16:17:15 <adamw> #startmeeting Fedora QA meeting
16:17:15 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Dec 16 16:17:15 2013 UTC.  The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:17:15 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:17:16 <roshi> lol
16:17:20 <adamw> #meetingname fedora-qa
16:17:20 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
16:17:24 <jreznik> ooh!
16:17:25 <roshi> there's that
16:17:25 <adamw> #topic Roll call
16:17:27 <adamw> oh lookit that, it works
16:17:32 <adamw> it's the power of pure imagination!
16:17:32 * roshi is here
16:17:38 <roshi> it was afraid of being left out
16:17:39 <adamw> who's here for QA magic time, folks?
16:17:43 * tflink is here
16:17:46 * masta waves
16:17:50 <adamw> #chair roshi masta jreznik
16:17:50 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw jreznik masta roshi
16:17:50 * Viking-Ice is here
16:17:51 <roshi> once the humans start having their own meetings....
16:17:54 * danofsatx is present and mostly accounted for
16:17:56 * pwhalen is here
16:18:08 * nirik is here.
16:18:19 * jreznik is here
16:18:41 <nirik> ride the wave!
16:18:41 <adamw> phew, there go all the smelly people
16:18:41 * handsome_pirate waves
16:18:47 * cmurf is somewhere
16:18:47 <adamw> did we lose anyone? say something if we lost you
16:18:51 * sgallagh hangs about
16:18:56 <nirik> I'm lost. :)
16:18:56 <Viking-Ice> quickly assign tasks assign tasks!!!
16:19:06 * handsome_pirate hops down from the Crows Nest
16:19:07 <adamw> _ #action Viking-Ice do everything
16:19:10 <adamw> like that?
16:19:13 <handsome_pirate> +1
16:19:18 <Viking-Ice> adamw, I'm still here so no...
16:19:26 <adamw> OH HEY i didn't see you there
16:19:38 <zodbot> adamw fires cmurf_
16:19:40 * Martix is here
16:19:45 <cmurf> oh finally
16:19:48 <adamw> haha, morning zodbot
16:19:53 <adamw> cmurf: yeah, there's THAT shoe
16:20:04 <adamw> #topic Previous meeting follow-up
16:20:37 <adamw> #info "adamw to draft a new test case and matrix row for validating cloud image checksums" - this was done, https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2013-December/119513.html
16:20:48 <adamw> yes, i'm so goddamn awesome that after three weeks i finally managed to write a lousy test case
16:20:48 <zodbot> adamw fires nirik
16:21:02 <adamw> one of these days i'll get around to adding satellit_'s sugar tests to the desktop validaiton page :/
16:21:22 <adamw> did anyone have a minute to look at the draft yet? robatino, you're the sanity testing guy?
16:21:32 <robatino> looks okay to me
16:21:34 <danofsatx> I looked at it...
16:21:43 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  It's been about two years since I've written a Fedora test case, I guess I'm due
16:21:49 <robatino> note that when i test lives, it actually includes both lives and spins
16:22:01 <cmurf> "cmurf left the chat room. (*.net *.split)"  Ummm noo, i'm right here.
16:22:17 <handsome_pirate> lol @ topic change
16:22:47 <adamw> robatino: i basically split the 'targets' up more or less by directory, smooshing arches together
16:22:50 <roshi> looks good to me
16:22:55 * cmurf looked
16:22:57 <adamw> if a different separation makes sense, do suggest it
16:23:17 <adamw> also if i left out any deliverables
16:23:21 * handsome_pirate is satisfied
16:23:32 <adamw> i _really_ feel the lack of a single page that lists out everything we're supposed to ship as part of a release
16:23:49 <nirik> such a page is likely to change a lot for f21. ;)
16:23:54 <cmurf> we need a  new topic, again
16:23:55 <roshi> yeah
16:23:58 <adamw> ha. don't even joke
16:23:58 <nirik> but we should definitely have one for then
16:24:00 <adamw> oh boy
16:24:22 <adamw> do i re-start meeting? who knows?
16:24:26 <adamw> #topic Testing
16:24:30 <adamw> oh hey, there we go.
