17:00:54 <kparal> #startmeeting F20-blocker-review
17:00:54 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Nov 14 17:00:54 2013 UTC.  The chair is kparal. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:54 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:54 <kparal> #meetingname F20-blocker-review
17:00:54 <kparal> #topic Roll Call
17:00:54 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f20-blocker-review'
17:01:07 <kparal> state your name
17:01:21 <roshi> roshi
17:01:28 <roshi> :p
17:01:28 <kparal> #chair roshi adamw
17:01:28 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw kparal roshi
17:01:31 * roshi is here
17:01:45 * satellit listening
17:01:46 * adamw is here
17:02:30 * tflink is lurking, ping if need more people
17:02:38 <kparal> do we have a volunteer for secretary duty?
17:02:45 * roshi has it
17:02:49 <kparal> roshi: thanks
17:02:52 <roshi> np
17:04:00 <kparal> ok, let's go
17:04:05 <kparal> we have a few people
17:04:12 <kparal> #topic Introduction
17:04:12 <kparal> Why are we here?
17:04:12 <kparal> #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.
17:04:12 <kparal> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
17:04:12 <kparal> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
17:04:14 <kparal> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
17:04:16 <kparal> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
17:04:18 <kparal> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
17:04:20 <kparal> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Alpha_Release_Criteria
17:04:22 <kparal> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Beta_Release_Criteria
17:04:24 <kparal> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Final_Release_Criteria
17:04:35 <kparal> today we serve:
17:04:37 <kparal> #info 7 Proposed Blockers
17:04:37 <kparal> #info 11 Accepted Blockers
17:04:37 <kparal> #info 4 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
17:04:37 <kparal> #info 0 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
17:04:59 <kparal> let's continue with the first dish on the menu
17:05:03 <kparal> #info Proposed Blockers
17:05:05 <adamw> tasty!
17:05:12 <kparal> #topic (1029790) dracut cannot handle encrypted partitions with a key file on the root file system
17:05:12 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1029790
17:05:12 <kparal> #info Proposed Blocker, dracut, NEW
17:05:15 <roshi> better than 20 :)
17:05:31 <kparal> so, harald added some info
17:05:44 <kparal> it is a bug and he will fix it, IIUIC
17:06:00 <kparal> "it would affect everybody with a keyfile for /usr or swap devices and that are not very many"
17:07:06 <kparal> I don't think that keyfiles are used so much to guarantee a blocker
17:07:14 <kparal> usually these people can release notes as well
17:07:22 <adamw> yeah, probably -1 blocker on basis that it's not a widespread config, but be nice to fix it
17:07:25 <kparal> but I'd like to grant +1 FE to it right away
17:08:06 <kparal> I probably would not take it to RC, but TCs should be fine
17:08:40 <adamw> it doesn't need an FE to go in TCs.
17:08:56 <adamw> if you wouldn't want to take it after freeze, then we shouldn't give it an FE: )
17:09:24 <kparal> well, freeze time can occur before RC, right?
17:09:41 <kparal> so for i.e. TC4 it might be needed to have an FE
17:10:04 <roshi> I'm a -1
17:10:08 <kparal> of course, harald can ask for it later
17:10:30 <adamw> kparal: it can, yeah, but ideally the first build after freeze is an RC. anyhow
17:10:38 <roshi> I don't see a problem with a FE  - seems like a smaller fix
17:11:22 <kparal> it's dracut, nothing is a small fix
17:11:36 <roshi> "seems" :)
17:12:28 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1029790 - RejectedBlocker - This does not affect a large enough user base to guarantee a blocker. We still would like to see this fixed before release. If the fix is ready during freeze period, please propose for a freeze exception.
17:12:49 <roshi> ack
17:14:04 <kparal> adamw: votes?
17:14:12 <adamw> ack
17:14:21 <kparal> ack
17:14:25 <kparal> #agreed 1029790 - RejectedBlocker - This does not affect a large enough user base to guarantee a blocker. We still would like to see this fixed before release. If the fix is ready during freeze period, please propose for a freeze exception.
