14:59:40 <adamw> #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting
14:59:40 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Aug 19 14:59:40 2019 UTC.
14:59:40 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
14:59:40 <zodbot> The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:59:40 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:59:40 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_qa_meeting'
14:59:43 <adamw> #meetingname fedora-qa
14:59:43 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
14:59:47 <adamw> #topic Roll call
14:59:47 <frantisekz> .hello2
14:59:48 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com>
14:59:50 <adamw> morning folks
14:59:54 <adamw> who's around for qa meety times?
15:00:01 * satellit listening
15:00:26 <lruzicka> .hello2
15:00:27 <zodbot> lruzicka: lruzicka 'Lukáš Růžička' <lruzicka@redhat.com>
15:00:30 <jlanda> .hello2
15:00:31 <zodbot> jlanda: jlanda 'Julen Landa Alustiza' <julen@landa.eus>
15:00:35 <jlanda> heya
15:00:44 <cmurf> .hello chrismurphy
15:00:45 <zodbot> cmurf: chrismurphy 'Chris Murphy' <bugzilla@colorremedies.com>
15:01:22 <bcotton> .hello2
15:01:25 <zodbot> bcotton: bcotton 'Ben Cotton' <bcotton@redhat.com>
15:02:39 <adamw> morning morning
15:02:42 <adamw> how's everyone doing today
15:02:54 <bcotton> peachy, how about you? :-)
15:03:09 <frantisekz> it's all sad and empty without composes :/
15:03:22 <adamw> our lives are grey and meaningless indeed
15:03:31 <lruzicka> I had to swallow two Prozacs
15:03:41 <adamw> tonight on 60 Minutes: The Tragedy Of The Compose Addicts
15:03:47 <adamw> they live for composes
15:03:50 <adamw> without composes they have nothing
15:03:56 <cmurf> they live on composes
15:04:00 <frantisekz> :D
15:04:00 <adamw> hehe
15:04:03 * kparal is here
15:04:12 <jlanda> composes live on them
15:04:16 <frantisekz> .fire kparal for being late
15:04:16 <zodbot> adamw fires kparal for being late
15:04:19 <adamw> lruzicka: i thought that was called 'qa breakfast'?
15:04:27 <cmurf> but hey, I don't so much need a compose, as much as I want F31 updates without fc32 packages :D
15:04:53 <jlanda> you didn't want a gpg key mess? meeeh
15:05:15 <lruzicka> adamw, was it? so that somehow calms me down :)
15:05:18 <adamw> it's not like we've been doing this for 32 releases and should be better at it by now or anything
15:05:40 <cmurf> that i discovered after the 700MBs of mixed pile of fc31 and fc32 packages dnf is offering me right now
15:06:44 <adamw> cmurf: is that with rawhide repos disabled?
15:06:49 <cmurf> yessir
15:07:02 <adamw> hmm
15:07:17 <adamw> nirik: is that on the list of known branching issues?
15:07:19 <cmurf> it definitely thinks it's a Fedora 31 system, says it's only using Fedora 31 repos
15:07:34 <cmurf> fedora-release says Fedora 31 (Thirty One) or whatever
15:07:36 <cmurf> not rawhide
15:07:53 <frantisekz> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8103
15:07:54 <cmurf> repolist shows only f31 repos enabled
15:07:58 <frantisekz> cannot it be this?
15:08:06 <adamw> aha
15:08:09 <adamw> yes, that would be it
15:08:32 <cmurf> haha
15:08:34 <cmurf> ok
15:08:51 <jlanda> 31 is rawhidr for mirrormanager :)
15:09:08 <adamw> that seems unfortunate, but on the other hand, also seems difficult to fix...
15:09:09 <nirik> there is no branched compose
15:09:18 <nirik> mirrormanager is pointing branched at rawhide
15:09:59 <cmurf> ok so some people who didn't notice the fc32 packages might have a distro-sync in their near future?
15:10:05 <cmurf> if they want to stay on 31?
15:10:07 <frantisekz> I guess
15:10:15 <nirik> yes
15:10:20 <monado> .