16:25:00 <adamw> so, is it OK if I go ahead and push this change out now? seems like everyone's on board
16:25:00 <adamw> and if i don't push stuff through i tend to forget about it :)
16:25:03 <cmurf> apparently this is an automated monday morning lesson in patience
16:25:07 <adamw> #topic Previous meeting follow-up
16:25:32 <cmurf> yes
16:26:38 <adamw> #action adamw to push the sanity check proposal out, group seems to approve
16:26:53 <adamw> #topic Fedora 20 recap
16:27:03 <adamw> #info huge vote of thanks to everyone who helped with F20 validation, great job folks
16:27:05 <Viking-Ice> I have not had time to review that sanity proposal
16:27:13 <adamw> Viking-Ice: ah ok, i'll hold for now
16:27:25 <adamw> Viking-Ice: yell if  you have feedback
16:27:51 <adamw> Viking-Ice: sorry, hard to keep track of who's responded and who hasn't with all the netsplitting :/
16:28:26 <danofsatx> I looked at it, but don't feel I'm qualified yet to offer a vote.
16:28:46 <danofsatx> maybe for F21, I'll have more of a clue.
16:28:50 <Viking-Ice> we dont usualy vote on this stuff more like ack/nack gradually improve
16:29:47 <Viking-Ice> patch approach
16:29:50 <danofsatx> ok, let me rephrase.... s/a vote/any feedback
16:30:07 <adamw> danofsatx: roger, thanks
16:30:20 <adamw> so F20 is going out tomorrow
16:30:36 <cmurf> gottseidank
16:30:41 <adamw> i worked on the commonbugs page over the weekend, i think it's in fairly good shape: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F20_bugs
16:31:02 * jreznik is looking
16:31:05 <adamw> please, if anyone's aware of additional bugs that should be listed there, do add them, or mark the bug with the CommonBugs keyword
16:31:19 <adamw> (that will cause those of us who check and add issues to commonbugs every so often to see it)
16:31:36 <jreznik> adamw: for that unfortunate bug in dracut, docs guys are aware and removing it
16:31:48 <adamw> i've just been made aware of serious issues using F20 as a FreeIPA server, so i'll add a note for that soon
16:31:49 * satellit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=888307  ? DVD as repo when inserted?
16:32:19 <adamw> satellit: i do wish we could get that fixed :/ it's probably not a bad thing to have on there indeed, can you throw CommonBugs keyword on it if it's not there already?
16:32:29 <adamw> which reminds me...
16:32:29 <satellit> k
16:32:36 <Viking-Ice> is that not something the freeipa guys should have been adding themselves or?
16:32:40 <adamw> #action adamw to check F19 and F18 commonbugs for issues that should be copied to F20
16:33:16 <adamw> Viking-Ice: eh, it's not a settled thing - commonbugs isn't really owned by anyone and doesn't have any real policies associated with it, near as i can tell, it's just something everyone hopes happens
16:33:50 <adamw> i tend to do a lot of the writing on it just because it's something i picked up doing, i don't mind adding new notes, it's always good to have people help though
16:34:03 <satellit> done
16:34:07 <adamw> satellit: thanks
16:34:09 <Viking-Ice> adamw, the time it takes me to explain to you is the same time I could have spend writing it myself ;)
16:34:21 <Viking-Ice> ( as opposed to have you do it for me )
16:34:25 <danofsatx> there was a 3-digit bug that came up in KDE channel the other day. it's 15 years old and not fixed yet...should we do something about that one?
16:34:31 * danofsatx is still looking for the bug in question
16:34:39 <adamw> Viking-Ice: eh, if they knew what was going on, sure - it just came in through the RH mail chain, like "omg our feature is broken for f20! STOP THE RELEASE!"
