2025-05-14 16:30:17 <@siosm:matrix.org> !startmeeting fedora_coreos_meeting
2025-05-14 16:30:19 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-05-14 16:30:17 UTC
2025-05-14 16:30:19 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'fedora_coreos_meeting'
2025-05-14 16:30:54 <@siosm:matrix.org> !topic roll call
2025-05-14 16:31:26 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !hi
2025-05-14 16:31:28 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Dusty Mabe (dustymabe) - he / him / his
2025-05-14 16:31:31 <@tlbueno:fedora.im> !hi
2025-05-14 16:31:32 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Tiago Bueno (tlbueno) - he / him / his
2025-05-14 16:31:36 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !hi
2025-05-14 16:31:37 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michael Armijo (marmijo)
2025-05-14 16:31:53 <@mnguyen:fedora.im> !hi mnguyen
2025-05-14 16:31:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michael Nguyen (mnguyen)
2025-05-14 16:32:00 <@ravanelli:matrix.org> !hi ravanelli
2025-05-14 16:32:00 <@hricky:fedora.im> !hi
2025-05-14 16:32:01 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Renata Ravanelli (ravanelli)
2025-05-14 16:32:01 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Hristo Marinov (hricky) - he / him / his
2025-05-14 16:33:02 <@jlebon:fedora.im> !hi
2025-05-14 16:33:03 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (jlebon)
2025-05-14 16:33:44 <@jdoss:beeper.com> !hi
2025-05-14 16:33:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Joe Doss (jdoss)
2025-05-14 16:34:54 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> !hi
2025-05-14 16:34:56 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Jean-Baptiste Trystram (jbtrystram) - he / him / his
2025-05-14 16:35:19 <@siosm:matrix.org> !topic Action items from last meeting
2025-05-14 16:35:28 <@siosm:matrix.org> !link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-coreos-community-meeting-minutes-2025-05-07/152389
2025-05-14 16:35:49 <@siosm:matrix.org> I don't see any action items from the last meeting
2025-05-14 16:35:59 <@siosm:matrix.org> !topic Review Fedora 43 Release Schedule
2025-05-14 16:36:05 <@siosm:matrix.org> !link https://fedorapeople.org/groups/schedule/f-43/f-43-key-tasks.html
2025-05-14 16:36:36 <@siosm:matrix.org> I don't think we have anything specific for this topic right now. We'll keep reviewing the incoming changes
2025-05-14 16:36:52 <@aaradhak:matrix.org> !hi aaradhak
2025-05-14 16:36:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Aashish Radhakrishnan (aaradhak)
2025-05-14 16:37:36 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> If we have any changes we want to submit we should try to do so before July 
2025-05-14 16:38:16 <@siosm:matrix.org> indeed
2025-05-14 16:38:40 <@siosm:matrix.org> OK, which topic should we start with?
2025-05-14 16:39:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 1730 :) 
2025-05-14 16:39:58 <@siosm:matrix.org> !topic revisit python discussion
2025-05-14 16:40:02 <@siosm:matrix.org> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1730
2025-05-14 16:40:24 <@siosm:matrix.org> Which is back again due to nfs-utils-coreos
2025-05-14 16:40:28 <@siosm:matrix.org> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1942
2025-05-14 16:42:04 <@siosm:matrix.org> this nfs-utils package really some work
2025-05-14 16:42:09 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 
2025-05-14 16:42:09 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> my general stance is that I'm done fixing python related packaging issues.
2025-05-14 16:42:09 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> my current proposal is to let this happen in rawhide and if someone fixes it before F43, great. If not, F43+ will have python
2025-05-14 16:42:32 <@jlebon:fedora.im> there was renewed interest in reworking the nfs-utils package. did that happen already?
2025-05-14 16:42:52 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Jonathan Lebon: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nfs-utils/pull-request/14#comment-262471 
2025-05-14 16:43:28 <@jlebon:fedora.im> ok. do we know if the rework fixes this?
