<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:00:17
!startmeeting FESCO (2026-02-24)
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:18
Meeting started at 2026-02-24 18:00:17 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:18
The Meeting name is 'FESCO (2026-02-24)'
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:00:22
!meetingname fesco
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:23
The Meeting Name is now fesco
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:00:28
!group members fesco
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:00:30
Members of fesco: Dave Cantrell, Fabio Valentini, Máirín Duffy, Jef Spaleta, Kevin Fenzi, ngompa (@conan_kudo:matrix.org, @ngompa:fedora.im, @pharaoh_atem:opensuse.org, @ngompa:kde.org, @ngompa:almalinux.im), salimma (@michel-slm:matrix.org, @salimma:fedora.im), Stephen Gallagher, Timothée Ravier, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:00:33
!topic Init Process
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:01:08
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:01:09
Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:01:10
morning
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:02:20
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:21
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:02:43
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:44
Dave Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:02:45
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:46
Máirín Duffy (duffy) - she / her / hers
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:02:57
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:59
Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:03:13
That's quorum.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:03:22
Buckle up, folks. This is looking like a long one today :-/
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:03:59
FWIW, I didn't have any time to look at things this week. Sorry!
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:04:05
I have a hard stop at 2pm
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:04:08
I only have 1 hour today, sorry
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:04:24
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:04:25
Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:04:46
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:04:47
Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:05:07
let's prioritize change incomplete stuff
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:05:09
OK, we have three topics on the agenda: 1) Incomplete Changes, 2) Flatpaks, 3) ptrace
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:05:09
How do we want to go through them?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:05:30
we need quorum for incomplete changes stuff
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:05:37
the rest can be deferred as needed
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:05:51
Makes sense
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:06:06
!topic #3569 Change: Restrict_ptrace_by_default
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:06:17
!fesco 3569
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:18
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:18
● **Opened:** a week ago by alking
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:18
● **Last Updated:** 2 hours ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:18
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:18
**fesco #3569** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3569):**Change: Restrict_ptrace_by_default**
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:06:24
Ah crap. Wrong one.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:06:34
!topic #3563 F44 Incomplete Changes Report
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:06:38
!fesco 3563
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:39
● **Last Updated:** a day ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:39
**fesco #3563** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3563):**F44 Incomplete Changes Report**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:39
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:39
● **Opened:** a month ago by alking
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:39
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:06:51
I'm off to a great start today...
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:07:05
there we go
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:07:08
I was about to say...
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:07:16
the table in https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3563#comment-1004124 should be up-to-date as of yesterday. so this should be more quick than last time
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:07:24
There seems to be some latency on some homeservers right now as well
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:08:13
Lets go thru any non ✅ ones one by one?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:08:25
note that I don't think any of the "move to Fedora 45" requests have been processed yet.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:08:29
nirik: We can probably skip CLOSED as well
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:08:46
Build Fedora CoreOS on Konflux fesco#3546 RHBZ#2439690 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:08:55
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3546
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:09:08
!bz 2439690
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:09:17
!bug
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:09:17
bug_id argument is required. e.g. `!bug 1234567`
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:09:23
!bug 2439690
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:09:26
!rhbz 2439690
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:09:29
RHBZ#2439690 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2439690): [Changes Tracking]: Changes/Build FCOS on Fedora Konflux
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:09:39
!bugme 2439690
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:09:43
I think last time dustymabe was going to try and find some status for us? or was that another one?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:09:43
(just joking)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:10:07
!fire zbyszek
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:10:12
aww they didn't port that one :P
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:10:25
We only approved this one fairly recently, but as it was purely additive, I think we generally agreed not to worry about it being ready yet?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:10:27
ok so we cant do anything on this since we don't know status. do we want to do another outreach for status
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:10:28
There's a ticket to port the joke commands. ;(
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:11:15
yes to both. I think we should find status out, but also, we should move on because it's just a beta/testrun and not actually being used for release (for now)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:11:18
can we reduce the chaos (and increase caffeine as needed) please?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:11:31
ok ill poke dusty offline, let's move on
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:11:50
!action Máirín Duffy will reach out to the Change owners
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:11:52
