17:00:10 <jreznik> #startmeeting F20 Final Go/No-Go meeting
17:00:10 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Dec  5 17:00:10 2013 UTC.  The chair is jreznik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:10 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:22 <jreznik> #meetingname F20 Final Go/No-Go meeting
17:00:22 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f20_final_go/no-go_meeting'
17:00:41 <jreznik> #topic Roll Call
17:00:59 <jreznik> hi guys! who's here today?
17:01:03 * pwhalen is here
17:01:25 * jzb briefly
17:01:29 * rbergeron is here
17:01:56 * nirik is here
17:02:07 * nirik goes to get coffee, back in a min
17:02:24 * williamjmorenor just looking
17:02:29 * satellit listening
17:03:42 <jreznik> ok, let's wait a moment for more folks to show up!
17:04:41 * danofsatx is here
17:05:31 <jreznik> ok, let's start! I pinged a few more folks
17:05:56 <jreznik> #topic Purpose of this meeting
17:06:17 <jreznik> #info Purpose of this meeting is to see whether or not F20 Final is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria.
17:06:18 <jreznik> #info This is determined in a few ways:
17:06:19 <jreznik> #info No remaining blocker bugs
17:06:21 <jreznik> #info Test matrices for Final are fully completed
17:06:34 <jreznik> #info Fedora 20 Final Release Candidate (RC) is available
17:06:49 <jreznik> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/20/final/buglist
17:06:50 <jreznik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_20_Final_TC4_Install
17:06:52 <jreznik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_20_Final_TC4_Base
17:06:54 <jreznik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_20_Final_TC4_Desktop
17:07:26 <jreznik> #topic Current status
17:08:04 <jreznik> for current state - we don't have RC available yet
17:08:37 <nirik> right.
17:08:41 <jreznik> TC5 is currently requested
17:09:08 <jreznik> for more details see current blocker list
17:09:37 <rbergeron> #link https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/20/final/buglist
17:09:37 <nirik> I think it's pretty clear we are no go. ;)
17:09:47 <jreznik> it's definitely looking better now but it's not yet there
17:10:13 <rbergeron> something about that "release candidate available" line :)
17:10:19 <jreznik> #info no release candidate (RC) available; TC5 requested
17:10:41 <jreznik> rbergeron: yep, added it there as robatino asked for that last time - it's pretty clear than
17:11:13 * rbergeron nods
17:11:37 <jreznik> a lot of fixes are waiting for QA verification -> TC5
17:13:08 <rbergeron> are we sorting through proposed/etc?
17:13:08 <jreznik> anyone else to mention anything for current status that should be mentioned?
17:13:18 <jreznik> rbergeron: yep
17:13:28 <rbergeron> jreznik: i figured, it just got quiet for a moment :)
17:14:05 <jreznik> #chair tflink
17:14:05 <zodbot> Current chairs: jreznik tflink
17:14:18 <jreznik> may I ask you to go through the proposed blocker bugs?
17:14:24 <nirik> I think perhaps we should just no-go and get back to testing/fixing? or did we want to go over all the blockers/proposed?
17:14:45 * masta looks in
17:14:50 <jreznik> nirik: we usually do it - the list of proposed is pretty short
17:14:53 <masta> howdy all
17:15:32 <jreznik> for accepted - it's not as bad neither - so I'd like to touch it and make sure things are moving
17:16:12 <jreznik> but I'm ok with skipping it too - I don't see any bug that needs urgent attention
17:16:31 <jreznik> adamw, tflink: ?
17:16:38 <adamw> ahoyhgoy
17:16:54 * tflink looks up
17:17:36 <masta> so ... no-go?
17:18:18 <nirik> masta: pretty clearly
17:18:33 <jreznik> yep, unfortunately
17:19:11 <adamw> yeah, definite no-go for anyone who wants a preview
17:19:23 <tflink> blocker review or no?
17:19:24 <halfie> I WANT MY FEDORA 20 ;(
17:19:26 <jreznik> tflink: so, do you want to go through proposed blockers? I see votes in that gpg key bug
17:19:57 <tflink> I can get setup for a review, sure
17:20:14 <jreznik> I prefer to go through that two proposed
17:20:46 <adamw> blocker review sure
17:20:53 <adamw> tflink: i can do it
17:21:14 <adamw> do i have a chair?
17:21:21 <jreznik> #chair adamw
17:21:21 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw jreznik tflink
17:21:25 <tflink> adamw: thanks
17:21:30 <jreznik> adamw: yes, you have :D
17:21:49 <adamw> thanks
17:21:55 <adamw> tflink: go code something
17:21:57 <adamw> :P
17:22:14 <adamw> #info Purpose of this blahblah
17:22:22 <adamw> Proposed blockers:
17:22:27 <adamw> #topic (1037934) 'unable to allocate aligned partition' errors keep occurring when trying to create partitions on iSCSI device, and does...other...odd...stuff
17:22:28 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1037934
17:22:28 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:22:51 <adamw> so we have another report of this working (though from another person who tested with a Fedora/RHEL box acting as an iSCSI target)
17:23:27 <adamw> given that so far it only fails for me, i'm fine with making it rejectedblocker. clearly there's a bug here, but it's likely specific to my NAS somehow.
