--- # System prepended metadata title: pulp_deb interest group meeting --- # 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