17:00:24 <tflink> #startmeeting f17-beta-blocker-review-4
17:00:24 <zodbot> Meeting started Fri Mar 30 17:00:24 2012 UTC.  The chair is tflink. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:24 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:24 <tflink> #meetingname f17-beta-blocker-review-4
17:00:24 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f17-beta-blocker-review-4'
17:00:35 <tflink> #topic roll call
17:00:40 * nirik is lurking.
17:00:48 <tflink> who's ready for some blocker review awesomeness?
17:01:11 <jskladan> yaaaay /me is ready to zzzap some blockers in the QA style!
17:01:23 <jskladan> (aka close as NOTABUG)
17:01:50 <adamw> that's my favourite resolution
17:02:00 * brunowolff is here
17:02:44 <kalev> hi
17:04:29 <tflink> jskladan, brunowolff, adamw, kalev: welcome to the party!
17:04:29 <adamw> no, actually, i lie
17:04:36 <adamw> my favourite resolution is WORKSFORME
17:04:44 <adamw> it has wonderful overtones of arrogance and lack of concern
17:04:50 <jskladan> hehe
17:05:02 * jskladan always forgets about the WORKSFORME state..
17:05:03 <adamw> well it works for ME. clearly, there is something wrong with you. have friends been avoiding you lately? do people stare at you on trains?
17:05:21 <brunowolff> And when it doesn't work for you, you can always use WONTFIX.
17:05:31 <jskladan> adamw: sounds like a good topic for xkcd comix ;)
17:05:31 <tflink> I always thought of WORKSFORME as more of "it's not perfect but I'm OK with it for now"
17:05:36 <adamw> jskladan: heh, point
17:05:38 <adamw> i should mail randall
17:05:57 <adamw> tflink: that may be what YOU use it for.
17:06:00 <adamw> :P
17:06:14 <tflink> we seem to have enough people for a quorum, so let's get started with a bit of boilerplate
17:06:24 <tflink> #topic Introduction
17:06:39 <tflink> #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.
17:07:06 <tflink> We will be working off of the following list of bugs:
17:07:10 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers
17:07:28 <tflink> And the almighty release criteria that we use can be found at:
17:07:57 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_17_Beta_Release_Criteria
17:07:58 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_17_Alpha_Release_Criteria
17:08:09 <kalev> hey, I proposed a blocker that's not on the list: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808497
17:08:11 <buggbot> Bug 808497: unspecified, unspecified, ---, kanarip, NEW, Firefox missing from gnome-shell application launcher
17:08:26 <tflink> the meeting will loosely follow the process outlined by:
17:08:31 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
17:08:40 <tflink> kalev: when did you propose it?
17:08:52 <kalev> about an hour ago
17:09:19 <tflink> that page is only updated 1x/hour so it'll show up at the next refresh which should be any minute now
17:09:49 <tflink> on the docket today, we have:
17:10:02 <tflink> #info 2 proposed blockers
17:10:02 <tflink> #info 3 accepted blockers
17:10:03 <tflink> #info 12 proposed NTH
17:10:27 <adamw> kalev: we'll pull it in, don't worry
17:10:29 <tflink> any objections to starting with the proposed blockers?
17:10:42 <tflink> I imagine that my scripts pulled it in, too
17:10:57 <kalev> yes, it just appeared on the page now
17:11:43 <tflink> ok, no objections so ...
17:11:55 <tflink> #topic (808499) dracut: FATAL: Don't know how to handle 'root=anaconda-kickstart'
17:11:58 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808499
17:12:00 <buggbot> Bug 808499: unspecified, unspecified, ---, hughsient, NEW, dracut: FATAL: Don't know how to handle 'root=anaconda-kickstart'
17:12:01 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NEW
17:12:29 <adamw> oh right, i was gonna try and reproduce this.
17:12:32 <tflink> does this need to wait for an update to preupgrade?
17:12:50 <adamw> i was slightly confused, because there's no such root= parameter in the grub config of my previous preupgrade test
17:12:53 * tflink isn't all that familiar with preupgrade
17:12:57 <adamw> i don't think there's a pending preupgrade update atm.
17:13:08 * tflink didn't see anything in bodhi earlier today
17:13:13 <tflink> but I could have missed something
17:13:14 <brunowolff> Is this an f16 or f17 bug?
17:13:19 <adamw> 16.
17:13:26 <adamw> well, i'd guess.
17:14:02 <tflink> yeah, I'm not seeing anything in koji or bodhi ATM
17:14:05 <brunowolff> So it wouldn't block composes, just going ahead with the beta release?
17:14:06 <adamw> so far preupgrade has always been broken by other bugs
17:14:09 <tflink> adamw: depends on where the bug is, no?
17:14:13 <adamw> brunowolff: assuming it's really in preupgrade, yeah.
17:14:30 <adamw> we've never actually made it to the point of discovering bugs in preupgrade itself yet.
17:15:01 <adamw> hey bcl
17:15:11 <bcl> mornin
17:15:19 <adamw> we're on http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808499
17:15:19 <tflink> bcl: welcome to the party!
