16:07:43 <bcotton> #startmeeting F33-blocker-review
16:07:43 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Aug 24 16:07:43 2020 UTC.
16:07:43 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:07:43 <zodbot> The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:07:43 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:07:43 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f33-blocker-review'
16:07:48 * bcotton is adamw now!
16:07:57 <bcotton> #meetingname F33-blocker-review
16:07:57 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f33-blocker-review'
16:08:00 <michel_slm> .hello salimma
16:08:01 <zodbot> michel_slm: salimma 'Michel Alexandre Salim' <michel@michel-slm.name>
16:08:04 <bcotton> #topic Roll call
16:08:12 <kparal> .hello2
16:08:13 <zodbot> kparal: kparal 'Kamil Páral' <kparal@redhat.com>
16:08:15 <michel_slm> .hello salimma
16:08:17 <zodbot> michel_slm: salimma 'Michel Alexandre Salim' <michel@michel-slm.name>
16:09:10 <lruzicka> .hello2
16:09:11 <zodbot> lruzicka: lruzicka 'Lukáš Růžička' <lruzicka@redhat.com>
16:09:38 <kparal> before adamw is back, let me give a short explanation about https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/33/beta/buglist now showing "Vote" links. It links to tickets in this project https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review and you can use it to vote on blockers outside of meetings. We're still polishing some last-minute bugs, but I hope it will be ready and get frequently used soon.
16:10:00 <bcotton> #topic Blocker voting mechanism
16:10:05 <bcotton> #chair kparal
16:10:05 <zodbot> Current chairs: bcotton kparal
16:10:20 <kparal> and I should repeat that, I suppose? :)
16:10:25 <bcotton> kparal, please go on (unless you've already said all you want to say)
16:10:34 <cmurf> kparal: COOL!
16:10:37 <kparal> before adamw is back, let me give a short explanation about https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/33/beta/buglist now showing "Vote" links. It links to tickets in this project https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review and you can use it to vote on blockers outside of meetings. We're still polishing some last-minute bugs, but I hope it will be ready and get frequently used soon.
16:10:38 <michel_slm> kparal: neat. do votes taken during the meeting get combined as well?
16:10:42 <kparal> I'm happy to answer questions
16:10:47 <bcotton> kparal: you don't have to repeat it, but #info-ing in reasonable chunks would be...oh
16:10:58 <adamw> kparal: i was gonna put it in the meeting, but hey :)
16:11:04 <adamw> oh, you did it, thanks
16:11:14 <bcotton> kparal: are we ready to start using it in earnest?
16:11:19 <kparal> the idea is that simply tickets get resolved outside of meetings throughout the week
16:11:21 <bcotton> #chair adamw
16:11:21 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw bcotton kparal
16:11:28 <kparal> for more complex ones, we can still wait until the meeting
16:11:46 <adamw> so now, let's vote on the blocker voting mechanism. hmm, we may need a mechanism to do this
16:11:57 <kparal> in the next BBA update the IRC format will also have a link to the relevant discussion ticket
16:11:58 <adamw> who can build us a blocker voting mechanism voting mechanism...
16:12:08 <bcotton> can we file a blocker on using the voting mechanism?
16:12:20 <cmurf> adamw: i volunteer zodbot
16:12:22 <adamw> kparal: it would actually be good if the IRC format could include the current vote count too
16:12:32 <kparal> adamw: you're a troublemaker
16:12:37 <adamw> thanks!
16:12:39 <cmurf> haha
16:12:44 <cmurf> :D
16:12:50 <bcotton> but in seriousness, i propose we start using this in earnest after the beta release so as to not throw a new process into the works as we approach crunch time
16:13:07 <kparal> bcotton: it should be ready to be used right now, but if you wait a few days, we'll fix a few annoyances
16:13:18 <bcotton> that also gives time to spread the word, answer questions, etc
16:13:40 <kparal> using it also helps us identify the problems
16:13:53 <cmurf> ok so the idea is to not say "vote in the bug/ticket" but to point folks to...the voting machine
16:14:03 <cmurf> (eventually)
16:14:14 <adamw> cmurf: right, it's a better way to vote 'offline' than directly in the bug
16:14:24 <adamw> avoids generating unnecessary bugzilla mails, has a counting mechanism, etc etc
16:14:24 <michel_slm> ah, so even during the meeting, we vote using the same interface? that seems consistent
16:14:43 <adamw> micha: i don't know if that was the idea...
