17:00:18 #startmeeting F22-blocker-review 17:00:18 Meeting started Mon Jan 26 17:00:18 2015 UTC. The chair is roshi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:18 #meetingname F22-blocker-review 17:00:18 The meeting name has been set to 'f22-blocker-review' 17:00:18 #topic Roll Call 17:01:10 * kparal is here 17:01:21 ahoyhoy 17:01:22 hey kparal :) 17:01:33 * roshi is here too 17:01:42 hi there 17:01:53 welcome tonghuix :) 17:02:00 * danofsatx looks for more coffee. 17:02:13 * roshi just poured more coffee 17:02:32 #topic Introduction 17:02:32 Why are we here? 17:02:32 #info Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and nice-to-have bugs. 17:02:36 #info We'll be following the process outlined at: 17:02:39 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting 17:02:41 #info The bugs up for review today are available at: 17:02:44 #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current 17:02:46 #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at: 17:02:48 * pschindl is here 17:02:49 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Alpha_Release_Criteria 17:02:52 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Beta_Release_Criteria 17:02:55 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Final_Release_Criteria 17:03:31 welcome :) 17:03:42 well, we have 2/1/2 to go through 17:03:49 apologies for the late announcement 17:03:59 * roshi coulda swore he sent it on Friday 17:04:13 alright, onto the ALpha proposals 17:04:14 #topic (1184453) mouse cursor is invisible for 1 minute after log in, g-s-d seems to be stuck waiting for cups 17:04:17 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1184453 17:04:19 #info Proposed Blocker, cups, NEW 17:04:29 +1 17:04:33 * danofsatx is prepped ;) 17:05:02 nice 17:05:12 i'm still not really sure this blocks alpha, i'd be more beta or final 17:05:14 is missing mouse icon blocker? 17:05:16 yeah 17:05:24 if it never came *back* that'd be one thing 17:05:27 there are some more issues, basically anything waiting for gnome-settings-daemon is stuck 17:05:39 I noticed for example airplane mode detection 17:05:49 some graphical glitches when waiting for icons 17:06:20 we don't need to get too hung up on it if it's going to get fixed, but i'm -1 alpha +1 beta i gues 17:06:35 same here 17:06:39 there's a workaround though, a gsetting option that will disable the cursor plugin in g-s-d 17:06:40 under which criteria though? 17:07:11 I'm fine with both Alpha and Beta, no strong feelings there 17:07:21 but it seems to be common, in my testing 17:07:32 it's interesting that it seems to affect only certain setups 17:07:46 as usual, I fall into the 'always affected' category 17:07:47 which criteria, since there wasn't one I saw in the bz proposal 17:08:15 * oddshocks pops in 17:08:24 adamw is our local criteria fuzzying guru 17:08:54 *fudge-ing ? 17:08:57 so we *are* supposed to judge the issues by the critreria 17:09:01 * danofsatx is digging for criteria now 17:09:02 desktop panel? 17:09:07 not decide whether we want it to be an issue then fuzz the criteria appropriately 17:09:08 ;) 17:09:11 yeah 17:09:26 comment 5 stated the violated Alpha criteria, conditionally 17:09:48 yeah, you can say it's a 'conditional' violation of any desktop criterion as it's hard to do any of 'em if you can't see the mouse 17:10:37 Required Applications? If you've got no cursor, you can't run apps. 17:10:49 imagine if the cursor never came back, we'd say something like 'conditional violation of "It must be possible to run the default web browser and a terminal application from all release-blocking desktop environments." 