16:34:53 <robatino> .bug 998
16:34:57 <zodbot> robatino: Bug 998 Network install/upgrade is unsafe, should check GPG signatures. - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=998
16:34:59 <adamw> Viking-Ice: as opposed to, you know, testing it *before* we signed off on release :/
16:35:02 <Viking-Ice> and you responded it's already out the door sucks to be you ;)
16:35:08 <adamw> yup
16:35:12 <danofsatx> yeah, that one ...thanks robatino
16:35:27 <adamw> danofsatx: that one is...a greatest hit
16:35:41 <adamw> danofsatx: you're not a true fedoran till you've had your first chat about #998 :P
16:36:07 <danofsatx> well, then, I guess I'm official now, huh?  ;)
16:36:16 * nirik doesn't think that merits a common bugs... I mean, what would you say... "Still can't solve insolvable problems" :)
16:36:21 <adamw> long story shorter, it's deceptively tricky to 'fix', at least if you take a sufficiently persnickety view of how it 'ought' to work. it's not really actually possible to 'fix' it without something like Secure Boot being enabled, according to some.
16:37:13 <adamw> #info if you have a bug that you think is sufficiently common/serious to merit a commonbugs note, do add it to the page yourself (following instructions in teh page source) or throw a CommonBugs keyword at it
16:37:50 <cmurf> wow a 15 year old bug
16:38:04 <adamw> so, we do have a few brown paper bag issues for release time, probably good if everyone knows about them
16:38:08 <cmurf> "Aliases:	fidelitas-ex-nihilo, oldest-bug-evar"
16:38:08 <adamw> so if anyone asks you know what to tell 'em
16:38:23 <adamw> cmurf: i'm a fan of 'fidelitas ex nihilo', dunno which scholar came up with that
16:38:56 <adamw> most notably, any install done to LVM thinp with the release package set (so DVD, live) will fail to boot
16:39:06 <adamw> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F20_bugs#lvm-thinp-fail for the instructions to avoid that
16:39:43 <adamw> lots of people are probably going to be reporting incorrect yum errors about groups not existing, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_F20_bugs#yum-group-errors for that
16:39:52 <adamw> (but then they'll be reporting that for f19 too)
16:40:14 <adamw> and yeah, from my inbox this morning it sounds like running a FreeIPA server on F20 is a really bad idea at present
16:40:22 * satellit wish DVD could be used for livecd-tools remix repo and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1043208 provide ksflaten .ks in spin-kickstarts
16:41:08 <Martix> adamw: I use LVM thinp and I have to use older ..-300.. kernel to successfully boot
16:41:16 <satellit> noted today the if install @sugar-desktop cannot find it  when do yum update
16:41:30 <adamw> #info Fedora 20 brown paper bag bugs: LVM thinp crash #1040669, yum group errors #1043207 #1014202 #1043221 #1043231, FreeIPA server LDAP attributes missing https://fedorahosted.org/389/ticket/47631
16:41:44 <adamw> Martix: see the commonbugs note - update dracut and rebuild initramfs, should fix it
16:41:47 <cmurf> Martix: it's unlikely the kernel, but the initramfs for that older kernel that makes it work
16:42:17 <cmurf> i tested lvmthinp with -301 and it works if dracut builds a correct initramfs
16:42:27 <adamw> of course, if everyone can blog / tweet / G+ / insert-favoured-propaganda-tool-here about the release that'd be great
16:42:40 <Martix> I tried running dracut yesteday, is this in today's updates?
16:42:44 <Viking-Ice> is it the classic bug of anaconda not rebuilding initramfs after install?
16:42:47 <cmurf> Martix: no
16:42:57 <cmurf> Martix: you have to revert to an older dracut
16:42:57 <adamw> Martix: it was pushed stable late yesterday i think, been in updates-testing till then
16:43:00 <adamw> Viking-Ice: no
16:43:04 <cmurf> oops ok there we go
16:43:16 <adamw> Viking-Ice: it's the bug 'dracut team completely broke dracut in RC1'
16:43:21 <Martix> adamw: ok, thanks
16:43:23 <adamw> Viking-Ice: I wrote a mail to the list about it
16:43:46 <danofsatx> one of many.....
16:43:47 <adamw> Viking-Ice: anaconda does re-generate the initramfs after install, now; but that's no good if harald broke initramfs generation for thinp :(
16:43:47 <Viking-Ice> I need to expand my bug horizon to cover dracut as well
16:43:56 <adamw> danofsatx: heh
16:44:00 <cmurf> lvmthinp is that poor godforsaken ornery feature that just got beat up left and right the entire release
16:44:17 <adamw> hehe
16:44:23 <Viking-Ice> btrfs for the win!