2025-05-14 16:43:47 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> nope, but anyone is welcome to investigate 
2025-05-14 16:46:14 <@siosm:matrix.org> I'll take a look at this; probably with one of our new team members
2025-05-14 16:46:37 <@jlebon:fedora.im> +   nfs-python-utils (to elminate the python dependency in other packages)
2025-05-14 16:46:37 <@jlebon:fedora.im> + - Move all of the (optional) programs that require a python interpreter to
2025-05-14 16:46:37 <@jlebon:fedora.im> https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/smayhew/rpms/nfs-utils/c/8730d56b2763a64a94e1e3ca1cc3527755fcbfb7?branch=new-pkg-split-squash has:
2025-05-14 16:46:37 <@jlebon:fedora.im> 
2025-05-14 16:46:43 <@jlebon:fedora.im> 
2025-05-14 16:46:43 <@jlebon:fedora.im> https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/smayhew/rpms/nfs-utils/c/8730d56b2763a64a94e1e3ca1cc3527755fcbfb7?branch=new-pkg-split-squash has:
2025-05-14 16:46:43 <@jlebon:fedora.im> - Move all of the (optional) programs that require a python interpreter to
2025-05-14 16:46:43 <@jlebon:fedora.im> - nfs-python-utils (to elminate the python dependency in other packages)
2025-05-14 16:47:26 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> > my current proposal is to let this happen in rawhide and if someone fixes it before F43, great. If not, F43+ will have python 
2025-05-14 16:47:26 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I'm happy for a solution to exist, but would still like to propose:
2025-05-14 16:47:26 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 
2025-05-14 16:47:47 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> IOW we timebox this effort. 
2025-05-14 16:47:51 <@jlebon:fedora.im> I'll note that this is also valuable for rhel-bootc/fedora-bootc minimal image users that just want to add nfs client support
2025-05-14 16:49:16 <@siosm:matrix.org> Let's say, if we haven't fixed this in 2 weeks, we drop the python exclude from Rawhide?
2025-05-14 16:49:24 <@siosm:matrix.org> I don't like it
2025-05-14 16:49:58 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Can we put that in a proposal? 
2025-05-14 16:50:11 <@jlebon:fedora.im> yeah, was going to suggest a similar thing. let's give it some time since it's actively being worked on it seems
2025-05-14 16:50:44 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> to be clear, if python3 gets added to rawhide it doesn't mean we can't remove it later. but we'd want to make sure any "fixing" happens before it hits our stable streams
2025-05-14 16:50:49 <@siosm:matrix.org> it's been in this weird half state for a while now
2025-05-14 16:51:37 <@siosm:matrix.org> Given the version numbers, I expect that we'll have this issue in F42 pretty soon
2025-05-14 16:51:42 <@siosm:matrix.org> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nfs-utils
2025-05-14 16:52:44 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> travier: this may be more related to this commit: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nfs-utils/c/02f028903bda100bc18c5cf9ac85eb085e45251c?branch=rawhide
2025-05-14 16:52:44 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> which is only on `rawhide`
2025-05-14 16:52:44 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 
2025-05-14 16:53:46 <@siosm:matrix.org> interesting, this is unexpected
2025-05-14 16:53:59 <@siosm:matrix.org> anyway, we'll look at it
2025-05-14 16:55:32 <@siosm:matrix.org> I don't have a good proposed so if you have dusty, go for it
2025-05-14 16:55:53 <@siosm:matrix.org> as soon as we drop the exclude, it's going to be harder to re-add it
2025-05-14 16:56:06 <@siosm:matrix.org> I don't really want to do it
2025-05-14 16:57:01 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !proposed we'll wait a few weeks to see if a solution to the problem presents itself. At that point we'll drop the exclude for python for rawhide. If the problem still persists once we switch over to F43 for our stable streams then we'll keep python3 in the base in the future. Anytime before F43 it can be removed without issue if a solution to the problem exists.
2025-05-14 16:57:45 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I only agree if it makes it into stable streams. If it's just rawhide I disagree
2025-05-14 16:58:08 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i think it does in the sense that we then don't notice if something else sneaks in that requires python
2025-05-14 16:58:20 <@siosm:matrix.org> yeah, that's my concern
2025-05-14 16:58:29 <@jlebon:fedora.im> but anyway, +1 to the proposed
2025-05-14 16:58:58 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> It's pretty easy to add a test for that specific case if you are worried about it. `rpm -e python3` and make sure the list in the error message only contains nfs-utils 
2025-05-14 17:00:33 <@siosm:matrix.org> My vote will stay at 0. The proposed is reasonable, but I don't think we should include Python in FCOS so I'm not voting for it;
2025-05-14 17:00:34 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Suggestion: "if the problem hasn't been fixed at that point we'll drop the exclude for python for rawhide"
2025-05-14 17:00:37 <@marmijo:fedora.im> but +1 from me
2025-05-14 17:00:44 <@siosm:matrix.org> My vote will stay at 0. The proposed is reasonable, but I don't think we should include Python in FCOS so I'm not voting for it.
