17:00:26 <pboyHB> #startmeeting fedora-server
17:00:26 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Jun  2 17:00:26 2021 UTC.
17:00:26 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
17:00:26 <zodbot> The chair is pboyHB. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:26 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:26 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-server'
17:00:35 <pboyHB> #topic Welcome / roll call
17:00:39 <eseyman> .hello2 eseyman
17:00:40 <zodbot> eseyman: eseyman 'Emmanuel Seyman' <emmanuel@seyman.fr>
17:00:42 <pboyHB> hi everyone!
17:00:48 <swefredde> Hi
17:00:49 <eseyman> hello, all
17:00:53 <cyberpear> .hi
17:00:54 <zodbot> cyberpear: cyberpear 'James Cassell' <fedoraproject@cyberpear.com>
17:00:56 <pboyHB> Everybody who is lurking, please say either .hello2 or .hello <fasname> , too
17:01:07 <swefredde> .hello2
17:01:08 <zodbot> swefredde: swefredde 'Fredrik Arneving' <fredrik.arneving@bahnhof.se>
17:01:27 <cmurf> .hello chrismurphy
17:01:28 <zodbot> cmurf: chrismurphy 'Chris Murphy' <bugzilla@colorremedies.com>
17:01:32 <langdon> .hello2
17:01:33 <zodbot> langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' <langdon@redhat.com>
17:01:35 <langdon> wasm
17:01:46 <langdon> wasn't sure if we were here or in freenode
17:03:00 <eseyman> I'm glad we're here, I'm no longer connected on Freenode
17:03:21 <pboyHB> #topic Agenda
17:03:30 <pboyHB> #link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/GEX3READTR5QNZRL3QY5QJI3F2CGSBBM/
17:03:37 <pboyHB> 1. Welcome
17:03:43 <pboyHB> 2. Agenda
17:03:49 <pboyHB> 3. Explore opportunities for cooperation with Cloud WG / Cloud Base Images as Fedora Server VM
17:04:00 <pboyHB> 3. Explore opportunities for cooperation with Cloud WG / Cloud Base Images as Fedora Server VM
17:04:12 <pboyHB> Fedora Server Documentation review
17:04:19 <pboyHB> Open Floor
17:04:46 <pboyHB> #topic Explore opportunities for cooperation with Cloud WG / Cloud Base Images as Fedora Server VM
17:05:03 <pboyHB> Current Status:
17:05:10 <pboyHB> We discussed opportunities of a cooperation with Dusty Mabe in early March
17:05:16 <pboyHB> Dusty raised the topic at the first „new“ cloud meetings March 30.
17:05:23 <pboyHB> Now we are at the beginning of June, without any progress
17:05:30 <pboyHB> We as Server WG have clearly expressed our interest several times
17:05:36 <pboyHB> Additionally
17:05:43 <pboyHB> Brief discussion on the relationship between Fedora Server and cloud images:
17:05:50 <pboyHB> #link https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/LVBLTCDDR3EGDCFQZJY5OPWUONWNCCOZ/
17:05:58 <pboyHB> Summary: Cloud and server too different, there is a (good) reason that both groups exist,  a VM based on cloud will never be anything like Fedora Server.
17:06:08 <pboyHB> Proposal: Defer the topic „explore opportunities for cooperation with Cloud WG“ (low in priority) and wait to see what Cloud WG comes up with.
17:06:14 <pboyHB> Regarding a VM version of Fedora Server, we might have to seek an interim solution.
17:06:27 <pboyHB> That's sso far. The floor is open
17:06:31 <langdon> vagrant images are also a challenge
17:09:39 <pboyHB> I see no comment so far.  I would agree the proposael in a minute or so.
17:09:51 <langdon> i wonder if it might be, in the near term, to have a "monthly" conjoined meeting of the 2 groups
17:10:11 <cmurf> Dusty isn't here, and I've discovered the matrix IRC bridge isn't working reliably.
17:10:20 <eseyman> a little discussion might show us what work we can share
17:10:33 <pboyHB> langdon: I would like that. But I don't see it. in tghe moment.
17:10:43 <langdon> i know when i was involved in the discussion of combining the two editions/wgs it was really about things like "containerization of all the things".. and if we coudl make sure we are both heading in the same direction and learning from each other i wonder if this would accomplish the same goal
17:11:50 <langdon> right.. we have a lot of overlap.. but very little on the fundamental of "edition".. e.g automated install of mail server would be very practical to both.. but btrfs/xfs while fundamental and distinct in editions is actually kinda "boring" re: goals of the editions
17:12:41 <langdon> so maybe regular alignment/prioritization would just make sure we aren''t both trying to build "easy install of mail server" or whatever
17:12:52 <pboyHB> cmurf: Do you propose to wait for Dusty?  Does this provide additional insight?