16:44:48 <adamw> thinp inside btrfs!
16:44:48 <adamw> on raid!
16:44:48 <adamw> on stilts! on the high wire!
16:45:05 <cmurf> i can vouch for btrfs working on thinp virtual LVs
16:45:14 <Viking-Ice> why....
16:45:16 <cmurf> of up to 32TB on a 100GB disk
16:45:25 <danofsatx> adamw: s/stilts/iscsi
16:45:35 <cmurf> how else are you going to make a 32TB btrfs volume without buying a lot of drives?
16:45:39 <Viking-Ice> danofsatx, nfsv4
16:45:43 <Viking-Ice> not iscsi
16:45:44 <Viking-Ice> ;)
16:45:59 <Viking-Ice> on top of glusterfs
16:46:00 <adamw> and people thought my storage matrix was complete
16:46:14 <adamw> this is the kind of stuff you actually wind up _thinking_ about if you sit down and try and draw one...
16:46:17 <danofsatx> who said a crazy thing like that?
16:46:24 <adamw> someone on the mailing list
16:46:57 <adamw> or in my head. one of the two. i've been working hard lately.
16:47:08 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  I like btrfs
16:47:13 <cmurf> yum cocktails, all weekend long
16:47:15 <cmurf> i saw them
16:47:18 <danofsatx> well, the only one that responded was cmurf....
16:47:20 <adamw> so, aside from battening down the hatches for the yum bugs, anyone think of anything else we need to do to prep for release?
16:47:28 <adamw> any steps that aren't in an sop and that i've forgotten?
16:47:30 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  I have btrfs on raid of scsi and san
16:47:50 <adamw> danofsatx: oh yeah, it was an off-topic subthread of the desktop package set rework mails
16:48:22 <danofsatx> k...I don't feel like re-reading them right now. ;)
16:48:25 <cmurf> "Re: Criterion revision proposal: KDE default applications"
16:48:28 <cmurf> that's the thread?
16:48:33 <adamw> danofsatx: i don't blame you
16:48:38 <adamw> cmurf: yeah, but it's split aacross three lists
16:48:45 <adamw> i didn't expect it to be _quite_ so controversial
16:48:47 <cmurf> oh piddle on the floor
16:48:55 <adamw> since the blocker rejection was voted through in like 15 seconds. but eh
16:48:57 <cmurf> what other two lists?
16:49:01 <adamw> desktop@ and kde@
16:49:14 <cmurf> and it's most controversial on which list?
16:49:18 <adamw> i wouldn't worry about it, i obviously have more work to do on the more radical proposals
16:49:24 <adamw> all of them? :P
16:49:43 <Viking-Ice> the output from the WG lands on the WG
16:49:45 <Viking-Ice> period
16:49:56 <adamw> Viking-Ice: i wasn't even thinking about the WG stuff]
16:50:05 <cmurf> please tell me you didn't suggest Manual Partitioning just be turned off, because if that's controversial we're screwed
16:50:13 <adamw> cmurf: no, nothing like that
16:50:31 <cmurf> ok so there's maybe hope i filter through them later
16:50:36 <Viking-Ice> so  DE ( anything ) is going out of our criteria into WG's own product critera
16:50:37 <adamw> Viking-Ice: everyone else seems to be cheerfully assuming all this fedora.next stuff is actually going to happen for f21, which in my opinion is batshit crazy, but never mind
16:51:00 <Viking-Ice> adamw, you know why that is right?
16:51:00 <cmurf> batshit is great fertilizeer
16:51:06 <adamw> Viking-Ice: i'm kind of working under the assumption it's all going to fall apart and/or be punted so we'll have a perfectly normal F21 release to worry about, but no-one else is on that page with me apparently. yet.
16:51:10 <jreznik> adamw: we will see in January...
16:51:20 <jreznik> but I'm with adamw...
16:51:26 <tflink> yeah, I figure there's not much to worry about yet
16:51:41 <adamw> tflink: well the thing that bugs me is that we can't do any planning, because it's all up in the air
16:51:52 <tflink> well, not much point in worrying too much until we have anything concrete to work with
16:51:52 <adamw> i can't get a proposal like this through because everyone's like 'OH BUT FEDORA NEXT!'
