16:00:12 <coremodule> #startmeeting F37-blocker-review
16:00:12 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Oct  3 16:00:12 2022 UTC.
16:00:12 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
16:00:12 <zodbot> The chair is coremodule. Information about MeetBot at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Zodbot#Meeting_Functions.
16:00:12 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f37-blocker-review'
16:00:12 <coremodule> #meetingname F37-blocker-review
16:00:12 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f37-blocker-review'
16:00:12 <coremodule> #topic Roll Call
16:00:20 <coremodule> Good morning everyone, who is around today?
16:01:20 <Penguinpee> .hello gui1ty
16:01:21 <zodbot> Penguinpee: gui1ty 'Sandro .' <gui1ty@penguinpee.nl>
16:01:58 <Penguinpee> Morning. 🥱
16:02:34 <geraldosimiao> .hello geraldosimiao
16:02:35 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: geraldosimiao 'Geraldo S. Simião Kutz' <geraldo.simiao.kutz@gmail.com>
16:04:46 <bcotton> .hello2
16:04:46 <lruzicka> .hello2
16:04:47 <zodbot> bcotton: bcotton 'Ben Cotton' <bcotton@redhat.com>
16:04:50 <zodbot> lruzicka: lruzicka 'Lukáš Růžička' <lruzicka@redhat.com>
16:05:46 * kparal lurks
16:06:08 <Penguinpee> 👀
16:07:05 <coremodule> #chair bcotton lruzicka
16:07:05 <zodbot> Current chairs: bcotton coremodule lruzicka
16:07:19 <coremodule> We'll see if frantisekz joins, he said he'd act as secretary for this meeting
16:07:41 <coremodule> #topic Introduction
16:07:41 <coremodule> Why are we here?
16:07:42 <coremodule> #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.
16:07:42 <coremodule> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
16:07:42 <coremodule> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
16:07:43 <coremodule> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
16:07:45 <coremodule> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
16:07:47 <coremodule> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
16:07:49 <coremodule> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria
16:07:51 <coremodule> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Beta_Release_Criteria
16:07:53 <coremodule> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_37_Final_Release_Criteria
16:07:57 <coremodule> #info Proposed Final Blockers
16:08:07 <coremodule> #topic (2131183) Installer Crashes When Attempting to Reclaim Space
16:08:07 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131183
16:08:07 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/938
16:08:07 <coremodule> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, POST
16:08:07 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+4,0,-0) (+mattdm, +kparal, +gui1ty, +geraldosimiao)
16:08:09 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao)
16:08:32 <frantisekz> .hello2
16:08:33 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com>
16:08:50 <coremodule> hello frantisekz!
16:09:03 <coremodule> are you still willing to act as secretary today?
16:09:04 <frantisekz> sorry for the delay, had the party started already?
16:09:06 <frantisekz> yep
16:09:16 <coremodule> #info frantisekz to secretarialize.
16:09:40 <lruzicka> frantisekz++
16:09:40 <zodbot> lruzicka: Karma for frantisekz changed to 1 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
16:09:52 <bcotton> +1 blocker
16:09:56 <frantisekz> :D
16:10:10 <Penguinpee> frantisekz: the party doesn't stop until after release party
16:10:29 <frantisekz> amazing, lemme tell that home... :D
16:11:51 <Penguinpee> It seems there's an upstream PR fixing this.
16:12:11 <coremodule> bugzilla is not loading for me...
16:12:57 <Penguinpee> no problems here
16:13:12 <geraldosimiao> Penguinpee: Yes
16:15:12 <frantisekz> what bug are we talking about now?
16:15:13 <coremodule> there it goes.
16:15:26 <coremodule> trying to find an appropriate criterion
16:15:27 <bcotton> frantisekz: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131183
16:15:29 <frantisekz> ty
16:16:19 <frantisekz> the linked fix looks trivial
16:16:51 <Penguinpee> frantisekz: I think you missed the intro: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/37/final/buglist
16:17:19 <frantisekz> yeah, np, thanks Penguinpee, know that from memory :)
16:17:26 <frantisekz> the reproducer "hittable", +1 blocker
16:18:58 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2131183 -  AcceptedBlocker (Final) - Accepted as a violation of the following final criterion: Any installer mechanism for resizing storage volumes must correctly attempt the requested operation.
