some of the existing spins though already have pages which in that case would need to be moved/copied
* nirik nods
kanarip so, let's take that part of the discussion to item #6 on the agenda
* ianweller high fives nirik and then walks back off
bryan_kearney kanarip: on item (4)
kanarip in item #1, we would like to take our little skeleton up for vote and then assign people part of the process to fill out the details (and review that in 2 weeks)
bryan_kearney kanarip: if trade mark is denied, it is not a spin?
kanarip bryan_kearney, then it's going back to Incomplete_Spin, yes
* jwb is here
kanarip bryan_kearney, that would be a "Fedora Remix"
bryan_kearney kanarip: thx
* kanarip moves to vote on the skeleton process if there's no further questions
bryan_kearney +1
kanarip Vote is: Do you agree with the process set forth in the Spins_Process wiki page, bearing in mind some of the details still need to be filled out?
kanarip +1
bryan_kearney +1
* nirik says +1 as well, but is unclear who has a vote here. ;) I'm sure further adjustment may be needed, but I think this is a much better process than the lack of one we had.
kanarip nirik, all attendees are either Spins SIG members, or maintainers, or representatives from other parties involved
* itamarjp1 has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
kanarip like QA, Rel-Eng, etc
* itamarjp has quit (Remote closed the connection)
kanarip jwb, poelcat, brunowolff, huffd, ping ^ please vote
brunowolff +1
* JSchmitt has quit (Remote closed the connection)
notting +1, if my vote counts. could use some clarification as to what happens if it blows up/fails/etc after it gets to Spins_Fedora_X, but that can be added later
kanarip notting, your vote always counts ;-)
jwb kanarip, iirc, i don't really have a vote
kanarip jwb, you are the Rel-Eng rep. right?
huffd +1 my only comment is that aos is not a "live-spin" or "installation spin" however good start
kanarip and as such, part of the process
igorps +1 for me too, the new process is really better than the one we had for F10
kanarip huffd, noted
poelcat +1
* poelcat wasn't sure if I was a voting member
jwb was mether able to make it?
jwb and did he ever state actual objections to the process itself on the list?
kanarip 8 for, 0 against, i want to give people who did not have the opportunity to argue about the outcome but it's very unlikely i'll get 9 angry community members ;-)
kanarip s/the opportunity/the opp. to attend this meeting/
nirik He did say that weekly composes/qa were overkill, but I didn't see any other specific complaints...
kanarip nirik, i guess he misread "bi-weekly"
kanarip i need 1-3 volunteers who can take on the details on the process, the 5 sub-items for agenda item #1
kanarip * Writing up details on the Wiki, where necessary
kanarip * Writing our Spins_SIG_Review_Checklist, and what to do if something isn't covered
kanarip * Maintainer responsiveness and responsibilities for current releases
kanarip * Checklist of DOs and DONTs, SHOULDs and SHOULD NOTs
kanarip * Defining permanent vs. non-permanent spins, the procedure to change status, and the consequences for the Spins Process.
kanarip this should obviously be a collaborative effort, with communication over the mailing list, giving everyone a chance to chime in with concerns and stuff
* kanarip volunteers
mether i dont think i misread anything but hard to say without a summary
* bryan_kearney can help on any of them
mether nobody even posted a meeting summary
kanarip bryan_kearney, cool, thanks
nirik mether: sorry about that. We didn't realize until the end that we didn't have someone taking notes. ;(
nirik mether: see the topic link and process from it.
brunowolff I'll review stuff (as I already have) since I am trying to work through the process.
kanarip brunowolff, great! let me know if and when you need help and i'll help you wherever i can
huffd kanarip: to add to that list I would also like to see more detail on the differnce b/t spin and respin
kanarip huffd, noted
kanarip ** bryan, bruno, kanarip taking on the details on Spins_Process, up for review and voting during our next meeting in two weeks
kanarip Item #2 on the agenda: Meeting schedule and time
kanarip does this time work for most of us?
* openpercept (n=openperc@unaffiliated/openpercept) has joined #fedora-meeting
huffd works for me, +1
poelcat kanarip: +1
brunowolff I will normally be able to take a break from work at this time. (Today I have off.)
kanarip works for me also, unless Max is cooking dinner... +1 ;-)
* itamarjp (n=itamar@189-015-207-177.xd-dynamic.ctbcnetsuper.com.br) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip and yes, for whoever asked, it seems he can cook or he is just pretending
* bryan_kearney1 (n=bkearney@nat/redhat/x-80b9f2dd55a9485c) has joined #fedora-meeting
bryan_kearney1 sorry.... had to reboot
kanarip bryan_kearney1, in case you missed, we're at whether this meeting schedule and time works for most of us
bryan_kearney1 k.. thx
kanarip 17:00 UTC, bi-weekly on even weeknumbers, Mondays
* nirik is around at this time most days.
* itamarjp has quit (Remote closed the connection)
* itamarjp (n=itamar@189-015-207-177.xd-dynamic.ctbcnetsuper.com.br) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip i would like to emphasize that 17:00 UTC always is 17:00 UTC, regardless of DST
brunowolff Didn't rel-eng have an issue with that as they change with DST?
