15:03:15 <adamw> #startmeeting Fedora QA meeting
15:03:15 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Mar 19 15:03:15 2012 UTC.  The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:03:15 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:03:18 <adamw> #meetingname fedora-qa
15:03:18 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
15:03:22 <adamw> #topic roll call
15:03:26 * elad661 is here
15:03:26 * brunowolff is here
15:03:26 <adamw> sorry i'm a bit late
15:03:31 <adamw> who's around for happy qa fun times?
15:03:32 * pschindl is here
15:03:35 <tflink> adamw: not acceptable!
15:03:43 * tflink is present
15:04:18 * kparal here
15:04:33 * jskladan is in
15:05:07 <adamw> .fire adamw
15:05:07 <zodbot> adamw fires adamw
15:05:14 <adamw> back to bed for me!
15:05:51 <adamw> #topic previous meeting follow-up
15:05:52 * maxamillion is here
15:06:26 <adamw> #info "adamw to co-ordinate with pjones on grub2 update" - we got that done, f16 has the core.img size regression fixed, f17 has a shiny new grub2 2.0-beta2 which is currently still pretending to be 1.99.
15:06:47 <pjones> as does rawhide.
15:07:03 <adamw> yup.
15:07:22 <adamw> #info "j_dulaney to ensure announcements are sent for 2012-03-13 and 2012-03-14 test days" - that happened too.
15:07:41 <adamw> yay efficiency!
15:08:03 <adamw> so on to...
15:08:08 <adamw> #topic fedora 17 Beta status
15:08:17 <adamw> not looking so shiny here
15:08:23 * maxamillion fears for the state of this topic
15:09:11 <adamw> the accepted blockers are mostly not terrible, but the new anaconda has, 'ow you say, broken ze world.
15:09:37 <adamw> we've got five proposed blockers, so let's just review them quickly
15:09:47 <adamw> #topic fedora 17 Beta status - http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804454
15:10:02 <adamw> "Fedora-17-Beta-TC2-i686-Live-KDE.iso is oversized"
15:10:33 <adamw> sounds like a clear blocker, criterion "The network installation image, DVD image, and live images for release-blocking desktops must meet current size requirements"
15:10:43 <tflink> pretty clear blocker
15:10:54 <adamw> anyone -1 on this?
15:11:50 <adamw> #agreed 804454 is a clear blocker, criterion "The network installation image, DVD image, and live images for release-blocking desktops must meet current size requirements"
15:11:50 <brunowolff> +1 blocker
15:12:02 <adamw> (trying to get through this fast, so shortcutting the protocol a bit)
15:12:24 <adamw> #topic fedora 17 Beta status - http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804446
15:12:29 <maxamillion> I thought the bugzappers meeting was for the +1/-1 of blockers
15:12:34 <maxamillion> ?*
15:12:46 <adamw> maxamillion: we do a regular blocker review on friday
15:12:58 <adamw> but we often do this in qa meetings close to releases too
15:13:07 <adamw> in the interests of...not waiting till friday
15:13:17 <adamw> there are no bugzappers meetings at present.
15:13:25 <maxamillion> ah, ok ... I've been irregular in my meeting attendance for too long and just don't know better :X
15:13:28 <brunowolff> We only have a week right?
15:13:32 <adamw> brunowolff: yup.
15:13:33 <adamw> "cannot fresh install from DVD"
15:13:46 <maxamillion> ouch
15:13:46 <adamw> so this is the one for TC2 apparently not picking up packages from the install media
15:13:46 <tflink> also sounds like a pretty clear blocker
15:13:54 <maxamillion> tflink: +1
15:14:10 <kparal> +1 blocker. btw do we have criteria?
15:14:20 <adamw> alpha criterion "When booting from a DVD ISO image, the installer must be able to use the DVD local package source options"
15:14:28 <elad661> +1 blocker.
15:14:29 <kparal> great
15:14:36 <adamw> kparal: apparently we thought of that!
