14:00:07 <bcotton> #startmeeting F31 Final Go/No-Go meeting
14:00:07 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Oct 24 14:00:07 2019 UTC.
14:00:07 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
14:00:07 <zodbot> The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:07 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:00:07 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f31_final_go/no-go_meeting'
14:00:08 <bcotton> #meetingname F31-Final-Go_No_Go-meeting
14:00:08 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f31-final-go_no_go-meeting'
14:00:19 <mboddu> .hello mohanboddu
14:00:20 <zodbot> mboddu: mohanboddu 'Mohan Boddu' <mboddu@bhujji.com>
14:00:24 <bcotton> #topic Roll Call
14:00:40 <sgallagh> .hello2
14:00:41 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com>
14:00:43 <lbrabec> .hello2
14:00:44 <zodbot> lbrabec: lbrabec 'Lukas Brabec' <lbrabec@redhat.com>
14:01:57 * bcotton wonders if adamw set an alarm
14:02:08 * satellit_ listening
14:02:21 * mhroncok around
14:02:54 <sgallagh> bcotton: He's a QA engineer. He's probably got alarms ringing constantly
14:03:01 <bcotton> sgallagh++
14:03:14 <bcotton> #topic Purpose of this meeting
14:03:15 * kparal is partially here
14:03:16 <bcotton> #info Purpose of this meeting is to check whether or not F31 Final is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria.
14:03:26 <bcotton> #info This is determined in a few ways:
14:03:27 <bcotton> #info 1. No remaining blocker bugs
14:03:29 <bcotton> #info 2. Release candidate compose is available
14:03:31 <bcotton> #info 3. Test matrices for Final are fully completed
14:03:43 <bcotton> #topic Current status — Blocker bugs
14:03:45 <bcotton> #link https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/31/final/buglist
14:04:20 <bcotton> AIUI the 2 proposed blockers have fixes in the compose, but let's go through them real quick-like
14:04:22 <frantisekz> .hello2
14:04:23 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com>
14:04:32 <bcotton> #topic (1763875) cut/copy to clipboard sometimes fails
14:04:34 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1763875
14:04:35 <bcotton> #info Proposed Blocker, gtk3, ON_QA
14:05:03 <bcotton> adamw said this is fixed: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1763875#c17
14:05:19 <bcotton> has anyone found anything to call him a liar?
14:05:32 <frantisekz> nope, looks like he speaks truth :)
14:05:44 <bcotton> i knew we could count on him
14:05:44 <sgallagh> bcotton: I can also verify that it is working properly as far as I am able to discern
14:05:45 <kparal> we don't have much feedback, I guess we'll consider this one fixed
14:06:14 <sgallagh> kparal: I installed it last night and haven't had any copy-paste issues today.
14:06:30 <bcotton> proposed #agreed This is fixed in the RC, so the blocker decision is moot
14:06:44 <kparal> ack
14:06:46 <lbrabec> ack
14:07:04 <frantisekz> ack
14:07:14 <sgallagh> nack
14:07:36 <sgallagh> I think we should still declare it a blocker, because if contradictory information comes in, it should impact our decision
14:07:45 <sgallagh> *comes in before the decision is made
14:07:57 <bcotton> sgallagh: that's a good point
14:08:04 <Lailah> Hello!
14:08:10 * kparal shrugs. +1 blocker then
14:08:12 <bcotton> anyone -1 to this being a blocker?
14:08:15 <Lailah> Sorry I'm late
14:08:19 <bcotton> welcome, Lailah
14:08:24 <Lailah> fas .lailah
14:08:27 <mboddu> +1 Blocker
14:08:36 <Lailah> .fas lailah
14:08:36 <zodbot> Lailah: lailah 'Sylvia Sánchez' <BHKohane@gmail.com>
14:08:40 <frantisekz> +1 Blocker
14:08:46 <lbrabec> +1 blocker
14:08:46 <Lailah> bcotton: hi, thanks!
