f36-blocker-review
MINUTES
16:00:43 <adamw> #startmeeting F36-blocker-review
16:00:43 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon May  2 16:00:43 2022 UTC.
16:00:43 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:00:43 <zodbot> The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
16:00:43 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:43 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f36-blocker-review'
16:00:47 <adamw> #meetingname F36-blocker-review
16:00:47 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f36-blocker-review'
16:00:50 <adamw> #topic Roll Call
16:01:09 <CRCinAU> Morning.
16:01:13 <lruzicka> .hello2
16:01:14 <zodbot> lruzicka: Something blew up, please try again
16:01:17 <zodbot> lruzicka: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:01:23 <lruzicka> .hello2
16:01:24 <zodbot> lruzicka: Something blew up, please try again
16:01:27 <zodbot> lruzicka: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:01:37 * lruzicka is here
16:02:10 <adamw> ahoyhoy, who's around for blocker review fun?
16:02:36 <CRCinAU> yup yup - at 2am cos I dropped a doozy on you guys hahaha
16:02:48 <OnuralpSezer[m]> .hello thunderbirdtr
16:02:49 <zodbot> OnuralpSezer[m]: Something blew up, please try again
16:02:52 <zodbot> OnuralpSezer[m]: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:03:04 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Good evening
16:03:11 <bcotton> .hello2
16:03:12 <zodbot> bcotton: Something blew up, please try again
16:03:15 <zodbot> bcotton: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:03:41 <geraldosimiao> .hello geraldosimiao
16:03:42 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: Something blew up, please try again
16:03:45 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:03:50 <CRCinAU> everyone is doing a .hello2 and making the bot blow up - and I'm too scared to ask why.....
16:04:14 <geraldosimiao> Zodbot neeeds QA
16:04:22 <davdunc> .hello davdunc
16:04:23 <zodbot> davdunc: Something blew up, please try again
16:04:26 <zodbot> davdunc: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:04:45 <CRCinAU> when in Rome.....
16:04:49 <CRCinAU> .hello crcinau
16:04:50 <zodbot> CRCinAU: Something blew up, please try again
16:04:53 <zodbot> CRCinAU: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:04:58 <adamw> i think lukas doesn't really exist
16:05:05 <adamw> zodbot is sending us a message from outside the matrix
16:05:30 <lruzicka> it seems that nobody exists
16:05:31 <OnuralpSezer[m]> geraldosimiao: We need blocker for zodbot :)
16:05:42 <lruzicka> zodbot --
16:05:53 <geraldosimiao> +1 on that
16:06:32 <geraldosimiao> .hello geraldosimiao
16:06:33 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: Something blew up, please try again
16:06:36 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information.
16:09:07 <nirik> zodbot: reload Fedora
16:09:07 <zodbot> nirik: Kneel before zod!
16:09:07 <adamw> CRCinAU: we're bullying the bot
16:09:07 <adamw> it's good for stress relief
16:09:07 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Oh my :))
16:09:07 <CRCinAU> normally that's a good job for misc spirits on ice...
16:09:16 <nirik> now you can all say hello
16:09:27 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Ben Cotton (he/him):  did you made PTO entry for zodbot recently 🤔  in your calendar 📅?
16:09:34 <CRCinAU> .hello crcinau
16:09:35 <zodbot> CRCinAU: crcinau 'Steven Haigh' <netwiz@crc.id.au>
16:09:39 <CRCinAU> eyyyyy
16:09:57 <Southern_Gentlem> .hellojbwillia
16:10:00 <OnuralpSezer[m]> .hello thunderbirdtr
16:10:01 <zodbot> OnuralpSezer[m]: thunderbirdtr 'Onuralp SEZER' <thunderbirdtr@gmail.com>
16:10:01 <Southern_Gentlem> .hello jbwillia
16:10:04 <zodbot> Southern_Gentlem: jbwillia 'Ben Williams' <vaioof@gmail.com>
16:10:06 <adamw> alrighty, looks like we can get the party started
16:10:07 <davdunc> .hello davdunc
16:10:08 <zodbot> davdunc: davdunc 'David Duncan' <davdunc@amazon.com>
16:10:13 <jednorozec> .hello humaton
16:10:14 <zodbot> jednorozec: humaton 'Tomáš Hrčka' <thrcka@redhat.com>
16:10:14 <lruzicka> .hello lruzicka
16:10:17 <zodbot> lruzicka: lruzicka 'Lukáš Růžička' <lruzicka@redhat.com>
16:10:20 <adamw> #chair lruzicka bcotton
16:10:20 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw bcotton lruzicka
16:10:42 <adamw> (if anyone wonders why i tend to keep making the same people chairs, it's because i can't see irc nicks any more so i just pick ones i'm pretty sure i know :>)
16:10:58 <adamw> impending boilerplate alert!
