17:00:07 <bcotton> #startmeeting F30 Beta Go/No-Go meeting 17:00:07 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Mar 28 17:00:07 2019 UTC. 17:00:07 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 17:00:07 <zodbot> The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:07 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:00:07 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f30_beta_go/no-go_meeting' 17:00:08 <bcotton> #meetingname F30-Beta-Go_No_Go-meeting 17:00:08 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f30-beta-go_no_go-meeting' 17:00:14 <bcotton> #topic Roll Call 17:00:16 <mboddu> .hola mohanboddu 17:00:17 * sumantro is here 17:00:20 * pwhalen is here 17:00:25 * mboddu tried, but didn't work 17:00:27 * satellit listening 17:00:28 <mboddu> .hello mohanboddu 17:00:29 <zodbot> mboddu: mohanboddu 'Mohan Boddu' <mboddu@bhujji.com> 17:00:30 <frantisekz> .hello2 17:00:31 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com> 17:00:38 * coremodule is here 17:00:39 <coremodule> .hello2 17:00:44 <zodbot> coremodule: coremodule 'Geoffrey Marr' <gmarr@redhat.com> 17:00:47 * kparal lurks 17:00:58 <adamw> .hello adamwill 17:00:59 <zodbot> adamw: adamwill 'Adam Williamson' <awilliam@redhat.com> 17:01:10 <jlanda> .hello2 17:01:13 <zodbot> jlanda: jlanda 'Julen Landa Alustiza' <julen@zokormazo.info> 17:01:15 <mkonecny> .hello zlopez 17:01:17 <zodbot> mkonecny: zlopez 'Michal Konečný' <michal.konecny@packetseekers.eu> 17:01:26 <nirik> morning 17:01:35 * jlanda is on the road, so lurking too 17:01:44 <mkonecny> morning nirik 17:01:52 <bcotton> hello, everyone! 17:02:05 <jlanda> morning/afternoon/ 17:02:07 <sgallagh> .hello2 17:02:08 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com> 17:02:14 <bcotton> #topic Purpose of this meeting 17:02:15 <bcotton> #info Purpose of this meeting is to check whether or not F30 Beta is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria. 17:02:17 <bcotton> #info This is determined in a few ways: 17:02:21 <bcotton> #info 1. No remaining blocker bugs 17:02:22 <bcotton> #info 2. Release candidate compose is available 17:02:23 <bcotton> #info 3. Test matrices for Beta are fully completed 17:02:32 <bcotton> so.... let's do this! 17:02:57 <bcotton> #topic Current status — blockers 17:03:05 <bcotton> #info 1 Proposed Blockers 17:03:07 <bcotton> #info 1 Accepted Blockers 17:03:11 <bcotton> let's review 17:03:20 <bcotton> #topic (1692135) Possible regression: Spinner will not always terminate unless window titlebar grabbed and window moved 17:03:21 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692135 17:03:22 <bcotton> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-shell, NEW 17:03:32 <nirik> -1 blocker, doesn't hit any beta critera. 17:03:33 <frantisekz> -1b 17:03:38 <bcotton> folks seemed pretty -1 in the BZ 17:03:42 <mboddu> -1 B 17:03:44 <pwhalen> -1 17:03:54 <jlanda> -1 17:04:01 <sumantro> -1 17:04:02 * mboddu didn't hit it while testing 17:04:03 <coremodule> -1 blocker 17:04:07 <adamw> -1 17:04:14 <nirik> I've seen this in rawhide sporadically... it's anoying, but not worth blocking beta for. 17:04:19 <adamw> intermittent, doesn't really violate any criteria 17:04:22 <nirik> in fact it's happening to me now. :) 17:04:25 * wa1em lurking and late 17:04:27 <pwhalen> :) 17:04:27 <coremodule> I hit it, but everything still works. It's annoying but not blocker, no criteria violations. 