15:10:31 <cmurf> i'm not affected, i was like, no way am i installing a mixed batch of packages that also say they aren't signed with some key
15:10:33 <Lailah> Hello everyone!
15:10:39 <Lailah> .fas lailah
15:10:40 <zodbot> Lailah: lailah 'Sylvia Sánchez' <BHKohane@gmail.com>
15:10:58 <monado> .fas monado
15:10:58 <zodbot> monado: 'monado' Not Found!
15:11:15 <adamw> hi lailah
15:11:21 <Lailah> You don't exist: monado  xD
15:11:27 <adamw> #topic Previous meeting follow-up
15:11:32 <monado> I do not exist
15:11:33 <Lailah> Hi adamw so long no see
15:11:35 <adamw> monado: the .hello thing is tied to your FAS name
15:11:40 <adamw> Lailah: yeah! good to see you back
15:11:49 <monado> I don't have a FAS
15:11:51 <monado> name
15:11:51 <adamw> monado: if your FAS name doesn't match your IRC name, you can do '.hello <fasname>'
15:11:57 <adamw> okay, in that case you cannot hello. :P
15:12:00 <lruzicka> I was affected in VMs, because I updated the system and it changed into something and now I only have like 4 modules in my modularity testing VM
15:12:11 <monado> I have no idea what FAS is
15:12:31 <Lailah> monado: Is the Fedora Account for contributors
15:12:35 <adamw> monado: it's the fedora account system
15:12:40 <lruzicka> monado, Fedora Account System :
15:12:51 <monado> Ah, I see
15:12:54 <Lailah> LEL
15:13:07 <monado> Well I'm not really a contributor to anything
15:13:08 <adamw> #info "adamw to send xen/ec2 proposal to devel@ as well if it wasn't already" - I did that, the discussion is ongoing
15:13:25 <Lailah> adamw:  I'm sorry I was so absent. I hope to get on track again.
15:13:31 <adamw> Lailah: don't worry about it at all :)
15:13:49 <Lailah> adamw: Thanks
15:13:52 <lruzicka> monado, you can always become one, if you create a FAS :)
15:14:03 <lruzicka> monado, https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts
15:14:12 <monado> I'm kind of stupid so I don't think I'd be any help
15:14:23 <adamw> #info "bcotton to send his ec2 instance type suggestion to the thread" - he did that; turns out his suggestion was a bit off, we now have a very comprehensive list of suggested instance types from an amazon person to work with as well
15:14:30 <lruzicka> monado, it looks you can read and write at least :)
15:14:36 <Lailah> Don't say that, there's surely something you can do for Fedora monado
15:14:41 <adamw> we're all pretty stupid, you have to be to join qa ;)
15:14:56 <monado> I have no skills
15:14:59 * Lailah raises a hand to ask a question
15:15:15 <lruzicka> monado, can you tell that something does not work as expected?
15:15:18 <adamw> Lailah: fire away
15:15:29 <monado> I haven't used fedora in some time
15:15:38 <Lailah> What ec2 is? Where it comes from?
15:16:19 <adamw> Lailah: it's amazon's cloud system
15:16:27 <adamw> https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/
15:16:35 <Lailah> Ah... okay...
15:16:42 <Lailah> And what was the problem?
15:17:00 <adamw> Lailah: we have an existing release criterion covering Xen (a virtualization system) which we were discussing whether to keep or not
15:17:12 <Lailah> Ah!!  I remember this!
15:17:31 <adamw> there's a consensus that the main reason it matters whether we work on Xen is because some EC2 instance types use Xen, and we want to be sure Fedora works in EC2 because EC2 is very widely used
15:17:45 <adamw> so we're talking about sort of converting the xen criterion into a specific criterion covering EC2 instead
15:18:00 <Lailah> Makes sense to me.
15:18:01 <adamw> there's a topic for this coming up, so we'll have more on it then :)
15:18:09 <Lailah> okay
15:18:31 <adamw> #info "adamw to tweak the last minute blocker draft a bit" - I did that also, and we have a topic for it and the xen/ec2 criterion coming up
15:18:51 <adamw> any other followup on last time before we go ahead?
