20:01:10 #startmeeting F18 Beta Go/No-Go meeting 20:01:10 Meeting started Thu Nov 22 20:01:10 2012 UTC. The chair is jreznik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:01:10 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 20:01:22 #meetingname F18 Beta Go/No-Go meeting 20:01:22 The meeting name has been set to 'f18_beta_go/no-go_meeting' 20:01:38 #topic roll call 20:01:43 yo! 20:01:44 * nirik waves. 20:01:49 * kparal lurks 20:01:55 * adamw gobbles 20:02:14 #chair rbergeron nirik kparal adamw 20:02:14 Current chairs: adamw jreznik kparal nirik rbergeron 20:02:23 * tflink is here 20:02:42 #chair Viking-Ice tflink 20:02:42 Current chairs: Viking-Ice adamw jreznik kparal nirik rbergeron tflink 20:02:50 everyone gets a chair! 20:03:02 it's thanksgiving after all ;) 20:03:02 #info Viking-Ice adamw jreznik kparal nirik rbergeron tflink present 20:03:15 * jreznik thanks and gives :) 20:03:22 * rbergeron passes around beverages 20:03:54 #topic Purpose of this meeting 20:04:01 #info Purpose of this meeting is to see whether or not F18 Beta is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria. 20:04:07 #info This is determined in a few ways: 20:04:12 #info No remaining blocker bugs 20:04:23 #info Test matrices for Beta are fully completed 20:04:25 #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/18/beta/buglist 20:04:32 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Alpha_Release_Criteria 20:04:38 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Beta_Release_Criteria 20:04:44 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test 20:04:55 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test 20:05:07 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test 20:05:17 flood ends... 20:05:41 everyone ready to start? 20:05:45 more or less 20:05:51 go-bble ahead 20:05:52 i'm trying to clean up the last couple of matrix pieces now 20:05:58 (c) 2012 adamw 20:06:25 can we start with proposed blockers? tflink ready for that? 20:06:40 I can be in a sec 20:07:07 ok, we should sort out also SB ticket formally 20:07:15 #topic Proposed blockers 20:07:57 at least by my reading of the ticket, fesco has determined by a 5 to 4 vote that SB is not a beta blocker. 20:08:15 ms-signed SB, yes. 20:08:27 the self-signed SB question is kind of open, but it certainly doesn't have enough votes to pass, if you want to look at it that way. 20:08:56 adamw: and see nirik's interpretation of self signed shim in updates-testing 20:10:58 any objections to the result of blockery voting? 20:11:01 right. the proposal was "blocking beta on self-signed version in updates-pending" which we do have... well, updates-testing, but I could be mistaking what notting meant. 20:11:17 you're mistaking, i think. 20:11:23 if neither passed does it matter? 20:11:34 i believe he meant 'blocking beta on taking the self-signed shim from updates-testing into the beta'. 20:11:41 anyhow, I think we can say MS signed is not a blocker, and not enough votes for self signed to be a blocker. 20:11:52 it doesn't make any sense to hold beta release until something is in updates-testing. that's a thing that makes no sense, and notting usually doesn't suggest such things. 20:11:53 adamw: could be. 20:12:13 Viking-Ice: point. 20:12:18 * Martix_ is here (I lost Internet connection just 3 minutes before mtg) 20:12:22 * nirik nods. agreed with Viking-Ice. 20:12:36 * rbergeron nods as well 20:12:37 * adamw just gumming up the works so he can get raid tests done 20:12:46 lol 20:13:04 well, it means SB is not blocker for both MS and self-signed variants 20:13:22 (for beta only...) 20:13:29 don't think anyone has any problems with that. yes, for beta only. 20:13:37 we should state that very clearly, as it seems to keep getting confused :) 20:13:42 yeah. 20:13:42 definitely Beta only 20:13:48 plan is still for Final to be SB-enabled. 20:14:06 yep. It's unfortunate if beta is not. ;( 20:14:07 * jreznik hoped for Alpha properly SB enabled... 