# pulp_deb interest group meeting

Time: 10:00 EST; 16:00 CET
Place: Online, the **meeting URL** has been mailed out by Calender invite. The room should be **available starting 15 minutes prior** to the scheduled meeting time.
Expected Attendees: quba42, hstct, davidd, Stephen Herr, Moustafa

## Meeting Next:

**Attendees:**
**Regrets:**

### Previous AIs:

### Agenda:

* [quba42] I would like to hear everyones thoughts on https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/issues/785

### Open PRs:

https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pulls

*

## Agenda 2023-06-01:

**Attendees:** quba42, Stephen Herr, davidd, hstct, Moustafa
**Regrets:**

* Apt-by-hash feature
* We have an intern starting and are thinking about having them work on this?
* => Valid feature request
* Will start by filing a issue with a design proposal asking for feedback (timeframe within weeks)
* Some uncertainty about the whole thing

### Previous AIs:

* AI: Drop a comment asking if the source PR work is unblocked
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/issues/742#issuecomment-1525828877
* AI: 2023-05-02 review session
* AI: quba42 schedule one more meeting same time next month

### Open PRs:

https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pulls

* Filter PR: https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/647
* quba42: fully reviewed and tested locally
* needs "happy path" test coverage => can be done on separate PR?
* Remember signing service PR: https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/689
* hstct: Needs a rebase and migration order fix.
* Test changes not strictly necessary because those tests are about to be reworked by Tobias anyway.
* Colliding Structure Fix: https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/760
* KeyError fix: https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/778
* The fix un-breaks repos where a user added a package with the "wrong" architecture.
* Possible long term fix: Add validation at the point of package upload.
* Alternative long term fix: Add the architecture on the fly.
* Source Indices PR:
* Open PRs against the PR, re-evaluate once some of the other PRs are in.
* Release file fields PR: https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/656
* quba42: I have a tested working state version of this branch, and a plan I would like to discuss
* Show quba's changes to david for comment!

## Agenda 2023-04-27

**Attendees:** quba42, davidd, Stephen, hstct
**Regrets:** Moustafa

* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/741 was merged to unblock others.
* What can we do to ensure https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/issues/742 is solved?
* Solved in pulp smash.
* Also needs a fix in pulpcore but this is probably not blocking us.
* AI: Drop a comment asking if the source PR work is unblocked
* AptByHash: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AptByHash
* Probably requires publication changes only
* Keeping publication artifacts from previous publications around would be more challenging
* Feature is well understood

### Open PRs:

https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pulls

* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/706
* Approved, need to modify an existing test as part of https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/744, which should provide coverage for this change as well.
* AI: To be merged soon.
* Awaiting final review?
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/689
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/647
* Will receive one more rework most likely before Tuesday
* AI: To be reviewed on Tuesday.
* Awaiting final rework:
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/656
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/295

### Action Items:

* AI: quba42 schedule one more meeting same time next month

## Agenda 2023-03-30

### Previous Action Items

* quba42 will approve https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/704 for merge this week.
* Approved and merged
* quba42 to schedule a follow up meeting.
* In a first step open PR's (or the associated issues) should provid `http` or `pulp` CLI based workflows on how to test them in a local test environment. => This significantly lowers the barrier to review
* In a second step open PR's should add test coverage.
* david to look at refactoring release fields into ReleaseFile/separate model https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/656

### Topics

* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/683 merged
* https://discourse.pulpproject.org/t/rfc-separating-sync-and-upload-workflows-in-pulp-deb-and-others/787
* A similar meeting to this one: https://hackmd.io/@pulp/pulp-deb-katello-integration

### Open PRs:
* Structured upload API
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/647
* Maybe this one does not need a test and is ready for final review?
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/689
* Has tests ready for final review, does not modify Release, but references them.
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/706
* daviddavis to write reproducer workflow
* Relies entirely on pulpcore feature, otherwise ready for testing/final review
* source package support: https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/295
* Test data is there on a separate branch <= this can perhaps be reviewed
* Upload test from microsoft team in the works
* Tobias to ping the author about pytest pointers
* quba42 to do some manual testing in oci env
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/656

### Action Item:
* quba42 to schedule the next meeting and update these notes.

## Agenda 2023-02-23

### Goals

* Improving cooperation on moving open pulp_deb PRs along

### Topics

* What can you tell us about your pulp_deb use case and to what extent do you expect that you will continue to open issues and PRs going forward?
* https://packages.microsoft.com/
* Azure linux team at Microsoft
* One of the projects is for distributing Linux packages (deb and rpm)
* Moved to Pulp
* Should we help to maintain the plugin?
* What is ATIX' relationship with pulp_deb
* ATIX has a downsream enterprise product (https://orcharhino.com/en/) of Foreman/Katello (https://theforeman.org/), which contains Pulp (https://pulpproject.org/). With the switch from Pulp 2 to Pulp 3 we became the maintainers of the pulp_deb plugin in particular.
* Testing
* State of the current test suite
* Conversion to pytest
* Local repo fixtures
* What kind of community submission _require_ test coverage to be accepted
* The current plan for https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/issues/599 (which is blocking a lot of things and may involve significant architectural changes)
* Open pull requests:
* https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/295
* Needs tests. Ping author.
* ...

### Action Items

* quba42 will approve https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/704 for merge this week.
* quba42 to schedule a follow up meeting.
* In a first step open PR's (or the associated issues) should provid `http` or `pulp` CLI based workflows on how to test them in a local test environment. => This significantly lowers the barrier to review
* In a second step open PR's should add test coverage. (Requires https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/704)
* david to look at refactoring release fields into ReleaseFile/separate model https://github.com/pulp/pulp_deb/pull/656