Meeting started at 2026-02-18 18:00:25 UTC

The Meeting name is 'fedora-server '

I'll post the agenda in 2-3 minutes.

As usual, let's wait a moment for everybody to show up.

Welcome to our weekly Server WG meeting.

!hi

Jocelyn Gould (korora) - she / her / hers

Hi Jocelyn!

Very active again.

!hello

Emmanuel Seyman (eseyman) - he / him / his

For the record, I’m on mobile and might have typos. LOL (or be slow to respond.)

Yeah, these mobiles are not the ideal devices for typing. But I get the typos also done on my bog laptop keyboard. :-)

OK, we are 3 members, so we have our quorum and can start (until I re-read our governance paper more closely I thought we would need more than 3)

Anything to add or remove ?

Obviously not. Let's start

Regarding the actions, please look at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/server-working-group/wg-minutes-2026/

There is nothing overwhelmingly new. Just current business.

I have nothing to announce at the moment. The decision about the CfPs for Flock is running. So we have to wait.

!hello

Steve Daley (mowest)

Hi mowest!

Hi, Steve

Anyone else with an announcement to make?

Hey Steve!

Hello, was late because I was reading Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): email 😁

Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): what do you call 'topics' in our repository?

No announcement from me

> what do you call 'topics' in our repository?

I think that's part of the next agenda topic here, isn't it?

Not sure. Let's see

OK, lets proceed

Tracking ticket: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/server/tickets/issues/183

We should only discuss this today and make decisions later, probably next meeting.

I made a more detailed draft proposal as a comment further down

I have a few nitpicks but, overall, I like the most recent proposal a lot

I have no feedback on the draft proposal, but am willing to listen to Emmanuel’s input

Emmanuel Seyman: Is your question regarding "what do you call 'topics' in our repository" referring to the proposal?

No, in the minutes you pointed to, you mention you haven't "created the topics in our repo" and I'm not sure what that refers to

Oh, i meant issues, project and milestones.

I read the emailed draft proposal which I liked. I wondered if there is a way to send a reminder at 2 years of inactivity to see if that spurs re-engagement. I work with volunteers and often reaching out and touching base is helpful to find out if a project pain point has them stuck or discouraged or if their life circumstances now prevent them from volunteering.

re the proposal, I'm torn between bringing people in asap and waiting to see if they're going to commit long-term

But I've done that today-

I'm too. I tried to re3solve that by "This is usually preceded by a (substantial) contribution".

> what do you call 'topics' in our repository

In the "Membership" section, I would remind people that you do not need to be a member of the WG to contribute

Wrong citate"

I think this would have to be done manually. (But I don’t know for sure)

Wrong citate"

I mean I'm torn between ....

I suspect a reminder will be more effective if it comes from a human

Agreed. So someone would have to keep track of this.

Yes a human touch point is what I was thinking. At our meeting someone is designated to reach out to in active volunteer near the two year time frame.

I think, we remind everyone with a corresponding topic on the Agenda for the meeting.

If we could automate the tracking that would be nice like a bot to tell us last time they posted in Matrix, or on the git forge or on the mailing list.

I used to mail to inactive people previously. Often it was not exactly a plesant task, And in most cases I got not even a short answer.

I’m walking into the doctors office. I’ll check my phone here in a few. I do have info for the F44 release portion of the meeting.

Jocelyn (she/her) (Server WG: Docs): gook luck we are checking if you are available again

Yes reaching out to inactive volunteers is often thankless but it can give peace of mind that we tried to keep a member active, I would say reaching out once is sufficient they can always come back later after dropped and we can accept them back on the team.

a) sending reminder to inactive members

right?

b) better detail our expectation that someone should give us some confidence that their contributions are long term.

We have 2 items to handle:

Yes good summary

indeed

I agree

B) is tough because they often don't know what contributions they can make at the beginning.

So, should we discuss proper additions to the draft on Matrix and let's prodeed here for now? And decide next meeting?

I wish I could attend ever Flock and present a session in service to Fedora Server, but that isn't realistic with the travel and expenses often involved not to mention time off of work.

I wish I could attend every Flock and present a session in service to Fedora Server, but that isn't realistic with the travel and expenses often involved not to mention time off of work.

re b), I think we should, when inviting people to the WG, remind them that this is a long-term commitment

Things should self-police relatively well

Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): and Emmanuel Seyman: agreed

OK, let's proceed for now. We are already half way through our time.

