2016-07-22: General discussion¶
Time: 14:00 UTC
Hangout link: https://hangouts.google.com/call/v5olhwzpfzgzpoq5i3wthjpqpie
How many repos?
How many contributors?
New core devs?
Governance/mechanism for formally proposing and deciding on enhancements.
* Motivation: Without a formal governance model it is difficult for the conda-forge community to reach final decisions. There is no designated place to propose changes in, e.g. compiler infrastructure or whether to run or not to run a package's unit tests, so these end up being scattered across pull requests and issues.
* The Python model: BDFL + PEPs
The Jupyter model: BDFL + Steering Council + JEPs: https://github.com/jupyter/governance
The astropy model: Coordinating Committee + APEs: https://github.com/astropy/astropy-APEs and http://www.astropy.org/about.html
IPEP : https://github.com/ipython/ipython/wiki/IPEP-0:-IPEP-Templatehttps://github.com/ipython/ipython/wiki/IPEP-0:-IPEP-Template
numpy governance: http://docs.scipy.org/doc/numpy-dev/dev/governance/governance.html
All of these models have a mechanism for enhancement proposals, so how about creating: github.com/conda-forge/conda-forge-enhancement-proposals
SciPy sprint: https://trello.com/b/KURmGkly/conda-forge-scipy-sprint
conda-forge code of conduct doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10dxX0Zse0Rx1HqsxC73Wfsghmy5m8PP8cHuBIOhWKpc/edit
Discuss some guidelines to contact the authors
Feedstocks philosophy: Explicit vs implicit / reproducible vs redundant
OSX - getting back to a usable, coherent, stack
* libc++ (clang) vs libstdc++ (gcc/g++)
Minimum OSX required for clang (10.8, I think?)
Actually clang is usable beginning in 10.7. So, this would be viable given your compatibility constraints.
Also, all the refs I have seen suggest that this will still have C++11 support.
Compatibility with defaults (built on 10.7, uses gcc) - where will people break? I think only if mixing packages - how do we assure that we have all the ones we need?
* Travis CI API issues
Finish out GitHub API issues
Better workflows with staged-recipes
Low level packaging
Basic community practices when PR-ing to staged-recipes.
No need to re-discuss this. I am still writing the docs and, if ready, I will send the link tomorrow (or after SciPy ;-)
also curl/ca-certificates and Perl packages) - Done?
* curl and ca-certificates are done and available.
Perl is no longer relevant as part of this process
Notifications (how do we stay on top of them)
* Mention [`toolchain`](https://github.com/conda-forge/toolchain-feedstock) . * Discuss rollout to feedstocks. * Get feedback on [`python-toolchain`](https://github.com/conda-forge/staged-recipes/pull/642)
* 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?
* 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?
OpenBLAS (on Windows)
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?
* We have Python 3.5, and 3.4 now. Would be nice to have 2.7.
Have everything. Though
conda-buildneeds some work.
Repo for installer exists, but many questions remain open. ( https://github.com/conda-forge/conda-forge-anvil )
* 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)
* 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... =(
Docker hosting solution
* Docker Hub builds were broken for a week and a half.
Have switched to quay.io currently.
Mirroring quay.io image on Docker Hub.
Thoughts about quay.io? Thoughts about hosting in general?
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.
Google hangouts has a max capacity of 10. Is it worth considering other methods of communication so everyone who wants to participate can?
Maybe this ( http://www.freeconferencecalling.com/ ) is an option.
Continuum has webex. Past experience is that some Linux platforms had trouble connecting
Drop numpy 1.10 and reduce our build matrix. (Numba now works with numpy 1.11.)
This comment from the PR for graphviz is the best summary I’ve seen: conda forge/staged recipes#568#issuecomment-225315370
Thanks for pointing this out. The described solution looks reasonable and is preferable to prefixing package names. Great!
What is the benefit?
Will we distinguish between libs and standalone tools, similar to Debian? I would strongly suggest to do this, because it is (1) established and (2) more accessible for the user (if he wants to use a library, he knows the language. If he wants to use a standalone, he doesn’t care). ( )https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/ch-module_packages.html#s-package_names)
Will there be an orchestrated move? If not, how do we deal with inconsistencies and potential conflicts (installing both python-h5py and h5py).
* we will probably go with meta-packages for conflicting packages
Should be easy to do. ( 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
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.
This doesn’t scale well though.
Should we (semi) automate removal?
Should we hot-fix broken packages? ( conda forge/conda forge.github.io#170 )
Travis CI API unreliability
- 873 repositories, 171 people
- Discussion of adding new core-devs and onboarding new contributors
- Governance/Enhancements proposals
Want place to move longer technical discussions which will eventually move to decision
Use cases for enhancements proposals from the past
* compiler decisions (one per OS)
CentOS 5 vs 6
Enhancements vs how decisions are made
* core group which votes on the issue? Others from the community?
proposal should provide evidence to help others understand the issue
Enhancement proposals get merged regularly
* "pending" status on issue where no decision has been made
No BDFL, committee instead (astropy has coordinating committee, numpy has a steering council)
Enhancement proposal proposal Pull Request – Jonathan
Iterate for numpy like governance
Blog post on conda-forge sprint – Filipe
code of conduct
* Filipe has draft, please review
How do we handle those who misbehave (specified in document)
Submit as enhancement proposal, review after ~1 week submit
committee which will sit on code-of-conduct panel to act as nanny (perhaps some external)
contacting authors – ping 4/5 active contributors to inform and ask if they want to contribute
* do not add people to list of maintainers without permissions, let them add themselves in a pull request
add common snippets to docs so they are easier to find and used by others
John will add a generic comment to guidelines for contacting contributors via PR.
Lots of mention and excitement of conda-forge at SciPy
* Time-series on big packages mentioned at SciPy?
Some questions on Nathan’s whl talk
Split gdal into libgdal and gdal like default has done, seem to have fixed issue
Next meeting 3 weeks from today, Aug 12th