Skip to main content

2016-08-25: General discussion

Time: 14:00 UTC

Hangout link: https://hangouts.google.com/call/v5olhwzpfzgzpoq5i3wthjpqpie

Attendees

Jonathan Helmus, Filipe, Michael Sarahan, John Kirkham, Jake VanderPlas, Eric Dill, Ray Donnelly , Phil Elson

Standing items

  • How many repos? 1035
  • How many contributors? 212 (with a few bots)
  • New core devs?

Notes

  • Invite Peter M. Landwehr (pmlandwehr) to be involved with review of staged-recipes. Should we give these type of people a title, Filipe will reach out to.

  • Governing Open Source Projects at Scale: Lessons from Wikipedia's Growing Pains | Staurt Geiger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSQJYEVcMWM&index=89&list=PLYx7XA2nY5Gf37zYZMw6OqGFRPjB1jCy6

  • Enhancement proposal document, Jonathan has notes will write these up later today.

  • Governance document - help is welcomed. Also "whos who" or "about" page. https://conda-forge.github.io/#about

    * This page could be expanded, should mentioned these meeting.
  • Removing items from agenda

    * Prioritize items on agenda which we should/must talk about.
    • Cross link items to GitHub issues/discussions
  • Status page: https://conda-forge.github.io/status/

    * Linked to "status" repo: [](https://github.com/conda-forge/status)[https://github.com/conda-forge/status](https://github.com/conda-forge/status)
  • conda-forge code of conduct - Filipe still workin on

  • Many groups working on new build systems: Filipe, Phil, Continuum

    * Continuum's plan would allow others to add build workers, perhaps conda-forge could use these in addition to the CI services, especially for long builds
    • Organize new meeting to discuss this topic
  • Open sourcing Anaconda Build, should we push to get this released?

    * Would be helpful to have our own build system rather than being dependent on CI systems.
  • Travis CI can increase time if we reduce concurrency

    * Can we switch between longer time and concurrency? How much work is this?
    • Probably not going to take offer at the moment
    • Better to find trusted hardware somewhere
    • Vagrant for OS X builds, can we look into this
  • Security

    * If user changes name and someone takes old name can be a security issue: [](https://groups.google.com/forum/#)[https://groups.google.com/forum/#](https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21topic/rustlang-security-announcements/BK_3gbXhSn4)[!topic/rustlang-security-announcements/BK_3gbXhSn4](https://groups.google.com/forum/#%21topic/rustlang-security-announcements/BK_3gbXhSn4)
    • Can be solved by using unique user ID rather than GitHub username
    • Want tokens for Anaconda.org which allow writing to a single package (Phil will push Continuum on this) rather than globally.
  • Metadata unification

    * Should conda-forge include additional metadata which would make it easier for Continuum to re-use recipes
    • Should this be required or optional?

      * Required would likely reduce number of contributors
      • Will require time/work to add these to all current packages

      • Add to linter and conda skeleton

        * Make linter have "warnings" not hard fails
      • Many of these seem redundant, can we re-use existing metadata?

    • License file should likely be required

      * Legal vs. suggested

Agenda

  • Marking agenda items as done.

  • Share status page. :) Also figure out how to direct notifications effectively.

  • Enhancement proposal document update.

  • conda-forge code of conduct doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10dxX0Zse0Rx1HqsxC73Wfsghmy5m8PP8cHuBIOhWKpc/edit

  • Mention Travis-CI offer for more CI time.

  • We could look at increasing your build time to 180 mins, but we may need to decrease your default concurrency from 5 jobs to 3 as you will be using multiple VMs for a long period at a time.

  • Mention/Discuss Travis Oliphant's comment regarding open sourcing Anaconda Build CI.

  • Security

  • Feedstocks philosophy: Explicit vs implicit / reproducible vs redundant

  • Metadata unification with Continuum - are we OK with adding some fields to about section to match Anaconda standard?

  • Including license file

  • Many recipes don't include the license file.

  • Almost every license has some terms about making the license available.

  • Should we just start requiring this field.

  • Note some developers are not including the license file either.

  • In some cases it has been a struggle to get them to.

  • CUDA/cuDNN update

  • Improving infrastructure

    * Better workflows with staged-recipes

    * Fast finish AppVeyor on merge ( [conda forge/staged recipes#1142](https://github.com/conda-forge/staged-recipes/pull/1142) )
    * Drop Travis CI matrix ( [conda forge/staged recipes#1234](https://github.com/conda-forge/staged-recipes/pull/1234) )
    * Use CircleCI for feedstock generation ( [conda forge/staged recipes#916](https://github.com/conda-forge/staged-recipes/issues/916) )
    * Keeping recipes out of PRs ( [conda forge/staged recipes#942](https://github.com/conda-forge/staged-recipes/issues/942) )
    * Bank work in partial conversion ( [conda forge/staged recipes#915](https://github.com/conda-forge/staged-recipes/issues/915) )
  • Notifications (how do we stay on top of them)

  • MSYS2

    * Available on defaults - was in conda 4.1.7, but that was pulled. Coming in 4.1.8.
    • Discussing Ray Donnelly's work on MSYS2 packages and how we want to use and integrate these into conda-forge.
    • Some use cases to consider OpenBLAS, FFTW, build tools, others?
  • Binary data

    * Do we include it in recipes?
    • What kinds do we allow if any (e.g. icons)?
    • How do we verify the licensing?
    • How do we verify that they are safe?
  • Dev releases: Where do they happen?

