17:03:34 <jreznik> #startmeeting F20 Alpha Go/No-Go meeting
17:03:34 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Sep 12 17:03:34 2013 UTC.  The chair is jreznik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:03:34 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:03:47 <jreznik> #meetingname F19 Alpha Go/No-Go meeting
17:03:47 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f19_alpha_go/no-go_meeting'
17:03:57 <jreznik> #topic Roll Call
17:04:02 <pschindl> Shouldn't it be F20?
17:04:09 <jreznik> #undo
17:04:09 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x298040d0>
17:04:16 <jreznik> #undo
17:04:20 * handsome_pirate waves from the crow's nest
17:04:27 <jreznik> #meetingname F20 Alpha Go/No-Go meeting
17:04:27 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f20_alpha_go/no-go_meeting'
17:04:33 * roshi here
17:04:42 <jreznik> pschindl: good catch, ctrl+c/v issue
17:04:53 <pschindl> jreznik: I thought so :)
17:05:07 <jreznik> let's get a few moments for other people to join us
17:05:11 * pschindl is here
17:05:19 * mkrizek is here
17:05:20 * suehle is here
17:05:23 * spoore is lurking
17:05:30 * handsome_pirate waves from the crow's nest
17:05:37 <rbergeron> Sorry. took me a while to scroll back up to see where we went :)
17:05:39 <jreznik> #info just a reminder - Readiness meeting follows in two hours later, even we say No-Go today
17:05:52 * nirik is here
17:05:56 <handsome_pirate> Same channel?
17:06:30 <jreznik> rbergeron: I was very, very generous to fpc :)
17:06:54 * tflink is here
17:07:16 <jreznik> handsome_pirate: -1 but we will see how long will fpc discuss scls :)
17:07:34 <handsome_pirate> rog-o
17:07:37 <jreznik> #chair rbergeron tflink pschindl nirik
17:07:37 <zodbot> Current chairs: jreznik nirik pschindl rbergeron tflink
17:07:52 <jreznik> #topic Purpose of this meeting
17:07:52 * satellit listening on f20 DVD install from DVD
17:08:09 <jreznik> #info Purpose of this meeting is to see whether or not F20 Alpha is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria.
17:08:11 <jreznik> #info This is determined in a few ways:
17:08:13 <jreznik> #info No remaining blocker bugs
17:08:14 <jreznik> #info Test matrices for Alpha are fully completed
17:08:15 <jreznik> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/20/alpha/buglist
17:08:17 <jreznik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_20_Alpha_RC2_Install
17:08:18 <jreznik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_20_Alpha_RC2_Base
17:08:20 <jreznik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_20_Alpha_RC2_Desktop
17:09:09 <jreznik> and I think we can start now with mini blocker review - tflink, may I ask you?
17:09:14 <tflink> sure
17:09:32 <tflink> #info current F20 alpha blocker status is:
17:09:40 <tflink> #info 3 Proposed Blockers
17:09:40 <tflink> #info 10 Accepted Blockers
17:09:40 <tflink> #info 2 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
17:09:40 <tflink> #info 16 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
17:09:44 <tflink> hrm
17:09:46 <tflink> #undo
17:09:46 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x2a536950>
17:09:48 <tflink> #undo
17:09:48 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x28a11690>
17:09:59 <tflink> starting with the proposed blockers
17:10:07 <tflink> #topic (1006113) anaconda unable to get update image
17:10:07 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006113
17:10:08 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:10:21 <tflink> I think this is a testcase error
17:10:44 <jreznik> and looking on install matrix, pschindl marked it as pass
17:10:46 <pschindl> I tried it today and updates definitely works just fine.
17:10:50 <tflink> we need to update the test case, but I don't think this is a valid bug against anaconda
17:11:06 <tflink> pschindl: with a different updates.img than the one in the testcase?
17:11:09 * handsome_pirate is -1 blocker do to epically old updates.img
17:11:19 <pschindl> Yes, I created my own one.
17:11:32 <pschindl> I will update test case.
17:11:40 <tflink> #info the updates.img in the testcase in question is too old to be valid, the test case needs to be updated
17:12:22 <tflink> proposed #agreed 1006113 - RejectedBlocker - While this would be a blocker for f20 alpha, the root cause is an out of date test case that needs to be updated and thus, does not block release of f20 alpha.