15:14:54 <adamw> #agreed 804446 is a clear blocker under Alpha criterion "When booting from a DVD ISO image, the installer must be able to use the DVD local package source options"
15:14:59 <kparal> there are some oracles in our midst
15:15:18 <adamw> #topic fedora 17 Beta status - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804483
15:15:42 <adamw> also sounds like a nice clear blocker, criterion "The installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces"
15:15:49 <adamw> on the bright side, at least none of these bugs is borderline...
15:16:07 <kparal> what does that mean_
15:16:27 <maxamillion> adamw: that's true
15:16:28 <adamw> none of them are those bugs where we spend half an hour arguing about whether they're blockers :)
15:16:30 <brunowolff> We don't need to waste time arguing about status.
15:16:34 <kparal> yep
15:16:35 <maxamillion> its all pretty cut and dry
15:16:35 <kparal> +1 blocker
15:16:39 <tflink> +1 blocker
15:16:42 <maxamillion> +1 blocker
15:16:50 * jskladan is with the crowd
15:16:58 <adamw> #agreed 804483 is a clear blocker per Alpha criterion "The installer must be able to complete an installation using the text, graphical and VNC installation interfaces"
15:17:46 <adamw> #topic fedora 17 Beta status - http://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785729
15:18:04 <adamw> well hey, here's a borderline one! sigh.
15:18:15 <adamw> kay's rationale for blocker status is in the first comment
15:18:54 <adamw> is argyllcms in a default install package set, does anyone know?
15:19:33 * kparal checks
15:19:46 <adamw> it's not directly in comps as default
15:19:53 <adamw> just looking at dependencies
15:19:59 <kparal> not installed
15:20:15 <adamw> okay, if it's not in a default install, i'm -1
15:20:23 <elad661> -1 as well
15:20:26 <brunowolff> I am not sure we want to block for hypothetical problems, on the other hand I'd like to see this fixed early so we don't find out about real problems too late.
15:20:44 <adamw> brunowolff: if it was installed by default i'd be on the same track as you, but if it's not i'm rather less worried
15:20:46 <tflink> -1 blocker
15:20:53 <maxamillion> -1 blocker
15:21:16 <brunowolff> -1 blocker (yeah I didn't see the not in default until after I finished typing)
15:21:17 <pschindl> -1 blocker
15:21:41 <adamw> whee
15:22:11 <adamw> #agreed 785729 is not a blocker as it's not present in the default install from DVD, network install or any release-blocking live spin
15:22:16 <adamw> (i just checked the lives.)
15:22:41 <adamw> and finally...
15:22:51 <adamw> #topic fedora 17 Beta status - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=804451
15:23:00 <adamw> "zenity depends on webkitgtk3"
15:23:05 <adamw> sounds odd, but this is the cause of kde live being oversize
15:23:23 <adamw> and it's not directly blocking f17beta, it's just via the dep on the 'tracking bug' kevin created
15:23:38 <adamw> by policy we review 'indirect blokcers' too, i'm happy to say +1 to this
15:23:48 <brunowolff> I can't see this as a blocker, even though it would fix the oversize issue.
15:24:09 <adamw> brunowolff: well, if we vote it not a blocker, that means it has to not block the tracker bug any more
15:24:23 <brunowolff> There may be other avenues to getting the KDE spin size down.
15:24:27 <elad661> There is a fix there, I think it should be a blocker.
15:24:36 <elad661> "zenity-3.2.0-4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17."
15:24:48 <elad661> we just need to push this to stable quickly.
15:25:10 <tflink> we're sure that nothing uses the webkitgtk3 stuff?
15:25:32 <adamw> i only just found out about this five minutes ago, so not personally, no. but i trust kk to know what he's talking about when it comes to the kde spin.
15:25:39 <brunowolff> Some optional stuff was turned on that hadn't been before. So turning it off should be OK.
15:26:15 <rdieter> I can confirm that webkitgtk3 was added as a new dep to zenity only very recently, and it is the main contribution to the kde spin growing by 10mb since alpha
15:26:26 <kparal> so what's the result? --html and --url options have been removed?
15:26:30 <adamw> i think the update doesn't turn the optional stuff off, it just removes the dep on the thing that makes the optional stuff work.
