18:00:56 #startmeeting 18:00:56 Meeting started Sat Nov 9 18:00:56 2024 UTC. The chair is werdahias. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:56 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 18:01:07 #topic rollcall 18:01:15 * werdahias is here 18:01:28 o/ 18:02:38 \o 18:03:50 well, moving on for now 18:04:12 #topic toolchain updates 18:04:48 f_g: want to explain a bit what you worked on ? 18:05:13 yep 18:05:34 unstable/trixie are on the latest stable atm, debcargo and librust-cargo are still one behind, though I hope to catch up there tomorrow 18:05:54 \o/ 18:05:59 the cdylib support stuff stalled a bit, though I hope to pick that up again as well 18:06:36 the next version of debcargo will improve handling of quilt patches that need to be rebased, and allow arch-restricting autopkgtest 18:06:44 great work with keeping the toolchain uptodate as always, thaks for all your hardwork :) 18:06:53 s/thaks/thanks/ 18:07:05 other than that, the biggest question is which version will end up in trixie when it gets frozen - but the ball is in RT's court, so to speak :) 18:07:33 * capitol reporing in 18:07:56 I am not sure whether implementing the declarative trimming features that we want to see is feasible in time for the freeze, but we'll see - it mainly depends on how much spare cycles I find for that I guess, unless somebody else does most of the work :-P 18:08:02 great, also really appreciate the work. Anything else ? 18:08:09 I think that's it :) 18:08:24 great :) 18:08:37 #topic transitions 18:09:28 plugwash did nix 0.29, thanks fot that 18:09:38 * f_g only has the cargo 0.83 one, and that's fairly small and basically done, just missing cutting the Debcargo release 18:09:55 s/fot/for 18:10:12 there's image, http (which one idr) and lazy-regex in work, iirc ? 18:10:18 and bindgen I suppose 18:10:36 I did a mini-heapless 0.7 -> 0.8 (done) and image 0.24>0.25 18:10:42 yes 18:10:46 lazy-regex is almost ready, 10/13 packages can already be uploaded, the other 3 are blocked by packages in NEW 18:11:10 great 18:11:55 As for bindgen, I took care of 9 packages. Not sure I checked them off in the tracking issue though 18:11:58 bindgen is just a lot of work checking all rdeps; I uploaded noisycoils' work to exp for now 18:12:43 Nope, I did not apparently. 18:12:46 noisycoil: Jonas also has some packages that require coordination, make sure to check those 18:13:49 env-logger 0.11 is also available in exp; I would appreciate help though since that has a ton of rdeps 18:14:36 bindgen and env-logger would be great to get in so trixie ships with those 18:15:11 anything else ? 18:16:09 moving on then 18:16:20 #topic misc 18:17:23 the number of DDs in the team, as well as the sponsorship, has gone up a lot which is great 18:17:25 ncts[m] brought up those topics: team book, logo and patch style but they are not here so I would move this to the next meet 18:17:34 weepingclown: yeah 18:18:08 I have two items: MIA uploaders and semver tracking 18:18:22 I'd also add meeting schedule to the agenda ;) 18:18:28 ah 18:18:32 indeed 18:18:48 let's do that one first then 18:19:19 right, we should make some proper decisions regarding that 18:19:53 do we want a fixed date ? i.e. 3rd of month at $day 18:20:20 that'd be better than the back and forth we are having each time 18:20:39 since what we currently have isn't working out all that well anyway 18:21:09 once there is a fixed date, at least people can have some plans 18:21:23 I'd propose the following procedure: first a poll for 1 week regarding frequency - once a month, every two months, every 6 weeks (the last would align with rustc release schedule ;)) 18:21:59 then a poll for a second week, depending on the outcome, with two alternating slots (time and weekday wise) chosen from the results 18:22:21 unless we find a single slot where everybody can attend anyway ;) 18:23:09 if nobody else wants to, I can do the polls :-P 18:23:23 f_g: SGTM 18:23:34 +1 18:24:15 werdahias: I suppose we could move on to your topics then 18:24:33 #action agree on meet frequency 18:24:47 #action agree on meet slots 18:25:19 I guess me and f_g will do the polls 18:25:28 that sounds good to me 18:26:04 ok, moving on (unless someone objects ?) 18:26:08 I don't have time to commit to do more admin stuff right now, maybe things will calm down after christmas for me 18:26:51 capitol: sure, thanks for taking care of the RFS pile :) 18:26:59 :) 18:27:28 ok, MIA uploaders 18:27:59 as you all know we have a lot of crates where the uploaders are not present anymore 18:28:35 this causes issues insofar as said crates only get updated when they part of a transition 18:29:29 I would like to propose we reach out to all MIA uploaders by mail and then track all crates where they are listed as first step 18:30:14 this sounds lika a graph problem, if we can color everything that doesn't touch the dep-tree of a binary, and is more than X months old 18:31:50 capitol: that is also a good idea; however this doesn't account for a crate that has been team-uploaded before but the actual uploader is not active in debian anymore 18:31:59 Sorry, I'm late 18:32:10 * werdahias waves 18:32:10 Is the meeting finished? 18:32:15 I don't have a big problem with having some random libraries packaged also, but it might cause extra work if there is security problems published for those 18:32:28 an3as: welcome, we are in the middle of it :) 18:32:39 an3as: just discussing the misc: topics 18:32:40 Great. I'm just lurking and learning 18:32:56 capitol: yeah 18:33:22 werdahias: what problem with MIA uploaders do you want to solve? Try to get them active again? 