20:01:10 <jreznik> #startmeeting F18 Beta Go/No-Go meeting
20:01:10 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Nov 22 20:01:10 2012 UTC.  The chair is jreznik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:01:10 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
20:01:22 <jreznik> #meetingname F18 Beta Go/No-Go meeting
20:01:22 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f18_beta_go/no-go_meeting'
20:01:38 <jreznik> #topic roll call
20:01:43 <rbergeron> yo!
20:01:44 * nirik waves.
20:01:49 * kparal lurks
20:01:55 * adamw gobbles
20:02:14 <jreznik> #chair rbergeron nirik kparal adamw
20:02:14 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw jreznik kparal nirik rbergeron
20:02:23 * tflink is here
20:02:42 <jreznik> #chair Viking-Ice tflink
20:02:42 <zodbot> Current chairs: Viking-Ice adamw jreznik kparal nirik rbergeron tflink
20:02:50 <adamw> everyone gets a chair!
20:03:02 <Viking-Ice> it's thanksgiving after all ;)
20:03:02 <jreznik> #info Viking-Ice adamw jreznik kparal nirik rbergeron tflink present
20:03:15 * jreznik thanks and gives :)
20:03:22 * rbergeron passes around beverages
20:03:54 <jreznik> #topic Purpose of this meeting
20:04:01 <jreznik> #info Purpose of this meeting is to see whether or not F18 Beta is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria.
20:04:07 <jreznik> #info This is determined in a few ways:
20:04:12 <jreznik> #info No remaining blocker bugs
20:04:23 <jreznik> #info Test matrices for Beta are fully completed
20:04:25 <jreznik> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/18/beta/buglist
20:04:32 <jreznik> #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Alpha_Release_Criteria
20:04:38 <jreznik> #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Beta_Release_Criteria
20:04:44 <jreznik> #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Installation_Test
20:04:55 <jreznik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Base_Test
20:05:07 <jreznik> #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test
20:05:17 <jreznik> flood ends...
20:05:41 <jreznik> everyone ready to start?
20:05:45 <adamw> more or less
20:05:51 <rbergeron> go-bble ahead
20:05:52 <adamw> i'm trying to clean up the last couple of matrix pieces now
20:05:58 <adamw> (c) 2012 adamw
20:06:25 <adamw> can we start with proposed blockers? tflink ready for that?
20:06:40 <tflink> I can be in a sec
20:07:07 <jreznik> ok, we should sort out also SB ticket formally
20:07:15 <jreznik> #topic Proposed blockers
20:07:57 <nirik> at least by my reading of the ticket, fesco has determined by a 5 to 4 vote that SB is not a beta blocker.
20:08:15 <adamw> ms-signed SB, yes.
20:08:27 <adamw> the self-signed SB question is kind of open, but it certainly doesn't have enough votes to pass, if you want to look at it that way.
20:08:56 <jreznik> adamw: and see nirik's interpretation of self signed shim in updates-testing
20:10:58 <jreznik> any objections to the result of blockery voting?
20:11:01 <nirik> right. the proposal was "blocking beta on self-signed version in updates-pending" which we do have... well, updates-testing, but I could be mistaking what notting meant.
20:11:17 <adamw> you're mistaking, i think.
20:11:23 <Viking-Ice> if neither passed does it matter?
20:11:34 <adamw> i believe he meant 'blocking beta on taking the self-signed shim from updates-testing into the beta'.
20:11:41 <nirik> anyhow, I think we can say MS signed is not a blocker, and not enough votes for self signed to be a blocker.
20:11:52 <adamw> it doesn't make any sense to hold beta release until something is in updates-testing. that's a thing that makes no sense, and notting usually doesn't suggest such things.
20:11:53 <nirik> adamw: could be.
20:12:13 <adamw> Viking-Ice: point.
20:12:18 * Martix_ is here (I lost Internet connection just 3 minutes before mtg)
20:12:22 * nirik nods. agreed with Viking-Ice.
