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