17:15:21 <buggbot> Bug 808499: unspecified, unspecified, ---, hughsient, NEW, dracut: FATAL: Don't know how to handle 'root=anaconda-kickstart'
17:15:54 <tflink> do we have enough info to vote on this?
17:16:04 <tflink> I'm not sure if this is an anaconda issue or a preupgrade issue
17:16:05 <adamw> well, as described, it's pretty blockery.
17:16:10 <adamw> it's a blocker whichever it's in.
17:16:14 <tflink> true
17:16:15 <adamw> if it hits all preupgrade attempts.
17:16:30 <bcl> that's going to be preupgrade writing the cmdline
17:16:45 <adamw> bcl: sure, but i guess the question is, is it writing something wrong/old that should be changed
17:16:50 <bcl> assuming that's what root really is.
17:16:55 <adamw> or is it writing something valid and exposing a bug in dracut/anaconda
17:17:07 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 808499 - AcceptedBlocker - Hits the F17 beta criterion "The installer must be able to successfully complete an upgrade installation from a clean, fully updated default installation (from any official install medium) of the previous stable Fedora release, either via preupgrade or by booting to the installer manually. The upgraded system must meet all release criteria"
17:17:17 <brunowolff> ack
17:17:22 <adamw> ack
17:17:24 <jskladan> ack
17:17:25 <adamw> will revisit if i can't reproduce
17:17:31 <tflink> #agreed - 808499 - AcceptedBlocker - Hits the F17 beta criterion "The installer must be able to successfully complete an upgrade installation from a clean, fully updated default installation (from any official install medium) of the previous stable Fedora release, either via preupgrade or by booting to the installer manually. The upgraded system must meet all release criteria"
17:17:46 <bcl> hmm, that may be related to the kickstart parsing rewriting root=
17:18:01 <adamw> bcl: ah
17:18:17 <adamw> bcl: see i was confused because i see no such root= in the cmdline from my previous preupgrade test
17:18:20 <adamw> so i was wondering about that
17:18:20 <tflink> adamw: that sounds like a personal issue - http://xkcd.com/583/
17:18:28 <bcl> might cc wwoods on it.
17:18:41 <tflink> #topic (808497) Firefox missing from gnome-shell application launcher
17:18:41 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808497
17:18:41 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, NEW
17:18:43 <buggbot> Bug 808497: unspecified, unspecified, ---, kanarip, NEW, Firefox missing from gnome-shell application launcher
17:18:51 <adamw> tflink: heh. i liked that one.
17:19:05 <brunowolff> Is firefox used in any of are test plans for beta?
17:19:07 <tflink> ah, this bug
17:19:13 <tflink> this only affects lives
17:19:27 <kalev> yep
17:19:27 <adamw> brunowolff: yes, but then, you can still launch it.
17:19:30 <adamw> it's just not in the favourites.
17:19:35 <tflink> and not installations done from either a traditional installer or livecd
17:19:49 <adamw> this seems clearly not a blocker to me, it's nowhere near serious enough to hit any criteria. but it seems safe enough to take as nth/
17:19:59 <brunowolff> I'm guessing its a pretty safe change, so I'd be OK with NTH.
17:20:12 <tflink> sounds like there is a fix to spin-kickstarts, too
17:20:46 <kalev> I have a local fix, just wanted you guys to approve it before pushing to spin-kickstarts
17:21:02 <brunowolff> We wouldn't update the package, just the repo.
17:21:03 * satellit_laptop name changed for ff
17:21:10 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 808497 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedNTH - This doesn't hit any of the beta release criteria but seems safe enough to take and is a very visable issue which can't be fixed by updates
17:21:11 <adamw> the fix is to spin-kickstarts alone aiui.
17:21:11 <brunowolff> The live images are built from the repo.
17:21:28 <adamw> ack
17:21:31 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:21:32 <satellit_laptop> it is on favorites doen with liveinst
17:21:47 <brunowolff> People aren't supposed to be messing with the repo's during freezes, but it's less controlled than package updates.
17:22:06 <tflink> brunowolff: re: blocks and RC2 :)
17:22:12 <kalev> the situation with spin-kickstarts and comps is pretty messy during freezes, no policies there as much as I can tell
17:22:26 <adamw> yes.
17:22:37 <adamw> i've said before there should be, but we've never done it.
17:24:06 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:24:09 <brunowolff> ack
17:24:17 * tflink doesn't like to take implicit acks
17:24:31 * adamw already acked
17:24:50 <tflink> adamw: before I asked for it, even
17:25:28 <tflink> at least 2 people are paying attention :)
17:25:29 <jskladan> ack
17:25:35 <tflink> #agreed - 808497 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedNTH - This doesn't hit any of the beta release criteria but seems safe enough to take and is a very visable issue which can't be fixed by updates
17:25:42 <kalev> adamw: when you request a new compose, please tell dgilmore to update spin-kickstarts
17:25:53 <tflink> OK, that's all of the proposed blockers
17:26:04 <tflink> now for the proposed NTH
17:26:48 * tflink debates skipping the NTH w/o fixes
17:26:54 <adamw> kalev: it gets pulled from git, i think.