16:15:16 <kparal> adamw: can you file a ticket for your request? it's not as easy as it sounds, I'd like to discuss that out of this meeting
16:15:35 <michel_slm> because... otherwise now there is two ways of voting, right? the voting that happens in IRC and the voting that happens offline
16:15:47 <adamw> kparal: okay, sure
16:15:55 <lruzicka> michel_slm, I think the idea was to vote offline and only vote in IRC for difficult bugs
16:16:14 <cmurf> lruzicka: yeah
16:16:17 <kparal> as I see is, either the ticket is closed before a meeting and therefore resolved, or we discuss it during the meeting and take everything in it into account
16:16:21 <kparal> people's votes, arguments, etc
16:16:24 <michel_slm> ah ok
16:16:59 <adamw> kparal: i don't remember if you did this before, but perhaps it would be a good idea to write up a mail explaining how we see the process working with the offline voting added in?
16:17:09 <cmurf> we don't know the split yet, but it means less weight on blocker review day for the bugs that are more straightforward or urgent blockers
16:18:02 <kparal> adamw: sure, I can do that. I'm not even sure I'm completely clear on that myself :)
16:18:31 <kparal> the initial idea was to replace the meeting, but some people wanted to keep it at least in some extent. And I agree that for complex issues it's easier to have a realtime discussion
16:18:39 <kparal> even though not everyone can participate this way
16:18:51 <kparal> so it's an experiment, and we'll see how much we like it
16:20:24 <adamw> ok, so yeah, seems like an idea to write down a clear plan so we know what we're doing :)
16:20:45 <adamw> #action kparal to write up an email with a plan for using the offline voting so we're all on the same page about how we will use it
16:20:46 <kparal> michel_slm: btw, there were always multiple ways of voting (in meeting & in bugzilla)
16:21:25 <michel_slm> kparal: ah. then yes, an explicit voting interface sounds nicer than voting within a ticket
16:22:35 <kparal> ok, so you're informed, you can try it, I'll write up some email, and I guess now we can go to the actual blocker meeting :)
16:22:54 <lruzicka> kparal, also please check why https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/30 is displayed in such an ugly way :D
16:23:08 <kparal> lruzicka: refresh the page
16:23:35 <lruzicka> kparal, that did the trick. Funny.
16:23:35 <kparal> it's a pagure bug, after your comment the ticket description gets updated and pagure doesn't format it properly
16:23:55 <lruzicka> ok, thanks
16:24:00 <kparal> our bot updates the description after each comment gets added
16:24:15 <adamw> thanks kparal!
16:24:26 <bcotton> kparal++
16:24:31 <adamw> #chair kparal bcotton
16:24:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw bcotton kparal
16:24:39 <adamw> impending boilerplate alert
16:24:40 <adamw> #topic Introduction
16:24:40 <adamw> Why are we here?
16:24:40 <adamw> #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.
16:24:40 <adamw> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
16:24:42 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
16:24:43 <adamw> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
16:24:45 <adamw> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
16:24:47 <adamw> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
16:24:49 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria
16:24:51 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_33_Beta_Release_Criteria
16:24:53 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_33_Final_Release_Criteria
16:25:01 <adamw> #info for Beta, we have:
16:25:05 <adamw> #info 2 Proposed Blockers
16:25:05 <adamw> #info 9 Accepted Blockers
16:25:09 <adamw> #info 1 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
16:25:10 <adamw> #info 1 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
16:25:19 <adamw> #info for Final, we have:
16:25:23 <adamw> #info 1 Proposed Blockers
16:25:23 <adamw> #info 1 Accepted Blockers
16:25:32 <adamw> anyone volunteer to secretarialize?
16:25:38 <adamw> if not, i can
16:26:27 <kparal> I'll handle updating blocker discussions. Need to test it :)
16:26:45 <adamw> sorry, you mean you'll update the bugs?