16:11:04 <adamw> #topic Introduction
16:11:08 <adamw> Why are we here?
16:11:12 <adamw> #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.
16:11:15 <adamw> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
16:11:18 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
16:11:27 <adamw> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
16:11:28 <adamw> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
16:11:29 <adamw> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
16:11:31 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria
16:11:34 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Beta_Release_Criteria
16:11:38 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Final_Release_Criteria
16:11:48 <adamw> #info for Final, we have:
16:11:54 <adamw> #info 3 Proposed Blockers
16:11:54 <adamw> #info 5 Accepted Blockers
16:12:01 <geraldosimiao> .hello geraldosimiao
16:12:02 <adamw> #info 3 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
16:12:02 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: geraldosimiao 'Geraldo S. Simião Kutz' <geraldo.simiao.kutz@gmail.com>
16:12:02 <adamw> #info 21 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
16:12:10 <adamw> coremodule: are you around to secretarialize?
16:13:42 <adamw> if not, anyone else want to do it?
16:13:46 <adamw> (or else I will)
16:13:58 <bcotton> i can do it, but it probably won't be until ~4pm ET
16:15:10 <adamw> i'll do it, then
16:15:18 <adamw> #info adamw will secretarialize
16:15:21 <adamw> let's start with:
16:15:24 <adamw> #topic Proposed Beta blockers
16:15:27 <adamw> er
16:15:28 <adamw> #undo
16:15:28 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x7fccae3305f8>
16:15:37 <adamw> #topic Proposed Final blockers
16:15:38 <adamw> that's the bunny.
16:15:57 <adamw> #topic (2079274) Contact deletion is unreliable
16:15:58 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079274
16:15:59 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/783
16:16:03 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-contacts, NEW
16:16:06 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,3,-3) (+bcotton, +asciiwolf, +nixuser, kparal, lruzicka, retiredlake9230, -geraldosimiao, -catanzaro, -nielsenb)
16:16:24 <adamw> so, we appear to have a bit of a tie, here.
16:17:07 <Southern_Gentlem> anything new with this
16:17:22 <adamw> there's a lot of discussion and mind-changing going on in the ticket
16:17:23 <adamw> not much in the bug report
16:17:38 <CRCinAU> Can we assume a common scenario - that a user wouldn't really use this on the live ISO - but after things have been installed?
16:17:56 <CRCinAU> ie I don't know anyone who would use the calendar app on a live ISO
16:18:12 <adamw> CRCinAU: for deciding whether it's a blocker, we kiiiiinda aren't supposed to do that because the criteria doesn't really give that kind of wiggle room
16:18:18 <adamw> if we accepted it as a blocker and were deciding whether to waive it, we could take that into account
16:18:52 <CRCinAU> gotcha. I was more thinking that if it'd be understood that people would normally use the calendar after an install, then it could be fixed in an update.
16:19:15 <adamw> this is contacts, not calendar
16:19:17 <Southern_Gentlem> CRCinAU, not calendar
16:19:19 <adamw> (but same point applies)
16:19:38 <adamw> i guess i'm kinda -1 on this because of the "it does work, it's just delayed" thing
16:19:39 <adamw> it's a dumb bug, sure.