15:26:36 <brunowolff> Given they are fixing this, I am not worried about blocker status. Lets just call it one and move on.
15:26:45 <adamw> but it'd probably be good to check with mclasen that he's okay with the fix.
15:26:53 <adamw> rdieter: do you know if you or kk has contacted the desktop team?
15:26:57 <rdieter> mclasen is the one submitted the new build
15:27:04 <rdieter> so I assume he's ok with it. :)
15:27:38 <adamw> ah :)
15:27:45 <adamw> i guessed it was kk fixing it manually
15:27:56 <adamw> okay, so this seems all alright
15:28:11 <tflink> yep, I was assuming that it was fixed manually as well
15:28:24 <adamw> propose #agreed 804451 is accepted as a blocker as the avenue being taken to reduce KDE spin size
15:28:25 <tflink> I'm OK with blocker on this
15:28:33 <adamw> tflink: er, i menat something else. =)
15:28:38 <adamw> unilaterally! that's it.
15:28:46 <adamw> i knew it had a lly in it.
15:29:30 <tflink> eh, as long as we both knew what we meant :)
15:29:32 <adamw> anyone still have concerns?
15:30:09 <kparal> if we accept this as a blocker, don't we say this is the road they must take to take down the size?
15:30:16 <kparal> maybe they could have done it otherwise
15:30:22 <kparal> other way
15:31:00 <adamw> we can always change things.
15:31:09 <adamw> bugs can be un-accepted.
15:31:30 <tflink> NTH would also accomplish the purpose but would make things a bit messy in bz
15:31:45 <kparal> ok then
15:32:25 <kparal> in this case it doesn't probably matter so much, the fix is already on its way
15:32:49 <tflink> also true but you're probably right about blocker/nth
15:32:51 <adamw> #agreed 804451 is accepted as a (dependent) blocker as it's the root cause of the KDE live being oversize
15:33:03 <adamw> okay, that's all the proposed blockers; at least now we know what we're dealing with
15:33:27 <adamw> RC is due tomorrow but i doubt we'll make that, with the blocker list we have; it's conceivable, though
15:33:44 <adamw> anyone have any specific concerns to raise about the beta?
15:33:44 <maxamillion> would make today one hell of a bug smashing sprint
15:34:10 <adamw> even though tc2 is obviously bad we should still be able to confirm several of the accepted blockers are fixed with it, and set those to VERIFIED
15:34:18 <adamw> so please do take a look through that list, everyone
15:34:25 <adamw> i'll fire out a 'blocker bug status' email today
15:36:27 <adamw> hi andre
15:37:11 <adamw> okay, well, guess we'll move on then...
15:37:24 <adamw> #topic Test Day report
15:37:37 <adamw> we had another packed test day schedule last week, three events
15:37:53 <adamw> j_dulaney's not around, anyone else have news from any of the test days?
15:38:51 <adamw> from what I can see, the USB 3.0 one didn't really get off the ground, the GNOME 3.0 one looks to have gone off well, as does desktop i18n
15:39:10 <adamw> lots of bugs filed from desktop i18n
15:40:34 * adamw looks around nervously, wonders if the rapture happened while he wasn't looking
15:40:49 <maxamillion> sorry, distracted by other bits of the internet :X
15:41:01 <tflink> adamw: its moving from east to west and hasn't gotten to you yet :)
15:41:04 <adamw> NOT ACCEPTABLE
15:41:10 <adamw> .fire maxamillion
15:41:10 <zodbot> adamw fires maxamillion
15:41:20 * maxamillion puts on his dunce cap and sits in the corner in shame
15:42:00 <adamw> #info looks like the USB 3.0 test day misfired, but desktop i18n and GNOME Shell went off well with good participation and bug filing
15:42:26 <adamw> #topic Upcoming QA Events
15:42:33 <adamw> this week, in 'stuff adamw got wrong'...
15:42:46 <adamw> looks like RC is scheduled for Thursday, not Tuesday. you'd think I'd know this stuff, right?
