17:00:49 <jkurik> #startmeeting F26 Beta Go/No-Go meeting
17:00:49 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu May 25 17:00:49 2017 UTC.  The chair is jkurik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:49 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:49 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f26_beta_go/no-go_meeting'
17:00:50 <jkurik> #meetingname F26-Beta-Go-No-Go-meeting
17:00:50 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f26-beta-go-no-go-meeting'
17:00:52 <jkurik> #topic Roll Call
17:00:53 <jkurik> .hello jkurik
17:00:55 <zodbot> jkurik: jkurik 'Jan Kurik' <jkurik@redhat.com>
17:01:09 <sgallagh> .hello sgallagh
17:01:10 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com>
17:01:13 <jkurik> #chair dgilmore nirik adamw sgallagh roshi mboddu
17:01:14 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw dgilmore jkurik mboddu nirik roshi sgallagh
17:01:23 <adamw> .hello adamwill
17:01:25 <zodbot> adamw: adamwill 'Adam Williamson' <awilliam@redhat.com>
17:01:31 <adamw> we have nothing to ship, so this will be an easy one...
17:01:33 <nirik> morning
17:01:43 <nirik> yeah, sadly should be a nice short meeting. ;(
17:01:50 <jkurik> hi everyone
17:02:21 <sgallagh> Yeah, shall we just hit the "No-Go" button and call it a day?
17:02:27 <jkurik> dgilmore, mboddu: are you around ? we need someone from releng
17:02:30 <adamw> well, we could probably do mini blocker review if folks are willing
17:03:06 <jkurik> I will start with some formalities, hopefully releng will join shortly
17:03:17 <jkurik> #topic Purpose of this meeting
17:03:18 <jkurik> #info Purpose of this meeting is to check whether or not F26 Beta is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria.
17:03:26 <jkurik> #info This is determined in a few ways:
17:03:28 <jkurik> #info * No remaining blocker bugs
17:03:29 <jkurik> #info * Release candidate compose is available
17:03:31 <jkurik> #info * Test matrices for Beta are fully completed
17:03:39 <jkurik> #topic Current status
17:03:40 <jkurik> As far as I am aware, the RC for F26 Beta is not yet ready ( https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6808 )
17:03:52 <jkurik> As such, we do not have test matrices for the RC ( https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Base_validation_testing&pagefrom=Fedora+23+Final+RC9+Base#mw-pages )
17:03:53 <jkurik> The lastest F26 nightly compose is available at https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org/compose/branched/Fedora-26-20170523.n.0/
17:04:02 <adamw> indeed.
17:04:14 <adamw> there seem to be some issues in the compose process; both the RC compose attempts got stuck in STARTED state
17:04:37 <adamw> nirik, are you representing releng? know anything about it?
17:04:56 <jkurik> afaik some builders went down and needed to be restarted, that slowed down the compose
17:05:10 <dgilmore> adamw: from looking there may be issues witha  libdb update
17:05:41 <nirik> right... they are hanging in lorax... and several failed in lorax -> libdb
17:05:58 <adamw> ooh.
17:06:17 <adamw> there's a libdb blocker fix which is supposed to *prevent* update hangs...
17:06:31 <dgilmore> it may be causeing compose hangs
17:06:31 <nirik> yep.
17:06:32 <adamw> maybe the fix has problems
17:06:41 <adamw> can you tell what libdb nevr is involved?
17:06:51 <adamw> well, maybe we should do this in #fedora-releng...
17:07:04 <dgilmore> DEBUG util.py:439:  (68/714) libdb-5.3.28-19.fc26.aarch64
17:07:25 <adamw> mmf, that's the latest one :/
17:07:30 <jkurik> #info RC for F26 Beta is not yet ready
17:07:32 <jkurik> #link https://pagure.io/releng/issue/6808
17:07:33 <jkurik> #info As we are missing RC there are no Test Matrices for F26 Beta
17:07:39 <adamw> relevant bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1443415
17:07:45 <nirik> should we cancel the hanging last 3? (2 ppc64's and 1 aarch64) to let the compose otherwise finish?