do you want rejecteds?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:11:59
Unification of boot loader updates, phase 1 fesco#3344 RHBZ#2342224 (⛔ REJECTED)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:12:02
no
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:12:17
CMake 4.0 fesco#3401 RHBZ#2376114 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:12:18
!fesco 3401
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:12:19
● **Closed: Accepted** 9 months ago by decathorpe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:12:19
● **Assignee:** lecris
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:12:19
**fesco #3401** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3401):**Change: CMake 4.0**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:12:19
● **Opened:** 10 months ago by amoloney
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:12:19
● **Last Updated:** a month ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:12:19
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:12:24
this is in progress
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:12:35
!bug 2376114
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:12:37
RHBZ#2376114 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2376114): [Changes Tracking]: CMake 4.0
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:12:39
CMake 4.0 itself has landed, some PRs are still being merged + built.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:13:05
I'd consider it basically done-ish at this point, as the remaining lag is landing PRs
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:13:07
Yeah, I think we should call this one ON_QA, honestly
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:13:22
Anything else that fails to build at this point is a bug in *that* software, not this Change
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:13:36
Proposal: Mark this change as ON_QA as it's implemented and now just waiting for packagers to react.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:13:45
+1
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:13:47
+1
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:13:47
+1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:13:50
+1
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:13:55
+1
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:13:58
+1
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:14:01
+1
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:14:01
+1
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:14:17
next is Django 6.x fesco#3557 RHBZ#2436478 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:14:21
wow... I don't think I've ever seen everyone vote
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:14:37
!agreed Mark this change as ON_QA as it's implemented and now just waiting for packagers to react. (+9, 0, -0)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:14:39
!agreed Mark [CMake 4.0] change as ON_QA as it's implemented and now just waiting for packagers to react. (+8, 0, -0)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:14:52
well I can't count :D
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:14:54
that's okay
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:15:29
!bug 2436478
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:15:31
RHBZ#2436478 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2436478): [Changes Tracking]: Changes/Django 6.x
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:15:41
python-django6-6.0.2-1.fc44 has been built.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:16:06
in German there's a saying that goes like "too many cooks spoil the stew" and maybe we can limit this to *one* person running the meeting?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:16:27
"too many cooks spoil the broth" is the english version
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:16:29
but yes sure
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:16:46
"I have one job on this ship and I'm going to do it!" -- Galaxy Quest
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:16:47
ah, did I forget to flip the state on the bug? sorry
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:16:49
(broth vs stew, 🤷♂️)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:17:10
It's MODIFIED
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:17:27
so it needs to be switched to ON_QA I think
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:17:49
so this doesn't need a vote just a flip?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:18:03
Michel Lind ☘ UTC is the Change owner and can do it ;)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:18:13
ok cool move on?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:18:21
Moving on
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:18:24
GNU Toolchain Update (gcc 16.1, binutils 2.46, glibc 2.43, gdb 16.3)fesco#3521RHBZ#2427441 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:18:52
GCC 16.1 still not released
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:18:56
so no change since last week
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:19:04
what do we do in that case
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:19:12
wait?
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
18:19:29
it'll be a while before 16.1 GA
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:19:38
I mean, we can probably call it ON_QA
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:19:39
I don't think we have to wait for gcc
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:19:40
it's done
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:19:44
now it's just normal updates
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:19:47
From a practical perspective, there's really no contingency plan for the toolchain
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:19:52
So let's just move on?
<@dustymabe:matrix.org>
18:19:55
I think that was another one. I can give a status update on this one in the BZ
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:20:01
we might ask them to update the change if it's not going to land before final freeze
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:20:05
I wonder if they typo-ed and meant 1.6.0-1 as thats what they packaged
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:20:21
16.0 in gcc is not GA release
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:20:24
16.1 is
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:20:26
16.0 is the pre-release for 16.1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:20:27
so that's intentional
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:20:32
Máirín Duffy: No, I think it was correct. Their numbering is odd
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:20:39
I think we should move on, but we also want to accurately report the gcc version in release notes and in other places. Just to avoid confusion.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:20:44
16.0 is basically "Release Candidate"
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:20:55
sometimes it's even
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:20:55
by move on we mean - we release RC in the Fedora release and not wait on 16.1?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:21:13
I walked *right* into that
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:21:17
we have in past Fedora releases
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:21:26
it's not terribly unusual
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:21:35
as long as 16.1 comes out before final freeze it's fine...
