2024-02-21 16:34:37 <@spresti:fedora.im> !startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting
2024-02-21 16:34:37 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2024-02-21 16:34:37 UTC
2024-02-21 16:34:37 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'fedora_coreos_meeting'
2024-02-21 16:34:45 <@spresti:fedora.im> !topic roll call
2024-02-21 16:34:51 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> .hi
2024-02-21 16:35:07 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> .hi c4rt0
2024-02-21 16:35:07 <@aaradhak:matrix.org> .hi!
2024-02-21 16:35:41 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> It's been just a week and I can't remember the correct way of welcoming the bot...
2024-02-21 16:36:37 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> !hi c4rt0
2024-02-21 16:36:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Adam Piasecki (c4rt0) - he / him / his
2024-02-21 16:36:49 <@spresti:fedora.im> Lol I understand
2024-02-21 16:37:06 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !hi jbtrystram
2024-02-21 16:37:07 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jean-Baptiste Trystram (jbtrystram) - he / him / his
2024-02-21 16:37:18 <@gurssing:matrix.org> .hi gursewak
2024-02-21 16:37:54 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ok lets wait a few more mins for people to roll in
2024-02-21 16:38:03 <@gurssing:matrix.org> !hi gursewak
2024-02-21 16:38:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Gursewak Singh (gursewak)
2024-02-21 16:38:39 <@jlebon:fedora.im> !hi
2024-02-21 16:38:41 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (jlebon)
2024-02-21 16:39:21 <@aaradhak:matrix.org> !hi
2024-02-21 16:39:29 <@zodbot:fedora.im> No Fedora Accounts users have the @aaradhak:matrix.org Matrix Account defined
2024-02-21 16:39:31 <@jlebon:fedora.im> (fyi, I just added a meeting label to https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/730)
2024-02-21 16:39:34 <@aaradhak:matrix.org> !hi aaradhak
2024-02-21 16:39:54 <@spresti:fedora.im> ah 
2024-02-21 16:39:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Aashish Radhakrishnan (aaradhak)
2024-02-21 16:40:17 <@spresti:fedora.im> well we can tackle that one first so I dont miss it
2024-02-21 16:40:24 <@spresti:fedora.im> Well lets start
2024-02-21 16:40:43 <@spresti:fedora.im> !topic Action items from last meeting
2024-02-21 16:41:02 <@fifofonix:matrix.org> !hi fifofonix
2024-02-21 16:41:04 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fifo Phonics (fifofonix)
2024-02-21 16:41:11 <@spresti:fedora.im> !info there were no any action items listed.
2024-02-21 16:41:37 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> .hi
2024-02-21 16:41:42 <@spresti:fedora.im> !topic Discuss enabling rpm-ostree cliwrap
2024-02-21 16:41:57 <@spresti:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/730
2024-02-21 16:42:02 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !hi
2024-02-21 16:42:04 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Dusty Mabe (dustymabe) - he / him / his
2024-02-21 16:42:07 <@spresti:fedora.im> Jonathan Lebon:  would you like to introduce this? 
2024-02-21 16:44:12 <@jlebon:fedora.im> sure! 
2024-02-21 16:44:19 <@spresti:fedora.im> Thank you
2024-02-21 16:44:25 <@jlebon:fedora.im> so basically, we had agreed to this a while back but never actually executed on it
2024-02-21 16:44:49 <@spresti:fedora.im> Yeah ok, thats what I was thinking based on the comments.
2024-02-21 16:45:08 <@jlebon:fedora.im> I'm proposing actually executing on it now as part of the f40 rebase
2024-02-21 16:45:20 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> well. we agreed to experiment with it and then added stipulations on actually fully implementing it
2024-02-21 16:45:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> > AGREED: We will turn on cliwrap in the FCOS next stream to gain feedback. We will document it, and send an email to coreos-status. We will file an f35 Change before turning it on on all streams (as well as possibly other rpm-ostree variants like FSB and IoT).
2024-02-21 16:45:43 <@jlebon:fedora.im> the reason for bringing this us is that as part of the bootable containers work, it would be really nice if users could actually type `dnf install` in their Containerfiles
2024-02-21 16:46:47 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i'm fine with following that recommendation if preferred. though i guess the change would have to go into f41 at this point, which is a while
2024-02-21 16:46:57 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i'm fine with following that recommendation if preferred. though i guess the change proposal would have to go into f41 at this point, which is a while
2024-02-21 16:47:43 <@jlebon:fedora.im> but also, I'd like to do this in RHCOS soon, and ideally RHCOS and FCOS match in this respect
2024-02-21 16:48:51 <@spresti:fedora.im> So to be silly here, if we did it as a part of the f40 rebase, what are the consequences? 