17:12:57 <langdon> and... sorry for my examples.. ignore the content as much as "where in the stack"
17:13:27 <pboyHB> langdon: That would be at least some progress.
17:13:40 <langdon> and might actually address the real goal..
17:13:57 <cmurf> My position is that Cloud+Server collaboration is orthogonal to the Cloud Btrfs by default change proposal, contrary to Peter's assertions on devel@ list.
17:14:14 <langdon> cmurf: i knew i shouldn't use btrfs as an example :)
17:14:31 <cmurf> If anything it makes the more alike, because Btrfs has an integrated volume manager and supports reflinks and snapshots. So does Server via LVM and XFS, whereas ext4 supports none of that.
17:14:33 <langdon> i just meant its a fundamental 'edition building" difference.. not whether its a good or bad choice
17:14:37 <cmurf> s/the/them/
17:15:28 <langdon> im with you on btrfs ... been running it on my daily driver for more than a year ... and haven't noticed.. except that i don't have to allocate space to my vms virt disk all the time :)
17:16:19 <pboyHB> cmurf: I could agree with the thesis of orthgonality.
17:16:44 <langdon> but.. if btrfs2 comes along.. i would be happier running that in the cloud edition .. on disposable machines.. than i would be on a bare metal server
17:16:59 <langdon> so.. a reason for edition separation exists
17:17:34 <pboyHB> murf: Nevertheless, instead of dropping it at all, I would prefer to defer it for now.
17:17:47 <pboyHB> Sorry
17:17:49 <pboyHB> cmurf: Nevertheless, instead of dropping it at all, I would prefer to defer it for now.
17:18:04 <pboyHB> Or what is your suggestion?
17:18:09 <eseyman> that sounds fair
17:19:06 <langdon> unless i misunderstand the proposal.. you can still *choose* to not-btrfs.. btrfs just becomes the default so it gets in to wider use in places where people don't care
17:19:28 <cmurf> Since you stated a "coup" has occurred as a result of the Btrfs by default change proposal, that's scuttled this alignment/merger question, I think it's relevant now to see if any other Server working group member agrees with that assessment.
17:19:41 <cmurf> Because I always try to give the contrary/minority view a voice.
17:19:50 <cmurf> but if it's just one voice, then we need to move on.
17:19:52 <pboyHB> Yes, for the time being i would prefer to stay with LVM /XFS.
17:20:09 <langdon> why? if you can still choose it?
17:20:15 <cmurf> I don't think Btrfs for Server is really on the table. There's no change proposal for it.
17:20:52 <langdon> ok.. so table it.. but any which way.. i don't think merging the editions is a good idea.. at least now.. and, im starting to think, ever
17:21:26 <pboyHB> cmurf:  BTRFS ist just one item. And it must not be a show stopper, in my view
17:21:56 <pboyHB> Ok, I see we agree
17:21:59 <pboyHB> 3
17:22:07 <pboyHB> 2
17:22:14 <langdon> agreemnet?
17:22:20 <pboyHB> yyes
17:22:22 <langdon> like what do you want to #agred
17:22:29 <langdon> i can't type today apparently
17:22:47 <pboyHB> #agreed.  Defer the topic „explore opportunities for cooperation with Cloud WG“ (low in priority) and wait to see what Cloud WG comes up with.
17:23:11 <pboyHB> #topic Deploying services via RPM and Ansible (continuation)
17:23:14 <langdon> i don't agree with that
17:23:35 <cmurf> I'm not in either SIG strictly speaking, I just poke my  head in when it comes to bootloader and filesystem things :P but I rather like the idea of Cloud restoring its Edition status.
17:23:42 <langdon> #undo
17:23:42 <pboyHB> Sorry, made a copy & paste error in the Agenda above. This is the topic as in the email
17:24:27 <pboyHB> langdon: What do you mean ?
17:24:29 <langdon> i think cooperation should be a high priority ... with a formal relationship like monthly conjoined meetings.. i don't think a merger is something we want to pursue at this time
17:24:50 <langdon> you #agreed and switched topics before anyone had a chance to comment :)
17:25:03 <cmurf> I think cooperation among editions and spins is so important it's effectively "built-in" to the process.
17:25:11 <pboyHB> OK, whats your exact proposal?
17:25:19 <cmurf> Even primarily Workstation changes, I consider at minimum deconfliction with other spins and editions.
17:25:46 <cmurf> Like, how could a change negatively impact others...
17:25:52 <langdon> maybe #undo the topic switch so the logs aren't messed up (im not a chair so mine didn't matter)
17:26:24 <pboyHB> langdon: how do i do that?