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:21:38
but I don't think that will be the case this cycle
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:21:47
GCC 16 has been very smooth
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:21:47
Yeah, it's likely to be fine for GA
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:21:50
it wasn't like GCC 15 last year
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:22:02
ok. we'll not worry then
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:22:03
moving on ibus-speech-to-text WhisperCpp supportfesco#3556RHBZ#2439692 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:22:19
uhh what's with the slurred text?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:22:38
slurred?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:22:54
I think your line-endings got chomped
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:23:05
ibus-speech-to-text WhisperCpp supportfesco#3556RHBZ#2439692 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:23:08
does that look better?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:23:12
Nope
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:23:15
(i'm in element desktop and it looks fine on my end)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:23:17
missing whitespace
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:23:18
yeah, you need to feed all your messages through dos2unix :)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:23:21
!fesco 3556
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:23:23
● **Opened:** a month ago by alking
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:23:23
● **Assignee:** matiwari
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:23:23
● **Last Updated:** a week ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:23:23
● **Closed: Accepted** a week ago by zbyszek
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:23:23
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:23:23
**fesco #3556** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3556):**Change: ibus-speech-to-text WhisperCpp support**
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:23:41
!bug 2439692
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:23:41
grr
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:23:43
RHBZ#2439692 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/2439692): [Changes Tracking]: Changes/ibus-speech-to-text pywhispercpp
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:24:04
pywhispercpp is packaged: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pywhispercpp
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:24:05
Do we have any word on this? It was a relatively late approval
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:24:19
but I'm not sure if it's actually *used* (or usable) anywhere.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:24:33
it's packaged and in f44
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:24:34
you can't check your bags less than an hour before departure, bounce it
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:24:50
we probably should ping the change owners and ask about the state of this
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:24:54
looks like it was enabled here.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:24:57
it looks like stuff is in, but no idea whether it's live
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:24:58
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ibus-speech-to-text/c/bc34428
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:25:01
i can ping them if helpful?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:25:10
flipped
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:25:13
yeah. having no responses at all from the Change owners isn't great.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:25:25
they were very responsive in discussions.fpo
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:25:26
yes please
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:25:33
ok ill ping 'em
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:25:35
next up, unslurred:
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:25:38
yeah, ping would be good.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:25:39
LLVM 22 fesco#3531 RHBZ#2429149 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:25:43
well, Bugzilla is what matters now :)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:25:44
(please tell me its unslurred)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:25:54
yes
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:25:59
LLVM 22 -> expected to be late.
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:26:02
tell me it's unslurred, but using a slur?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:26:43
yeah, the release cycles of llvm mean they have to land this late. It's expected and ok...
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:26:54
Well, it's expected :-P
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:26:57
ok move on?
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:27:00
I'm fine with a late llvvmm
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:27:07
the next one is moved state, do we care about moved state since it moved
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:27:10
mkosi-initrd fesco#2990 RHBZ#2203221 (⏭️ MOVED)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:27:15
nah
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:27:20
skip moved ones
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:27:22
no, except that Allison needs to process this
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:27:24
ok next sounds exciting
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:27:25
Modernize Live Media fesco#2885 RHBZ#2139918 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:27:47
> I think this will need to be deferred to F45 unfortunately.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:27:55
do you want to make this official?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:27:58
dracut-110 didn't land in f44+, so it needs to be deferred to f45
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:28:02
I put a comment about it
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:28:14
so, that moves to MOVED
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:28:21
how _do_ I make it official?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:28:23
can somebody poke Allison to get all the MOVED ones processed? ...
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:28:25
Yeah, deferred again
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:28:52
at least there is progress 😂
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:29:10
next up.....
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:29:11
I'm not able to influence fedora dracut package, I'm just upstream 🤷♂️
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:29:12
Use of swappable -bin packages for managing NodeJS symlinks fesco#3452 RHBZ#2394090 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:29:41
I don't know what's going on with this now
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:29:55
there was a ticket about it... was it resolved/
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:30:00
I think the nodejs stuff got all sorted out in theory... has that landed though?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:30:03
there was a ticket about it... was it resolved?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:30:03
There was some chaos last week that I *think* got sorted?
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:30:09
I heard someone is working on a replacement for dracut called dunstable
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:30:30
lol
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:30:33
:gavel: :gavel: :gavel: ORDAAAAAR
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:30:40
do we need people to be pinged
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:30:52
yes, but one ping only
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:30:55
I'll reach out to jstanek
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:31:14
pings are supposed to echo
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:31:17
👨⚖️
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:20
The packages exist
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:31:21
!action Stephen Gallagher to reach out to jstanek re: fesco#3452 RHBZ#2394090
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
nodejs24-bin-1:24.13.0-7.fc44.noarch
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
```
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
$ fedrq pkgs -b f44 nodejs\*-bin
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
nodejs20-bin-1:20.20.0-5.fc44.noarch
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
nodejs20-npm-bin-1:20.20.0-5.fc44.noarch
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
```
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
nodejs24-npm-bin-1:24.13.0-7.fc44.noarch
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
nodejs22-bin-1:22.22.0-7.fc44.noarch
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:24
nodejs22-npm-bin-1:22.22.0-7.fc44.noarch
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:31:25
(did i do that right?)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:31:27
ooh i did!
