2025-07-22 17:03:20 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !startmeeting FESCO (2025-07-22)

2025-07-22 17:03:21 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-07-22 17:03:20 UTC
2025-07-22 17:03:21 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'FESCO (2025-07-22)'
2025-07-22 17:03:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !meetingname fesco
2025-07-22 17:03:25 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting Name is now fesco
2025-07-22 17:03:29 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !group members fesco
2025-07-22 17:03:29 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !topic Init Process
2025-07-22 17:03:31 <@zodbot:fedora.im> **Usage:** !group members <groupname>
2025-07-22 17:03:32 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-22 17:03:34 <@fale:fale.io> !hi
2025-07-22 17:03:34 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)
2025-07-22 17:03:36 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning.
2025-07-22 17:03:36 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fabio Alessandro Locati (fale) - he / him / his
2025-07-22 17:03:38 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-22 17:03:39 <@zodbot:fedora.im> David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
2025-07-22 17:03:54 <@humaton:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-22 17:03:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Tomáš Hrčka (humaton) - he / him / his
2025-07-22 17:04:02 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-22 17:04:02 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> We have quourum.
2025-07-22 17:04:02 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-22 17:04:03 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2025-07-22 17:04:04 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
2025-07-22 17:04:49 <@salimma:fedora.im> quourum, the British spelling of quorum
2025-07-22 17:04:51 <@salimma:fedora.im> :P
2025-07-22 17:05:09 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> All those extra letters just make it seriouser. It's a feature of the language.
2025-07-22 17:05:13 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> so it's pronounced kwoo-rum?
2025-07-22 17:05:59 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> (as opposed to kwoh-rum ;)) 
2025-07-22 17:06:39 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I'm here
2025-07-22 17:06:41 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !topic #3445 Change: Filter Fedora Flatpaks for Atomic Desktops
2025-07-22 17:06:41 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3445
2025-07-22 17:06:55 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Sorry, was running late from lunch and my phone Matrix app wasn't connecting
2025-07-22 17:07:16 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> There were a few messages in the ticket.
2025-07-22 17:07:18 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I have not read the stuff in the last 18 hours or whatever. I don't think I want to vote on this today... FWIW
2025-07-22 17:07:21 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> PTAL if you haven't today.
2025-07-22 17:07:55 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I have not read the stuff in the last 12 hours or whatever. I don't think I want to vote on this today... FWIW
2025-07-22 17:08:04 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-07-22 17:08:05 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-07-22 17:08:15 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I did actually read the blog post from @mcatanzaro a couple hours ago. It's quite a good breakdown.
2025-07-22 17:08:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I don't want to vote on this today.
2025-07-22 17:08:38 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I read it, but I need time to think about how I want to discuss it.
2025-07-22 17:08:44 <@fale:fale.io> the part that is not very clear to me is the relation between "let's filter some flatpaks" with "we like flathub or not
2025-07-22 17:08:58 <@salimma:fedora.im> is Firefox a flatpak on Silverblue? or RPM
2025-07-22 17:09:03 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> RPM
2025-07-22 17:09:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> ah ok. but it's an example of "if you're on ARM, surprise surprise flathub is incomplete" - I'm sure there are other examples
2025-07-22 17:09:37 <@salimma:fedora.im> surely if flathub does not have a package it's better to show the Fedora flatpak than have nothing
2025-07-22 17:09:45 <@salimma:fedora.im> separate from "what if both provide a package for a given arch"
2025-07-22 17:09:52 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I don't particularly want to have even implied Flathub over Fedora
2025-07-22 17:10:25 <@salimma:fedora.im> I need to read Catanzaro's essay on this too
2025-07-22 17:10:56 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> I started reading it this morning but then got pulled in to an urgent thing, as is every workday
2025-07-22 17:11:00 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> OK, so we have three (unless I missed someone) fesco people saying that they need more time. Michael also mentioned that in the ticket.
2025-07-22 17:11:08 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Ah, four.
2025-07-22 17:11:19 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yeah this is too early to vote IMO
2025-07-22 17:11:36 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Something I proposed the last time this topic came up (years ago) was allowing distributions to sign Flathub flatpaks such that we could essentially give them a Fedora Seal of Approval to specific ones. Just want to throw that back into the ring...
2025-07-22 17:12:07 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> based on what critera?
2025-07-22 17:12:11 <@salimma:fedora.im> did Michael actually suggest replacing even RPMs like Firefox with Fedora flatpaks?
2025-07-22 17:12:12 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !info Some lengthy comments were posted today, so we'll give people at one more week to catch up and discuss.
