<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:01:13
!startmeeting FESCO (2026-06-30)
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:01:14
Meeting started at 2026-06-30 17:01:13 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:01:14
The Meeting name is 'FESCO (2026-06-30)'
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:01:20
!meetingname fesco
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
17:01:21
The Meeting Name is now fesco
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:01:21
!hi
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:01:24
!group members fesco
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:01:28
!topic Init Process
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:01:29
zbyszek: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbyszek)
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:01:30
Members of fesco: Fabio Valentini, Máirín Duffy, gotmax23 (@gotmax:matrix.org, @gotmax23:fedora.im), 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), Timothée Ravier, Simon de Vlieger, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:01:38
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:01:40
Michel Lind ☘ UTC+1 ⏱️: Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:01:47
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:01:48
gotmax23: Maxwell G (gotmax23) - he / him / his or they / them / theirs
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:01:48
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:01:50
Fabio Valentini 🌈: Fabio Valentini (decathorpe) - he / him / his
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:01:57
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:01:59
Conan Kudo 😌: Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:02:23
morning
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:02:34
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:02:35
Máirín Duffy: Máirín Duffy (duffy) - she / her / hers
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:02:40
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:02:46
Timothée Ravier: Timothée Ravier (siosm) - he / him / his
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:03:16
What's wrong?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:03:31
I got back from Germany yesterday
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:03:40
I'm just exceedingly tired
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:03:43
EuroSummer + jetlag?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:03:51
yup
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:03:58
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:03:59
kashyapc: Kashyap Chamarthy (kashyapc)
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:05:40
PSA: Don't forget to subscribe to notifiations on the new migrated repo
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:05:45
Should we proceed?
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:05:50
notifications*
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:05:57
!info PSA: Don't forget to subscribe to notifications on the new migrated repo
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:06:03
!fesco 3620
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:06:03
!topic #3620 Selection of the Fedora Council Engineering Rep
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:06:21
!fesco 3620
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:22
● **Last Updated:** 6 days ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:22
● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by decathorpe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:22
**fesco #3620** (https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3620):**Selection of the Fedora Council Engineering Rep**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:22
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:06:22
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:06:33
Oh, but this still points to Pagure :(
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:06:54
!action someone to file ticket/PR with maubot-fedora to fix !fesco alias
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:06:55
yeah, needs updated. I can do that at some point, there's other pr's pending there.
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:07:18
Ooops, but it's the first meeting after migration… I'm sure we'll find a few other places that need updating.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:07:19
!forgeissue fesco/tickets 3620
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:07:29
or not?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:07:33
!forge issue fesco/tickets 3620
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:07:40
?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:08:01
I'm pretty sure there's an alias-less zodbot command ... eh
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:08:20
https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/tickets/issues/3620 ?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:08:29
!link https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/tickets/issues/3620
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:08:35
should be forge issue org repo
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:09:01
!forge issue fesco tickets 3620
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:09:02
● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by decathorpe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:09:02
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:09:02
**fesco/tickets #3620** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/tickets/issues/3620):**Selection of the Fedora Council Engineering Rep**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:09:02
● **Last Updated:** 4 days ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:09:02
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:09:17
Anyways, only Fabio Valentini 🌈 was nominated so far
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:09:34
Does Fabio accept the nomination?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:09:52
I do, gotmax23 asked before nominating me.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:10:06
+1 to Fabio Valentini 🌈 :)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:10:12
+1
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:10:15
+1 to Fabio
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:10:15
+1 to Fabio Valentini 🌈
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:10:17
+1
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:10:31
(abstain)
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:10:32
+1
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:10:34
!fesco 3620
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:10:37
● **Opened:** 2 weeks ago by decathorpe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:10:37
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:10:37
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:10:37
**fesco/tickets #3620** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/tickets/issues/3620):**Selection of the Fedora Council Engineering Rep**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:10:37
● **Last Updated:** 4 days ago
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:11:02
[Fabio Valentini 🌈](https://matrix.to/#/@decathorpe:fedora.im) I think you should be allowed to vote for yourself
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:11:06
nirik: while you have time, can you make the multiline thingy work? Asking for a friend.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:11:32
Thats much harder. It's only in some cases too... topic and startmeeting. I think it works all other cases.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:11:49
Just to confirm - I can receive email notification of new fesco issues on forge.fpo by clicking the watch icon in the upper right on https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/tickets ?