20:12:36 * rbergeron nods as well
20:12:37 * adamw just gumming up the works so he can get raid tests done
20:12:46 <rbergeron> lol
20:13:04 <jreznik> well, it means SB is not blocker for both MS and self-signed variants
20:13:22 <nirik> (for beta only...)
20:13:29 <adamw> don't think anyone has any problems with that. yes, for beta only.
20:13:37 <adamw> we should state that very clearly, as it seems to keep getting confused :)
20:13:42 <nirik> yeah.
20:13:42 <jreznik> definitely Beta only
20:13:48 <adamw> plan is still for Final to be SB-enabled.
20:14:06 <nirik> yep. It's unfortunate if beta is not. ;(
20:14:07 * jreznik hoped for Alpha properly SB enabled...
20:14:26 * rbergeron hands around some pound signs for stating things clearly in the minutes and whatnot
20:14:34 * nirik would be +1 NTH on MS signed SB in beta if we end up slipping and it shows up.
20:14:41 <jreznik> rbergeron: preparing right now
20:15:05 <rbergeron> nirik: indeed
20:15:20 * rbergeron taste tests food
20:15:25 <nirik> but I think it's already a NTH bug thats accepted, so thats just degressing. ;)
20:15:36 <jreznik> #info FESCo has determined by a 5 to 4 vote that Secure Boot signed by MSFT is not a beta blocker
20:15:55 <Martix_> -1 betablocker/+1 NTH
20:16:21 <jreznik> #info not enough +1 votes to accept self-signed shim as a Beta blocker
20:17:25 <jreznik> everyone ok with SB resolution? should we move on?
20:17:35 <Martix_> ack
20:17:37 <Viking-Ice> yup
20:17:39 <rbergeron> mooooooove on
20:17:42 <nirik> well, those folks that wanted to block on it aren't likely happy, but... ;)
20:17:57 <adamw> eh, distract 'em with a turkey
20:18:01 <tflink> fortunately, they aren't here right now?
20:18:10 * rbergeron modifies her hot dog launcher into a turkey launcher
20:18:10 <jreznik> nirik: you're one of them :)
20:18:29 <rbergeron> blocker list :)
20:18:40 <jreznik> tflink: are you ready for blocker blocker blocker fun?
20:18:54 <nirik> I am? I wanted to not block on MS signed, I would have been ok blocking on fedora signed, but was ok with it after mjg59's comments.
20:19:01 <tflink> jreznik: ready? no, I don't think I'm ever ready for the level of fun that blocker review brings
20:19:02 <adamw> mooooving on
20:19:04 <nirik> anyhow, I continue to digress. ;)
20:19:09 <tflink> but I'm prepared to start doing so
20:19:21 <adamw> digressing?
20:19:23 <tflink> We have:
20:19:32 <tflink> #info 2 non-VERIFIED proposed blockers
20:19:44 <tflink> #undo
20:19:44 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x19c0d550>
20:19:50 <tflink> I think I'm jumping the gun a bit
20:19:57 * tflink waits for #topic change
20:20:12 <adamw> hey, since when did anaconda grow dual monitor support?! that's weird.
20:20:17 <adamw> or possibly a bug. :)
20:20:17 <jreznik> topic change?
20:20:28 <tflink> or I can just get started
20:20:42 * tflink wasn't sure if you were planning to change topics or something like that
20:21:07 <jreznik> I'd say it's still on topic, if you want to change it, np but not sure I'd set better topic
20:21:43 <tflink> oh, nvm. I should have checked the current topic first
20:21:56 <tflink> anyhow, we have:
20:22:07 <tflink> #info 2 proposed blockers not in VERIFIED state
20:22:16 <tflink> #info 1 accepted blocker not in VERIFIED state
20:22:26 <tflink> starting with the proposed blockers ...
20:22:33 <tflink> #topic (879187) NFS in RC1 regressed vs. TC9: does not override inst.stage2 when passed as inst.repo, interactive NFS is impossible
20:22:36 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879187
20:22:39 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
20:23:35 <adamw> want the executive summary on this one?