20:14:26 * rbergeron hands around some pound signs for stating things clearly in the minutes and whatnot 20:14:34 * nirik would be +1 NTH on MS signed SB in beta if we end up slipping and it shows up. 20:14:41 rbergeron: preparing right now 20:15:05 nirik: indeed 20:15:20 * rbergeron taste tests food 20:15:25 but I think it's already a NTH bug thats accepted, so thats just degressing. ;) 20:15:36 #info FESCo has determined by a 5 to 4 vote that Secure Boot signed by MSFT is not a beta blocker 20:15:55 -1 betablocker/+1 NTH 20:16:21 #info not enough +1 votes to accept self-signed shim as a Beta blocker 20:17:25 everyone ok with SB resolution? should we move on? 20:17:35 ack 20:17:37 yup 20:17:39 mooooooove on 20:17:42 well, those folks that wanted to block on it aren't likely happy, but... ;) 20:17:57 eh, distract 'em with a turkey 20:18:01 fortunately, they aren't here right now? 20:18:10 * rbergeron modifies her hot dog launcher into a turkey launcher 20:18:10 nirik: you're one of them :) 20:18:29 blocker list :) 20:18:40 tflink: are you ready for blocker blocker blocker fun? 20:18:54 I am? I wanted to not block on MS signed, I would have been ok blocking on fedora signed, but was ok with it after mjg59's comments. 20:19:01 jreznik: ready? no, I don't think I'm ever ready for the level of fun that blocker review brings 20:19:02 mooooving on 20:19:04 anyhow, I continue to digress. ;) 20:19:09 but I'm prepared to start doing so 20:19:21 digressing? 20:19:23 We have: 20:19:32 #info 2 non-VERIFIED proposed blockers 20:19:44 #undo 20:19:44 Removing item from minutes: 20:19:50 I think I'm jumping the gun a bit 20:19:57 * tflink waits for #topic change 20:20:12 hey, since when did anaconda grow dual monitor support?! that's weird. 20:20:17 or possibly a bug. :) 20:20:17 topic change? 20:20:28 or I can just get started 20:20:42 * tflink wasn't sure if you were planning to change topics or something like that 20:21:07 I'd say it's still on topic, if you want to change it, np but not sure I'd set better topic 20:21:43 oh, nvm. I should have checked the current topic first 20:21:56 anyhow, we have: 20:22:07 #info 2 proposed blockers not in VERIFIED state 20:22:16 #info 1 accepted blocker not in VERIFIED state 20:22:26 starting with the proposed blockers ... 20:22:33 #topic (879187) NFS in RC1 regressed vs. TC9: does not override inst.stage2 when passed as inst.repo, interactive NFS is impossible 20:22:36 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879187 20:22:39 #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW 20:23:35 want the executive summary on this one? 20:23:48 yeah, you know more about this issue than I do 20:23:48 adamw: yep pls 20:24:38 okay, so we have two basic ways of triggering an install from an NFS repo. one is to pass either inst.repo=nfs or inst.repo=nfsiso on the cmdline (they're really just about the same these days). the other is interactively - select nfs on the Installation Source spoke and enter your server address. 20:24:54 in RC1, interactive NFS repo selection is entirely broken. so far as we can tell, it doesn't work and cannot work. 20:25:05 does it traceback there? or ? 20:25:15 you either get a traceback or you get Closest Mirror. 20:25:28 and hits the installer must be able to use the HTTP, FTP and either NFS or NFSISO remote package source options 20:25:29 not finished with the summary yet, hold questions till end :) 20:25:44 * nirik waits 20:26:11 merely appending inst.repo=nfs(iso) to cmdline also does not work: you get Closest Mirror. however, if you remove the default inst.stage2= parameter from the cmdline and *replace* it with inst.repo=nfs(iso), that works. 20:26:36 finally, simply appending inst.repo with a direct kernel boot (PXE-style) - as opposed to using netinst or DVD - works fine. 20:26:58 i'm not sure if we tested interactive NFS selection in the direct kernel boot case, might be interesting to know if that works, though it seems like it'd be a corner case. 20:27:17 I thought kparal tested that, no? 20:27:29 the criterion, as viking-ice stated, is: "The installer must be able to use the HTTP, FTP and either NFS or NFSISO remote package source options" 20:27:37 i'm not sure whether he was testing interactive or cmdline for that case 20:27:40 * kparal reads up 20:28:13 so...discuss. on the one hand, lots of the NFS support is clearly borked (oh, this is a regression from TC9). on the other hand, you can make it work, if you know the trick. the criterion is not entirely clear on the call here, I don't think. 