17:12:28 <tflink> or do we just close it as invalid
17:12:28 <handsome_pirate> ack
17:12:41 <Viking-Ice> so the update images was unpacked in run/install/updates ?
17:12:54 <pschindl> ack
17:12:56 <Viking-Ice> if so just close it as invalid
17:12:58 <tflink> Viking-Ice: well, there and /tmp
17:13:01 <rbergeron> does that test case normally (when working correctly) provide any feedback on things that *would* be blockers?
17:13:01 <handsome_pirate> tflink:  I vote close as invalid and update test case
17:13:25 <tflink> rbergeron: yes, updates.img via http is a release criterion for alpha
17:13:58 <rbergeron> but we know that it is working otherwise via the matrix.
17:14:10 <jreznik> rbergeron: yep, pschindl checked it
17:14:12 <rbergeron> just wanted to make sure it wasn't rooting out anything else :)
17:14:14 <tflink> rbergeron: yes, several people (including me) have gotten it to work
17:14:27 <jreznik> ack (or invalid, doesn't matter for me)
17:14:47 * nirik is fine with close invalid.
17:15:00 <rbergeron> okay, mooooooving on (and i'm okay with invalid too, for the record)
17:15:20 <jreznik> of course with fixing the testcase
17:15:26 <pschindl> I just tried it one more time. And it works and updates are in /tmp/updates/
17:15:26 <tflink> #info this bug will be closed as invalid due to the out-of-date testcase
17:15:42 <jreznik> thanks pschindl
17:15:43 <tflink> #action pschindl to coordinate updating the testcase
17:15:49 <tflink> #undo
17:15:49 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Action object at 0x2aed21d0>
17:15:55 <tflink> #action pschindl to coordinate updating the updates.img via http testcase
17:16:13 <tflink> anything else before moving on?
17:16:18 <jreznik> no
17:16:23 <tflink> #topic (1007387) ValueError: ('invalid size specification', '1.52587892899e-06 mb')
17:16:27 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007387
17:16:29 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:17:28 <tflink> this is really easy to hit
17:17:35 <Viking-Ice> +1 blocker
17:17:39 <tflink> +1 blocker
17:17:47 * nirik reads
17:17:55 <pschindl> I don't like it, but I'm +1 too :(
17:17:57 <handsome_pirate> +1 blocker
17:18:08 <jreznik> it's pretty bad looking, can be workarounded by deleting all (as Alpha says it does not have to preserve old data) but it's really easy to hit +1
17:18:18 <mkrizek> +1 :/
17:18:30 <nirik> ugh. ;(
17:18:37 <jreznik> dlehman is already working on patch
17:18:39 <tflink> proposed #agreed 1007387 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F20 alpha release criterion: "The installer must be able to complete an installation to a single disk using automatic partitioning."
17:18:41 <rbergeron> doubleugh
17:18:43 <handsome_pirate> ack
17:18:44 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:18:51 <jreznik> ack
17:18:53 <rbergeron> ack
17:18:54 <nirik> ack I sadly say
17:18:54 <mkrizek> ack
17:18:58 <tflink> #agreed 1007387 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F20 alpha release criterion: "The installer must be able to complete an installation to a single disk using automatic partitioning."
17:19:11 <tflink> #topic (1004889) AttributeError: 'FC3_Cdrom' object has no attribute 'noverifyssl'
17:19:12 <jreznik> but not sure we will be able to pick the patch up without significant retesting of partitioning...
17:19:14 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1004889
17:19:17 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, pykickstart, VERIFIED
17:19:19 * satellit deleting each partition from bottom up and not usint all sems to work
17:19:31 <tflink> this isn't as clear of a blocker
17:19:45 * tflink notes that it's already a freeze exception
17:20:01 <jreznik> is it in RC2 already or not?
17:20:05 <tflink> and it's fixed
17:20:08 <tflink> nvm
17:20:10 <tflink> #undo
17:20:10 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x28176d50>
17:20:11 <tflink> #undo
17:20:11 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x28176110>
17:20:13 <tflink> #undo
17:20:13 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x29dfb310>
17:20:19 <tflink> so, that's all of the proposed blockers
17:20:37 <tflink> qa is already no-go, do we want to continue with the other unaddressed blocker?