15:19:55 <Lailah> No idea. I'm only reading so far.
15:19:55 <adamw> okey dokey then
15:20:02 <adamw> #topic "Process proposals: Xen / EC2 criteria, 'last minute' blockers"
15:20:28 <adamw> so, yep, this is for the currently-active policy proposals: the ec2 criterion and the 'last minute blocker' policy
15:21:01 <Lailah> Okay
15:21:04 <adamw> see the threads "Update to last minute blocker bugs proposal (Rev:07242019)" and "Xen / EC2 release criteria proposal"
15:21:22 <adamw> so...it seems like we had pretty good consensus on my most recent draft for the 'last minute blocker' thing
15:21:28 <adamw> so i
15:21:30 <adamw> d'oh
15:21:42 <Lailah> What?
15:21:54 <Lailah> I hadn't read the emails. Just FYI
15:22:01 <adamw> so i'm figuring to go ahead and put that into place this week, unless anyone has any further notes on it
15:22:29 <Lailah> No notes from me....
15:22:31 * kparal doesn't
15:22:38 <adamw> for reference that draft is https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/GJG22RUWYAL7LJHHBKFJKMRS5TZIRVSV/
15:22:47 <Lailah> kparal doesn't... what?
15:23:29 <adamw> have any notes on the 'last minute blocker' draft :)
15:23:40 <Lailah> ah
15:25:07 <adamw> so, on the ec2 thing
15:26:03 <adamw> we got that big laundry list of instance types from Matt Wilson at Amazon
15:26:20 <adamw> 19 of 'em
15:26:45 <lruzicka> adamw, I cannot see any draft on ec2
15:26:58 <adamw> lruzicka: thread title "Xen / EC2 release criteria proposal"
15:27:15 <Lailah> I'm still trying to find it...
15:27:46 <lruzicka> adamw, thanks, I can see it now
15:28:38 <jlanda> +1 to going ahead with the last minute one
15:28:58 <lruzicka> I am ok with the last blocker suggestion, too.
15:29:02 <adamw> cool
15:29:24 <adamw> so on the ec2 front...19 instance types is obviously a lot to test manually, which makes me wonder where we're at with automated cloud testing
15:29:54 <adamw> for the 'old' cloud/atomic host groups, i think we only ever had autocloud testing booting the images locally.
15:30:28 <adamw> right now we're in a sort of awkward spot where the cloud image is still technically release blocking, but most of the work in that area is happening on fedora coreos
15:30:37 <adamw> does anyone know if coreos is looking at automated testing in remote clouds?
15:30:52 <jlanda> I wonder were are the coreos folks on cloud automation and what we could use for their tests for vanilla
15:31:10 <frantisekz> kparal , do you know anything?
15:31:25 <jlanda> dusty wrote something about a bot, bodhi larma and automated ec2 tests on coreos side
15:31:38 <Lailah> adamw:  No idea about CoreOS. Do they have their own mailing list or channel or something?
15:32:31 <jlanda> On infra@ i think? Or the issue tracker, don't remember but they have something
15:32:31 <kparal> frantisekz: adamw: I know they have an automated test suite but I don't know whether they intend to run it in remote clouds
15:32:32 <adamw> Lailah: there's a coreos mailing list yeah
15:32:43 <adamw> okay, so that seems like something we should look into
15:32:58 <adamw> based on the assumption coreos is going to be The Thing for The Cloud in future, which seems like a safe assumption
15:33:08 <kparal> looks like it
15:33:13 <frantisekz> yep
15:34:02 <lruzicka> adamw, what if we talked to them, whether they could test those things for us?