2025-07-22 17:12:16 <@fale:fale.io> My read of the proposal is not about flathub but filtering fedora flatpaks... am I missing something?
2025-07-22 17:12:20 <@salimma:fedora.im> (for Silverblue, since I read it as "only for image based OS")
2025-07-22 17:12:50 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> nirik: "Has passed a packaging review and this particular flatpak has been through Bodhi"
2025-07-22 17:13:19 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Silverblue aims to try to use Flatpak Firefox, but Kinoite will not
2025-07-22 17:13:36 <@salimma:fedora.im> FWIW for his proposal -- as opposed to the proposal in the ticket - I quite like turning off GNOME Software's ability to manage RPMs by default. just saying
2025-07-22 17:13:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> The ability to remove the default browser is an unwanted capability since it leaves users without the ability to discover documentation in failure cases
2025-07-22 17:13:52 <@salimma:fedora.im> we get more confusion by internal users asking why they have two package caches than we get benefits
2025-07-22 17:14:11 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> (the two package cache thing is gone with the dnf5daemon thing for g-s)
2025-07-22 17:14:24 <@salimma:fedora.im> oh, finally. so ... since f42? or f43
2025-07-22 17:14:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> f43
2025-07-22 17:14:36 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> the average user simply wants to install the one that works and they don't care where it comes from or who built it
2025-07-22 17:14:54 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there is no such thing as the "average user" for us
2025-07-22 17:15:11 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> let's not use a nonexistent entity as a scapegoat for arguments here
2025-07-22 17:15:11 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> By filtering fedora flatpaks, the ones from flathub are always selected when possible. So this is effectively about picking the latter.
2025-07-22 17:15:28 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> dcantrell: The same average user who plugs a USB key they found on the ground into their computer to see what's on it? :-)
2025-07-22 17:15:31 <@fale:fale.io> zbyszek: if the user has enabled flathub, sure
2025-07-22 17:15:48 <@salimma:fedora.im> we can ask "ok among fesco members who use flathub". I do for some software, so I suspect among non-packagers / non-developers it is quite common
2025-07-22 17:16:06 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Fale: yeah, but the assumption (apparently backed by data) is that most users have that.
2025-07-22 17:16:09 <@salimma:fedora.im> so I think just saying "no flathub, full stop" is not a viable option
2025-07-22 17:16:18 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> just to make sure - is there much value in having a discussion today if >50% of us say we need more time to discuss this?
2025-07-22 17:16:26 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there isn't
2025-07-22 17:16:26 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> I use flathub for things we don't provide
2025-07-22 17:16:32 <@salimma:fedora.im> I think we should punt
2025-07-22 17:16:34 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Fabio Valentini: Not willing to vote != not worth discussing
2025-07-22 17:16:42 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> same
2025-07-22 17:16:55 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> which is only three applications
2025-07-22 17:17:05 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> all of them are horrible electron apps
2025-07-22 17:17:07 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Me too. Two or three apps.
2025-07-22 17:17:29 <@dcantrell:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: you know the hypothetical I'm talking about.  the user who is using a computer to complete a task, not someone like us who use computers simply because we want to use computers and like difficult shit.  if Fedora is not interested in catering to the former, then we're just coming to agreement on how complicated we want things to be
2025-07-22 17:17:30 <@davide:cavalca.name> (a vetted subset of) flathub to backfill things that Fedora doesn't ship seems reasonable to me; prioritizing flathub over things that Fedora ships IMO defeats the purpose of having a distribution in the first place
2025-07-22 17:17:39 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I use it for some things... less since I am on aarch64 now (no chrome, no zoom, no discord)
2025-07-22 17:18:01 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Atomic Fedora for non-x86 should just end if we do this, they are not useful products in that case
2025-07-22 17:18:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> Davide Cavalca: note that Michael's position is more pro-flathub than you - he was saying only default apps should be fedora flatpaks, the assumption being presumably that we could retire most of the others
2025-07-22 17:18:53 <@salimma:fedora.im> but yeah it will be funny if you only build some fedora flatpaks for aarch but not for x86 - won't even save much time on the builders since they are just repackaged RPMs right
2025-07-22 17:19:15 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> also unlike RPMs, fedora flatpaks are automatic
2025-07-22 17:19:38 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> "Automatic" in what sense?