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:11:56
(only if you do want to take the role that is :))
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:12:07
(that, and make sure email notifications are enabled *at all*)
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:12:10
How's `agreed decathorpe will be FESCo's Council representative until the end of his term`?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:12:24
Sounds good.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:12:32
ack (I had planned to step down after 12 months anyway.)
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:12:53
How's `agreed decathorpe will be FESCo's Council representative until the end of his current term`?
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:12:57
+1
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:12:59
I added "current"
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:13:11
+1
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:13:18
ack
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:13:54
(+6, 1, -0)?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:15:00
+1
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:15:13
!agreed (+7, 1, -0) decathorpe will be FESCo's Council representative until the end of his current term
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:15:26
Thank you Fabio!
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:15:32
!topic #3623 Planning for the Forgejo distgit migration
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:15:37
!forge issue 3623
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:38
Issue querying Forgejo: None
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:15:43
:D
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:15:48
!forge issue 3623
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:49
Issue querying Forgejo: None
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:15:54
!fesco issue 3623
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:15:54
!fesco 3623
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:55
Issue querying Forgejo: None
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:56
● **Last Updated:** 6 days ago
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:56
**fesco/tickets #3623** (https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/tickets/issues/3623):**Planning for the Forgejo distgit migration**
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:56
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:56
● **Assignee:** Not Assigned
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:15:56
● **Opened:** a week ago by gotmax23
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:16:25
So far my attempts to reach the Forge team have been unsuccessful
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:16:25
looks like we got no takers from your invitation earlier
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:16:31
yes
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:16:35
this is normal, unfortunately
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:16:53
Do we want to postpone or does anybody have anything to add here?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:17:06
well, this is a time when lots of people are on pto... and also that team is... not in this timezone
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:17:06
And does someone else want to be actioned to try to reach out to them?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:17:07
though now with Aoife Moloney back, we might be able to get some help getting people to talk to us
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:17:12
we can ask them if a different time slot would work better for them for a forge <-> fesco sync meeting
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:17:19
or poke Brendan Conoboy
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:17:24
let's postpone this
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:17:27
I proposed the option of an async discussion also
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:17:28
for example, ryan is in .au...
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:17:48
postpone+1, postpone_indefinitely-1 :)
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:17:52
anyhow, we should postpone and try and get some info. ;)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:17:55
we will need the FOA to step in, like we had to last year for the other stuff
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:18:00
otherwise nobody will respond to us
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:18:02
Nobody has responded to any ticket pings at all
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:18:47
Hmm, so since we have a newly minted representative for Council, could that avenue work?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:19:00
I can try to reach out to people.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:19:14
Or give more time... since we aren't migrating src.fedoraproject.org next week or anything
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:19:34
well hopefully we're not going to be surprised with a deadline again like what happened for pagure.io
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:19:40
I think we should make part of the regular agenda to keep an eye on things.
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:19:54
more time is good, but setting up a *working* communication channel would be good before things turn into "this is now urgent"
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:20:03
Agreed
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:20:23
right. I don't care what the form is, something they check since apparently it's not pagure / forge :P
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:20:25
I'm old, but it's anoying to me how impatient folks are sometimes. There's time, lets not stress?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:20:28
Does anyone want to propose something fancy? Or just vote to postpone ticket to next meeting?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:20:33
has anyone reached out to blc
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:20:50
I don't want to nag people, but not getting any responses to anything feels bad
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:21:05
it's not great, but we don't know why... there could well be reasons...
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:21:24
blc has been summoned 🙂
<@blc:fedora.im>
17:21:36
Hi. I'm in a plane about to take off. But I'm around for like another 5m then it's in the hands of airplane wifi
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:22:04
Did ye try the forge room?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:22:08
Brendan Conoboy: what's the best way to get in touch with the forge / forgejo folks
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:22:10
Yes and the forge tracker
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:22:25
and people were pinged in the ticket last week about the pagure.io migration also
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:22:26
fyi, jednorozec|afk is on pto this week.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:22:38
and he likely could answer some questions.
