16:00:43 <adamw> #startmeeting F36-blocker-review 16:00:43 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon May 2 16:00:43 2022 UTC. 16:00:43 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 16:00:43 <zodbot> The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions. 16:00:43 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:43 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f36-blocker-review' 16:00:47 <adamw> #meetingname F36-blocker-review 16:00:47 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f36-blocker-review' 16:00:50 <adamw> #topic Roll Call 16:01:09 <CRCinAU> Morning. 16:01:13 <lruzicka> .hello2 16:01:14 <zodbot> lruzicka: Something blew up, please try again 16:01:17 <zodbot> lruzicka: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:01:23 <lruzicka> .hello2 16:01:24 <zodbot> lruzicka: Something blew up, please try again 16:01:27 <zodbot> lruzicka: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:01:37 * lruzicka is here 16:02:10 <adamw> ahoyhoy, who's around for blocker review fun? 16:02:36 <CRCinAU> yup yup - at 2am cos I dropped a doozy on you guys hahaha 16:02:48 <OnuralpSezer[m]> .hello thunderbirdtr 16:02:49 <zodbot> OnuralpSezer[m]: Something blew up, please try again 16:02:52 <zodbot> OnuralpSezer[m]: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:03:04 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Good evening 16:03:11 <bcotton> .hello2 16:03:12 <zodbot> bcotton: Something blew up, please try again 16:03:15 <zodbot> bcotton: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:03:41 <geraldosimiao> .hello geraldosimiao 16:03:42 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: Something blew up, please try again 16:03:45 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:03:50 <CRCinAU> everyone is doing a .hello2 and making the bot blow up - and I'm too scared to ask why..... 16:04:14 <geraldosimiao> Zodbot neeeds QA 16:04:22 <davdunc> .hello davdunc 16:04:23 <zodbot> davdunc: Something blew up, please try again 16:04:26 <zodbot> davdunc: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:04:45 <CRCinAU> when in Rome..... 16:04:49 <CRCinAU> .hello crcinau 16:04:50 <zodbot> CRCinAU: Something blew up, please try again 16:04:53 <zodbot> CRCinAU: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:04:58 <adamw> i think lukas doesn't really exist 16:05:05 <adamw> zodbot is sending us a message from outside the matrix 16:05:30 <lruzicka> it seems that nobody exists 16:05:31 <OnuralpSezer[m]> geraldosimiao: We need blocker for zodbot :) 16:05:42 <lruzicka> zodbot -- 16:05:53 <geraldosimiao> +1 on that 16:06:32 <geraldosimiao> .hello geraldosimiao 16:06:33 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: Something blew up, please try again 16:06:36 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: An error has occurred and has been logged. Please contact this bot's administrator for more information. 16:09:07 <nirik> zodbot: reload Fedora 16:09:07 <zodbot> nirik: Kneel before zod! 16:09:07 <adamw> CRCinAU: we're bullying the bot 16:09:07 <adamw> it's good for stress relief 16:09:07 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Oh my :)) 16:09:07 <CRCinAU> normally that's a good job for misc spirits on ice... 16:09:16 <nirik> now you can all say hello 16:09:27 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Ben Cotton (he/him): did you made PTO entry for zodbot recently 🤔 in your calendar 📅? 