2025-07-22 17:20:02 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> they do not require manual effort to build and rebuild
2025-07-22 17:20:21 <@davide:cavalca.name> yeah my main point is that Linux distributions exist to ship software to users; if we abdicate this and instead just ship content from flathub, an entity we have no control over and with quality and licensing policies vastly different from ours, it removes a lot of value for Fedora users
2025-07-22 17:20:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> (my understanding is that this isn't done yet, but nothing stops yselkowitz from just doing a cron job of builds and rebuilds now)
2025-07-22 17:21:12 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> git work isn't required to build flatpaks from our content
2025-07-22 17:21:15 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> well, the fact that the flatpak build pipeline has been broken since the DC move kinda does prevent it :)
2025-07-22 17:21:27 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Which is why I think there could still be value in Fedora as a signatory rather than a producer of this content.
2025-07-22 17:21:34 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> well there is that, but lots of things broke with the DC move
2025-07-22 17:21:55 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> There's only a very few left (like that one)
2025-07-22 17:22:13 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> !hi
2025-07-22 17:22:14 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Yaakov Selkowitz (yselkowitz)
2025-07-22 17:22:31 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Hi Yaakov. Welcome to the discussion.
2025-07-22 17:23:15 <@fale:fale.io> ratifying flathub's might be even harder than producing flatpaks, since flathub structure and policies are very different from Fedora's
2025-07-22 17:23:17 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> We are not going to vote. 
2025-07-22 17:23:18 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> alas no
2025-07-22 17:23:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but I don't like all these attempts to end-run around Fedora contributors
2025-07-22 17:23:57 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> nirik: We agreed not to vote, not to skip the discussion
2025-07-22 17:24:09 <@salimma:fedora.im> yeah
2025-07-22 17:24:19 <@salimma:fedora.im> what about we just let Fedora Workstation WG sort this out first
2025-07-22 17:24:30 <@salimma:fedora.im> since they've been working on this for... a few months now
2025-07-22 17:24:56 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ok. I don't feel like I can fully contribute to the discussion because I haven't read the things you all are reacting to... but ok.
2025-07-22 17:24:58 <@salimma:fedora.im> and say unless Workstation WG give up and ask FESCo to decide, let them decide at least for the Workstation product (which includes Silverblue iirc)
2025-07-22 17:25:23 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there are some things about Michael's blog post that have deeply upset me too :(
2025-07-22 17:25:38 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> note that the change proposal (last I checked) would affect all atomic desktops, not just silverblue though
2025-07-22 17:25:48 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I don't know how to respond to it without feeling like I'm going off the rails
2025-07-22 17:26:16 <@salimma:fedora.im> yup, in which case we can reject it and say hey let Workstation finish their deliberations first
2025-07-22 17:26:20 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Michel Lind UTC-5: I think this goes further than the Workstationg WG. It's about setting the general development direction. So I don't think we should send this back to the WG at this point.
2025-07-22 17:26:25 <@salimma:fedora.im> (note: not voting today, just suggesting an option)
2025-07-22 17:26:32 <@salimma:fedora.im> ah, fair
2025-07-22 17:26:36 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Correct me if I'm wrong, but Michael's blog post ALSO advised against making Flathub the preferred provider *at this time*.
2025-07-22 17:26:36 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I don't think we can send it back to the WG at all
2025-07-22 17:26:53 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> his blog post self-contradicts
2025-07-22 17:27:11 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> It was optimistic about eventually making Flathub good enough to be in that position
2025-07-22 17:27:15 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it is _pro forma_ the preferred provider by filtering out everything
2025-07-22 17:27:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ie being preferred without explicitly saying so
2025-07-22 17:27:42 <@salimma:fedora.im> Timothee or Michael?
2025-07-22 17:27:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Michael
2025-07-22 17:28:01 <@salimma:fedora.im> Timothee's CP seems mostly aligned with Michael's blog post - they both say "Fedora flatpaks for default apps"
2025-07-22 17:28:08 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> well, more like ... "the scales will be tipped more towards flathub being the better option in the future [me doubts], but not necessarily *right now*"
2025-07-22 17:28:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the CP text is not explicitly sayin it, Michael's blog post does
2025-07-22 17:28:35 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the CP text is not explicitly saying it, Michael's blog post does
2025-07-22 17:29:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the _intent_ is to make Flathub the default provider by simply eliminating the possibility of Fedora Flatpaks showing up
2025-07-22 17:29:33 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I thought Michael's was saying the opposite:
2025-07-22 17:29:37 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and this is particularly an issue with Workstation because Flatpak > RPM order means no Fedora content is ever surfaced
2025-07-22 17:29:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> It's less of an issue in KDE because RPM > Flatpak order
2025-07-22 17:29:55 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> We'd build the default apps in the Fedora Flatpak system and prefer those for that use-case and Flathub for other things
2025-07-22 17:30:07 <@yselkowitz:fedora.im> but kinoite...?
