Meeting started at 2026-05-18 19:00:28 UTC

The Meeting name is 'Fedora Infrastructure Ops Daily Standup Meeting'

hello

morning.

!next

Run `!ticket #<number>` for each ticket, discuss and classify. DON'T DO THIS FOR PRIVATE TICKETS.

!ticket 13349

● **Assignee:** Not Assigned

● **Last Updated:** 2 days ago

● **Opened:** 2 days ago by omajid

**infra/tickets #13349** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/13349):**Request creation of copr-only group rpminspect**

Issue querying Pagure: Issue not found

1pt / low / d2d?

Hey

I think 1pt is fine.

sure.

is there any difference between a normal FAS group and a copr group?

let's move to the next one

!ticket 13350

Issue querying Pagure: Issue not found

**infra/tickets #13350** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/13350):**TLS certificate for `centos-integration` service is about to expire in 30 days**

● **Opened:** a day ago by firmitas-automata

● **Last Updated:** 2 hours ago

● **Assignee:** firmitas-automata

no, but there's different between normal fas groups and package groups...

I asked greg about some things in this one.

low 1pt day-to-day for now?

agreed

!ticket 13351

● **Last Updated:** Never

● **Assignee:** Not Assigned

● **Opened:** 19 hours ago by ryanlerch

**infra/tickets #13351** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/13351):**VM for hosting pagure.io static archive on staging**

Issue querying Pagure: Issue not found

med 3 pts (or 5?) day to day?

Basically we just need to define a pagure-stg-ro01 or something thats similar to the existing pagure-stg01...

i would do 3, what does @James think?

I'm not sure ... so would lean towards 5. But reading it feels like they just want a static webserver with an IP and some storage, which isn't that hard from our end.

5 it is then

So 3 I guess.

ha

and now what? :D

yeah, implementation is on ryan... we are just setting up the vm.

we need to know what os also...

hopefully not rhel8.

Yeh, go 3 then ... we can decide again based on XP when they request the one for prod. ;)

okay, 3 points and ill ask what os he wants the vm to run

Given it's just a static server they should be fine with rhel10

hopefully yes

If they want rhel8 I'm saying 13 pts ;)

if they want rhel8 im closing the issue (joking)

ha

that is all

!next

so... i'm working on more rhel10 migrations. I found out my problem when trying to install the new dedicated solutions by trying on osuosl02. ;)

currently working on: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/ansible/pulls/3359

i did this: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/ansible/commit/4cf99e088abfa4ff489cb41613984c40d583ef8f (+ nagged Greg to run the playbook for me)

James: should we file a mass update/reboot ticket to track what we want to do in it, (scheduling to be determined) or just wait until we decide more?

I can open a ticket this week ... I'm pretty sure I want to do it the week of the 1st, so not a big rush.

sure. There's a few other things I might want to do then too... (proxies upgrades, builders, etc) but we can figure it out

Yeh.

@nirik wanted to ask about your comment on the #3359 PR

do you want the script to try and pull it from the cluster? currently i just parse the files we have in roles/openshift-apps/APP

well, I was picturing just a static file, so you are already above that. ;) but... I am not sure how we can tell in a lot of cases.

I mean if we pull image foo:latest from someplace. How do you tell whats in it?

I've been catching up on random things ... want to get the pagure hack I did on Thu. into an rpm, maybe not finish today though.

Do the images not have /etc/os-release files?

well the obvious fix is to just not use :latest, but that's probably not the kind of fix we are looking for

Not always. I don't think things like alpine have those...

well, it's a layered image probibly, so we do want the latest app, but we don't know what base os image it's using.

so it might be fedora 38 with the latest waiverdb layered on it.

but really we can't know 100% from a script, thats why I was thinking we would need a static thing for a human to update in some cases.

well the script accepts notes

https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/ansible/pulls/3359/files#diff-fb079e9eb8ee1d6e3bcdfd747b867d912e7905e4

so we can manually match stuff/replace + add notes

yeah, saw that... sounds good

I don't have much more aside that I am annoyed at rhel10.1...

what happened in 10.1?

i could try querying the pods from ocp directly, but i think that would be just over-engineering it

but if you want i can do it

In some ways I think it'd be better to query the images instead of the build files to create the images ... because sometimes they don't get rebuilt that often.

But I'm not sure if you can easily query the images, without using `oc` commands.

we could (teoreticly) just run the oc command in a CI pipeline and then somehow feed it to the script

ill have to think about it

so you mean oc rsh into pods and looking?

I think that could be very complex very fast.

vnc dropped 'use rdp', but the kickstart rdp directive isn't added (like it is in fedora).

welp, yeah

i'll think about it, we could just fill it in the notes and manualy update those

yeah, unless someone else has already written a 'os checker' thing?

seems like something someone would have made

ill search around

times up