16:19:10 <lruzicka> ack
16:19:12 <bcotton> ack
16:19:13 <frantisekz> ack
16:19:14 <Penguinpee> ack
16:19:25 <coremodule> #agreed 2131183 -  AcceptedBlocker (Final) - Accepted as a violation of the following final criterion: Any installer mechanism for resizing storage volumes must correctly attempt the requested operation.
16:19:25 <geraldosimiao> Ack
16:19:52 <coremodule> #topic (2131243) [abrt] gnome-calendar: gcal_event_widget_clone(): gnome-calendar killed by SIGSEGV
16:19:52 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131243
16:19:52 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/939
16:19:52 <coremodule> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-calendar, NEW
16:19:53 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-gui1ty)
16:21:43 <Southern_Gentlem> +1 FE -1FB
16:22:20 <lruzicka> The bug does not say it explicitely, but I suspect, that this is connected with Gnome Calendar somehow.
16:22:59 <Southern_Gentlem> appears to happen when it hits a huge calendar, which whom knows the size or format
16:23:03 <bcotton> hm. it'd be nice to know how reproducible this is
16:23:17 <frantisekz> lruzicka, #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-calendar, NEW
16:23:20 <bcotton> or, most correctly, how widespread
16:23:50 <Southern_Gentlem> bcotton thats why i think its a race condition and say +FE
16:24:10 <bcotton> i think i lean -1 just because it seems to be pretty narrow. on the other hand, we have 3 gnome-calendar blockers already. what's one more? :-(
16:24:25 <geraldosimiao> Yeah, I'm not so sure it qualify as blocker
16:24:25 <geraldosimiao> FE +1
16:24:31 <coremodule> I am also -1 blocker based on the information available
16:24:35 <Penguinpee> Maybe try it with a full Fedora calendar? But it looks like frequent updates play a part in it as well.
16:25:05 <Penguinpee> FinalFE +1
16:25:06 <frantisekz> I have bunch of calendars/events there, without any crashing
16:25:16 <frantisekz> FB -1, FE +1
16:26:42 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2131243 -  RejectedBlocker (Final ) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - We don't see a widespread issue with this bug and efforts by frantisekz to reproduce it were not fruitful. We accept it as an FE in case a fix is released.
16:26:52 <frantisekz> ack
16:27:45 <bcotton> ack
16:28:43 <Penguinpee> ack
16:29:12 <coremodule> #agreed 2131243 -  RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - We don't see a widespread issue with this bug and efforts by frantisekz to reproduce it were not fruitful. We accept it as an FE in case a fix is released.
16:29:25 <coremodule> #topic (2130661) Link Contacts feature completely broken
16:29:25 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130661
16:29:25 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/926
16:29:25 <coremodule> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-contacts, NEW
16:29:25 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+4,2,-1) (+bcotton, +lruzicka, +catanzaro, +gui1ty, geraldosimiao, kparal, -mattdm)
16:30:11 <geraldosimiao> coremodule: ack
16:31:06 <bcotton> Given catanzaro's vote, I'm inclined to keep my +1
16:31:32 <coremodule> love the reference Penguinpee
16:31:33 <coremodule> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=er8g6D_PqvY
16:31:58 <bcotton> gui1ty++
16:31:58 <zodbot> bcotton: Karma for gui1ty changed to 1 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
16:32:27 <Penguinpee> coremodule: the image appeared instantly in my mind...
16:32:41 <frantisekz> FB -1 from me here
16:32:57 <Penguinpee> I've been using the phrase ever since.
16:34:28 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2130661 -  AcceptedBlocker (Final) - Accepted as a violation of the following blocker criterion: For Fedora Workstation on the x86_64 architecture, all applications installed by default which can be launched from the Activities menu must meet... basic functionality requirement. Basic functionality means that the app must at least be broadly capable of its most basic expected operations, and that it must not
16:34:28 <coremodule> crash without user intervention or with only basic user intervention.
16:34:30 <mattdm> My point is this isn't like that at all -- if the thing crashed when you open it, yeah. But this... eh. I don't love it, but let's not penalize Fedora for upstream not catching it.