* CheekyBoinc (n=CheekyBo@fedora/CheekyBoinc) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip brunowolff, they may, but there's also #fedora-meeting-1
kanarip i guess we have a pass on the meeting schedule and time unless some of us complain because our real-life schedules change, at which time we can review
bryan_kearney1 fine with me.. just please send reminder to the list
kanarip ** Meeting time and schedule, Mondays on even weeks at 17:00 UTC regardless of DST
kanarip bryan_kearney1, will do, cronjob ftw
kanarip item #3, determining our workflow
* fbijlsma (n=fbijlsma@p54B2F476.dip.t-dialin.net) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip i'd like to see a more formalized set of tasks to be performed by the Spins SIG and the spin maintainers, so that we know when to branch off GIT, what to branch, what to compose(-test), what to expect from spin maintainers, etc.
kanarip i guess i'm looking for a volunteer to draft that for an upcoming Fedora N release
kanarip if anyone has a pretty much complete picture of what needs to happen when, please step up?
kanarip i can help wherever necessary of course, but i can not draft up entire processes, SOPs, timelines, things to do, and lead the Spins SIG
kanarip that would just be... wrong
bryan_kearney1 kanarip: do we know if there are resources from releng to support
bryan_kearney1 resources == machine
bryan_kearney1 if the answer is no, then it is part of the detailed process
huffd Right I am courious about the third bullet.... I dont have a problem with ths however is this documented? Is these builds on on a fedora infrstructure box?
kanarip bryan_kearney1, not that i know of, yet
kanarip huffd, unknown as of yet, it's something that apparently needs to happen in order to prevent the Spins SIG handing off garbage to Rel-Eng, but at the same time I understand maintainers may not have the resources to perform the task
bryan_kearney1 kanarip: then perhaps this is detail around the process, specifically.. the timeline section at the end
kanarip bryan_kearney1, yes I guess you're right
kanarip i'd very much like our process to be very well documented, so that everyone knows what needs to happen (and we can assign, like, tickets in a milestone to an owner)
kanarip that's basically the entire idea
bryan_kearney1 agreed.... lets start by flushing it out in the timeline,
kanarip part of it I guess depends on the Spins Process details which still have to be drafted up
* bryan_kearney has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
kanarip bryan_kearney1, ok then
bryan_kearney1 and then see how / if we can leverage autmation via trac / build machines / etc
kanarip bryan_kearney1, i guess we'll bounce around a few emails on the details, keeping in mind it may have some dependencies and chase those, or have those chased after by other volunteers
bryan_kearney1 agreed
kanarip if that's ok with everyone, i'd like to continue with item #4
kanarip which is - the process for recurring
kanarip which is - the process for recurring releases
nirik How about they have to add a page for each release, but can automagically pass some steps? board approval? spins sig approval?
bryan_kearney1 I think it is the same.. with the wrangler/owner deciding if there is enough change to go back to eh board
nirik and also should add a 'whats changed/whats new' section?
bryan_kearney1 need to add a release to the template
* drago01 has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
* lfoppiano has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
kanarip nirik, poelcat and myself have pondered about whether Spin_Fedora_10 category to a spins page, and then adding Incomplete_Spins as soon as Fedora 10 is released would make sense
kanarip adding a link to the Fedora 10 revision of the page, so that history is maintained and retrievable
nirik yes, that would work.
nirik I think a new this time/changes section would also be nice for release notes/docs.
poelcat that would mean we'd have to redo the links on the spins summary page for Fedora 10 so they remain fixed
poelcat not a big deal, but a little work
* itamarjp has quit (Remote closed the connection)
kanarip poelcat, sorry, spins summary page ... which one?
poelcat kanarip: we should have an overall summary page like: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/11/FeatureList
kanarip sorry, Spin_Fedora_10 was an example... since this process is going for the F11 development cycle, i mean Spin_Fedora_11
poelcat for each release
kanarip yes, ah, right
poelcat so there is a user-friendly view of all the spins for particular release
poelcat we can link to it in the release notes, etc.
kanarip isn't that the Category:Spin_Fedora_11 page, which you can edit so that it has an introduction and then lists the pages in that category?
poelcat i'm not sure how to do that w/ mediawiki
poelcat i do it manually for the features
kanarip i think it is standard in mediawiki
kanarip hold on
poelcat it might not format as nice w/ the table, etc.
kanarip https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Test_Cases
kanarip it doesn't have more details than that though; just the page name
brunowolff Will that pick up the correct version after a new release?
kanarip well, not test cases, but Spin_Fedora_N+1 would, yes
nirik it will pick up anything in that Category I think.