17:26:32 <langdon> literally "#undo"
17:26:40 <pboyHB> #undo
17:26:40 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x7f33927cafd0>
17:26:49 <langdon> cmurf how do you think the cooperation is built in the process?
17:26:59 <langdon> if you do it again, it will do the #agreed as well
17:27:08 <eseyman> pboyHB, langdon: "actively explore opportunities for cooperation with Cloud WG through discussions"?
17:27:20 <langdon> i can't remember when workstation coordinated with cloud or server :)
17:27:30 <cmurf> change proposals are brought to devel@ for review, all the stake holders get a chance to ack/nack/patch any proposal.
17:27:31 <pboyHB> eseyman: We tried that several times
17:28:14 <cmurf> But insofar as Cloud+Server specifically I think the issue is saying you want to collaborate isn't specific enough. It's a glittering generality. It sounds good but doesn't describe next steps.
17:28:22 <langdon> cmurf: well.. thats after the fact and makes sure we don't actually shoot ourselves in the foot.. not exactly leading the cooperation :)
17:28:32 <cmurf> I think you need a particular something you want or need to collaborate on.
17:28:45 <pboyHB> cmurf: the exact wording is: exploring ....
17:28:45 <langdon> cmurf: im not sure of the "you" in that .. but i agree...
17:29:25 <cmurf> you = the two parties
17:29:40 <langdon> i would say something like "seek to create a monthly meeting between the cloud and server wgs" and "defer the exploration of a merger of the cloud and server wgs until collaboration has been explored as independent groups"
17:29:46 <eseyman> "wait to see what Cloud WG comes up with" sounds barely better than nothing at all
17:29:49 <langdon> so kinda like what eseyman said but more
17:30:10 <eseyman> that's my issue with the original proposal
17:31:12 <pboyHB> new proposal: defer the exploration of a merger of the cloud and server wgs until collaboration has been explored as independent groups and seek to create a monthly meeting between the cloud and server wgs
17:31:31 <langdon> yeah.. but i would lose the "and" and just do 2
17:31:40 <eseyman> +1 on that
17:32:14 <pboyHB> new proposal: Defer the exploration of a merger of the cloud and server wgs until collaboration has been explored as independent groups. Seek to create a monthly meeting between the cloud and server wgs
17:32:31 <pboyHB> 3
17:32:33 <langdon> sorry if i wasn't clear.. i meant:
17:32:51 <langdon> cow-#agreed: Defer the exploration of a merger of the cloud and server wgs until collaboration has been explored as independent groups.
17:32:53 <langdon> and
17:33:04 <langdon> cow-#agreed: Seek to create a monthly meeting between the cloud and server wgs
17:33:34 <pboyHB> OK: Propoal is 2 agrees as langdon said.
17:33:37 <langdon> s/cow/foo ... i started using "cow" as a default var name a LONG time ago
17:33:44 <pboyHB> 3
17:33:53 <pboyHB> 2
17:34:03 <pboyHB> 1
17:34:15 <pboyHB> #agreed Defer the exploration of a merger of the cloud and server wgs until collaboration has been explored as independent groups.
17:34:33 <pboyHB> #agreed Seek to create a monthly meeting between the cloud and server wgs
17:35:02 <pboyHB> As for action: who volunteers to seek?
17:35:34 <langdon> well.. the first one is easy.. don't do anything :)
17:35:50 <langdon> the second one.. one or more of us ask to add it to their next agenda?
17:36:00 <pboyHB> Yes, woh does the second on, seek to create ...
17:36:24 <langdon> i can certainly help as i know dusty well.. but.. i am not the "leadership" of this group at the moment
17:36:34 <pboyHB> langdon: do you take it?
17:36:42 <langdon> sure... i can
17:36:50 <langdon> or cmurf?
17:37:00 <pboyHB> #action:  Langdon will contact Cloud WG
17:37:01 <cmurf> doesn't matter to me, I also know Dusty
17:37:10 <cmurf> super :)
17:37:33 <pboyHB> #topic Deploying services via RPM and Ansible (continuation)
17:37:46 <pboyHB> Status:
17:37:54 <pboyHB> I added / refined use case „Wildfly“ as described by jwhimpel (via email)
17:38:02 <pboyHB> Unfortunately didn’t manage to complete the other use cases so far.
17:38:20 <pboyHB> So, the floor is open
17:39:24 <eseyman> I'm still interested in making a Bugzilla deployment as easy as possible
17:39:31 <swefredde> I still volonteer to contribute but prefer the sysadm tasks before java/developer stuff
17:40:30 <pboyHB> That would be a use case of its own. Could you elaborate a bit?  here a bit short, longer  on mailing list?
17:41:06 <swefredde> Not really, Anything in line with what jwhimpel descrbes when it comes to mail services.