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:31:33
next is Enable NTSYNC kernel module for Wine and gaming packages fesco#3510 RHBZ#2418382 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
18:31:38
I believe zbyszek confirmed that they were fixed properly to have the right Requires
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
18:31:40
nah, I'm the real me. at least I think I am. but I am just coming off a week of PTO and have not caught up to anything. my mind is mush right now
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:32:09
yes, this looks done.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:32:24
yeah, seems done. Should be moved to on_qa?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:32:25
that one just needs to move to ON_QA
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:33:10
can anyone here do that?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:33:32
I can sure...
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:33:43
next up ...
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:33:43
will triple check and do it after meeting
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:33:44
Package builds are expected to be reproducible fesco#3386 RHBZ#2361706 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:33:59
Already done
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:34:05
ok, fine then. ;)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:34:11
Sorry, that was in reply to nirik about the previous topic, to be clear
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:34:27
you made all package builds reproducible already
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:34:29
wow
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:34:45
it should move to f45
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:34:47
Conan Kudo: I've got this bridge for a really good price, if you're interested...
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:34:50
(per last comment in bug)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:35:01
who can move it
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:35:05
is that on allison
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:35:09
yeah
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:35:16
Yes
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:35:27
!action Allison to move fesco#3386 RHBZ#2361706 to F45
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:35:40
5 more, we can do this
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:35:40
Protobuf 5.x/6.x fesco#3336 RHBZ#2341815 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:36:03
this ol one. ;(
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:36:10
very doubtful that this will happen for F44 :D
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:36:16
We should probably try and finish this
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:36:28
But yeah it's probably risky without beta
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:36:38
Last comment says "defer"
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:36:44
we got to moveit move it? :lemur:
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:36:50
"This change is not good enough yet to be included in F44, deferring this."
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:36:51
I'd say defer and then if we upgrade rawhide fine we can see if we should update stable too
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:37:08
#action Allison to move fesco#3336 RHBZ#2341815 to F45
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:37:19
Upgrade uutils-coreutils to 0.5 and nushell to 0.109.2+ fesco#3555 RHBZ#2436483 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:37:23
Exclamation point, not #
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:37:27
(by somebody who is not a change owner)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:37:38
Ah, was not aware
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:37:53
y'all seem to think it's too risky
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:37:53
Oh mine again
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:37:57
!action Allison to move fesco#3336 RHBZ#2341815 to F45
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:38:05
This will probably land late but should be fine for f44
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:38:11
It is just a lot of packages
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:38:26
not ready for ON_QA yet tho?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:38:38
nope
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:38:40
Its not on any media/deliverables tho right?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:38:46
no, I don't think so.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:38:56
they're all purely opt-in packages.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:39:07
yeah, so I think it's fine to land late...
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:39:15
needs a vote or move on
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:39:21
(update ticket with a note?)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:39:57
this can wait
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:40:09
just needs the owners to be poked and we can move on
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:40:35
proposal: this change is not on any media/deliverables so it can land after beta
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:40:41
nirik: +1
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:40:43
I'm one of the owners
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:40:54
ok poking done
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:40:55
Fabio is another I think 🤭
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:40:59
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:40:59
Stop Creating Default Network Profiles By Anaconda fesco#3525 RHBZ#2429152 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:40:59
up next:
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:41:03
technically yes ;)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:41:51
I think the anaconda network profiles landed and should be moved to ON_QA
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:41:51
> The change is implemented.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:42:03
looks like this should just be ON_QA, yeah
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:42:10
On it
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:42:12
can someone update it to ON_QA
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:42:13
yay
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:42:19
two more, im giddy with excitement
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:42:20
TeXLive 2025 fesco#3488 RHBZ#2407057 (❓ ASSIGNED)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:42:35
I think this is done, bug just not updated.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:42:45
poke maintainers?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:42:59
No, that's just the hypoxia as these incomplete Changes suck all the air out of the room
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:43:05
yeah, it's landed I think and should be ON_QA also... but you can doublecheck with change folks
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:43:25
ok i can email poke them
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:43:33
LAST ONE!