17:14:36 <kparal> #topic (1025908) unable to unlock LUKS encrypted device from Live-Desktop
17:14:36 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1025908
17:14:36 <kparal> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-disk-utility, NEW
17:15:34 <kparal> so, mkrizek could not reproduce
17:15:50 <Viking-Ice> interesting three people doing votes here
17:15:56 <kparal> I'm -1 and let him repropose if he can reliably reproduce it
17:15:59 <kparal> Viking-Ice: welcome and join us
17:16:48 <Viking-Ice> -1
17:16:54 <roshi> -1
17:17:09 <adamw> -1 based on feedback so far, can always re-vote if necessary
17:17:49 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1025908 - RejectedBlocker - Currently this seems to be very hard to hit, and therefore rejected as a blocker. Please repropose if you find a reliable reproducer.
17:18:04 <roshi> ack
17:18:10 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:18:28 <kparal> ack
17:19:08 <adamw> ack
17:19:22 <kparal> #agreed 1025908 - RejectedBlocker - Currently this seems to be very hard to hit, and therefore rejected as a blocker. Please repropose if you find a reliable reproducer.
17:19:31 <kparal> #topic (1007121) [abrt] system-config-services-0.101.10-2.fc20: connection.py:651:call_blocking:DBusException: org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.UnknownMethod: Method "list_services" with signature "" on interface "org.fedoraproject.Config.Services.ServiceHerder" doesn't exist
17:19:31 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1007121
17:19:31 <kparal> #info Proposed Blocker, system-config-services, NEW
17:20:25 <Viking-Ice> was not that system-config-$foo stuff supposed to be remove or am I remembering ?
17:20:29 <adamw> as the criteria stand it's a pretty clear blocker
17:20:42 <adamw> Viking-Ice: over time, yeah
17:20:52 <Viking-Ice> yeah a blocker
17:20:52 <adamw> s-c-s isn't on the desktop live any more, but it is on kde
17:21:05 <adamw> dropping it from the spin would be a 'fix', of course, so we can always do that if all else fails
17:21:42 <Viking-Ice> looks like that's the right thing to do based on comments
17:21:47 <kparal> does it crash only if you start it as root?
17:21:51 <kparal> or as standard user as well?
17:22:48 * adamw doesn't have it installed, hold on
17:23:11 <kparal> I can run Live
17:23:19 <adamw> crashes as normal user for me
17:23:24 <Viking-Ice> also this looks like a dupe of 790339
17:23:24 <kparal> ok
17:23:26 <adamw> and with sudo
17:23:33 <kparal> +1 per criteria
17:23:59 <adamw> Viking-Ice: yeah, good catch
17:24:16 <roshi> +1
17:24:35 <adamw> roshi: you can close the bug as a dupe of 790339, change 790339 to be against 20, and apply our decision to 790339 as part of secretarialization
17:24:45 <roshi> ok, will do
17:24:56 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1007121 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates criterion "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test". This needs to get fixed or removed from KDE spin.
17:25:00 <adamw> ack
17:25:10 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:25:12 <kparal> ack
17:25:48 <kparal> #agreed 1007121 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates criterion "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test". This needs to get fixed or removed from KDE spin.
17:26:01 <kparal> #topic (1026860) Instantiated service is not run, it stays in inactive state (and systemd debug log does not state why)
17:26:02 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026860
17:26:02 <kparal> #info Proposed Blocker, systemd, NEW
17:26:36 <adamw> seems to be a descendant of the raid-on-lvm bug we found in beta
17:27:03 <adamw> "All of the problems I have encountered with this version of LVM2 occur on an installation to single btrfs / subvol on a gpt drive."
17:27:38 <Viking-Ice> hmm would have thought this should have been reported against lvm
17:27:49 <kparal> so you need to have raid, lvm and btrfs?
17:27:55 <adamw> well, that's not from the OP
17:28:06 * adamw is a bit confused whether clyde and peter have the same bug
17:28:41 <adamw> and what the bug actually is
17:29:22 <Viking-Ice> to much of an corner case this is
17:29:26 <Viking-Ice> btrfs with lvm?
17:29:31 <Viking-Ice> makes no sense
17:30:08 <adamw> i'm not sure if btrfs is involved in peter's case or not
17:30:14 <kparal> I'd say punt until more information about the impact are available
17:30:31 <adamw> if I had to guess I'd say it's LVM-on-multiple-RAID, but not 100% sure
17:30:34 <kparal> in peter's case he seems to have two different raids ?