14:08:47 <lruzicka> .hello2
14:08:48 <zodbot> lruzicka: lruzicka 'Lukáš Růžička' <lruzicka@redhat.com>
14:09:05 <alciregi> .hello2
14:09:06 <zodbot> alciregi: alciregi 'Alessio' <alciregi@gmail.com>
14:09:06 * mboddu running checksum test now
14:09:15 <kparal> mboddu: thanks
14:10:21 <bcotton> proposed #agreed 1763875 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - This violates the basic functionality and data loss criteria. It appears to be fixed but we are giving it blocker status in case further testing shows that it is not.
14:10:50 <sgallagh> ack
14:10:53 <kparal> ack
14:10:54 <lbrabec> ack
14:11:05 <Lailah> ack
14:11:12 <kparal> coremodule: available for secretary duty?
14:11:13 <lruzicka> ack
14:11:16 <mboddu> ack
14:11:17 <kparal> or we need a different volunteer
14:11:40 <frantisekz> ack
14:12:04 <bcotton> #agreed 1763875 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - This violates the basic functionality and data loss criteria. It appears to be fixed but we are giving it blocker status in case further testing shows that it is not.
14:12:16 <bcotton> #topic (1763831) revert incorrect arm64 <-> aarch64 mapping
14:12:17 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1763831
14:12:19 <bcotton> #info Proposed Blocker, rpm, MODIFIED
14:12:31 <bcotton> again: appears to be fixed in the RC
14:13:20 <Lailah> Oh, this one was discussed in the last blockers meeting.
14:13:49 <bcotton> +1 blocker because it is fundamentally wrong and also appears to violate trademarks
14:13:55 <kparal> do we actually have some confirmation that this is working?
14:14:15 <bcotton> pbrobinson: are you around?
14:14:35 <sgallagh> +1 blocker
14:14:45 <mboddu> +1 Blocker
14:14:47 <sgallagh> pwhalen: Can you speak to this?
14:16:11 * bcotton just asked in #fedora-arm
14:16:43 <bcotton> so i think we go ahead and call this a blocker and then table it for a bit to see if someone can verify it
14:16:55 <Lailah> +1 blocker
14:17:02 <Lailah> bcotton: yes
14:17:58 <kparal> I'll let blocker decision to people more knowledgeable in this area. But postponing it until we get some replies sounds good.
14:18:17 <bcotton> proposed #agreed 1763831 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - This violates Arm's trademark and it will cause long-term support problems for aarch64 images
14:18:44 <frantisekz> ack
14:18:47 <lruzicka> ack
14:18:50 <lbrabec> ack
14:18:52 <Lailah> ack
14:19:13 <sgallagh> Ack
14:19:17 <bcotton> #agreed 1763831 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - This violates Arm's trademark and it will cause long-term support problems for aarch64 images
14:19:33 <bcotton> #info This appears to be fixed, but we are seeking confirmation
14:19:41 <bcotton> okay, on to our accepted blockers
14:19:59 <bcotton> #topic (1691430) dnf.exceptions.Error: Incorrect or unknown "arch": armv7hcnl
14:20:01 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1691430
14:20:02 <bcotton> #info Accepted Blocker, libdnf, VERIFIED
14:20:40 <bcotton> pwhalen says it's fixed. i believe him
14:20:45 <adamw> Morning folks
14:20:50 <kparal> morning
14:20:56 * bcotton hands adamw some coffee
14:21:10 <Lailah> adamw: Afternoon
14:21:23 <lruzicka> adamw, the new day is greeting you
14:21:26 <kparal> we almost never vote on verified bugs, afaik. but if you prefer, we can
14:21:47 <Lailah> kparal: I'm fine either way
14:21:49 <bcotton> not looking for a vote, just input
14:22:06 <bcotton> does anyone disagree with pwhalen that it's fixed?
14:22:06 <kparal> doh, this one is already accepted
14:22:13 <bcotton> speak now or forever hold your peace
14:22:32 * kparal holds his peace
14:22:35 <bcotton> (where "forever" is "until the next #topic")
14:22:42 <bcotton> great
14:22:43 * Lailah holds her peace
14:22:59 <bcotton> #info This is fixed in RC1.9 according to pwhalen
14:23:19 <bcotton> and lastly
14:23:23 <bcotton> #topic (1764642) Reporting installer crashes fails when installing from live images due to RPM header string type issue (QA:Testcase_Anaconda_save_traceback_to_bugzilla)
14:23:25 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1764642
14:23:26 <bcotton> #info Accepted Blocker, python-meh, VERIFIED
14:23:37 <bcotton> ditto
14:24:11 <bcotton> (except this time it's alciregi who says it works)
14:24:15 <bcotton> objections?