17:10:51 yeah 17:11:06 proposed #agreed - 1184453 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug conditionally violates the Beta criterion by making it difficult/impossible to do anything within the GUI. 17:11:21 ack 17:12:37 ack 17:12:43 um 17:12:52 you didn't actually mention which criterion, plus that one is alpha not beta 17:12:53 try: 17:13:14 but nice try 17:13:15 proposed #agreed - 1184453 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug conditionally violates the Alpha criterion ""It must be possible to run the default web browser and a terminal application from all release-blocking desktop environments." by making it difficult/impossible to do anything within the GUI. 17:13:21 d'oh 17:13:39 proposed #agreed - 1184453 - AcceptedBlocker for Beta - This bug conditionally violates the Alpha criterion ""It must be possible to run the default web browser and a terminal application from all release-blocking desktop environments." by making it difficult/impossible to do anything within the GUI, the violation is considered serious enough to block Beta but not Alpha 17:13:39 let's say it violates Alpha, but is not that serious, so postponed to Beta 17:13:47 right 17:13:47 ack 17:13:48 #chair adamw kparal danofsatx 17:13:48 Current chairs: adamw danofsatx kparal roshi 17:13:49 right, for conditional violations we get to pick 17:14:09 ack 17:14:22 ack 17:14:33 ack 17:14:48 ack 17:14:51 #agreed - 1184453 - AcceptedBlocker for Beta - This bug conditionally violates the Alpha criterion ""It must be possible to run the default web browser and a terminal application from all release-blocking desktop environments." by making it difficult/impossible to do anything within the GUI, the violation is considered serious enough to block Beta but not Alpha 17:15:07 who wants to secretarialize? 17:15:22 i got it 17:15:28 I don't know how, or I would. 17:15:51 danofsatx: well first you need to be initiated into the brotherhood of stonecutters, obviously. 17:16:03 done. 17:16:12 *secret handshake* 17:16:20 * roshi confirms 17:16:22 I've been stealing my son's Minecraft game ;) 17:16:28 haha 17:16:53 all the kids with their crafty mines 17:16:55 get off my lawn 17:17:02 danofsatx: you can take a crack at it - we can answer any questions you have 17:17:11 if adamw doesn't mind, that is 17:17:53 next bug? 17:18:06 ok, so what's the first step - add #agreed statement to bug? 17:18:14 anything to white board? 17:18:47 jas 17:18:51 danofsatx: i'll tutor you in #fedora-qa 17:19:06 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting#Secretary_Duty 17:19:29 it's all nice and documented and things :D 17:19:33 rgr adamw, thanks for the link roshi 17:19:35 alright, bug two 17:19:45 #topic (1185195) SELinux is preventing NetworkManager from 'create' accesses on the lnk_file .resolv.conf.NetworkManager. 17:19:48 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185195 17:19:51 #info Proposed Blocker, selinux-policy, NEW 17:21:12 +1, breaks networking. 17:21:26 +1 17:21:28 pick any old criterion, let's say "The installed system must be able to download and install updates with the default console package manager. " 17:21:33 can't do that with no network! 17:21:46 +1 17:21:52 could also use web browser. 17:22:38 +1 17:22:39 proposed #agreed - 1185195 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug prevents anything requiring the network from working. Violates at least the following criterion: "The installed system must be able to download and install updates with the default console package manager." 17:22:46 ack 17:22:49 ack 17:22:58 +1, ack and all that 17:23:11 #agreed - 1185195 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug prevents anything requiring the network from working. Violates at least the following criterion: "The installed system must be able to download and install updates with the default console package manager." 17:23:16 onto the beta proposals 17:23:32 #topic (1184933) login screen stuck after switching users 17:23:32 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1184933 17:23:32 #info Proposed Blocker, gdm, MODIFIED 17:23:41 +1 17:23:57 +1 17:24:05 we're working on it in the upstream report 17:24:07 still issues 17:24:19 gdm stuck, or xorg reset, or black screen 17:24:32 it also appear sometimes in F21 17:24:42 comment 2 says it was fixed. Was it, or not? 17:24:51 not yet 17:25:10 +1 17:25:56 hmm 17:26:06 i'm trying to remember if user switching is *intentionally* left out of that criterion 17:26:11 it's always kind of had a history of flakiness 17:26:29 this is an unusually bad case, though 17:27:14 I'm of the opinion that it violates because it's an offered mechanism in the gui 17:27:17 * adamw checks the history 17:28:11 * adamw curses his five-year-younger self for not linking to "the discussion around this" 17:29:05 I think this is pretty basic functionality 17:29:16 bah, can't find it 17:29:21 i'm OK with a provisional +1 17:29:22 and all my family members curse gnome constantly because of this 17:29:25 heh 17:29:39 I feel it is, also. In me experience, Fedora is the only product it doesn't work in - even KDE doesn't work 100%. 