16:51:52 <Viking-Ice> adamw, they have this glorious fuckup of halting Fedora until it's ready. It takes time for the WG's to to climb the elephant and duck tape the wings on it
16:51:54 <adamw> sigh
16:52:15 <cmurf> duct tape
16:52:19 * satellit don't forget the feather
16:52:19 <Viking-Ice> the WG is an utter and total failure
16:52:21 <cmurf> pronounced like duck tape
16:52:36 <danofsatx> the brand name is Duck Tape.
16:52:37 <cmurf> if only we had duck tape, to prevent ducks from exploding or something
16:52:41 <adamw> the worst case scenario is fedora.next falls apart and fesco decides to go ahead and do a release four months later and we don't have time to go and fix these things properly so we get to go through f21 with the duct tape again
16:52:57 <cmurf> haha really, a brand of duct tape called Duck Tape, brilliant
16:52:57 <Viking-Ice> satellit I would not be surprised if that ends up being the output they just tar and feather it and throw it of a cliff
16:52:57 <adamw> arbitrary live image size targets and suboptimal package sets and all the other stuff we could be fixing now
16:53:08 <Viking-Ice> fly baby fly <sploink>
16:53:19 <adamw> cmurf: the question of whether it's called duct tape or duck tape is only marginally less controversial than that wikipedia page about wrestling :P
16:53:27 <adamw> Viking-Ice: haha, someone needs to gif that'
16:53:38 <cmurf> oh i'm not looking at that wikipedia page ever never
16:54:16 <adamw> so, ok
16:54:21 <adamw> now we got our bellyaching done
16:54:33 <cmurf> F21 is an unknown until January
16:54:35 <cmurf> right?
16:54:36 <handsome_pirate> adamw:   phear
16:54:44 <tflink> cmurf: at a minimum, yeah
16:54:46 <adamw> #info please post any thoughts you have on lessons learned from F20 QA cycle to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_20_QA_Retrospective
16:54:53 <adamw> and quickly:
16:54:53 <cmurf> So either we get something coherent in January, or there will be a punt in January, right?
16:54:57 <adamw> #topic Fedora 21 planning
16:55:01 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  I was under the impression from fesco that earlist f21 would land is September
16:55:05 <adamw> cmurf: and yes, that's correct
16:55:07 <handsome_pirate> Oh
16:55:11 <handsome_pirate> That was perfect timing
16:55:14 <adamw> handsome_pirate: that's assuming they make the decision in january...
16:55:14 * handsome_pirate dances
16:55:18 <nirik> punt to what?
16:55:23 <sgallagh> handsome_pirate: Yes, I was just digging up the FESCo ticket there.
16:55:26 <jreznik> cmurf: yes and it's not going to happen earlier than the and of august
16:55:40 <cmurf> F21 for horses vs F21 for unicorns
16:55:41 <jreznik> s/and/end
16:55:47 <adamw> #info Fedora 21 is up in the air on the basis of the fedora.next proposals until January
16:55:57 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  Come January, I'm going to point out to FESCo that we (QA) was promised 3 months, no matter hwat
16:56:02 <handsome_pirate> s/hwat/what
16:56:06 <adamw> #info we cannot do significant F21 planning until we know what the FESCo plan for the fedora.next stuff is, which will happen then
16:56:16 <nirik> right.
16:56:22 <sgallagh> https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1178
16:56:28 <adamw> #info F21 GA cannot come earlier than late August
16:56:36 <jreznik> handsome_pirate: yep, that 3 months are in that outlined schedule
16:56:58 <handsome_pirate> So, even if fedora.next dies, *we still get our three months*
16:56:59 <cmurf> OK so whether F21 is standard magic or new magic, there's going to be a ~3 month retooling gap?
16:57:02 <anhhct> guys i wanna know the fedora 20 counter on the project homepage is set based on which timezone? thanks!
16:57:12 <adamw> so, yeah, i was hoping we'd be able to talk about various things we can do to try and plan a more organized workload for F21 cycle, but it's hard to cover a lot of that stuff when we don't know where fedora.next will go.