2025-07-22 17:30:18 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> (I don't necessarily agree, but I think that was what was proposed by Michael)
2025-07-22 17:30:23 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yeah, I'm opposed to this for Kinoite on principle too
2025-07-22 17:31:11 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> (I'm getting a headache and this discussion isn't helping - I need to step away from glowing pixels for a bit)
2025-07-22 17:31:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> tbh, I don't really want to discuss this issue at all either
2025-07-22 17:32:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it's extremely upsetting to me as a Fedora contributor
2025-07-22 17:32:51 <@salimma:fedora.im> bring this back to the ticket? (I get the same feeling everytime flatpaks come up and both those meetings are on Tuesdays)
2025-07-22 17:33:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> OK, so for the meeting summary:
2025-07-22 17:33:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !link https://yselkowitz.github.io/blog/2025/02/25/the-case-for-fedora-flatpaks.html
2025-07-22 17:33:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !link https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2025/07/21/fedora-must-carefully-embrace-flathub/
2025-07-22 17:33:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/proposal-enable-flathub-by-default/157011
2025-07-22 17:33:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-filter-fedora-flatpaks-for-atomic-desktops-self-contained/157262
2025-07-22 17:33:45 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/463
2025-07-22 17:34:16 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> OK, let's move on.
2025-07-22 17:34:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !topic Next week's chair
2025-07-22 17:34:32 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Volunteers? 
2025-07-22 17:34:55 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I should be able to do it.
2025-07-22 17:35:07 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !action Stephen will chair next meeting
2025-07-22 17:35:09 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Thanks!
2025-07-22 17:35:15 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor
2025-07-22 17:36:35 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> A long cab ride may be required ;)
2025-07-22 17:36:49 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Anyway, if we have nothing, I'll close in a minute.
2025-07-22 17:36:51 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Oh, I had one small thing...
2025-07-22 17:36:54 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Go!
2025-07-22 17:37:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> we have several nonresponsive maintainer tickets... reminder that the process for these is not like other tickets. It's not a majority vote and approved.
2025-07-22 17:37:30 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/#steps
2025-07-22 17:37:50 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Yep, they require extra handling.
2025-07-22 17:37:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so, we should remember to process them right.
2025-07-22 17:38:06 <@salimma:fedora.im> no no, it just means I have plausible deniability if I don't vote ;)
2025-07-22 17:39:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> thats all. :)
2025-07-22 17:39:54 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> nirik: I didn't think I did anything wrong, but sorry if I did
2025-07-22 17:39:55 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> yeah, we should double-check that the last 2-3 tickets were handled correctly. for example, Kai has responded in ticket, so it shouldn't be marked as approved, right?
2025-07-22 17:41:33 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Conan Kudo: no worries... it's a bit confusing a process...
2025-07-22 17:42:02 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> and Miro posted something on Rex' ticket, the @ -mention reminder at week 2 was missing 
2025-07-22 17:42:03 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> especially because it's time based
2025-07-22 17:42:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Fabio Valentini: he's been gone since 2023, he hasn't responded to any emails in a year
2025-07-22 17:42:30 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> I hope I handled the one for fab correctly but I tried to follow the policy document 
2025-07-22 17:43:01 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> sure, but that's not really a reason to skip a step that won't change the outcome anyway
2025-07-22 17:43:04 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> anyhow, just wanted to raise awareness... if someone wants to check the pending ones that would be great, or I can try to later too.
2025-07-22 17:43:35 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> well, it's a problem with some of the KDE stuff that only has rex as the owner
2025-07-22 17:43:45 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> most of the SIG are not provenpackagers and cannot bypass ACLs
2025-07-22 17:44:05 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> the difference would've been a few days at most
2025-07-22 17:44:21 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we wanted to have things fixed before tomorrows mass build..
2025-07-22 17:44:21 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> Since we're discussing process, another thing: if you're voting, and it's past the one-week or two-week boundary, then immediately set the vote tally and `pending-announcement` label. This allows people who are waiting for the vote result to proceed without waiting for chair to get around to the ticket.
2025-07-22 17:44:48 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> being spammed with FTBFS errors is not fun :(
2025-07-22 17:45:08 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> or worse, FTI issues
2025-07-22 17:45:12 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> And especially for FastTrack. There the result can be set if there were 7 votes.
2025-07-22 17:46:24 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> OK, if nothing else, let's wrap this wrap.
2025-07-22 17:46:30 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> See y'all next week, traffic permitting. 
2025-07-22 17:46:43 <@zbyszek:fedora.im> !endmeeting