20:23:48 <tflink> yeah, you know more about this issue than I do
20:23:48 <jreznik> adamw: yep pls
20:24:38 <adamw> okay, so we have two basic ways of triggering an install from an NFS repo. one is to pass either inst.repo=nfs or inst.repo=nfsiso on the cmdline (they're really just about the same these days). the other is interactively - select nfs on the Installation Source spoke and enter your server address.
20:24:54 <adamw> in RC1, interactive NFS repo selection is entirely broken. so far as we can tell, it doesn't work and cannot work.
20:25:05 <nirik> does it traceback there? or ?
20:25:15 <adamw> you either get a traceback or you get Closest Mirror.
20:25:28 <Viking-Ice> and hits the installer must be able to use the HTTP, FTP and either NFS or NFSISO remote package source options
20:25:29 <adamw> not finished with the summary yet, hold questions till end :)
20:25:44 * nirik waits
20:26:11 <adamw> merely appending inst.repo=nfs(iso) to cmdline also does not work: you get Closest Mirror. however, if you remove the default inst.stage2= parameter from the cmdline and *replace* it with inst.repo=nfs(iso), that works.
20:26:36 <adamw> finally, simply appending inst.repo with a direct kernel boot (PXE-style) - as opposed to using netinst or DVD - works fine.
20:26:58 <adamw> i'm not sure if we tested interactive NFS selection in the direct kernel boot case, might be interesting to know if that works, though it seems like it'd be a corner case.
20:27:17 <tflink> I thought kparal tested that, no?
20:27:29 <adamw> the criterion, as viking-ice stated, is: "The installer must be able to use the HTTP, FTP and either NFS or NFSISO remote package source options"
20:27:37 <adamw> i'm not sure whether he was testing interactive or cmdline for that case
20:27:40 * kparal reads up
20:28:13 <adamw> so...discuss. on the one hand, lots of the NFS support is clearly borked (oh, this is a regression from TC9). on the other hand, you can make it work, if you know the trick. the criterion is not entirely clear on the call here, I don't think.
20:28:26 <Viking-Ice> so this boils down to do we considered the inst.stage2 removal documented in the release notes an acceptable workaround for the criteria
20:28:30 <adamw> right.
20:28:38 <adamw> or 'use direct kernel boot'
20:28:43 <jreznik> yep as a workaround
20:28:50 <adamw> which may be what people who typically install from NFS like to do, even. i'm not really sure.
20:28:54 <nirik> people getting the traceback would get to the bug report... so it could also be explained there...
20:29:00 <tflink> I don't think that 'use direct kernel boot' is an OK workaround - it's not always an option
20:29:15 <adamw> well, we have two 'workarounds' effectively.
20:29:16 <tflink> by itself, anyways
20:29:17 <adamw> pick your favourite.
20:29:35 * nirik ponders.
20:29:43 <Viking-Ice> the argument in favor being that the end user already is on the kernel command line to set this right?
20:29:53 <adamw> holy mother of freaking god, i have an actual genuine fwraid-1 install.
20:30:03 <adamw> Viking-Ice: sorry?
20:30:07 <nirik> adamw: congrats. Or condolances. :)
20:30:13 <tflink> adamw: you sure it's not just an illusion ?
20:30:16 <tflink> :-D
20:30:26 <adamw> Viking-Ice: well, if you were planning to pass inst.repo you'd already be using the cmdline, yeah. if you were planning to use the interactive option, you wouldn't, i guess.
20:30:42 <nirik> I guess I would be ok with documenting this and not blocking on it. But that could just be the overeager to just have beta release already.
20:30:53 <jreznik> but it would be documented so you should be aware of that
20:30:59 <adamw> right, i am in exactly the same place: instinct says ship it, i do not entirely trust my instinct.
20:31:01 <nirik> jreznik: if you read the docs.