17:29:46 it's a bit difficult to teach them ctrl+alt+fx 17:30:25 of course it would be nice if we put it directly into the criterion 17:30:50 proposed #agreed - 1184933 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug is a conditional violation of the criterion: "Shutting down, logging out and rebooting must work using standard console commands and the mechanisms offered (if any) by all release-blocking desktops." As "Switch User" is an offered mechanism. 17:31:58 ack 17:33:31 ack 17:33:31 ack 17:33:51 the explanation stands on water a bit, it is worth to include account switch directly into the criterion? should I propose it on the list? 17:34:06 can I get a review of 1184453 before I continue with secretary duty? 17:34:09 I think so 17:34:17 sure danofsatx 17:34:22 kparal: yeah, please do 17:34:28 if we're going to block on it let's do it right 17:34:28 ok 17:34:35 second action item! 17:34:57 #action kparal to propose criteria change to the list regarding user switching 17:35:40 any more ack/nack/patch 17:35:42 ? 17:35:44 ack 17:36:03 #agreed - 1184933 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug is a conditional violation of the criterion: "Shutting down, logging out and rebooting must work using standard console commands and the mechanisms offered (if any) by all release-blocking desktops." As "Switch User" is an offered mechanism. 17:36:08 #topic (1185117) UEFI dual-boot + Windows, cannot practically remove and install Fedora over an existing default opensuse installation 17:36:11 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185117 17:36:14 #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW 17:37:41 umm.....I'm iffy on this one. It's specific in the bug to Suse, but it would apply to any previous installation with btrfs. 17:38:23 yeah, i'm more +1 on this from the description than the summary 17:38:34 sounds like it'd also affect a previous fedora install to lvm thinp, which is a thing we offer 17:38:39 I want to reproduce this just to *see* it 17:38:48 i don't really like the criterion... 17:38:55 roshi: try installing over a thinp f21, i guess 17:38:59 after you use it for a bit 17:39:46 i'd probably prefer this as a partial violation of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Beta_Release_Criteria#Custom_partitioning bullet #1 17:39:59 that's what I was just going to paste 17:40:13 seems pretty clear it isn't reading things on disk correctly 17:40:24 it's not really doing that 'correctly' for btrfs snapshots / lvm thinp, as described 17:40:41 +1 under that criterion 17:40:51 i'm ok with +1 beta for now, yeah, i trust cmurf 17:40:57 we have time to adjust if anaconda folks disagree 17:41:41 so, beta? it's proposed as final 17:41:53 sure, but it seems like a reasonable beta blocker under that criterion 17:41:56 we can twiddle it later if necessary 17:41:58 proposed #agreed - 1185117 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug is a violation of the Beta criterion: "Correctly interpret, and modify as described below, any disk with a valid ms-dos or gpt disk label and partition table containing ext4 partitions, LVM and/or btrfs volumes..." 17:41:58 ok 17:42:13 roshi: patch to say beta 17:42:18 danofsatx: ^^ that bug is moving from proposed Final to Beta 17:42:21 it does 17:42:37 it says it's a violation of Beta criterion, but not explicitly that it's a beta blocker 17:42:55 you can't assume a mapping from one to the other 17:43:07 roger, got it 17:43:19 in the past when we only reviewed for one milestone at a time it was fine not to say explicitly, but now we're reviewing for all milestones i think we should make it clear 17:43:19 the mapping has traditionally been done by the secretary, aiui 17:43:26 roshi: it's good to have it in the meeting logs 17:43:39 I just always put AcceptedBlocker that space 17:43:51 we used to review for one milestone at a time so it was pretty clear 17:43:57 proposed #agreed - 1185117 - AcceptedBlocker for Beta - This bug is a violation of the Beta criterion: "Correctly interpret, and modify as described below, any disk with a valid ms-dos or gpt disk label and partition table containing ext4 partitions, LVM and/or btrfs volumes..." 