16:26:51 <kparal> the pagure tickets
16:27:07 <kparal> if you can handle bugzilla, that would be welcome
16:27:14 <adamw> ah k
16:27:25 <adamw> #info adamw will secretarialize after the meeting
16:27:25 <pwhalen> .hello2
16:27:26 <zodbot> pwhalen: pwhalen 'Paul Whalen' <pwhalen@redhat.com>
16:27:34 <adamw> #topic Proposed Beta blockers
16:27:54 <adamw> #topic (1871389) GNOME Terminal and GNOME apps won't launch from X11 session
16:27:54 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1871389
16:27:54 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-session, ON_QA
16:28:18 <kparal> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/30
16:28:34 <adamw> #info we have +2 (adamw, kparal) from the pagure ticket
16:28:52 * lruzicka also voted +1 there
16:29:00 <pwhalen> +1 from me too
16:29:18 <michel_slm> +1 sounds like a deal breaker esp for people stuck on X11
16:29:28 <adamw> lruzicka: ah sorry, i didn't refresh
16:29:31 <adamw> #undo
16:29:31 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: INFO by adamw at 16:28:34 : we have +2 (adamw, kparal) from the pagure ticket
16:29:34 <lruzicka> malfunctioning Xorg kills the AutoCoconut before it even started.
16:29:41 <adamw> #info we have +3 (adamw, lruzicka, kparal) from the pagure ticket
16:29:53 <bcotton> and my +1
16:30:07 <frantisekz> +1
16:30:30 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1871389 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - accepted as a violation of "It must be possible to run the default web browser and a terminal application from all release-blocking desktop environments" when GNOME is run on Xorg (which is the default config for some systems)
16:30:39 <kparal> ack
16:30:44 <bcotton> ack\
16:31:15 <cmurf> ack
16:31:21 <pwhalen> ack
16:31:30 <adamw> #agreed 1871389 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - accepted as a violation of "It must be possible to run the default web browser and a terminal application from all release-blocking desktop environments" when GNOME is run on Xorg (which is the default config for some systems)
16:31:35 <adamw> #topic (1863041) systemd-resolved.service not work with DNS server placed behind VPN (openconnect)
16:31:36 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1863041
16:31:36 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, openconnect, NEW
16:31:45 <adamw> so, last week we punted this to propose and discuss criteria
16:31:57 <adamw> i got around to proposing them only on Friday, so the proposal is a bit fresh to use today i think
16:32:50 <adamw> #info we now have a network/VPN criteria proposal as of Friday: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/ZK6FRRRWQNC3FQVX7ZTMUHQMPPEAZSJA/
16:34:18 <lruzicka> So, I believe we should be +1 according to the criteria
16:34:32 <adamw> well, it's only a proposed criterion for now
16:34:35 <adamw> and only has a few replies
16:34:38 <adamw> so i'd propose punting for another week
16:34:39 <cmurf> punt?
16:34:41 <adamw> yeah
16:35:02 <cmurf> could mention it'll likely be a blocker once criterion is agreed to?
16:35:02 <bcotton> +1 punt with the expectation that i'll be +1 blocker next week
16:35:05 <pwhalen> +1 punt
16:35:15 <lruzicka> ok, lets punt then
16:35:18 <frantisekz> punt
16:35:19 <adamw> cmurf: i can put that in the note yeah
16:35:19 <lruzicka> +1 punt
16:36:07 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1863041 - punt (delay decision) - we anticipate accepting this under the newly-proposed network/VPN criteria once they're reviewed, but they are still quite new so we're going to wait a week for the proposal to firm up and gain more support
16:36:11 <cmurf> extra week of notice is good, and the owners of the bug can also throw rocks at the criterion if they see problems with it
16:36:14 <cmurf> ack
16:36:16 <frantisekz> ack
16:36:23 <bcotton> ack
16:36:28 <cmurf> s/rocks/pebbles/
16:36:37 <adamw> i believe there's actually a fix for the bug now too
16:36:43 <pwhalen> ack
16:36:44 <adamw> oh wait no
16:36:46 <adamw> that was a different bug. :P
16:36:49 <cmurf> haha
16:36:58 <cmurf> i *never* get bugs confused
16:37:16 <kparal> ack
16:37:30 * cmurf is always confused
16:37:50 <michel_slm> eternal confusion is eternal bliss
16:38:17 <michel_slm> ack
16:38:57 <lruzicka> ack
16:39:13 <bcotton> are we ack-ing the confusion now?
