15:02:30 <rjune_wrk> #startmeeting
15:02:39 <adamw> well, this is new. :)
15:02:45 <tk009> its great
15:02:49 <tk009> no need to log
15:03:03 <tk009> rjune_wrk in the eeting chair
15:03:04 <rjune_wrk> I'm doing it today guys, please bear with me
15:03:38 <rjune_wrk> #topic update on components and triagers page refresh (and FAS groups)
15:03:49 <adamw> that should be arxs
15:04:00 <rjune_wrk> arxs: update?
15:04:18 <arxs> rjune_wrk: it's done since last week
15:04:30 <arxs> the version that are now in the wiki is the final one
15:04:41 <rjune_wrk> ok then.
15:04:47 <adamw> on FAS groups
15:05:07 <adamw> comphappy is working on having a components page as part of the triage metrics system, using the FAS group
15:05:12 <adamw> it's not ready yet but it's In Progress
15:05:26 <adamw> quote: "adamw: the components page is not up yet I was sorting some stuff out with kylev, there is some db trickery that I will have to think about.  Also been thinking about the best way to deal with the requests to break down the triage metrics by release. I will get back to you in more detail on that wed"
15:06:04 * sgireesh joined a bit late..
15:06:10 <rjune_wrk> comphappy_: just talking about you
15:06:56 <adamw> hey sgireesh / comphappy_, we're walking the agenda, rjune_wrk is leading today
15:06:57 <rjune_wrk> adamw: anything else?
15:07:14 <adamw> unless comphappy_ wants to add anything (i explained what we talked about last night, brennan) - no
15:07:26 <adamw> (this is on the components page in triageweb)
15:07:28 <comphappy_> What do you need? I am on the run
15:07:41 <adamw> nothing needed unless you specifically wanted to mention anything :)
15:08:12 <comphappy_> Nope
15:08:17 <rjune_wrk> #meetingtopic fedora bugzappers
15:08:26 <rjune_wrk> #topic tk009 to report if he figured out how the 'important component list' was generated
15:08:33 <tk009> ok
15:08:39 <rjune_wrk> Moving along, tk009?
15:08:46 <tk009> I have tried to squeeze jds2001
15:08:52 <comphappy> Unless you got any imfo on kernel
15:09:02 <adamw> that's later
15:09:02 <rjune_wrk> comphappy: that's coming up
15:09:07 <tk009> but he has not replied to e either in IRC or email
15:09:22 <tk009> I will be up his butt today
15:09:26 <rjune_wrk> tk009: any other contact method?
15:09:34 <adamw> STEAMROLLER
15:09:48 <rjune_wrk> going up his butt might require a level of familiarity you don't have.
15:10:04 <tk009> my foot neds no intro
15:10:08 <rjune_wrk> heh
15:10:22 <rjune_wrk> ok, let's put that off till next week then, yes?
15:10:32 <tk009> the list
15:10:40 <tk009> it will be completed before next week
15:12:01 <rjune_wrk> ok
15:12:11 <rjune_wrk> #topic update on kernel triage status
15:12:41 <rjune_wrk> adamw sent out an email to the guys involved, I've not seen anything back, to knowledge neither has adamw or tk009, yes?
15:12:51 <adamw> yeah, we are waiting on cebbert
15:12:59 <adamw> if he doesn't reply relatively soon jlaska will escalate
15:13:04 <tk009> nothing here but I am behind
15:13:12 <tk009> I have 280 emails to read
15:13:20 <adamw> just one thing to add - at the retrospective meeting that's going on right now, jon stanley mentioned he's interested in improved kernel qa
15:13:25 <adamw> so he may be willing to help us out here
15:13:40 <jlaska> adamw: I think it was j-rod who mentioned that
15:13:48 <rjune_wrk> enlighten me, who's he?
