16:04:42 <tflink> #startmeeting f18beta-blocker-review-3.1
16:04:42 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Oct 11 16:04:42 2012 UTC.  The chair is tflink. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:04:42 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:04:42 <tflink> #meetingname f18beta-blocker-review-3.1
16:04:42 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f18beta-blocker-review-3.1'
16:04:48 <tflink> #topic Roll Call
16:04:55 <tflink> Who's ready for some blocker review awesomeness?
16:05:02 * satellit_e listening
16:05:04 <adamw> kparal is
16:05:04 * kparal is
16:05:08 * elad661 is
16:05:08 * nirik will try and look in from time to time.
16:05:09 <tflink> as a side note, I'm trying a slightly different format today and might be a bit disorganized
16:05:14 <adamw> woop. made my morning.
16:06:43 <akshayvyas> different format....cool :)
16:06:56 <tflink> it shouldn't be all that different from the qa end
16:07:02 <tflink> the changes are:
16:07:12 <tflink> 1. grouping bugs by component and assignee
16:07:29 <tflink> 2. attempting to ping assignee over IRC shortly before the bug comes up
16:07:45 <tflink> I should have email invites ready for next week, too
16:08:10 * nirik wonders... if there's no questions about something wouldn't pinging assignee just slow things down...
16:08:16 <nirik> but trying new things is good. ;)
16:08:26 <adamw> it's more of an old thing - we used to do it
16:08:29 <adamw> then we got lazy
16:09:05 <tflink> nirik: possibly, yes. this is as much of an experiment as anything, though
16:09:21 <nirik> sure. Easy to try and adjust. ;)
16:10:40 <tflink> ok, I think that I've filtered out most of the bugs we covered yesterday
16:10:55 * tflink should have started earlier - learning process
16:11:40 <tflink> shall we get started?
16:11:45 <adamw> I just proposed 865066, btw.
16:12:25 <adamw> sure
16:12:35 * tflink eyes the stick for beating people who change the list after its generated
16:12:53 <tflink> #topic Introduction
16:13:36 * dgilmore watches tflink beat adamw
16:13:46 <tflink> Why are we here?
16:13:46 <tflink> #info Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and nice-to-have bugs.
16:13:53 <tflink> #info We'll be following the process outlined at:
16:13:53 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
16:14:01 <tflink> #info The bugs up for review today are available at:
16:14:01 <tflink> #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
16:14:17 <tflink> with the exception of the ones that we covered yesterday, of course
16:14:24 <tflink> #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
16:14:24 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Alpha_Release_Criteria
16:14:24 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Beta_Release_Criteria
16:14:24 <tflink> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_18_Final_Release_Criteria
16:14:46 <tflink> any objections to starting with the proposed blockers that we didn't get to yesterday?
16:15:19 * kparal agrees
16:15:23 <nirik> go for it
16:16:13 <tflink> #topic (864128) f18b tc anaconda gets stuck after deleting a preexisting partition in the 'unknown tree' after coming from a previous mistake or error
16:16:16 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864128
16:16:19 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
16:17:28 * nirik reads
16:17:50 <kparal> isn't that a duplicate of already discussed bug?
16:17:53 * kparal searches
16:18:32 <nirik> I see a cannot duplicate from anaconda folks... I'd say punt and wait for more info from reporter(s)
16:18:53 <kparal> is it different from 863451?
16:19:03 <nirik> .bug 863451
16:19:06 <zodbot> nirik: Bug 863451 AttributeError: 'DeviceFormat' object has no attribute 'peStart' - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863451
16:19:24 <zodbot> Ticket notification - f18betablocker: [Bug 865066] 'Software selection' spoke is incorrectly rendered on top of the hub if you boot a DVD image, change 'installation source' to a remote mirror, then enter the 'software selection' spoke <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865066>
16:19:36 <kparal> it was also about removing partitions from "unknown" tree
16:19:49 <kparal> but different outcome, it seems
16:20:04 <tflink> yeah, freeze vs. crash
16:20:20 <adamw> yeah, this looks different to me
16:20:57 <adamw> i'm not sure it's a blocker, though, seems a bit too tricky to pin down
16:21:09 <adamw> reartes' reproducer is very complex and chris couldn't make it fly anyhow
16:21:12 * nirik would say -1 blocker, need more info from reporters.
16:21:22 <adamw> john didn't really seem to provide a process
16:21:51 <adamw> if it can only be hit by doing a series of concerted fiddling, that probably wouldn't hit either the current or proposed revised beta criteria, it'd be more of a final thing...
16:22:53 <adamw> so i guess i'm -1, re-propose with a simpler reproducer if desired
16:22:54 <tflink> reject, then?