17:41:17 <pboyHB> swefredde: We could elaborade the other usecases, mail, IPA etc.
17:41:21 <swefredde> I guess whatever it will be I'll need to read up a bit to start with
17:41:41 <eseyman> postfix + amavis + spamassassin + dkim +...
17:42:12 <eseyman> koji + bodhi?
17:42:32 <swefredde> ...will start with some reading...  LOL
17:42:33 <langdon> as a java programmer for many years.. i would probably be able to stand up wildfly on my own.. but a mail server? no way
17:42:52 <langdon> koji+bodhi seems low on the list.. why not just use fedora's
17:42:59 <eseyman> langdon: it's the other way round for me
17:43:10 <pboyHB> swefredde: I could send you a step-by-step documentation how to set up manually.
17:43:33 <eseyman> I was thinking of making it easy to set up a Fedora downstream
17:43:34 <pboyHB> swefredde: may be an inital guide
17:43:54 <swefredde> Sure, but have we agreed on what to set up exactly?
17:44:10 <pboyHB> langdon: I would join the wildfly project
17:44:16 <langdon> eseyman: is that really the target audience? isn't it people who want to have a small office server
17:44:59 <langdon> pboyHB: ohh... i shouldn't do it.. we should get some expert.. whatever way i set it up would work but would have massive security holes and baling wire :)
17:45:01 <eseyman> not sure, TBH
17:45:22 <langdon> thats what the prd said :)
17:45:30 <pboyHB> sorry, what is TBH?
17:45:37 <langdon> to be honest
17:45:47 <pboyHB> oh, thanks
17:46:07 <langdon> if you haven't used/seen https://www.acronymfinder.com/ is really good
17:46:29 <pboyHB> langdon: Thanks, copied to bookmarks
17:46:32 <langdon> in case you see TLAs where you don't want to ask :) (three letter acronyms)
17:46:36 <eseyman> so SOHO mail service and what? a file server setup
17:46:45 <eseyman> ?
17:47:13 <langdon> files, maybe sso, dns, dhcp, things like that
17:47:41 * langdon couldn't remember the soho acronym :)
17:47:53 <eseyman> small office, home office
17:48:05 <pboyHB> Proposal: I'll sort this discussion in the wiki page and we continue on mailing list?
17:48:14 <pboyHB> as we are running out of time
17:48:15 <langdon> yeah... else i would have used it above.. but had MOBO stuck in my head :)
17:48:19 <langdon> pboyHB: +1
17:48:22 <langdon> well
17:48:36 <swefredde> +1
17:48:41 <eseyman> yeah, let's continue on the list
17:48:43 <langdon> i think "whats in a soho server" might eb a good wiki page.. and then link out to get to the installs
17:48:43 <pboyHB> #action pboy will sort out this discussion on the wiki page.
17:49:00 <langdon> and then people could add/argue "whats in soho"
17:49:05 <pboyHB> #topic Fedora Server Documentation review
17:49:10 <pboyHB> Status:
17:49:18 <pboyHB> We have now sufficient content to start and make the content publicly available (Marked as beta for now).
17:49:25 <pboyHB> We need to review each of them.
17:49:39 <pboyHB> There a 5 articles to be reviewed.
17:49:55 <pboyHB> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Documentation
17:50:17 <pboyHB> Section "Content to start with"
17:50:45 * langdon adds to his reading list
17:51:03 <pboyHB> who can take one of the articles
17:51:11 * eseyman adds to his reviewing list
17:51:53 <eseyman> pboyHB: I'll take "Server Administration"
17:52:10 <pboyHB> eseyman:  thanks" I'll add it do the list
17:52:38 <swefredde> I go with the SBC
17:53:11 <pboyHB> swefredde:  thanks
17:53:34 <eseyman> FTR, that "Communicating and Getting Help" gets me a 404
17:55:02 <pboyHB> Sorry, will correct is after our meeting
17:55:08 <eseyman> np
17:55:56 <pboyHB> Someone else?
17:56:18 <pboyHB> Guys, I spend a lot of time in writing.
17:57:05 <pboyHB> OK, Hope dies last.
17:57:06 <langdon> ill try to look at them all.. but i don't want to sign up to be a reviewer atm
17:57:27 <pboyHB> #topic  Open Floor
17:57:34 <swefredde> I can go through Virt as well
17:57:43 <pboyHB> swefredde thanks
17:57:49 <pboyHB> langdon thanks
17:58:06 <eseyman> finally managed to attend a meeting \o/
17:58:28 <pboyHB> Congratulations
17:58:46 <pboyHB> well, time is up
17:59:02 <pboyHB> in a minute I'close if there is nothing else
17:59:36 <pboyHB> OK, many thanks to everybody!
17:59:44 <pboyHB> #endmeeting