14:24:18 <mhroncok> meh
14:24:23 <bcotton> mhroncok++
14:24:33 <kparal> I also tested the update
14:24:54 <kparal> no objections
14:25:04 <bcotton> #info This is fixed in RC1.9 according to alciregi and kparal
14:25:11 <frantisekz> I've tested RC 1.9, fixed
14:25:23 <bcotton> #info ...and frantisekz :-)
14:25:26 <bcotton> #topic Current status — Blocker bugs
14:26:10 <bcotton> #info All accepted and proposed blockers are fixed in the latest RC, but we are waiting for someone on the arm team to verify 1763831
14:26:24 <bcotton> so while we wait for that...
14:26:26 <bcotton> #topic Current status — Candidate compose
14:26:53 <bcotton> mboddu has been making RCs like they're going out of style
14:27:13 <mboddu> Haha
14:27:27 <bcotton> #info RC1.9 is the current candidate
14:27:44 <bcotton> anything we should know about 1.9? how do our non-blocking deliverables look?
14:28:30 <mboddu> There are some that missed - https://pagure.io/releng/failed-composes/issue/368
14:28:33 * satellit_ soas seems to have no netwoking   but need time to test
14:29:04 * satellit_ 1.8 and 1.3 worked
14:29:21 <mboddu> I think we got all spins, some labs are missing
14:29:36 <mboddu> But we missed armhfp containers, server, workstation
14:30:10 <bcotton> #info All spins are in RC1.9, some labs are missing. armhfp containers, server, workstation also missing
14:30:12 <bcotton> #link https://pagure.io/releng/failed-composes/issue/368
14:30:34 <bcotton> #info soas seems to have no networking, testing ongoing
14:30:37 * mboddu checksum test is done and everything passed
14:31:13 <Southern_Gentlem> is arm a blocking arch?
14:31:15 <Lailah> mboddu:  "I think we got all spins, some labs are missing"  Sounds like you have a stamps collection...
14:31:49 <mboddu> Lailah: Haha :D
14:32:05 <Lailah> I see that the Scientific Lab failed...?
14:32:49 <bcotton> Southern_Gentlem: arm is only blocking for Minimal and Xfce https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/31/ReleaseBlocking
14:33:37 <pwhalen> we got all armhfp images, the images that failed are expected (sorry in another meeting)
14:33:53 <bcotton> pwhalen++
14:33:53 <zodbot> bcotton: Karma for pwhalen changed to 5 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:34:33 <bcotton> pwhalen: while we have you, can you check that https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1763831 is truly fixed in 1.9? we'll come back to it when you're ready
14:34:50 <bcotton> any other questions or comments on RC1.9 before we move on to test coverage?
14:36:23 <bcotton> #topic Current status — Test matrix coverage
14:36:25 <bcotton> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_31_Test_Results
14:37:07 <adamw> ok
14:37:10 <adamw> i'm going through this right now
14:37:33 <frantisekz> so, I am testing QA:Testcase_upgrade_gnome-software_previous_workstation right now, for fix for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1762751 on F29
14:37:38 <adamw> we're looking fairly good; note arm desktop tests are transferred from rc1.3, cloud tests from rc1.8, those should be okay
14:37:39 <frantisekz> F30 fix is confirmed working
14:37:48 <Lailah> bcotton: No further questions, Your Lordship
14:37:52 <adamw> cloud tests haven't been run in a real cloud yet
14:37:54 <adamw> xen test isn't done yet
14:37:55 <bcotton> Lailah++
14:38:48 <adamw> that's about it. i can try and test xen real quick
14:38:53 <bcotton> frantisekz++
14:38:53 <zodbot> bcotton: Karma for frantisekz changed to 2 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:38:58 <Lailah> frantisekz:  But F29 will be EOL when F31 is released, isn't it?
14:39:16 <adamw> no.
14:39:20 <bcotton> Lailah: 28 days after the release
14:39:25 <Lailah> Ah, okay
14:39:31 <adamw> and we specifically support upgrade during that time
14:39:43 <Lailah> bcotton: Why didn't I get my cookies?