16:19:40 <CRCinAU> dammit, you're right - and it appears at 2:20am I can't read ;D
16:19:42 <bcotton> i'll switch to 0 (from +1). i'm not super convinced that the "it's supposed to work this way" reasoning matters to actual users, but i can accept the argument enough in the interests of shipping the release and letting an update fix it (assuming upstream wants to fix it)
16:19:59 <Southern_Gentlem> -1 FB cant reproduce
16:20:29 <frantisekz> .hello2
16:20:30 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com>
16:21:05 <adamw> Ben Cotton (he/him): i agree it's probably not supposed to work that way, but the fact that deletion *does* work after a delay makes it not completely awful for me.
16:21:10 <frantisekz> FB -1
16:21:26 <lruzicka> I am -1 FB here. These are the kind of bugs we have already discarded for other apps.
16:22:30 <jednorozec> FB -1, it states Deleting contact so I assume it will be deleted
16:22:37 <jednorozec> with delay
16:22:43 <adamw> ok, let's do some counting
16:22:47 <coremodule> hey, sorry I'm late, my wife had a doctors appointment and we just got home. adamw, I'll secretarialize for you
16:22:48 <adamw> bcotton changes to 0, so we're at +2
16:23:17 <adamw> new -1s are me, gentleman, frantisekz, jednorozec
16:23:24 <adamw> so we're at +2/-7, which is enough to call it
16:23:30 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FB
16:23:30 <adamw> coremodule: roger! hope your wife's ok
16:23:48 <adamw> #info in a late substitution, coremodule will take over secretarialization
16:24:18 <bcotton> pinch hitting for Pedro adamw, Manny coremodule module module module
16:24:37 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2079274 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as deletion does work after a delay, and the notification's grammar does technically convey this, we decided this doesn't quite meet the bar of a "basic functionality" failure
16:24:47 <lruzicka> ack
16:24:53 <Southern_Gentlem> ack
16:24:57 <coremodule> ack
16:25:02 <jednorozec> ack
16:25:12 <bcotton> ack
16:25:15 <CRCinAU> ack
16:25:26 <adamw> #agreed 2079274 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as deletion does work after a delay, and the notification's grammar does technically convey this, we decided this doesn't quite meet the bar of a "basic functionality" failure
16:25:30 <adamw> #topic (2080720) CPU Fan speeds going very fast at random
16:25:34 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080720
16:25:38 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/799
16:25:42 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, kernel, NEW
16:25:46 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,1,-3) (geraldosimiao, -kparal, -augenauf, -bcotton)
16:25:49 <adamw> so this seems, uh....vague
16:26:08 <Southern_Gentlem> -1 fb
16:26:09 <adamw> i was slightly troubled by the suggestion that the author had talked to other people who also have suspend/resume issues, though. anyone seen any discussions like that?
16:26:13 <adamw> i don't hang out in #fedora much these days
16:26:30 <Southern_Gentlem> not that i have seen
16:26:47 <CRCinAU> I'd kinda like to know more info - but that being said, there's nothing to work with in even evaluating this imho....
16:26:50 <Eighth_Doctor> I have the issue on my laptop
16:26:54 <Eighth_Doctor> but I have no idea what's causing it
16:27:03 <Eighth_Doctor> and it's also causing battery drain to go much faster than F35
16:27:17 <jednorozec> nothing like that on my desktop
16:27:22 <Eighth_Doctor> but I don't think we can block on it
16:27:30 <NishantMishra[m]> Same issue with me
16:27:34 <NishantMishra[m]> On my Laptop
16:27:35 <Eighth_Doctor> simply because of how difficult it would be to pin down
16:27:43 <CRCinAU> Eighth_Doctor: does that happen to be a Ryzen something based laptop/
16:27:45 <lruzicka> adamw, I have been seeing a sleep problem on my computer -> sometimes, when the computer switches off screen after some time of inactivity, it does not wake automatically. You have to switch to tty and back.
16:27:46 <CRCinAU> ?
16:27:55 <Eighth_Doctor> CRCinAU: no, Intel 10th gen
16:28:01 <NishantMishra[m]> CRCinAU: Yes sir
16:28:03 <Eighth_Doctor> Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Extreme Gen 2
16:28:06 <NishantMishra[m]> Ryzen user here
16:28:08 <lruzicka> however, I am not seeing any fan problems.