15:13:52 <adamw> oh yes
15:13:57 <adamw> jarod wilson, rather
15:14:57 <adamw> he has no people page
15:15:02 <adamw> bad j-rod
15:15:07 <rjune_wrk> Anything else?
15:15:09 <adamw> his site is http://wilsonet.com/
15:15:13 <rjune_wrk> oops, sorry
15:15:58 <adamw> he does kernel stuff
15:16:01 <adamw> irc nick is j-rod
15:16:09 <adamw> i'll try and bring him in on this thing
15:16:43 <adamw> alright, i think that's it for that topic :)
15:16:48 <rjune_wrk> ok then
15:16:54 <rjune_wrk> #topic request from EPEL project for help with their bug day
15:17:34 <adamw> so, this is a pretty simple one - we were contacted by michael stahnke, who's involved with EPEL, for help with a test day they have coming up
15:17:57 <adamw> he also mailed the list (topic "EPEL Bug Day"), and gave a wiki link - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL_Bug_Day_July_2009
15:18:04 <adamw> date is july 11th
15:18:37 <tk009> how does this work?
15:18:38 <rjune_wrk> what does he want help with?
15:18:39 <adamw> for anyone who's unaware, EPEL is a project to provide unofficial extra packages (mainly based on fedora packages) for RHEL
15:18:47 <tk009> can we change redhat bugs?
15:18:56 <nirik> no, just epel bugs. ;)
15:19:10 <adamw> they're not red hat bugs (epel is a separate project), and yeah, we can.
15:19:11 <tk009> =)
15:19:21 <adamw> yes, those are good questions and the ones I asked him too :)
15:19:28 <nirik> look at your bugzilla front page, and you will see there are 140 "Fedora EPEL" bugs... those are the ones we want to run though.
15:19:30 <adamw> he's promised to provide us more information closer to the time.
15:19:57 * nirik is also happy to provide more info on it.
15:20:02 <adamw> i think in principle we're happy to help, in practice we need info on what needs doing and then anyone who's around on the day can certainly show up at that event to help out.
15:20:47 <adamw> anyone disagree/really enthusiastic/have suggestions?
15:20:53 <rjune_wrk> How many bugs that get fixed in fedora are still broken in epel? don't they basically rebuild extras?
15:21:17 <sgireesh> is there a difference in the process flow in EPEL?
15:21:35 <arxs> for triage of EPEL bugs, is a installed RHEL needed?
15:21:49 <thomasj> Will that event happen in #fedora-bugzappers?
15:22:01 <adamw> "Where: Primary activity will take place on bugzilla and in IRC channel #epel on freenode. "
15:22:07 <nirik> rjune_wrk: usually maintainers are the same, so any fixes go into epel too.
15:22:37 <nirik> rhel shouldn't be needed. You could get by with a centos box, or in some cases neither.
15:22:59 <arxs> nirik: thanks for pointing that out
15:23:14 <nirik> mostly the idea would be to triage these bugs and see what they are, ping for progress, see if any are easyfix, that kind of thing.
15:23:32 <nirik> since there are only (ha) 140 of them, we might be able to get though looking at them all at least.
15:24:13 * thomasj should just read the link, thanks anyways adamw
15:24:18 <adamw> what about sgireesh's process question?
15:24:30 <adamw> does epel follow the rhel bug flow? fedora bug flow? something different? :)
15:24:42 <nirik> ah, yes. Good question. I don't think so... epel should follow the fedora bug flow.
15:25:01 <sgireesh> ok
15:25:05 <adamw> fedora bug flow is of course https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/BugStatusWorkFlow
15:25:07 <nirik> with some minor differences I guess...
15:25:12 <nirik> there is no rawhide.
15:25:40 * nirik nods. Yes, epel should follow that same process.
15:27:58 <rjune_wrk> that it for  this topic?
15:28:53 <adamw> think so
15:29:18 <rjune_wrk> Thank you all for coming
15:29:21 <rjune_wrk> #endmeeting