15:34:39 <Lailah> lruzicka: I like the idea
15:35:57 <cmurf> Fedora CoreOS recently release their first preview
15:36:09 <adamw> i mean, it's not about 'them and us' :)
15:36:37 <cmurf> and my understanding is Silverblue will rebase on it, not sure of the time frame though
15:36:48 <adamw> it's been talked about, i think
15:37:14 <adamw> let's give people who aren't here action items, that's always fun
15:37:42 <adamw> #action coremodule to check with coreos team and update us on current status and plans for automated ec2 testing
15:37:58 <lruzicka> adamw, but we do not have the options to test amazon clouds without access to amazon ...
15:38:04 <kparal> I'm happy to talk to coreos but I'm completely lost when it comes to Xen
15:38:20 <Lailah> cmurf:  I didn't know Silverblue is going to rebase on CoreOS...?
15:38:38 <adamw> kparal: i don't think knowing much about xen is necessary in this case
15:38:48 <kparal> I thought this was related to the Xen topic
15:38:53 <jlanda> kparal xen thing now reduces to instance type
15:38:56 <adamw> Lailah: i saw something about it somewhere, but i don't think it's a firm plan yet
15:39:17 <jlanda> you just need to ensuee there is a kvm one and a xen one ;)
15:39:21 <adamw> kparal: if we're working on the basis of converting the xen criterion to an ec2 criterion, all you really need to know is 'some ec2 instances run on xen'
15:39:35 <Lailah> adamw: Ah, okay. I need to soak myself in these things. I was in Silverblue before falling in a black hole.
15:39:39 <adamw> hehe
15:39:47 <kparal> ok. if coremodule doesn't want to action item, I'm happy to take it then
15:39:52 <adamw> #undo
15:39:52 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: ACTION by adamw at 15:37:42 : coremodule to check with coreos team and update us on current status and plans for automated ec2 testing
15:40:02 <adamw> #action coremodule and/or kparal to check with coreos team and update us on current status and plans for automated ec2 testing
15:40:58 <adamw> so, it sounds like we're generally in favour of the idea of switching from a xen criterion to ec2 requirements, and it's just about figuring out the details, right?
15:41:13 <Lailah> Yes.
15:41:18 <frantisekz> +1
15:41:28 <lruzicka> ok
15:41:45 * kparal nods
15:42:47 <adamw> cool. so, we'll work on that on the list
15:43:08 <adamw> #topic Storage criteria (drop btrfs? What would that look like?)
15:43:32 <adamw> so, there was an f31 blocker related to btrfs
15:43:48 <adamw> it got fixed, but its existence caused the anaconda team to register that they don't think we ought to block on btrfs installs any more
15:43:54 * satellit afk
15:44:05 <adamw> so i figured we could have a topic to kick that around a bit
15:44:12 <kparal> wasn't it the kernel team?
15:44:12 <frantisekz> so, I am not against dropping btrfs blocking
15:44:17 <adamw> oh yes it may have been
15:44:21 <adamw> someone, anyhow :)
15:44:23 <bcotton> i say we fire it into the sun
15:44:31 <adamw> so, the storage criteria have always been an issue, it's a very difficult thing to word
15:44:41 <adamw> right now what we have are quite general and very broad criteria
15:44:48 <adamw> with test case coverage that isn't quite as broad as the criteria
15:45:08 <adamw> at least in theory we basically require that just about anything the installer lets you do must work, if you try it
15:45:10 <jlanda> np with droping the criteria. Should we drop btrfs from anaconda too?
15:45:15 <frantisekz> are there file systems in anaconda that we don't block on?
15:45:19 <Lailah> Personally I don't see BTRFS issues as a blocker. I know nobody using it.
15:45:25 <jlanda> Or add a notice or something?