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:22:49
Thats unfortunate :(
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:23:08
I am happy to help though if I can. Do you have a list of priorities you need worked on? I
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:23:14
the problem is that there is time until there isn't
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:23:20
and this keeps happening
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:23:20
I was about to type what nirik said as well
<@blc:fedora.im>
17:23:28
If they haven't responded to tickets I would try a group email. Please CC me and jbley.
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:23:38
yeah, I know everyone is busy and has pto and travel and etc
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:23:44
sure, but... stressing and yelling and escalating quickly is exhausting
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:23:46
it appears so https://matrix.to/#/!BZXFjVQIigxSjizirN:fedora.im/$H-DgHXlBP-4AV4wghB0q3CxcXU3YKHMSziLIPn_T-04?via=fedoraproject.org&via=fedora.im&via=matrix.org
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:23:48
I just want to make sure that this doesn't fall by the wayside
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:24:18
FWIW I don't think gotmax23is being impatient here - this is a team effort, it should not depend on any single person, so not getting response in a few weeks and asking "where else should we ask" seems reasonable
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:24:20
Sure, I agree... lets revisit next week and escalate more if nothing?
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:24:32
ack
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:24:46
If you have a list of items you need doing, and in some kind of priority order, the team will prob be able to add them to their backlog and pull them into work as and when they can
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:24:51
ack
<@blc:fedora.im>
17:24:56
Yes, but it needs to be clear how to connect and have common expectations. I'm not clear how long people have been waiting or if there is an understanding that hasn't been met.
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:25:03
I pretty much wanted to just open the discussion in https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/tickets/issues/3623
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:25:19
So we can identify what those items/priorities are
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:25:31
sure, about a week for that ticket?
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:26:04
then Id wait till Tomas is back and get some time with him as that teams PO, and in the meantime as Kevin suggests start working on the stuff for FESCo together
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:26:16
Proposed `info we will wait to here from the Forge team and postpone this ticket until next week`
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:26:22
+1
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:26:22
Is that something we need to vote on?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:26:25
Or can I just info it?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:26:32
*hear
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:26:34
just info it
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:26:36
+1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:26:38
there's nothing to vote on
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:26:39
Proposed `info we will wait to hear from the Forge team and postpone this ticket until next week`
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:26:43
yeah. "let's wait" is fine without vote :)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:26:51
we would be deferring this anyway since nobody is here
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:26:52
yeah, I don't think anyone wants to pull the trigger today so let's wait seems the consensus
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:27:02
I expect that we'll be deferring it through the rest of July and partly into August
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:27:21
Aoife Moloneyspeaking of which the banner about the migration is ... not quite accurate then? do we know when pagure.io will be sunset?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:27:36
!info we will wait to hear from the Forge team and postpone this ticket until next week
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:27:41
yes, there's a ticket and a pr to update that, but it's wrong and needs fixing before deployment
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:27:53
!topic Next week's chair
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:28:06
salimma has already given cookies to kevin during the F44 timeframe
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:28:16
My understanding of everything is read-only pagure.io is 2026-07-31
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:28:25
I can chair next week
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:28:33
I'll be out of town the week after so might as well
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:28:50
!action Michel Lind ☘ UTC+1 ⏱️ will chair next meeting
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:28:57
!topic Open Floor
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:29:30
I think there will be a Council meeting tomorrow, is there anything I should bring up (or bring back)?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:30:10
Not sure. There's the Sandbox proposal that I've been kind of following but I think it's still a draft
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:30:14
I have mixed feelings about it
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:30:31
very mixed from me too
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:30:38
I'm not sure it actually helps anything
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:30:47
and there's some presuppositions I am not happy about
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:31:02
the intent isn't bad, but I don't know whether it actually does what it says on the tin
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:31:06
it would have been useful to have for things like Nightingale I guess
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:31:07
I can relay mixed feelings if that topic is on the agenda ;)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:31:21
Nightingale? is that the new Hummingbird?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:31:32
ah, is it Hummingbird? all these birds
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:31:37
It was too large and verbose for me, TBF. I'm looking for a condensed version of it
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:32:04
Surely, you'll only know that once you try it in practise? :)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:32:04
I expect that it'll get larger and more verbose
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:32:11
no
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:32:17
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:32:17
though yeah in that case it's normally better to start less verbose and add corner cases later
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:32:17
provided we have a way to iterate I guess it's better to have something and tweak it
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:32:18
the devil is in the details too
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:32:47
I was worried that this might in some way bypass FESCo
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:32:56
But it still seems that this ends up as a Change Proposal at some point
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:32:58
it is currently written as such to imply FESCo acceptance
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:33:01
that is a big problem
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:33:04
FWIW, I think the current draft is much more concrete than the first draft. So we're certainly moving in the right direction.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:33:16
FWIWI think it's a good idea
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:33:21
TBC, we're talking about this one, right? - https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/a-modest-proposal-a-technology-innovation-lifecycle-process-for-fedora/182435
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:33:24
Is it written like that? The proposal is a bit vague.