17:20:41 <jreznik> ah, one new blocker to rule them all
17:20:52 <tflink> we have an old one, too
17:20:56 <jreznik> tflink: for record, I'd go through unadressed accepted ones
17:21:07 <tflink> ok, there's just one
17:21:14 <jreznik> yep, that one
17:21:16 <tflink> #topic (1002737) initial-setup-graphical.service does not run - TypeError: Argument 1 does not allow None as a value
17:21:19 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1002737
17:21:22 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, initial-setup, ON_QA
17:22:03 <jreznik> the first crash was fixed but there was another place in the code not sanity checked
17:22:05 <tflink> the issue here is that initial-setup isn't running on at least KDE arm images
17:22:17 <jreznik> so it should be one liner
17:22:21 <Viking-Ice> still a blocker that needs to be fixed
17:22:25 <handsome_pirate> Indeed
17:22:26 <jreznik> Viking-Ice: sure
17:23:00 <jreznik> vpodzime complains he does not have access to arm hw but while checking it, I think qemu-arm is not as bad
17:23:19 <jreznik> pwhalen provided tb to anaconda guys
17:23:25 <jwb> jreznik, apparently there is a regression in the kernel that breaks qemu-arm
17:23:30 <pschindl> jreznik: he complained about speed of qemu
17:23:48 <handsome_pirate> jwb:  News to me
17:24:07 <tflink> jreznik: does he have the tools he needs to fix the new issue?
17:24:24 <jreznik> tflink: it's pretty simple fix, one missing check
17:24:27 <jwb> handsome_pirate: it was mentioned in the ARM meeting yesterday.  happened between 3.11.0-3 and 3.11.0-300
17:24:40 <tflink> ok
17:24:48 <handsome_pirate> jwb:  Ah, missed the meeting yesterday
17:25:01 <tflink> #info developers are aware of the new issue, are working on a fix
17:25:30 <tflink> #info the fix should be simple and this bug doesn't need any additional prodding
17:25:34 <jreznik> bcl just sent patch to try to pwhalen
17:25:50 <tflink> anything else on this bug?
17:25:55 <jreznik> so that's all for blockers
17:26:32 <tflink> yep
17:26:37 <handsome_pirate> yay
17:26:46 <tflink> all the rest of teh accepted blockers are just waiting for karma and push to stable
17:27:38 <jreznik> do we want try to get fixes built and retest? I'd say for the first anaconda one with not minor change I'd say it would require retesting of the most anaconda test cases
17:27:50 <tflink> agreed
17:28:13 <tflink> do we even have a build with a fix yet?
17:28:27 <jreznik> tflink: not yet, both fixes in progress
17:28:45 <jreznik> let's check first test matrices coverage, that can help us with decision
17:28:48 <tflink> I'm not sure we'd have time to not slip at this point
17:28:57 <handsome_pirate> +1
17:29:13 <Viking-Ice> yep I'm pretty sure we need to slip
17:29:19 <tflink> we wouldn't have RC3 for another ... 4 hours minimum?
17:29:37 <handsome_pirate> And, that's assuming the fixes get done now
17:29:41 <Viking-Ice> and we really should not be stressing us into making it
17:29:46 <tflink> yeah, I said minimum
17:29:49 <jreznik> tflink: yep, minimum
17:29:49 * nirik nods. we are doomed again. slip. ;(
17:29:56 <spstarr_work> :/
17:30:06 <rbergeron> Viking-Ice: +1 to that.
17:30:13 <tflink> i actually thought we were going to make it until that new anaconda bug showed up
17:30:24 <tflink> do we still want to go over the matrices?