17:27:02 <adamw> tflink: we should probably do them
17:27:13 <adamw> since this has been short and they may get fixes before we spin
17:27:21 <tflink> adamw: yeah, true
17:27:25 <tflink> #topic (804309) [abrt] abrt-addon-ccpp-2.0.7-4.fc17: abrt-action-analyze-core:106:extract_info_from_core:IndexError: list index out of range
17:27:28 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804309
17:27:30 <buggbot> Bug 804309: unspecified, unspecified, ---, abrt-devel-list, NEW, [abrt] abrt-addon-ccpp-2.0.7-4.fc17: abrt-action-analyze-core:106:extract_info_from_core:IndexError: list index out of range
17:27:31 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
17:27:48 <adamw> this is the one which stops some abrt reports working?
17:28:23 <adamw> oh right
17:28:26 <adamw> it stalled at +2 nth
17:28:30 <adamw> if we get any more +1 it wins, i guess
17:29:14 <kparal> should I vote for something?
17:29:15 <tflink> adamw: I count ~ +4 nth
17:29:45 <adamw> oh yeah, it's got 2 more.
17:29:53 <adamw> so we can just acceptednth it and move on, i guess.
17:30:11 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 804309 - AcceptedNTH - This doesn't count as blocker but would be nice to have for beta
17:30:15 <brunowolff> A couple of us were +0, but I don't see any -1s
17:30:16 <jskladan> ack
17:30:20 <tflink> I'm pretty much +0 on it
17:30:27 <tflink> but we're already at +4
17:30:30 <adamw> ack, based on other people's votes
17:30:41 <brunowolff> ack (I agree the vote passed)
17:30:47 <tflink> #agreed - 804309 - AcceptedNTH - This doesn't count as blocker but would be nice to have for beta
17:31:04 <tflink> #topic (806505) default password was set when install with serial
17:31:04 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806505
17:31:04 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
17:31:06 <buggbot> Bug 806505: unspecified, unspecified, ---, wwoods, NEW, default password was set when install with serial
17:31:39 <adamw> this seems like an obvious polish issue that would be nice to fix, in the installer so can't be done with updates.
17:31:41 <adamw> so, +1 from me.
17:31:51 <tflink> +1 here, too
17:32:31 <brunowolff> What is that password used for?
17:33:15 <tflink> brunowolff: I believe that's the root password for the installed system
17:33:16 <jskladan> brunowolff: IMHO it's a password to 'tap into' the install process
17:33:24 <tflink> nvm
17:33:37 <jskladan> but who knows
17:33:52 <brunowolff> The wording was weird, which was why I asked.
17:33:59 <jskladan> all in all, deffinitelly +1 NTH here
17:34:10 <tflink> #topic (806505) default password was set when install with serial
17:34:10 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806505
17:34:10 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
17:34:12 <buggbot> Bug 806505: unspecified, unspecified, ---, wwoods, NEW, default password was set when install with serial
17:34:13 <tflink> crap
17:34:15 <tflink> #undo
17:34:15 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x19bbe990>
17:34:18 <tflink> #undo
17:34:18 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x26248cd0>
17:34:20 <tflink> #undo
17:34:20 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x32774210>
17:34:25 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 806505 - AcceptedNTH - This is a polish issue in the installer that can't be fixed w/ updates
17:34:29 <tflink> that's better
17:34:31 <brunowolff> Though I am kind of leaning toward +1 NTH on the confusion value alone.
17:34:55 <jskladan> tflink: ack
17:35:06 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:35:21 <brunowolff> If it is the initial root password, the description of what it is for doesn't really seem right.
17:35:29 <brunowolff> ack
17:35:41 <tflink> brunowolff: yeah, I think it's something else but haven't done all that many serial console installs
17:35:53 <bcl> huh. that's weird.
17:36:15 <adamw> ack
17:36:35 <tflink> #agreed - 806505 - AcceptedNTH - This is a polish issue in the installer that can't be fixed w/ updates
17:36:48 <tflink> #topic (484945) D-Bus activation needs a way to prefer one service over the other depending on the running desktop environment
17:36:51 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484945
17:36:53 <buggbot> Bug 484945: medium, low, ---, davidz, ASSIGNED, D-Bus activation needs a way to prefer one service over the other depending on the running desktop environment
17:36:53 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, ASSIGNED
17:38:30 <tflink> um, is there even a fix for this?
17:38:59 <brunowolff> This one sounds risky to fix.
17:39:08 <adamw> it started out as a more 'obvious' bug
17:39:15 <adamw> (telepathy doing silly things in sugar)
17:39:28 <adamw> but it turns out to have this complex underlying cause, and only show up when you install (I think) KDE and Sugar togethet
17:39:30 <adamw> together*
17:39:38 * jskladan does not at all know what this bug really means... but i'm still in the middle of reading comments in BZ
17:39:41 <brunowolff> Do both policykit handlers get installed in any of the live images or by default?
17:39:41 <adamw> given that it's dbus ickiness, it doesn't sound like a great NTH candidate any more.
17:39:44 <tflink> but there's been almost no movement on it in years
17:39:46 <adamw> brunowolff: no.
17:40:05 <adamw> brunowolff: satellit_ found it by doing one of his 'install every desktop at once' tests.