16:09:34 <CRCinAU> .hello crcinau 16:09:35 <zodbot> CRCinAU: crcinau 'Steven Haigh' <netwiz@crc.id.au> 16:09:39 <CRCinAU> eyyyyy 16:09:57 <Southern_Gentlem> .hellojbwillia 16:10:00 <OnuralpSezer[m]> .hello thunderbirdtr 16:10:01 <zodbot> OnuralpSezer[m]: thunderbirdtr 'Onuralp SEZER' <thunderbirdtr@gmail.com> 16:10:01 <Southern_Gentlem> .hello jbwillia 16:10:04 <zodbot> Southern_Gentlem: jbwillia 'Ben Williams' <vaioof@gmail.com> 16:10:06 <adamw> alrighty, looks like we can get the party started 16:10:07 <davdunc> .hello davdunc 16:10:08 <zodbot> davdunc: davdunc 'David Duncan' <davdunc@amazon.com> 16:10:13 <jednorozec> .hello humaton 16:10:14 <zodbot> jednorozec: humaton 'Tomáš Hrčka' <thrcka@redhat.com> 16:10:14 <lruzicka> .hello lruzicka 16:10:17 <zodbot> lruzicka: lruzicka 'Lukáš Růžička' <lruzicka@redhat.com> 16:10:20 <adamw> #chair lruzicka bcotton 16:10:20 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw bcotton lruzicka 16:10:42 <adamw> (if anyone wonders why i tend to keep making the same people chairs, it's because i can't see irc nicks any more so i just pick ones i'm pretty sure i know :>) 16:10:58 <adamw> impending boilerplate alert! 16:11:04 <adamw> #topic Introduction 16:11:08 <adamw> Why are we here? 16:11:12 <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. 16:11:15 <adamw> #info We'll be following the process outlined at: 16:11:18 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting 16:11:27 <adamw> #info The bugs up for review today are available at: 16:11:28 <adamw> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current 16:11:29 <adamw> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at: 16:11:31 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria 16:11:34 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Beta_Release_Criteria 16:11:38 <adamw> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_36_Final_Release_Criteria 16:11:48 <adamw> #info for Final, we have: 16:11:54 <adamw> #info 3 Proposed Blockers 16:11:54 <adamw> #info 5 Accepted Blockers 16:12:01 <geraldosimiao> .hello geraldosimiao 16:12:02 <adamw> #info 3 Proposed Freeze Exceptions 16:12:02 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: geraldosimiao 'Geraldo S. Simião Kutz' <geraldo.simiao.kutz@gmail.com> 16:12:02 <adamw> #info 21 Accepted Freeze Exceptions 16:12:10 <adamw> coremodule: are you around to secretarialize? 16:13:42 <adamw> if not, anyone else want to do it? 16:13:46 <adamw> (or else I will) 16:13:58 <bcotton> i can do it, but it probably won't be until ~4pm ET 16:15:10 <adamw> i'll do it, then 16:15:18 <adamw> #info adamw will secretarialize 16:15:21 <adamw> let's start with: 16:15:24 <adamw> #topic Proposed Beta blockers 16:15:27 <adamw> er 16:15:28 <adamw> #undo 16:15:28 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x7fccae3305f8> 16:15:37 <adamw> #topic Proposed Final blockers 16:15:38 <adamw> that's the bunny. 16:15:57 <adamw> #topic (2079274) Contact deletion is unreliable 16:15:58 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079274 16:15:59 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/783 16:16:03 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-contacts, NEW 16:16:06 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,3,-3) (+bcotton, +asciiwolf, +nixuser, kparal, lruzicka, retiredlake9230, -geraldosimiao, -catanzaro, -nielsenb) 16:16:24 <adamw> so, we appear to have a bit of a tie, here. 16:17:07 <Southern_Gentlem> anything new with this 16:17:22 <adamw> there's a lot of discussion and mind-changing going on in the ticket 16:17:23 <adamw> not much in the bug report 16:17:38 <CRCinAU> Can we assume a common scenario - that a user wouldn't really use this on the live ISO - but after things have been installed? 16:17:56 <CRCinAU> ie I don't know anyone who would use the calendar app on a live ISO 16:18:12 <adamw> CRCinAU: for deciding whether it's a blocker, we kiiiiinda aren't supposed to do that because the criteria doesn't really give that kind of wiggle room 16:18:18 <adamw> if we accepted it as a blocker and were deciding whether to waive it, we could take that into account 16:18:52 <CRCinAU> gotcha. I was more thinking that if it'd be understood that people would normally use the calendar after an install, then it could be fixed in an update. 