2024-02-21 16:49:58 <@jlebon:fedora.im> it would bake together with the f40 rebase. so in branched first, then next, then eventually GA
2024-02-21 16:50:05 <@jlebon:fedora.im> it would bake together with the f40 rebase. so in branched first, then next, then eventually stable
2024-02-21 16:50:44 <@spresti:fedora.im> Sorry, I am asking more of what are we losing by changing the manifest files
2024-02-21 16:51:52 <@spresti:fedora.im> From this comment, it seems low impact on dev, https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-config/pull/830#issuecomment-781596771 but what impact does it have other then adding the functionality? 
2024-02-21 16:51:52 <@jlebon:fedora.im> it's not changing anything that doesn't currently work. it's essentially adding wrappers for dnf, dracut, and grubby (the latter two are just simple bits that say "hey, you should use rpm-ostree $x instead")
2024-02-21 16:52:20 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ok, so from the sounds of it, I am certainly for adding it to the f40 rebase.
2024-02-21 16:52:29 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> does it change dnf in just the building container case or for all of FCOS?
2024-02-21 16:52:46 <@jlebon:fedora.im> both the container case and client side
2024-02-21 16:53:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> ehh, ok
2024-02-21 16:53:57 <@jlebon:fedora.im> this is still far, but note that eventually it's possible we ship dnf5 in FCOS, at which point we would undo parts of this
2024-02-21 16:54:11 <@jlebon:fedora.im> obviously lots of things to discuss/flesh out before that
2024-02-21 16:54:18 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> i'm ok with an advanced timeline. I liked the change proposal approach because it raised visibility 
2024-02-21 16:54:40 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> but w/e at least it's new and shouldn't break anything (I think)
2024-02-21 16:55:13 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ok, so it sounds like we have two proposals lets vote between them.
2024-02-21 16:55:18 <@jlebon:fedora.im> one thing i can imagine breaking are things that check for `/usr/bin/dnf` before `/usr/bin/rpm-ostree` instead of e.g. `/run/ostree-booted` or `/etc/os-release`
2024-02-21 16:55:40 <@jlebon:fedora.im> but hopefully we find those out as part of the branched and next baking
2024-02-21 16:56:46 <@spresti:fedora.im> all for proposed: Enable cliwrap with f40 rebase
2024-02-21 16:56:56 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> yeah that's a good point
2024-02-21 16:57:21 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i will abstain from voting :)
2024-02-21 16:57:30 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> there's an ansible role that may start breaking now.. not sure, but we'll find out 
2024-02-21 16:58:19 <@spresti:fedora.im> All for proposed: advanced timeline, propose enablement of cliwrap for f41
2024-02-21 16:58:53 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> yeah, want to type it out?
2024-02-21 16:59:06 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> do you mean f40 ?
2024-02-21 16:59:21 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> does the cliwrap do the `ostree commit` that's needed in containerfile when doing native stuff ?
2024-02-21 16:59:39 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> does the cliwrap do the `ostree commit` that's needed in containerfile when doing native containers stuff ?
2024-02-21 16:59:52 <@spresti:fedora.im> The second one , is the change proposal  for f41 
2024-02-21 17:00:07 <@jlebon:fedora.im> jbtrystram: no, that's separate. the cliwrapped dnf essentially just redirects to rpm-ostree for a few commands (e.g. `install`, `upgrade`)
2024-02-21 17:00:08 <@spresti:fedora.im> sorry if I am sucking at elaborating well on this. 
2024-02-21 17:01:11 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> it feels a bit half baked to allow users to do dnf install in containerfiles if they still have to do ostree commit ?
2024-02-21 17:01:23 <@jlebon:fedora.im> spresti: probably less complicated to vote on one proposal at a time. so e.g. you can do a proposed for the f40 one and we see the outcome?
2024-02-21 17:01:39 <@spresti:fedora.im> Sure :) 
2024-02-21 17:01:57 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ok sorry all, lets start that over
2024-02-21 17:02:09 <@spresti:fedora.im> proposed: Enable cliwrap with f40 rebase
2024-02-21 17:02:29 <@spresti:fedora.im> +1
2024-02-21 17:02:46 <@jlebon:fedora.im> well, they're separate things. the ostree container commit bit is actually optional nowadays IIRC

the dnf wrapper gets us closer to what people are used to.