15:42:58 * adamw vows to switch to diet crack
15:43:07 <tflink> Tuesday, Thursday ... same thing
15:43:14 <adamw> so many of the letters are the same!
15:43:39 <adamw> #info freeze is tomorrow, RC is scheduled for Thursday, we have lots of blocker resolvin' to do
15:43:55 <adamw> we also have the Sugar desktop test day coming up Thursday
15:44:13 <adamw> that looks like it still needs work, the test day page is still mostly template
15:44:22 <adamw> #action adamw to bug j_dulaney to bug Sugar test day folks
15:44:27 <maxamillion> adamw: diet crack!?!? blasphemy, you need more a more wholesome high but with less calories ... get Lite ... >.>
15:44:36 <adamw> #info Sugar test day set for Thursday as well
15:45:00 <adamw> maxamillion: crack lite just doesn't smoke smoothly, you know? you can't ever forget you're smoking second-rate crack
15:45:10 <maxamillion> adamw: fair criticism
15:45:44 <adamw> that's everything on my list, anyone have exciting plans for the week?
15:46:16 <maxamillion> oh, are there XFCE and KDE test days scheduled yet?
15:47:12 <maxamillion> I don't see any on the list .... in all reality the XFCE spin should be pretty solid since not a whole lot in XFCE land has changed but testing is still good, I know KDE went to 4.8.x so that likely needs some run throughs .... or are those just included as part of the Desktop validation testing and don't need dedicated test days anymore?
15:47:26 <adamw> maxamillion: neither.
15:47:30 <maxamillion> rgr
15:47:38 <adamw> maxamillion: nothing 'needs' a test day
15:47:47 <adamw> we don't have a set schedule; they're entirely optional
15:47:56 <adamw> it just comes down to whether anyone wants to run one or not
15:48:07 <adamw> no-one proposed an xfce test day or a kde test day, so...we don't have them.
15:48:14 <adamw> i don't think we've ever done a kde test day, actually
15:48:30 <maxamillion> yeah, come to think of it maybe we haven't
15:48:56 <kalev> on a different note, I noticed that the GNOME live cd failed the last best test compose and tracked it down
15:49:04 <maxamillion> alright, well .... I'll look and see if I can attend two of the open time slots to run both a KDE and XFCE test day and if so I'll propose slots on the schedule
15:49:06 <kalev> should be fixed by https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-4138 , maybe it could get some karma?
15:49:08 <adamw> kalev: oh right, should have put that in beta status
15:49:21 <adamw> we should really have a blocker bug for that
15:50:22 <adamw> #info OUT-OF-TOPIC-BAND: kalev tracked down cause of TC2 desktop spin failing to compose, it is fixed by https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-4138
15:50:43 <adamw> maxamillion: the open slots are very late, but there are non-thursdays available of course
15:51:05 <maxamillion> adamw: yeah, true .... I'll see what I can do, if not I'll just test and file bugs the best I can
15:51:15 <maxamillion> TEST ALL THE THINGS!
15:51:18 <maxamillion> >.>
15:51:34 <adamw> desktops actually make a reasonable amount of sense as late test days
15:51:41 <adamw> since there's a high chance bugs found will be nth or even blocker
15:51:51 <adamw> so...if we were going to run anything on those days, kde/xfce make sense, i guess.
15:52:29 <adamw> #info maxamillion will look at possibilities for kde/xfce test days
15:52:30 <maxamillion> well my schedule is about to get really crazy so I'm not even sure I could run the test days but I wanted to bring the topic up for discussion either way
15:52:33 <adamw> sure
15:52:46 <adamw> j_dulaney is the official test day co-ordinator for this cycle, so i'm a bit more hands-off than usual
15:53:22 <kparal> maxamillion: contact jreznik, he was interested in KDE test day as well
15:53:33 <adamw> #topic AutoQA update
15:53:39 <maxamillion> kparal: very cool, will do! thanks
15:53:40 <adamw> so we have ze big news here, right kparal?
15:53:54 <kparal> #info AutoQA 0.8 released and deployed
15:54:00 <kparal> #link https://kparal.wordpress.com/2012/03/16/autoqa-0-8-released/
15:54:14 <kparal> soooo, it's running!