16:23:05 <kparal> adamw: agreed
16:23:26 * nirik nods.
16:23:44 <adamw> tflink: did you ping rbergero and jreznik btw?
16:23:51 <akshayvyas> -1 blocker
16:24:07 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864128 - RejectedBlocker - This seems require enough elements from custom partitioning that it wouldn't hit any of the F18 beta release criteria - as such, it is rejected as a blocker but could be reproposed as a final blocker with a more simple reproducer
16:24:11 <tflink> adamw: no, I forgot
16:24:41 <nirik> ack
16:24:44 <akshayvyas> ack
16:24:53 <kparal> I would say it can be even Beta with a simple and working repro
16:25:09 <tflink> rbergeron: you available for some blocker review awesomeness?
16:25:29 <adamw> ack
16:25:30 <tflink> doesn't look like jreznik is on IRC atm
16:25:32 <adamw> er, seems to*
16:25:39 * dgilmore is paying attention
16:25:50 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864128 - RejectedBlocker - This seems to require enough elements from custom partitioning that it wouldn't hit any of the F18 beta release criteria - as such, it is rejected as a blocker but could be reproposed as a final blocker with a more simple reproducer
16:25:54 * nirik notes rbergeron is in paris.
16:25:55 <adamw> ack
16:26:05 <dgilmore> its 7:30pm for jreznik
16:26:05 <tflink> oh yeah, fudcon EMEA
16:26:13 * adamw hangs beret on rbergeron
16:26:28 <tflink> #topic (864618) f18b tc2 anaconda issues switching languages from the main hub (workaround = restart and select desired language in the first screen)
16:26:30 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864618
16:26:31 * kparal is looking for 5 differences
16:26:33 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
16:26:38 <adamw> you didn't send the #agreed.
16:26:44 <tflink> bah
16:26:48 <tflink> #undu
16:26:53 <tflink> I can't spell, either
16:26:56 <tflink> #undo
16:26:56 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x2d1e54d0>
16:26:59 <tflink> #undo
16:26:59 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x2d1e53d0>
16:27:01 <tflink> #undo
16:27:02 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x1e6a2bd0>
16:27:11 * adamw hooks up the coffee IV to tflink's arteries
16:27:14 <tflink> #agreed 864128 - RejectedBlocker - This seems to require enough elements from custom partitioning that it wouldn't hit any of the F18 beta release criteria - as such, it is rejected as a blocker but could be reproposed as a final blocker with a more simple reproducer
16:27:39 <tflink> adamw: you'd put an IV in an artery? I'm glad you don't work @ a hospital
16:27:52 <adamw> hey, i didn't *say* i was trying to help
16:27:52 <tflink> #topic (864618) f18b tc2 anaconda issues switching languages from the main hub (workaround = restart and select desired language in the first screen)
16:27:55 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864618
16:27:57 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
16:28:31 <dgilmore> its ugly, but does it really violate release criteria
16:28:31 <adamw> esp with clumens' comment, -1.
16:28:36 <kparal> this is not a Beta blocker
16:28:40 <adamw> since the fix is just going to be 'take it out'.
16:28:41 <nirik> -1 beta blocker.
16:28:46 <akshayvyas> #3 :0
16:29:08 <dgilmore> -1 blocker here
16:29:11 <akshayvyas> -1 blocker
16:29:23 <kparal> I don't think it's final either, btw
16:29:38 <kparal> first language selection works, only second selection doesn't
16:29:40 <dgilmore> kparal: i dont think it actually violates any criteria
16:29:46 <dgilmore> its a use case not seen before
16:30:11 <kparal> and isn't the spoke about keymap only?
16:30:16 <adamw> we're all solidly -1.
16:30:24 <dgilmore> yep lets move on
16:30:55 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864618 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't violate any of the F18 release criteria and thus, rejected as a blocker for F18 beta.
16:31:10 <akshayvyas> ack
16:31:21 <nirik> ack
16:31:30 <kparal> ack
16:31:37 <tflink> #agreed 864618 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't violate any of the F18 release criteria and thus, rejected as a blocker for F18 beta.
16:31:42 <tflink> #topic (864765) DeviceCreateError: ('-6', 'fedora_f18v')
16:31:42 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864765
16:31:42 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
16:31:42 <tflink> #info assigned to: anaconda-maint-list@redhat.com
16:33:18 <tflink> the more I think about the idea of pinging devs on IRC before a bug of theirs comes up, the more I'm thinking it's a bad idea
16:33:19 <nirik> looks blockery to me
16:33:59 <tflink> is RAID+btrfs supposed to be working?