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:43:34
Use kmscon as default VT console fesco#3513 RHBZ#2418795 (🔃 MODIFIED)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:43:45
We backed this out, no?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:43:46
move to f45
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:43:47
that was moved to F45
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:43:53
right, it's moving to f45.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:44:09
!action Allison to move fesco#3513 RHBZ#2418795 to F45
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:44:16
🏆️ for all of us. I think that's all
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:44:34
now just the other topics. ;)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:44:47
Stephen Gallagher: now you can queue up ptrace
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:44:51
nothing controversial, should be quick, right?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:45:16
OK, we've got the eternal, endless Flatpak debate or the upstart ptrace debate.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:45:29
which one could be completed? sounds like ptrace?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:45:31
we don't got time for flatpak today
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:45:35
(in terms of discussion complete in 15)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:45:39
ptrace should be quicker
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:45:39
ptrace we can probably bang out in 15 minutes
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:45:52
That seems optimistic, but I'll buy it.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:46:00
(and the flatpak one is messier since there's now a third ticket filed against fesco)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:46:08
!topic #3569 Change: Restrict_ptrace_by_default
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:46:13
!fesco 3569
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:46:14
● **Last Updated:** 3 hours ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:46:14
● **Opened:** a week ago by alking
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:46:14
**fesco #3569** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3569):**Change: Restrict_ptrace_by_default**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:46:14
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:46:14
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:46:39
yeah, I guess I am slightly +1 for the current proposal.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:46:50
So, there was a compromise proposal pitched here.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:46:52
I at least understand this proposal
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:47:01
me: not happy with this not-fish-not-meat proposal with potential for accidental security mechanism disablement, but not unhappy enough to vote -1, so I will 0
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:47:15
so this is a capybara proposal Fabio Valentini?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:47:20
(sorry, Lenten humour)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:47:30
lol yes
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:47:32
:P
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:47:35
dont we not normally override configs with package installs
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:47:39
more like fungus
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:47:45
we do
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:47:49
creeps back in when you don't pay attention
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:48:02
in practice, the vast majority of Fedora folks will not experience the effect of this Change, I think
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:48:14
I'm weakly -1 on this because I don't like security configuration dictated by package install.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:48:16
I'm a weak +1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:48:24
I'm a weak +1 as well
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:48:41
I'm +1 too.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:48:52
it's at least better out of the box though I wonder if we have a better way to mark that some packages change default security stance
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:48:55
I think it amounts to telling our users we've tightened security, when in practice we haven't, because anyone who installs the toolchain will have it automatically turned off, silently
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:49:00
We certainly have packages which set policy. Systemd does this a lot.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:49:00
we have plenty of things in fedora security settings dictated by packaging
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:49:07
i like the idea of being more restricted OOTB. i think it's clever to change config if you install gdb but that also seems like a yucky thing to change config on package install
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:49:16
(or if any other user on a shared machine does.)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:49:38
any user with root, anyway :)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:49:42
I think we shouldn't let perfect be the enemy of an incremental improvement. *Most* people don't have gdb and friends installed.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:49:43
that is a bigger issue that goes up to whether this should be handled by SELinux MAC
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:49:51
its definitely not a full solution, but it's slightly better than what we have now
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:49:56
agreed. +1 (weak) from me then, incremental progress
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:49:58
zbyszek: With respect, please cite your source?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:50:17
ISTR that gdb-minimal used to show up everywhere because at one point it was in the ABRT dep chain
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:50:20
well, it's not included on any default installs is it?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:51:00
I have gdb on my system and gdb-headless but not gdb-minimal
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:51:08
I am in favor of incremental progress, but I feel like this is not actually doing that.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:51:15
gdb-headless is installed on almost every variant
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:51:22
Michel Lind ☘ UTC: I mistyped and meant gdb-headless
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:51:29
desktop users who just want a desktop who dont know what gdb is will be safer with this imho
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:51:30
ah
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:51:31
and we have plenty of those
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:51:36
(unless i misunderstand)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:51:50
Máirín Duffy: Unless it was installed silently
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:51:56
trying to `dnf remove gdb-*` also rips out the whole "fedora-packager" toolchain, including fedpkg and rpm-build. so ...
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:51:59
fedpkg and rpmbuild pull it in
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:52:09
right, but most people won't have those
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:52:17
does this proposal handle removing the config if gdb package is removed?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:52:18
it is required for retracing support in abrt as well
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:52:28
Máirín Duffy: Not directly, no.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:52:31
Stephen Gallagher: well sure but if someone can install anything on the system silently i suppose all bets are off
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:52:38
(re: gdb being installed silently)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:52:39
I also have.. gdb pulled in by anaconda-install-env-deps
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:52:39
nope.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:52:41
DNF's leaf removal may remove it, but that's hit-or-miss
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:52:49
but those can be removed together. odd.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:52:57
kind of messy
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:53:04
I guess it's incomplete cleanup when installing from live media?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:53:04
nope (gdb is, the ptrace override isn't.)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:53:06
also, lets have a moment of silence for abrt. ;(
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:53:10
so yeah maybe out of the box we don't get any benefit right now
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:53:26
Normally dnf leaf removal will remove packages which were only installed as deps. At least for fairly new installations. So I think the answer is "yes, this is handled".
