Meeting started at 2026-07-07 16:01:40 UTC

The Meeting name is 'ELN SIG 07 Jul '26'

The Meeting Name is now eln

!hi

Davide Cavalca: Davide Cavalca (dcavalca) - he / him / his

!hi

jligon: Jeff Ligon (jligon)

!hi

Stephen Gallagher: Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his

!hi

James Troy: James Troy (bhoy-troy)

!hi

Simon de Vlieger: Simon de Vlieger (supakeen) - he / him / his

!hi

Troy Dawson: Troy Dawson (tdawson)

ok let's get started

[jligon](https://matrix.to/#/@jligon:matrix.org) we're getting really close iiuc?

so close!

going back to renaming the tenants, so we can do standard instead of minimal-plus

so question for you, once all this gets done and there are images in quay.io/bootc-devel, do you know what would sync them to quay.io/fedora?

the tenant itself should have a push secret to put it there

or would it just be another tag for that same image?

no, we should have a separate quay.io/fedora/eln-bootc image, just like we have separate eln-named images for other containers

ok, seems doable

do we need another robot account on quay to push it there?

idk, probably need to ask releng

seems like a job for me

it's in the same quay org, so maybe not?

if you could, but please cc me

of course

so, so close...

[Simon de Vlieger](https://matrix.to/#/@supakeen:fedora.im) there's going to be a release soon with the latest config changes?

yes i can click the button at any moment but normally it'd be on wednesday

i would like to (if no one has concerns) start migrating some of the image types currently produced to use `image-builder` in the pungi config(s) next week

which ones? eln doesn't have configs for the cloud images yet iirc

I would start with the guest image (`qcow2`) initially, any cloud images will also need coordination with Jeremy Cline for the upload parts.

But those would be the likely followup (`ec2`, `azure`, `gce`).

fwiw, I was thinking about creating a rhel-11 config similar to rhel-10 with the eln changes and having eln use that instead, thoughts? or do you really want to stick with the "experimental" separate config files?

For now I'd prefer to stick with them; once these configs move out of our repository and into the Fedora forge everyone is free to organize how they please.

If you have concerns we can merge them back into a single file though :)

wrt uploading, I thought it was based on subvariant names, so as long as they match the current ones they should just work? or am I missing something?

There might be metadata that's required to be communicated; for example the boot mode of an uploaded AMI.

(that might also /not/ be a problem, but hence I'll need to have a chat with Jeremy about it)

as for what we start building with image-builder, it should look like what we would expect rhel/cs 11 to do

e.g. what about https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ModernizeBootISO ?

Yep; aside from RHUI and CVM images I think?

yes within the limitations of eln itself of course

Well, that will be a toggle in the configs. We probably want that for RHEL-11 but it won't automatically land in ELN without someones intervention.

so the goal for rhel 11 is to use image-builder for all these things?

We already use `image-builder` for all these things in RHEL 9 and 10 at the moment; I think it'll be the same for 11.

Ah, aside from the `boot.iso` but it's a complicated story; we /do/ want that also on `image-builder` for 11.

ok then that should be the goal for eln

so we have some more work to do in that regard

Shouldn't be much work; we could swap over the `boot.iso` right now for ELN (though I haven't validated it) as we can already produce them. The RHEL composes currently don't make that ISO with `image-builder` though :)

Shouldn't be much work; we could swap over the `boot.iso` right now for ELN (though I haven't validated it) as we can already produce them. The RHEL/CentOS/Fedora composes currently don't make that ISO with `image-builder` though :)

but if the goal is to do so for 11 then eln should lead, not follow

Ok, this is soon to land in rawhide (hopefully within the next few weeks) do you want me to also apply immediately to ELN or lag it a bit?

well I'd like to validate it first but we should proceed

And I know there are ideas floating around for switching ELN over to the webui, the two things don't necessarily collide but is there a timeframe for that?

good question, haven't heard from the anaconda folks in a while

I have a meeting with them on thursday, I'll ask.

thanks

Let's make it an action item that I'll PR the ELN pungi configs with the 'safe' things to swap (e.g. no 3rd party dependencies on it in regards to uploads) and then we can discuss there which ones we want to land when?

Thank you 🙂

thank *you* for all the work on this

[Stephen Gallagher](https://matrix.to/#/@sgallagh:fedora.im) ?

I have *news*!

We are moving off of the CentOS Stream hosting and onto Fedora Infrastructure. As of about three minutes ago, I've stopped the CS instance. (It was fortuitous: it happened to be in the period between the Bodhi update submission and the builds hitting the `eln` tag)

James will be helping me push it to production within the next hour

🎉 🎉

We also got approval from FESCo to land the draft build support in EBS. I'll be looking into that next, but I'm going to hold off deploying that until I'm back from the PTO I'll be taking next week

I'll be looking into the Koji Hub Policy later today or tomorrow and prepping a merge request for that as well, in preparation.

If things go well, I *may* try the Draft Build work out in the staging environment this week, but we're definitely holding off on production until I get back

I think that's the highlights reel. Questions?

No, I'm just happy that we get draft builds :)

thank you, this has been a long time coming

[James Troy](https://matrix.to/#/@bhoy-troy:fedora.im) is a new member on our team, and has been working on CR

Welcome!

he has it ported to dnf5 with a ~2x speedup as a result

just doing final reviews and testing, but hopefully that will be live fairly soon too

so 2-3 hours per run instead of 6-7, so much less lag time

any conflicts next week?

I will not be around, as previously noted.

I should be here

Same.

I guess one thing

Since I was just reminded of it this morning: next week is the Fedora 45 mass-rebuild. That will trigger a flurry of activity as Fedora and ELN fixes build failures. Be ready.

and we did an ELN mass rebuild recently, ~17 failures remaining plus ~8 packages not yet ported to openssl 4.0

https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/571

As far as the images, I'd hoped to see progress on using Konflux and using container technology to build those

welcome [Colin Walters](https://matrix.to/#/@walters:fedora.im)

see above wrt bootc

as for the others, we're following the lead of the image-builder team, see above

what were you expecting to be different?

I think the ISO should look more like https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ModernizeBootISO personally

that was discussed earlier and is now planned for eln

but would still be in koji iiuc

moving fedora builds of anything (besides bootc) to konflux is an entirely different discussion

and we only have 3 minutes left :-)

I don't think it's a separate discussion - we are investing in Konflux, also it would actively help some discussions I've had if custom ISOs were buildable as containers

sorry we don't have time for it here today, but if you could please file a ticket at https://github.com/fedora-eln/eln/issues/new/choose we can discuss further

we're out of time, so I'm going to have to cut this short

but thank you all for your work and for being here today, see you in channel or back here next week