16:34:31 <adamw> it comes in this area we're still fudging about with.
16:34:58 <adamw> per the current criterion, is it a 'commonly used filesystem type'? per my initial revised proposal, probably 'yes', though i didn't address combinations specifically.
16:35:19 * nirik thinks it should be a blocker. at least it shouldn't crash here.
16:35:20 <tflink> I don't see why we'd exclude fs types from RAID, though
16:35:31 <adamw> oh, btrfs with redundancy checked shouldn't give you RAID, should it? it should give you btrfs' RAID-y type thing.
16:35:45 <adamw> part of the whole point of btrfs is it can 'do' redundancy and volume groups and stuff itself, isn't it?
16:36:10 <dgilmore> adamw: right
16:36:10 <tflink> oh, I assumed that redundancy here was referring to RAID
16:36:11 <dlehman> there is no stacking at this time
16:36:28 <dlehman> raid-like features offered for btrfs are provided by btrfs, &c
16:36:29 <nirik> yeah, btrfs has builtin 'raid'
16:36:33 <adamw> this one feels pretty +1 to me, just on instinct. so i think the criteria should cover it. :)
16:36:33 * nirik nods
16:36:59 <tflink> "The installer's custom partitioning mode must be capable of the following: ... Creating, destroying and assigning mount points to partitions of any specified size using most commonly-used filesystem types" ?
16:37:02 <dgilmore> adamw: i have to agree is a blocker
16:37:09 <Viking-Ice> ack
16:37:09 <dgilmore> if anaconda offers it it should work
16:37:22 <Viking-Ice> yup
16:37:22 <dlehman> this is a btrfs bug FWIW
16:37:52 <dgilmore> dlehman: then we should reasign the bug to the btrfs tools
16:37:59 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864765 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 beta release criterion: "The installer's custom partitioning mode must be capable of the following: ... Creating, destroying and assigning mount points to partitions of any specified size using most commonly-used filesystem types"
16:38:16 <Viking-Ice> ack
16:38:24 <dgilmore> ack
16:38:30 <nirik> acl
16:38:34 <nirik> ack even
16:38:38 <tflink> #agreed 864765 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 beta release criterion: "The installer's custom partitioning mode must be capable of the following: ... Creating, destroying and assigning mount points to partitions of any specified size using most commonly-used filesystem types"
16:38:51 <tflink> #topic (865066) 'Software selection' spoke is incorrectly rendered on top of the hub if you boot a DVD image, change 'installation source' to a remote mirror, then enter the 'software selection' spoke
16:38:55 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865066
16:38:57 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW
16:39:00 <tflink> #info assigned to: anaconda-maint-list@redhat.com
16:39:52 <tflink> #undo
16:39:52 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x26964a50>
16:40:17 <tflink> I knew I was going to do that - the assigned to isn't supposed to make it into the channel
16:40:54 <adamw> dlehman: i'll leave it to you to re-assign the bug
16:41:00 <tflink> this title is a bit too wordy
16:41:11 <nirik> yeah.
16:41:26 <nirik> seems blocker to me due to inability to choose things.
16:41:34 <kparal> I wonder why I don't see it
16:41:40 <dgilmore> +1 blocker
16:42:01 <adamw> kparal: so if you just boot netinst.iso and go into Software Selection you don't see it?
16:42:11 <adamw> what's the system? KVM, metal...?
16:42:30 <tflink> criterion suggestions?
16:42:41 * kparal checking again
16:42:50 <adamw> "The installer must be able to install each of the release blocking desktops, as well as the minimal package set, with each supported installation method "
16:42:51 <adamw> alpha
16:42:58 <adamw> but i'm interested in kparal's case here
16:42:59 <Viking-Ice> +1 blocker
16:43:05 <adamw> maybe it affects only KVMs, or is resolution-dependent, or something
16:43:08 <akshayvyas> +1 blocker
16:43:20 <Viking-Ice> we got 3 for blocker
16:43:28 <kparal> ah, now it happened
16:43:38 <kparal> but it must be really recent
16:43:46 <adamw> i just tested back to tc1
16:43:53 <adamw> happens to all three
16:43:57 <nirik> +1 blocker (if that wasn't clear before)
16:43:59 <kparal> I'm quite sure I used the spoke in TC1 and TC2
16:44:15 <adamw> kparal: it only happens if the source is a mirror
16:44:24 <adamw> it doesn't happen if you're doing a DVD install
16:44:31 <kparal> actually I boot from PXE most of the time, so the source is a closest mirror
16:44:33 <adamw> hum
16:44:39 <adamw> interesting. but still, if you reproduce it now...
