Infrastructure/Meetings/2006-11-02

= Meeting of 2006-11-02 =


 * Time shown in EST

16:00 Current UTC: Thursday, November 2, 2006 at 21:00:57 16:01 we having a meeting today? 16:03 yes 16:03 anyone else here? 16:03 -!- c4chris [n=chris@5.251.77.83.cust.bluewin.ch] has joined #fedora-admin 16:04 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Schedule Meeting Agenda is here. 16:04 I'm here. 16:04 iWolf mentioned that he has a conflicting meeting. 16:04 mmcgrath, dgilmore? 16:04 lmacken had school things to attend to. 16:04 I'm here (provided my ADSL modem behaves...) 16:04 I'm here 16:04 yo 16:04 I think we're an hour late :D 16:05 warren: im here 16:05 Are we? 16:05 oh 16:05 * mmcgrath makes mental note 16:05 day light savings. 16:05 I'm a little busy doing several things now, so I'd like to state a status update of Core + Extras merge first. 16:06 warren: have at it. 16:06 Red Hat has some political blockers to deal with to make it a reality. And we have a major meeting to figure out the Red Hat s ide of this story November 12th-15th with a few people flying in for this purpose. 16:06 < etc_> re 16:06 Meanwhile testing and improving f13's model mercurial based package VCS would be very helpful. 16:07 If we can prove that it is a great and working alternative that satisfies all needs before November 12th, then it would make it more likely that we can use it for Core + Extras merge. 16:07 Getting the packages merged into a single repository is the first step. We can integrate Package Database and other parts later. 16:07 f13, where is the plague instance running? 16:07 warren, how do we test it? Is there a howto somewhere ? 16:08 -!- etcwrk [n=etc@jbourne3.mtroyal.ca] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 16:08 warren: publictest1.fedora.redhat.com 16:08 f13, could you post about your mercurial + plague instance on fedora-infrastructure-list? 16:08 -!- etc_ is now known as etcwrk 16:08 I've got a generic user 'hgtest@fedoraproject.org' added in and certs ready for anybody who wants them. 16:08 warren: sure. 16:08 thanks. 16:08 I'd really like to take a breather day, and then start in on dist-git 16:08 Oh, you suspect it is worth comparing mercurial to git? 16:09 there are some very strong urges inside Red Hat to use git instead of HG, so I want to give it a try. 16:09 yes. 16:09 I was under the impression that mercurial had benefits in ACL control over git. 16:09 Worth comparing yes. 16:09 depends, I have to investigate. 16:09 I haven't setup the ACLs for mercurial either yet. 16:09 -!- mrclos [n=chatzill@216.68.73.132] has joined #fedora-admin 16:09 ACL's in mercurial would require a custom plugin. 16:09 but it is fairly straightforward and upstream mercurial is excited to help us. 16:09 warren: hrm, not from what I've seen. 16:09 f13: Can you move your hg page under infrastructure? 16:10 I thought they had ACLs at a repo level 16:10 abadger1999: sure. 16:10 (I'm watching for changes to Infrastructure/*) 16:10 hmm 16:10 f13, oh I see. With one repo per package/branch, we can use upstream's existing ACL support no problem. 16:10 yep. 16:10 warren: thats one of the advantages of my layout 16:10 f13, my earlier investigation was into having a repository with package/branch dirs, and that required custom ACL 16:10 that and isolated changesets. 16:10 Yeah 16:10 I like tihs. 16:10 this. 16:11 it wasn't too difficult to edit up Makefile.common or plague, only 4 files in plague I think (plus config file) 16:11 Any other questions or concerns regarding VCS? Otherwise we move on. 16:11 none here. 16:12 f13, we could improve both the Makefile and plague systems to more easily handle different VCS systems. 16:12 Livna's svn hacks could be abstracted in a similar way too. 16:12 warren: plague system yes, Makefile, I'm not so sure there is value in supporting multiple VCS systems. 16:12 warren: thats one of the things i have been planing on adding to plague 16:12 along with a few different things 16:12 f13, alrighty. 16:13 warren: I've talked to dcbw about making VCS something pluggable in plague, but its a bit more of a larger project. 16:13 bbl 16:14 warren: you still MCing? 16:14 I could. 16:15 have at it ;-) 16:15 OK, next topic. 16:15 Package Database 16:15 hm... ok... next 16:15 Hm.. 16:15 mmcgrath, my heart isn't in this. I'm distracted by two other things. 16:16 hehe no problem. 16:16 mmcgrath, and it seems we don't have many people here. 16:16 Not too many, thats just a good excuse to go quick. 16:16 Ok, dglmore's gone for the package database. 16:16 iWolf: everything still on hold till we get the dell's back? 16:16  * mmcgrath remembers iWolf might be a bit late. 16:16 we'll assume on hold. 16:16 lmacken: ping? 16:17 mmcgrath, he said he's busy with school 16:17 I think 16:18 yeah, he's doing a school thing. 16:18  hey guys, I won't be able to make the meeting today.  I have to meet with a lab group from 4-6. 16:18 ahh, got'cha. 16:19 ok, Xen's been going great. 16:19 (next item xen) 16:19 We haven't really talked about this but does anyone think we shouldn't go the Xen route? 16:19 What if a xen server goes down? Are too many eggs in one basket? 16:20 Or will we have the capacity to host those xen instances on our other xen servers? 16:20 its possible. but I think the alternative is not providing a service at all :D 16:20 we'll try to spread it out as best we can, especially with the app/proxy servers. 