16:57:22 <nirik> anhhct: try asking in #fedora-websites
16:57:26 <handsome_pirate> anhhct:  gmt, I believe
16:57:32 <sgallagh> adamw: The intent was for the time between F20 and F21 planning to be made available for QA and Rel-eng to play catch-up on their automation efforts
16:57:47 <adamw> sgallagh: yeah, I know
16:57:52 <nirik> sgallagh: and to ramp up/work on new needs.
16:57:57 <sgallagh> Yes
16:57:57 <Viking-Ice> there is more then just automation that needs to be worked on < sigh>
16:58:09 * handsome_pirate notes that if we don't get that time, he does have enough pikes for FESCo
16:58:23 <sgallagh> Viking-Ice: There's plenty that needs work. However automation is a big bang for the buck. It frees people up to work on those other things
16:58:33 <adamw> sgallagh: what worries me slightly is the prospect that we end up saying 'well, fedora.next isn't ready yet but it sure will be soon, let's wait for it!' then in *february or march* the call comes 'yeah...no fedora.next, let's just do a quick release of the old stuff in august, we don't need to change anything because it all worked so well last time, right?'
16:58:37 <nirik> handsome_pirate: it's already scheduled. Put yer pikes away. ;)
16:58:38 <tflink> handsome_pirate: that seems a bit ... excessive
16:58:39 <Viking-Ice> handsome_pirate, there is no use for us getting that time unless we can map out what to use it for
16:59:11 <Viking-Ice> we have to wait for the wg sheningan output until we know what to use that time for
16:59:14 <handsome_pirate> Viking-Ice:  We have quite a bit of it mapped out already
16:59:21 <nirik> adamw: I would be very against that... as I think others would be too.
16:59:29 <adamw> well, that's good. i just like worst case scenarios.
16:59:38 <sgallagh> adamw: I'll state on the record right now: my vote will not to be fewer than six months to deliver a "traditional" F21 release, if we choose that route.
16:59:40 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  That's why I have the pikes
16:59:49 <cmurf> yeah it's commit or die in January
16:59:53 <nirik> sgallagh: +1
16:59:56 <cmurf> that's far enough out as it is
17:00:01 <sgallagh> So if we decide in March that Fedora.next is F22, then the earliest you worry about is late 'September
17:00:07 <Viking-Ice> adamw, I would not be surprised if that worst case scenario of yours comes to pass
17:00:36 <adamw> so anyhoo, i doubt we have time to really discuss the big topic for this section either, i was thinking we could talk about what we can do with the criteria and validation tests to make things better for f21
17:00:43 <adamw> but we've had an hour and that's probably a half hour topic
17:00:48 <adamw> sgallagh: that'd be good.
17:01:01 <sgallagh> Viking-Ice: Two FESCo members just stated, in writing, that this is not what we will ask for.
17:02:08 <adamw> one thing we could knock off, though: does someone want to be the Test Day organizer for f21 cycle? i was thinking it'd be a good thing for roshi, but that's just an idea
17:02:11 <cmurf> so is the time frame for F21 the same regardless of whether it's Fedora.next or Fedora.current?
17:02:13 <Viking-Ice> sgallagh, I will believe it when I see it in actions things have been said and what has actually been done has contradict that
17:02:19 <Viking-Ice> in the past
17:02:37 <Viking-Ice> adamw, no organize tracker takes care of that
17:02:49 <Viking-Ice> want a test day file a ticket
17:02:50 <adamw> cmurf: the *minimum* frame is the same, anyway. presumably it's up to fesco to decide whether it thinks we should do 'fedora.next on fedora.old time', 'fedora.next but take longer for the initial release', or 'abort! abort! abort!'
17:02:53 <Viking-Ice> first come first serve
17:03:20 <Viking-Ice> roshi can just always take those tickets if he wants to ( or someone else )
17:03:20 <adamw> Viking-Ice: someone has to read all the tickets, help people who need help to organize their event, reconcile dates, post the schedule, ensure the events actually run properly, post news about them...