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:33:40
And also there's the idea that this would allow for some things to happen "inside the project boundry" that wouldn't have before
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:33:52
the sandbox cannot assume that the various teams in fedora accept the project when finishing in the sandbox term
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:33:55
But I don't know what that really means. The idea of a Fedora project boundry is kind of nebulous
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:34:02
right now, it kind of does
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:34:08
But I don't know what that really means. The idea of a Fedora project boundary is kind of nebulous
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:34:12
at least that was my intense reading of it on the plane indicated
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:34:21
right now some of these things are done with just Council approval already anyway right? so it can't get worse
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:34:32
What happens now without a process like this is that stuff gets spun up, and there's no actual process to make a decision that it's a failed experiment or it carries on to another phase of maturity
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:34:42
This leads to contributor burnout and hard feelings in the worst cases
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:34:47
well technically no... right now those things go into limbo
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:34:48
I've worked on several such projects
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:35:03
I'm starting to realize that people are already unclear about when to go to Council vs. FPC vs. FESCo
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:35:05
Having an actual framework to conduct such experiments and clear communication at each step would solve a lot of those problems
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:35:09
Not sure if that makes this better or worse
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
Gate: Curated Exit Review
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
Gate: Maintenance Review
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
Stage: Integrated
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
```
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
Stage: Curated
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
Gate: Sandbox Exit Review
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
Stage: Sandbox
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
Gate: Entry Proposal
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
```
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:35:31
I still need to digest it, but it has so many steps, it feels a bit heavy-weight for an open source project (maybe I'm reacting too quickly). IIUC, this is roughly based on CNCF's https://www.cncf.io/sandbox-projects/
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:35:35
keep in mind that the final process from the sandbox won't give you that either
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:35:46
Yes it's inspired by CNCF sandbox. Which is a proven framework
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:35:47
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/draft-council-proposal-for-the-fedora-innovation-lifecycle/190996 is the current draft I think
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:35:52
unless it's intended to be a bypass
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:35:56
ah... no wonder
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:36:11
the CNCF sandbox doesn't require multiple teams to play nice with each other, which is a big difference
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:36:15
give what
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:36:21
it shouldn't be. at least that's my understanding from talking to Jef. it might be good to make that more explicit in the draft / proposal
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:36:25
a guaranteed success state
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:36:35
who is asking for that
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:36:44
how does it not
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:36:45
yeah, the intent from what Jef told me is that it isn't, but my reading indicates that it can be used that way
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:36:55
I'm fine with it as long as it doesn't put off contributors. Generally, people like to contribute in OSS projects because it's usually less beaurocrappy, and you can just get things done.
<@kashyapc:fedora.im>
17:37:21
My worry is, if we mire contributors in a Kafkaesque process (I'm not saying this is so), it can sap their energies.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:37:24
+1 I read it as giving folks a space to be able to innovate / experiment without bureaocratic overhead
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:37:56
It has to balance that and stability for more mature efforts
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:38:04
CNCF sandbox is for vendor projects to change to CNCF projects, and most of the CNCF projects are islands... the whole CNCF structure optimizes for this model
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:38:08
most Fedora changes can still be done with just the change process, right?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:38:09
Máirín Duffy: You mentioned that you've participated in some failed innovation experiments? What does that mean in the context of Fedora projects?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:38:10
I'm not sure how useful it will be, but I think it's worth trying out on some things that seem a good fit for it. But of course details may need adjustments
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:38:12
Fedora is deliberately not that
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:38:17
Máirín Duffy: You mentioned that you've participated in some failed innovation experiments? What does that mean in the context of Fedora processes?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:38:27
if some people want to push through things through something more structured and long term and they think this sandbox thing is it, then go ahead
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:38:39
I can relay that "this is not intended to bypass existing processes" should be more explicit in the proposal text, if that's the biggest gripe with it currently?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:38:43
That something was retired? It was never introduced into the repos in the first place? An image stopped being built in composes?