20:31:16 <nirik> which many people sadly do not until it breaks. ;(
20:31:17 <tflink> everyone reads the docs before installing, though.
20:31:20 <jreznik> nirik: I said "should" :)
20:31:24 * nirik nods.
20:31:30 <rbergeron> tflink: orly
20:31:45 <Martix_> right, ship that cow finally :-)
20:31:49 <adamw> there may possibly have been the tiniest element of sarcasm to tflink's post
20:31:54 <rbergeron> perhaps ;)
20:32:01 <adamw> shocking I know, but...:)
20:32:10 <kparal> if we're not going to slip, I think we should waive this blocker. realistically, it's not going to be better next week, something else will break up
20:32:40 <nirik> well, it could be fixed up... but at soonest monday...
20:32:48 <tflink> rbergeron: rly! why else would RTFM become common?
20:32:50 <nirik> which probibly means a normal 1 more week slip.
20:33:02 * tflink does know better than to think everyone reads the docs, BTW :)
20:33:11 <adamw> kparal: sorry, not sure i can parse that. if we take the blocker we slip. if we don't take it, we ship. (pending other bugs).
20:33:14 <jreznik> kparal means more - more bugs would appear...
20:33:15 <nirik> anyhow, -1 blocker, +1 nth.
20:33:34 <tflink> I think that this could be fixed by reverting the patch which caused it in the first place
20:33:38 <adamw> jreznik: kparal: ah, that's jlaska's 'tipping point' concept, which is interesting and probably not enough explored. yeah, this could well be the tipping poin.
20:33:44 <kparal> adamw: if there is no other reason to slip, let's take this as a non-blocking issue
20:33:46 <Viking-Ice> agreed -1 blocker +1 nth I simply dont think slipping a week for this is worth it
20:33:49 * rbergeron is with nirik on that
20:33:51 <adamw> kparal: gotcha
20:33:56 <rbergeron> and Viking-Ice ;)
20:34:00 <tflink> wasn't nfs working before that made it into the last anaconda build?
20:34:01 <adamw> ok, i'm with the room, -1 / +1
20:34:09 <jreznik> ok, -1/+1
20:34:09 <Martix_> tflink: do we know which one?
20:34:10 <adamw> tflink: tc9 was substantially better, yeah. like i said, it's a regression.
20:34:15 <tflink> I'm not +1 blocker enough to argue about it
20:34:22 <adamw> Martix_: i identified a suspect in the bug. i'm not 100% sure, but like 95%.
20:34:35 <adamw> Martix_: look at the last few comments, there's some info from me on what the suspect commit is, and why it's in RC1.
20:35:17 <nirik> additionally, could an updates.img fix this for the gui/ui path?
20:35:31 <jreznik> well, I think we have enough votes I'd say
20:35:31 <tflink> nirik: I doubt it
20:35:32 <adamw> very possibly, yeah.
20:35:34 <adamw> heh
20:35:37 <adamw> tflink: why not?
20:35:42 * nirik flips a coin. ;)
20:35:44 <tflink> I think all the nfs stuff is in dracut
20:35:48 <tflink> not in anaconda
20:35:58 <adamw> oh, that's a point.
20:36:02 <adamw> i keep forgetting we can't patch dracut...
20:36:08 <Viking-Ice> ping haraldh ;)
20:36:11 <tflink> IIRC, the stuff that is in dracut, setting stuff up for anaconda can't be fixed w/ updates.img
20:36:13 <jreznik> yep, it is - docs for this part are written based on my docs
20:36:14 <nirik> dracut needs updates.img support! ;)
20:36:15 <Viking-Ice> he's not turkey-ing ;)
20:36:44 <adamw> anyway, there's no possibility we can fix anything without a slip at this point.
20:36:48 <adamw> no matter how simple or otherwise the fix.
20:36:50 <tflink> proposed #agreed 879187 - RejectedBlocker, AcceptedNTH - While this does come close to blocker status due to the intereference with nfs sources during installation, there are acceptable workarounds and it was decided that this isn't severe enough overall to justify blocker status for F18 beta.