16:44:45 <kparal> yes, in a VM, I can
16:44:50 <adamw> i suppose it could actually depend on the *content of the mirror*?
16:44:52 <kparal> no other machine around atm
16:44:56 <tflink> proposed #agreed 865066 - AcceptedBlocker - This violates the following F18 alpha release criterion for a non-trivial number of systems not using a DVD for installation : "The installer must be able to install each of the release blocking desktops, as well as the minimal package set, with each supported installation method"
16:44:59 <akshayvyas> ack
16:45:00 <Viking-Ice> ack
16:45:00 <adamw> ack
16:45:03 <nirik> ack
16:45:04 <kparal> ack
16:45:08 <tflink> #agreed 865066 - AcceptedBlocker - This violates the following F18 alpha release criterion for a non-trivial number of systems not using a DVD for installation : "The installer must be able to install each of the release blocking desktops, as well as the minimal package set, with each supported installation method"
16:45:27 <tflink> #topic (864360) gpt isn't automatically created on UEFI system
16:45:27 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864360
16:45:28 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ASSIGNED
16:46:09 <Viking-Ice> +1 blocker
16:46:56 <kparal> yes, seems that autopartitioning is broken with UEFI atm
16:47:05 * nirik nods. +1 blocker here
16:47:12 <dgilmore> +1 blocker
16:47:13 <tflink> "The installer must be able to complete an installation using automatic partitioning to any sufficiently large target disk, whether unformatted, empty, or containing any kind of existing data"?
16:47:16 <adamw> +1 blocker, breaks a straight-through UEFI install.
16:47:26 <tflink> for UEFI, anyways
16:47:31 <akshayvyas> +1 blocker
16:47:34 <dgilmore> seems lik its only an issue if the disk has an existing msdos label
16:47:38 <adamw> tflink: yeah, sounds good.
16:47:47 <dgilmore> but its still a blocker
16:47:57 <adamw> dgilmore: that's more or less the standard case.
16:48:08 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864360 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 alpha release criterion for UEFI systems: "The installer must be able to complete an installation using automatic partitioning to any sufficiently large target disk, whether unformatted, empty, or containing any kind of existing data"
16:48:12 <nirik> UEFI needs gpt right?
16:48:15 <adamw> yes.
16:48:16 <dgilmore> adamw: well an empty disk should work ok
16:48:19 <dgilmore> yep
16:48:25 <adamw> dgilmore: most 'empty disks' have ms-dos disklabels.
16:48:25 <nirik> ack
16:48:25 <kparal> ack
16:48:25 <dgilmore> tflink: ack
16:48:27 <Viking-Ice> ack
16:48:31 <tflink> #agreed 864360 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 alpha release criterion for UEFI systems: "The installer must be able to complete an installation using automatic partitioning to any sufficiently large target disk, whether unformatted, empty, or containing any kind of existing data"
16:48:40 <dgilmore> adamw: ok
16:48:53 <tflink> #topic (864180) AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'isExtended'
16:48:55 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864180
16:48:58 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ON_QA
16:49:29 <tflink> wait, did we do this one yesterday?
16:49:52 <tflink> no, I was thinking of another bug
16:49:53 <kparal> all of these bugs are similar
16:49:58 <adamw> there's a bunch of 'NoneType's
16:50:05 <kparal> +1 blocker here
16:50:30 <kparal> The installer's custom partitioning mode must be capable of the following:
16:50:30 <kparal> Creating, destroying and assigning mount points to partitions of any specified size using most commonly-used filesystem types
16:50:37 <kparal> ah, that's custom mode
16:51:00 <Viking-Ice> +1 blocker
16:51:10 <adamw> under the existing criteria this would mostly hit alpha "The installer must be able to complete an installation using automatic partitioning to any sufficiently large target disk, whether unformatted, empty, or containing any kind of existing data"
16:51:26 <adamw> it's clearer under my proposed revision since it explicitly requires selective removal of partitions at beta time, but i think this still hits that.
16:51:34 <dgilmore> +1 blocker
16:51:35 <kparal> but it demonstrates why I would like criteria to be UI agnostic
16:51:42 <adamw> i reproduced it doing a pretty straightforward install attempt last night, just try to delete all existing partitions on a disk to make space.
16:52:18 <adamw> so i'm happy with taking it under that existing alpha criterion.