17:30:41 <jreznik> Viking-Ice: if it would be only that second bug, it would make sense to try but for the partitioning one bug - for sure, no
17:31:02 <jreznik> tflink: yep, to see where we're and where we can still hit another issues (we don't know about yet)
17:31:11 <jreznik> #topic Test Matrices coverage
17:31:22 <tflink> the big problem is cloud images
17:31:27 <tflink> biggest
17:31:33 <tflink> there's a blocker there that I'm not sure how to file
17:31:35 <jreznik> #info biggeste problem are cloud images
17:31:43 <jreznik> #undo
17:31:43 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x15575d90>
17:31:44 <tflink> i386 AMI is DOA
17:32:14 <tflink> it would be nice if the cloud sig was helping to test the stuff that they want promoted more
17:32:27 <Viking-Ice> actually they should be doing that stuff
17:32:53 * jreznik is pinging mattdm to join us
17:33:14 <rbergeron> tflink: blocker that you're not sure how to file?
17:33:19 <jreznik> yeah, if we want it as prime offering, we need help
17:33:20 <tflink> rbergeron: yeah, DOA AMI
17:34:04 <handsome_pirate> yeah, that's +1 blocker
17:34:07 <jreznik> what does it mean (for dumb not cloud compatible me)
17:34:16 <tflink> jreznik: the AMI can't boot
17:34:29 <handsome_pirate> rbergeron:  Also, we need to talk about making Amazon space available for testers
17:34:32 <jreznik> ok, better now
17:34:32 <tflink> x64 is fine, i386 is borked
17:34:57 <spstarr_work> handsome_pirate: yeah cost $$$
17:35:09 <pschindl> We shouldn't support i386 any more :)
17:35:10 <spstarr_work> if there is a free account to use for testing that would be helpful
17:35:12 <tflink> the testing cost me less than USD .50
17:35:20 <jreznik> lol
17:35:25 <rbergeron> handsome_pirate: okay, we can probably do that at some point on the cloud sig list - it's easy enough to dole out access with IAM
17:35:28 * mattdm jumps in
17:36:07 <tflink> not sure if this discussion needs to happen in go/no-go, though
17:36:08 <Viking-Ice> so cloud community not testing and i386 img borket
17:36:25 <spstarr_work> rbergeron: assuming red hat has a close partnership with Amazon it should be free for us ;)
17:36:32 <jreznik> tflink: well, if it's blocker, we should cover it here
17:36:46 <tflink> Viking-Ice: depends on if sandro counts as cloud or qa, i suppose
17:36:47 <tflink> both?
17:36:57 <tflink> but that doesn't matter much
17:37:04 <Viking-Ice> tflink, both
17:37:16 <Viking-Ice> but one indvidual is well one indvidual
17:37:18 <jreznik> mattdm: as Viking-Ice said, i386 ami is broken, also we would like to see more involvement from cloud people to test the stuff
17:37:27 <handsome_pirate> rbergeron:  Roger
17:37:36 <handsome_pirate> mattdm:  See what rbergeron just said
17:37:52 <jreznik> tflink: what's the problem with filling bug?
17:38:01 <tflink> i don't know where to file it
17:38:04 <mattdm> yes. i've been swamped this week.
17:38:27 <mattdm> the i386 problem is permissions/releng, right?
17:38:29 <jreznik> mattdm: any idea where/how to report it?
17:38:50 <tflink> mattdm: permissions were fixed. i have no idea what's wrong with it, though
17:39:11 <jreznik> mattdm: could you take a look and let us know then?
17:39:20 <tflink> system log i grabbed before terminating: http://paste.fedoraproject.org/39105/13790023/
17:39:55 <mattdm> maybe wrong aki?
17:40:41 <dgilmore> mattdm: doubtful
17:40:43 <jreznik> we are getting to close to details now -> #fedora-qa or -devel pls just I'd want to be sure we will handle it correctly, not to forgot about it
17:40:44 <mattdm> i'll look into it. as for the bigger problem of where to track these....
17:40:47 <Viking-Ice> kernel issue?
17:41:04 <tflink> Viking-Ice: or snafu with build process
17:41:06 <jreznik> anything else important missing in test matrices?
17:41:37 <tflink> not really - RC2 didn't get much PXE but that didn't change much from RC1 and I'm not too worried about it
17:41:57 <jreznik> tflink: kparal was waiting for RC2 sync to run PXE test
17:42:15 <jreznik> ok, so let's move on
17:42:24 <tflink> the arm desktop testing has been a bit sparse due to lack of widely dispursed HW but it is getting done
17:42:35 <tflink> so I'm not so worried about that
17:42:36 <tflink> either
17:42:39 <jreznik> tflink: yep, I asked arm guys to take a look
17:42:50 <tflink> pschindl: any other concerns you see?