16:39:41 <michel_slm> we haven't voted on the confusion
16:39:42 <adamw> proposed: confusion!
16:39:50 <adamw> #agreed 1863041 - punt (delay decision) - we anticipate accepting this under the newly-proposed network/VPN criteria once they're reviewed, but they are still quite new so we're going to wait a week for the proposal to firm up and gain more support
16:40:32 <adamw> #topic Proposed Beta freeze exceptions
16:40:36 <adamw> #topic (1818807) gnome-contacts select local address book done button does nothing
16:40:36 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1818807
16:40:36 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, gnome-contacts, ON_QA
16:40:48 <cmurf> +1 beta FE
16:40:53 <cmurf> +1 final blocker
16:41:01 <bcotton> is gnome-contacts not part of the default package set?
16:41:02 <kparal> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/31
16:41:14 <kparal> bcotton: it is
16:41:14 <cmurf> not sure why the final blocker got removed
16:41:16 <adamw> seems like it should be fixed now, but +1 FE
16:41:21 <frantisekz> +1 FE
16:41:26 <michel_slm> sounds like +1 for both to me too
16:41:29 <cmurf> it'll get fixed for beta anyway
16:41:30 <bcotton> shouldn't this be a blocker then?
16:41:30 <adamw> cmurf: it's not? i see it proposed as final blocker
16:41:37 <adamw> bcotton: it's proposed as Beta FE and Final blocker
16:41:41 <michel_slm> I see it installed by default but I normally use Evolution
16:41:41 <bcotton> ah, okay
16:41:41 <cmurf> did it get readded?
16:41:43 <adamw> +1 both for me
16:41:46 <bcotton> +1 both
16:41:56 <cmurf> comment 3
16:42:21 <pwhalen> +1 both
16:42:24 <adamw> cmurf: that changed it from blocking Final FE to blocking Beta FE
16:42:36 <adamw> it blocked final blocker the whole time
16:42:56 <cmurf> oh
16:43:19 <cmurf> huh
16:43:35 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1818807 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta), AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a Final blocker as a violation of "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical mechanism after a default installation of Fedora Workstation on the x86_64 architecture must start successfully..." and as a Beta FE as a significant bug that cannot be fixed for live images with an update
16:43:37 <cmurf> ack
16:43:52 <michel_slm> ack
16:43:57 <pwhalen> ack
16:44:03 <kparal> ack
16:44:05 <cmurf> oh i see what i did wrong
16:44:09 <bcotton> ack
16:44:20 <lruzicka> ack
16:44:43 <cmurf> i set the milestone to f33beta and checked both boxes haha
16:44:48 <frantisekz> ack
16:45:07 <adamw> #agreed 1818807 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta), AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a Final blocker as a violation of "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical mechanism after a default installation of Fedora Workstation on the x86_64 architecture must start successfully..." and as a Beta FE as a significant bug that cannot be fixed for live images with an update
16:45:18 <cmurf> ack
16:45:27 <adamw> #info that was the proposed Final blocker, so we'll move right on to...
16:45:30 <cmurf> oh i'm late
16:45:34 <adamw> #topic Accepted Beta blocker status review
16:45:38 <adamw> cmurf: you already acked it first
16:45:43 <adamw> cmurf: one ack at a time!
16:45:48 * cmurf wonders if his coffee is spiked with whiskey or something...
16:45:57 <cmurf> more spacey than usual
16:46:11 <adamw> #topic (1827915) Fedora 33: Workstation live x86_64 image exceeds maximum size
16:46:11 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1827915
16:46:11 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, distribution, NEW
16:46:21 <bcotton> one ack, vasily. one ack only, pleash
16:46:26 <adamw> #info Workstation team appears to be working on this, as the size has come down a lot from "way over 2G" to "just over 2G"
16:46:40 <adamw> kalev: any notes on this?