16:19:15 <adamw> this is contacts, not calendar 16:19:17 <Southern_Gentlem> CRCinAU, not calendar 16:19:19 <adamw> (but same point applies) 16:19:38 <adamw> i guess i'm kinda -1 on this because of the "it does work, it's just delayed" thing 16:19:39 <adamw> it's a dumb bug, sure. 16:19:40 <CRCinAU> dammit, you're right - and it appears at 2:20am I can't read ;D 16:19:42 <bcotton> i'll switch to 0 (from +1). i'm not super convinced that the "it's supposed to work this way" reasoning matters to actual users, but i can accept the argument enough in the interests of shipping the release and letting an update fix it (assuming upstream wants to fix it) 16:19:59 <Southern_Gentlem> -1 FB cant reproduce 16:20:29 <frantisekz> .hello2 16:20:30 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com> 16:21:05 <adamw> Ben Cotton (he/him): i agree it's probably not supposed to work that way, but the fact that deletion *does* work after a delay makes it not completely awful for me. 16:21:10 <frantisekz> FB -1 16:21:26 <lruzicka> I am -1 FB here. These are the kind of bugs we have already discarded for other apps. 16:22:30 <jednorozec> FB -1, it states Deleting contact so I assume it will be deleted 16:22:37 <jednorozec> with delay 16:22:43 <adamw> ok, let's do some counting 16:22:47 <coremodule> hey, sorry I'm late, my wife had a doctors appointment and we just got home. adamw, I'll secretarialize for you 16:22:48 <adamw> bcotton changes to 0, so we're at +2 16:23:17 <adamw> new -1s are me, gentleman, frantisekz, jednorozec 16:23:24 <adamw> so we're at +2/-7, which is enough to call it 16:23:30 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FB 16:23:30 <adamw> coremodule: roger! hope your wife's ok 16:23:48 <adamw> #info in a late substitution, coremodule will take over secretarialization 16:24:18 <bcotton> pinch hitting for Pedro adamw, Manny coremodule module module module 16:24:37 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2079274 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as deletion does work after a delay, and the notification's grammar does technically convey this, we decided this doesn't quite meet the bar of a "basic functionality" failure 16:24:47 <lruzicka> ack 16:24:53 <Southern_Gentlem> ack 16:24:57 <coremodule> ack 16:25:02 <jednorozec> ack 16:25:12 <bcotton> ack 16:25:15 <CRCinAU> ack 16:25:26 <adamw> #agreed 2079274 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as deletion does work after a delay, and the notification's grammar does technically convey this, we decided this doesn't quite meet the bar of a "basic functionality" failure 16:25:30 <adamw> #topic (2080720) CPU Fan speeds going very fast at random 16:25:34 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080720 16:25:38 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/799 16:25:42 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, kernel, NEW 16:25:46 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,1,-3) (geraldosimiao, -kparal, -augenauf, -bcotton) 16:25:49 <adamw> so this seems, uh....vague 16:26:08 <Southern_Gentlem> -1 fb 16:26:09 <adamw> i was slightly troubled by the suggestion that the author had talked to other people who also have suspend/resume issues, though. anyone seen any discussions like that? 16:26:13 <adamw> i don't hang out in #fedora much these days 16:26:30 <Southern_Gentlem> not that i have seen 16:26:47 <CRCinAU> I'd kinda like to know more info - but that being said, there's nothing to work with in even evaluating this imho.... 16:26:50 <Eighth_Doctor> I have the issue on my laptop 16:26:54 <Eighth_Doctor> but I have no idea what's causing it 16:27:03 <Eighth_Doctor> and it's also causing battery drain to go much faster than F35 16:27:17 <jednorozec> nothing like that on my desktop 16:27:22 <Eighth_Doctor> but I don't think we can block on it 16:27:30 <NishantMishra[m]> Same issue with me 16:27:34 <NishantMishra[m]> On my Laptop 16:27:35 <Eighth_Doctor> simply because of how difficult it would be to pin down 16:27:43 <CRCinAU> Eighth_Doctor: does that happen to be a Ryzen something based laptop/ 16:27:45 <lruzicka> adamw, I have been seeing a sleep problem on my computer -> sometimes, when the computer switches off screen after some time of inactivity, it does not wake automatically. You have to switch to tty and back. 16:27:46 <CRCinAU> ? 