17:04:50 <mboddu> I have tested for only few min, but didn't hit it 17:04:56 <sgallagh> -1 beta blocker, -1 final blocker 17:04:59 <bcotton> proposed #agreed BZ1692135 is rejected as a beta blocker. It does not violate any criteria 17:05:06 <adamw> ack 17:05:06 <frantisekz> ack 17:05:07 <mboddu> ack 17:05:09 <sumantro> ack 17:05:10 <pwhalen> ack 17:05:10 <coremodule> ack 17:05:13 <jlanda> ack 17:05:14 <sgallagh> ack 17:05:20 <bcotton> #agreed BZ1692135 is rejected as a beta blocker. It does not violate any criteria 17:05:34 <bcotton> #topic (1692323) qemu crashes with virgl enabled on some GPUs 17:05:36 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1692323 17:05:37 <bcotton> #info Accepted Blocker, qemu, VERIFIED 17:05:56 <frantisekz> I've verified that , fixed in 1.8 17:05:57 <bcotton> looks like this is fixed in -1.8? 17:05:59 <bcotton> awesome 17:06:04 <adamw> yeah, fix is in beta-1.8 and verified 17:06:11 <jlanda> Yep 17:06:12 <bcotton> #info fix is in beta-1.8 and verified 17:06:23 <bcotton> anything else on blockers before we move on? 17:06:35 <jlanda> nope 17:06:37 <adamw> for the record, we curate VERIFIED state very carefully for blockers, so any time you see it, it means 'we have verified that this is fixed in the current candidate 17:07:00 * nirik is glad it didnt hit the same libseccomp thing f29 did 17:07:11 <bcotton> #topic Current status — Release Candidate 17:07:22 <adamw> nirik: yeah, not sure why not, but it definitely doesn't. i tested it specifically myself 17:07:28 <bcotton> #info Beta-1.8 is the release candidate 17:07:33 <bcotton> anything else we want to say on this? 17:07:42 <mboddu> ship it :) 17:07:45 <frantisekz> :) 17:07:47 <sumantro> :) 17:07:47 <adamw> is this where we do validation status? 17:07:52 <adamw> or is there a separate topic for that? 17:08:28 <bcotton> adamw: we're about to move to test coverage if that's what you're after 17:09:12 <cmurf> U.S.S. Ship It 17:09:17 <adamw> rogr 17:09:40 <bcotton> #topic Current status — Test coverage 17:10:05 <bcotton> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_30_Beta_Test_Results 17:10:17 <bcotton> adamw and team, the floor is yours 17:10:57 <frantisekz> adamw and his servants .... ehm :D 17:11:06 <adamw> jsut a sec 17:11:13 <bcotton> ack 17:11:38 <adamw> so, coverage is looking fine except for a few things on server 17:11:39 <wa1em> been largely absent this cycle but willing to help on any remaining testing for B or final 17:12:00 <adamw> sgallagh: i thought you ran the AD tests at some point, but testcase_stats says no? 17:12:04 <adamw> also remote logging has never been run 17:12:09 <wa1em> adamw, remote logging from my little testing the other night looked fine, although I forgot to update matrix 17:12:17 <sgallagh> adamw: I ran the AD tests but didn't update the matrix. 17:12:19 <sgallagh> We're good there. 17:12:20 <adamw> wa1em: awesome, can you please do it now? :) 17:12:21 <adamw> sgallagh: ditto 17:12:32 <adamw> so with that info, i'd say coverage looks good 17:12:36 <jlanda> same here, I made the rsyslog thing on 1.7 but miss the matrix :D 17:12:46 <bcotton> #info Test coverage looks good 17:12:59 <adamw> every test is covered between beta-1.4 and beta-1.8 except SAS as per the ancient traditions 17:13:24 <wa1em> one sec and I can for sure 17:13:25 <bcotton> great 17:13:53 * adamw should really put that remote logging test in openqa... 17:14:25 <bcotton> any other questions or comments on test coverage? 17:15:19 <sgallagh> Updated. adamw I realized I didn't do the kickstart tests, but there really isn't a codepath there that isn't satisfied by the sssd, cockpit or FreeIPA tests 17:15:31 <wa1em> adamw, mind you I never got to the tcp optional on remote logging 17:15:31 <adamw> yeah, it Should be okay ;) 17:15:46 <adamw> wa1em: that's ok, 'optional' means optional :P 17:15:56 <bcotton> okay, well then I think we're ready to make a decision 17:15:57 <adamw> if the other stuff works the requirement is satisfied 17:16:03 <wa1em> I usually get to them tho hence the mention 17:16:30 <bcotton> #topic Go/No-Go decision 17:16:31 <bcotton> I will poll each team. Please reply “go” or “no-go” 17:16:35 <bcotton> FESCo? 