14:40:00 <bcotton> Lailah: i must have given you a cookie already during the f31 cycle
14:40:02 <Lailah> adamw:  Oh, fair enough
14:40:22 <Lailah> Or maybe you have to write my username with lowercase?
14:40:27 <Lailah> Like lailah?
14:40:35 <bcotton> #info arm desktop tests are transferred from RC1.3
14:40:43 <bcotton> #info cloud tests are transferred from RC1.8
14:41:08 <bcotton> any other questions or comments on test matrices?
14:42:54 <bcotton> pwhalen: are you checking the arm64 <-> aarch64 mapping fix?
14:43:17 <sgallagh> Lailah++
14:43:32 <sgallagh> lailah++
14:43:32 <zodbot> sgallagh: Karma for lailah changed to 1 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:43:36 <Lailah> Ah!
14:43:39 <sgallagh> Yup, seems to be that
14:43:43 <Lailah> It was that, the lowercase
14:43:59 <bcotton> huh. get with the times, zodbot
14:44:06 <sgallagh> Lailah, if you set your IRC Nick in FAS, it will also accept that
14:44:07 <bcotton> lailah++
14:44:07 <zodbot> bcotton: Karma for lailah changed to 2 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:44:19 * Lailah eats her cookies while happily purring
14:44:33 <adamw> i don't think cats are supposed to eat cookies
14:44:49 <Lailah> adamw:  This one does.
14:44:49 <mboddu> Lailah: What sgallagh said, you need to update your FAS with the exact nick
14:44:51 <adamw> =)
14:45:06 <jlanda> lailah++
14:45:06 <zodbot> jlanda: Karma for lailah changed to 3 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:45:10 <jlanda> Another test :)
14:45:11 <faezebax> unicorn does
14:45:16 <Lailah> mboddu: Oh!  I will then. Thanks sgallagh & mboddu
14:45:22 * jlanda waves
14:45:26 <bcotton> hi jlanda
14:45:34 * Lailah waves back at jlanda
14:45:36 <lruzicka> lailah++
14:45:39 <zodbot> lruzicka: Karma for lailah changed to 4 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:45:46 <frantisekz> lailah++
14:45:46 <zodbot> frantisekz: Karma for lailah changed to 5 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:45:56 <Lailah> faezebax:  That's true
14:46:33 <sgallagh> So where did we leave off?
14:46:34 <jlanda> Now that lailah have 5 cookies we can release :D
14:46:42 <bcotton> okay, so that leaves us with making a decision. i'd like independent verification of the arm blocker, but that doesn't seem to be forthcoming
14:47:11 <Lailah> jlanda:  That is correct
14:47:28 <adamw> i'd also like to try and get this xen test run
14:47:37 <bcotton> adamw: how long should we stall?
14:47:39 <adamw> and if anyone could do cloud in a real cloud
14:47:53 <adamw> er
14:48:09 <frantisekz> so, QA:Testcase_upgrade_gnome-software_previous_workstation is passing too, just upgraded with new libdnf, packagekit, kudos to kalev!!!!
14:48:17 <bcotton> kalev++
14:48:25 <jlanda> kalev++
14:48:25 <zodbot> jlanda: Karma for kalev changed to 8 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:48:25 <lruzicka> I confirm.
14:48:26 <Lailah> adamw: Not really possible to do a cloud here, I'm still struggling with some weird bugs in KDE
14:48:28 <adamw> gimme ten minutes
14:48:50 <bcotton> #topic Stalling for a few minutes to run a few final tests
14:48:53 <Lailah> kalev++
14:49:15 <Lailah> Duh...  Didn't work
14:49:32 <pwhalen> bcotton, confirmed, fixed in rpm-4.15.0-6.fc31 (sorry)
14:49:33 <sgallagh> kalev++
14:49:33 <zodbot> sgallagh: Karma for kalev changed to 9 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:49:39 <bcotton> pwhalen++
14:49:41 <Lailah> bcotton:  So what do we do now? Do we just wait while having a cup of tea?
14:49:41 <sgallagh> pwhalen++
14:49:41 <zodbot> sgallagh: Karma for pwhalen changed to 6 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
14:49:44 <bcotton> Lailah: yes
14:49:54 <sgallagh> Lailah: Sounds good to me.