16:27:55 <Eighth_Doctor> CRCinAU: no, Intel 10th gen 16:28:01 <NishantMishra[m]> CRCinAU: Yes sir 16:28:03 <Eighth_Doctor> Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon Extreme Gen 2 16:28:06 <NishantMishra[m]> Ryzen user here 16:28:08 <lruzicka> however, I am not seeing any fan problems. 16:28:24 <adamw> lruzicka: yeah, that sounds different 16:28:25 <NishantMishra[m]> CRCinAU: I am a Ryzen User 16:28:30 <NishantMishra[m]> I can confirm that 16:28:45 <CRCinAU> mixed bunch of responses - but as far as the bug report, I'm not sure that we can block on something so vague we can't even determine the scope of a problem :| 16:28:48 <adamw> we've already accepted the ryzen proposed blocker (by ticket vote) 16:28:57 <NishantMishra[m]> Okay 16:29:15 <NishantMishra[m]> I will test and let you know once again 16:29:24 <igarcia1089> Lenovo thinkpad p14 amd 2gen, no issues with fan speed. 16:29:25 <Eighth_Doctor> I think this is probably not blockery enough 16:29:32 <CRCinAU> yeah - for those with ryzen laptop issues (not desktop), feedback on if installing kernel 5.17.5 from testing (I think) would fix it might help..... 16:29:41 <Eighth_Doctor> simply because we don't have enough info 16:29:48 <NishantMishra[m]> I was on that kernel 16:29:52 <NishantMishra[m]> It worked fine 16:29:59 <Southern_Gentlem> can we get back on topic 16:30:12 <adamw> Southern_Gentlem: sorry, my fault, i made the topic a bit vague :) 16:30:17 <CRCinAU> yeah, I don't want to turn the meeting into a support session and derail it ;) 16:30:32 <adamw> as this bug currently stands, i'm -1. too vague, not enough actionable detail, there are always individual issues with this system or that system for any release 16:30:49 <lruzicka> agreed 16:30:58 <OnuralpSezer[m]> -1 16:30:58 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FB 16:30:59 <jednorozec> yeah not enough info -1 16:31:08 <NishantMishra[m]> -1 not enough info 16:31:11 <lruzicka> -1 FB 16:31:24 <frantisekz> -1 FB 16:32:11 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2080720 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as currently described this is too vague and does not demonstrate any kind of impact on any broader class of hardware than just "this reporter's system" 16:32:17 <Southern_Gentlem> ack 16:32:20 <jednorozec> ack 16:32:20 <CRCinAU> -1 FB 16:32:25 <CRCinAU> ack 16:32:27 <OnuralpSezer[m]> Ack 16:32:37 <frantisekz> ack 16:32:58 <adamw> #agreed 2080720 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as currently described this is too vague and does not demonstrate any kind of impact on any broader class of hardware than just "this reporter's system" 16:33:04 <adamw> #topic (2080938) CVE-2022-1271 16:33:08 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2080938 16:33:12 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/800 16:33:15 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, xz, ON_QA 16:33:18 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,1,-1) (+chrismurphy, +bcotton, +imsedgar, kparal, -adamwill) 16:33:21 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+2,0,-0) (+kparal, +adamwill) 16:33:46 <adamw> so my contention here is, we didn't take https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073312 as a blocker, and this is the same thing in xz (aiui) 16:35:18 <Southern_Gentlem> so do we have a fix for this already +1FB 16:35:32 <adamw> same reason applies: the criterion stipulates issues "which cannot be satisfactorily resolved by a package update (e.g. issues during installation)" - someone being convinced to do a malicious xzgrep from a live boot that's able to target valuable data feels like a pretty tricky scenario to me 16:36:09 <frantisekz> yeah, -1 FB, +1 FE then :) 16:36:09 <bcotton> i like the creative interpretation :-) 16:36:19 <lruzicka> -1 FB, +1 FE 16:36:20 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FB, +1 FE 16:36:25 <CRCinAU> Pretend I'm dumb..... A Freeze Exception is basically a day 1 update, right? 