15:00:51 #startmeeting Fedora QA meeting 15:00:51 Meeting started Mon Oct 16 15:00:51 2017 UTC. The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:51 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:00:51 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_qa_meeting' 15:00:55 #meetingname fedora-qa 15:00:55 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa' 15:00:58 #topic Roll Call 15:01:02 morning folks, who's around? 15:01:10 * coremodule is here! 15:01:44 morning coremodule 15:02:00 * sumantrom[m] is here 15:02:05 Morning adamw 15:02:25 coremodule: hii :) 15:02:42 Morning adamw, long time! Glad to be here. 15:02:55 Hi sumantrom[m] :) 15:03:09 hi sumantro 15:03:38 * sumantrom[m] missed coremodule 15:04:15 me too, but i've reloaded the custard pie gun and i'm ready to try again 15:04:31 * adamw wonders if anyone else is thinking of turning up 15:04:39 i did actually send the invitation, right? 15:04:56 Yes you did :) 15:05:58 whew, not my fault then :P 15:08:46 well, if no-one else shows up, i'm not sure if it's worth going through the agenda...what do you guys think? 15:10:14 I do agree 15:10:31 We can still talk about couple of them and post the meeting logs with updates about what we did and where are we now . Also I would like to propose an on boarding session for fedora QA with specific emphasis on modular server testing. If the test cases and stuffs are ready. 15:11:42 i don't think so :/ 15:11:52 i also don't think it's really testable yet - but i need to talk to sgallagh about that 15:12:02 let's do a sorta quick run through then... 15:12:11 Okay 15:12:13 #info due to short attendance we'll be a bit more informal than usual today 15:12:19 #topic Previous meeting follow-up 15:12:29 adamw: I am around-ish 15:13:58 #info looks like we didn't have anything from last meeting 15:14:08 sgallagh: i'll ping you somewhere else in a minute :) 15:14:16 ack 15:14:51 #topic Fedora 27 status 15:15:01 sooo, this is where i was hoping people can fill me in, kinda :) 15:15:08 sumantrom[m]: what's your take on current f27 status? 15:16:15 It's good except for the kernel bug. I would like to although point some specific upgrade issues. Rest look good to me. 15:16:20 (and fill coremodule in too, of course) 15:17:09 #info main F27 release process is running along quite smoothly, we are still worried about the kernel bug with VMs using qxl 15:17:36 aiui, for Server we've basically split it off to its own release process, yes, but this seems to be getting done as we go along? 15:18:34 Yes I know 15:19:25 #info Server (modular) release process has been de-coupled from main release process and is intended to deliver a month behind main process dates, process for handling this is being made up as we go along apparently 15:19:50 i was thinking we could at least do with separate blocker tracker bugs for Server 15:19:59 and are we using the same blocker review meetings, or doing separate ones? 15:20:22 is the plan to release a traditional server product or to skip that for 27? 15:22:32 i heard that it's not blocking at least 15:22:38 i'm not sure if we're still planning to ship it at all 15:23:02 #info we're not sure whether a traditional Server product will be produced / delivered at all, but we at least know it does not block the main release process 15:23:28 Yes I concur with adamw , we probably should have the modular blocker bug separate meeting. 15:23:35 #action adamw to create separate blocker/fe tracking bugs for Server and update appropriate pages 15:23:56 #info need to decide if modular Server blocker bugs will be discussed in regular blocker review meetings or separate ones 15:24:08 do we create new milestones in the blockerbugs app, then? 15:25:05 hmm, yeah, that's a point, maybe i'd better check if that'll work first 15:26:06 I suspect it would work 15:26:22 if all else fails, the milestone would be something like beta-server 15:27:06 yeah, but i'll just need to play with it a bit first to figure it out. 15:27:29 sgallagh: well, if you're around, i suppose we might as well do this on the record if you don't mind...? 15:27:33 .hello alciregi 15:27:34 alciregi: alciregi 'Alessio Ciregia' 15:27:40 >.> 15:27:54 sgallagh: 'this' being: so what *is* the status of modular server right now, exactly? is it at a point where we can usefully test...anything? 15:28:19 basically all i know right now is we have modular composes that produce ISOs which seem to boot straight to the installer's text mode. and...that's it. 15:28:21 adamw: Short answer: no. Slightly longer answer: we've been at the cusp of "yes" for a week now. 15:28:48 The Cusp Of "Yes": little-known album of live tracks and b-sides 15:29:24 sgallagh: so, is there an ETA on when we're likely to *reach* yes? 15:29:28 As of right now, we're probably not going to have something useful in time for this week's go/no-go 15:29:58 If things go smoothly, we should have a testable image by Thursday, but it's not enough time to expect a "Go" decision 15:30:07 okay. 15:30:13 well, "smoothly" meaning "no worse than they have been" 15:30:21 heh. 15:30:37 * Southern_Gentlem is glad that modularity doesnt block f27 15:30:38 We have a list of the remaining blockers to a testable image 15:30:48 It needs some massaging and should be public by EOB today 15:30:49 do you know how things are going on defining required test coverage, criteria etc.? I know that was at least partly assigned to me but i also heard someone else was trying to do something about it 15:31:30 adamw: Some of that will be covered by the document I just mentioned. 15:31:33 okay. 15:32:01 We also have an internal list of known things that would violate the release criteria as run in F26, but we need to push that out somewhere visible 15:33:28 #info per sgallagh, modular Server is not currently in a usefully-testable state but may reach it by Thursday. the team has lists of known blockers (both to a testable state and under the existing release criteria) that it's working to make public. 15:33:43 is that a reasonable summary? 15:33:46 ack 15:33:49 thanks. 15:34:36 I'll be missing the blocker triage today in the interest of shortening those lists :) 15:34:48 we're not actually planning on running one... 15:35:12 although we do now have two proposed blockers (there were none on friday) 15:35:41 so, i guess that about covers it for 27...did anyone have any other notes? 15:37:17 Nopes :) 15:37:36 Nothing here, we'll run a mini-blocker-review on Thursday at the go/no-go, right? 15:38:04 for server, yeah 15:38:12 Gotcha, okay. 15:38:13 for regular, maybe we can vote in-bug on the two proposed final blockers 15:39:26 #topic Test Day status 15:39:32 sumantrom[m]: any notes on test days? 15:41:25 Everything ran well and as expected. We might want to have commblog access to continue to engage more audience 15:42:10 yeah, i'm still trying to talk to them about that... 15:42:19 maybe when bex is back (not sure if he is yet) we'll get further... 15:43:23 Sure! 15:43:44 so we don't currently have any more scheduled for f27, right? but you're interested in doing something for server when we can? 15:44:02 * bexelbie is back tomorrow :) 15:44:10 Yes sure , awaiting :) 15:44:11 * bexelbie should be ignored for today :) 15:45:22 * adamw studiously doesn't look at the bex behind the curtain 15:46:25 #info planned test days for F27 cycle went well, we may do another event for server/modularity once it's in testable shape 15:46:30 #topic Open floor 15:46:37 so, any other business? 15:47:16 Nothing from my end 15:47:39 nothing here, either 15:47:58 alright 15:49:56 thanks for coming along, everyone 15:50:01 * adamw sets fuse 15:51:26 #endmeeting