14:49:55 <bcotton> #info arm64 <-> aarch64 mapping is fixed as confirmed by pwhalen
14:49:56 * sgallagh brews
14:50:01 <frantisekz> or a cigarette :)
14:50:02 <Lailah> Okay.
14:50:09 <mboddu> pwhalen++
14:50:14 <Lailah> frantisekz: I don't smoke
14:50:19 <bcotton> anyone who wants to step away for a moment, i will resume substantive content *no sooner than* 1500 UTC (10 minutes from now)
14:50:27 <sgallagh> I only smoke when I set myself on fire
14:50:32 <frantisekz> :D
14:50:37 * Lailah shoo away the birds in the balcony and starts preparing tea
14:50:45 <sgallagh> (Which has happened an alarming number of times)
14:50:52 <Lailah> sgallagh:  That's a good one
14:51:09 <Lailah> sgallagh: You need a new fire alarm me think
14:51:43 <sgallagh> Doesn't usually help when the problem is "dangling bathrobe belt and natural gas stovetop"
14:52:03 <sub_pop> O_O
14:52:30 <Lailah> sgallagh:  At least it can warn you earlier...
14:52:44 <sub_pop> Get flame-retardant bathrobes?
14:52:48 <sgallagh> It generally doesn't warn you faster than the heat does
14:52:59 <Lailah> Also, sgallagh: turn the gas off
14:53:18 <sgallagh> Clearly I just need to do all of my cooking naked.
14:53:38 <sgallagh> (Instead of just most of it)
14:53:54 <adamw> sorry, testing xen is always fun cos i never do it
14:53:56 <adamw> (iyswim)
14:54:09 <Lailah> sgallagh: put on some underwear, you never know...
14:54:31 <sgallagh> Didn't we plan to remove Xen from blocking this release since Amazon doesn't require it anymore?
14:54:37 <bcotton> so... how about anything other than this conversation? :-)
14:55:04 <bcotton> sgallagh: some EC2 instance types still use Xen apparently, but we had discussed making EC2 the requirement as a proxy for xen
14:55:10 <bcotton> iirc we never came to a final conclusion
14:55:45 <sgallagh> bcotton: Some use Xen, but the modern ones use KVM and there's no price incentive to use the old ones.
14:56:08 <bcotton> that doesn't mean people won't :-)
14:56:31 <adamw> sgallagh: i tried, people complained, life sucks
14:56:44 <adamw> so for now the old criterion still exists
14:56:47 <bcotton> in my epxerience, people will continue using whatever instance type they started using until something forces them to change
14:56:48 <adamw> i'll hit the pinata again this round
14:56:51 <sgallagh> I'll raise the issue again after Go/No-Go
14:57:12 <sgallagh> bcotton: Like... Fedora dropping blocking support for Xen?
14:57:17 <adamw> the proposal to change the criterion got a bit hung up on ec2 details and stuff
14:57:38 <Lailah> adamw:  I was convinced XEN was dropped...
14:57:45 <Lailah> I must have dreamed it then
14:58:13 <bcotton> sgallagh :-D
14:59:12 <jlanda> we someway decided to move from xen to ec2 blocker, then we started discussing about what ec2 instamce types... and beta came and we parked it as is
14:59:25 <frantisekz> so, I'd need to leave for another meeting, fingers crossed for GO ;)
14:59:56 <bcotton> frantisekz: thanks for your help, enjoy the meeting
15:00:03 <frantisekz> sorry everybody, bye!
15:00:15 <adamw> ok, my xen install is running now
15:00:26 <Lailah> frantisekz bye! Have fun!
15:00:37 <adamw> so yeah, as well as this if anyone can at least fire up *some* ec2 instance and test it'd be good
15:01:08 <sgallagh> adamw: Where do I get the ec2 AMIs?
15:01:15 <sgallagh> I'll give it a shot
15:01:25 <adamw> er
15:01:28 <adamw> always with the tough questiond
15:01:30 <adamw> mboddu?
15:01:30 * pwhalen is testing aarch64 cloud on aws
15:01:42 <mboddu> sgallagh: https://dl.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/stage/31_RC-1.9/Cloud/x86_64/images/
15:01:53 <sgallagh> Thanks
15:01:53 <mboddu> Or other arches
15:02:00 <adamw> those aren't amis...