20:28:26 so this boils down to do we considered the inst.stage2 removal documented in the release notes an acceptable workaround for the criteria 20:28:30 right. 20:28:38 or 'use direct kernel boot' 20:28:43 yep as a workaround 20:28:50 which may be what people who typically install from NFS like to do, even. i'm not really sure. 20:28:54 people getting the traceback would get to the bug report... so it could also be explained there... 20:29:00 I don't think that 'use direct kernel boot' is an OK workaround - it's not always an option 20:29:15 well, we have two 'workarounds' effectively. 20:29:16 by itself, anyways 20:29:17 pick your favourite. 20:29:35 * nirik ponders. 20:29:43 the argument in favor being that the end user already is on the kernel command line to set this right? 20:29:53 holy mother of freaking god, i have an actual genuine fwraid-1 install. 20:30:03 Viking-Ice: sorry? 20:30:07 adamw: congrats. Or condolances. :) 20:30:13 adamw: you sure it's not just an illusion ? 20:30:16 :-D 20:30:26 Viking-Ice: well, if you were planning to pass inst.repo you'd already be using the cmdline, yeah. if you were planning to use the interactive option, you wouldn't, i guess. 20:30:42 I guess I would be ok with documenting this and not blocking on it. But that could just be the overeager to just have beta release already. 20:30:53 but it would be documented so you should be aware of that 20:30:59 right, i am in exactly the same place: instinct says ship it, i do not entirely trust my instinct. 20:31:01 jreznik: if you read the docs. 20:31:16 which many people sadly do not until it breaks. ;( 20:31:17 everyone reads the docs before installing, though. 20:31:20 nirik: I said "should" :) 20:31:24 * nirik nods. 20:31:30 tflink: orly 20:31:45 right, ship that cow finally :-) 20:31:49 there may possibly have been the tiniest element of sarcasm to tflink's post 20:31:54 perhaps ;) 20:32:01 shocking I know, but...:) 20:32:10 if we're not going to slip, I think we should waive this blocker. realistically, it's not going to be better next week, something else will break up 20:32:40 well, it could be fixed up... but at soonest monday... 20:32:48 rbergeron: rly! why else would RTFM become common? 20:32:50 which probibly means a normal 1 more week slip. 20:33:02 * tflink does know better than to think everyone reads the docs, BTW :) 20:33:11 kparal: sorry, not sure i can parse that. if we take the blocker we slip. if we don't take it, we ship. (pending other bugs). 20:33:14 kparal means more - more bugs would appear... 20:33:15 anyhow, -1 blocker, +1 nth. 20:33:34 I think that this could be fixed by reverting the patch which caused it in the first place 20:33:38 jreznik: kparal: ah, that's jlaska's 'tipping point' concept, which is interesting and probably not enough explored. yeah, this could well be the tipping poin. 20:33:44 adamw: if there is no other reason to slip, let's take this as a non-blocking issue 20:33:46 agreed -1 blocker +1 nth I simply dont think slipping a week for this is worth it 20:33:49 * rbergeron is with nirik on that 20:33:51 kparal: gotcha 20:33:56 and Viking-Ice ;) 20:34:00 wasn't nfs working before that made it into the last anaconda build? 20:34:01 ok, i'm with the room, -1 / +1 20:34:09 ok, -1/+1 20:34:09 tflink: do we know which one? 20:34:10 tflink: tc9 was substantially better, yeah. like i said, it's a regression. 20:34:15 I'm not +1 blocker enough to argue about it 20:34:22 Martix_: i identified a suspect in the bug. i'm not 100% sure, but like 95%. 20:34:35 Martix_: look at the last few comments, there's some info from me on what the suspect commit is, and why it's in RC1. 20:35:17 additionally, could an updates.img fix this for the gui/ui path? 20:35:31 well, I think we have enough votes I'd say 20:35:31 nirik: I doubt it 20:35:32 very possibly, yeah. 20:35:34 heh 20:35:37 tflink: why not? 20:35:42 * nirik flips a coin. ;) 20:35:44 I think all the nfs stuff is in dracut 20:35:48 not in anaconda 20:35:58 oh, that's a point. 