17:40:12 <tflink> other than reassignment to rawhide and blocking f17beta-nth
17:40:16 <brunowolff> If it's not a problem in default cases I am very -1 NTH on this.
17:40:27 <adamw> note
17:40:35 <adamw> the reason this is showing up is it's marked as blocking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806539
17:40:37 <buggbot> Bug 806539: urgent, unspecified, ---, than, NEW, Telepathy Authentication Handler pops up in sugar-desktop asks Password for KDE Wallet then for Jabber Password which is direct conflict with jabber.sugarlabs.org in sugar.  kills working jabber connection
17:40:41 <tflink> this sounds too big to take on as a NTH so late in beta -1 #topic (484945) D-Bus activation needs a way to prefer one service over the other depending on the running desktop environment
17:40:45 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484945
17:40:46 <tflink> damnation
17:40:46 <buggbot> Bug 484945: medium, low, ---, davidz, ASSIGNED, D-Bus activation needs a way to prefer one service over the other depending on the running desktop environment
17:40:47 <adamw> that's the bug that's directly proposed as f17 beta nth
17:40:48 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, ASSIGNED
17:40:49 <tflink> #undo
17:40:49 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x38873ed0>
17:40:52 <tflink> #undo
17:40:53 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x38873610>
17:41:26 <adamw> #info this is an implied NTH: the bug directly proposed as NTH is #806539
17:41:36 * tflink apologizes for the extra noise, main desktop is currently borked and this isn't his main machine
17:42:37 <adamw> i propose we just consider 806539 directly
17:43:00 <brunowolff> I don't think we need to approve indirect NTHs. If a safer way to handle the approved NTH isn't found this doesn't block the release.
17:43:03 <tflink> WORKSFORME
17:43:23 <jskladan> tflink: ^^^ /me is with the crowd on this one...
17:43:45 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 484945 - This is an indirect NTH, will consider the parent 806539
17:44:32 <tflink> #agreed - 484945 - This is an indirect NTH, will consider the parent 806539
17:44:46 <adamw> the only problem is, unless we set something in the whiteboard field, the implied blocker/nth shows up in the 'proposed' list forever.
17:44:52 <tflink> #topic (808378) GNOME 3.4.0 as NTH for F17 Beta
17:44:52 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808378
17:44:52 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
17:44:54 <buggbot> Bug 808378: unspecified, unspecified, ---, notting, NEW, GNOME 3.4.0 as NTH for F17 Beta
17:45:04 <adamw> maybe we should just put 'Implied' or something in that field and adjust our searches.
17:46:32 <brunowolff> There is a noticeable login change in 3.4. I am not sure how much other stuff changed, but there is risk to doing this.
17:46:42 <adamw> yeah.
17:46:45 <tflink> yeah, I don't like -1 or +1
17:46:58 <adamw> on one hand, it'd be really nice to get it in, and it definitely fixes stuff compared to 3.3.91.
17:47:03 <tflink> the timing of this could have been better :-/
17:47:04 <adamw> on the other hand, it's obviously a big risk.
17:47:19 <adamw> on the gripping hand...
17:47:24 <brunowolff> There may be importance in getting it out now to test, but that could probably be handled as an update.
17:47:40 <tflink> brunowolff: it would be nice to have on the lives, though
17:47:50 <adamw> i guess the main problems with making it an update are a) it's not in the lives and b) PR.
17:47:56 <kalev> I think there's a chance for one more RC early next week if anything from the 3.4.0 update needs fixing
17:48:25 <adamw> well, that's possible.
17:48:26 <kalev> regarding the login change (the mysql user showing up), I believe this doesn't affect the default install
17:48:27 <tflink> I'd rather have a better idea of the level of problems before accepting it, though
17:48:52 * adamw is building a live with 3.4 included just to poke at.
17:49:11 <tflink> yeah, I wonder if that's the better way to go about this
17:49:17 <kalev> I would have never proposed this if we weren't slipping
17:49:22 <brunowolff> The login change isn't a problme, it's just different. I actually like it better.
17:49:34 <kalev> but now that we are slipping, maybe something good can come out of it after all.
17:49:35 <tflink> do some pre-RC testing to get a better idea of what we'd be getting ourselves into
17:49:42 <kalev> yeah, very good idea
17:49:57 <adamw> it's just...we still don't have a crazy amount of time.
17:50:07 <tflink> yeah, exactly
17:50:07 <adamw> i would very much like to get an rc built today that passes validation.
17:50:13 <adamw> anything other than that and we're kinda crunching again.
17:50:24 * tflink would like to avoid more 16 hour days if possible
17:51:05 <tflink> what image is the software rendering test day using?
17:51:09 <tflink> isn't that today?
17:51:10 <brunowolff> I am leaning -1. The risk just seems too high.
17:51:34 <adamw> tflink: it was yesterday, and halfline did a custom build with 3.4
17:52:43 <kalev> adamw: how long does it take to build the test live image? Maybe delay the decision until we can try booting it?
17:53:02 <brunowolff> Also for lives, there are nightly builds as an option.