16:34:35 * Penguinpee needs to fix badges or miss out on cookies
16:34:59 <bcotton> patch
16:35:09 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2130661 -  AcceptedBlocker (Final) - Accepted as a violation of the following blocker criterion: For Fedora Workstation on the x86_64 architecture, all applications installed by default which can be launched from the Activities menu must meet ...basic functionality... requirement.
16:35:16 <bcotton> ack
16:35:21 <Penguinpee> ack
16:35:22 <lruzicka> ack
16:35:28 <frantisekz> ack
16:35:36 <geraldosimiao> ack
16:35:40 <coremodule> mattdm, do you want to hash it out some more here before we accept it?
16:35:49 <mattdm> no i'm fine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwfaCpWe0zY
16:36:30 <coremodule> lol perfect
16:36:35 <geraldosimiao> mattdm: yeah, there's a few upstream bugs affecting fedora the couple last releases.
16:36:49 <Penguinpee> mattdm: my age shows...
16:36:58 <coremodule> I love the contrast between ancient/modern tech, both with the same message on a Monday morning
16:37:18 <bcotton> leaving it in penalizes Fedora more than delaying the release to fix it, imo
16:37:26 <geraldosimiao> coremodule: +1
16:37:43 <bcotton> because users/reviewers are going to blame us, not upstream
16:38:08 <Penguinpee> bcotton++
16:38:17 <AllanDay[m]> we can always choose to take apps out
16:38:17 <geraldosimiao> bcotton: you got a point, yes
16:38:46 <mattdm> I'm not so sure they will, w.r.t things deep in applications. They might complain about GNOME or Linux in general, though. But I really don't want to derail this meeting. I will bring the "hey, maybe you could invest more in this qa thing upstream" thing to the GNOME Advisory Board.
16:39:12 <coremodule> mattdm, that is a great idea
16:39:41 <coremodule> #agreed 2130661 -  AcceptedBlocker (Final) - Accepted as a violation of the following blocker criterion: For Fedora Workstation on the x86_64 architecture, all applications installed by default which can be launched from the Activities menu must meet ...basic functionality... requirement.
16:40:15 <coremodule> #topic (2130927) Favorited photos from albums are shown as favorited only after app restart or second attempt
16:40:16 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130927
16:40:16 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/930
16:40:16 <coremodule> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-photos, NEW
16:40:16 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+2,1,-4) (+catanzaro, +augenauf, kparal, -bcotton, -lruzicka, -geraldosimiao, -gui1ty)
16:40:18 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+4,0,-0) (+lruzicka, +geraldosimiao, +augenauf, +gui1ty)
16:41:36 <bcotton> I'm going to disagree with catanzaro this time. I'm willing to +1 FE though
16:41:41 <frantisekz> FB -1, FE +1
16:43:44 <geraldosimiao> another upstream bug, as it happens on gnomeOS nightly too
16:44:27 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2130927 -  RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  We reject this as a blocker as the general consensus on this bug was that it was not "basic functionality". We do accept it as a freeze exception though.
16:44:55 <AllanDay[m]> i was borderline on that one myself
16:44:57 <coremodule> patch
16:44:59 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2130927 -  RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  We reject this as a blocker as the general consensus on this bug is that it is not "basic functionality". We do accept it as a freeze exception though.
16:45:07 <frantisekz> ack
16:45:14 <Penguinpee> ack
16:45:14 <coremodule> patched for same tense in sentence
16:45:19 <geraldosimiao> ack
16:45:31 <lruzicka> patchack
16:45:49 <bcotton> pat sajak
16:46:02 <coremodule> #agreed 2130927 -  RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  We reject this as a blocker as the general consensus on this bug is that it is not "basic functionality". We do accept it as a freeze exception though.
16:46:21 <coremodule> #topic (2130937) Memory exhaustion when editing a cropped photo
16:46:22 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2130937
16:46:22 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/931
16:46:22 <coremodule> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-photos, NEW
16:46:22 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+4,2,-2) (+bcotton, +lruzicka, +geraldosimiao, +augenauf, kparal, gui1ty, -mattdm, -catanzaro)
16:46:23 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+gui1ty)
16:46:59 <lruzicka> +1 blocker
16:47:29 <frantisekz> FB -1, FE +1
16:48:47 <Penguinpee> it boils down to how many people actually edit cropped photos with GNOME Photos
16:48:56 <bcotton> my only concern here is if the reproducer is too specific
16:49:03 <lruzicka> it is easily reproducible
16:49:21 <bcotton> yes, but in a scenario people will actually use?