20:36:02 i keep forgetting we can't patch dracut... 20:36:08 ping haraldh ;) 20:36:11 IIRC, the stuff that is in dracut, setting stuff up for anaconda can't be fixed w/ updates.img 20:36:13 yep, it is - docs for this part are written based on my docs 20:36:14 dracut needs updates.img support! ;) 20:36:15 he's not turkey-ing ;) 20:36:44 anyway, there's no possibility we can fix anything without a slip at this point. 20:36:48 no matter how simple or otherwise the fix. 20:36:50 proposed #agreed 879187 - RejectedBlocker, AcceptedNTH - While this does come close to blocker status due to the intereference with nfs sources during installation, there are acceptable workarounds and it was decided that this isn't severe enough overall to justify blocker status for F18 beta. 20:37:00 ack 20:37:01 ack 20:37:01 ack 20:37:03 ack 20:37:03 ack 20:37:17 ack 20:37:19 #agreed 879187 - RejectedBlocker, AcceptedNTH - While this does come close to blocker status due to the intereference with nfs sources during installation, there are acceptable workarounds and it was decided that this isn't severe enough overall to justify blocker status for F18 beta. 20:37:29 #topic (876218) kernel boot + nfsiso repo = hang on reboot 20:37:29 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876218 20:37:29 #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ASSIGNED 20:37:55 agreed -1 blocker +1 nth I simply dont think slipping a week for this is worth it ... 20:38:19 yeah, I think this is probably in the same boat 20:38:29 right. i was a bit uncomfortable with fudging this for 17 *final*, but for a beta it's not a real big deal. 20:38:29 as we punt the previous one, I'm -1 blocker 20:38:30 * nirik nods. same here. 20:38:40 * rbergeron gets in teh same line 20:38:53 -1/+1 20:38:59 well blocker for F18 final? to make adamw feel better? and we can punt it later :) 20:39:16 yup 20:39:19 * rbergeron assumes this one doesn't interact negatively with the previous bz (comment 10 says NFS or NFSISO both hang on reboot) 20:39:39 -1 blocker 20:39:44 no point voting nth at tihs point really 20:40:00 proposed #agreed 876218 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't hit any F18 beta release criteria 100% and was deemed not a blocker for F17 final. Therefore, it was decided that this is not severe enough to justify blocker status for F18 beta. 20:40:10 ack 20:40:11 ack 20:40:21 ack 20:40:21 mashedpotato attack... er... ack 20:40:37 ack 20:40:46 ack 20:40:51 #agreed 876218 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't hit any F18 beta release criteria 100% and was deemed not a blocker for F17 final. Therefore, it was decided that this is not severe enough to justify blocker status for F18 beta. 20:40:58 OK, that's all of the proposed blockers 20:41:08 on to the 1 remaining accepted blocker 20:41:14 #topic (873459) Upgraded system does not reboot if a kernel upgrade is part of the upgrade 20:41:17 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=873459 20:41:20 #info Accepted Blocker, fedup-dracut, ON_QA 20:41:36 summary time :) 20:41:54 this was a big problem with fedup for a while where the disks were being unmounted forcibly before all the files were written 20:42:18 this led to truncated kernel and initramfs files, for which this bug was originally filed 20:42:32 I had been waiting for a couple more tests before moving this to VERIFIED 20:42:41 we have three successful upgrade tests so far at least, right? 20:42:46 you me and i think someone else 20:42:52 seems kparal did a few tests successfully 20:42:56 but considering the number of upgrades that I and others have done without obviously hitting this, I'm OK with moving it to VERIFIED 20:43:00 we do need to karma up the builds and push them 20:43:02 two upgrades today from me 20:43:12 I've done 20 or so w/o seeing this 20:43:18 maybe more, I lose count 20:43:30 er, without hitting the obvious symptoms 20:43:37 +1 verified 20:44:23 considering the way in which this is doubly-fixed ATM, I think that the risk of getting truncated files during upgrade is minimal 20:44:46 ok 20:44:50 with the currently packaged stuff, this is dirty-hack-fixed in fedup-dracut and properly fixed in systemd 20:45:02 double fix 20:45:10 the dirty hack fix in fedup-dracut will be removed in the next version, though 20:45:30 talking to wwoods about it, we didn't think it was a big enough issue to worry about for beta 20:45:47 * nirik nods. 20:45:48 ok 20:46:24 sounds safer to leave it in anyhow. 