17:07:47 <adamw> i'll talk to pkubat
17:08:00 <mattdm> I think a post-mortem here or anywhere is useful
17:08:03 <adamw> *shrug* i guess
17:08:13 * roshi is here
17:08:16 <mattdm> Is there a reason this happened in the RC compose but wasn't caught in the nightlies?
17:08:21 <roshi> (sorry, got nerdsniped)
17:08:32 <dgilmore> mattdm: becayse nightlies use an older libdb
17:08:35 <adamw> mattdm: because this libdb is a blocker fix that's being pulled into the compose
17:08:58 <mattdm> okay, that makes sense
17:09:22 <jkurik> Let's do at least Mini-blocker review today
17:09:24 <mattdm> I mean, unfortunate that it's broken, but at least that's a simple cause
17:09:37 <jkurik> roshi, adamw: may I ask you please to chair the mini-blocker review ?
17:09:46 <roshi> sure thing
17:09:49 <jkurik> #topic Mini-Blocker Review
17:09:50 <jkurik> #link https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/26/beta/buglist
17:09:51 <dgilmore> nirik: we can cancel the running and tehy should let the compose carry on
17:09:58 * nirik does so
17:10:00 <mattdm> This is https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a4c41ecc27?
17:10:02 <dgilmore> some alt arches will not be very functional
17:10:08 <roshi> #info 2 proposed blockers for Beta
17:10:09 <mattdm> (sorry, I'm behind the topic. I can wait)
17:10:26 <adamw> mattdm: yes
17:10:35 <roshi> first up:
17:10:36 <roshi> #topic (1450639) [abrt] gnome-shell: operator delete(): gnome-shell killed by signal 6
17:10:39 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1450639
17:10:41 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-shell, NEW
17:12:06 <jkurik> I would agree with Comment #12 -> block for final, do not block for beta
17:12:17 <jkurik> s/12/21/
17:12:18 <adamw> a few people have run into this, it seems linked to totem perhaps, but i can't see why it should block beta at least
17:12:28 <adamw> for final it's more debatable but it'd need to affect a lot of people to be a blocker
17:12:36 <roshi> same here
17:12:53 <roshi> -1 for beta at the very least, from me
17:12:56 <sgallagh> Yeah, I'm -1 to blocking on this
17:13:26 <sgallagh> I've been running F26 as my daily driver for weeks and haven't seen this
17:14:02 <adamw> it's probably hardware related
17:14:09 <roshi> proposed #agreed - RHBZ#1450639 - RejectedBlocker - This bug doesn't clearly violate any Beta criterion and doesn't seem to affect enough users to justify a special case. Would consider for FE if there's time and a clean fix proposed.
17:14:18 * roshi added the bit about FE, but can take it out
17:14:51 <jkurik> ack
17:14:55 <sgallagh> Take it out for now. I'm not willing to risk a slip by adding GNOME patches that aren't blockers.
17:15:01 <roshi> kk
17:15:07 <sgallagh> Too much potential risk
17:15:11 <roshi> proposed #agreed - RHBZ#1450639 - RejectedBlocker - This bug doesn't clearly violate any Beta criterion and doesn't seem to affect enough users to justify a special case.
17:15:12 <adamw> +1 on that
17:15:14 <adamw> ack
17:15:27 <roshi> #agreed - RHBZ#1450639 - RejectedBlocker - This bug doesn't clearly violate any Beta criterion and doesn't seem to affect enough users to justify a special case.
17:15:36 <roshi> #topic (1446879) [abrt] gnome-shell: gweather_location_unref(): gnome-shell killed by signal 11
17:15:39 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1446879
17:15:42 <roshi> #info Proposed Blocker, libgweather, MODIFIED
17:18:50 <roshi> adamw: does -3 fix it for you as well?