20:37:00 <Viking-Ice> ack
20:37:01 <Martix_> ack
20:37:01 <rbergeron> ack
20:37:03 <jreznik> ack
20:37:03 <nirik> ack
20:37:17 <adamw> ack
20:37:19 <tflink> #agreed 879187 - RejectedBlocker, AcceptedNTH - While this does come close to blocker status due to the intereference with nfs sources during installation, there are acceptable workarounds and it was decided that this isn't severe enough overall to justify blocker status for F18 beta.
20:37:29 <tflink> #topic (876218) kernel boot + nfsiso repo = hang on reboot
20:37:29 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876218
20:37:29 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ASSIGNED
20:37:55 <Viking-Ice> agreed -1 blocker +1 nth I simply dont think slipping a week for this is worth it ...
20:38:19 <tflink> yeah, I think this is probably in the same boat
20:38:29 <adamw> right. i was a bit uncomfortable with fudging this for 17 *final*, but for a beta it's not a real big deal.
20:38:29 <jreznik> as we punt the previous one, I'm -1 blocker
20:38:30 * nirik nods. same here.
20:38:40 * rbergeron gets in teh same line
20:38:53 <Martix_> -1/+1
20:38:59 <jreznik> well blocker for F18 final? to make adamw feel better? and we can punt it later :)
20:39:16 <Viking-Ice> yup
20:39:19 * rbergeron assumes this one doesn't interact negatively with the previous bz (comment 10 says NFS or NFSISO both hang on reboot)
20:39:39 <adamw> -1 blocker
20:39:44 <adamw> no point voting nth at tihs point really
20:40:00 <tflink> proposed #agreed 876218 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't hit any F18 beta release criteria 100% and was deemed not a blocker for F17 final. Therefore, it was decided that this is not severe enough to justify blocker status for F18 beta.
20:40:10 <adamw> ack
20:40:11 <Viking-Ice> ack
20:40:21 <jreznik> ack
20:40:21 <nirik> mashedpotato attack... er... ack
20:40:37 <rbergeron> ack
20:40:46 <Martix_> ack
20:40:51 <tflink> #agreed 876218 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't hit any F18 beta release criteria 100% and was deemed not a blocker for F17 final. Therefore, it was decided that this is not severe enough to justify blocker status for F18 beta.
20:40:58 <tflink> OK, that's all of the proposed blockers
20:41:08 <tflink> on to the 1 remaining accepted blocker
20:41:14 <tflink> #topic (873459) Upgraded system does not reboot if a kernel upgrade is part of the upgrade
20:41:17 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=873459
20:41:20 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, fedup-dracut, ON_QA
20:41:36 <tflink> summary time :)
20:41:54 <tflink> this was a big problem with fedup for a while where the disks were being unmounted forcibly before all the files were written
20:42:18 <tflink> this led to truncated kernel and initramfs files, for which this bug was originally filed
20:42:32 <tflink> I had been waiting for a couple more tests before moving this to VERIFIED
20:42:41 <adamw> we have three successful upgrade tests so far at least, right?
20:42:46 <adamw> you me and i think someone else
20:42:52 <jreznik> seems kparal did a few tests successfully
20:42:56 <tflink> but considering the number of upgrades that I and others have done without obviously hitting this, I'm OK with moving it to VERIFIED
20:43:00 <adamw> we do need to karma up the builds and push them
20:43:02 <kparal> two upgrades today from me
20:43:12 <tflink> I've done 20 or so w/o seeing this
20:43:18 <tflink> maybe more, I lose count
20:43:30 <tflink> er, without hitting the obvious symptoms
20:43:37 <adamw> +1 verified
20:44:23 <tflink> considering the way in which this is doubly-fixed ATM, I think that the risk of getting truncated files during upgrade is minimal
20:44:46 <Viking-Ice> ok
20:44:50 <tflink> with the currently packaged stuff, this is dirty-hack-fixed in fedup-dracut and properly fixed in systemd
20:45:02 <jreznik> double fix
20:45:10 <tflink> the dirty hack fix in fedup-dracut will be removed in the next version, though
20:45:30 <tflink> talking to wwoods about it, we didn't think it was a big enough issue to worry about for beta
20:45:47 * nirik nods.