16:46:45 <cmurf> idea here is to get the package set in order, and whatever the resulting ISO size is, we'll add 100M or whatever, and make that the max size value
16:47:24 <adamw> well, "way over" was an exaggeration, i was eliding a 0
16:47:32 <adamw> #undo
16:47:32 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: INFO by adamw at 16:46:26 : Workstation team appears to be working on this, as the size has come down a lot from "way over 2G" to "just over 2G"
16:47:37 <cmurf> last time i looked it was maybe 50-60M
16:47:47 <adamw> #info Workstation team appears to be working on this, as the size has come down somewhat already
16:47:52 <adamw> cmurf: it's now like 16M
16:47:59 <adamw> as of 08-22
16:48:08 <michel_slm> they're removing Rhythmbox I think?
16:48:14 <cmurf> maybe
16:48:31 <lruzicka> will Video play sound now?
16:48:40 <cmurf> need to figure out some details on what should play audio files by default
16:48:42 <lruzicka> I mean sound files?
16:49:00 <cmurf> it should, so that'd be worth testing
16:49:26 <lruzicka> cmurf, ok, I can take a look and see what can be played with Video
16:49:53 <cmurf> it could be tricky to test, i'm not sure how the file types to app matching logic works
16:50:24 <cmurf> i suspect you'd at least have to move rhythmbox first, and grab some commong audio files and see what program they open in by default and if they are ready to play
16:50:27 <adamw> michel_slm: there's a GNOME Music thing now isn't there?
16:50:35 <michel_slm> cmurf: if the desktop file includes the right mimetype, you can just right click and open with the app of your choice I think
16:50:40 <adamw> https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Music
16:50:46 <cmurf> there is, but Music is a manager
16:50:52 <michel_slm> or yeah, to test if it opens by default, rename the rhythmbox desktop file
16:51:01 <cmurf> so the quandary is all these managers don't just play one off files, they want to manage things
16:51:24 <michel_slm> we don't ship Music though, do we?
16:51:28 <cmurf> nope
16:51:32 <adamw> ah, yeah
16:51:34 <adamw> then i guess totem it is!
16:51:38 <michel_slm> and given we're oversized it probably won't get added
16:51:52 <cmurf> well if that were the solution we'd just change the max size
16:51:56 <cmurf> 2.1G 2.2G
16:51:58 <adamw> well, we package gnome-music, but it's not in comps afaics.
16:52:11 <adamw> anyhoo
16:52:12 * michel_slm super happy with Celluloid but it can't be in Fedora proper
16:52:15 <adamw> point is, it's being dealt with
16:52:22 <adamw> #topic (1849430) Fedora 33: Everything boot x86_64 image exceeds maximum size
16:52:22 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849430
16:52:22 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, distribution, ASSIGNED
16:52:23 <cmurf> yessireebob
16:52:41 <adamw> #info sgallagh has foolishly volunteered for this: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9689
16:52:57 <michel_slm> adamw: yeah, my bad, I mean ship by default
16:53:01 <adamw> but if anyone wants to help, you know...feel free
16:53:32 <bcotton> here's question
16:53:41 <bcotton> who actually "owns" the Everything images?
16:54:10 <adamw> whoever volunteers!
16:54:18 <adamw> so, usually sgallagh or nirik, those fools
16:54:21 <michel_slm> um... fesco? (guessing)
16:54:26 <adamw> but yeah, it's a question
16:54:35 * bcotton spins the Wheel of Assignees for assigning the bug
16:54:40 <sgallagh> FESCo, usually delegating to me and nirik as adamw says
16:55:22 <cmurf> all those firmware files should be on the squash image and thus compressed already
16:55:34 <michel_slm> sgallagh: speaking of the netinstall image, if it could be rebranded so it doesn't say "Fedora Server" that would be great
16:55:35 <adamw> sgallagh: i might try building an image later with the netronome firmwares thrown out and see how big it comes out
16:55:37 <sgallagh> My initial investigation suggests that the biggest single offender is linux-firmware, having doubled in size in recent history
16:55:43 <adamw> not sure how much they get compressed in the end
16:56:01 <adamw> michel_slm: the Everything one doesn't, does it?
16:56:10 <cmurf> what path is firmware in?
16:56:24 <michel_slm> adamw: the only netinstall ISO on getfedora is the server one, right now anyway (for F32)
16:56:24 <adamw> michel_slm: https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/646567#step/_boot_to_anaconda/10 doesn't have any Server branding i can see
16:56:47 <adamw> michel_slm: yeah, that's actually intended, aiui. we keep the Everything one around for, er, reasons i forget? but we don't actually advertise it to people.