17:30:37 <adamw> yeah
17:30:50 <adamw> clyde does too, I _think_, though he doesn't explicitly say
17:30:56 <kparal> seems a bit out of ordinary use case
17:30:57 <Viking-Ice> and here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1026860#c6 it seems lvm + btrfs is the issue
17:31:43 <Viking-Ice> as in btrfs partition and lvm parttion "totally ignoring the drive with the btrfs filesystems, normal startup occurs."
17:31:46 <kparal> wait for developer info?
17:31:52 <Viking-Ice> yeah punt
17:32:11 <adamw> +1
17:33:14 <adamw> er, +1 punt
17:33:16 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1026860 - Punt - We will wait until developers provided more information about cause and impact of this bug, so that we can better decide whether this should block the release.
17:33:35 <adamw> ack
17:33:48 <kparal> probably lot of grammar errors
17:34:09 <roshi> I can fix in secretarializing :)
17:34:17 <adamw> fix it in post!
17:34:36 <kparal> other votes?
17:34:37 <kparal> ack
17:35:10 <kparal> roshi: Viking-Ice: votes?
17:35:10 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:35:15 <kparal> #agreed 1026860 - Punt - We will wait until developers provided more information about cause and impact of this bug, so that we can better decide whether this should block the release.
17:35:20 <kparal> #topic (1028207) non US keyboard layouts not working at console
17:35:20 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1028207
17:35:20 <kparal> #info Proposed Blocker, systemd, NEW
17:35:34 <Viking-Ice> that's a blocker
17:36:09 <kparal> wasn't this fixed for Beta already?
17:36:10 <kparal> the UK bug
17:36:38 <Viking-Ice> condition path nonsense
17:37:06 <roshi> +1 blocker
17:37:28 <Viking-Ice> non us keyboard works fine here
17:38:01 <kparal> so, to clear this up, you can't decrypt the disk, right?
17:38:20 <adamw> kparal: depends on whether you can type the passphrase on a US layout (and know what's going on, and how to do so)
17:38:23 <roshi> that is the main issue kparal
17:38:36 <kparal> in that case +1 blocker
17:38:38 <adamw> you could certainly get into a situation where you couldn't enter a passphrase, yeah, if you used a character not present on a US layout
17:38:56 <kparal> e.g. a pound key :)
17:39:21 <kparal> currency is not good in passwords, it seems
17:40:07 <kparal> so, adamw doesn't get a cookie. did not include the criterion
17:41:15 <adamw> aww
17:41:28 <kparal> conditional breach of this one?  A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility.
17:41:30 <adamw> americans call # the "pound" key
17:41:35 <adamw> leading to hilarity when they meet brits
17:41:53 <kparal> adamw: so how do they call the real pound key?
17:42:05 <adamw> there isn't one on a US keyboard, so they don't call it anything :P
17:42:11 <roshi> that british symbol
17:42:16 <kparal> roshi: :D
17:42:20 <roshi> :)
17:42:25 <kparal> criterion suggestions?
17:42:28 <adamw> kparal: yeah, that criterion with the 'encrypted partitions' note
17:42:34 <adamw> which is right below it and reads "In all of the above cases, if any system partitions were encrypted as part of the installation, the boot process must prompt for the passphrase(s) and correctly unlock the partition(s) when provided with the correct passphrase(s). "
17:43:00 <adamw> trivia question! who knows the correct name for # ?
17:43:11 <roshi> well, the correct password isn't being entered
17:43:14 <roshi> sharp
17:43:19 <roshi> in music, anyway
17:43:27 <kparal> hash?
17:43:33 <adamw> nope and nope
17:43:44 <roshi> it is a sharp in music :)
17:43:46 <Viking-Ice> adamw, was the basic exluded ( $PATH correct gzip installed etc )
17:43:48 <adamw> roshi: that becomes a somewhat philosophical question, but as far as the user's concerned, they're entering the right passphrase.
17:43:54 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1028207 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates criterion "A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility" when it comes to booting from an encrypted drive with one of the affected keymaps.