No tracking ticket yet

FTR, I have a meeting just after this one

OK, let's hurry!

- One moderator for each topic, so that not everything falls to one person.

- End a discussion / topic with a wrap up, and in possible with a !agreed or !action statement.

We should adapt our meeting routine:

- If possible, one ticket for each topic

- On Friday or Monday a list of topics in our matrix room

So going an hour later is not helpful and going an hour earlier would hit high noon on East Coast when people will be off devices eating and socializing hopefully

Please please *PLEASE* let's give everyone in the meeting chair capabilities

This looks good

mowest: Yeah, so we should let the time as it is now.

I can handle our meetings being an hour later but not them being an hour earlier

This seems good, I like the one moderator per topic is chair for topic sounds good

I could handle either an hour earlier or an hour later

Emmanuel Seyman: As Justin told me, in Matrix there is no concept of chair. But let's try:

!chair mowest @pboPeter Boy (ServerWG, Docs) Emmanuel Seyman Jocelyn (she/her) (Server WG: Docs)

Sorry I brought up time was typing before I saw meeting notes, time seems best possible

There is no reaction from zopbot

So everyone can do any of the tasks (!action. !agreed, ...)

Sweet $ENTITY...

When I thought of chair I just meant guided the topic discussion

I have been holding back since we moved to Matrix for no reason at all?

seems so. 😀

Well, there's good to know

Great if we can all do those actions we can guide our respective topics

I didn't know that either until 3 days ago.

mowest: Yes, that's part of the proposal. That we pass the moderator to a member how is dealing most with the topic.

😁

proposal. !agreed We share the moderator task between members. Details to be determined in a meeting guide (to be written).

+1

+1

How will write a proposal for the meeting guide? (in a ticket as we have for governance)

I can do that but .....

We have a general Fedora meeting guide. We can take that and adjust it.

proposed !action pboy will create a ticket with a draft meeting guide.

Sounds like the most efflcient approach to me

Just curious if it could just be a sub point of the "meeting" section in the governance guide draft.

!hi

Paul Maconi (aggraxis) - he / him / his

May, but let's separate them at the moment. it's complex enough

sorry for the lateness. work and all that.

One doc that guides all the work of the WG

Problem is: "Governance" is a rule book, to be agreed with by FESCo. Meeting is a procedure thing.

mowest: one doc to rule them all!

Oh I see I didn't realize that governance needed to be approved by FESCo

OK, I think I take the action and we can proceed.

!action. pboy will create a ticket with a meeting guide draft proposal.

Well Meet Bot needs its time

No tracking ticket yet

Jocelyn (she/her) (Server WG: Docs): your part according to our new rules. 😀

I have not been able to test the aarch image yet.

I’ve tested it a few times now and the result is the same. We have a working qcow image now.

So I pulled the F44 qcow image and ran though initial setup, after that I was able to log in.

Very good that the KVM image works.

Unfortunately, I was complete busy today.

What are the next steps to do?

We should make sure we will fill in the test table!

We're at beta freeze, right?

We should see the first beta candidate compose soon.

I'm not sure, we just branched.

We have a table? Where is it

I have the schedule not in my head.

yeah, yesterday was beta freeze day

Re: Test table. There is a list, when a new testing release it available.

> , yesterday was beta freeze day

oh, we are late (again)

The beta go/no go is the first week of March, but I bet they'll want us testing nightlies

Proposal: Joselyn and I prepare a ticket how to proceed with the testing.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_44_Rawhide_20260127.n.0_Summary this is the current summary from the wiki. It's a wee bit stale?

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Summary

That's quite an olde one.

Don't we have a beta candidate yet?

I think we'll see that update soon is really more my point. I will get my test environment prepped for the next compose

I’ll hunt down the tables for

No not yet. I think we'll have one soon.

proposed. !action Jocelyn and Peter prepare a ticket about how we proced with testing this release.

OK, so back to my proposall

Our time is up.

Any objections?

3

2

Nothing from me

OK

Probably only short. After us there is no meeting, as far as I know. So we can lend 5 mins.

Anything here? The floor is widely open. 😀

OK, I see nothing

3

2

1