16:56:50 <sgallagh> cmurf: `/usr/lib/firmware`
16:57:32 <adamw> #info we are still investigating ways to cut down on the size, focusing on firmware files at the moment as those seem to be growing/multiplying rapidly
16:57:36 <adamw> #topic (1849431) Fedora 33: Server boot x86_64 image exceeds maximum size
16:57:37 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1849431
16:57:37 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, distribution, ASSIGNED
16:57:47 <cmurf> firmware seems to compress a lot
16:57:55 <adamw> #info status for this is same as previous bug (sgallagh and helpers looking into it, https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9689 )
16:58:05 <michel_slm> adamw: ah. yeah, so... that's OK then. I wonder how many of my users would ask "hey why am I getting a server OS". I'll stick with it if that's the one more people are using
16:58:39 <bcotton> yeah, i'm basically hoping fixing server fixes everything :-)
16:58:55 <adamw> bcotton: whatever we do should affect both
16:59:02 <sgallagh> I'm basically hoping I can fix anything at all :-P
16:59:02 <adamw> as the installer environment is built the exact same way
16:59:22 <sgallagh> That's the other piece: the installer depchain seems to have grown some surprising things too
16:59:23 <cmurf> 408M uncompressed, 147M compressed (tar.zst)
16:59:24 <adamw> only difference between the server and everything netinsts is installer customizations really
16:59:37 <cmurf> i expect xz is in the ballpark or slightly better
16:59:49 <cmurf> if the firmware files are in the squash images which, darn, they must be...
16:59:56 <adamw> so, please do any further follow-up on these two issues (netinst sizes) on that releng ticket
16:59:58 <bcotton> seems like a job for asamalik and the Minimization objective?
17:00:12 <adamw> bcotton: there's a difference in urgency, this needs fixing *now*
17:00:19 <adamw> and this limit isn't an arbitrary one, it's the size of a CD
17:00:21 <cmurf> bcotton: i did once ask that very question some time ago
17:00:25 <adamw> which, you know, someone somewhere is probably still using!
17:00:58 <adamw> #topic (1869892) Release-blocking Fedora 33 images have Fedora 32 backgrounds
17:00:58 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1869892
17:00:58 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, distribution, NEW
17:01:18 <adamw> #info new f33-backgrounds package is in and desktop-backgrounds is updated, but KDE package changes to adopt the new background are not yet done
17:01:19 <cmurf> obvious blocker right?
17:01:26 <adamw> cmurf: we're on accepted blocker review, not voting
17:01:31 <cmurf> oh
17:01:39 <adamw> #action adamw to file KDE-specific bug and have it block this bug
17:01:43 * cyberpear uses netinst on a CD
17:01:49 <adamw> cyberpear: hey, hi, someone! :D
17:01:53 <adamw> cyberpear: a CD, not a DVD?
17:01:57 <cyberpear> yes
17:02:02 <adamw> so hey, there ya go
17:02:08 <adamw> i've tried pinging rdieter about this a couple times, will try again today
17:02:43 <bcotton> can we start a collection to fund someone to make Plasma not need an update every time we update the backgrounds pacakge? because i would contribute to that
17:02:53 <michel_slm> cyberpear: a 700MB or 800MB CD? ;)
17:02:55 <adamw> you say "collection", i say "club with nails in it"
17:03:21 <cyberpear> 700... not sure I knew 800 was a thing :p
17:03:33 <adamw> it was an unofficial extended thing
17:03:34 <bcotton> that's a metric cd ;-)
17:03:47 <adamw> like an 80 minute audio CD
17:04:05 <adamw> i think some crazy company started pressing 99 minute ones at some point, which would play in almost nothing.
17:04:17 <adamw> ah, CDs, good times
17:04:36 <cyberpear> 80 min is approx 700 MB, but you can usually squeeze a bit more with over burn
17:04:46 <adamw> oh yeah, that's right, the 800MB ones were like 90 minute ones, or something like that.
17:04:52 <adamw> they usually didn't work anyway...