17:23:48 <nirik> would a test on rhel6 virthost, netapp iscsi for the fedora instance be of use? I could do one of those if so.
17:24:16 <adamw> sure, as many tests as possible gives us confidence that the bug isn't more common
17:24:33 * nirik adds to his todo.
17:25:02 <jreznik> so reject or punt? I think we can reject and proposed it again in case there will be more reports of failures
17:25:12 <danofsatx> Due to my experience with adamw's brand of NAS, I heartily recommend another hardware iSCSI implementation test. That particular brand has.....issues.
17:25:32 <nirik> -1 for now, if it happens to be more common repropose?
17:25:34 <adamw> jreznik: fine by me
17:25:39 <adamw> -1 on that basis
17:25:41 <jreznik> ok, so -1
17:25:59 <pwhalen> -1
17:26:49 <masta> yeah... reject
17:27:08 <masta> adamw: what NAS is that?
17:27:20 <adamw> proposed #agreed #1037934 is rejected as a blocker for now on the basis it appears to be specific to adamw's iscsi target, can be re-proposed if it looks like it will affect enough configurations to be worthwhile blocking on
17:27:30 <jreznik> ack
17:27:33 <pwhalen> ack
17:27:37 <adamw> masta: thecus n5550. the UI is kinda janky, but it works fine for what i use it for
17:28:01 <masta> adamw: ty noted
17:28:13 <adamw> for anyone who doesn't come to many blocker meetings: here you 'ack', 'nack' or 'patch' the proposed agreement - you can't 'nack' it because you disagree with the vote, though, that's what the vote was for. it's just an accuracy check.
17:28:32 <nirik> ack
17:28:47 <adamw> #agreed #1037934 is rejected as a blocker for now on the basis it appears to be specific to adamw's iscsi target, can be re-proposed if it looks like it will affect enough configurations to be worthwhile blocking on
17:29:00 <masta> ack ack ack
17:29:33 <adamw> #topic (1023178) RPM GPG key not imported on live images
17:29:34 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023178
17:29:34 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, spin-kickstarts, NEW
17:29:46 <adamw> hey look folks, a release wouldn't be complete without #998 getting invoked SOMEHOW
17:30:19 <jreznik> and 4 more digits in bz numbers...
17:30:34 <adamw> so, yeah, i'm -1 on this simply on the basis we've been shipping the DVD this way since day 1.
17:30:44 <adamw> so it doesn't seem like we can logically block on the lives doing it too.
17:30:59 <adamw> it's more consistent this way! :P
17:31:20 <nirik> well, gnome-software handles this? and/or PK?
17:31:30 <nirik> (which it didn't in the past which is why the thing was added)
17:31:49 <adamw> yes, it was buggy in gnome-software for a while but it works fine now
17:32:04 <pwhalen> -1/+1
17:32:23 <jreznik> -1 blocker
17:32:23 <nirik> if it's importing ok in gnome-software and PK, I don't care if we fix it then.
17:32:24 <adamw> yeah, with a week's cushion i can be +1 FE
17:32:37 <nirik> well, we have a fix, but is that even worth pushing?
17:32:40 <adamw> again for blocker newbies, when someone votes X/Y, first vote is for blocker, second vote is for freeze exception
17:32:54 <adamw> nirik: seems nice to make the lives work the way they did before if we can
17:32:57 <jreznik> adamw should be teacher
17:33:13 <howcanuhavemyuse> thanks adamw! ;)
17:33:28 <nirik> adamw: ok. Even tho the reason we added that is no longer the case?
17:33:31 <adamw> nirik: and rebuilding spin-kickstarts apparently isn't the arsing pain it used to be
17:33:38 * satellit don't see the need to change it on lives
17:33:46 <adamw> nirik: oh, so, i should unpack
17:33:56 <adamw> my recollection is that we've done this somehow on lives for a _long_ time
17:33:58 <jreznik> I can be +1 FE is you guys think it's a good idea to have it
17:34:02 <adamw> we didn't just add it to work around gnome-software bug
17:34:32 * nirik looks.
17:34:38 <adamw> i *guess* we somehow lost it early in f20 cycle and then noticed when we came across the gnome-software bug, and kalev - thinking only of the software bug - added it back
17:34:46 <adamw> but imbw, we should probably straighten that out
17:35:14 <adamw> yeah, in f19, we have:
17:35:17 <adamw> fedora-live-base.ks:rpm --import /etc/pki/rpm-gpg/RPM-GPG-KEY-fedora
17:35:38 <adamw> ditto 18, and so on back, most likely.
17:35:58 <nirik> yeah, looks like 2008.
17:36:10 <adamw> i guess it got dropped in f20 because of the changed key file name, then resurrected?
17:36:37 <nirik> yeah, except the new name was not right.
17:36:42 <nirik> so it didn't work
17:36:49 <adamw> oh, huh
17:36:51 <nirik> you can't use $releasever there.
17:36:54 <adamw> actually it never got dropped, it was just broken
17:36:56 <nirik> it's just in the post.