15:54:19 <adamw> IT'S ALIIIIIIIVE
15:54:33 <adamw> #chair kparal tflink brunowolff
15:54:33 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw brunowolff kparal tflink
15:54:34 <jreznik> kparal: it was more "I try to propose it tmrw for our kde sig meeting", but yeah, I think it would be nice to have a test day
15:54:36 * adamw throws chairs around
15:54:41 <kparal> we have the resultsdb running as well. just look at http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/
15:54:48 <adamw> #info AutoQA 0.8 is released and deployed, resultsdb is in production
15:55:02 <brunowolff> Hey I don't want to be thrown around.
15:55:40 <adamw> kparal: awesome news! congratulations.
15:55:42 <kparal> our automated installation test is also running on production now: http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/resultsdb/frontend/search?type=Testcase&terms=rats_install
15:55:58 <kparal> the last two days it caught some broken dependencies problem
15:56:03 <adamw> #info rats_install is also in production
15:56:07 <kparal> I already asked relevant people to push fixed packages
15:56:17 <kparal> which brings me to this question
15:56:36 <kparal> do you think we should do automated installation from stable updates only, or updates-testing as well?
15:56:50 <kparal> the latter means it will be broken more often
15:57:00 <adamw> yeah, good question
15:57:01 <kparal> the former means it's more serious when it breaks
15:57:12 <adamw> the best answer, obviously, would be 'both' :)
15:57:23 <tflink> and the actual images tend to be a combination of the two during development
15:57:42 <kparal> I think the netinst has updates-testing enabled, right?
15:57:58 <kparal> OTOH DVD is composed mainly of stable repo
15:58:29 <kparal> so, if you have any preference, let's hear it
15:58:54 <adamw> can we do both?
15:59:03 <adamw> does the test take a lot of time/resources?
15:59:24 <kparal> it does, but we can do both
15:59:39 <kparal> but it will require some tweaking
15:59:52 <adamw> i think that would be the best, because there's obvious value to catching failures down both paths
16:00:19 <kparal> ok, I'll try it
16:00:45 <adamw> if we just have to pick one, i guess i'd vote for updates-testing as it's the default netinst case and meets the original 'israwhidebroken.com' intent
16:01:09 <kparal> great, that's the current behavior
16:01:25 <brunowolff> Note that rawhide currently doesn't inherit from updates-testing.
16:01:30 <adamw> anyone else have a take on this?
16:01:49 <adamw> brunowolff: sure, that's not the rawhide i meant :)
16:02:06 <tflink> brunowolff: AFAIK, rats uses images from releng so it isn't actually using rawhide anyways
16:02:53 <kparal> that name is somewhat obsolete, yes. maybe rawhide -> branched, rats -> bats? :)
16:03:01 <adamw> heh
16:03:03 <maxamillion> lol
16:03:17 <adamw> anyhoo, we're getting over time, so..
16:03:21 <adamw> anything else from autoqa side, kparal?
16:03:22 <kparal> all from me
16:03:37 <adamw> tflink?
16:03:41 <maxamillion> bats are informally know as "just wing'd rats" so there could be some fun pun about flying rats coming out of branches .... >.>
16:03:55 <tflink> nothing from me
16:04:06 <maxamillion> I see awesome t-shirts in our future
16:04:15 <kparal> :)
16:05:02 <adamw> halloween party!
16:05:11 <adamw> #topic open floor
16:05:16 <adamw> anything else from anyone else at all?
16:07:14 <bodhi_zazen> adamw: thanks for all your hard work on this =)
16:07:37 <adamw> on running around telling everyone what to do? you're welcome!
16:07:44 <adamw> sometimes they even listen.
16:08:03 <bodhi_zazen> your posts to the mailing list as well
16:09:07 <adamw> okay
16:09:11 <adamw> guess that's it, folks
16:09:20 <adamw> so if everyone can help out with blocker re-testing with tc2 that'd help a lot...
16:10:58 <adamw> thanks everyone!
16:11:00 <adamw> #endmeeting