2025-05-14 17:01:40 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> marmijo: want to do a full !proposed ? not sure exactly what edit you want me to make 
2025-05-14 17:02:52 <@marmijo:fedora.im> Sure, the wording could just be interpreted as: "we'll drop the exclude regardless of whether the issue is fixed". I can rewrite it.
2025-05-14 17:03:48 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !proposed we'll wait a few weeks to see if a solution to the problem presents itself. At that point, if the issue hasn't been resolved, we'll drop the exclude for python for rawhide. If the problem still persists once we switch over to F43 for our stable streams then we'll keep python3 in the base in the future. Anytime before F43 it can be removed without issue if a solution to the problem exists.
2025-05-14 17:04:17 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> +1 
2025-05-14 17:05:01 <@marmijo:fedora.im> this vote is in line with a previous decision: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1730#issuecomment-2137959378
2025-05-14 17:05:16 <@jlebon:fedora.im> +1
2025-05-14 17:05:18 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> if that can't be solved the last resort will be to publish the nfs-utils as a sysext I guess :D 
2025-05-14 17:05:29 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> anyway, +1
2025-05-14 17:05:36 <@siosm:matrix.org> 0 :)
2025-05-14 17:05:52 <@aaradhak:matrix.org> +1
2025-05-14 17:05:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 2. If not fixed by the time `next` is rebased to F43 - python3 enters production FCOS streams
2025-05-14 17:05:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 1. If not fixed by June - python3 enters rawhide
2025-05-14 17:05:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 
2025-05-14 17:05:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> TL;DR our milestones are:
2025-05-14 17:06:48 <@siosm:matrix.org> !agreed we'll wait a few weeks to see if a solution to the problem presents itself. At that point, if the issue hasn't been resolved, we'll drop the exclude for python for rawhide. If the problem still persists once we switch over to F43 for our stable streams then we'll keep python3 in the base in the future. Anytime before F43 it can be removed without issue if a solution to the problem exists.
2025-05-14 17:07:09 <@nemric:relativit.fr> I didn't have the strength to say that :D
2025-05-14 17:07:32 <@siosm:matrix.org> !agreed we'll wait a few weeks to see if a solution to the problem presents itself. At that point, if the issue hasn't been resolved, we'll drop the exclude for python for rawhide. If the problem still persists once we switch over to F43 for our stable streams then we'll keep python3 in the base in the future. Anytime before F43 it can be removed without issue if a solution to the problem exists.
2025-05-14 17:07:46 <@siosm:matrix.org> is zodbot out?
2025-05-14 17:08:25 <@siosm:matrix.org> <del>is zodbot out?</del>
2025-05-14 17:08:35 <@marmijo:fedora.im> I see responses from the bot
2025-05-14 17:08:58 <@siosm:matrix.org> Let's move to the next topic
2025-05-14 17:09:03 <@siosm:matrix.org> !topic Migrate existing systems to OCI updates
2025-05-14 17:09:08 <@siosm:matrix.org> !link https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1890
2025-05-14 17:09:30 <@siosm:matrix.org> Dustty/JB who wants to take this one?
2025-05-14 17:09:38 <@siosm:matrix.org> Dusty/JB who wants to take this one?
2025-05-14 17:11:00 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> I added this one, just to send a reminder that we should trigger the migration of the testing stream to deploy-via-OCI on the next update 
2025-05-14 17:11:26 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> so if there are any concern now is the time to raise it :)
2025-05-14 17:12:12 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> The migration script have been shipped for a few releases now and is under /usr/libexec/coreos-oci-rebase
2025-05-14 17:12:13 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> hmm. were we going to do `next` first ? 
2025-05-14 17:12:33 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> it does not do much when executing : simply tell zincati to get the next update via OCI. 
2025-05-14 17:12:44 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> yes sorry
2025-05-14 17:12:50 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> I always mix up next and testing
2025-05-14 17:12:57 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> :) 
2025-05-14 17:13:02 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> so lets game this out
2025-05-14 17:13:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I say we have two releases where `next` has the migration script. Then we can consider enabling it for `testing` (which will flow into `stable`). 