17:18:50 <adamw> so a lil' tale here
17:19:09 * roshi takes a seat and grabs the popcorn
17:19:27 <adamw> once upon a time there was https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1443206
17:19:58 <adamw> then we sent out an update which was meant to fix that (-2.fc26), but several people -1'ed the update, reporting that they'd run into *this* crash
17:20:03 * mattdm listens
17:20:42 <adamw> at first i thought it was a consequence of / somehow related to the #1443206 crash, so was treating them as interdependent, but fmuellner said that's not the case, it just happened that people could hit this crash now the other one was out of the way
17:21:03 <adamw> so i removed the interdependency and proposed this as a blocker in its own right, on the basis that -2 fixed the already-accepted blocker and we should consider this one separately
17:21:29 <adamw> then in the meantime i found another commit that said it fixed a memory issue upstream, backported that - which is -3 - and it seems to fix everything for everyone
17:21:39 <adamw> it may also provide free unicorns
17:21:43 <roshi> sweet
17:21:46 * roshi was running low
17:21:59 <roshi> well, +1 blocker, even if it's fixed now in -3
17:23:02 <adamw> this one's not quite as slam-dunk-y as 1443206 was, since cmurf is the only person who claims he still  hit an infinitely-repeatable g-i-s crash with -2 , but i'd still be +1 because the impact is pretty bad if you *do* hit this crash, and multiple people hit it
17:23:14 <jkurik> it seems to be reasonable to block, so +1
17:23:18 <adamw> (like the other one, what happens is the entire Shell crashes, so you lose any open work)
17:25:04 <adamw> that's +3, right?
17:25:08 <roshi> yeah
17:26:05 <nirik> sure, +1
17:26:10 <roshi> proposed #agreed - RHBZ#1446879 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility."
17:26:25 <jkurik> ack
17:26:55 <adamw> ack
17:27:04 <roshi> #agreed - RHBZ#1446879 - AcceptedBlocker - This bug is a clear violation of the following criterion: "A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility."
17:27:19 <roshi> #topic AcceptedBlockers
17:27:34 <roshi> #info there's 5 accepted for us to go through
17:27:40 <roshi> #topic (1454897) Release-blocking Cloud base images missing from Fedora 26 composes
17:27:42 * mboddu is here
17:27:43 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1454897
17:27:46 <roshi> #info Accepted Blocker, distribution, ON_QA
17:28:15 <adamw> i believe dgilmore basically fixed this, so it shouldn't be a problem in completed composes
17:28:24 <roshi> #info the compose process hit a hangup, rel-eng is working to fix it
17:28:33 <adamw> i'd probably want to get one RC compose with the images present just to verify, before closing
17:28:38 <roshi> yeah
17:28:40 <roshi> makes sense
17:28:48 <roshi> nothing for us to do on this one until then though
17:28:56 <roshi> and we need to pull in -3 from the last bug as well
17:29:05 <roshi> so we're already getting another compose
17:29:15 <roshi> #topic (1443415) [TRACKING] Upgrade f25 to f26 get stuck in Cleanup
17:29:15 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1443415
17:29:16 <roshi> #info Accepted Blocker, dnf, MODIFIED
17:30:34 <mattdm> soooo, should this be negative karma for https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-a4c41ecc27?
17:30:41 <roshi> #info This bug is believed to be the source of the compose issues. Work is ongoing to resolve this issue.
17:31:31 <adamw> roshi: -3 was listed for rc1 (I just called it a 'better fix' for the existing blocker...)
17:31:43 <roshi> ah
17:31:49 <adamw> mattdm: i'm going to withdraw the update, right now it seems i can't for some reason (because it's 'pending' maybe)
17:31:57 <adamw> but i withdrew the 24 and 25 updates
17:32:02 <roshi> anything else to be done for this bug or should we move on?
17:32:13 <adamw> the new libdb does seem to fix this actual *bug*, but we obvbiously need to figure out what it's doing to the compose process and fix that
17:32:24 <mattdm> do we have a bug to track that?
17:32:54 * roshi doesn't recall one
17:33:07 <mattdm> and, is there a fast reproducer that doesn't require a full compose to be started?
17:34:36 <adamw> mattdm: for now i'm just following up in this bug
17:34:46 <adamw> since it's pretty clearly an issue in the patch for this bug
17:34:51 <mattdm> *nod* ok I'll watch there. that makes sense.
17:34:54 <adamw> dunno about reproducers
17:35:43 <nirik> it seems to be hitting runroot tasks for lorax stuff... so perhaps lorax in a mock chroot...