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:53:38
but ... no?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:53:46
`dnf autoremove` is not run automatically.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:54:04
DNF doesn't always get this right and it defaults to *not* removing something if it's not 100% sure it's no longer needed.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:54:07
`dnf autoremove` does not remove those two, I just tried
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:54:10
`dnf rm gdb-headless` would remove it though
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:54:13
it tried to remove enchant and python3-sniffio
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:54:28
Hmm, OK.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:54:34
yeah, removing that removes abrt and a bunch of stuff
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:54:52
anyway, I did `dnf rq --whatdepends gdb-headless` and abrt comes up, so...
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:54:55
is the proposal to add the scope override only in gdb or in gdb-headless? I just checked the proposal and it seems to say gdb, not gdb-headless?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:54:57
clean_requirements_on_remove is default True
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:55:01
In conclusion: it's going to be on a LOT of systems and probably most upgraded systems.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:55:11
nirik: on remove, yes
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:55:19
but dependencies that are dropped on *update* aren't cleaned up.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:55:45
Michel Lind ☘ UTC: GDB isn't the only thing that would cause it to be pulled in, just the easiest example to point to
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:56:10
and it would be pulled on basically everywhere because ABRT. so I'm not sure the proposal changes anything.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:56:12
we should look at removing abrt from everywhere...
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:56:31
it's going to be fun going back to being blind about crashes :(
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:56:35
ugh
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
18:56:36
So we have a bunch of files in sysctl.d. But actually, anything that installs polkit policy could be said to be overrding security policies… Those files certainly change extend user privileges in many cases.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:56:39
Add ABRT to obsoleted packages?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:56:48
or maybe ask Red Hat not to hug it until it's dead but rather move it to a community project? ...
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:57:10
documenting how the abrt infra works would be a good start for that
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:57:13
well, remove it from comps to start with, then retire it later.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:57:28
personally would rather not actually lose abrt
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:57:30
With respect, we can argue about technical solutions once we decide on whether we actually want to include this.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:57:33
but thats probibly another discussion.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:57:48
since it's the only way many of us are going to get useful crash reports to troubleshoot
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:57:49
Stephen Gallagher: if its going to get installed everyhere anyway bc of abrt=>gdb-headless then it is pointless
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:58:09
so, given that this is a f45 proposal... how about we punt since it sounds like people have a bunch more questions/comments they should ask the change owners...
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:58:27
What I would prefer to see is an SELinux-style central configuration that we ship default-on and is easy for developers to flip to "permissive" mode if they need to (and have root)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:58:35
and ask everyone with such comments/concerns to ask them?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:58:54
maybe we can ask SELinux people to weigh in on that?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:59:00
I am surprised it can't be done in SELinux already
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
18:59:02
(And if that's what was in the first proposal, my apologies; I was on vacation during the entirety of that discussion)
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
list of q's:
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
- how many fedora systems will get the secure profile effectively?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
- does gdb-headless pull it in
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
- does abrt pull it in
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
- how does this interact with SELinux?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
- if gdb* is removed, does the more permissive config get removed as well?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
18:59:34
^ reasonable?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
18:59:42
I seem to recall someone saying it was not easy to do in selinux, but I can't recall the details.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
18:59:46
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SELinuxDenyPtrace
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
19:00:04
I've timed out and have to go to my next thing, talk to everyone later
<@duffy:fedora.im>
19:00:21
samesies for me, i am turning into a pumpkin friends
<@duffy:fedora.im>
19:00:33
^^ lmk if the questions above useful, and i can post in the fedora discussion for the change proposal
<@duffy:fedora.im>
19:01:06
i emailed the 3 sets of change proposal owners on their status for F44, can follow up in #devel or on devel-list with what i learn, LMK if this makes sense
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:01:36
sounds fine, but I would rephrase the selinux one to be 'Can this change be implemented via selinux controls instead of kernel controls'?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:02:18
To be clear: I wasn't saying I wanted it to be handled by SELinux. Just that I wanted it to be possible to easily enable/disable it similar to how we do with SELinux
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:02:35
I was quite surprised to see that an SELinux-based solution actually already exists since F17
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:02:52
I was surprised about the yamam thing _because_ there's an SELinux control
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:02:56
I was surprised about the yama thing _because_ there's an SELinux control
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:02:56
(I was trying to describe a preferred behavior, not a preferred implementation)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:02:58
I think the problem may be interface... ie, it just doesn't work and you have to know what to do
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:03:41
anyhow, lets punt to discussion on it.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:03:47
If there's a config file that can be flipped, can't gdb et. al. just print a message warning that ptrace functionality may be impeded?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:03:56
Well, I asked the proposers of the changes to change gdb to emit some helpful hint (and other tools). But nobody volunteered to do this.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:04:17
I think if the tools were smarter, this would go a long way to make this easier to accept.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:04:54
we can propose a security stance package where each level requires / conflicts with certain packages
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:04:56