2025-05-14 17:13:57 <@jlebon:fedora.im> hmm, i thought we had the rollout plan written up somewhere
2025-05-14 17:14:25 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> dustymabe: you mean the migration script enabled by default 
2025-05-14 17:14:46 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i see https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1823#issuecomment-2465422672, though that comment is older than i remember the last time talking about this
2025-05-14 17:15:01 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: yes, basically the migration script activated 
2025-05-14 17:15:27 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> we have a few sentences here : https://hackmd.io/U2_VVU2IRV6J_AkF6o7VUA?edit
2025-05-14 17:16:25 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> so it was "for next, on third release after deploy-via-container default in bootimages"
2025-05-14 17:16:39 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> it's been default on bootimages for more than 3 releases I think
2025-05-14 17:16:43 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> :) - we're way past that at this point 
2025-05-14 17:16:48 <@jlebon:fedora.im> dustymabe: i'd say 2 releases is the bare minimum for validating
2025-05-14 17:17:03 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Jonathan Lebon: ok, 3 ? 
2025-05-14 17:17:09 <@jlebon:fedora.im> SGTM
2025-05-14 17:18:18 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> TBH it would make our life easier to just roll this out with the F43 update.. but we're also going to stop shipping any OSTree updates with F43 and I don't think it would be good to do that at the same time
2025-05-14 17:18:25 <@jlebon:fedora.im> that was highly optimistic
2025-05-14 17:18:25 <@jlebon:fedora.im> 
2025-05-14 17:18:25 <@jlebon:fedora.im> > end of march
2025-05-14 17:18:47 <@jlebon:fedora.im> yeah, agree
2025-05-14 17:19:39 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> +1
2025-05-14 17:19:57 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> May 28 - First next release with migration script
2025-05-14 17:19:57 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> June 25 - 3rd ""
2025-05-14 17:19:57 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> July 9th - First testing release with migration script (rolls into `stable` in two weeks) 
2025-05-14 17:19:57 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Jun 11 - 2nd ""
2025-05-14 17:20:14 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> we can push back the decomission of the ostree updates but i don't think it's worth waiting until october
2025-05-14 17:20:27 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> OR should we keep it out of `stable` for longer than the normal promotion? 
2025-05-14 17:21:02 <@jlebon:fedora.im> dustymabe: yeah, was going to suggest that. this is the pattern we normally follow, but for this particular one, update issues need time to manifest
2025-05-14 17:22:03 <@jlebon:fedora.im> though i acknowledge it's awkward too to have testing and stable differ
2025-05-14 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Aug 6 - 3rd
2025-05-14 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> July 9th - First testing release with migration script
2025-05-14 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> July 23 - 2nd
2025-05-14 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Aug 20 - First `stable` release with migration script
2025-05-14 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> May 28 - First next release with migration script
2025-05-14 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Jun 11 - 2nd ""
2025-05-14 17:22:19 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> June 25 - 3rd ""
2025-05-14 17:23:10 <@jlebon:fedora.im> it's crazy when you think of time in 2 week increments how fast you go down the calendar
2025-05-14 17:23:26 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> > Aug 20 - First stable release with migration script
2025-05-14 17:23:26 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> that get quite close to f43 freeze
2025-05-14 17:23:33 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> that get quite close to f43 freeze
2025-05-14 17:23:33 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> > Aug 20 - First stable release with migration script
2025-05-14 17:23:33 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> 
2025-05-14 17:23:39 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Jonathan Lebon: and our release cadence is fast by almost all standards 
2025-05-14 17:24:10 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: that shouldn't affect us
2025-05-14 17:25:22 <@jlebon:fedora.im> dustymabe: yeah, agree re. operational complexity
2025-05-14 17:25:24 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> I know, i am just saying that the timeframe where people will be able to do OCI + ostree to sort out their migration is quite narrower as I had thougt
2025-05-14 17:25:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Jun 11 - 2nd ""
2025-05-14 17:25:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Aug 20 - First `stable` release with migration script enabled
2025-05-14 17:25:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> May 28 - First next release with migration script enabled
2025-05-14 17:25:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> July 23 - 2nd
2025-05-14 17:25:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> July 9th - First testing release with migration script enabled
2025-05-14 17:25:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> June 25 - 3rd ""
2025-05-14 17:25:34 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Aug 6 - 3rd
2025-05-14 17:25:59 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> a little less than 3 months (if f43 is on schedule)
2025-05-14 17:26:13 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> They'll still have til F43 GA - yeah. 3 months should be plenty IMO
2025-05-14 17:26:29 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> and TBH they should have hit this already if they ever deploy any new nodes (since F42) 
2025-05-14 17:27:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I don't have anything else for this topic.. other than we should take this timeline to the ticket 
2025-05-14 17:28:23 <@jlebon:fedora.im> let's go to open floor with the few minutes left
2025-05-14 17:29:45 <@siosm:matrix.org> !topic Open Floor
2025-05-14 17:30:05 <@siosm:matrix.org> (I'll update the ticket with the timeline above)
2025-05-14 17:30:58 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> !info 05/2025 edition of FCOS numbers: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-coreos-numbers-05-2025-edition/153283 
2025-05-14 17:32:19 <@jlebon:fedora.im> wow, aarch64 overtaking x86_64
2025-05-14 17:32:29 <@jlebon:fedora.im> did not expect that
2025-05-14 17:33:02 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Not sure if there is anybody that wants to work on pushing that over the finish line or not
2025-05-14 17:33:02 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Another topic: since there was an afterburn release we are now unblocked on shipping proxmox: https://github.com/coreos/fedora-coreos-tracker/issues/1652
2025-05-14 17:33:02 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 
2025-05-14 17:33:11 <@jlebon:fedora.im> i guess that's mostly podman machine, though?
