16:00:18 #startmeeting Prioritized bugs and issues 16:00:18 Meeting started Wed Jan 15 16:00:18 2020 UTC. 16:00:18 This meeting is logged and archived in a public location. 16:00:18 The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:18 The meeting name has been set to 'prioritized_bugs_and_issues' 16:00:19 #meetingname Fedora Prioritized bugs and issues 16:00:19 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_prioritized_bugs_and_issues' 16:00:33 #topic Purpose of this meeting 16:00:35 #info The purpose of this process is to help with processing backlog of bugs and issues found during the development, verification and use of Fedora distribution. 16:00:37 #info The main goal is to raise visibility of bugs and issues to help contributors focus on the most important issues. 16:00:38 #link https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/program_management/prioritized_bugs/#_process_description 16:00:45 #topic Roll Call 16:01:32 * jsmith is lurking 16:02:37 hello, jsmith! 16:02:41 hi! 16:02:47 hello mattdm! 16:03:03 I am on The Document Foundation advisory board call as well 16:03:03 Hello! 16:03:10 so half attention 16:03:20 okay, i'll only count your vote for half then 16:03:32 #topic Nominated bugs 16:03:34 #info 1 nominated bugs 16:03:35 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&f1=flagtypes.name&f2=OP&o1=substring&product=Fedora&query_format=advanced&v1=fedora_prioritized_bug%3F 16:03:37 fair 16:03:40 #topic shim-unsigned-x64: FTBFS in Fedora, hasn't been rebuilt since Fedora 28 16:03:41 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780827 16:03:55 so the maintainer says this is Not An Issue 16:04:31 it doesn't matter that the shim hasn't rebuilt, so long as we don't drop this package 16:04:38 right. let's not drop shim 16:04:46 basically its an edge case in the FTBFS policy 16:05:16 yeah. 16:06:02 that's my position, yes 16:06:21 (also keep in mind it is not GPL code, and we don't have strong requirements in that regard) 16:07:43 proposed #agreed BZ 1780827 is rejected as a prioritized bug since it is not a bug, but an edge case in policy. The package should be excepted from the long-term FTBFS cleanup 16:07:52 pjones++ 16:07:52 bcotton: Karma for pjones changed to 1 (for the current release cycle): https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any 16:09:37 bcotton: and by "the package" we mean shim, shim-unsigned-x64, and shim-unsigned-aarch64 16:09:43 pjones: ack 16:10:12 updated proposed #agreed BZ 1780827 is rejected as a prioritized bug since it is not a bug, but an edge case in policy. shim, shim-unsigned-x64, and shim-unsigned-aarch64 should be excepted from the long-term FTBFS cleanup 16:11:34 In the past we had excluded them from mass rebuilds as well, though that seems to have stopped happening at some point, so instead they just fail every time, 16:11:46 which is how they came to be noticed as FTBFS in the first place. 16:12:08 ah. i assume you told releng about this? 16:12:32 I don't know what mechanism we used to exclude them; my suspicion is that I thought they were on a list somewhere that tools knew about, but actually they were in someone in releng's head somewhere and that person stopped being the person doing the rebuilds. 16:13:04 bcotton: I have shouted into several voids about this in the past, but I'm really not sure where the correct place to follow through on this is. 16:13:27 pjones: okay, i'll follow up with releng about this 16:13:32 (the fact that the mass rebuilds are completely opaque, with a non-person listed in the change log, doesn't help.) 16:13:47 #action bcotton to check with releng about excluding shim packages from mass rebuild, as they used to be 16:15:01 i'm not hearing any complaints about the proposed agreed so i'll just let zodbot have it 16:15:10 #agreed BZ 1780827 is rejected as a prioritized bug since it is not a bug, but an edge case in policy. shim, shim-unsigned-x64, and shim-unsigned-aarch64 should be excepted from the long-term FTBFS cleanup 16:15:30 anything else on this bug before we move on to the accepted bugs? 16:17:23 that's a no! 16:17:26 #topic Accepted bugs 16:17:27 #info 1 accepted bugs 16:17:29 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&f1=flagtypes.name&f2=OP&&o1=substring&product=Fedora&query_format=advanced&v1=fedora_prioritized_bug%2B 16:17:34 #topic Migrate Fedora 31 users back to nonmodular content overridden by the eclipse module 16:17:36 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1780827 16:18:10 so we accepted this, but i'm not sure we quite know what to do about it other than to say "yep, this should be fixed" 16:18:37 mattdm: do you know if this is an issue for the eclipse module maintainer or someone else? 16:25:10 okay, i guess we'll leave this for later then 16:25:36 #topic Next meeting 16:25:38 #info The 29 January meeting is canceled. We will meet again on 15 February at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting 16:25:52 #undo 16:25:52 Removing item from minutes: INFO by bcotton at 16:25:38 : The 29 January meeting is canceled. We will meet again on 15 February at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting 16:26:11 #info The 29 January meeting is canceled. We will meet again on 12 February at 1600 UTC in #fedora-meeting 16:26:38 #endmeeting