17:05:43 <cyberpear> sorry, didn't mean to derail...
17:06:04 <adamw> okay, next one!
17:06:10 <adamw> #topic (1860616) abrt-server errors when processing zstd compressed core dumps produced by systemd-246~rc1-1.fc33
17:06:10 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1860616
17:06:10 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, libreport, POST
17:06:13 <adamw> so this is the one with the packaging...fun
17:06:40 <adamw> i pinged msuchy (who's sort of at the top of the abrt/libreport food chain) about this and he promised to get it sorted out
17:07:37 <michel_slm> is abrt-server just not compiled with zstd support?
17:08:07 <adamw> michel_slm: libreport wasn't
17:08:15 <adamw> it got ported to libarchive so now it does support zstd
17:08:38 <adamw> but the new libreport bumped the library soname and this was not handled...well...in terms of cutting new releases of its deps and doing package builds properly
17:08:53 <michel_slm> ah
17:09:24 <adamw> #info fix for this is in libreport 2.14.0, the first attempt to ship which had various problems. koji shows mfabik currently trying this again in a side tag, so we will await the outcome of that
17:10:24 <adamw> #topic (1866570) FreeIPA deployment fails in current Rawhide due to various issues with Java 11
17:10:24 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1866570
17:10:24 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, resteasy, NEW
17:10:33 <adamw> i should probably bump this, as in current F33 this seems to be better
17:10:46 <adamw> we do still have failures in the kickstart deployment test and the F32->F33 upgrade test, though
17:11:11 <adamw> #info FreeIPA is no longer entirely broken in current F33, so we should update this. there are still issues with kickstart client enrolment and F32->F33 server upgrades, though
17:11:19 <adamw> #action adamw to update this bug and file new bugs for the remaining issues
17:12:33 <michel_slm> ack
17:12:45 <adamw> #info bug now closed
17:12:55 <adamw> #topic (1861700) login stuck when changing users repeatedly (log out, log in a different one)
17:12:56 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1861700
17:12:56 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, sddm, NEW
17:13:22 <adamw> #info we're still waiting on the packager to respond to kparal's latest info here
17:14:31 <adamw> #info I have pinged the maintainers
17:14:35 <michel_slm> qq: which spins do this affect?
17:14:40 <michel_slm> just KDE or any other too
17:14:43 <adamw> just KDE i believe
17:14:50 <adamw> and KDE-based spins i guess
17:14:55 <adamw> don't think anything else uses sddm
17:15:37 <adamw> #topic (1862686) SELinux is preventing systemd-machine from 'create' accesses on the sock_file io.systemd.Machine.
17:15:37 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1862686
17:15:37 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, selinux-policy, POST
17:15:48 <adamw> #info a new selinux-policy build has now happened, so this should be ON_QA
17:16:20 <adamw> #info Workstation base_services_start openQA test is passing, so this is clearly fixed at least as far as that consequence goes
17:17:17 <adamw> we'll need to check if the virt thing is fixed too
17:18:20 <adamw> #action adamw and/or cmurf to check the VM launch case here is fixed before closing bug
17:18:37 <adamw> #topic (1857043) FreeIPA server deployment fails in Fedora-Rawhide-20200714.n.0 due to pki-tomcat failing to run with "java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: org.apache.tomcat.util.modeler.modules.MbeansDescriptorsIntrospectionSource"
17:18:37 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1857043
17:18:37 <adamw> #info Accepted Blocker, tomcat, MODIFIED
17:18:51 <adamw> #info FreeIPA server deployment tests are passing on current composes, so we can close this
17:19:04 <michel_slm> ack
17:19:08 <bcotton> hooray
17:19:26 <adamw> #info bug now closed
17:19:31 <michel_slm> 🎊
17:19:36 <adamw> #topic Open floor
17:19:42 <adamw> and that's everything on the lists!
17:19:48 <adamw> any other business, folks? issues not addressed, etc?
17:21:04 <frantisekz> thanks adamw and the rest for the meeting, see you next monday!
17:21:22 <michel_slm> thanks everyone!
17:21:28 <adamw> yep, thanks everyone for coming!
17:21:30 <lruzicka> thank you, take care
17:21:34 <cmurf> cya!
17:24:02 <adamw> #endmeeting