that would be interseting
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:05:18
so if you want to check if you are at the default stance, check if that package is installed. if it's not and you install it it force-removes packages that override the config
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:05:23
who will maintain it though
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
19:05:45
that would be a bit unusual. other similar things are managed by policy (selinux, crapto-policies, etc.)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:06:29
and possibly would be either too fine grained or too corse... ie, I want policy A on this and policy B on that.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:06:30
did you intentionally write crapto :P
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:06:40
ha
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:06:47
I mean... if the shoe fits
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:06:48
I'm pretty firm on my -1 about not having package presence be the determinator for policy
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:06:55
maybe an audit tool that reports on deviances is a better idea then
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:06:59
If we have other places that are doing that, I'm not keen on those either.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:07:10
it's basically how the entire fedora system works these days
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:07:13
(Systemd may be a special case)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:07:18
(thinking of my ops days Chef has both the Chef client and inspec, the latter is to report on compliance with poicy)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:07:41
we do it for selinux policy, systemd presets, tunables, xdg configuration, crypto stuff, and a lot more
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:07:45
systemd, selinux-policy-*, polkit*,
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:08:03
it's also basically our fault Linux works this way
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:08:09
as we started that concept in the first place
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:08:24
because we didn't want to have a debconf-style system in rpm
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:08:35
OK, I may have not been clear.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:08:45
I'm opposed to package addition resulting in a *loosening* of security
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:09:08
ehhh
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
19:09:29
aw, no "dnf install backdoor"?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:09:34
Stephen Gallagher I think this is already happening. E.g. take a system without polkit installed. A lot of things are impossible. Now install polkit, and suddenly the user can e.g. reboot the machine.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:09:49
if the kernel defaults to "no", then an override is for "yes", I don't really know how else we would deal with this
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:10:05
Or install packagekit, and suddenly the user can install packages.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:10:09
Etc, etc, etc.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:10:15
etcD
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:10:32
still a weak +1 for me fwiw
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:10:35
the only concern I would say is probably valid is that we don't regularly audit these things like the SUSE people do
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:10:37
zbyszek: In that specific case, PackageKit requires polkit policy to allow it, but I get your point
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:10:42
it at least makes it easier to get to the upstream default if you want
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:11:05
are we not bootstrapping the fedora security SIG again? maybe this can be something they look into
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:11:07
But let's take a straw poll right now? If I'm just outvoted, so be it
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
19:11:26
still 0
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:11:27
in the future, yeah
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:11:33
still weak +1
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:11:38
Proposal: Accept the proposal as written in ticket 3569
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:11:41
-1
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:11:44
I'm still +1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:11:52
weak +1
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:12:01
I am in favor of more discussion with the change owners. If it's not effective for almost all installs I would want it reworked or rejected.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:12:24
I don't think we need to approve/reject it right now, it's a f45 change right?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:12:28
I'm also fine with "further discussion"
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:12:31
yeah it's f45
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:12:33
we can just wait
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:12:47
OK, we can postpone for now
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:12:48
there are no more f44 changes on the docket to process thankfully :)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:12:52
well, we have a lot of questions it seems...
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:12:55
so we have some time
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:13:11
But we should action somebody to write up a summary to keep the discussion moving.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:13:52
Máirín Duffy offered to ^
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:14:45
Oh, great.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:15:14
I copied those Qs into the ticket.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:15:27
we're getting close to me turning into a pumpkin too
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:15:28
Do we want to attempt to tackle the Flatpak discussion today or punt?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:15:47
we did mention this in the workstation wg
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:15:54
so if anyone shows up maybe we should, otherwise we punt
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
19:16:03
I won't be around next Tuesday
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:16:04
so there were changes this morning to the proposal, and another related ticket about changing our policy... so I am ok punting... however...
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:16:20
hmm I can't even find Catanzaro here
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:16:40
Any chance we could get someone to condense the discussion into a summary before the next meeting?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:16:41
It was noted in the discussion thread that this change proposal discussion has gone on so long, we never voted on it, and now f44 is going to beta and it will likely have to be f45...
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:16:59
which isn't great. stuck in comittee. ;(
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:17:13
yeah... it came up in the WG too (I pointed out the owners should just poke us if they think it's ready)
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:17:21
I'd prefer to punt very much too. I didn't catch up on the discussion and my brain in mush.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:17:26
yeah.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:17:27
definitely not great, but it's not like we intentionally sat on this
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:17:50
yeah, typically discussion dies down after a few weeks...