20:45:48 <jreznik> ok
20:46:24 <adamw> sounds safer to leave it in anyhow.
20:46:38 <tflink> proposed #agreed 873459 - This has been tested to the point where the risk of it not actually being fixed is minimal. Move to VERIFIED state
20:46:39 <jreznik> at least for now and good to hear we have proper fix
20:46:42 <tflink> adamw: exactly
20:46:57 <jreznik> ack
20:46:57 <Martix_> ack
20:46:58 <Viking-Ice> ack
20:47:01 <nirik> ack
20:47:03 <adamw> ack
20:47:05 <dgilmore> ack
20:47:10 <adamw> ooh, we have a gilmore
20:47:12 <rbergeron> ack
20:47:15 <tflink> #agreed 873459 - This has been tested to the point where the risk of it not actually being fixed is minimal. Move to VERIFIED state
20:47:19 <dgilmore> adamw: just woke up
20:47:33 <tflink> OK, that would be all of the blockers for beta
20:47:39 <tflink> unless I missed something
20:47:40 <Martix_> dgilmore: hello, good to see you
20:47:53 <jreznik> dgilmore: good morning!
20:47:59 <tflink> all of the beta blocker bugs are either closed or VERIFIED
20:48:07 <tflink> or will be once we finish updating the bugs
20:48:07 <nirik> morning dgilmore
20:48:21 <jreznik> #info all of the beta blocker bugs are either closed or VERIFIED
20:48:39 <rbergeron> woo
20:49:02 <Martix_> hurray
20:49:06 <rbergeron> gobblegobble
20:49:30 * adamw catching up with secretarialization
20:49:36 * Martix_ is finally openning a beer and starting with dinner ;-)
20:49:38 <jreznik> anything else for blockers?
20:49:50 <jreznik> Martix_: not a time for a beer yet - test matrices
20:49:50 * tflink looks around suspiciously, waiting for something to explode now that the blockers are done for beta
20:50:07 <Viking-Ice> check the turkey!
20:50:22 <jreznik> oh that would be bad - exploded turkey!
20:50:42 <Martix_> jreznik: I didn't yet finished triaging Gnome and KDE Test Days, I don't see there any possible beta-blockers
20:51:13 * jreznik notes exploded turkey for fedora 20 name proposal - as it's similar case as schredinger cat - you don't know it exploded or not while being in owen
20:51:20 <adamw> we ran the validation tests though, and they look good.
20:51:44 * tflink proposed naming the beta "exploding turkey"
20:51:47 <jreznik> Martix_: thanks for leading the Gnome and KDE testdays
20:51:48 <tflink> proposes
20:51:49 * adamw just got successful hwraid install
20:52:03 <jreznik> tflink: +1
20:52:16 <jreznik> #topic Test matrices
20:52:23 <Martix_> jreznik: np, just rehearsal before Network Test Week :-)
20:52:46 <adamw> hasn't someone been doing desktop_login test?
20:52:52 <adamw> i kinda figured someone was working on that
20:52:57 * jreznik is doing subset of KDE one
20:53:07 <adamw> so, we're missing SCSI, which we usually waive because god, SCSI, we should just take it out of the list, and the desktop_login tests for gnome and kde
20:53:21 <adamw> we can get them done in the next few minutes if we try
20:53:25 <dgilmore> adamw: we should remove scsi
20:53:26 <adamw> i don't expect any failures
20:53:48 * satellit I have no problem with HD install of desktop - logging in
20:53:52 <adamw> do we want to hold the meeting while someone runs the tests?