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:38:49
Yeh a number of applications in fedora infra that ended up getting retired...
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:38:52
esp if these are corporate driven and they think they want more structure, why not
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:38:53
CNCF sandbox is for vendor projects to change to CNCF projects, and most of the CNCF projects are islands... the whole CNCF structure optimizes for this model... Fedora is deliberately not that as it's an integration project
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:39:04
Exactly.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:39:14
Examples would be packages.fpo, fedora hubs, a bunch of website properties
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:39:21
I don't have a problem with the concept, as long as it doesn't create a bypass valve
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:39:31
The change process is very tied to changes in Fedora the linux distro. Less so in 'how we make fedora the linux distro long term' or things that aren't reflected in the distro
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:39:34
so this
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:39:36
routing around FESCo and Mindshare would be a bad outcome
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:39:46
I'm a little meh about creating somsthing that is only going to be used for big corporate projects, but meh
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:39:52
I think we should not speak for mindshare here really
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:40:03
innovation is sort of the antithesis of big corpo projects no
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:40:06
Especially if the first stage gets approved and then the other bodies disapprove of it, and then false expectations are created
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:40:10
but yes as long as it does not route around fesco, if this enables people to do things they don't have a good way of doing right now...
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:40:19
what about hummingbird?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:40:31
I'm saying it as a detail... if something is going to affect how Fedora grows as a community, they need to be engaged
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:40:34
I don't see how Hummingbird and AI Developer Workstation would be the "examples" then
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:40:35
if they are not, that's broken
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:40:43
But I assume that was more of a lack of people to maintain it issue and less of an actual "failure?"
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:41:03
having a lack of people interested enough in a thing to build and maintain it is absolutely a failure state
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:41:12
Sure, but I don't think having a Sandbox process would've prevented that
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:41:26
It would have set expectations and made state clear.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:42:25
I'm not sure the sandbox fits well for applications either... but of course there could be overlap
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:42:47
I don't think a sandbox process would have helped with the causes Máirín Duffy mentioned. Those things were fine for a while and would have successfullly graduated out of the sandbox. The problem is that support dropped after a while.
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:42:56
If those projects in particular are being used as examples, it's because they exist and are in our space. And just becaues it's a corporate backproject doesn't mean it doesn't have people who could be net new contributors to fedora
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:42:56
I know of non-corporate projects that decided not to use Fedora as a place for their projects because of the overhead bc we didn't have a facility such as this
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:43:03
I view Modularity as a failure because it was deployed, didn't work and caused problems, and then got retired. But maybe that's "a different kind of failure".