17:36:20 <adamw> could be that something missing in a mock chroot messes with what it's trying to do, sure
17:37:40 <mattdm> that bug is initially POWER, and most of the comments are about arm... do we know if the hangs were on those arches?
17:37:55 <adamw> some were on x86_64
17:37:58 <adamw> but the fix isn't really arch specific
17:38:06 <adamw> it's basically trying to detect when glibc/libpthread get updated
17:38:14 <adamw> and recreate some stuff if they are
17:39:00 <mattdm> ok
17:40:20 <roshi> anything else for this bug, or should we move on?
17:40:30 <roshi> just 3 more to check in on, then we can get to the vote
17:40:40 <adamw> nope, move on
17:40:44 <jkurik> I would suggest to move on
17:40:46 <roshi> #topic (1438046) initial-setup.service: Failed to set up stdin: Inappropriate ioctl for device
17:40:49 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1438046
17:40:52 <roshi> #info Accepted Blocker, initial-setup, MODIFIED
17:41:14 <adamw> pwhalen might know best about this one
17:41:37 <adamw> there's definitely an *attempt* to fix it (which will be pulled into any RC we actually manage to build)
17:42:04 <roshi> #info an attempted fix will be pulled into any RC for testing
17:42:36 * roshi skips the gnome-shell crash one because we already talked about that one
17:42:39 <roshi> #topic (1348688) Anaconda cannot access LVM partitions in a LUKS-encrypted disk partition after decryption
17:42:42 <roshi> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1348688
17:42:45 <roshi> #info Accepted Blocker, lvm2, ON_QA
17:44:15 <adamw> again, attempted fix will be pulled into any RC
17:44:20 <adamw> feedback on the update so far looks OK
17:44:30 <adamw> (though only one of those is specifically about the bug, i think)
17:44:46 <roshi> #info attempted fix will be pulled into any RC
17:44:56 <roshi> that's it for blocker review
17:44:58 <adamw> well
17:45:02 <roshi> ?
17:45:06 <jkurik> ?
17:45:07 <adamw> while we're here, should we grant an FE to the Samba CBE?
17:45:09 <adamw> CVE*
17:45:29 <jkurik> good point
17:45:31 <nirik> probibly so yeah
17:45:41 <roshi> I don't see that in the list
17:45:43 * roshi refreshes
17:45:46 <adamw> no, i'm just finding it
17:46:05 * roshi lets adamw take over
17:46:36 <adamw> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1455050
17:46:37 <nirik> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-c729c6123c
17:46:41 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1455050
17:46:50 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exception, samba, MODIFIED
17:47:02 <adamw> grrr
17:47:03 <adamw> #undo
17:47:04 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: INFO by adamw at 17:46:50 : Proposed Freeze Exception, samba, MODIFIED
17:47:06 <adamw> #undo
17:47:06 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x184cb650>
17:47:23 <adamw> #topic (1455050)  CVE-2017-7494 samba: Loading shared modules from any path in the system leading to RCE [fedora-all]
17:47:30 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1455050
17:47:33 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exception, samba, MODIFIED
17:47:36 <adamw> there we go
17:47:47 <adamw> big CVE, obviously shouldn't ship with it vulnerable, +1
17:47:54 <mattdm> yeah +1
17:47:56 <roshi> +1
17:47:59 <jkurik> +1 FE
17:48:13 <mattdm> (although AIUI SELinux does mitigate. So, yay.)
17:49:32 <roshi> proposed #agreed - RHBZ#1455050 - AcceptedFreezeException - We'd love to get a fix for this CVE in for Beta.
17:49:41 <nirik> +1
17:49:41 <adamw> proposed #accepted 1455050 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is a serious and widely-known security issue, we should not ship a Beta vulnerable to it
17:49:46 <nirik> ack
17:49:47 <adamw> grr
17:50:02 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1455050 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is a serious and widely-known security issue, we should not ship a Beta vulnerable to it
17:50:09 <roshi> ack to adamw
17:50:13 <jkurik> ack
17:50:19 <nirik> ack ack
17:51:09 <adamw> #agreed 1455050 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is a serious and widely-known security issue, we should not ship a Beta vulnerable to it
17:51:29 <jkurik> is that all from the Mini-blocker review ?