17:44:03 <adamw> Viking-Ice: it's just from a straightforward out of the box install for me
17:44:25 <adamw> Viking-Ice: mike has rather messed up the bug with 17,000 comments but for me it was simply 'install with a non-US keyboard layout and boot'
17:44:37 <adamw> ack
17:44:40 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:44:43 * roshi notes that mike isn't him
17:44:44 <adamw> # is an octothorpe, y'all
17:44:48 <adamw> roshi: yeah, different mike
17:44:51 <roshi> lol
17:44:52 <roshi> ack
17:44:54 <kparal> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_sign
17:45:08 <kparal> #agreed 1028207 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates criterion "A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility" when it comes to booting from an encrypted drive with one of the affected keymaps.
17:45:21 <kparal> #topic (1006386) Boot takes 27 seconds longer with /var/log/journal than without
17:45:21 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1006386
17:45:21 <kparal> #info Proposed Blocker, systemd, NEW
17:45:26 <adamw> kparal: bah, that's nowhere near prescriptive enough :P
17:46:10 <adamw> for a start, this is filed against rawhide
17:47:23 <adamw> oh, c#39 is a summary of Why  This Should Be A Blocker
17:48:13 <Viking-Ice> there must be something we are missing
17:48:15 <adamw> seems a bit...political at the end.
17:48:32 <Viking-Ice> mean I should have hit this myself and as well as majority of useres
17:48:48 <adamw> i'd like to know if mschmidt and lennart agree with karel's interpretation
17:48:55 <adamw> and yeah, why aren't we hitting this?
17:48:59 <kparal> so, 967521 is for F19 and fixed
17:49:13 <robatino> if this is why gdm fails to start half the time in my F20 vbox guest, then it seems serious
17:49:43 <adamw> kparal: karel contends the 'fix' for 967521 wasn't really a fix
17:50:05 <Viking-Ice> punt this for more data
17:50:46 <kparal> do you see any information that it affects F20? the whole bug report speaks about F21
17:51:02 <Viking-Ice> "Yes, the bug is not new in F20."
17:51:33 <kparal> that's the only sentence
17:51:49 <Viking-Ice> this might be limited to kdm
17:52:06 <adamw> neither mschmidt nor lennart seem to be online
17:52:07 <kparal> I've never seen the problem in F20
17:52:14 <adamw> so i'd suggest we punt with a comment to ask them for more info
17:52:15 <Viking-Ice> neither have I
17:52:54 <roshi> +1 punt
17:52:55 <adamw> it sounds like it's something that developers over time
17:53:08 <adamw> so you wouldn't see it if you're just continually doing clean f20 installs and blowing them away
17:53:21 <adamw> but i have my desktop and one laptop both on F20 full-time and haven't seen anything like it...
17:53:58 <Viking-Ice> I got my laptop full time 20
17:54:04 <kparal> I have F20 on my work laptop as well
17:54:10 <roshi> my laptop is f20
17:54:11 <kparal> since Alpha
17:54:14 <roshi> same
17:54:15 <Viking-Ice> I think we all agreed on punt
17:54:20 <kparal> (upgraded)
17:54:34 <Viking-Ice> kparal, living dangerously however I'm running Gnome
17:55:11 <robatino> "Basically, the problem affects *every single system*, only the consequences differ based on the speed of hardware and how many messages the system logs."
17:55:23 * kparal writing summary
17:55:31 <robatino> you guys tend to have faster-than-average hw. my VM is very slow. timing?
17:56:03 <adamw> could be
17:56:06 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1006386 - Punt - We would like to see more information from systemd developers before deciding a blocker bug question. Also, we would like to get confirmation that this affects F20, because this report only mentions Rawhide and the linked (fixed) reports go to F19.
17:56:16 <Viking-Ice> ack robatino I got old hardware T420
17:56:21 <roshi> ack
17:56:29 <Viking-Ice> the guys are getting t440 or t530
17:56:30 <Viking-Ice> here
17:57:06 <Viking-Ice> Startup finished in 1.612s (kernel) + 1.623s (initrd) + 2.473s (userspace) = 5.709s
17:57:21 <kparal> adamw: vote?
17:57:22 <Viking-Ice> I probably should cut initrd out
17:57:29 <adamw> ack
17:57:35 <kparal> #agreed 1006386 - Punt - We would like to see more information from systemd developers before deciding a blocker bug question. Also, we would like to get confirmation that this affects F20, because this report only mentions Rawhide and the linked (fixed) reports go to F19.