17:53:03 <tflink> the other downside is that if we don't put 3.4 in beta, it gets less general testing
17:53:04 <adamw> tflink: I just added https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808039 to the proposed NTH list, note.
17:53:06 <buggbot> Bug 808039: high, unspecified, ---, simon, NEW, Fedora-17-Beta-i386-DVD.iso does not contain sugar-desktop in DVD repo
17:53:10 <adamw> kalev: like 10 minutes.
17:53:15 <tflink> adamw: thanks for the heads up
17:53:57 <kalev> I can try listing some things the 3.4.0 update fixes, but this is just off the top of my head
17:54:27 <kalev> 1) button events in clutter-gtk apps, e.g. most gnome-games didn't react to mouse clicks at all
17:54:47 <adamw> that'd be a final blocker
17:55:04 <adamw> quite a few people did show up for yesterday's test day, and i don't see any horrible breakages listed, in a quick look at the results
17:55:09 <tflink> but a polish issue and rather visable
17:55:13 <kalev> 2) keyring dialogs (those that pop up when you do fedpkg clone) resized itself all the time when typing in these; fixed
17:55:54 <kalev> 3) user switching is completely missing in the packages that are currently in stable
17:56:14 <adamw> test
17:56:16 <adamw> grr
17:56:25 * adamw booting his live image now
17:56:27 <kalev> 4) swell-foop missing icon (it's on the live cd), also a final blocker I guess
17:56:55 <kalev> 5) gnome-screenshot causing whole gnome-shell to crash when taking screenshots repeatedly
17:57:05 <kalev> 6) several visible crashers in gnome-control-center
17:57:15 <kalev> EOF
17:57:19 * nirik suggests if we pull this in, we should redo desktop tests on that rc... just to be sure.
17:57:37 <tflink> nirik: yeah, we'd have to do that for gnome, at least
17:57:41 <kalev> yes, certainly, this invalidated desktop tests
17:57:45 <adamw> i get an selinux denial right out of the box on boot.
17:59:16 <adamw> that's 808050
17:59:39 <adamw> so if we pulled 3.4 we'd probably want a new selinux-policy...
18:00:42 <tflink> if we're making the decision right now, I'm probably -.5 NTH based on the high risk and number of unknowns
18:01:29 <adamw> well we can leave it open
18:01:31 <tflink> how do we feel about putting together some lives and/or installs to test out and revisit before RC3 request is submitted
18:01:35 <adamw> sounds reasonable
18:01:49 <adamw> i can probably blow through the beta desktop tests before rc3 submission
18:01:56 <kalev> yes, I agree, not enough data to decide right now
18:02:27 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 808378 - This is a rather high risk update and we want more testing before accepting for beta, will do more testing and revisit before the RC3 request is made
18:02:37 <tflink> adamw: I assume that you're doing x86_64?
18:03:03 <adamw> yeah
18:03:08 <jskladan> tflink: ack here
18:03:23 <tflink> adamw: I'll get started on i686 after the meeting
18:03:54 <adamw> okay. not that arch ever seems to make a difference any more.
18:04:14 <adamw> ack
18:04:15 * tflink had some wierd issues w/ i686 on RC2 that he forgot to file
18:04:31 <adamw> huh
18:04:33 <tflink> #agreed - 808378 - This is a rather high risk update and we want more testing before accepting for beta, will do more testing and revisit before the RC3 request is made
18:04:55 <tflink> adamw: it might have been nouveau related but I'd never seen the fail whale @ GDM prompt before
18:06:07 <tflink> hrm, we have a bunch of gnome 3.4 related NTHs
18:06:16 <adamw> do they all require 3.4?
18:06:23 <tflink> any objections to skipping them for now and revisiting them w/ the 3.4 bug later
18:06:34 <tflink> adamw: not all of the ones that are left
18:06:46 <adamw> tflink: 'gdm' is actually a special instance of shell, these days, on systems capable of shell. so it can hit fail whale.
18:07:04 <adamw> well, revisit is okay i guess.
18:07:16 <tflink> 808430, 806693 are fixed by the 3.4 update
18:08:04 <tflink> #info 808430 and 806693 are fixed by the gnome 3.4 update which is undecided, will revisit them when we revisit 808378
18:08:12 <kalev> s/808430/803430/
18:08:25 * kalev is the master of nitpicking.
18:08:32 <tflink> #undo
18:08:32 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x2dc37910>
18:08:40 <tflink> #info 803430 and 806693 are fixed by the gnome 3.4 update which is undecided, will revisit them when we revisit 808378
18:08:43 <tflink> kalev: thanks
18:08:48 <tflink> #topic (806539) Telepathy Authentication Handler pops up in sugar-desktop asks Password for KDE Wallet then for Jabber Password which is direct conflict with jabber.sugarlabs.org in sugar.  kills working jabber connection
18:08:52 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806539
18:08:54 <buggbot> Bug 806539: urgent, unspecified, ---, than, NEW, Telepathy Authentication Handler pops up in sugar-desktop asks Password for KDE Wallet then for Jabber Password which is direct conflict with jabber.sugarlabs.org in sugar.  kills working jabber connection
18:08:55 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
18:09:12 <brunowolff> I'm still -1 NTH on this.