2025-05-14 17:33:24 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Yeah. TBH I'm not entirely sure
2025-05-14 17:33:35 <@jlebon:fedora.im> would be nice to have that breakdown
2025-05-14 17:34:05 <@jlebon:fedora.im> but i guess it'd require a separate countme bucket
2025-05-14 17:34:13 <@siosm:matrix.org> yep
2025-05-14 17:34:49 <@marmijo:fedora.im> re: proxmox, i'll work on producing official images, and I can also work on a few items in that list.
2025-05-14 17:34:55 <@siosm:matrix.org> or our users use aarch64 as it's usually cheaper in clouds :)
2025-05-14 17:34:58 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> half the people are disabling auto-update
2025-05-14 17:35:25 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: yeah. it's a problem
2025-05-14 17:35:25 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> it's crazy, we work so hard for those to be reliable :(
2025-05-14 17:35:35 <@jlebon:fedora.im> travier: probably some element of it, though i'm dubious it accounts for the bulk of its growth
2025-05-14 17:35:55 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> though I probably need to dig into the numbers more. For example I wonder for the "transient" nodes, what is the release breakdown? 
2025-05-14 17:35:57 <@siosm:matrix.org> agree, it's likely podman desktop growth first
2025-05-14 17:36:04 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> looking forward to see some RISC-V numbers :)
2025-05-14 17:36:36 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: I have a RISC-V system up and running - but the repos it has enabled aren't the Fedora ones (where countme=1 is enabled) 
2025-05-14 17:37:04 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> jbtrystram: I have a RISC-V system up and running - but the repos it has enabled aren't the main Fedora ones (where countme=1 is enabled)
2025-05-14 17:37:09 <@jbtrystram:matrix.org> Nice
2025-05-14 17:37:37 <@nemric:relativit.fr> what are transient nodes ?
2025-05-14 17:38:57 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> they've been up for less than a week
2025-05-14 17:39:15 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> i.e. either brand new nodes.. or batch processing nodes they will get destroyed after they do their work
2025-05-14 17:39:26 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> I just looked and 20233 transient nodes are F40 
2025-05-14 17:39:32 <@nemric:relativit.fr> I mean, does that include live ones ?
2025-05-14 17:39:48 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> likely a single big player that has stabilized on a particular release of F40 based FCOS for batch processing 
2025-05-14 17:40:22 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> It includes any nodes that have only been living for 1 week or less :) 
2025-05-14 17:41:13 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> but yes.. if you run your workloads from "live" media then you'll likely rarely get to a sys_age of 3 or 4 (you might hit 2) 
2025-05-14 17:41:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 3 - Six Months (5-24 weeks)
2025-05-14 17:41:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> ```
2025-05-14 17:41:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> client age
2025-05-14 17:41:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 1 - First week
2025-05-14 17:41:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 2 - First Month (2-4 weeks)
2025-05-14 17:41:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> 4 - More than Six Months (> 24 weeks)
2025-05-14 17:41:49 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> ```
2025-05-14 17:44:23 <@nemric:relativit.fr> yes, I reboot every 2 weeks, and if needed for some k8s/cri-o updates, so I'm surfing between transiant and static
2025-05-14 17:44:44 <@nemric:relativit.fr> yes, I reboot every 2 weeks, and if needed for some k8s/cri-o updates, so I'm surfing between transient and static
2025-05-14 17:45:53 <@siosm:matrix.org> Alright, let's close this meeting
2025-05-14 17:46:02 <@siosm:matrix.org> we're overtime
2025-05-14 17:46:29 <@siosm:matrix.org> !endmeeting