18:33:46 it gets quite complicated when there are tons of packages who don't really have active uploaders anyway and is rotting away 18:34:01 well it's crates that in theory are team maintained but in fact there is no active maintainer 18:34:08 I think writing a mail to see if they are still active, and then deciding on whether we still need those crates would be the way to go 18:34:18 +1 18:34:21 yeah 18:34:31 anything that isn't part of the dep tree of an executable needs someone to step up, else it gets an RC bug filed followed by removal after a period of inactivity 18:34:37 identifying such packages and removing the unused/low popcorn/no rdeps ones amongst them might do good 18:35:03 a crate that is packaged but not linked into any executable is only worth keeping around if it's to enable a future executable being packaged, IMHO 18:35:10 f.g: yes, precisely 18:35:11 yes 18:35:33 ties into my next topic, removal of semver crates 18:35:36 so the main question is - who does the initial email? :-P 18:36:10 * weepingclown ducks 18:36:14 I can do it if someone can point me to a way to grep those crates with no rdeps 18:36:18 weepingclown: what you say would help filtering out MIA uploaders too, if done beforehand. No need to contact them if the package needs to be removed anyway 18:37:24 werdahias: which is another problem. Do we really have a way to list rdeps other than our *slow* script? 18:37:47 In Bug of the Day we use some UDD query: https://salsa.debian.org/tille/tiny_qa_tools/-/blob/master/botd/get-random-bug?ref_type=heads 18:38:02 I think I have checked with apt rdepends and reverse-depends before which doesn't work iirc 18:38:03 You might adapt it bit for your purpose. 18:38:09 weepingclown: for transitions I used codesearch.debian.net since I believe it's more reliable 18:38:24 No maintainer upload >5 years is a good start for orphaned packages. 18:38:51 f_g: linked into a binary, or used in the tests somehw 18:39:00 Same for old Standards-Version 18:39:09 capitol: yes, good point! 18:39:21 noisycoil: you shouldn't exactly arbitrarily remove a package that's not entirely buggy without the maintainer ack tbh, so a mail would still be better 18:39:39 an3as: that gets updated dynamically by debcargo, but good point 18:40:06 I guess debcargo is only updating Git, isn't it? 18:40:10 yeah, also without a mail you won't find out if it's still needed for something wip 18:40:17 UDD is featuring what is really uploaded. 18:41:21 I agree with the email approach and using a 21 day waiting period like per ITS procedure might be a sensible time span 18:41:28 weepingclown: ordinary packages, yes. packaged rust source code not so much probably. but yeah, there may still be reasons for wanting to have it around 18:42:41 is this something we want to do before the freeze? 18:42:48 it might make sense to also have some record for NEW things *why* it was packaged in the first place (to avoid the guesswork when we next do a cleanup like this ;)) 18:42:52 or maybe as a part of it 18:42:54 I'd still say the same, because there is no reason to remove a perfectly ok package maintained by someone. Unless it gets too buggy or the uplpader themselved gives ack that it's nerdrf anymore. 18:42:56 capitol: doesn't have to be before, during is fine as well 18:43:03 capitol: better if we could do that 18:43:14 :) 18:43:15 anything that leaves testing can't be reintroduced after some point of the freeze 18:43:21 ah yes, actually removals could happen anytime 18:43:30 I was thinking pre-trixie :p 18:44:22 so any volunteers for collecting a list of uploaders with no activity for longer than $THRESHOLD and writing a mail to them? 18:44:34 well the release dates are not announced yet anyway 18:45:07 yeah, I see this mostly as team housekeeping, it has the benefit of also removing cruft from trixie before its release if we don't take too long doing it 18:45:11 I can write a mail if someone helps me with the query 18:45:42 Would like to help, but quite busy unfortunately. I plan to help with such things after I could find some breathing space. 18:46:20 ergo, after zellij work is done probably 18:47:09 I mean this takes care of my next topic too: removing unneeded semver packages and tracking those 18:47:35 like clap-3; actively working to reduce the amount we have 18:47:43 werdahias: could you give some examples? 18:47:53 clap3 :) 18:47:57 I am not sure which packages you are referring to 18:48:07 ah yes :p 18:49:07 #action werdahias looks into an SQL query for outdated packages 18:49:45 werdahias: the debcargo release after this will also change how semver packages express their relationship to non-semver packages 18:50:03 I will probably re-upload all existing semver packages with a no-change bump after that 18:50:08 before the freeze 18:50:16 so getting rid of unneeded ones before that would be great ;) 18:50:25 debcargo!72 has the details 18:50:43 fixing the provides: syn for instance ? 18:51:18 saw that MR 18:51:49 f_g: the output in the MR looks clean to me :) 18:51:52 nice 18:52:19 ok, anything else related to cleaning up outdated / old packages ? 18:53:23 can't say anything other than it'll be good without having some expertise on the subject :p 18:53:35 does anyone have any additional topic they want to discuss ? 18:54:34 if that's not the case then I would end the meet 18:55:13 looks like you're good to go 18:55:16 #endmeeting