14:18:44 <jkurik> #startmeeting Prioritized_bugs_and_issues 14:18:44 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Sep 13 14:18:44 2017 UTC. The chair is jkurik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:18:44 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 14:18:44 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'prioritized_bugs_and_issues' 14:18:46 <jkurik> #meetingname Fedora Prioritized bugs and issues 14:18:46 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_prioritized_bugs_and_issues' 14:18:56 <jkurik> #topic Purpose of this meeting 14:18:57 <jkurik> #info The purpose of this process is to help with processing backlog of bugs and 14:18:59 <jkurik> #info issues found during the development, verification and use of Fedora distribution. 14:19:10 <jkurik> #info The main goal is to raise visibility of bugs and issues to help 14:19:12 <jkurik> #info contributors focus on the most important issues. 14:19:13 <jkurik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/Prioritized_bugs_and_issues_-_the_process 14:19:16 <jkurik> #info Currently we have 1 proposed bugs for evaluation and 5 bugs already approved for review. 14:19:29 <jkurik> #topic Roll Call 14:19:31 <jkurik> #chair jkurik mattdm mcatanzaro dustymabe sgallagh roshi 14:19:31 <zodbot> Current chairs: dustymabe jkurik mattdm mcatanzaro roshi sgallagh 14:19:32 <mattdm> oh hi jkurik! fancy meeting you here! 14:19:40 <jkurik> hi mattdm 14:19:49 * roshi wakes up 14:20:04 <jkurik> nice to read you again roshi 14:20:05 <mattdm> roshi! 14:20:07 <sgallagh> I'm here today, I guess 14:20:21 <roshi> you pinged, I answered :) 14:20:29 <roshi> same to you jkurik! 14:20:32 <mattdm> we need a thing like .fire that is "buys coffee" 14:20:39 <mattdm> or whisky, whichever 14:20:56 <roshi> and an actual bot to deliver said libation 14:20:59 <roshi> :) 14:21:12 <jkurik> so, we have more people than usually today, so lets start 14:21:17 <jkurik> #topic Evaluation of bug #1390198: [abrt] gnome-shell: st_bin_dispose(): gnome-shell killed by SIGABRT 14:21:18 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1390198 14:22:11 <mattdm> Ok, so this *really* seems like a TopIcons Plus bug 14:22:22 <mattdm> By design, GNOME Shell lets extensions do things which could cause crashes 14:22:39 <mattdm> It's a tradeoff of power vs. safety 14:22:56 <roshi> if you get rid of that extension, does it still crash? 14:23:19 <mattdm> roshi: People are reporting that getting rid of it solves the problem, and putting it back causes crashes again 14:23:26 <mattdm> However, it's a very popular extension 14:23:28 <sgallagh> right 14:23:49 <sgallagh> And only likely to become more so in F27 14:23:51 <mattdm> And, GNOME is removing the awful bottom notifications popout thing *completely* in the future 14:23:57 <sgallagh> Right, that 14:24:11 <mattdm> and recommending that topicons or topicons plus be installed if you want to run software that needs it 14:24:23 <dustymabe> hi jkurik 14:24:28 <jkurik> hi dustymabe 14:24:34 <mattdm> #link https://github.com/phocean/TopIcons-plus/issues/73 14:24:44 <mattdm> is *probably* it, but is marked "can't reproduce" 14:26:13 <sgallagh> So, I'm not really sure what marking this Prioritized would accomplish. 14:26:22 <roshi> yeah 14:26:27 <sgallagh> Upstream is aware of the issue (but having difficulty coming up with a consistent reproducer) 14:26:28 <roshi> especially if it's in a plugin 14:26:36 <mattdm> Well, we could maybe ask someone from the desktop team if they could assist in finding a reproducer 14:26:42 <sgallagh> Hmm 14:27:44 <jkurik> so, I am probably -1 to have this as a prioritized bug, bud +1 to ask desktop team to help find a reproducer 14:28:12 <mattdm> I'm making a comment in the bug 14:28:13 <sgallagh> Yeah, what jkurik said 14:28:20 <roshi> same 14:29:21 <jkurik> proposed #agreed We see no benefit to have this bug as Prioritized however we consider this as important one and we will ask desktop team to help finding a reproducer 14:29:33 <roshi> ack 14:29:41 <sgallagh> patch 14:30:14 <sgallagh> proposed #agreed We aren't marking this as Prioritized because we don't have appropriate resources at our disposal, however we consider this as important one and we will ask desktop team to help finding a reproducer. 14:30:38 <mattdm> who is taking the action item to do that asking? 