Meeting started at 2026-07-01 18:00:31 UTC

The Meeting name is 'EPEL (2026-07-01)'

The Meeting Name is now epel

!hi

Diego Herrera: Diego Herrera (dherrera) - he / him / his

!hi

Robby Callicotte: Robby Callicotte (rcallicotte) - he / him / his

!howdy

one day i'll implement that shortcut

!hi

Carl George: Carl George (carlwgeorge) - he / him / his

Hehe

!hi

No Fedora Accounts users have the @jakubsencak:matrix.org Matrix Account defined

Hi Diego Herrera Robby Callicotte Carl George and Jakub Senčák

Jakub Senčák: Welcome. Are you here for a sepecific reason, or just to see how things work?

Let's start by finishing up the issue from last week.

!epel 367

● **Assignee:** Not Assigned

● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by salimma

**epel/steering #367** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/epel/steering/issues/367):**(Slightly) incompatible update for EPEL 8 and 9: p7zip -> 7zip**

● **Last Updated:** 6 days ago

Issue querying Pagure: Issue not found

I don't know if Michel Lind ☘ UTC+1 ⏱️ is going to make it this week, but this is what he said on the epel channel a little bit ago.

"update on what's discussed in the meeting last week - I'm working on 7zip for epel 9 today - there was one bug the reporting user felt passionate about and also a 26.02 update that ominously said has security fixes but did not specify, so I'm building those fixes for Fedora first then branching and building, then I'll announce it while the package is on the way to testing"

So it sounds like he's testing everything in Fedora before bringing it over to EPEL9.

Anyway, sounds like he's progressing in the recommended manor.

Does anyone have anything else they want to comment on about this issue?

it's already approved so i consider it a done deal from the committee side, just good to be aware of the rollout

I'm here ish

!hi

Michel Lind ☘ UTC+1 ⏱️: Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his

hi here ish, i'm dad

Lol

Was dealing with a gum in shoe incident that happened in a playground, fittingly enough

So yeah I'll post to epel-announce and might poke the room to get someone to approve it

Are we ok taking the meeting tag off? And we'll put it back on if we need to?

OK, moving on to the other issue ... I just put the meeting tag on, which I should have done a day or two ago.

!epel 368

**epel/steering #368** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/epel/steering/issues/368):**Proposed incompatible update / retirement: syncthing v1.30 -> v2**

● **Opened:** a week ago by decathorpe

● **Last Updated:** 2 minutes ago

● **Assignee:** Not Assigned

Issue querying Pagure: Issue not found

There isn't much there, it's mostly in the email here - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/ONAGYZSMJ7HJQWFSODWMVQPYSGQMJGYP/

For me, the retirement from epel 8 and 9 ... well, that's not really something we need to vote on. And he's doing it in a well publicized manner, so it shouldn't be a surprise.

yup, i trust fabio to handle this appropriately with all necessary announcements, both for the retirement and incompat

i'm +1

I'm a +1 also, but I'd like a short summary of what is happening. Making it easier to see what is happening.

i might reply about the el8/el9 golang versions, it might not be necessary to retire

rhel9, c9, and c10 all have the same version (1.26.4)

rhel8 is older but checking gitlab it seems 1.26 is on the way

Does anyone have any problems with him updating syncthing to v2 in EPEL 10.3 and 10.2 ?

this is the nature of golang epel apps build on the rolling golang appstream

so i see two +1s

yeah, +1

We need 1 more for a majority ... Robby Callicotte do you have an opinion on this issue?

I was looking into upstream database migration process, and it seems that they have it well documented

Looks like Robby dropped for a bit ... Let's hold the vote at +3, and if anyone else from the committee wants to vote, we can open it back up then.

Sorry. I'm back

+1

Thanks.

I'll put it in the issue, also stating that we don't vote on dropping packages, but that it's good to advertise as he is doing so people know.

And with that, let's move to Old Business.

Does anyone have any Old Business?

Last week we talked about finding a new time for our meetings.

I'm not trying to pressure you, but just remind someone that they volunteered to create a survey.

Is there any other Old Business?

i said last week i would send in an incompat for caddy in epel9 (similar scenario as syncthing) but i haven't finished writing it up yet

i'll send it once i'm able, and we can vote at the next meeting after a full week

Moving on to Open Floor.

Does anyone have anything for Open Floor?

i think Jakub Senčák was joining us to talk about epel11 ideas

Hi :) yes, but the talk that we had last time was a bit... complicated. We ended up stuck on the maintainer ownership issue.

yeah that will be key to any batch creation of branches and/or builds

for everyone else's context, me, jsencak, Troy Dawson, and yselkowitz had a meeting last week to start this discussion

or at least, start asking questions 😁

So, do we want to discuss it now? Or possibly wait for next weeks open office?

So, do we want to discuss it now? Or possibly wait for next weeks office hours?

verbal is nice for this sort of thing

Yeah, it ight more reasonable. I still have so much to learn about the whole thing.

Yeah, it might more reasonable. I still have so much to learn about the whole thing.

i will plant a thought seed for people to think about before that discussion: content resolver plans out workloads and their dependencies. on the rhel side, employees (or rather teams) can be assigned to each package brought in. on the epel side (and eln-extras), the people who create the workloads don't necessarily have commit access to all the packages brought in, can't be "assigned" as volunteers, and the existing maintainers can't be forced to maintain epel branches. that difference will be the key problem to solve i think.

discussing it on the devel list could also work. But from what I'm understanding, this is in still early stages and needs higher bandwith, so verbal is good

We're also fairly short on time in this meeting, short enough that we're not going to get much more than what Carl said above.

yeah i didn't mean to open the whole can of worms, just give people a peek at the worms

We've got 5 minutes left. Anything else for Open Floor before we end the meeting?

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cjson/pull-request/4

if anyone wants to review it, i've got a pending pr for an important cve fix in cjson. the pr is to rawhide, but its compatible so epel9+ can be fast-forwarded to it.

it's Jonathan Wright's package, but extra review helps, especially if he's too busy to take a look

Looks good to me. Fairly simple patch, but changing it to Autolog makes it look huge.

yeah looking per commit helps

Looks like we are out of time. Thank you all for the good discussions, and thank you all for all you do for EPEL and it's community.

Talk to ya'll next week, if not sooner.

Thanks Troy ^^