17:57:41 <kparal> #topic (1029594) Regression from f17 - Xorg crashes
17:57:41 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1029594
17:57:42 <kparal> #info Proposed Blocker, xorg-x11-drv-ati, NEW
17:58:32 <adamw> this is a -1 unless something surprising happens
17:59:03 <adamw> no idea what's going on, but it doesn't appear to be affecting anyone but nathanael
17:59:05 <Viking-Ice> -1
17:59:14 <roshi> -1
17:59:44 <roshi> out of curiosity, how many people will update from F17 to 20?
17:59:55 <kparal> also, he should try running a LiveCD
18:00:18 <adamw> point
18:00:30 <Viking-Ice> yeah this looks like multiple instances of stupidity which are resulting in difficult to debug hangs.
18:00:33 <adamw> roshi: directly, probably not many. over time, a few.
18:00:51 <roshi> ok
18:01:26 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1029594 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't seem to be a general issue, but affect only the reporter. If this turns out to be an issue affecting large portion of our user base, please re-propose. Also try to run clean F20 environment from LiveCD and report back.
18:01:51 <adamw> ack
18:01:55 <kparal> ack
18:02:03 <roshi> ack
18:02:18 <kparal> #agreed 1029594 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't seem to be a general issue, but affect only the reporter. If this turns out to be an issue affecting large portion of our user base, please re-propose. Also try to run clean F20 environment from LiveCD and report back.
18:02:33 <kparal> that's all of Proposed Blockers
18:02:39 <kparal> want to go to FE?
18:02:54 <adamw> yup
18:03:01 <kparal> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions
18:03:06 <kparal> #topic (972265) When using a kickstart that specifies nothing about repo, 'closest mirror' doesn't seem to be usable
18:03:06 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972265
18:03:06 <kparal> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, anaconda, NEW
18:03:43 <kparal> so, this is a dupe of my old bug
18:03:49 <kparal> and bcl said "not valid"
18:03:56 <adamw> ?
18:03:59 <Viking-Ice> ?
18:04:11 <kparal> you have to use a repo command if you want online mirrors to be used
18:04:20 <kparal> since F19 I think
18:04:37 <Viking-Ice> well and no meaning full error msg to tell you that then?
18:04:37 <kparal> let me find my old bug
18:04:39 <adamw> 1) what 'old bug'?
18:04:46 <adamw> 2) what do you mean 'to be used'?
18:04:57 <adamw> not expecting it to be automatically picked up necessarily, but you should be able to interactively select it.
18:05:14 <kparal> ah
18:05:47 <kparal> Releasing hotfix, eng-ops
18:05:48 <kparal> For security reasons, you have been logged out automatically. The cookie that was remembering your login is now gone.
18:05:51 <adamw> i'm not expecting a non-interactive install. i'm expecting an interactive install that works. the use case here is 'provide a partial kickstart which just specifies a list of packages', which is what anaconda team always tells people who want granular package selection back.
18:05:51 <kparal> bugzilla message
18:05:52 <kparal> nice
18:06:09 <kparal> bugzilla down
18:06:16 <adamw> "Releasing hotfix, eng-ops"
18:06:18 <Viking-Ice> wtf "Releasing hotfix, eng-ops"
18:06:23 <adamw> means they're doing a BZ patch.
18:06:31 <Viking-Ice> throw something in them
18:06:41 <kparal> adamw: in that case it's not a dupe
18:06:42 <Viking-Ice> screaming we are at a QA meeting
18:06:52 <kparal> let's give them a few minutes
18:07:06 <Viking-Ice> so bugzilla does not have announcement banner feature
18:07:20 <adamw> this was acceptedFE for f19, i'm +1 again for f20, but it looks like fixing this bug is not high priority :(
18:07:40 <Viking-Ice> yeah FE looks like a cosmetic issue
18:07:54 <Viking-Ice> classic developer not producing meaning full error msg
18:08:15 <adamw> it's not really cosmetic
18:08:25 <adamw> there's no reason you shouldn't be able to just pick 'closest mirror' in such a case
18:08:35 <adamw> but you absolutely can't, it just will not work - you have to find and provide a mirrorlist URL yourself
18:09:05 <kparal> you can work around it if you put this into the kickstart:
18:09:06 <kparal> url --mirrorlist=http://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/mirrorlist?repo=fedora-$releasever&arch=$basearch
18:09:06 <kparal> repo --name=fedora
18:09:07 <kparal> repo --name=updates
18:09:07 <kparal> repo --name=updates-testing
18:09:12 <adamw> if anaconda want to say 'oh, partial kickstarts aren't supported any more', i mean, i guess, fine? except what they always tell people who want any kind of advanced function that was taken out of the UI is 'use a kickstart', so...