16:52:42 <dgilmore> adamw: works for me
16:52:45 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864180 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 alpha release criterion: "The installer must be able to complete an installation using automatic partitioning to any sufficiently large target disk, whether unformatted, empty, or containing any kind of existing data"
16:52:50 <adamw> ack
16:52:51 <kparal> ack
16:52:56 <dgilmore> ack
16:53:08 <zodbot> Ticket notification - f18betablocker: [Bug 864765] mkfs.btrfs SIGABRT at OS install time <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864765>
16:53:14 <nirik> ack
16:53:18 <Viking-Ice> ack
16:53:19 <tflink> #agreed 864180 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 alpha release criterion: "The installer must be able to complete an installation using automatic partitioning to any sufficiently large target disk, whether unformatted, empty, or containing any kind of existing data"
16:53:24 <tflink> #topic (864842) AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'id'
16:53:26 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864842
16:53:29 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ON_QA
16:54:21 <kparal> that's the new dialog about bootloader target
16:54:37 <kparal> I didn't really get it when seeing it for the first time
16:55:10 <kparal> poor users. anyway, removing your only disk from the list makes anaconda crash
16:55:14 <tflink> kparal: aren't proposed blockers supposed to come with criteria violations? :-P
16:55:31 <kparal> they should, at least from QA members
16:55:39 * kparal looks
16:56:15 <kparal> " Rejecting obviously invalid operations without crashing "
16:56:27 <kparal> but that's tied to custom part. mode at the moment
16:56:59 * adamw doesn't really get this one
16:57:05 * adamw goes to reproduce
16:57:29 <adamw> it does seem like that requirement should apply to all partitioning stuff, not just custom part, yeah.
16:57:33 <adamw> hell, it should apply to the whole installer. =)
16:58:17 <kparal> the link is called "Full disk summary and options"
16:58:18 <adamw> still, though...i'm not 100% sure we need to block a beta release for this
16:58:22 <adamw> yeah, i see it now
16:58:31 <kparal> just select disk and hit Remove
16:58:43 <adamw> fundamentally this is a silly thing to do
16:58:53 <dgilmore> adamw: if its trival to reproduce we should block on it
16:58:55 <adamw> you're likely to hit it pretty early in install, you can just reboot and go again
16:59:23 <kparal> adamw: I wonder, are disk partitions removed before Begin installation, or afterwards?
16:59:24 <adamw> dgilmore: it's trivial, sure, you just go to 'installation destination', click on 'full disk summary and options', select the only disk there (if you only have one disk), and click 'remove'
16:59:26 <adamw> boom, crash
16:59:30 <adamw> kparal: after
16:59:38 <kparal> even existing part. removals?
16:59:40 <adamw> kparal: when you hit 'start installation' you see it applying the partitioning changes
16:59:44 <adamw> i believe so yeah
16:59:48 <kparal> ok, that's good
16:59:57 <adamw> it's part of the whole two-stage design: hub+spoke creates a kickstart, 'start installation' applies it
17:00:19 <adamw> so i think you can reboot out at any time before actually starting the install, and the disks will be untouched
17:00:31 <adamw> dlehman: is that correct?
17:00:51 <kparal> screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/ddzor.png
17:00:53 <adamw> so yeah, i'm -1 on this...crashers are always bad but this is a pretty unnecessary operation.
17:01:14 <adamw> i don't think it passes 'if this were go/no-go and this were the last bug, would we delay for a week'.
17:01:25 <kparal> ok
17:01:45 <kparal> adamw: are you talking about Final as well?
17:01:49 <adamw> kparal: no, just beta.
17:02:38 <kparal> can we immediately ack for Final, or do you prefer I re-propose it? (or not at all?)
17:03:05 <kparal> I'll try to come up with a criterion this time
17:03:27 <dlehman> adamw: yes, that is correct
17:03:39 <dlehman> adamw: no data is lost until you push the big red button
17:03:46 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864842 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't clearly hit any of the F18 release criteria and is easily recoverable.
17:03:52 <adamw> ack
17:03:59 <adamw> kparal: re-propose i think...
17:04:09 <kparal> ok
17:04:17 <adamw> kparal: in general i rather hope bugs will just get fixed between now and final so we don't have to worry about final status :)
17:04:22 <kparal> ack
17:04:50 <kparal> or we might need to spend time to read through it again, it's double-edged sword
17:04:58 <kparal> but I understand
17:05:56 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
17:06:02 <dgilmore> ack
17:06:09 <tflink> #agreed 864842 - RejectedBlocker - This doesn't clearly hit any of the F18 release criteria and is easily recoverable.