* ianweller pokes in
kanarip nirik, right
* kital (n=Joerg_Si@fedora/kital) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip ianweller, since there is only 10 minutes left, can we try and come up with something that works for all of us over the next 2 weeks and finalize it at the next meeting?
kanarip i really, really need the last two items to have some action items
ianweller kanarip: sure.
kanarip thanks
ianweller kanarip: if you have qusetions, fedora-wiki@lists.fp.o is the place
kanarip ianweller, i'll post a message there and see where it takes us, thanks
kanarip As for item #5, i think we can take the Games Spin for a vote right now...? that is, if everyone reads the commits that have been made to the games spin by brunowolff so far?
kanarip i think brunowolff has done an awesome job where the Games SIG itself had not for the Fedora 10 development timeframe
brunowolff Related to this, I was hoping to get an answer to the 4 GiB question since I need to adjust things one way or the other.
kanarip ah, right
kanarip i almost forgot that, thanks for the reminder
* nirik hasn't looked at the ks file or done any testing on Games, so I don't feel able to vote now.
kanarip that's what we should take a look at first
brunowolff And if I cut, I had a question if it is OK to subtract stuff from the desktop ks rather than add to the base ks?
kanarip ** Do we allow spins with a squashfs file greater then 4GiB, meaning that the .iso will definitely be over 4 GiB
kanarip brunowolff, yes that is OK, as far as it concerns packages ;-)
* mbacovsk has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
brunowolff I think your concern was really about the ISO size rather than the squashfs size.
* llaumgui (n=llaumgui@cro34-2-82-226-153-125.fbx.proxad.net) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip brunowolff, yes
kanarip i don't care much about the squashfs file size to be honest ;-))
poelcat kanarip: does the games spin have a "spins page" in the new format?
kanarip poelcat, not yet i think, but that's item #6
brunowolff Not yet. I was going to ask if I should move the feature page over to a spin page at this meeting.
kanarip and, haha, i think item #5 and #6 are in the wrong order and are not going down in one meeting anyway
kanarip let's scrap item #5 since item #6 isn't done yet
kanarip we do need a verdict on spins > 4GB though
brunowolff As long as rel-eng will be able to do a spin for the alpha, I don't care about getting final approval today.
kanarip ok, i'm calling a vote if nobody else has anything to comment:
kanarip ** Vote: Do we object against live spins with a .iso file over 4GB?
* kanarip +1
brunowolff The comments I have heard for are that XP (and later) windows users can use NTFS and > 4 GiB files aren't an issue there.
nirik so whats the downside?
brunowolff And it was felt that USB drives weren't going to be used a lot.
kanarip nirik, let me link you the talk page
brunowolff On the down side, having a spin be available to more people is a good thing.
kanarip https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Talk:Spins_SIG_Review_Checklist
kanarip I guess I lost my answers on that page before I had a chance to save them to the wiki
kanarip many users still use vfat
kanarip we all know they shouldn't, but it's a fact of life
brunowolff I have a slight preference for going over 4 GiB, but mostly I want to know how I should b spending my time getting ready for the alpha.
* itamarjp (n=itamar@189-015-207-177.xd-dynamic.ctbcnetsuper.com.br) has joined #fedora-meeting
kanarip brunowolff, strip to under 4GB so it's not an issue, get the patch into livecd-tools, and revisit before Beta compose
brunowolff OK. That sounds fine.
nirik kanarip: +1
kanarip nirik, you object to >4GB spins as well?
brunowolff As an aside, can you complain to whoever decided updating openssl less than a week before the alpha on behalf of the spins SIG?
nirik kanarip: no, I was saying we should stick to <4GB for now, and revisit if the patch is accepted/no objections are heard.
kanarip brunowolff, yes you can, there's a topic on that on the -devel list, with concerns raised by f13, but the maintainer of openssl said it wouldn't break all that much...
bryan_kearney1 kanarip: 0
kanarip nirik, noted
kanarip since brunowolff is OK with going <4 GB for now, let's revisit this on the next meeting
nirik so this means that people with vfat won't be able to download/burn the spin?
kanarip it's 18:00 UTC and we're out of our timeslot, but I want to make a quick note on item #6
brunowolff Not using that file system.
* nirik wonders if it provides any kind of usefull error, or if people will download, get a bad image and try and burn that.
kanarip volunteers to recheck the pages that are there for Fedora 10, copy them to the right location for Fedora 11, add them to Incomplete_Spins, edit the pages to reflect Spins_New_Spin_Page_Template, contact the maintainers of the Spin
brunowolff Any objection to my moving the Games Spin Feature to a Games Spin proposed spin page in the wiki? Is there anything that needs the old
f13 hrm, it's getting to be releng meeting time
kanarip nirik, "cannot write"
brunowolff feature page to stick around?
kanarip brunowolff, i'd love you to do that
huffd Fedora AOS: David Huff dhuff@redhat.com
kanarip huffd, noted
huffd kanarip: also for item 3) workflow: I'll see what I can do here, I'll contact rel-eng and try to get a bettter idea of what a process would look like and ask about hardware, at least try to revisit the conversation
* iarlyy has quit ("Leaving")
kanarip f13, i'm closing up now
brunowolff OK. Thanks, you guys answered the questions I was hoping to get answered.
* nirik notes he will be happy to own/drive the Xfce spin since mether is low on time.
kanarip ok, so far so good, thanks everyone