16:28:24 <adamw> lruzicka: yeah, that sounds different
16:28:25 <NishantMishra[m]> CRCinAU: I am a Ryzen User
16:28:30 <NishantMishra[m]> I can confirm that
16:28:45 <CRCinAU> mixed bunch of responses - but as far as the bug report, I'm not sure that we can block on something so vague we can't even determine the scope of a problem :|
16:28:48 <adamw> we've already accepted the ryzen proposed blocker (by ticket vote)
16:28:57 <NishantMishra[m]> Okay
16:29:15 <NishantMishra[m]> I will test and let you know once again
16:29:24 <igarcia1089> Lenovo thinkpad p14 amd 2gen, no issues with fan speed.
16:29:25 <Eighth_Doctor> I think this is probably not blockery enough
16:29:32 <CRCinAU> yeah - for those with ryzen laptop issues (not desktop), feedback on if installing kernel 5.17.5 from testing (I think) would fix it might help.....
16:29:41 <Eighth_Doctor> simply because we don't have enough info
16:29:48 <NishantMishra[m]> I was on that kernel
16:29:52 <NishantMishra[m]> It worked fine
16:29:59 <Southern_Gentlem> can we get back on topic
16:30:12 <adamw> Southern_Gentlem: sorry, my fault, i made the topic a bit vague :)
16:30:17 <CRCinAU> yeah, I don't want to turn the meeting into a support session and derail it ;)
16:30:32 <adamw> as this bug currently stands, i'm -1. too vague, not enough actionable detail, there are always individual issues with this system or that system for any release
16:30:49 <lruzicka> agreed
16:30:58 <OnuralpSezer[m]> -1
16:30:58 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FB
16:30:59 <jednorozec> yeah not enough info -1
16:31:08 <NishantMishra[m]> -1 not enough info
16:31:11 <lruzicka> -1 FB
16:31:24 <frantisekz> -1 FB
16:32:11 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2080720 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as currently described this is too vague and does not demonstrate any kind of impact on any broader class of hardware than just "this reporter's system"
16:32:17 <Southern_Gentlem> ack
16:32:20 <jednorozec> ack
16:32:20 <CRCinAU> -1 FB
16:32:25 <CRCinAU> ack
16:32:27 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Ack
16:32:37 <frantisekz> ack
16:32:58 <adamw> #agreed 2080720 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as currently described this is too vague and does not demonstrate any kind of impact on any broader class of hardware than just "this reporter's system"
16:33:04 <adamw> #topic (2080938) CVE-2022-1271
16:33:08 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080938
16:33:12 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/800
16:33:15 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, xz, ON_QA
16:33:18 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,1,-1) (+chrismurphy, +bcotton, +imsedgar, kparal, -adamwill)
16:33:21 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+2,0,-0) (+kparal, +adamwill)
16:33:46 <adamw> so my contention here is, we didn't take https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073312 as a blocker, and this is the same thing in xz (aiui)
16:35:18 <Southern_Gentlem> so do we have a fix for this already +1FB
16:35:32 <adamw> same reason applies: the criterion stipulates issues "which cannot be satisfactorily resolved by a package update (e.g. issues during installation)" - someone being convinced to do a malicious xzgrep from a live boot that's able to target valuable data feels like a pretty tricky scenario to me
16:36:09 <frantisekz> yeah, -1 FB, +1 FE then :)
16:36:09 <bcotton> i like the creative interpretation :-)
16:36:19 <lruzicka> -1 FB, +1 FE
16:36:20 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FB, +1 FE
16:36:25 <CRCinAU> Pretend I'm dumb..... A Freeze Exception is basically a day 1 update, right?
16:36:28 <OnuralpSezer[m]> +1 FE
16:36:35 <lruzicka> I do not think someone is going to be that creative.