17:06:18 <tflink> #topic (865048) kickstarted install can't autopart disk
17:06:18 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865048
17:06:18 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ON_QA
17:06:57 * kparal finally reported a bug with a blocker criterion cited
17:07:24 <adamw> yay kparal
17:07:36 <kparal> I learned that default anaconda generated kickstart won't reformat the disk again, so it must be adjusted
17:07:37 <dgilmore> +1
17:07:43 <kparal> fortunately the second kickstart provided did just that
17:08:18 <adamw> -1
17:08:28 <adamw> we should clarify the criterion a bit, but i think everything's working as intended here
17:08:33 <kparal> how come?
17:08:38 <adamw> oh wait, i may be misreading
17:08:50 <kparal> you can't format the disk in the kickstart
17:08:52 <tflink> yeah, I think this hits the beta scripted install criterion
17:08:54 <kparal> AFAIUI
17:08:58 <kparal> eh
17:09:07 <tflink> it's not clear what the actual bug is, though
17:09:13 <adamw> yeah i'd like to know that too
17:09:27 <kparal> I believe the bug is that "clearpart --all --initlabel" doesn't work
17:09:29 <adamw> the thing I wonder is 'would clearpart --all --initlabel --drives=vda' work
17:09:42 <adamw> i.e. just changing --none to --all, which is what you're supposed to have to do to make this fly
17:09:45 <tflink> but it sounds like something isn't right in the ks generation where it relates to formatting
17:09:53 <adamw> in your test you dropped the --drives=vda part
17:09:56 <zodbot> Ticket notification - f18betablocker: [Bug 865066] 'Software selection' spoke is incorrectly rendered on top of the hub if you enter the 'software selection' spoke while 'installation source' is a remote mirror <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865066>
17:10:05 <kparal> adamw: yes, but that does make the kickstart even stronger, I think
17:10:06 <adamw> ^^^ that was just a title change, no worries
17:10:26 <adamw> kparal: well...you could expect it to mean 'wipe all drives' or 'wipe no drives'...it seems ambiguous
17:10:47 <kparal> well it used to work for F17
17:10:49 <adamw> OK
17:10:50 <kparal> with a single drive
17:10:51 <tflink> either way, I don't think that the generated ks from previous install will work
17:10:55 <adamw> and by the documentation it should mean 'all drives'
17:11:09 <adamw> tflink: it's actually intended that the generated ks doesn't wipe the drives, I believe
17:11:23 <adamw> it's supposed to be an anti-shoot-in-the-foot precaution, to make you go in and edit it before it'll blow anything away
17:11:31 <adamw> which is why i said we should clarify the criterion slightly
17:11:49 <kparal> I can quickly try with --drive=vda
17:11:55 <tflink> I'd think that uncommented partitioning on the same system would still hit this
17:11:59 <adamw> in oldui, the generated kickstart had all the partitioning operations commented out, you had to un-comment them to make it destructive and unattended
17:12:10 <tflink> taking one generated ks and using it verbatim on another system - not so much
17:12:21 <adamw> still anyway
17:12:38 <adamw> clearpart --all clearly isn't doing what it should, so i'm gonna say +1 to that.
17:13:03 * kparal running VM
17:13:17 <kparal> give me 30 sec
17:13:25 <tflink> proposed #agreed 865048 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 beta release criterion: "The installer must be able to successfully complete a scripted installation, using the installer's preferred scripting system, which duplicates the default interactive installation as closely as possible"
17:13:31 <kparal> so I used "clearpart --all --initlabel --drives=vda"
17:13:35 <kparal> doesn't work
17:13:38 <adamw> ok
17:13:50 <adamw> hm, now i read the criterion back, it's fine
17:13:54 * jlk suspects that there might be something else going on, not related to the clearpart line.
17:13:57 <adamw> if anything would need adjusting it'd be the test case.
17:14:14 <adamw> ack
17:14:18 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:14:25 <kparal> ack
17:14:28 <jlk> note that I've recently done clearpart and autopart in text mode kickstarts and it works
17:14:34 <tflink> #agreed 865048 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 beta release criterion: "The installer must be able to successfully complete a scripted installation, using the installer's preferred scripting system, which duplicates the default interactive installation as closely as possible"
17:14:52 <tflink> #topic (864120) LUKS encryption option has no effect
17:14:52 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864120
17:14:52 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, POST
17:15:42 <kparal> the UI was changed in anaconda 18.14, so it might work now
17:15:47 <kparal> I didn't have time to re-test
17:16:17 <kparal> but it was simply non-functional in 18.12
17:16:33 <tflink> as written, I'm +1 blocker
17:16:42 <tflink> do we want to accept or punt for retesting
17:16:51 <nirik> +1 blocker to me
17:17:02 <adamw> +1 is fine
17:17:03 <kparal> +1 blocker
17:17:11 <adamw> if it's already fixed, hey, it's fixed. accepting it as a blocker isn't a problem.