15:45:26 <frantisekz> (other than btrfs and ext3/4)
15:45:30 <bcotton> +! to jlanda's statement in the form of a question
15:45:34 <bcotton> +1 also
15:45:55 <adamw> jlanda: yeah, to me that's a key question
15:46:06 <adamw> as i said, the principle right now is "if the installer exposes it by default, it must work"
15:46:07 <cmurf> btw that btrfs bug was discovered and fixed by upstream by the time it was tripping up openqa tests
15:46:28 <adamw> if we "drop" btrfs from the criteria we're breaking that association and saying "some stuff in the installer we stand behind and some we don't, and it's not obvious which is which"
15:47:10 <adamw> in the past when we considered btrfs experimental it was hidden - the installer didn't show it by default, you had to pass a special argument to make it show up
15:47:14 <lruzicka> my belief is that we either keep it or remove the option from anaconda
15:47:15 <kparal> iirc the kernel team proposed anaconda team somehow makes it less visible again
15:47:33 <adamw> so...it sounds like we're all on the same page here again
15:47:51 <kparal> it's weird to be offering something the kernel team doesn't want to support
15:47:55 <lruzicka> so, as kparal is saying, if it is less visible ... then we can drop the criteria
15:48:12 <kparal> so making it behind an option or something would definitely be a good idea
15:48:13 <adamw> proposal: let's have a discussion (on list or on a pagure ticket) and pull in the kernel and anaconda teams, about dropping or hiding btrfs in the installer
15:48:17 <Lailah> I tihnk it should be hidden from menu or dropped altogether.
15:48:19 <kparal> but we need to run this through the anaconda team
15:48:33 <jlanda> +1 to the proposal
15:48:54 <lruzicka> ygen
15:48:59 <Lailah> +1 to the proposal
15:49:13 <kparal> sure, +1
15:49:21 <frantisekz> +1
15:49:40 <cmurf> i think the kernel team doesn't really understand the criterion is so broad that it says "if offered it should work" and they don't really have a way around that
15:49:52 <cmurf> i've never heard them suggest that btrfs should be hidden in the installer
15:50:07 <bcotton> +1
15:50:53 <cmurf> i think the discussion should go to devel@
15:50:58 <frantisekz> also, it's visible only in advanced partitioning , if I am not mistaken, (blivet-gui in anaconda), I wouldn't necessarily block on everything that's available inside that tool
15:50:59 <cmurf> it affects the installer offering
15:51:13 <adamw> #action adamw to start a discussion about btrfs question with anaconda and kernel teams to consider the idea of removing or hiding it in the installer
15:51:26 <adamw> cmurf: i think we should talk to the teams first and see if they agree on the idea first
15:51:41 <adamw> taking it straight to devel seems a bit like jumping the gun if we don't have kernel and anaconda folks on the same page first
15:52:36 <cmurf> ok
15:52:36 <lruzicka> true
15:53:40 <adamw> #topic Test Day / community event status
15:53:54 <adamw> i think sumantro is not around, so...
15:54:43 <adamw> #info i18n Test Day is set for 2019-09-10: https://pagure.io/i18n/issue/111
15:54:55 <adamw> #info dates for Silverblue and GNOME test days are currently being arranged
15:55:06 <adamw> any other notes on this?
15:55:59 <kparal> nope
15:56:22 <adamw> alllrighty
15:56:26 <adamw> #topic Open floor
15:56:29 <adamw> any other business, folks?
15:56:52 <kparal> nothing here
15:57:00 <lruzicka> +1
15:57:23 <Lailah> Not from me. I can't even find my emails.....
15:57:57 <adamw> man i wish i could say that!
15:58:16 <Lailah> Not finding emails?
15:58:33 <adamw> yeah
15:58:36 * adamw has all too many emails :P
15:59:04 * Lailah too, that's why she can't find them, it's all a mess
15:59:08 <adamw> ah
15:59:26 <adamw> you might want to look into various filter systems people use
15:59:30 <adamw> getting things done, inbox zero etc
15:59:36 <adamw> might find something helpful there
16:01:07 <adamw> alrighty, thanks for coming, everyone!
16:01:12 <Lailah> It would be the same. I fell in a black hole, do you remember? My Inbox would be a mess anyway.
16:01:15 <adamw> i hope we'll get the branching mess sorted out soon :)
16:01:28 <frantisekz> thanks for leading the meeting adamw
16:01:30 <adamw> Lailah: haha, yes, i don't know of any black hole-proof approaches
16:01:37 <Lailah> LOL
16:01:40 <Lailah> Me neither
16:02:59 <adamw> #endmeeting