17:36:58 <nirik> right
17:37:04 <adamw> so the " # work around for poor key import UI in PackageKit" comment has been there for years
17:37:15 <nirik> yeah, imported from livecd-tools.
17:37:21 <adamw> so the discussion of whether we still need this is actually relevant, but should have been had...however many years ago it was that PK fixed its bug :)
17:37:22 <nirik> possibly when spin kickstarts were split off
17:38:02 <adamw> anyway, i'm fine with voting +1 FE and discussing the ugly details of what's the right thing to do in the bug
17:38:12 <nirik> sure, works for me.
17:38:12 <jreznik> +1 FE then
17:38:31 * nirik doesn't feel strongly about this any way. Leave broken, fix, remove. All is fine to me.
17:38:45 <adamw> so, +1 FE from me
17:39:00 * masta is indifferent
17:40:02 <jreznik> so let's move on, seems like FE has three votes
17:40:33 <adamw> proposed #agreed #1023178 is rejected as a blocker but accepted as a freeze exception issue: the DVDs have always behaved like this, so it's illogical to block on the lives doing the same thing.
17:41:08 <jreznik> ack, no need to explain fe
17:41:16 <pwhalen> ack
17:41:16 <adamw> yeah, can do that in the bz comment
17:41:23 <adamw> couldn't think of how to do it shortly enough
17:42:03 <nirik> ack
17:42:10 <adamw> #agreed #1023178 is rejected as a blocker but accepted as a freeze exception issue: the DVDs have always behaved like this, so it's illogical to block on the lives doing the same thing.
17:42:38 <adamw> #topic Please stand by...
17:42:40 <adamw> OK, what next?
17:43:04 <jreznik> so, say it
17:43:26 <adamw> #info there are still open blockers unaddressed in the current compose (which is not even an RC)
17:43:45 <adamw> was that it?
17:43:58 <jreznik> yes
17:44:01 <adamw> okay then. :)
17:44:22 <jreznik> even I'd like to hear something different :)
17:44:43 <masta> indeed
17:45:17 <jreznik> proposed #agreed Fedora 20 Final is No-Go due to unaddressed blocker bugs and no RC available; to slip one week
17:45:41 <nirik> ack
17:45:43 <howcanuhavemyuse> ack
17:45:45 <rbergeron> ack.
17:45:46 <pwhalen> ack
17:46:09 <adamw> er, we're using blocker meeting format for go/no-go now?
17:46:14 <adamw> don't we usually do it...differently?
17:46:25 <adamw> jreznik: i was just handing back to you to continue the meeting
17:47:02 <nirik> does it matter what colour the red tape is?
17:47:06 <adamw> but anyway, QA is ack to that per our rule for voting.
17:47:07 <jreznik> adamw: I like it this way - a bit more transparent and I already did it this way for several go/no-go meetings
17:47:14 <adamw> nirik: MAGENTA OR GTFO
17:47:20 <adamw> jreznik: ah, I must've been drunk.
17:47:29 <jreznik> #agreed Fedora 20 Final is No-Go due to unaddressed blocker bugs and no RC available; to slip one week
17:47:48 <adamw> so, we'll likely be able to do RC1 today
17:48:10 <nirik> I think we should keep the fires lit for sure... no slacking up because we have another week.
17:48:53 <adamw> well, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1032921 is kind of the holdout now
17:48:58 <adamw> bit worrying
17:49:09 <jreznik> adamw: yep, could be possible to do it today/tomorrow - we need more evidence for systemd/kde combination
17:49:20 <danofsatx> yeah, I just got bitten by that one.
17:49:43 <jreznik> adamw: I asked pschindl to play with it as he hit that slow boot, otherwise kde guys are unable to reproduce it
17:49:51 <jreznik> but he broke his system instead...
17:50:10 <adamw> heh
17:50:22 <adamw> jreznik: also you may want to change the topic again.
17:50:41 <jreznik> #action jreznik to announce slip and update schedule
17:51:02 <jreznik> adamw: what topic? open floor or accepted blockers discussion?
17:51:42 <jreznik> #topic Open floor
17:51:51 <jreznik> let's do it this way :)
17:52:22 <jreznik> so would be nice to have more people dragged into that systemd and kde issue, there's some evidence it could be connected but
17:52:56 <adamw> other than that I think we now have fixes for everything; fix for the last systemd bug looks good, just needs an official build, and dgilmore and I figured out the fedup bug
17:53:07 <jreznik> yep
17:54:10 <jreznik> anything else? i think we are pretty much covered today, so I'll start countdown...
17:54:26 <jreznik> and thanks everyone for amazing work on hunting blockers!
17:55:01 <jreznik> 3...
17:56:06 <jreznik> 2...
17:56:53 <rbergeron> 1.5....
17:57:14 <adamw> pi...
17:57:30 <jreznik> pi? should I count it backwards now?
17:57:36 <jreznik> thanks for coming!
17:57:45 <breaker19> epsilon..
17:57:58 <jreznik> just a reminder - Readiness meeting in one hour! #fedora-meeting-1
17:58:19 <jreznik> #info Fedora 20 Readiness meeting in one hour
17:58:22 <jreznik> #endmeeting