17:44:02 ack 17:44:02 yeah 17:44:28 I just wanted that field to be pretty standard if I ever had to write something to parse the logs from these meetings for statistics or something 17:44:36 ah, i see 17:44:52 well the ones where i ran the meetings would be busted anyway :P 17:44:57 regex! regex! 17:44:59 ack 17:45:00 adding things to fields makes that a lot harder :p 17:45:08 lol 17:45:18 #agreed - 1185117 - AcceptedBlocker for Beta - This bug is a violation of the Beta criterion: "Correctly interpret, and modify as described below, any disk with a valid ms-dos or gpt disk label and partition table containing ext4 partitions, LVM and/or btrfs volumes..." 17:45:25 tell you what, when you write something and start cursing, file an issue for writing the regex and assign it to me :P 17:45:30 you can always write proposed #agreed {json} 17:45:45 if that seems easier 17:45:48 haha 17:45:52 will do, adamw :p 17:45:53 lol 17:45:56 alright, last bug 17:45:57 #topic (1182652) Missing high contrast icon 17:45:57 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1182652 17:45:57 #info Proposed Blocker, setroubleshoot, NEW 17:46:12 proposed for final i guess? 17:46:14 +1 17:46:25 +1 17:46:29 +1 17:46:30 regression from F20 17:46:32 F21 17:46:58 +1 17:47:02 +1 17:47:56 proposed #agreed - 1182652 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug violates the criterion: "All applications installed by default in Fedora Workstation must comply with each MUST and MUST NOT guideline in the Applications and Launchers policy." 17:48:48 ack 17:49:17 ack 17:49:29 ack 17:49:40 #agreed - 1182652 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug violates the criterion: "All applications installed by default in Fedora Workstation must comply with each MUST and MUST NOT guideline in the Applications and Launchers policy." 17:49:44 well, that's it 17:49:48 man, this whole 'review everything as we go along' plan is way way better. why didn't we do this earlier. 17:49:49 #topic Open Floor 17:50:20 same reason as always, adamw : $REASONS 17:50:22 no FE's? 17:50:28 not in freeze 17:50:34 duh 17:50:36 no need for an exception :p 17:51:02 anybody have anything for open floor? 17:51:10 * roshi sets the fuse... 17:51:34 adamw: do you think it will save us from 20 pending blockers every week during the release cycle? I wouldn't be that optimistic 17:51:59 I foresee some longer meetings 17:52:28 but I also see it being easier to keep things under control throughout a release 17:52:46 kparal: i think it'll help... 17:52:49 but hey, i'm an optimist 17:52:53 and not having a couple weeks towards the end of a milestone having few and then getting a ton the next week 17:52:58 good lord, my desktop is royally screwed up right now. 17:53:05 ok, I think I did the BZ updating correctly....anyone care to double check? 17:53:17 it's called GNOME, adamw :p 17:53:19 * roshi ducks 17:53:20 danofsatx: i'll check it over later 17:53:25 rgr 17:53:35 roshi: heh. no, it's freeipa stuff 17:53:42 it's completely crapped itself 17:53:48 (that's a highly technical description) 17:53:53 haha 17:54:09 but srsly, how have users tolerated this global modal thing? 17:54:22 hum? 17:54:25 global modal thing? 17:54:33 the gnome password trap 17:54:38 oh, yeah, that's annoying. 17:54:49 i believe i have documented my workaround procedure in the bug 17:54:53 I didn't tolerate it, I switched to KDE. mo bettah' 17:54:55 "curse, punch the desk, hit esc and do it again' 17:55:07 that's what I've currently implemented as well 17:55:51 danofsatx: I like my DE's like I like my bathroom floors - tiled. 17:56:45 3... 17:57:32 2... 17:58:35 1... 17:58:41 thanks for coming folks! 17:58:54 #endmeeting