17:16:42 <nirik> go go go 17:16:43 <sgallagh> go 17:16:49 <bcotton> #info FESCo is GO 17:16:53 <bcotton> RelEng? 17:17:13 <adamw> quick nirik, change hats 17:17:22 * nirik ducks into a phone booth 17:17:23 <mboddu> Go 17:17:23 <nirik> go 17:17:25 <bcotton> #info RelEng is GO 17:17:27 <bcotton> QA? 17:17:40 <jlanda> go 17:17:42 <sumantro> GO 17:17:43 <frantisekz> go 17:17:48 <bcotton> #info QA is GO 17:18:02 <cmurf> i think servants need their master to answer 17:18:08 <adamw> nope. 17:18:11 <cmurf> haha 17:18:11 <frantisekz> :D 17:18:13 <bcotton> #agreed Fedora 30 Beta RC-1.8 is GO 17:18:14 <mboddu> :D 17:18:14 <bcotton> #info Fedora 30 Beta will release on 2019-04-02 17:18:16 <sumantro> :D 17:18:25 <bcotton> #action bcotton to announce decision 17:18:32 <nirik> cool. Another ontime release. ;) 17:18:32 <bcotton> #topic Open floor 17:18:34 <bcotton> Anything else we need to discuss before closing? 17:18:42 <adamw> QA decision is made according to a policy: "QA approves the release if all validation tests appropriate to the release phase (Beta or Final) have been performed and there are no accepted blocker bugs that are unaddressed in the candidate compose, updates repository or previous releases updates repository. QA does not approve the release if there are any accepted blocker bugs that are unaddressed or if validation testing is incomplete. There is no 17:18:42 <adamw> room for discretion in this determination" 17:18:48 <cmurf> \o/ 17:18:52 * wa1em goes to setup for populating for B release seeding 17:18:55 <adamw> nirik: technically on time (tm) 17:18:56 <jlanda> There is a infra ticket about ppc64le repos on f30 17:19:03 <sgallagh> adamw: the *best* kind of on-time 17:19:07 <adamw> =) 17:19:12 <mhroncok> oh, that's soon :) 17:19:18 <jlanda> We should fix that too ideally 17:19:20 <bcotton> sgallagh++ you beat me to it 17:19:20 <zodbot> bcotton: Karma for sgallagh changed to 13 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 17:19:20 <mboddu> nirik: I think only the final matters 17:19:25 <mhroncok> adamw: can you please later halp me with the pycthon classroom lab? 17:19:37 <adamw> mhroncok: let's talk in #fedora-qa ? 17:19:41 <mhroncok> sure 17:19:45 <bcotton> jlanda: is it a problem? or just a thing? 17:19:52 <jlanda> Give me a sec 17:20:02 <wa1em> mhroncok, I'm game for helping that too 17:20:03 <nirik> ppc64le is not blocking. ;) 17:20:16 <nirik> but yes, we can fix it... 17:20:45 <jlanda> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/7672 17:21:01 <cmurf> i just this morning started getting update-testing complaints on ppc64le 17:21:31 <jlanda> I'm not the best candidate to determinate if it's a big problem or not, but looks weird at least 17:21:52 <jlanda> but yeah, is not blockinh 17:21:59 <jlanda> So let go 17:22:14 <bcotton> #info URLs are wrong for F-30 updates/updates-testing on ppc64le 17:22:17 <bcotton> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/7672 17:22:25 <bcotton> good to know about, at least 17:22:44 * nirik thinks we can fix them later today, so it shouldn't be a problem too much longer. ;) 17:22:58 <bcotton> #info nirik thinks we can fix them later today 17:22:59 <jlanda> nice nirik++ 17:23:14 <mboddu> nirik: I can help as well 17:23:16 <bcotton> anything else, or are we ready for me to send an email? 17:23:21 <cmurf> by the time ls -l completes in a ppc64le kvm, this will get fixed :D 17:23:26 <nirik> mboddu: i was counting on it. ;) 17:23:34 <cmurf> ^on x86_64 17:23:35 <jlanda> Send send 17:23:58 <mboddu> nirik:Sure :) 17:24:47 <bcotton> okay! thanks everyone. we'll see you again in a few weeks when we do this for final :-) 17:24:56 <bcotton> #endmeeting