18:09:54 <tflink> yeah, this seems like too much of a corner case to take a big fix this late
18:10:16 <adamw> yeah, now we know the cause is icky and the reproducer is unusual, -1.
18:10:29 * satellit_laptop yum remove ksecrets is fix
18:11:02 <adamw> might be worth throwing in commonbugs
18:11:13 <adamw> satellit_: that's a workaround. we can't use it as a 'fix'.
18:11:20 <adamw> we can't take ksecrets out of the KDE deps...
18:11:21 <satellit_laptop> ok
18:11:26 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 806539 - RejectedNTH - This is a rather uncommon corner case and the fix is rather large to be taking in this late in beta
18:11:33 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
18:11:34 <jskladan> tflink: ack
18:11:39 <brunowolff> ack
18:11:45 <adamw> ac
18:11:46 <adamw> k
18:11:47 <tflink> #agreed - 806539 - RejectedNTH - This is a rather uncommon corner case and the fix is rather large to be taking in this late in beta
18:12:03 <tflink> #topic (804779) XFS is not an available installation time file system
18:12:03 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804779
18:12:03 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, POST
18:12:07 <buggbot> Bug 804779: unspecified, unspecified, ---, mgracik, POST, XFS is not an available installation time file system
18:12:45 <adamw> i'm okay with this as nth as it's really just including files in anaconda
18:12:50 <adamw> not really sure what the current status is, though
18:12:56 <adamw> but as far as nth goes, +1
18:13:07 <tflink> I thought that I heard xfs was fixed to work w/ usrmove
18:13:13 <tflink> but nothing is mentioned in this bug
18:13:33 <tflink> yeah, I'd be OK with nth since it would be mostly moving files around to not be deleted by lorax
18:14:21 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 804779 - AcceptedNTH - This affectes files to be pulled into the installer and can't be fixed by an update. The fix sounds reasonably safe if implemented in time.
18:14:40 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
18:15:06 <jskladan> ack
18:15:21 <brunowolff> ack
18:15:24 <adamw> ack
18:15:31 <tflink> #agreed - 804779 - AcceptedNTH - This affectes files to be pulled into the installer and can't be fixed by an update. The fix sounds reasonably safe if implemented in time.
18:15:44 <tflink> #topic (807083) iscsi tools do not exist on F17 beta RC1 DVDs
18:15:44 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=807083
18:15:45 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, MODIFIED
18:15:46 <buggbot> Bug 807083: medium, unspecified, ---, bcl, MODIFIED, iscsi tools do not exist on F17 beta RC1 DVDs
18:16:15 <tflink> looks like I missed a bug when I was verifiying the other day
18:16:28 <tflink> the tools are on RC2 images
18:16:28 <adamw> yeah, we voted on this, right? and i think should be fixed in rc2.
18:16:38 <adamw> you can close it then, 17.16 is stable now
18:16:44 <tflink> I don't think we ever voted on it, no
18:16:53 <adamw> oh, well.
18:17:16 <tflink> wait, we did - we just forgot to update after go/no-go
18:17:18 <tflink> nvm
18:17:22 <bcl> it is, I checked it this morning on RC2
18:17:59 <tflink> #info this was already accepted as NTH but the bug was never updated
18:18:55 <tflink> #topic (796899) when saving traceback to remote system, name defaults to "tmp" instead of original file name
18:18:58 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=796899
18:19:00 <buggbot> Bug 796899: low, unspecified, ---, gavin, NEW, when saving traceback to remote system, name defaults to "tmp" instead of original file name
18:19:01 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
18:19:13 * adamw tries to give a ....
18:20:17 * tflink isn't sure about taking fixes to report/libreport this late
18:20:18 <jskladan> seems legit
18:21:18 <jskladan> although, this can probably handled by 'commonbugs' too (aka "how many tracebacks do you really need to save at once...")
18:21:28 <brunowolff> Do you get a chance to change the default? If so, I don't think this is worth doing as NTH.
18:21:49 <jskladan> brunowolff: imho yes
18:21:58 <tflink> yeah, I'm not saying the bug isn't legit - just not convinced it's worth breaking freeze for a fix
18:22:45 <tflink> assuming a fix were available
18:22:48 <robatino> yes, if you specify the file name (not just the directory) it'll use it
18:24:04 <tflink> I'm probably -1 NTH on this, too
18:24:39 <tflink> which makes -2, any other votes?
18:25:43 <adamw> -1.
18:26:03 <adamw> hey mclasen, we already decided to delay the 3.4 decision and do some testing on 3.4 first
18:26:21 <brunowolff> -1 nth
18:26:53 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 796899 - RejectedNTH - Even though this can't be fixed with an update, the workaround is reasonable and the consequence isn't too bad
18:26:54 <mclasen> adamw: sure, ok - just don't test too long, 3.4.1 is out in 2.5 weeks...