20:53:54 <jreznik> btw that test case does not work at all for KDE
20:53:58 <adamw> is anyone working on the GNOME one?
20:54:06 <adamw> jreznik: you have to apply a bit of imagination, yeah. i wrote it to GDM.
20:54:09 <kparal> Viking-Ice confirmed the national passwords work well in GNOME
20:54:22 <adamw> okay, i think i can confirm the rest of the test from other testing
20:54:27 <adamw> so let's mark that as a combined pass
20:54:49 <jreznik> are you going to mark it to avoid wiki conflict or should I?
20:55:00 <Martix_> kparal: usually do :-)
20:55:08 * adamw done
20:55:15 <adamw> so now we just need the kde one
20:55:36 <jreznik> ok, I'll edit it
20:56:44 <jreznik> done
20:57:00 <jreznik> ah, fix needed
20:57:05 <jreznik> bad column
20:57:21 <adamw> fallback?
20:57:28 <adamw> fallback always catches everyone out. :)
20:57:43 <jreznik> as always
20:57:52 <adamw> happily for f19 we can take it out instead of just ignoring it...
20:58:14 <kparal> adamw: yes, because it won't be in GNOME anymore
20:58:14 <jreznik> ok, so desktop matrice is filled in
20:58:19 <adamw> so then we're basically 100% on the matrices, minus scsi
20:58:22 <Martix_> is fallback mode considered as release-blocking desktop?
20:58:27 <nirik> but possible replaced with 'official plugins for fallback like thing' ;(
20:58:29 <jreznik> kparal: but there will be classic mode emulation :)
20:58:29 <Martix_> for F18?
20:58:36 <adamw> i have evaluated all the WARNs/FAILs and all that needed considering for blocker status have been considered
20:58:39 <jreznik> Martix_: F19
20:58:39 <tflink> I thought that was for gnome 3.8
20:58:43 <adamw> Martix_: not any more
20:58:54 <adamw> Martix_: we stopped considering it release blocking in 17, i think.
20:59:02 <adamw> whenever llvmpipe came in.
20:59:15 <Martix_> jreznik: ok, I knew about removal before it was annonced :-)
20:59:25 <Martix_> adamw: good
20:59:40 <adamw> so...i think we're good on matrices
21:00:23 <jreznik> #info QA is good on test matrices
21:00:23 <adamw> propose #agreed matrices are 100% with standard waiver for scsi
21:00:28 <adamw> okay, #info is fine
21:00:53 <jreznik> #undo
21:00:53 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x14dc6490>
21:00:58 <adamw> no, your info was fine
21:01:02 <adamw> put it back :)
21:01:10 <jreznik> adamw: for scsi
21:01:14 <adamw> oh k
21:01:30 <jreznik> ack
21:01:32 <nirik> ack
21:01:38 <Viking-Ice> ack
21:01:45 <adamw> #agreed matrices are 100% with standard waiver for scsi
21:01:46 <tflink> ack
21:02:07 <Martix_> late ack
21:02:57 <jreznik> ok so - blockers and test matrices are done!
21:03:05 * rbergeron eats a turkey in celebration
21:03:18 <dgilmore> rbergeron: is that number 2?
21:03:18 <jreznik> #topic Go or No Go?
21:03:40 <Martix_> Go cow, go, go!
21:03:44 <tflink> rbergeron: the whole turkey?
21:03:58 <rbergeron> dgilmore: no just #1
21:04:00 <rbergeron> just sat down
21:04:01 <dgilmore> shes asleep from turkey overload
21:04:45 <nirik> lets roll this beta cow out.