16:49:35 <bcotton> i don't doubt people do simple cropping with Photos. but do they also do the other edits?
16:49:51 <lruzicka> if they wanted to, it should work.
16:49:54 <bcotton> I wouldn't think to, but I'm not a representative user either
16:49:58 <lruzicka> basic functionality, I suppose
16:50:20 <bcotton> that's the question, though: is it "basic functionality"?
16:50:28 <frantisekz> the thing is, I don't think this is basic functionality
16:50:52 <bcotton> i voted +1 in the ticket, but i can't say i'm super confident about that
16:50:55 <lruzicka> what can photos do? it can display the photo and it enables basic editting
16:51:03 <frantisekz> eg. cropping is imo
16:51:06 <Penguinpee> I don't, but I'm not on GNOME 😜 I don't have a clue how large the group of people is that crop _and_ edit.
16:51:12 <lruzicka> if basic editting does not work, it is basic
16:51:26 <bcotton> you're begging the question
16:51:37 <frantisekz> cropping would be basic editing, not changing colors
16:51:45 <bcotton> cropping is basic editing
16:51:49 <lruzicka> we should not decide on how many people use it, but if it violates the criteria
16:51:57 <frantisekz> does it?
16:52:23 <bcotton> i'd argue that basic functionality is defined in part by how many people use it
16:52:26 <lruzicka> it is not changing colors, it is changing the lightness of the photo
16:52:31 <frantisekz> (ignore my last sentence, didn't read "if" there)
16:53:04 <Penguinpee> Let's punt it for now and grant it FE.
16:53:08 <lruzicka> bcotton, so if not many people use it, then it can be broken?
16:53:20 <frantisekz> (you change the light, you get different color)
16:53:30 <bcotton> we can't fix every bug
16:54:22 <coremodule> Okay, do we want to vote on FE status for this?
16:54:37 <Penguinpee> Yes. I already did in the ticket.
16:54:41 <lruzicka> are we punting?
16:54:47 <coremodule> I think I am a mild -1 blocker based off the "basic functionality" argument.
16:55:01 <coremodule> But am probably a +1 FE
16:55:18 <lruzicka> an application eating up the memory is a severe thing, I believe
16:55:23 <bcotton> i just asked for more input in #workstation:fedoraproject.org
16:55:31 <bcotton> +1 FE for sure
16:55:59 <coremodule> lruzicka, I'm also OK with punting for blocker status as the votes are close
16:55:59 <frantisekz> yep, FE it definitely is
16:56:11 <bcotton> i'd be okay with a punt. i think if push comes to shove, I'm still +1 blocker, but I still don't feel great about it
16:57:14 <AllanDay[m]> in a normal photo editing workflow, crop and change levels is fairly basic, i would say
16:57:41 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2130937 - punt for Blocker AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  We want to get more consensus on whether or not to classify this as a blocker through more testing. We accept it as an FE.
16:57:48 <AllanDay[m]> whether people actually do this with gnome photos is bound up with the question of whether people use gnome photos in general...
16:58:20 <bcotton> ack
16:58:40 <Penguinpee> ack
16:58:56 <frantisekz> ack
16:59:00 <bcotton> Allan Day: it's questions all the way down!
16:59:08 <coremodule> #agreed 2130937 - punt for Blocker AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  We want to get more consensus on whether or not to classify this as a blocker through more testing. We accept it as an FE.
16:59:21 <coremodule> #topic (2049849) Windows with bitlocker enabled can't be booted, needs to use bootnext instead of chainloader
16:59:21 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049849
16:59:21 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/695
16:59:21 <coremodule> #info Proposed Blocker, grub2, NEW
16:59:21 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-5) (-adamwill, -geraldosimiao, -kparal, -frantisekz, -gui1ty)
16:59:26 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:00:02 <Penguinpee> Let's rubber stamp it.