17:18:43 * adamw gets out the tflink poking stick
17:18:53 <tflink> sorry, got a phone call
17:18:57 <adamw> poke! poke!
17:19:12 <kparal> I think we have chair as well, we can #propose too
17:19:35 <kparal> but poking is more fun
17:19:55 <Viking-Ice> +1 blocker
17:19:55 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864120 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 beta release criterion: "The installer's custom partitioning mode must be capable of the following: ... Creating encrypted partitions"
17:19:58 <Viking-Ice> ack
17:20:02 <nirik> ack
17:20:04 <kparal> ack
17:20:15 <tflink> #agreed 864120 - AcceptedBlocker - Violates the following F18 beta release criterion: "The installer's custom partitioning mode must be capable of the following: ... Creating encrypted partitions"
17:20:15 <adamw> ack
17:20:24 <tflink> but that does remind me that I forgot to chair people
17:20:29 <tflink> #chair adamw kparal
17:20:29 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw kparal tflink
17:20:46 <tflink> #topic (847831) kickstart boot fails with %include file generated by %pre
17:20:46 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=847831
17:20:46 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ASSIGNED
17:20:47 <adamw> #chair clinteastwood
17:20:58 <adamw> thank you ladies and gentleman, i'm here all week, tip your server
17:21:19 <jlk> adamw: zing
17:21:31 <kparal> I wanted to test this bug, but then I instead reported the clearpart one, and haven't tested this one
17:21:45 <Viking-Ice> lol
17:21:56 <tflink> whoops, I'm not surprised that I forgot one that we hit yesterday
17:22:01 <adamw> we covered this one yesterday anyhow
17:22:04 <kparal> but general kickstart capabilities seem to work
17:22:20 <tflink> #undo
17:22:20 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x35c1610>
17:22:21 <tflink> #undo
17:22:21 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x2d1dabd0>
17:22:22 <kparal> so it might be just the %include
17:22:23 <tflink> #undo
17:22:23 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x1c449650>
17:22:37 <tflink> #topic (864353) important GNOME packages are not installed from DVD/netinst
17:22:37 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864353
17:22:37 <tflink> #info Proposed Blocker, comps, NEW
17:22:55 <jlk> (I know we're on a different subject but...)
17:23:10 <jlk> FYI on the clearpart issue, it appears to only be a bug when doing graphical kickstarts.
17:23:15 <jlk> it is not a bug when doing text kickstarts.
17:23:30 <kparal> aha, are you ready for this? I have to admit there is absolutely no criteria for this bug (864353)
17:23:44 <tflink> there isn't?
17:23:45 <kparal> but I still consider it pretty important and that's why I suggested it
17:23:49 <kparal> I don't know about any
17:23:54 <tflink> I was going to use "The installer must be able to install each of the release blocking desktops, as well as the minimal package set, with each supported installation method"
17:24:15 <tflink> unless the packages were omitted on purpose
17:24:23 <kparal> well it installs the gnome package set just fine. but some optional sets are not included
17:24:25 <nirik> so I guess this would also hit other desktops too...
17:24:26 <tflink> but I have a hard time believing that evolution was removed on purpose
17:24:27 <kparal> that were in F17 and older
17:24:32 <Viking-Ice> -1 blocker
17:24:32 <nirik> due to the way the new comps is setup.
17:24:44 <Viking-Ice> optional sets are not covered in criteria
17:24:53 <kparal> Viking-Ice: correct
17:24:56 <tflink> Viking-Ice: evolution is optional in gnome?
17:24:59 <adamw> it is in fact on purpose.
17:25:02 <kparal> that's why I consider this a call of reason
17:25:03 <dgilmore> -1
17:25:15 <adamw> not sayin i agree with the new package groups or the selection design, but that's how they were set up.
17:25:16 <nirik> The way it was explained to me is that the optional stuff should appear (unchecked) and allow the user to select it.
17:25:18 <Viking-Ice> it's just a regular bug against comps
17:25:22 <nirik> gnome apps, gnome whatever
17:25:31 <tflink> ok, I was figuring that rhythmbox and evolution were part of the gnome desktop
17:25:38 <adamw> yeah, they should appear in the right-most panel when the GNOME desktop is selected
17:25:38 <kparal> Viking-Ice: have you read my justification?
17:25:47 <adamw> when KDE is selected you should see KDE optional groups, etc.
17:25:47 <kparal> it won't get any testing done
17:25:56 <kparal> libreoffice, evolution, etc
17:25:56 <adamw> kparal: 'yum install evolution' is so hard?