15:02:21 <pwhalen> list of amis - https://apps.fedoraproject.org/datagrepper/raw?topic=org.fedoraproject.prod.fedimg.image.publish&delta=86400
15:03:08 <jlanda> pwhalen++
15:03:08 <zodbot> jlanda: Karma for pwhalen changed to 7 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
15:03:09 <adamw> pwhalen da boss
15:06:22 <adamw> jeez, xen installs are slow for some reason
15:06:51 * adamw watches it configure shared-mime-info
15:07:08 <sgallagh> I've got an x86_64 AMI up and running, seems to be functioning largely as one would expect.
15:07:14 <sgallagh> Any specific tests you want run?
15:08:03 <adamw> the tests on cloud page i guess
15:08:07 <adamw> but just that it runs is good news
15:08:11 <adamw> any failed services?
15:08:39 <sgallagh> None
15:08:48 <adamw> cool
15:08:49 <adamw> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_31_RC_1.9_Cloud?rd=Test_Results:Current_Cloud_Test tests
15:09:27 <pwhalen> aarch64 ami also working, no failed services
15:09:56 <adamw> xen install just finished
15:10:41 <sgallagh> adamw: All passed
15:10:49 <sgallagh> I'll run relval real quick
15:11:59 <Lailah> adamw:  it took its time...
15:12:29 <adamw> gah, xen doesn't want to run the installed system
15:14:27 * sgallagh starts baking fudge
15:15:32 <satellit_> soas 1.9 x86 works in VM
15:15:40 <bcotton> hooray!
15:15:40 <satellit_> sees network
15:15:51 <adamw> eh
15:16:02 <adamw> i give up on getting xen to co-operate
15:16:11 <satellit_> nuc i5
15:16:15 <adamw> i don't think it's broken in a criteria-violating way necessarily, it's my dom0 that's playing up[
15:16:22 <adamw> at least the install ran
15:16:22 <sgallagh> Actually, let me see which instance type I started
15:17:27 * Lailah goes for another cuppa
15:19:06 <sgallagh> OK, I had launched an HVM instance.
15:19:13 <sgallagh> Let me try for a paravirt one...
15:20:55 <sgallagh> Am I reading this wrong, or are we not actually publishing any of the paravirt AMIs to Amazon anyway?
15:21:05 <adamw> i dunno
15:21:41 <Lailah> sgallagh: No idea
15:22:23 <sgallagh> Yeah, looks like we don't even bother building Xen instances for Fedora
15:22:27 <sgallagh> err for Amazon
15:22:27 <jlanda> [17:21:30] <ffffffjlanda> hvm = xen = adamw can stop fighting with dom0 ?
15:22:40 <adamw> hum
15:22:40 <sgallagh> jlanda: hvm != xen
15:22:41 <adamw> okay
15:22:47 <bcotton> well i guess that settles that, then
15:22:54 <adamw> not really
15:23:01 <adamw> the current criterion says xen has to work. nothing about ec2.
15:23:11 <bcotton> we should stop building any artifacts, then none of our tests can fail
15:23:31 <sgallagh> "HVM AMIs are presented with a fully virtualized set of hardware"
15:24:15 <bcotton> so are we blocked from making a decision by the xen tests at this point?
15:24:37 <sgallagh> The *only* reason we have that criterion is because we thought EC2 required it.
15:24:53 <sgallagh> But we don't even publish EC2 images that work for it.
15:25:07 <adamw> that's not the only reason, no
15:25:11 <adamw> but let's not re-litigate that here
15:25:48 <adamw> let's just say i can't get the test run and we'll waive it on the basis that xen people are supposed to be doing the testing and they're clearly still not
15:25:54 <bcotton> +1
15:26:07 <adamw> pygrub is failing to find the bootloader in the image i think, but i've no idea if i'm doing something wrong or what
15:26:27 <sgallagh> +1
15:26:31 <bcotton> anything else before we poll for go/no-go?