17:00:17 <bcotton> -1 blocker based on revised criterion
17:00:32 <cmurf> -1 blocker
17:00:59 <Southern_Gentlem> -1 fb
17:01:32 <geraldosimiao> I already voted
17:02:20 * Penguinpee nods
17:03:18 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2049849 -  RejectedBlocker (Final) -  We reject this as a blocker per the rewritten criterion: "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an existing clean Windows installation. As long as the Windows installation does not have BitLocker enabled, the installer must also install a bootloader which can boot into both Windows and Fedora."
17:03:45 <Penguinpee> ack
17:03:49 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:04:22 <frantisekz> ack
17:04:24 <Penguinpee> This one could/should go into the release notes, I suppose.
17:04:29 <lruzicka> ack
17:04:53 <coremodule> #agreed 2049849 -  RejectedBlocker (Final) -  We reject this as a blocker per the rewritten criterion: "The installer must be able to install into free space alongside an existing clean Windows installation. As long as the Windows installation does not have BitLocker enabled, the installer must also install a bootloader which can boot into both Windows and Fedora."
17:05:04 <coremodule> #topic (2131673) Default GTK_IM_MODULE should be ibus in GNOME Xorg
17:05:04 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131673
17:05:04 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/942
17:05:04 <coremodule> #info Proposed Blocker, imsettings, NEW, depends on other bugs
17:05:52 <bcotton> this is a non-default configuration, right?
17:06:06 <Penguinpee> I didn't know what to make of this bug. So, I skipped voting on it.
17:06:26 <bcotton> or do we still use xorg by default on some blocking deliverables?
17:06:45 <Penguinpee> "Strictly speaking this regression started actually in F36 (Gnome 42) I believe."
17:07:04 <Penguinpee> Why is this an issue now?
17:07:10 <coremodule> bcotton, I can't tell... It almost reads like it's the default configuration to me...
17:07:39 <geraldosimiao> Penguinpee: me too
17:07:57 <coremodule> I am +1 punt for more info
17:08:26 <Penguinpee> I agree
17:09:01 <bcotton> +1 punt
17:09:38 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2131673 - punt -  We want more info on this bug before we vote, so we will punt for now.
17:09:47 <bcotton> if we're not using Xorg by default anywhere, then I'm -1. so that's really what i want to know
17:10:04 <Penguinpee> ack
17:10:10 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:10:16 <lruzicka> ack
17:10:28 <bcotton> ack
17:10:34 <frantisekz> ack
17:10:39 <coremodule> patch
17:10:39 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2131673 - punt -  We want more info on this bug before we vote (particularly regarding Xorg and if it is default config anywhere), so we will punt for now.
17:11:00 <coremodule> sorry, bcotton makes a good point that we should reference in the meeting notes, hence the patch
17:11:11 <Penguinpee> patchack
17:11:20 <bcotton> ack^2
17:11:49 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:11:58 <lruzicka> patchack
17:12:02 <coremodule> #agreed 2131673 - punt -  We want more info on this bug before we vote (particularly regarding Xorg and if it is default config anywhere), so we will punt for now.
17:12:31 <coremodule> Let's move to freeze exceptions
17:12:37 <coremodule> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions
17:12:48 <coremodule> #topic (2045255) cjdns: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide/f36
17:12:49 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045255
17:12:49 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/943
17:12:49 <coremodule> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, cjdns, ASSIGNED, depends on other bugs
17:12:49 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+4,0,-0) (+frantisekz, +kparal, +gui1ty, +geraldosimiao)
17:13:18 * Penguinpee thinks patchack has the same ring to it as ketchup 🤣
17:13:22 <lruzicka> +1 fe
17:13:56 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2045255 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:14:19 <Penguinpee> I think all the proposed FEs can just be rubber stamped.