16:20 but, for example, CVS. I'm a fan of taking a xen box with only one xen guest on it. 16:21 that way we could move that Xen guest if need be. 16:21 if xen can handle a shared FS you might be able to fail them over, I have no idea if it's that advanced yet though 16:21 though of course you'd need something to host a shared FS for you too 16:21 If we show the success of Xen to provide services for Fedora, we could more easily make a case to buy a shared storage solution. 16:22 We currently however *SHOULD* be making backups, enabling us to recover from a xen host failure very rapidly. 16:22 Just create the guest elsewhere, restore from backups and proceed. 16:22 also, what is there going to be for backup on those boxes? 16:22 In the past without Xen, we couldn't bring services back online rapidly in this manner. 16:22 Sadly, I'm not familiar with our backup mechanisms. How well are they documented? 16:22 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/BackupPC/ 16:23 it'll change as soon as we get that dell back. Change as in become more robust. 16:23 Anyhow, shared storage would be nice to have, but we can already bring services back online fairly quickly with Xen + backups. 16:23 Shared storage would enable us to bring guests back within SECONDS instead of an hour. 16:23 actually xen now supports live switchover :D provided a box doesn't completely die on its own. 16:24 * mmcgrath has never actaully done that though. 16:24 Shared storage would allow live switch-over, or bringing up that guest elsewhere rapidly after a complete host failure. 16:24 both actually :D 16:24 Pre-Xen: Days or weeks to get a service back. 16:24 Xen: hours to get a service back 16:24 Xen + Shared Storage: minutes or seconds 16:25 yeah. here's to keeping our fingers crossed. 16:25 dgilmore: back yet to talk about the legacy builders? 16:25 f13: how's that going? 16:27 meh 16:27 I haven't really put much effort into it yet 16:27 * f13 looks at lmacken for an update tool 16:27 yeah, you've been busy 16:27 So thats all the priority one stuff. 16:27 Just a heads up Kimo and paulobanon are looking into putting the wiki behind our proxies. 16:28 -!- etc_ [n=etc@jbourne3.mtroyal.ca] has joined #fedora-admin 16:28 They're also going to look into how much mod_cache vs squid cache would help performance. 16:28 awesome 16:28 That should be coming down the pipe fairly soon. 16:28 * etc_ catches up 16:29 I've been looking at skvidal's config management system. 16:29 I'm hoping to be able to get at least some of our configs in there to proof of concept it to everyone else. 16:29 I'll keep everyone informed on that. 16:30 I've given lyz a dump of our database minus the passwords for the new LDAP database. i think thats going well. 16:30 Thats really all I've got (based off of who is here) 16:30 anyone have anything else to say? 16:30 Oh -- VCS question: Is there any reason we'd need symlinks or empty directories within the repository? 16:30 mmcgrath, thanks for the dump 16:30 lyz: hey! 16:31 is that what you needed? 16:31 I noticed mercurial doesn't do either of those but I can't think of any reason we'd need them. 16:31 mmcgrath, haven't checked yet. I will check it tonight 16:31 abadger1999: hmm. 16:31 lyz: cool. 16:31 our Makefile system doesn't need symlinks 16:31 and if a directory contains at least a makefile, no problem =) 16:31 abadger1999: I can think of needs for that in the fedora infrastruture but not for general development. 16:31 abadger1999: the only thing I can think of for symlinks is the common repo 16:32 f13, for what? 16:32 f13: As in symlinking to files in the common repo instead of including it in each package repo? 16:32 something sortof like that 16:32 with CVS common is a symlink I do believe to a top level common 16:33 with dist-hg, I just manually checkout the top level common and put it in package/ 16:33 so I don't think we need symlinks or emptydirs 16:33 At the repo level or the working directory level? 16:33 at either level 16:33 -!- abompard [n=gauret@bne75-8-88-161-125-228.fbx.proxad.net]  has joined #fedora-admin 16:34 Err -- in reference to  "with CVS common is a symlink I do believe  to a top level common" 16:34 It seems you've solved it for dist-hg. 16:35 I solved it yea 16:35 How do you update common if the files change? 16:36 part of the make command is cd ../common; hg pull -u 16:36 -!- dbewley [n=dlbewley@tofu.lib.ucdavis.edu] has quit ["Leaving"] 16:36 (I think I remember doing that) 16:36 k. 16:36 * iWolf back from work meeting 16:36 -!- p3n [n=p3n@dxb-as56546.alshamil.net.ae] has quit [Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)] 16:36 I think the cvs version did the same thing, cd ../common; cvs up 16:37 -!- p3n [n=p3n@dxb-as56546.alshamil.net.ae] has joined #fedora-admin 16:38 -!- farshad_ [n=farshad@217.219.57.163] has joined #fedora-admin 16:38 -!- farshad_ [n=farshad@217.219.57.163] has quit [Client Quit] 16:38 -!- tibbs [n=tibbs@fedora/tibbs] has quit ["Konversation terminated!"] 16:38 -!- farshad_ [n=farshad@217.219.57.163] has joined #fedora-admin 16:38 Ok, does anyone have anything else? If not I'll close the meeting and we can continue discussing CVS? 16:40 -!- etcwrk [n=etc@jbourne3.mtroyal.ca] has quit [Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)] 16:40 -!- etc_ is now known as etcwrk 16:40 CLOSED --- :D