16:06:42 <roshi> #startmeeting F22-blocker-review
16:06:42 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Jan 12 16:06:42 2015 UTC.  The chair is roshi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:06:42 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:06:42 <roshi> #meetingname F22-blocker-review
16:06:42 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f22-blocker-review'
16:06:43 <roshi> #topic Roll Call
16:06:57 * brunowolff is here
16:07:08 * roshi is here (obviously)
16:08:10 * kparal is here
16:08:15 <adamw> ahoyhoy
16:08:21 * satellit_e listening
16:08:37 <roshi> #chair adamw kparal brunowolff satellit_e sgallagh
16:08:38 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw brunowolff kparal roshi satellit_e sgallagh
16:08:49 <roshi> #topic Introduction
16:08:49 <roshi> Why are we here?
16:08:49 <roshi> #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.
16:08:53 <roshi> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
16:08:55 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
16:08:58 <roshi> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
16:09:00 <roshi> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
16:09:03 <roshi> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
16:09:05 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Alpha_Release_Criteria
16:09:08 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Beta_Release_Criteria
16:09:11 <roshi> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Final_Release_Criteria
16:09:23 * pschindl_wifi is here (after small connection failure)
16:09:30 <sgallagh> /me is here
16:09:35 <roshi> first and last proposed blocker - for beta
16:09:36 <roshi> #topic (1166598) going back to installation destination picker swaps partitions on disks
16:09:39 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1166598
16:09:42 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ASSIGNED
16:10:12 <roshi> no movement from last week
16:10:54 <sgallagh> I remain unconvinced that the annoyance level of this bug is worth blocker status. I'd happily call it a Freeze Exception.
16:10:56 <kparal> what information do we need?
16:11:09 <kparal> there's no needinfo in that bug
16:11:50 <brunowolff> There was a patch that fixed part of the problem and we aren't sure if it is in the package now.
16:12:10 <brunowolff> There was a less important related issue that is still open.
16:12:49 <adamw> iirc the patch we initially put in for this caused another blocker, so it was reverted
16:13:02 <roshi> http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-blocker-review/2015-01-07/f22-blocker-review.2015-01-07-16.02.log.html
16:13:17 <roshi> at 16:55:24 is the discussion from last meeting
16:13:39 <kparal> we're calling potentially destructive commands on wrong partitions, I think this should be a blocker
16:14:07 <roshi> does this still happen in rawhide?
16:14:08 <kparal> we waived it last time because we didn't want to delay the release further
16:14:41 <adamw> i'm not +1 *alpha* blocker for this in any case as it clearly doesn't hit the pretty tight alpha disk criteria
16:14:46 <adamw> it's beta or final for me
16:14:47 <kparal> we will need to test it in all cases
16:14:56 <adamw> but let me track down exactly what was in that updates.img, should be in my IRC logs
16:14:56 <kparal> adamw: it's proposed for beta
16:15:01 <adamw> kk
16:15:15 <kparal> I also think it's not alpha material
16:16:08 * roshi either
16:16:23 <roshi> beta I can see pretty easy, final for sure
16:16:56 <adamw> afaics there's nothing intended to fix this on master.
16:17:04 <adamw> i can't tell from IRC logs exactly what was in that updates.img
16:17:13 <adamw> but whatever it was, it didn't get committed, i don't think.
16:17:39 <roshi> so we need to get someone to poke at getting the fix committed?
16:18:10 <roshi> aiui, right now it's just a graphical quirk, not a actual swapping of the intended disks, right?
16:18:21 <kparal> I think they'll want to rework it a bit anyway, the original fix caused other issues, that's why we reverted it
16:18:47 <adamw> roshi: no, i don't think that's right.
16:18:55 <kparal> I believe it still crashes because it runs lvremove on a standard partition, or something like that
16:19:06 <adamw> roshi: there's nothing in anaconda that addresses the bug in any way. i don't see any reason to believe that it isn't still valid exactly as described.
16:19:14 <adamw> c#22 was talking about the updates.img
16:19:27 <adamw> you can't use that to say 'ah, it's mostly fixed';
16:20:07 <roshi> ah, I misunderstood then
16:20:45 <roshi> I was under the impression that the updates.img was the fix for the crash and it had made it in - but left the odd swap of disk order in the display
16:21:21 <adamw> i don't think so, but hold while i check blivet
16:21:25 <kparal> I think it didn't make it in
16:21:25 <adamw> keep forgetting to check fking blivet
16:22:00 <roshi> I could easily be wrong :)
16:22:31 <adamw> yeah, no, still the same story in blivet. i'm pretty sure that change never made it in.
16:22:35 <roshi> kk
16:22:40 <roshi> +1 on that
16:22:42 <adamw> the *earlier* attempt to fix it made it in, but was reverted, as we previously discussed.
16:22:47 <roshi> er, w/ that info
16:22:55 <adamw> so i'm +1 blocker either beta or final
16:23:02 <adamw> probably final to be realistic
16:23:12 <adamw> i can see us handwaving it at beta
16:23:48 <roshi> same here
16:24:03 <roshi> either way though, this is more lead time on it than it ever had before, even for beta
16:24:09 <roshi> which is a good thing :)
16:24:23 <roshi> votes for beta blocker?