    * Do we do them at conda-forge?

    * Maybe add a label.

    * Do we let others do them with a feedstock on their own repo?
    • How do we enforce whatever we decide?
  • Channel mirroring

    * Can this point be a little bit explained? I thought about this as well and would like to contribute to this point.

    * Eric Dill has put together a script for copying a package from one channel to another here: [conda forge/conda forge.github.io#134](https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-forge.github.io/pull/134)
    * I have a really, really crude script that copies all of the packages in one channel to another that I just put at: [](https://gist.github.com/mwcraig/8473cf840f6d29236d6d8af699404555)[https://gist.github.com/mwcraig/8473cf840f6d29236d6d8af699404555](https://gist.github.com/mwcraig/8473cf840f6d29236d6d8af699404555)
    * conda-build-all can copy from one channel to another: `conda build-all --inspect-channels conda-forge --upload-channels astropy some_packge_recipe` will copy the `some_package` from the channel conda-forge to astropy if it can, or build it if it doesn't exist on conda-forge. Discussion about what the desired behavior should be has started at: [SciTools/conda build all#46](https://github.com/SciTools/conda-build-all/issues/46)
  • Feedstock history

    * Is it sacred?
    • Do we rebase/force push?

      * If so, under what conditions?
      • How do we avoid multiple people doing this simultaneously?

        * I don't think you can.

        * IMHO, if it's just one author in staged recipes, sure. If feedstock, no force push - only to PRs to feedstock. If people don't mind merge PRs, it sure is a lot simpler to not rebase. I have messed up rebasing a few times recently... =(
  • Continuum metadata request: can we add these to linter?

    * example metadata: [](https://github.com/ContinuumIO/anaconda-recipes/blob/master/anaconda-build/meta.yaml#L36-L44)[https://github.com/ContinuumIO/anaconda-recipes/blob/master/anaconda-build/meta.yaml#L36-L44](https://github.com/ContinuumIO/anaconda-recipes/blob/master/anaconda-build/meta.yaml#L36-L44)
    • Also, distinguish summary (limit of 77 or 80 chars) from description (unlimited)
    • Anaconda verify: would be nice to meet in the middle, rather than diverge. conda-build may integrate anaconda-verify, would be nice if conda-forge added metadata here.
  • Drop numpy 1.10 and reduce our build matrix. (Numba now works with numpy 1.11.)

  • Signing packages

    * Should be easy to do. ( [](http://conda.pydata.org/docs/signed-packages.html)[http://conda.pydata.org/docs/signed-packages.html](http://conda.pydata.org/docs/signed-packages.html) )
    • There has been some interest previously.
  • HTTPError: 503 Server Error: Service Unavailable: Back-end server is at capacity for url...

    * Seems we are regularly running into this issue under normal usage conditions.
    • Had discussed previously caching packages on AppVeyor and trying to reuse those to start.
    • Maybe we need to consider caching on all CIs.
    • Building our own Miniconda-like self-extracting scripts with packages via constructor.
    • There have been improvements on Continuum's side that should help this. In short, repodata (the package index for a given channel) was being generated for each anaconda.org query. This was unnecessarily high cost, and some caching schemes have been implemented.
  • Handling removal of unpinned/improperly pinned packages.

    * Has been done manually thus far.
  • Not currently buildable packages

    * In particular open source code that is out of scope for CIs.
    • Examples include Qt4, Qt5, possibly PyQt4, possibly PyQt5, gcc, VTK, etc.

    • How do we indicate they are built manually?

    • Are we ok with uploading non-built binaries?

    • When do we determine something is ok to be built manually?

    • What procedures should people follow for building manually?

      * Use a standard build docker image, VM, or vagrant file
      • Sign package?

      • Implement reproducible builds where feasible (linux)

        * [](https://reproducible-builds.org/)[https://reproducible-builds.org/](https://reproducible-builds.org/)
      • What changes do we need to make in conda-smithy elsewhere?

    • What other build infrastructure could we utilize?

      * Would be nice to provide some volunteer builder abstraction, so that we could have an elastic worker farm that would be somewhat resilient.
      • Standardizing build images is probably (relatively) easy - how to orchestrate, though?
  • Staged Releases

  • Windows BLAS Solutions

    * Still don't have a BLAS for Windows yet need something.
    • Don't build a BLAS

      * NumPy has a small subset of BLAS functionality.
      • Not sure what to do with SciPy (unable to find Windows wheels for them either).

      • Build OpenBLAS with C support only.

        * Will be pretty slow.
      • Should work on all Pythons.

      • Build OpenBLAS with MinGW compilers.

        * Works with Python 2.7 and 3.4.
      • Won't work with Python 3.5?

      • Reuse something like R's BLAS.

        * Is there a package for something like this?
      • Will it have the same issues with Python 3.5?

      • ATLAS?