17:43:03 <tflink> see/have
17:43:17 <pschindl> nothing from me.
17:43:24 <jreznik> (for initial-setup bug, we have working patch, just fyi)
17:43:37 <jreznik> ok, let's move on
17:44:15 <jreznik> #info issues - cloud coverage and broken i386 ami
17:44:25 <jreznik> #info arm coverage being worked on
17:44:39 <jreznik> #info PXE missing for RC2 but should be same as RC1
17:44:48 <jreznik> #topic Go/No-Go decision
17:45:08 <jreznik> ok, so QA already stated they are No-Go
17:45:09 <tflink> QA is no-go due to open, unresolved blockers
17:45:26 <jreznik> #info QA is no-go due to open, unresolved blockers
17:46:10 <jreznik> now, do we want full week slip now or try it in less time?
17:46:27 <dgilmore> jreznik: i really dont like not doing a full week
17:46:29 <tflink> full week
17:46:37 <drago01> we have the "no full week" feature
17:46:41 <drago01> so lets use it for once
17:46:50 <drago01> instead of adding an artifical delay
17:46:52 <drago01> dgilmore: why?
17:46:54 <jreznik> drago01: we already used it once
17:47:07 <Viking-Ice> yeah full week
17:47:29 <Viking-Ice> so qa and releng in for a week
17:47:40 <jreznik> but I can see the point of having full week - RC validation was rushed as there was not much time (and kudos QA for the coverage in just half day!)
17:47:51 <dgilmore> drago01: because everything in the releng world revolves around being scheduled as we normally do. if we dont do a full week it means a lot of extra work for me
17:48:05 <dgilmore> as is i worked till 4am to get RC2 out last night
17:48:11 <tflink> and I don't relish the idea of more days where I'm up until 6am
17:48:15 <Viking-Ice> jreznik,  we really should not be doing that it's better to just slip and give people enough time
17:48:37 <Viking-Ice> rather then chasing some pointless release date
17:48:39 <rbergeron> slipped product is better than slipped humans :)
17:48:47 <jreznik> Viking-Ice: yep, this time I'm for full week slip and thanks dgilmore for working on RC2!
17:48:56 <pschindl> +1 for full week
17:49:17 <drago01> dgilmore: the extra work part makes no sense to me but ok
17:49:24 <pschindl> More time for another testing will be better.
17:49:40 <jreznik> proposed #agreed Fedora 20 Alpha is No-Go; to slip full one week
17:49:41 <dgilmore> drago01: things that i do over days i have to cram into smaller time frames
17:49:55 <drago01> dgilmore: ok
17:50:19 <pschindl> drago01: He is not lazy one, dgilmore is really worked hard to get RC2 done.
17:50:32 <Viking-Ice> let's try to cover cloud better in that's week time
17:50:34 <drago01> pschindl: I didn't say (nor imply) that
17:50:38 <jreznik> drago01: if we would have another RC in progress and we would just need some validation, I'd be for retrying it tomorrow, but there really wasn't as much testing as anyone would like to see for Alpha
17:50:55 <jreznik> so acks?
17:50:57 <pschindl> drago01: I thought so :)
17:51:01 <tflink> ack
17:51:03 <mkrizek> ack
17:51:03 * dgilmore acks a week
17:51:03 <handsome_pirate> ack
17:51:07 <pschindl> ack
17:51:10 * nirik nods.
17:51:11 <drago01> pschindl: it was more of a "hmm isn't this just kicking off some script"
17:51:51 * tflink is amused that most of the acks are qa folks :)
17:51:56 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:51:59 <drago01> anyway
17:51:59 <drago01> ack
17:52:07 * jreznik can ack my own proposal :)
17:52:10 <jreznik> ack
17:52:28 <jreznik> #agreed Fedora 20 Alpha is No-Go; to slip full one week
17:53:14 <jreznik> ok, thanks for coming! I think it does not look bad for the next week, good job guys!