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:43:06
that's more of redhat's "60% problem"
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:43:09
well, or the reason they existed went away... *cough* modularity *cough*
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:43:11
even noggin is experiencing that now
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:43:22
eventually the paid people go away and it just sits there
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:43:36
I disagree. I think that resource planning and maintenance could have been discussed at known milestones and been clearly communicated instead of a fog of confusion over years in some cases
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:43:43
Jef is away for a while in case you wanted him here to talk about this in a little more detail, but it sounds like as a group ye have more conversations to have amonst yourselves on the concepy, just fyi on his availability
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
17:43:57
Jef is away for a while in case you wanted him here to talk about this in a little more detail, but it sounds like as a group ye have more conversations to have amonst yourselves on the concept, just fyi on his availability
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:43:59
that really doesn't change how resources get pulled without notice and people stop working on it accordingly
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:44:36
Fedora can't make Red Hat maintain its commitments
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:44:43
Yes it does. Because it makes the milestones clear, and the decision points clear. So there aren't surprises. It's okay to say something people disagree with, but it's not ok to surprise them.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:44:46
we have no legal agreements for the sandbox or anything we do to make that effective
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:44:57
you mean ipsilon?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:45:03
no, I do mean noggin
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:45:04
It's not about agreements or guarantees, it's about clarity and alignment
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:45:11
the RFE backlog is huge and nobody has worked on them in years
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:45:15
ok... I disagree, but ok.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:45:24
once it was deployed, feature development mostly ended
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:45:34
right. if there is alignment and then things change and something get deprioritized, it's easier to then say "ok this is a failure then"
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:45:39
even though there are multiple features still on the request list for parity with the old FAS
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:45:45
without having that expectation things can just stay in zombie mode for ages
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:45:55
It would be good if people other than me could participate on the new draft
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:46:02
!link https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/draft-council-proposal-for-the-fedora-innovation-lifecycle/190996
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:46:07
Yes. And it puts contrbutors (like younger Mo 10+ years ago) thinking, "if I had only done a better job, it wouldn't have failed" when that wasn't the issue at all
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:46:14
That causes burnout, disengagement, etc.
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:46:31
having requests that aren't magically implemented doesn't mean something is dead.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:46:37
I'll try to take a look at the current draft, in between internal paperwork nonsense
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:46:58
anyhow, I don't think this is actually related to the sandbox proposal at all.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:47:32
no, but the majority of commits being bot commits is somewhat indicative of it
<@duffy:fedora.im>
17:47:34
"Establish a Path to Integration: Define clear criteria and a structured transition path for successful Sandbox projects to move toward becoming official Fedora features, services, or outputs."
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
17:47:40
no, but the majority of commits being bot dep update commits is somewhat indicative of it
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:48:11
I'd argue that the Packager Dashboard is successful, and it's still without maintenance
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:48:14
yeah let's continue discussion in Discourse, since gotmax noted we have not been engaging there?
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:48:14
sure, but thats not "and promise to maintain and grow them forever and ever" thats impossible
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:48:36
do we have anything else to discuss before I can get dinner :P
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:49:25
Oh, one quick thing. Can we add a label to the tracker for active votes?
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:49:30
Already starting dinner :)
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:49:39
We do that on the Ansible Community SC and I find it helpful
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:49:51
ooh nice
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:49:54
sounds reasonable
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:49:55
oh that sounds like a good idea
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:49:57
And there's sometimes confusion about whether we're voting on something or nto
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:50:00
*not
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:50:17
`vote-in-progress` label or something like that?
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:50:32
We use `active-vote` in Ansible
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:50:41
But either is fine, one is just shorter :)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:51:22
should I set that up?
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:51:31
+1
<@zbyszek:fedora.im>
17:51:36
yes, please
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:51:43
sure
<@nirik:matrix.scrye.com>
17:51:49
👍
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:51:52
I'll also migrate the two remaining missing ticket templates
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:52:02
Also, might be good to enable PRs to allow proposing changes to those templates?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:52:14
yes, I was going to ask about that
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:52:30
!action add issue tag for active votes to the tracker
<@siosm:fedora.im>
17:52:39
+1 for PRs as well, I was wondering about it as well
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:52:52
I turned off the PR unit in the repo since it only had a readme. but now that it has actual code / content, enabling the PR unit makes sense
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:52:56
!action adjust issue template for Changes to set active-vote label by default
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:53:10
(since I think those are always being voted on once they're filed?)
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:53:10
so many possibilities!
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:53:25
!action re-enable PRs in fesco/tickets
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:53:28
Okay, endmeeting?
<@decathorpe:fedora.im>
17:53:50
the yaml based template / form feature is nice, when you grok what it wants from you 😆
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:53:55
salimma has already given cookies to gotmax23 during the F44 timeframe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:53:57
decathorpe gave a cookie to gotmax23. They now have 68 cookies, 10 of which were obtained in the Fedora 44 release cycle
<@salimma:fedora.im>
17:54:07
sounds good
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
17:54:24
siosm gave a cookie to gotmax23. They now have 69 cookies, 11 of which were obtained in the Fedora 44 release cycle
<@gotmax23:fedora.im>
17:54:26
!endmeeting