17:51:52 <roshi> think so
17:51:54 <jkurik> roshi, adamw: thanks
17:51:57 <jkurik> #topic Test Matrices coverage
17:52:01 <jkurik> #info As there is no RC yet, Test matrices are not ready as well
17:52:07 <jkurik> #info We are skipping the Test Matrices coverage check
17:52:09 <adamw> right, our coverage is standing at a nice, round number right now :)
17:52:18 <jkurik> :)
17:52:20 <adamw> isn't there a 'compose is available' check, anyway?
17:52:24 <adamw> it's in the preamble
17:52:31 <roshi> yeah
17:52:34 <adamw> <jkurik> #info This is determined in a few ways:
17:52:35 <adamw> <jkurik> #info * No remaining blocker bugs
17:52:35 <adamw> <jkurik> #info * Release candidate compose is available
17:52:35 <adamw> <jkurik> #info * Test matrices for Beta are fully completed
17:52:47 <adamw> seems like we should have a "is there a candidate?" section between the blocker bug section and the matrix check
17:53:25 <jkurik> I just wanted to state in the minutes that we skip this due to unavailable RC
17:53:37 <adamw> anyhoo, just a process noet
17:53:55 <jkurik> #topic Go/No-Go decision
17:54:00 <jkurik> here we go ...
17:54:05 <mattdm> GO!
17:54:08 <roshi> No-Go
17:54:10 <mattdm> oh, maybe not
17:54:23 <jkurik> No-Go
17:54:29 <nirik> lets just reship alpha and see if anyone notices? ;)
17:54:35 <nirik> it's pretty clear we are no go
17:54:53 <mboddu> No-Go
17:55:07 <adamw> +1 nirik
17:55:17 <adamw> slap a coat of paint on it
17:55:24 <adamw> #info QA votes no-go as there is no candidate.
17:55:27 <jkurik> proposed #info Fedora Project Lead is unsure whether we should ship nonexisting compose
17:55:32 <mattdm> lol
17:56:06 <jkurik> proposed #agreed Due to missing RC for the F26 Beta release and presence of blocker bugs, the decision is “No Go”. We slip the release for one week.
17:56:14 <adamw> just think - it's guaranteed to have absolutely no bugs at all
17:56:20 <jkurik> patch
17:56:24 <mattdm> the perfect release!
17:56:27 <jkurik> proposed #agreed Due to missing RC for the F26 Beta release and presence of blocker bugs, the decision is “No Go”. We ship the release for one week.
17:56:33 <mattdm> just like the sysadmin's dream of having no users
17:57:01 <roshi> ack
17:57:13 <mattdm> +1
17:57:43 <jkurik> #agreed Due to missing RC for the F26 Beta release and presence of blocker bugs, the decision is “No Go”. We slip the release for one week.
17:57:52 <jkurik> #action jkurik to publish the Go/No-Go result
17:57:54 <jkurik> #action jkurik to organize second round of Go/No-Go meeting for F26 Beta in one week at the same time
17:58:06 <jkurik> #topic Open floor
17:58:07 <jkurik> anything else to discuss today on this meeting ?
17:58:11 <mattdm> yeah...
17:58:29 <mattdm> Can I do anythin gto help coordinate the libdb bug?
17:58:36 <mattdm> bug fix, I mean? :)
17:59:32 <mattdm> Or is that conversation already happening (adamw I guess) and I'd just add more noise?
18:00:55 <adamw> sorry
18:00:57 <adamw> uh
18:01:06 <adamw> i think it should be ok, the dev's been active on the bug
18:01:12 <adamw> if we hit any roadblocks i'll let you know
18:01:59 <mattdm> adamw: thanks! I'll do what I can if needed, sit back out of the way otherwise :)
18:02:10 <jkurik> ok, anything else ?
18:03:01 <jkurik> Thanks everybody and see at least some of you in one hour on the Readiness meeting
18:03:10 <jkurik> #endmeeting