17:14:22 <Penguinpee> ack
17:14:23 <bcotton> i guess :-)
17:14:44 <bcotton> more of a "..as the alternative is dropping it from the distro, but the maintainer is still working on it"
17:14:56 <coremodule> The above text *is* my rubber stamp
17:15:21 <bcotton> we generally don't approve FTBFS FEs, but this one is a special case
17:16:02 <lruzicka> ack
17:16:06 <Penguinpee> coremodule: all right. keep 'em coming. ;)
17:16:12 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:16:20 <coremodule> bcotton, I'll take your "i guess" as an ack
17:16:32 <bcotton> coremodule: a fair interpretation :-)
17:16:36 <coremodule> :)
17:16:40 <coremodule> #agreed 2045255 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:16:52 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:16:58 <coremodule> #topic (2131704) Backport GNOME 43 Support
17:16:58 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131704
17:16:58 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/945
17:16:58 <coremodule> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, gnome-shell-extension-gamemode, POST
17:16:58 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+3,0,-0) (+kparal, +geraldosimiao, +gui1ty)
17:17:14 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2131704 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:17:48 <bcotton> ack
17:17:49 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:17:59 <Penguinpee> ack
17:18:06 <coremodule> #agreed 2131704 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:18:15 <coremodule> #topic (2058155) F37FailsToInstall: home-assistant-cli
17:18:15 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2058155
17:18:15 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/940
17:18:15 <coremodule> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, home-assistant-cli, ON_QA
17:18:16 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+4,0,-0) (+kparal, +frantisekz, +geraldosimiao, +gui1ty)
17:18:31 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2058155 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:18:45 <bcotton> ack
17:19:28 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:19:31 <Penguinpee> ack
17:19:39 <frantisekz> ack
17:20:13 <lruzicka> ack
17:20:14 <coremodule> #agreed 2058155 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:20:20 * Penguinpee hums "rollin', rollin, rollin'..."
17:20:24 <coremodule> #topic (2103647) muse: FTBFS in Fedora Rawhide
17:20:24 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2103647
17:20:24 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/944
17:20:24 <coremodule> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, muse, MODIFIED
17:20:24 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+4,0,-0) (+frantisekz, +kparal, +gui1ty, +geraldosimiao)
17:20:33 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2103647 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:20:44 <bcotton> +1 based on the "let's get rid of python 3.10 packages"
17:20:45 <bcotton> ack
17:20:49 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:21:04 <Penguinpee> ack
17:21:06 <Southern_Gentlem> ack
17:21:06 <coremodule> #agreed 2103647 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:21:23 <geraldosimiao> already submitted for stable by bodhi
17:21:28 <coremodule> Alright, that's everything. I'm going to defer to adamw's expertise on going through the accepted stuff next meeting.
17:21:35 <coremodule> #topic Open Floor
17:21:42 <coremodule> anything for the open floor?
17:21:59 <Penguinpee> nope
17:22:14 <geraldosimiao> and this?
17:22:15 <geraldosimiao> https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/946
17:22:55 <geraldosimiao> 👀
17:23:04 <coremodule> It was submitted after the meeting start, so it didn't make it into the meeting notes
17:23:08 <coremodule> lets go through it quick
17:23:13 <Southern_Gentlem> +1 fe
17:23:29 <coremodule> #topic (2131778) latest build dropped subpackages breaking system updates
17:23:30 <coremodule> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2131778
17:23:30 <coremodule> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/946
17:23:30 <coremodule> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, pipewire, NEW
17:23:30 <coremodule> #info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+kparal)
17:23:32 <geraldosimiao> +1 FE
17:23:42 <bcotton> you're welcome :p
17:23:44 <bcotton> +1 FE
17:23:48 <lruzicka> +1 fe
17:24:07 <coremodule> lol
17:24:12 <coremodule> proposed #agreed 2131778 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:24:26 <geraldosimiao> ack
17:24:39 <Penguinpee> ack
17:24:56 <frantisekz> ack
17:25:01 <coremodule> #agreed 2131778 - AcceptedFreezeException (Final) -  The decision to classify this bug as an "AcceptedFreezeException (Final)" was made as it is a noticeable issue that cannot be fixed with an update.
17:25:03 <lruzicka> ack
17:25:16 <bcotton> ack
17:25:57 <Penguinpee> thanks, coremodule for chairing
17:26:10 * Penguinpee sneaks out the backdoor
17:26:15 <geraldosimiao> coremodule++
17:26:15 <zodbot> geraldosimiao: Karma for coremodule changed to 2 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:26:18 <coremodule> alright, that's everything!
17:26:23 <coremodule> thanks for coming everyone
17:26:34 <geraldosimiao> 🎉
17:26:56 <coremodule> #endmeeting