2024-02-21 17:03:00 <@aaradhak:matrix.org> +1
2024-02-21 17:03:06 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> +1
2024-02-21 17:03:15 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> +1
2024-02-21 17:03:20 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> +1 - we'd need to communicate this to our users: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1655
2024-02-21 17:03:20 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> +1
2024-02-21 17:03:47 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> okay, cool to know it's optionnal 
2024-02-21 17:04:08 <@marmijo:fedora.im> +1
2024-02-21 17:04:10 <@spresti:fedora.im> Okay voting ending in 30 seconds for this.
2024-02-21 17:05:00 <@jlebon:fedora.im> dustymabe: i'll add it to the ticket
2024-02-21 17:05:00 <@spresti:fedora.im> proposed: make a change proposal for f41 with cliwrap
2024-02-21 17:05:18 <@spresti:fedora.im> +0
2024-02-21 17:05:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> hmm. I don't see the point
2024-02-21 17:06:09 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> making a change proposal for something we already implemented is kind of shirking the process
2024-02-21 17:06:23 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> unless we want to enable it in other variants
2024-02-21 17:07:10 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ok; I guess we can go with option one then :) Voting ended for second proposed
2024-02-21 17:09:05 <@spresti:fedora.im> !agreed Enable cliwrap with f40 rebase; Additionally communicate this to our users by updating https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1655
2024-02-21 17:09:38 <@spresti:fedora.im> Thank you Jonathan Lebon  for that
2024-02-21 17:09:43 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ok moving to the next topic
2024-02-21 17:09:46 <@spresti:fedora.im> !topic 2021: Revisit SwapOnZram
2024-02-21 17:09:58 <@spresti:fedora.im> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/859
2024-02-21 17:10:45 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> I think most folks will love that in the desktop variants :) 
2024-02-21 17:10:58 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> Altough the change already exist somewhat : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/OstreeNativeContainerStable#rpm-ostree_dnf/yum_CLI_compatibility
2024-02-21 17:11:08 <@spresti:fedora.im> apiaseck: would you mind introducing this ?
2024-02-21 17:12:14 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> I would have to go through this first - don't have enough info from the top of my head on the subject.
2024-02-21 17:12:42 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ah ok I saw you added the meeting topic so I thought you might.
2024-02-21 17:12:52 <@spresti:fedora.im> No worries, sorry to put the pressure on you lol
2024-02-21 17:12:56 <@jlebon:fedora.im> yeah sorry, apiaseck tagged it on my behalf while we were discussing it live
2024-02-21 17:13:05 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i can take this one
2024-02-21 17:13:13 <@spresti:fedora.im> Ty
2024-02-21 17:13:41 <@jlebon:fedora.im> so essentially, we discussed this a while back but at the time didn't enable it because notably k8s didn't support it well
2024-02-21 17:14:13 <@jlebon:fedora.im> and we were gating on adding more docs for k8s distributors/users to undo this sort of stuff (together with the oomd change)
2024-02-21 17:15:18 <@jlebon:fedora.im> it seems like nowadays, k8s plays nicer with swap which makes this easier to do. the goal is to try to match Fedora
2024-02-21 17:15:31 <@jlebon:fedora.im> but... let me doublecheck what the status of the feature is in latest k8s
2024-02-21 17:16:52 <@jlebon:fedora.im> ok no change in 1.29 that i can see, so presumably still a beta feature
2024-02-21 17:17:13 <@jlebon:fedora.im> anyway, no rush on this but it stuck out in backlog refinement as a delta that we're still carrying
2024-02-21 17:17:16 <@spresti:fedora.im> rather an alpha right?
2024-02-21 17:17:32 <@jlebon:fedora.im> https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/859#issuecomment-1733652634
2024-02-21 17:17:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Jonathan Lebon: could you update the ticket with what you found? 
2024-02-21 17:18:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> should we just saw we'll implement swaponzram (i.e. match Fedora) when its no longer beta?
2024-02-21 17:18:20 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> should we just say we'll implement swaponzram (i.e. match Fedora) when its no longer beta?
2024-02-21 17:19:09 <@jlebon:fedora.im> maybe. the other approach is we tie it to e.g. the f40 rebase and add docs (linked from communications too) for how to disable it
2024-02-21 17:19:30 <@jlebon:fedora.im> which i think is closer to where we were going originally with https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/880#issuecomment-884565096
2024-02-21 17:21:11 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> ehh. I think that "single node defaults" thing never quite picked up enough steam
2024-02-21 17:21:46 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> i'm not sure if I would carry that here - we never really did the work there
2024-02-21 17:23:14 <@jlebon:fedora.im> yeah, the proposal there is more involved.
anyway, we don't have to linger on this. but essentially my 2c is: i think we probably should just turn this on with sufficient notice to match Fedora and provide docs to turn it off.