16:36:36 <Southern_Gentlem> so do we have a fix for this already -1 FB +1 FE
16:36:38 <Eighth_Doctor> CRCinAU: no, it's released before GA freeze of the repos
16:36:52 <jednorozec> +1 FE -1FB
16:36:58 <Eighth_Doctor> so that means we make a compose with it included
16:36:58 <bcotton> since there's a build available, it seems somewhat academic, but i'll remain +1 (which I think I would be to the other one had I voted). i won't fight for it, though
16:36:59 <adamw> CRCinAU: no, we need a new RC
16:37:00 <geraldosimiao> -1 FB
16:37:00 <geraldosimiao> +1 FE
16:37:07 <frantisekz> It'll probably have the same outcome as if it was a blocker CRCinAU
16:37:08 <adamw> anything we accept as an FE today that doesn't feel too scary is going into it
16:37:12 <lruzicka> CRCinAU, no, FE can be included before the release but cannot stop release if not included
16:37:12 <CRCinAU> ok.
16:37:45 <CRCinAU> in that case, I'd agree.... -1 FB +1 FE
16:37:58 <Southern_Gentlem> if someone has physical access the machine is hosed period
16:38:31 <adamw> Southern_Gentlem: aiui this bug isn't about physical access, the trick is to get someone to run a maliciously-crafted zgrep or xzgrep command
16:39:42 <Eighth_Doctor> which is possible in rescue scenarios
16:40:06 <Eighth_Doctor> convoluted and contrived, but possible
16:40:21 <adamw> anyhoo
16:40:27 <adamw> we're at -7/+3 by my count now
16:40:29 <adamw> so
16:41:35 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2080938 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as with the same bug in gzip (2073312) which was rejected as a blocker, this is rejected on the basis we feel it can be satisfactorily resolved with an update; the issue is not likely to be encountered during installation or typical use of a live image
16:41:51 <lruzicka> ack
16:41:53 <bcotton> ack
16:41:56 <coremodule> ack
16:41:56 <CRCinAU> ack
16:41:58 <jednorozec> ack
16:42:00 <bcotton> wait
16:42:02 <bcotton> patch
16:42:02 <frantisekz> ack
16:42:12 <lruzicka> I like how adamw words it. Would not be able to do it myself :D
16:42:35 <adamw> Ben Cotton (he/him): patch away
16:42:43 <frantisekz> maybe add AcceptedFE there adamw?
16:42:47 <bcotton> s/RejectedBlocker (Final)/RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final)/
16:42:54 <frantisekz> heh :D
16:43:03 <adamw> oh yes, thanks
16:43:44 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2080938 - RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - as with the same bug in gzip (2073312) which was rejected as a blocker, this is rejected as it can be satisfactorily resolved with an update; the issue is not likely to be encountered during installation or typical use of a live image
16:43:53 <bcotton> ack f'real
16:44:03 <lruzicka> rack
16:44:15 <geraldosimiao> Ack
16:44:40 <frantisekz> ack
16:45:01 <jednorozec> ack
16:45:08 <adamw> #agreed 2080938 - RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - as with the same bug in gzip (2073312) which was rejected as a blocker, this is rejected as it can be satisfactorily resolved with an update; the issue is not likely to be encountered during installation or typical use of a live image
16:45:26 <adamw> OK, on to the one remaining:
16:45:31 <adamw> #topic Proposed Final Freeze Exception
16:45:39 <adamw> #topic (2079330) "Set As Wallpaper" only sets wallpaper for GNOME light theme and not dark theme
16:45:43 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079330
16:45:45 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/797
16:45:48 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, nautilus, VERIFIED
16:45:52 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+2,0,-1) (+asciiwolf, +nielsenb, -kparal)
16:46:23 <bcotton> i'd like answers to kparal's questions before i vote
16:46:28 <bcotton> https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/797#comment-795172
16:46:42 <frantisekz> heh, new gnome
16:46:46 <frantisekz> let's get it in! :D
16:46:57 <bcotton> what could possibly go right?!
16:47:08 <CRCinAU> bcotton: apparently changing the wallpaper?
16:47:37 <bcotton> CRCinAU: you're very clever at nearly 3am :-)
16:48:02 <CRCinAU> don't let my sarcasm fool you ;)
16:48:10 * Eighth_Doctor shrugs
16:48:10 <adamw> yeah, I'm with kparal on this one. seems safer to fix it with an update.