16:36:28 <OnuralpSezer[m]> +1 FE 16:36:35 <lruzicka> I do not think someone is going to be that creative. 16:36:36 <Southern_Gentlem> so do we have a fix for this already -1 FB +1 FE 16:36:38 <Eighth_Doctor> CRCinAU: no, it's released before GA freeze of the repos 16:36:52 <jednorozec> +1 FE -1FB 16:36:58 <Eighth_Doctor> so that means we make a compose with it included 16:36:58 <bcotton> since there's a build available, it seems somewhat academic, but i'll remain +1 (which I think I would be to the other one had I voted). i won't fight for it, though 16:36:59 <adamw> CRCinAU: no, we need a new RC 16:37:00 <geraldosimiao> -1 FB 16:37:00 <geraldosimiao> +1 FE 16:37:07 <frantisekz> It'll probably have the same outcome as if it was a blocker CRCinAU 16:37:08 <adamw> anything we accept as an FE today that doesn't feel too scary is going into it 16:37:12 <lruzicka> CRCinAU, no, FE can be included before the release but cannot stop release if not included 16:37:12 <CRCinAU> ok. 16:37:45 <CRCinAU> in that case, I'd agree.... -1 FB +1 FE 16:37:58 <Southern_Gentlem> if someone has physical access the machine is hosed period 16:38:31 <adamw> Southern_Gentlem: aiui this bug isn't about physical access, the trick is to get someone to run a maliciously-crafted zgrep or xzgrep command 16:39:42 <Eighth_Doctor> which is possible in rescue scenarios 16:40:06 <Eighth_Doctor> convoluted and contrived, but possible 16:40:21 <adamw> anyhoo 16:40:27 <adamw> we're at -7/+3 by my count now 16:40:29 <adamw> so 16:41:35 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2080938 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - as with the same bug in gzip (2073312) which was rejected as a blocker, this is rejected on the basis we feel it can be satisfactorily resolved with an update; the issue is not likely to be encountered during installation or typical use of a live image 16:41:51 <lruzicka> ack 16:41:53 <bcotton> ack 16:41:56 <coremodule> ack 16:41:56 <CRCinAU> ack 16:41:58 <jednorozec> ack 16:42:00 <bcotton> wait 16:42:02 <bcotton> patch 16:42:02 <frantisekz> ack 16:42:12 <lruzicka> I like how adamw words it. Would not be able to do it myself :D 16:42:35 <adamw> Ben Cotton (he/him): patch away 16:42:43 <frantisekz> maybe add AcceptedFE there adamw? 16:42:47 <bcotton> s/RejectedBlocker (Final)/RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final)/ 16:42:54 <frantisekz> heh :D 16:43:03 <adamw> oh yes, thanks 16:43:44 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2080938 - RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - as with the same bug in gzip (2073312) which was rejected as a blocker, this is rejected as it can be satisfactorily resolved with an update; the issue is not likely to be encountered during installation or typical use of a live image 16:43:53 <bcotton> ack f'real 16:44:03 <lruzicka> rack 16:44:15 <geraldosimiao> Ack 16:44:40 <frantisekz> ack 16:45:01 <jednorozec> ack 16:45:08 <adamw> #agreed 2080938 - RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - as with the same bug in gzip (2073312) which was rejected as a blocker, this is rejected as it can be satisfactorily resolved with an update; the issue is not likely to be encountered during installation or typical use of a live image 16:45:26 <adamw> OK, on to the one remaining: 16:45:31 <adamw> #topic Proposed Final Freeze Exception 16:45:39 <adamw> #topic (2079330) "Set As Wallpaper" only sets wallpaper for GNOME light theme and not dark theme 16:45:43 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079330 16:45:45 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/797 16:45:48 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, nautilus, VERIFIED 16:45:52 <adamw> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+2,0,-1) (+asciiwolf, +nielsenb, -kparal) 16:46:23 <bcotton> i'd like answers to kparal's questions before i vote 16:46:28 <bcotton> https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/797#comment-795172 16:46:42 <frantisekz> heh, new gnome 16:46:46 <frantisekz> let's get it in! :D 16:46:57 <bcotton> what could possibly go right?! 