18:09:32 <kparal> I'm +1 FE here
18:09:33 <adamw> kparal: well, that's barely a workaround, that's more 'doing it differently'.
18:10:15 <Viking-Ice> well putting my server WG hat one our requirement to proper ks functionality will step up a notch...
18:10:19 <adamw> fundamentally, you ought to be able to pass a partial kickstart and select anything not defined in the kickstart interactively, but newUI anaconda just doesn't work well with that at all (this isn't the only bug in that use case, btw)
18:10:30 <Viking-Ice> s/one/on
18:10:45 <adamw> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972266 is the other bug i found in this use case
18:10:45 <kparal> other votes?
18:10:52 <Viking-Ice> so I'm being persuade to a blocker
18:10:52 <roshi> I can
18:11:02 <roshi> I can't get to the bug
18:11:08 <kparal> :/
18:11:23 <Viking-Ice> roshi, aren't you closed to the bz admins
18:11:25 <kparal> alright, let's leave it for next week?
18:11:31 <kparal> at least we did the blockers
18:11:39 <roshi> closed to the bz admins?
18:11:48 <kparal> probably "close"
18:11:51 <roshi> ah
18:12:08 <Viking-Ice> +1 blocker here and counting adamw that's also +1 as well as kparal so
18:12:08 <roshi> not that I know of - since I don't know who admins bz
18:12:19 <Viking-Ice> roshi vote
18:12:24 <adamw> Viking-Ice: we're not particularly, no. we have to file tickets to get anything done.
18:12:43 * adamw is only +1 FE but it is annoying that this isn't getting fixed
18:12:52 <roshi> I can't read the bug, so I don't know what it is
18:13:02 <roshi> I shouldn't vote on something I haven't read
18:13:07 <kparal> sure
18:13:16 <Viking-Ice> roshi, sure fesco does it all the time
18:13:22 <kparal> let's wait two more minutes and then end it today
18:13:24 <adamw> if you run anaconda using a partial kickstart - that doesn't specify a repository - you can't use 'Closest Mirror'
18:13:51 <roshi> Viking-Ice, I can't speak to that
18:14:01 <adamw> it comes up selected by default but not 'valid' (the ! is showing), if you go in and just leave again with 'Closest Mirror' selected you get a metadata download error
18:14:10 <roshi> but I do live in a country where a lot of the voters don't read anything - but I do :)
18:14:37 <adamw> if you go in, change to some bogus URL, go out, go back in, change back to Closest Mirror, it *still* doesn't work (that dodge sometimes works to fix issues like this, but not in this case)
18:14:45 <roshi> from what you guys have said it seems like it's an FE
18:14:46 <adamw> all you can do is pass a valid explicit URL of some kind
18:15:04 <kparal> personally I don't usually propose FEs for anaconda unless there is a patch. I don't think they concentrate more on bugs that are FE accepted in advance. they have enough real blockers all the time
18:15:12 <robatino> what if you just want to use the DVD as a local repo?
18:15:18 <adamw> the historic expectation for partial kickstarts is that anything specified in the kickstart is used, and anything not specified you define interactively just as if you weren't using a kickstart
18:15:28 <Viking-Ice> we are +1 and -/+ 1 so
18:15:41 <Viking-Ice> as in we are 3 + one undecided
18:15:43 <adamw> robatino: i haven't tested it with local repos
18:15:57 <kparal> Viking-Ice: we're still voting just on FE, not blocker. just to be clear
18:16:08 <Viking-Ice> yes I know
18:16:11 <kparal> ok
18:16:43 <kparal> so, do you want to vote even though roshi couldn't read it properly?
18:16:57 <kparal> ah, bugzilla is back
18:16:59 <robatino> adamw did say in one of the two kickstart bugs that there was an argument for making it a blocker, if i remember right
18:17:00 <roshi> if you have three votes you should be good
18:17:31 <kparal> too bad it's back, I wanted to stop :)
18:18:07 <roshi> haha
18:19:09 <Viking-Ice> kparal, we can have a larger pile up of FE if you want
18:19:23 <roshi> +1 FE
18:19:31 <Viking-Ice> this is far from being the last blocker bug meeting
18:21:18 <Viking-Ice> so proposal ?