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:17:54
If we punt, can we please pick someone (who *has* been following it closely) to produce a fair summary of the positions?
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:18:20
Because at this point, it's been discussed at great length in at least three different places.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:18:39
so someone who is not anti or pro flatpak and who has spare time :P
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:18:46
s/flatpak/flathub
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:18:51
I can try. I want to reread the discussions.
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:19:00
salimma has already given cookies to zbyszek during the F43 timeframe
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:19:12
zbyszek: Your drinks are on me at Flock.
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:19:28
decathorpe has already given cookies to zbyszek during the F43 timeframe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:19:34
sgallagh gave a cookie to zbyszek. They now have 156 cookies, 6 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:19:48
Stephen Gallagher You know how to motivate people!
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:19:52
!action zbyszek will put together a summary of the current Flatpak debate for FESCo's consideration.
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
19:20:40
where is that summary going to live?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:21:12
it'll be in the ticket
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:21:38
To be decided. Probably the fesco ticket, but if I there's more questions, then maybe the discussion page be better. Don't know at this point.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:21:58
I may have just made a terrible mistake. 😱
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
19:22:26
!topic Chaos Ramble
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
19:22:32
or whatever this is now
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:22:54
!topic Next Week's Chair
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:23:07
Who wants it?
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:23:36
Can someone also mark the first part of https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3570 as formally approved?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
19:23:48
I can do it
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:24:38
Thanks
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:24:45
sgallagh has already given cookies to decathorpe during the F43 timeframe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:24:53
zbyszek has already given cookies to decathorpe during the F43 timeframe
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:24:58
!action Fabio Valentini will chair the 2026-03-03 meeting
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:25:05
!topic Open Floor
<@Lihis:matrix.org>
19:26:06
Was issue 3549 discussed or voted on already?
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:26:24
Sorry, meant to hold my comment for Open Floor. Is the original request that only concerns F42 in https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3570 now considered approved?
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:26:43
They decided to push it to next week
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:26:46
yes
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:26:51
Tomino, we didn't have time but zbyszekvolunteered to summarize the discussion
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:26:58
so we can vote on it next week
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:27:09
yes
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:27:22
gotmax23 I did the procedure in the ticket.
<@Lihis:matrix.org>
19:27:32
Alright, thanks
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:27:49
Ah, I see it now. Thanks zbyszek
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:28:23
It just got approved. I misread the date it was filed and should have marked it approved earlier today, but zbyszek fixed that a few minutes ago.
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:28:45
(I thought it still had until tomorrow to collect votes)
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:29:15
I'll include that in my meeting summary email
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:29:18
yselkowitz: Go ahead
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
19:29:21
!fesco 3559
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:29:22
**fesco #3559** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3559):**Clarify permission to implement an approved Change proposal**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:29:22
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:29:22
● **Last Updated:** a week ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:29:22
● **Opened:** a month ago by yselkowitz
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:29:22
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
19:29:37
where does the change proposal ticket template live?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:30:12
I don't think alking used a template right? it's some sort of AI processing IIRC
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:30:24
but I wonder where Ben's and Aoife's templates are
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:30:55
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/operations/changes_policy/#_change_process says "When a FESCo member has marked the change ticket as APPROVED, you may then proceed with the implementation."
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:31:02
So I think that's good.
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
19:31:08
right, that was one part
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:31:09
We can close the FESCo ticket.
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
19:31:21
but we also wanted to update the template?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:31:39
I think that will require asking aking about it...
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:31:46
I think some of it is in https://pagure.io/fedora-pgm/pgm_scripts now
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:31:51
the pgm/foa scripts handle that
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
19:32:12
Yeah, if the implementation is not in alignment with the documented SOP, then that's something to be fixed somewhere…
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:32:31
IIRC some of the new AI Change wrangling stuff was in RH internal Gitlab but was supposed to be synced there
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:33:06
and the schedule is in... some horrible thing. ;)
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
19:33:08
there it is, thanks
<@yselkowitz:fedora.im>
19:33:26
ok I'll file a PR and link it in the ticket
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:33:31
Is there a ticket somewhere to fix the schedule stuff?
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:33:41
zbyszek gave a cookie to yselkowitz. They now have 26 cookies, 4 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:34:24
yeah, I think so... but I'm not sure what the issues around it are, so likely it will wait until Aoife Moloney - back 18 May 2026 (on maternity leave) is back.
<@gotmax:matrix.org>
19:34:39
Right
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:34:47
OK, anything further for Open Floor today?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:36:43
I bid you adieu from Europe otherwise
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
19:36:49
nothing here
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:36:55
nothing from me
<@sgallagh:fedora.im>
19:37:31
!endmeeting