17:53:20 <rbergeron> :)
17:53:33 <jwb> question
17:53:37 <jreznik> (a bit of optimism is needed)
17:53:40 <jreznik> jwb: go on
17:53:41 <dgilmore> jreznik: sure
17:53:52 <jwb> does that 1 week slip cause everything else to slip out by 1 week?
17:53:57 <jreznik> jwb: yep
17:53:58 <rbergeron> jwb: yes.
17:54:00 <dgilmore> jwb: yes
17:54:15 <jwb> hm
17:54:31 <drago01> (that's why I wanted to avoid it if possible)
17:54:36 <jwb> so final change deadline is 2013-11-19?
17:54:49 <jreznik> jwb: not ideal but we still have some buffer before christmas and we already did go/no-go on thanksgiving day
17:54:50 <tflink> jreznik: yeah, I don't things are horrible - just a few things we found late. I'd be surprised if we didn't go next week
17:54:51 <rbergeron> jwb: basically if we keep slipping we'll be in january.
17:54:52 <handsome_pirate> jwb:  Aye
17:54:55 <rbergeron> or we'll be in mental hospitals.
17:54:56 <rbergeron> :)
17:55:03 <rbergeron> if we don't.
17:55:03 <handsome_pirate> Oh, god
17:55:12 <handsome_pirate> Visions of F18 come back
17:55:15 <rbergeron> handsome_pirate: yep.
17:55:23 <tflink> handsome_pirate: it's not that bad
17:55:25 <jreznik> I don't expect F20 to be as bad
17:55:28 <jwb> ok.  kernel team has some more thinking to do now
17:55:37 <Viking-Ice> for what ?
17:55:39 <jreznik> jwb: what kind?
17:55:51 <jwb> to determine if getting 3.12 into F20 is feasible
17:56:00 <jreznik> jwb: when is 3.12?
17:56:15 <jwb> likely to be final around the first week of Nov
17:56:24 <jwb> already close to -rc1
17:56:57 <jreznik> jwb: any big changes expected?
17:57:13 <jwb> no more than every other rebase we push out to a stable release.
17:57:52 <Viking-Ice> I say just go ahead and plan for it per tradition we probably slip again
17:57:53 <Viking-Ice> ;)
17:58:15 <handsome_pirate> +1
17:58:28 <tflink> Viking-Ice: planning to fail?
17:58:36 <jreznik> jwb: seems doable in that time (if it will be released early nov)
17:58:46 <Viking-Ice> tflink, no just sticking to tradition
17:58:57 <jwb> of course, f20 has impacts to ARM.  and ARM is... unstable.
17:59:02 <jwb> so who knows
17:59:03 <jreznik> Viking-Ice: F19 tradition :)
17:59:08 <jwb> like i said, thinking to do
17:59:30 <pschindl> There should be rule: "Every even release has to be slipped at least 4 weeks." :)
17:59:41 <jreznik> (that would be very nice tradition - one slip at alpha and then go, go)
17:59:51 <tflink> pschindl: -1 million
18:00:01 <jreznik> jwb: ok, just let us know (so we can be prepared for it)
18:00:02 <dgilmore> jreznik: im likely going home for november
18:00:25 <Viking-Ice> or just really change the release cycle to something that more accurately reflects what we are doing
18:00:29 <jreznik> dgilmore: yeah, you told me already - how much online you would be?
18:00:47 <dgilmore> jreznik: normal amount. just different hours
18:00:56 <dgilmore> though ill likely take 1 or 2 weeks off
18:01:02 <jreznik> Viking-Ice: we will see how fedora.next will end up - open to everything
18:01:38 <jreznik> dgilmore: ok, let me know once you know better so we can see where we are
18:02:02 <jreznik> anything else to add? one hours passed and I need dinner before readiness meeting :)
18:02:11 <handsome_pirate> heh
18:02:17 * handsome_pirate is good
18:02:45 <jreznik> so readiness meeting in one hour - see you later!
18:02:50 <jreznik> setting fuse
18:02:53 <jreznik> 3...
18:03:14 * pschindl is cutting fuse to 2
18:03:33 * handsome_pirate lights it right next to the dynamite
18:03:37 <handsome_pirate> BOOM!
18:03:44 <jreznik> thanks again!
18:03:49 <jreznik> #endmeeting