16:47:08 <CRCinAU> bcotton: apparently changing the wallpaper? 16:47:37 <bcotton> CRCinAU: you're very clever at nearly 3am :-) 16:48:02 <CRCinAU> don't let my sarcasm fool you ;) 16:48:10 * Eighth_Doctor shrugs 16:48:10 <adamw> yeah, I'm with kparal on this one. seems safer to fix it with an update. 16:48:11 <adamw> -1 16:48:11 <Eighth_Doctor> nobody changes wallpapers, rite :P 16:48:23 <lruzicka> I agree with kparal. Let's not take 23 builds into at this point. 16:48:24 <adamw> Conan Kudo: i dunno if anyone changes wallpapers like *this* 16:48:28 <lruzicka> -1 FE 16:48:40 <bcotton> -1 FE 16:48:45 <Eighth_Doctor> -1 FE 16:48:49 <Eighth_Doctor> +1 0Day 16:48:49 <jednorozec> -1 FE 16:48:54 <frantisekz> -1 FE 16:48:57 <adamw> Conan Kudo: that's not what 0day is. 16:49:00 <CRCinAU> how many years using Fedora - and I didn't know you could set a wallpaper like that...... *hangs head in shame* 16:49:15 <bcotton> there's a verified fix, so in theory people will update right away and it won't matter, but maybe we should commonbugs it for good measure? 16:49:35 <Eighth_Doctor> adamw: it's not going to be a stable update once the locks are released? 16:49:39 <Eighth_Doctor> sure looks like it will 16:49:44 <geraldosimiao> - FE 16:49:57 <geraldosimiao> * -1 FE 16:50:00 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2079330 - RejectedFreezeException (Final) - this seems like a small enough issue that it's better to fix it as an update, especially since the current submitted update is a large one that includes many other packages 16:50:16 <geraldosimiao> ack 16:50:16 <adamw> Conan Kudo: "+1 0Day" means you're voting for it to be a 0Day blocker. 16:50:25 <Eighth_Doctor> oh 16:50:25 <Eighth_Doctor> meh 16:50:31 <Eighth_Doctor> that's not what I mean 16:50:32 <bcotton> ack 16:50:33 <jednorozec> ack 16:50:35 <Eighth_Doctor> ack 16:50:55 <adamw> #agreed 2079330 - RejectedFreezeException (Final) - this seems like a small enough issue that it's better to fix it as an update, especially since the current submitted update is a large one that includes many other packages 16:51:25 <adamw> #topic Accepted Final Blockers 16:51:52 <adamw> so, here's a general survey: we do not have fixes for the gnome-photos bugs. I am gonna go ahead and assume we're likely to waive those at go/no-go. 16:52:19 <lruzicka> ok 16:52:22 <adamw> so my plan for now is to try and review the wpa_supplicant fix as best I can, do a build of that, then request an RC with that plus kernel 5.17.5 plus whatever FEs look sane 16:52:26 <Eighth_Doctor> yup 16:52:32 <adamw> and assume we will ship that unless anything new emerges 16:52:37 <Eighth_Doctor> makes sense to me 16:52:40 <adamw> does anyone see any issues there? did i miss anything? 16:52:47 <bcotton> i approve this message 16:52:56 <geraldosimiao> that plan looks good 16:53:43 <geraldosimiao> adamw: must remove kpral and Inie from the scene... 16:53:59 <geraldosimiao> 😂😂 16:54:55 <jednorozec> good plan 16:55:02 <CRCinAU> adamw: so on that, it looks like F35 just got kernel 5.17.5 from testing -> stable here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-916eaaeb7b 16:55:03 <adamw> #info gnome-photos blockers are not fixed and we are expecting them to be waived at go/no-go. fixes are in progress for 2080694 and 2072070 and a new RC with those fixes will be requested later today 16:55:12 <lruzicka> sound like a Plan 16:55:41 <CRCinAU> adamw: So if 5.17.5 on F36 gets the same here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d37373c604 16:56:11 <adamw> #topic Open floor 16:56:12 <CRCinAU> then just a build with that on should fix the one for #2080694 16:56:16 <adamw> any other business, folks? 16:56:18 <geraldosimiao> adamw: and with 2056303? 