2024-02-21 17:23:35 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I'm not really strong enough opinion to block any of these changes; just don't think much has changed since we originally talked about them
2024-02-21 17:23:50 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I would love to get closer to matching Fedora in the long run - 100%
2024-02-21 17:24:11 <@jlebon:fedora.im> yeah, exactly. :) nothing changed, so this is just taking the easier approach
2024-02-21 17:24:28 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> what I don't want to do is break people. 
2024-02-21 17:24:59 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> which I guess rolling it out on `next` first would do
2024-02-21 17:25:01 <@jlebon:fedora.im> indeed. it needs to be communicated properly.
2024-02-21 17:25:27 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> like if we know everyone who has a kube cluster who hasn't enabled this beta feature is going to break.. that's not great 
2024-02-21 17:25:42 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> which would be an  argument for waiting to roll it out when it's no longer beta 
2024-02-21 17:25:56 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> but we also don't want to hold back changes forever
2024-02-21 17:26:19 <@fifofonix:matrix.org> as someone who runs `next` i would want clear communication.
2024-02-21 17:26:48 <@fifofonix:matrix.org> but also, I run `next` to help validate things for you guys, and not to slow the train
2024-02-21 17:27:15 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i think we need to clarify what the failure mode is currently with the beta support even if not enabled
2024-02-21 17:28:29 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Sounds good. I think bringing that new information to the ticket will help us make a more informed decision at least
2024-02-21 17:28:56 <@jlebon:fedora.im> ok, let's move on
2024-02-21 17:30:07 <@spresti:fedora.im> Agreed, should we make an action item for this?
2024-02-21 17:31:05 <@jlebon:fedora.im> if someone could bring up a 1.28 cluster on a systems with swap on that'd be really helpful :)
2024-02-21 17:32:47 <@spresti:fedora.im> Any takers (nogoes for me) ?
2024-02-21 17:33:02 <@fifofonix:matrix.org> (i may be able to help but not in the next two weeks while i ski and then it will be busy when i'm back etc)
2024-02-21 17:33:46 <@spresti:fedora.im> Thank you fifofonix 
2024-02-21 17:34:36 <@jlebon:fedora.im> fifofonix: that'd be amazing. i don't think there's any rush on this.
2024-02-21 17:35:18 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> open floor?
2024-02-21 17:35:26 <@spresti:fedora.im> !action fifofonix to bring up a 1.28 cluster with zswap
2024-02-21 17:35:38 <@spresti:fedora.im> We still have two topics lol
2024-02-21 17:35:48 <@spresti:fedora.im> We might need to push them to next week.
2024-02-21 17:35:51 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> there's always next week
2024-02-21 17:35:52 <@fifofonix:matrix.org> i'm out. sorry. have a call with someone.
2024-02-21 17:36:06 <@spresti:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor
2024-02-21 17:36:52 <@spresti:fedora.im> Thank you all for such a good discussion, def a surface I have not thought about before. 
2024-02-21 17:37:05 <@spresti:fedora.im> Any topics for OD ? 
2024-02-21 17:37:42 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I have one
2024-02-21 17:37:49 <@spresti:fedora.im> Go for it?
2024-02-21 17:38:35 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> we have F40 beta coming up.. we'll need to create a test day ticket and organize a test day like we have in the past. it would be great if a motivated person or two could organize it.
2024-02-21 17:38:50 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !info we have F40 beta coming up.. we'll need to create a test day ticket and organize a test day like we have in the past. it would be great if a motivated person or two could organize it.
2024-02-21 17:38:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> spresti: that's it from me
2024-02-21 17:39:07 <@spresti:fedora.im> Thank you dustymabe 
2024-02-21 17:40:02 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> I would be more than happy to help anyone who is willing to run it.
2024-02-21 17:41:25 <@spresti:fedora.im> oo sounds more like a volunteer 
2024-02-21 17:42:00 <@aaradhak:matrix.org> I would like to volunteer for the test day

2024-02-21 17:42:11 <@spresti:fedora.im> awesome!!!
2024-02-21 17:43:11 <@spresti:fedora.im> !info ash  will create a test day ticket and organize test day like we have in the past with the assistance of apiaseck 
2024-02-21 17:43:25 <@spresti:fedora.im> Well with that, if there is nothing else. 
2024-02-21 17:43:30 <@spresti:fedora.im> I will end todays meeting
2024-02-21 17:44:21 <@apiaseck:matrix.org> Thanks for running spresti 
2024-02-21 17:44:23 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> ash: apiaseck can you look to Renata Ravanelli for guidance? I think she ran the last one
2024-02-21 17:44:43 <@spresti:fedora.im> !endmeeting