20:46:38 proposed #agreed 873459 - This has been tested to the point where the risk of it not actually being fixed is minimal. Move to VERIFIED state 20:46:39 at least for now and good to hear we have proper fix 20:46:42 adamw: exactly 20:46:57 ack 20:46:57 ack 20:46:58 ack 20:47:01 ack 20:47:03 ack 20:47:05 ack 20:47:10 ooh, we have a gilmore 20:47:12 ack 20:47:15 #agreed 873459 - This has been tested to the point where the risk of it not actually being fixed is minimal. Move to VERIFIED state 20:47:19 adamw: just woke up 20:47:33 OK, that would be all of the blockers for beta 20:47:39 unless I missed something 20:47:40 dgilmore: hello, good to see you 20:47:53 dgilmore: good morning! 20:47:59 all of the beta blocker bugs are either closed or VERIFIED 20:48:07 or will be once we finish updating the bugs 20:48:07 morning dgilmore 20:48:21 #info all of the beta blocker bugs are either closed or VERIFIED 20:48:39 woo 20:49:02 hurray 20:49:06 gobblegobble 20:49:30 * adamw catching up with secretarialization 20:49:36 * Martix_ is finally openning a beer and starting with dinner ;-) 20:49:38 anything else for blockers? 20:49:50 Martix_: not a time for a beer yet - test matrices 20:49:50 * tflink looks around suspiciously, waiting for something to explode now that the blockers are done for beta 20:50:07 check the turkey! 20:50:22 oh that would be bad - exploded turkey! 20:50:42 jreznik: I didn't yet finished triaging Gnome and KDE Test Days, I don't see there any possible beta-blockers 20:51:13 * jreznik notes exploded turkey for fedora 20 name proposal - as it's similar case as schredinger cat - you don't know it exploded or not while being in owen 20:51:20 we ran the validation tests though, and they look good. 20:51:44 * tflink proposed naming the beta "exploding turkey" 20:51:47 Martix_: thanks for leading the Gnome and KDE testdays 20:51:48 proposes 20:51:49 * adamw just got successful hwraid install 20:52:03 tflink: +1 20:52:16 #topic Test matrices 20:52:23 jreznik: np, just rehearsal before Network Test Week :-) 20:52:46 hasn't someone been doing desktop_login test? 20:52:52 i kinda figured someone was working on that 20:52:57 * jreznik is doing subset of KDE one 20:53:07 so, we're missing SCSI, which we usually waive because god, SCSI, we should just take it out of the list, and the desktop_login tests for gnome and kde 20:53:21 we can get them done in the next few minutes if we try 20:53:25 adamw: we should remove scsi 20:53:26 i don't expect any failures 20:53:48 * satellit I have no problem with HD install of desktop - logging in 20:53:52 do we want to hold the meeting while someone runs the tests? 20:53:54 btw that test case does not work at all for KDE 20:53:58 is anyone working on the GNOME one? 20:54:06 jreznik: you have to apply a bit of imagination, yeah. i wrote it to GDM. 20:54:09 Viking-Ice confirmed the national passwords work well in GNOME 20:54:22 okay, i think i can confirm the rest of the test from other testing 20:54:27 so let's mark that as a combined pass 20:54:49 are you going to mark it to avoid wiki conflict or should I? 20:55:00 kparal: usually do :-) 20:55:08 * adamw done 20:55:15 so now we just need the kde one 20:55:36 ok, I'll edit it 20:56:44 done 20:57:00 ah, fix needed 20:57:05 bad column 20:57:21 fallback? 20:57:28 fallback always catches everyone out. :) 20:57:43 as always 20:57:52 happily for f19 we can take it out instead of just ignoring it... 20:58:14 adamw: yes, because it won't be in GNOME anymore 20:58:14 ok, so desktop matrice is filled in 20:58:19 so then we're basically 100% on the matrices, minus scsi 20:58:22 is fallback mode considered as release-blocking desktop? 