16:48:11 <adamw> -1
16:48:11 <Eighth_Doctor> nobody changes wallpapers, rite :P
16:48:23 <lruzicka> I agree with kparal. Let's not take 23 builds into at this point.
16:48:24 <adamw> Conan Kudo: i dunno if anyone changes wallpapers like *this*
16:48:28 <lruzicka> -1 FE
16:48:40 <bcotton> -1 FE
16:48:45 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FE
16:48:49 <Eighth_Doctor> +1 0Day
16:48:49 <jednorozec> -1 FE
16:48:54 <frantisekz> -1 FE
16:48:57 <adamw> Conan Kudo: that's not what 0day is.
16:49:00 <CRCinAU> how many years using Fedora - and I didn't know you could set a wallpaper like that......  *hangs head in shame*
16:49:15 <bcotton> there's a verified fix, so in theory people will update right away and it won't matter, but maybe we should commonbugs it for good measure?
16:49:35 <Eighth_Doctor> adamw: it's not going to be a stable update once the locks are released?
16:49:39 <Eighth_Doctor> sure looks like it will
16:49:44 <geraldosimiao> - FE
16:49:57 <geraldosimiao> * -1 FE
16:50:00 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2079330 - RejectedFreezeException (Final) - this seems like a small enough issue that it's better to fix it as an update, especially since the current submitted update is a large one that includes many other packages
16:50:16 <geraldosimiao> ack
16:50:16 <adamw> Conan Kudo: "+1 0Day" means you're voting for it to be a 0Day blocker.
16:50:25 <Eighth_Doctor> oh
16:50:25 <Eighth_Doctor> meh
16:50:31 <Eighth_Doctor> that's not what I mean
16:50:32 <bcotton> ack
16:50:33 <jednorozec> ack
16:50:35 <Eighth_Doctor> ack
16:50:55 <adamw> #agreed 2079330 - RejectedFreezeException (Final) - this seems like a small enough issue that it's better to fix it as an update, especially since the current submitted update is a large one that includes many other packages
16:51:25 <adamw> #topic Accepted Final Blockers
16:51:52 <adamw> so, here's a general survey: we do not have fixes for the gnome-photos bugs. I am gonna go ahead and assume we're likely to waive those at go/no-go.
16:52:19 <lruzicka> ok
16:52:22 <adamw> so my plan for now is to try and review the wpa_supplicant fix as best I can, do a build of that, then request an RC with that plus kernel 5.17.5 plus whatever FEs look sane
16:52:26 <Eighth_Doctor> yup
16:52:32 <adamw> and assume we will ship that unless anything new emerges
16:52:37 <Eighth_Doctor> makes sense to me
16:52:40 <adamw> does anyone see any issues there? did i miss anything?
16:52:47 <bcotton> i approve this message
16:52:56 <geraldosimiao> that plan looks good
16:53:43 <geraldosimiao> adamw: must remove kpral and Inie from the scene...
16:53:59 <geraldosimiao> 😂😂
16:54:55 <jednorozec> good plan
16:55:02 <CRCinAU> adamw: so on that, it looks like F35 just got kernel 5.17.5 from testing -> stable here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-916eaaeb7b
16:55:03 <adamw> #info gnome-photos blockers are not fixed and we are expecting them to be waived at go/no-go. fixes are in progress for 2080694 and 2072070 and a new RC with those fixes will be requested later today
16:55:12 <lruzicka> sound like a Plan
16:55:41 <CRCinAU> adamw: So if 5.17.5 on F36 gets the same here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d37373c604
16:56:11 <adamw> #topic Open floor
16:56:12 <CRCinAU> then just a build with that on should fix the one for #2080694
16:56:16 <adamw> any other business, folks?
16:56:18 <geraldosimiao> adamw: and with 2056303?
16:56:30 <adamw> CRCinAU: yes, I know, thanks
16:56:38 <frantisekz> adamw: I am thinking, it might be good idea to backport https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/2359 ?