18:27:23 <tflink> mclasen: if we're still debating beta bugs in 2.5 weeks, I think we have other issues at hand :)
18:28:29 <brunowolff> ack
18:28:33 <jskladan> a-a-a-a-ack
18:28:40 <tflink> #agreed - 796899 - RejectedNTH - Even though this can't be fixed with an update, the workaround is reasonable and the consequence isn't too bad
18:28:55 <tflink> #topic (804194) X doesn't start
18:28:55 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804194
18:28:55 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, ON_QA
18:28:57 <buggbot> Bug 804194: unspecified, unspecified, ---, xavier, ON_QA, X doesn't start
18:30:21 <tflink> this wouldn't affect any users that aren't using VIA graphics, would it?
18:30:41 <tflink> if not, I'm OK with NTH - it's not like it would be any worse than they already have
18:31:18 <brunowolff> +1 NTH
18:32:00 <adamw> mclasen: we're meaning 'in the next few hours' not 'next few weeks'. =)
18:32:32 <brunowolff> (Someone using the nv driver reported a simlar problem on the test list today.)
18:32:57 <adamw> this probably does affect all hardware using drivers that default to XAA, as i read it.
18:33:17 <adamw> still, that's...almost no-one. it does read like all VIAs would be broken.
18:33:26 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 804194 - AcceptedNTH - OpenChrome is currently broken on F17 and the driver update shouldn't affect other users - it's a low risk and would improve user experience greatly
18:33:35 <adamw> ack
18:33:44 <adamw> we could call it a blocker, but eh. let's just take it.
18:33:57 <brunowolff> ack
18:34:25 <tflink> adamw: not sure its enough HW to call it a blocker
18:35:05 <adamw> yeah, it's borderline. and not worth arguing about.
18:35:07 <tflink> going once ... twice ...
18:35:22 <tflink> #agreed - 804194 - AcceptedNTH - OpenChrome is currently broken on F17 and the driver update shouldn't affect other users - it's a low risk and would improve user experience greatly
18:36:08 <tflink> #topic (808039) Fedora-17-Beta-i386-DVD.iso does not contain sugar-desktop in DVD repo
18:36:11 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=808039
18:36:13 <buggbot> Bug 808039: high, unspecified, ---, simon, NEW, Fedora-17-Beta-i386-DVD.iso does not contain sugar-desktop in DVD repo
18:36:14 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, NEW
18:36:56 <adamw> this probably accounts for some of the DVD loss in size. =)
18:37:01 <tflink> I think that I'd be OK with this as NTH
18:37:03 <adamw> not sure why it would be missing, but seems like a clear NTH to me.
18:37:07 <adamw> +1
18:37:12 <brunowolff> +1 NTH
18:37:31 <jskladan> +1
18:37:32 <brunowolff> Do we need to worry about oversize install DvD?
18:37:51 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 808039 - AcceptedNTH - Allows for installation of Sugar from DVD, blocker for sugar desktop
18:37:58 <brunowolff> ack
18:38:06 <tflink> brunowolff: I think we're currently @ 2.3G for the dvd ISO
18:38:08 <adamw> brunowolff: no, we're WAY under size.
18:38:47 <jskladan> ack
18:38:52 <tflink> #agreed - 808039 - AcceptedNTH - Allows for installation of Sugar from DVD, blocker for sugar desktop
18:39:07 <tflink> OK, that's all the NTH
18:39:17 <tflink> on to the accepted blockers
18:39:34 <tflink> #topic (806931) Anaconda doesn't boot with kickstart injected into initrd.img
18:39:37 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=806931
18:39:38 <buggbot> Bug 806931: unspecified, unspecified, ---, anaconda-maint-list, ASSIGNED, Anaconda doesn't boot with kickstart injected into initrd.img
18:39:39 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, ASSIGNED
18:40:44 <tflink> this sounds like it might not be a blocker any more
18:41:00 <bcl> the problem here isn't the kickstart, it is the network link line in the kickstart.
18:41:16 <adamw> right
18:41:18 <bcl> which should get fixed when wwoods commits his latest fixes I think.
18:41:20 <adamw> so probably not a beta blocker
18:41:29 <adamw> but i'd be okay with nth
18:43:09 <adamw> propose we drop to nth?
18:43:16 <tflink> that'd work
18:44:12 <brunowolff> I am not sure I understand the use case / issue well enough, so I'll stay at +0.
18:44:28 * jskladan has to go, 9pm on friday seems like a good time to stop working .fire jskladan
18:44:46 <adamw> bonus revoked!
18:44:48 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 806931 - Drop to BetaNTH - This bug is no longer severe enough to be a blocker and there are acceptable workarounds - a fix would be accepted past freeze but we won't block release for it
18:44:57 <adamw> jskladan: cya, have a good weekend
18:44:59 <adamw> ack
18:45:09 <tflink> jskladan: thanks for helping
18:45:28 <jskladan> adamw: tflink: same to you guys! see you on monday, gang
18:45:46 <tflink> #agreed - 806931 - Drop to BetaNTH - This bug is no longer severe enough to be a blocker and there are acceptable workarounds - a fix would be accepted past freeze but we won't block release for it
18:46:12 <tflink> time for everyone's favorite bug!