15:27:24 <bcotton> #topic Go/No-Go decision
15:27:25 <bcotton> I will poll each team. Please reply “go” or “no-go”
15:27:27 <jlanda> The release must boot successfully as Xen DomU with releases providing a functional, supported Xen Dom0 and widely used cloud providers utilizing Xen.
15:27:27 <lruzicka> not from me
15:27:38 <bcotton> FESCo?
15:27:42 <sgallagh> Go
15:27:43 <jlanda> Can we met that without pvhvm ?
15:27:58 <jlanda> The and widely used cloud providers part
15:28:12 <jlanda> Wr twchnically provide images, just for hvm :)
15:28:21 * bcotton pauses
15:29:27 <bcotton> ...i guess we can?
15:29:42 * bcotton resumes
15:29:44 <bcotton> Releng?
15:29:44 <smooge> jlanda, who are you expecting an asnwer from
15:29:50 <mboddu> Go
15:29:52 <adamw> it's not something that's changed recently, anyhow.
15:29:56 <bcotton> QA?
15:29:59 * mboddu also wishes we could do more testing
15:30:17 * lruzicka lets adam decide
15:30:29 * Lailah also lets adam decide
15:30:41 <Lailah> adamw ?
15:30:53 <adamw> i think we can say go according to the policy
15:31:00 <adamw> no outstanding blockers, test coverage considered acceptable
15:31:01 <bcotton> adamw: you don't sound convinced?
15:31:02 <lruzicka> ok, +1
15:31:11 <jlanda> smooge: no one specific, I think we should go
15:31:19 <adamw> i sound like this meeting is happenign three hours early and i didn't get coffee
15:31:29 <bcotton> well i sent it to you!
15:31:39 <bcotton> okay, so that's "go" around the board
15:31:53 <bcotton> #agreed Fedora 31 Final is GO
15:32:06 <Lailah> YAY!!!
15:32:10 <mhroncok> \o/
15:32:12 <bcotton> take *that* random internet commenter who said we should just call it a november release
15:32:26 <bcotton> #info Fedora 31 Final will release on 2019-10-29
15:32:37 <bcotton> #action bcotton to announce decision
15:32:41 <lruzicka> that is a nice date
15:32:49 * mhroncok wasn't paying much attention, should we make sure the libgit2 dnf-plugins and packageit updates both hit stable on 29 and 30 before the release?
15:32:52 <lruzicka> however, we could release on Helloween
15:32:57 <Lailah> Great! In time for Halloween, Samhain and Herbstferien
15:33:15 <sgallagh> mhroncok: That's part of the policy for PreviousReleaseBlocker already
15:33:28 <mhroncok> sgallagh: thanks for confirming
15:33:48 <bcotton> last call!
15:33:52 <kparal> the packagekit/gnome-software fix be stable for declaring Go? I'm just asking
15:34:12 <mhroncok> that was the idea behind my question
15:34:13 <kparal> hmm, half of my sentence is missing
15:34:39 <kparal> so, once again, when those previous release updates need to be stable?
15:34:42 <adamw> mhroncok: yeah, we still need to ensure that.
15:34:44 <bcotton> kparal: sorry, but full sentences are not a blocker criterion
15:34:47 <adamw> on release date
15:34:59 <mboddu> adamw: Why not before release date?
15:34:59 <adamw> so we need to push em monday at latest ,really
15:35:03 <Lailah> bcotton: Last call for what?
15:35:04 <adamw> they can be stable before
15:35:07 <adamw> but they *must* be stable by
15:35:08 <mboddu> We can push them now if they have karma
15:35:18 <bcotton> Lailah: for people to say things before i end the meeting
15:35:31 <mboddu> I would like to push them asap, so that all mirrors will pick it up before people start upgrading
15:35:42 <bcotton> mboddu++
15:35:49 <Lailah> bcotton:  The only thing I have to say I'm happy, Fedora is GO.
15:36:00 <sgallagh> mboddu: +1
15:36:02 <Lailah> Nothing really outstanding, you see
15:36:07 <bcotton> okay, i'm going to end the meeting
15:36:13 <Lailah> Okay
15:36:29 <mhroncok> mboddu: where are all the random LGTMers when we need them?
15:36:52 <mhroncok> bcotton++
15:37:03 <lruzicka> I tested the 29 fix, I have just given it the karma.
15:37:07 <bcotton> #endmeeting