17:03:28 <adamw> Viking-Ice: well they don't *have* to, but it works out well if someone does
17:03:28 <sgallagh> cmurf: We made a guarantee that nothing would come sooner than August, and based on the WG output might be granted additional time.
17:03:31 <cmurf> adamw: so there's maybe a 50/50 chance there will be one release of Fedora in 2014
17:03:37 <Viking-Ice> adamw, that someone can be anyone
17:03:40 <Viking-Ice> and should be
17:03:42 <adamw> cmurf: i am not, at this point, prepared to stick numbers on anything
17:03:59 <cmurf> actually, it sounds like 100%
17:04:12 <roshi> I like helping with the test days
17:04:17 <cmurf> there seems to be no way in that timing for there to be more than one
17:04:23 <adamw> Viking-Ice: sure, multiple people can always do it, just seems like from experience test days work best when someone steps up to make sure it always happens
17:04:26 <nirik> cmurf: right, one release next year.
17:04:48 <roshi> and I'm fine with just taking the tickets as Viking-Ice suggests
17:04:56 <sgallagh> cmurf: That depends in part on the WG output and what defines Fedora releases going forward. There's been some chatter about the Base having a more rapid cycle, but we need to see where that goes.
17:04:56 <adamw> Viking-Ice: but hey, your approach is the correct one in 'policy' terms i think, let's just say everyone please help out with test day stuff, and roshi will likely look to pick up a lot of them
17:04:57 <Viking-Ice> adamw, as I said roshi can then always beat people grabbing those tickets
17:05:24 <roshi> I don't think anyone needs to be beaten
17:05:27 <roshi> :P
17:05:32 <adamw> yeah, there isn't usually a stampede to trac :P
17:05:38 <Viking-Ice> adamw, doing it this way leaves rooms for others to participate and learn in the process ( which you exclude if roshi or someone else own the process )
17:05:53 <adamw> #info everyone please help out with test days as you can, roshi will look to make sure they aren't neglected
17:05:59 <Viking-Ice> plus you cant depend on RH employees anyway so...
17:06:03 <roshi> Viking-Ice: I don't want to own the process - or any process
17:06:09 <cmurf> oh dear
17:06:14 <Viking-Ice> roshi, nor should you
17:06:20 <adamw> okay then
17:06:31 <roshi> I jsut want to be able to help move things along, when and where they're needed :)
17:06:43 <adamw> any other topics for f21 planning we can cover in the, er, negative six minutes we have left? :)
17:07:17 <adamw> i guess we'll table the criteria/matrix stuff for next week
17:07:29 <danofsatx> are we having a meeting next week?
17:07:41 <danofsatx> it *is* two days before Christmas
17:07:56 <roshi> yeah, which is a great time to pontificate on what ifs danofsatx
17:07:59 <adamw> well, let's say 'next time'
17:08:02 <cmurf> F21 planning: I don't know how to achieve this but I think it's inherently valuable to stick the final release date, as it's set once beta go has occurred.
17:08:03 <Viking-Ice> you mean fake christmas with coca cola santa
17:08:09 <adamw> but if people want to, we can
17:08:25 <Viking-Ice> Yule (real christmas )  is on the 21 dec
17:08:42 <adamw> cmurf: yeah, i would like that too, it's what i'm trying to work towards with these proposals
17:09:17 <cmurf> yeah, a 2 week slip on beta is not the same as a 2 week slip of final
17:09:40 <adamw> that's why i keep talking about how can we ensure things we want working at final are actually tested by beta
17:09:47 <adamw> anyhoo, next time :)
17:09:48 <handsome_pirate> Viking-Ice:  If you think about it, that Jesus dude was likely born in August
17:09:49 <cmurf> yes please
17:09:57 <handsome_pirate> Viking-Ice:  So, it's all fake :)
17:10:22 <adamw> handsome_pirate: dec 21 is the winter solstice, the one inarguably significant event that happens during the period :)
17:10:34 <adamw> no matter your calendar or creed...everyone notes the solstice
17:10:52 <cmurf> we value the photons from our local star
17:11:15 <adamw> #topic Open floor
17:11:25 <adamw> anyone have something important that needs to be covered now?