16:56:30 <adamw> CRCinAU: yes, I know, thanks 16:56:38 <frantisekz> adamw: I am thinking, it might be good idea to backport https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/merge_requests/2359 ? 16:56:48 <CRCinAU> adamw: sorry, I got the email about 10 minutes ago for F35 hahaha 16:56:53 <adamw> geraldosimiao: that one is basically addressed already, but still open for us to track the updates going into f34 and f35 and whether there are still identifiable problems 16:57:23 <geraldosimiao> ok, good to know :) 16:57:29 <frantisekz> shall I create FE for that? (I didn't test it, just randomly noticed) 16:57:44 <adamw> frantisekz: hmm, yes, that seems reasonable 16:58:54 <bcotton> preemptive +1 FE for that 16:59:08 <geraldosimiao> yeah, +1 FE here too 16:59:59 <lruzicka> +1 FE 17:00:12 <geraldosimiao> New RC by tomorrow? 17:00:23 <adamw> by this evening my time, i hope 17:00:28 <adamw> say 10-12 hours 17:00:33 <CRCinAU> nice :) 17:00:42 <geraldosimiao> ok 17:01:04 <geraldosimiao> so I'll wait for it to do relval 17:01:05 <CRCinAU> Oh, as a random topic, I noticed earlier in the F36 release timeline, there was kernel 5.18.x? Was that just not going to be ready in time? 17:01:27 <frantisekz> proposed as a FE: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2081070 17:02:03 <geraldosimiao> CRCinAU: just rc5 kernel, not a validone for release 17:02:11 <geraldosimiao> > <@CRCinAU:libera.chat> Oh, as a random topic, I noticed earlier in the F36 release timeline, there was kernel 5.18.x? Was that just not going to be ready in time? 17:02:11 <geraldosimiao> * just rc5 kernel, not a valid one for release 17:02:30 <CRCinAU> gotcha. 17:02:58 <adamw> let's do a quick vote, then 17:03:07 <geraldosimiao> right 17:03:28 <adamw> #topic (2081070) Backport fix for G42 radeon crash 17:03:28 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2081070 17:03:44 <geraldosimiao> +1 FE 17:03:46 <frantisekz> +1 FE (obviously :P) 17:03:48 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, mutter, NEW 17:03:58 <adamw> +1 FE from me, with confirmation from desktop team if possible 17:03:59 <lruzicka> +1FE 17:04:12 <bcotton> +1 fe 17:04:14 <adamw> i'll have to check if we have any wrinkles with a mutter build already being in testing or anything, but i'll deal with that if so 17:05:20 <adamw> proposed #agreed 2081070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this will prevent Workstation booting correctly on legacy Radeon adapters and thus is definitely worth an FE. We note Ubuntu's experience that it has been reported multiple times for their new release 17:05:32 <frantisekz> ack 17:05:38 <geraldosimiao> ack 17:06:11 <Eighth_Doctor> ack 17:06:17 <bcotton> ack 17:06:50 <adamw> #agreed 2081070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this will prevent Workstation booting correctly on legacy Radeon adapters and thus is definitely worth an FE. We note Ubuntu's experience that it has been reported multiple times for their new release 17:06:54 <adamw> thanks for catching that, frantisekz 17:07:00 <adamw> #topic Open floor 17:07:05 <adamw> back to open floor! any other last minute heroes? 17:07:16 <geraldosimiao> any news on that Prioritized Bug? 17:07:18 <frantisekz> np :) , will you have cycles to do the build once guys at #workstation give it a go ahead? 17:08:35 <bcotton> geraldosimiao: just the latest update in the BZ that a signed build is expected in about a month 17:08:50 <geraldosimiao> ok 17:09:13 <geraldosimiao> and that isn't a blocker. Or is it? 17:09:22 <bcotton> no. it's a prioritized bug. different process 17:09:28 <geraldosimiao> ok 17:09:31 <adamw> frantisekz: yeah, that won't be a problem 17:09:34 <geraldosimiao> fine :D 17:09:37 <frantisekz> ty :) 17:14:47 <adamw> ok, thanks everyone, i guess we're done 17:15:25 <lruzicka> ok, have a nice time everyone 17:15:44 <geraldosimiao> alright 17:15:57 <geraldosimiao> se you all latter 17:15:59 <geraldosimiao> by 17:16:55 <adamw> #endmeeting