18:21:36 <adamw> yeah, i think that's enough voting
18:21:42 <kparal> proposed #agreed 972265 - AcceptedFreezeException - Kickstarts are expected to be used as partial configuration. It should be possible to configure manually the remaining pieces. Unless this has changed, this is an inconvenient bug and we would accept a patch after freeze if self-contained and safe.
18:21:44 <Viking-Ice> 3 were
18:21:45 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:22:26 <Viking-Ice> ack/nack/patch people!
18:22:29 <roshi> ack
18:22:32 <adamw> ack
18:22:36 <kparal> #agreed 972265 - AcceptedFreezeException - Kickstarts are expected to be used as partial configuration. It should be possible to configure manually the remaining pieces. Unless this has changed, this is an inconvenient bug and we would accept a patch after freeze if self-contained and safe.
18:22:44 <kparal> #topic (972266) Installation Destination spoke behaves strangely when installing from a minimal (packages only) kickstart
18:22:44 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=972266
18:22:44 <kparal> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, anaconda, NEW
18:23:15 <Viking-Ice> nano really?
18:23:50 <adamw> NANO FTW
18:23:51 <Viking-Ice> +1 FE
18:23:57 <adamw> this is the other bug I found in this use case, which is kinda worse
18:24:44 <adamw> +1 obviously
18:24:47 <roshi> +1
18:25:34 <kparal> proposed #agreed 972266 - AcceptedFreezeException - This is obviously unintended and unexpected behaviour, and while it can be worked around, the workaround is quite hard to discover and to do, and looks really bad. We would accept a patch after freeze if self-contained and safe.
18:25:44 <adamw> ack
18:25:46 <roshi> ack
18:25:46 <kparal> ack
18:25:53 <kparal> #agreed 972266 - AcceptedFreezeException - This is obviously unintended and unexpected behaviour, and while it can be worked around, the workaround is quite hard to discover and to do, and looks really bad. We would accept a patch after freeze if self-contained and safe.
18:25:56 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:26:05 <kparal> #topic (1023609) 'biosdevname=0' not passed into installed system
18:26:05 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1023609
18:26:05 <kparal> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, anaconda, POST
18:26:56 <kparal> +1 fe
18:27:30 <roshi> +1 fe
18:27:30 <Viking-Ice> hmm tell me we are still installing the dell stuff
18:27:36 <Viking-Ice> +1 fe
18:27:53 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1023609 - AcceptedFreezeException - This setting should be consistent in the installer environment and in the installed system. We would accept a patch after freeze if self-contained and safe.
18:27:57 <adamw> ack
18:27:58 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:28:04 <kparal> ack
18:28:21 <kparal> #agreed 1023609 - AcceptedFreezeException - This setting should be consistent in the installer environment and in the installed system. We would accept a patch after freeze if self-contained and safe.
18:28:22 <kparal> #topic (1022810) error detecting raid1 thin pool layout
18:28:23 <kparal> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1022810
18:28:23 <kparal> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, python-blivet, NEW
18:29:54 <Viking-Ice> -1 fe+
18:29:57 <Viking-Ice> mean -1
18:30:29 <Viking-Ice> this looks like a prime candidate for hot potato to hot to be touched this late in the cycle
18:31:37 <adamw> well, touching it *now* is probably ok, i agree it might be a bit dangerous to poke in freeze...
18:31:58 <roshi> -1
18:32:14 <roshi> we've voted on this a couple times already
18:32:19 <kparal> agreed with adamw
18:32:20 <adamw> yeah, as blocker for beta
18:32:21 <adamw> -1 FE
18:33:27 <Viking-Ice> It would actually be good to "except it uncovers another systemd/udevd/lvm related issues during system boot. " to get that one reported
18:33:41 <Viking-Ice> ( assuming he did not since he's not refering to it ()
18:33:56 <kparal> proposed #agreed 1022810 - RejectedFreezeException - This is fine if it is fixed before Final freeze. But during the freeze we feel that this is a risky patch that might cause different side effects. If developers feel that this should get included during freeze and it's safe, please re-propose.