16:56:48 <CRCinAU> adamw: sorry, I got the email about 10 minutes ago for F35 hahaha
16:56:53 <adamw> geraldosimiao: that one is basically addressed already, but still open for us to track the updates going into f34 and f35 and whether there are still identifiable problems
16:57:23 <geraldosimiao> ok, good to know :)
16:57:29 <frantisekz> shall I create FE for that? (I didn't test it, just randomly noticed)
16:57:44 <adamw> frantisekz: hmm, yes, that seems reasonable
16:58:54 <bcotton> preemptive +1 FE for that
16:59:08 <geraldosimiao> yeah, +1 FE here too
16:59:59 <lruzicka> +1 FE
17:00:12 <geraldosimiao> New RC by tomorrow?
17:00:23 <adamw> by this evening my time, i hope
17:00:28 <adamw> say 10-12 hours
17:00:33 <CRCinAU> nice :)
17:00:42 <geraldosimiao> ok
17:01:04 <geraldosimiao> so I'll wait for it to do relval
17:01:05 <CRCinAU> Oh, as a random topic, I noticed earlier in the F36 release timeline, there was kernel 5.18.x? Was that just not going to be ready in time?
17:01:27 <frantisekz> proposed as a FE: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2081070
17:02:03 <geraldosimiao> CRCinAU: just rc5 kernel, not a validone for release
17:02:11 <geraldosimiao> > <@CRCinAU:libera.chat> Oh, as a random topic, I noticed earlier in the F36 release timeline, there was kernel 5.18.x? Was that just not going to be ready in time?
17:02:11 <geraldosimiao> * just rc5 kernel, not a valid one for release
17:02:30 <CRCinAU> gotcha.
17:02:58 <adamw> let's do a quick vote, then
17:03:07 <geraldosimiao> right
17:03:28 <adamw> #topic (2081070) Backport fix for G42 radeon crash
17:03:28 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2081070
17:03:44 <geraldosimiao> +1 FE
17:03:46 <frantisekz> +1 FE (obviously :P)
17:03:48 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, mutter, NEW
17:03:58 <adamw> +1 FE from me, with confirmation from desktop team if possible
17:03:59 <lruzicka> +1FE
17:04:12 <bcotton> +1 fe
17:04:14 <adamw> i'll have to check if we have any wrinkles with a mutter build already being in testing or anything, but i'll deal with that if so
17:05:20 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2081070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this will prevent Workstation booting correctly on legacy Radeon adapters and thus is definitely worth an FE. We note Ubuntu's experience that it has been reported multiple times for their new release
17:05:32 <frantisekz> ack
17:05:38 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:06:11 <Eighth_Doctor> ack
17:06:17 <bcotton> ack
17:06:50 <adamw> #agreed 2081070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this will prevent Workstation booting correctly on legacy Radeon adapters and thus is definitely worth an FE. We note Ubuntu's experience that it has been reported multiple times for their new release
17:06:54 <adamw> thanks for catching that, frantisekz
17:07:00 <adamw> #topic Open floor
17:07:05 <adamw> back to open floor! any other last minute heroes?
17:07:16 <geraldosimiao> any news on that Prioritized Bug?
17:07:18 <frantisekz> np :) , will you have cycles to do the build once guys at #workstation give it a go ahead?
17:08:35 <bcotton> geraldosimiao: just the latest update in the BZ that a signed build is expected in about a month
17:08:50 <geraldosimiao> ok
17:09:13 <geraldosimiao> and that isn't a blocker. Or is it?
17:09:22 <bcotton> no. it's a prioritized bug. different process
17:09:28 <geraldosimiao> ok
17:09:31 <adamw> frantisekz: yeah, that won't be a problem
17:09:34 <geraldosimiao> fine :D
17:09:37 <frantisekz> ty :)
17:14:47 <adamw> ok, thanks everyone, i guess we're done
17:15:25 <lruzicka> ok, have a nice time everyone
17:15:44 <geraldosimiao> alright
17:15:57 <geraldosimiao> se you all latter
17:15:59 <geraldosimiao> by
17:16:55 <adamw> #endmeeting