21:04:46 <jreznik> ok, the most important word now - as the blocker bugs are sorted out, test matrices are filled in - is everybody ok with saying Go? QA, FPL, devel, rel-eng
21:05:22 <rbergeron> go-bble
21:05:23 <adamw> tflink: viking-ice: i believe we're 'go' per our rules
21:05:31 <Viking-Ice> Go from QA
21:05:31 <tflink> adamw: agreed
21:05:55 <jreznik> spherical go-w
21:06:12 <nirik> go-bble(tm)
21:06:25 <Martix_> GO
21:06:42 <dgilmore> releng is go
21:06:50 <dgilmore> wait no we are nogo
21:06:54 <dgilmore> j/k go
21:06:59 <tflink> dgilmore: even with the permissions issue w/ upgrade.img?
21:07:09 <dgilmore> tflink: i manually changed it
21:07:14 <tflink> I suppose that isn't enough to block on, though
21:07:25 <nirik> dgilmore: it's causing branched to not compose...
21:07:27 <dgilmore> tflink: ill fix up lorax today
21:07:31 <nirik> but if we are go it's moot for beta.
21:07:55 <dgilmore> nirik: right
21:08:14 <dgilmore> we have Fedora repo that has everything it should
21:08:19 <nirik> yep.
21:08:39 <jreznik> propose #agreed to Go for Fedora 18 Beta by FPL, Fedora QA, FPGM and rel-eng teams
21:08:51 <tflink> ack
21:08:52 <rbergeron> ack
21:09:10 <nirik> ackey
21:09:29 <Martix_> wait
21:09:31 <Martix_> ack
21:09:40 <Viking-Ice> ack
21:09:47 <jreznik> #agreed to Go for Fedora 18 Beta by FPL, Fedora QA, FPGM and rel-eng teams
21:10:02 <Casper_v2> YES!!! \ð/
21:10:03 <jreznik> it's roooooling
21:10:14 <Martix_> yupee
21:10:35 <dgilmore> ack
21:10:42 <nirik> thanks for everyone's hard work on it...
21:10:52 * rbergeron assumes the workarounds from this meeting will go into commonbugs and release notes?
21:10:56 <nirik> you all rock.
21:11:12 <Martix_> ack
21:11:14 <tflink> rbergeron: yeah, I think all the bugs discussed here have been marked for commonbugs
21:11:16 <rbergeron> TURKEYS FOR EVERYONE
21:11:17 <jreznik> adamw: pls take care of common bugs and I'll contact docs team
21:11:19 <dgilmore> thanks usaians for coming on a public holiday
21:11:29 <tflink> release the exploding turkey!
21:11:48 <rbergeron> tflink: that is the worst possible thing to say :) lol
21:11:49 <jreznik> definitely, sorry for scheduling it on exploding turkey day but...
21:12:12 <Martix_> after protracted negotiations beta is green
21:12:16 <tflink> rbergeron: considering the colliquial usage of turkey, probably
21:12:27 <rbergeron> exactly ;)
21:12:35 <rbergeron> but it is nowmy daughter's new favorite line
21:12:55 * rbergeron thanks everyone for coming and ... goes to eat her turkey
21:12:55 <dgilmore> rbergeron: :D
21:13:07 <jreznik> rbergeron: enjoy the turkey!
21:13:34 <Viking-Ice> beta gravy
21:13:36 <jreznik> anyone anything else?
21:14:07 <Martix_> rbergeron: enjoy your turkey!
21:14:20 * jreznik would like to taste rbergeron's turkey but is on 28 days diet now
21:15:19 <jreznik> #action jreznik to announce the Go decision publicly
21:15:33 <jreznik> thank you everyone for coming, for hard work on Beta and I'm setting fuse...
21:15:35 <dgilmore> :) no turkey for me
21:15:35 <Viking-Ice> the only time I go on a diet is when I'm dead
21:16:08 <tflink> Viking-Ice: you've been dead before?
21:16:25 <jreznik> 3...
21:17:05 <jreznik> Viking-Ice: you now, my gf started and otherwise I'd have to prepare the dinner for me :)
21:17:09 <jreznik> 2...
21:17:57 <Martix_> jreznik: just retweet ;-)
21:18:07 <jreznik> 1...
21:18:22 <Martix_> <end of line>
21:18:38 <jreznik> #endmeeting