17:11:34 <adamw> (since we're over time, trivial stuff to the list or next time)
17:11:49 <handsome_pirate> adamw:   Indeed :)
17:11:55 * danofsatx plans trivial question for qa channel later
17:11:56 <Viking-Ice> so post mortem release QA meeting on the 23
17:12:10 * handsome_pirate wonders why the year isn't shifted so that Jan 1 is on the solstice
17:12:14 <Viking-Ice> danofsatx 42
17:12:31 <handsome_pirate> lol
17:13:26 <adamw> Viking-Ice: something like that...well, figure this was the post mortem, next week is the reanimation :P
17:13:39 <cmurf> bring a cat
17:13:58 <Viking-Ice> well we have 13 santa's so I bring one of the with me
17:14:01 * danofsatx wonders if the wife will miss her pure black devil of a feline
17:14:21 <handsome_pirate> cmurf:  cat?
17:14:29 <Viking-Ice> or as we call them yule lads
17:14:30 <Viking-Ice> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yule_Lads
17:14:31 <handsome_pirate> cmurf:  I usually have my towel with me, but a cat?
17:14:49 <cmurf> reanimations require at least one cat per reanimation, duh
17:15:04 <Viking-Ice> ignore that coca cola dress they are wearing
17:15:09 <Viking-Ice> on that wikipedia image
17:15:22 <cmurf> ok so Rawhide is how raw usually?
17:15:24 <satellit_e> Schrodinger's cat?
17:15:40 <adamw> sounds like december is the ideal time of year to be a shoe thief in iceland
17:15:42 <cmurf> is there at least one build a week that'll install and boot or what?
17:15:44 <handsome_pirate> cmurf:  Bring a towel
17:15:51 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  LOL
17:16:01 <handsome_pirate> adamw:  December is a bad time to be in Iceland
17:16:01 <adamw> cmurf: installing rawhide is usually the dodgiest part, it's usually easier to install previous release and update to it
17:16:06 <Viking-Ice> adamw, yeah if you only want to steal left shoes ;)
17:16:14 <roshi> for remember, everyone should watch "Rare Exports" for christmas
17:16:16 <adamw> cmurf: i fedup'ed to rawhide (first time i ever tried that) two days ago, went fine
17:16:29 <sgallagh> adamw: That's one place where I've been trying to recommend some automation work.
17:16:33 <cmurf> ok, and how about trying to blow up anaconda 21
17:16:34 <nirik> yeah, once you are installed, it's usually fine... there's occasional breakage, but usually workaroundable until it gets fixed
17:16:39 <adamw> sgallagh: which place?
17:16:51 <sgallagh> Build into the composes that it should reject any build for which a simple 'minimal' install fails.
17:16:58 <Viking-Ice> handsome_pirate, mid Janurary to end of February or early mars is a bad time to be in Icelands
17:17:00 <adamw> sgallagh: well, it's not like we're unaware of the *place*.
17:17:02 <nirik> sgallagh: we should circle back around to that... we had a good meeting or two on it. ;)
17:17:05 <adamw> sgallagh: it's the *work* bit that's the tricky part.
17:17:16 <sgallagh> nirik: Yes, that would be interesting.
17:17:41 <adamw> sgallagh: once upon a time, a year or two ago, we had an autoqa test that did a kickstart-driven minimal install of fedora and reported the error if it failed.
17:17:49 <sgallagh> adamw: Certainly. I'd like to hear more about that, because I'd like to be able to include a request for the time to accomplish that as part of our post-WG-report requests.
17:17:54 <adamw> that took several months of work and stopped working soon after, because automated tests need care and feeding and we didn't have the time because we don't have enough people and we're on a release train...
17:18:10 <adamw> anyhoo
17:18:15 <Viking-Ice> adamw, have the WG write those automation test they need
17:18:20 <adamw> we're now 18 mins over time, so i guess we'll be back next week :)
17:18:39 <sgallagh> Viking-Ice: Build us a framework and we'll do our best.
17:18:47 <adamw> we built two, take yer pick :P
17:18:56 <Viking-Ice> or we adopt an existing one
17:19:05 <adamw> thanks for coming, folks
17:19:12 <adamw> #endmeeting