#fedora-blocker-review: F24-blocker-review
Meeting started by adamw at 16:07:09 UTC
(full logs).
Meeting summary
- Roll Call (adamw, 16:07:09)
- Introduction (adamw, 16:10:16)
- 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. (adamw,
16:10:16)
- We'll be following the process outlined
at: (adamw,
16:10:17)
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
(adamw,
16:10:18)
- The bugs up for review today are available
at: (adamw,
16:10:20)
- http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
(adamw,
16:10:22)
- The criteria for release blocking bugs can be
found at: (adamw,
16:10:24)
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Alpha_Release_Criteria
(adamw,
16:10:26)
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Beta_Release_Criteria
(adamw,
16:10:28)
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_24_Final_Release_Criteria
(adamw,
16:10:30)
- kparal will secretarialize (adamw,
16:11:51)
- (1321393) blivet.errors.DeviceTreeError: no slaves found for device md127 (adamw, 16:12:29)
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1321393
(adamw,
16:12:29)
- Proposed Blocker, python-blivet,
ASSIGNED (adamw,
16:12:29)
- AGREED: 1321393 -
punt (delay decision) - we still didn't get categorical information
here, but we suspect it was caused by multiple installer launches,
which is an unfortunate UI issue but wouldn't be a blocker. if we
don't get new information by next week this will be rejected
(adamw,
16:24:16)
- ACTION: adamw to ping
hughsie about his 1321393 experience (adamw,
16:24:24)
- moving on to proposed Final blockers
(adamw,
16:26:02)
- (1325471) resolving Supplements: dependencies pull in multilib packages (adamw, 16:26:07)
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1325471
(adamw,
16:26:07)
- Proposed Blocker, dnf, NEW (adamw,
16:26:07)
- AGREED: 1325471 -
AcceptedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - details are
not nailed down yet, but installing a ton of multilib packages on
system update is considered a conditional violation of "The
installed system must be able to download and install updates with
the default console package manager." and accepted as a Final
blocker and Beta freeze exception for now. decision may be changed
based on later info (adamw,
16:41:03)
- (1320273) Grub2 out of memory error (adamw, 16:41:26)
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1320273
(adamw,
16:41:26)
- Proposed Blocker, grub2, NEW (adamw,
16:41:26)
- AGREED: 1320273 -
AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this seems like a clear violation of "The
installer must be able to install into free space alongside an
existing clean Windows installation and install a bootloader which
can boot into both Windows and Fedora." in the case of a UEFI
windows install (adamw,
16:47:30)
- (1317927) selinux prevents systemd-coredump from working (adamw, 16:47:43)
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1317927
(adamw,
16:47:43)
- Proposed Blocker, selinux-policy, NEW
(adamw,
16:47:43)
- AGREED: 1317927 -
RejectedBlocker (Final) - firefox being unusable would constitute a
blocker issue, however no-one present in the blocker meeting has hit
this issue in F24 testing and the bug seems unclear on exactly what
configuration is required to trigger it. can be re-proposed with a
clearer reproducer and blocker justification (adamw,
16:53:22)
- circling back to the newly proposed beta
blocker (adamw,
16:53:59)
- (1326047) Network Manager IPv4 and IPv6 dialogs incorrectly displayed, unusable with mouse (adamw, 16:54:30)
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326047
(adamw,
16:54:30)
- Proposed Blocker, NetworkManager, NEW
(adamw,
16:54:31)
- AGREED: 1326047 -
AcceptedBlocker (Final) - violates "All applications that can be
launched using the standard graphical mechanism of a
release-blocking desktop after a default installation of that
desktop must...withstand a basic functionality test." The 'advanced
network config' experience for Beta is unfortunate, but we don't
consider it a sufficiently serious case to take as a conditional
violation of e.g. updates criterion (adamw,
17:08:22)
- AGREED: we do think
1326047 sucks and would like it fixed ASAP, and will likely vote +1
FE for Beta if it comes to that. (adamw,
17:08:51)
- (1326055) Applications using Qt 5 are not displaying spinner and checked menu items properly. (adamw, 17:09:26)
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1326055
(adamw,
17:09:26)
- Proposed Blocker, adwaita-qt, NEW (adamw,
17:09:27)
- AGREED: 1326055 -
RejectedBlocker (Beta) - this clearly does not violate any of the
Beta criteria, nothing in those depends on Qt apps running on
Workstation (adamw,
17:18:43)
- Beta accepted blocker round up (adamw, 17:19:19)
- info is still requested on
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1262556 (adamw,
17:19:30)
- we more or less know what's going on with
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1306808 (btrfs volume
reuse bug) and anaconda team expects it to be dealt with some time
this week (adamw,
17:20:21)
- Beta freeze is 2016-04-19 , so we'll be
reviewing FEs next week (adamw,
17:22:24)
- Open floor (adamw, 17:23:24)
Meeting ended at 17:28:11 UTC
(full logs).
Action items
- adamw to ping hughsie about his 1321393 experience
Action items, by person
- adamw
- adamw to ping hughsie about his 1321393 experience
People present (lines said)
- adamw (210)
- sgallagh (83)
- cmurf (81)
- kparal (42)
- danofsatx (16)
- pwhalen (11)
- pschindl (11)
- garretraziel (9)
- jpigface (8)
- zodbot (5)
Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.