16:24:53 <kparal> I'm a bit afraid it will get waived again if this waits for final
16:25:18 <pschindl_wifi> +1 beta
16:25:25 <brunowolff> +1 beta blocker
16:25:47 <kparal> +1 beta
16:26:00 <kparal> I can be convinced for final instead, I'd prefer beta
16:26:22 <adamw> what's the criterion for beta, btw?
16:26:30 <roshi> +1 for beta
16:26:34 <roshi> looking for it now
16:27:07 <roshi> ""When using the guided partitioning flow, the installer must be able to:
16:27:08 <kparal> "Discussed at 2014-11-05 blocker review meeting [1]. Accepted as a blocker. This bug violates the beta criterion "Complete an installation using any combination of disk configuration options it allows the user to select" in the case you change your mind."
16:27:10 <roshi> * Complete an installation using any combination of disk configuration options it allows the user to select
16:27:13 <roshi> * Remove existing storage volumes to free up space, at the user's direction"
16:27:32 <roshi> wow, sorry for that ugly paste I just did :(
16:27:55 <kparal> but I'm not totally sure it was not the other bug that we forked this bug from
16:27:56 <adamw> sure
16:28:08 <kparal> damn forking
16:28:22 <kparal> *cloning
16:28:28 <roshi> I'm fine with that criteria since we put the "if you change your mind" bit at the end
16:28:58 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1166598 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug violates the beta criterion "Complete an installation using any combination of disk configuration options it allows the user to select" in the case you change your mind
16:29:51 <kparal> ack
16:30:26 <adamw> ack
16:30:40 <roshi> #agreed - 1166598 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug violates the beta criterion "Complete an installation using any combination of disk configuration options it allows the user to select" in the case you change your mind
16:30:51 <roshi> who wants to secretarialize?
16:31:22 * roshi can after the meeting if no one wants to
16:32:07 <adamw> i've got it
16:32:22 <roshi> sweet, thanks :)
16:32:44 <roshi> alright, onto the 2 proposed for Final
16:32:46 <roshi> #topic (1179905) [dnf] select default optional addons when changing environments
16:32:49 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1179905
16:32:52 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, MODIFIED
16:35:04 <kparal> I think our current criteria don't cover this
16:35:06 <adamw> i'm not sure this would actually constitute a blocker in practice atm as i don't think any of our blocking package sets uses default option groups
16:35:19 <kparal> so the question is whether they should
16:35:31 <kparal> adamw: and that
16:35:35 <roshi> seems more like a FE, to me
16:35:39 <adamw> i'd probably say that *if they did* it'd be an alpha or beta blocker (I have a proposal to amend the relevant criterion in for review atm), but as they don't, it's probably not
16:36:11 <adamw> i'd just go -1 blocker for now, we can revisit later if it seems needed, but probably won't be
16:36:12 <roshi> -1 blocker
16:36:22 <kparal> -1
16:36:22 <jsmith> WORKSFORME, -1 blocker
16:36:34 * jsmith lurks while listening to a conference call at ${DAYJOB}
16:37:35 <roshi> proposed #agreed - 1179905 - RejectedBlocker - This bug doesn't violate any criterion we have currently and none of the release blocking package sets use default option groups.
16:37:42 <brunowolff> ack
16:37:55 <jsmith> ACK
16:45:18 <adamw> yeah, be good to have independent confirmation
16:45:28 <roshi> we can consider the meeting ended, and when zodbot gets back I'll do the endmeeting bits and send the minutes
16:45:31 <kparal> pschindl_wifi is now also on rawhide
16:45:40 <roshi> or make them if zodbot did kick the can
16:46:09 <roshi> thanks for coming folks!
16:46:10 <pschindl_wifi> kparal: That's true, but I have f21 at home.
16:46:16 <adamw> heeeeeere's zodbot
16:46:28 <satellit> wifi works for mw on f22 rawhide lives
16:46:29 <adamw> #topic (1180706) Does not launch: "Gjs-CRITICAL **: Attempting to call back into JSAPI during the sweeping phase of GC."
16:46:39 <adamw> #agreed - 1180706 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug is a clear violation of the Final 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."
16:46:47 <adamw> #topic Open Floor
16:46:47 <roshi> there we go
16:46:52 <adamw> history recreated!
16:47:09 <roshi> :)
16:47:11 * satellit soory too soon for comment
16:47:21 * roshi is going to end meeting unless someone has something
16:47:23 <adamw> satellit: npnp
16:47:28 <roshi> 3...
16:47:42 <roshi> 2...
16:47:56 <roshi> 1...
16:48:03 <roshi> 0.66...
16:48:14 <roshi> 0.33...
16:48:15 <adamw> 0.pi
16:48:27 <roshi> thanks for coming!
16:48:30 <roshi> #endmeeting