18:46:15 <tflink> #topic (802475) libvirt in a VM occasionally brings up 'default' network when it shouldn't, kills vm networking
18:46:18 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802475
18:46:19 <buggbot> Bug 802475: unspecified, unspecified, ---, libvirt-maint, ASSIGNED, libvirt in a VM occasionally brings up 'default' network when it shouldn't, kills vm networking
18:46:20 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, ASSIGNED
18:47:07 <adamw> ah, the big one.
18:47:17 <adamw> splitting the package up seems like it would work.
18:47:18 <tflink> it sounds like a fix for this is still in the proposal process
18:47:55 <brunowolff> That just gives more time for testing gnome 3.4.
18:47:57 <adamw> i want to do an rc today, really.
18:48:08 <adamw> so if this doesn't get done we'll just have to kill it from comps.
18:48:16 * nirik hopes a good fix comes out and that I don't get burned at the stake for trying the easyfix. ;)
18:48:58 <brunowolff> Can we roast marshmellows if you do?
18:49:06 <nirik> sure!
18:49:17 <adamw> anyone know daniel's IRC nick?
18:50:02 <adamw> i don't really hate losing gnome-boxes from the default install, tbh.
18:50:08 <adamw> and it's what we've been testing all along.
18:50:15 <nirik> danpb I think...
18:50:19 <adamw> might be best just to do that, and fix libvirt for final.
18:51:26 <tflink> not seeing him in #fedora-devel, we could ping on RH irc ir we want input
18:51:29 <kalev> I think think this might be a good option. As much as I know, notting only added gnome-boxes to comps to see what happens to the Live CD size in nightly composes. Never intended it to be in Beta.
18:52:12 <adamw> ah.
18:52:27 <tflink> doesn't that mean no RC today, though?
18:52:34 <adamw> no, mash is only 4 hours.,
18:52:41 <adamw> i'm just gonna go ahead and do it now, then.
18:52:49 <tflink> ok
18:53:52 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 802475 - There has been no fix from libvirt and gnome-boxes was not intended to make beta - remove boxes from F17 comps until after beta and hopefully there will be a proper libvirt fix by then
18:54:05 <adamw> pushed.
18:54:38 <tflink> #agreed - 802475 - There has been no fix from libvirt and gnome-boxes was not intended to make beta - remove boxes from F17 comps until after beta and hopefully there will be a proper libvirt fix by then
18:54:52 <tflink> #topic (745202) gnome-shell does not display correctly with NV3x adapters - multicolor corruption of panel, Shell-style menus and text [nvfx]
18:54:55 <tflink> #link http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=745202
18:54:57 <buggbot> Bug 745202: high, unspecified, ---, bskeggs, NEW, gnome-shell does not display correctly with NV3x adapters - multicolor corruption of panel, Shell-style menus and text [nvfx]
18:54:58 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, NEW
18:55:02 <tflink> not sure this needs to be a blocker any more, does it?
18:55:15 <tflink> unless I'm getting my bugs mixed up
18:55:40 <adamw> if affected users have confirmed the blacklist works in rc2, then yeah, we can drop it as a blocker.
18:56:22 <adamw> but i don't see that. i'll ask.
18:57:01 <brunowolff> Wouldn't it just turn into a closed blocker? Or was that the related bug?
18:57:19 <tflink> brunowolff: yeah, I was thinking of something else
18:58:24 <tflink> proposed #agreed - 745202 - This should be fixed but is waiting for verification with affected hardware
18:58:32 <brunowolff> ack
18:58:57 <brunowolff> Probably that would be just #info though.
18:59:19 <adamw> it's not fixed.
18:59:23 <adamw> the bug is for the corruption.
18:59:33 <adamw> what we have in beta is a workaround (disable shell on the affected hardware), not a fixed.
18:59:39 <adamw> that's why it's not in MODIFIED or ON_QA.
18:59:53 <adamw> but if we get confirmation that the workaround works, we can drop it as a blocker.
19:00:09 <brunowolff> OK.
19:00:39 <tflink> #info A workaround has been proposed but as of yet, has not been tested - waiting for someone with affected hardware to test
19:01:08 <tflink> #info if the workaround functions as it should, will propose dropping as a blocker bug for f17 beta
19:01:26 <tflink> OK, I do believe that is all of the blockers unless new ones have been proposed sine we started
19:01:53 <tflink> #topic open floor
19:02:04 <tflink> Any other bugs to bring up or ones that I missed?
19:02:12 <adamw> think that's it
19:02:51 <tflink> 2 hours - so much for this being short :)
19:03:18 <tflink> #info No planned blocker review meeting next week unless beta slips again
19:03:26 <tflink> #undo
19:03:26 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x1675a210>
19:03:52 <tflink> #info There are no plans for a blocker review meeting next week
19:04:23 <tflink> unless there are other proposed topics, it sounds like time to do some testing!
19:04:40 * tflink sets fuse for ~ 5 minutes
19:06:01 <adamw> yay testing.
19:10:03 <tflink> adamw: I forgot to ask but are you planning to secretarialize?
19:12:37 <adamw> will do, yeah.
19:13:04 <tflink> thanks
19:13:17 <tflink> OK, that's it. Thanks for coming everyone!
19:13:23 * tflink will send out minutes shortly
19:13:26 <tflink> #endmeeting