18:34:39 <adamw> ack
18:34:50 <adamw> Viking-Ice: yeah
18:35:14 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:35:16 <roshi> ack
18:35:35 <kparal> please add Viking-Ice's remark during secretarialization
18:35:38 <kparal> #agreed 1022810 - RejectedFreezeException - This is fine if it is fixed before Final freeze. But during the freeze we feel that this is a risky patch that might cause different side effects. If developers feel that this should get included during freeze and it's safe, please re-propose.
18:35:46 <kparal> that was the last proposed FE
18:35:57 <roshi> sweet
18:36:07 <kparal> now, please please don't tell me you want to go through accepted blockers :)
18:36:28 <Viking-Ice> kparal, no go have your czech thursday beer and get hammered
18:36:37 <kparal> exactly
18:36:38 <adamw> hell no
18:36:42 <kparal> (sipping tea right now)
18:36:43 <roshi> wait, you have a thing called Thursday Beer?
18:37:08 <kparal> roshi: sure, it's a day after Wednesday Beer
18:37:09 <Viking-Ice> every day that ends with y in czech republic is beer day
18:37:25 * roshi feels like he should honor this - out of respect for his Czech co-workers
18:37:49 <Viking-Ice> you dont get hungover drinking Czech beer
18:38:01 <roshi> I don't get hungover at all anyway
18:38:05 <roshi> :)
18:38:21 <Viking-Ice> roshi, that's just because you dont drink enough
18:38:28 <roshi> but we've lost focus
18:38:30 <kparal> #topic Open Floor
18:38:32 <kparal> anything else?
18:38:41 <Viking-Ice> not really
18:38:50 <roshi> Viking-Ice: sometime if we get the chance, I'll show you :)
18:39:07 <robatino> adamw: you commented in the two bugs that there might be an argument for making them blockers. can you elaborate?
18:39:15 <Viking-Ice> well to many anaconda bugs this late in the cycle which indiccates slippage but what else is new
18:39:22 <robatino> the only mention of ks i see in the criteria is in beta
18:39:53 <robatino> kickstart bugs, i mean (972265 and 972266)
18:41:21 <adamw> robatino: sorry, phone
18:41:22 <Viking-Ice> roshi, I'll bring a Icelandic shark delicacy for the occasion
18:41:26 <kparal> roshi: you may want to read http://thepraguething.wordpress.com/2012/11/08/33-things-ive-learnt-from-prague/
18:41:36 <Viking-Ice> however they probably wont let me in the states with taht
18:42:17 * roshi reads
18:42:20 <kparal> Viking-Ice: they probably shot you down without asking, after finding that in your bag
18:42:34 <kparal> definitely a terrorist thing
18:42:41 <roshi> what's the shark delicacy?
18:42:49 <robatino> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_Beta_Release_Criteria#Kickstart_delivery says "The installer must be able to use all available kickstart delivery methods." and "The intent of available is that the installer developers get to define the set of supported kickstart methods.", but since the anaconda devs are always telling people to use partial ks, it could be argued that they themselves define partial ks
18:42:49 <robatino> as supported
18:42:50 <Viking-Ice> kparal, when they open the can the it's gitmo for me
18:43:01 <Viking-Ice> mean then it is gitmo for me
18:43:02 <kparal> Viking-Ice: what's that icelandic word for it?
18:43:19 <Viking-Ice> you mean shark
18:43:22 <Viking-Ice> Hákarl
18:43:34 <kparal> yeah. roshi: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A1karl
18:44:29 <kparal> robatino: we don't really have a proper ks criteria. I don't think it could be accepted as a blocker at the moment
18:44:33 <roshi> interesting, I would try that :)
18:44:35 <kparal> (but it wasn't even proposed)
18:44:48 <kparal> roshi: only if you can disable your smell sensors
18:45:24 <Viking-Ice> it separated RH men from boys in brno
18:45:32 <kparal> heh
18:45:52 <kparal> so, I think we can discuss the ks thing after the meeting as well, right?
18:46:04 <kparal> in #fedora-qa
18:46:11 <kparal> let's end the meeting, shall we?
18:46:15 <Viking-Ice> yep
18:46:15 <roshi> yeah
18:46:19 <kparal> #endmeeting