20:58:27 but possible replaced with 'official plugins for fallback like thing' ;( 20:58:29 kparal: but there will be classic mode emulation :) 20:58:29 for F18? 20:58:36 i have evaluated all the WARNs/FAILs and all that needed considering for blocker status have been considered 20:58:39 Martix_: F19 20:58:39 I thought that was for gnome 3.8 20:58:43 Martix_: not any more 20:58:54 Martix_: we stopped considering it release blocking in 17, i think. 20:59:02 whenever llvmpipe came in. 20:59:15 jreznik: ok, I knew about removal before it was annonced :-) 20:59:25 adamw: good 20:59:40 so...i think we're good on matrices 21:00:23 #info QA is good on test matrices 21:00:23 propose #agreed matrices are 100% with standard waiver for scsi 21:00:28 okay, #info is fine 21:00:53 #undo 21:00:53 Removing item from minutes: 21:00:58 no, your info was fine 21:01:02 put it back :) 21:01:10 adamw: for scsi 21:01:14 oh k 21:01:30 ack 21:01:32 ack 21:01:38 ack 21:01:45 #agreed matrices are 100% with standard waiver for scsi 21:01:46 ack 21:02:07 late ack 21:02:57 ok so - blockers and test matrices are done! 21:03:05 * rbergeron eats a turkey in celebration 21:03:18 rbergeron: is that number 2? 21:03:18 #topic Go or No Go? 21:03:40 Go cow, go, go! 21:03:44 rbergeron: the whole turkey? 21:03:58 dgilmore: no just #1 21:04:00 just sat down 21:04:01 shes asleep from turkey overload 21:04:45 lets roll this beta cow out. 21:04:46 ok, the most important word now - as the blocker bugs are sorted out, test matrices are filled in - is everybody ok with saying Go? QA, FPL, devel, rel-eng 21:05:22 go-bble 21:05:23 tflink: viking-ice: i believe we're 'go' per our rules 21:05:31 Go from QA 21:05:31 adamw: agreed 21:05:55 spherical go-w 21:06:12 go-bble(tm) 21:06:25 GO 21:06:42 releng is go 21:06:50 wait no we are nogo 21:06:54 j/k go 21:06:59 dgilmore: even with the permissions issue w/ upgrade.img? 21:07:09 tflink: i manually changed it 21:07:14 I suppose that isn't enough to block on, though 21:07:25 dgilmore: it's causing branched to not compose... 21:07:27 tflink: ill fix up lorax today 21:07:31 but if we are go it's moot for beta. 21:07:55 nirik: right 21:08:14 we have Fedora repo that has everything it should 21:08:19 yep. 21:08:39 propose #agreed to Go for Fedora 18 Beta by FPL, Fedora QA, FPGM and rel-eng teams 21:08:51 ack 21:08:52 ack 21:09:10 ackey 21:09:29 wait 21:09:31 ack 21:09:40 ack 21:09:47 #agreed to Go for Fedora 18 Beta by FPL, Fedora QA, FPGM and rel-eng teams 21:10:02 YES!!! \ð/ 21:10:03 it's roooooling 21:10:14 yupee 21:10:35 ack 21:10:42 thanks for everyone's hard work on it... 21:10:52 * rbergeron assumes the workarounds from this meeting will go into commonbugs and release notes? 21:10:56 you all rock. 21:11:12 ack 21:11:14 rbergeron: yeah, I think all the bugs discussed here have been marked for commonbugs 21:11:16 TURKEYS FOR EVERYONE 21:11:17 adamw: pls take care of common bugs and I'll contact docs team 21:11:19 thanks usaians for coming on a public holiday 21:11:29 release the exploding turkey! 21:11:48 tflink: that is the worst possible thing to say :) lol 21:11:49 definitely, sorry for scheduling it on exploding turkey day but... 21:12:12 after protracted negotiations beta is green 21:12:16 rbergeron: considering the colliquial usage of turkey, probably 21:12:27 exactly ;) 21:12:35 but it is nowmy daughter's new favorite line 21:12:55 * rbergeron thanks everyone for coming and ... goes to eat her turkey 21:12:55 rbergeron: :D 21:13:07 rbergeron: enjoy the turkey! 21:13:34 beta gravy 21:13:36 anyone anything else? 21:14:07 rbergeron: enjoy your turkey! 21:14:20 * jreznik would like to taste rbergeron's turkey but is on 28 days diet now 21:15:19 #action jreznik to announce the Go decision publicly 21:15:33 thank you everyone for coming, for hard work on Beta and I'm setting fuse... 21:15:35 :) no turkey for me 21:15:35 the only time I go on a diet is when I'm dead 21:16:08 Viking-Ice: you've been dead before? 21:16:25 3... 21:17:05 Viking-Ice: you now, my gf started and otherwise I'd have to prepare the dinner for me :) 21:17:09 2... 21:17:57 jreznik: just retweet ;-) 21:18:07 1... 21:18:22 21:18:38 #endmeeting