14:30:43 <jkurik> ack, it is more diplomatic :) 14:30:49 <jkurik> mattdm: me 14:30:50 <sgallagh> mattdm: I thought that's what you just did? 14:30:53 <roshi> ack 14:30:54 <sgallagh> But okay 14:30:58 <mattdm> thanks jkurik :) 14:31:17 <mattdm> sgallagh: no i'm posting a general "provide info to upstream" please comment 14:31:39 <sgallagh> gotcha 14:31:50 <jkurik> #action jkurik to ask destop team to help finding a reproducer for #1390198 14:32:08 <jkurik> that's all for the new proposals 14:32:14 <jkurik> now we have some reviews .... 14:32:23 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1366004: [abrt] setroubleshoot-server: service.py:647:_message_cb:SystemError: <built-in function isinstance> returned a result with an error set 14:32:25 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366004 14:34:14 <jkurik> looks like there was not much done; does the dbus-python component falls under Python-SIG ? 14:36:02 <mattdm> hmmm looks like someone was on it and then vanished :( 14:36:12 <jkurik> right 14:37:38 <mattdm> As I understand it, the severity here is that it masks real problems from being reported 14:39:19 <mattdm> how about we reassing it back to setroubleshoot and ask the maintainers of that to take another look? 14:39:34 <mattdm> because I am sure that "Alternative GTK desktop environment SIG" is not right 14:39:38 <roshi> sounds reasonable 14:40:58 <jkurik> yeah, "Alternative GTK desktop environment SIG" is definitely not right 14:41:33 <jkurik> I was thinking of asking cstratak@redhat.com what his pov is 14:42:09 <mattdm> bugzilla is really slow right now 14:42:11 <jkurik> as he was already playing with some patches 14:45:56 <mattdm> oh look now it's assigned to dan walsh 14:46:24 <jkurik> ? 14:47:03 <mattdm> that's what happened when I changed the component to setroubleshooter 14:47:03 <jkurik> ah, ok :) 14:47:20 <mattdm> asking cstratak seems like a good move 14:48:01 <jkurik> #action jkurik to ask cstratak what is the current status of #1366004 14:48:18 * cstratak waves 14:48:29 <jkurik> #info Bug #1366004 has been re-assigned back to setroubleshooter component 14:48:37 <jkurik> Hi cstratak 14:48:45 <cstratak> taking a fast look 14:49:36 <jkurik> you were working on this, so we wanted to check with you whether you have any status update 14:49:44 <cstratak> ah as I recall I had prepared some 'kinda debug' builds for people to try but I got no answer 14:50:11 <cstratak> comment 47 was where I was left off. No more updates from that 14:50:53 <cstratak> and as I have no way of reproducing the issue, I can only provide some debug builds and wait for people who experience the bug to test them, as it is. 14:51:55 <mattdm> cstratak: for what it's worth, looks like we have a lot more dupes with similar crashes than we did a year ago :-/ 14:53:14 <cstratak> I see. Not sure what would be the best course of action here. 14:53:48 <cstratak> I could certainly update the debug builds to more recent ones 14:54:29 <cstratak> but apart from that there must be some people who can reproduce it and are willing to test the builds 14:55:11 <cstratak> so as it is, I'll try to provide updated builds sometime this or the next week with a requests for people to test it. Would that be a sufficient things for the time being? 14:55:40 <jkurik> Thanks, it definitely helps. 14:56:14 <jkurik> We will revisit in two weeks (or so) and we will see then, whether there is any progress in testing. 14:56:28 <jkurik> cstratak: thanks 14:56:58 <jkurik> #info cstratak is going to provide updated builds sometime this or the next week with a requests for people to test it 14:57:36 <jkurik> #info We will revisit this on the next meeting and see whether there is any progress in testing 14:58:00 <jkurik> during the last 2 minutes.... 14:58:04 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1375468: [abrt] nautilus: nautilus_window_slot_get_allow_stop(): nautilus killed by SIGSEGV 14:58:05 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375468 14:58:08 <roshi> thanks cstratak 15:01:02 <jkurik> hmm... this seems to be in a similar state as the previous bug - not having a reliable reproducer 15:01:31 <jkurik> ok, time is up, lets finish the review on a next meeting 15:01:39 <jkurik> #undo 15:01:39 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x554b490> 15:02:03 <jkurik> Thanks all for comming 15:02:10 <jkurik> #endmeeting