17:26:04 <dgilmore> kparal: i dont see it a blocker, packages are optional in comps you have to choose them yourself
17:26:08 <elad661> This one should be closed as NOTABUG
17:26:10 <kparal> no it's not. how many people will do it however
17:26:14 <adamw> i don't think a beta tester's going to go 'welp, the installer didn't install evolution, i'll just go home and cry'
17:26:20 <nirik> all those are in 'gnome-apps'
17:26:20 <zodbot> Ticket notification - commonbugsrss: [Bug 864842] AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'id' <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864842>
17:26:32 <adamw> i mean, i think the default GNOME set should be made bigger, but is it a beta blocker? nah.
17:26:52 <kparal> adamw: it's public Beta, people who don't know how to use yum (but can hit Send in ABRT) can test this
17:26:56 <Viking-Ice> why the hell would I want evolution install if I use thunderbird
17:27:10 <Viking-Ice> hence optional
17:27:19 <Viking-Ice> in anycase -1 blocker -1 nth
17:27:22 <jlk> I don't accept this as blocker criteria.
17:27:27 <kparal> Viking-Ice: yes, but it should be checked by default, and possible to uncheck
17:27:46 <jlk> if the gnome desktop folks feel that evo et al shouldn't be installed by default, that's their prerogative
17:27:49 <Viking-Ice> if anything should be default in anaconda then it is minimal install
17:27:49 <tflink> Viking-Ice: I don't think it's our call to determine what is part of a default install
17:28:22 <Viking-Ice> tflink, I know
17:28:25 <kparal> tflink: so who decides this?
17:28:31 <Viking-Ice> Team anaconda
17:28:35 <adamw> nope
17:28:36 <tflink> kparal: good question, I was just wondering the same thing
17:28:38 <adamw> Team Notting
17:28:45 <jlk> if there is a bug in anaconda's ability to present the gnome folks' desires, that would be different.
17:28:46 <adamw> in practice, right now. this whole thing is part of notting's rework of comps
17:29:01 <adamw> anaconda just does what comps tells it to
17:29:04 <tflink> yeah, I don't think this is an anaconda bug - I thought it was reassigned to comps
17:29:09 <jlk> but if you just disagree with their selection, that's not something to block the beta over.
17:29:17 <dgilmore> adamw: right and its doing the right thing it seems
17:29:20 <jlk> tflink: fair.
17:29:22 <adamw> yeah, afaict it is.
17:29:29 * Viking-Ice gone out smoking while you argue about this some more
17:29:33 <kparal> it's not their selection
17:29:38 <adamw> yeah, i think we sort of beat this one to death.
17:29:50 <tflink> I'm OK with not beta blocker
17:29:55 * nirik is -1 blocker
17:30:01 <tflink> there is a stronger case for final, I think
17:30:04 <elad661> -1 blocker -1 nth -1 bug
17:30:09 <kparal> no office suite in default install, nice
17:30:10 <tflink> but we can figure that out later
17:30:31 <elad661> kparal: if you install from LiveCD, which is our default, you don't get office suite either
17:30:52 <kparal> elad661: yeah, I want to report a bug about it either. that was caused by livecd size limitation
17:30:55 <kparal> that is now gone
17:31:13 <elad661> in that case
17:31:16 <tflink> proposed #agreed 864353 - RejectedBlocker - While it could be argued that these packages should be a part of the default GNOME install, they can still be installed and isn't severe enough to justify blocking F18 beta.
17:31:17 <adamw> i thought mclasen had added it when i brought it up...
17:31:20 <kparal> anyway, I think FESCo or someone should decide what is installed by default
17:31:20 <adamw> ack
17:31:29 <dgilmore> ack
17:31:39 <kparal> atm no one knows, no one cares, no one wants to deal with it
17:31:45 <adamw> kparal: the blocker process just isn't the place for it.
17:31:51 <nirik> ack
17:31:51 <jlk> I believe FESCo has delegated that to the desktop team
17:31:57 <tflink> #agreed 864353 - RejectedBlocker - While it could be argued that these packages should be a part of the default GNOME install, they can still be installed and isn't severe enough to justify blocking F18 beta.
17:31:57 <adamw> our beta criteria require a working desktop with a terminal and a web browser. we've got that. this is not a blocker issue.
17:32:04 <nirik> kparal: ajax was looking at testing adding office to the live desktop.
17:32:12 <tflink> hey, we're done with the proposed blockers!
17:32:16 <kparal> but it diminishes our effort
17:32:25 <kparal> less public testing
17:32:33 <kparal> anyway, let's go on
17:32:50 <tflink> on to the accepted blockers!
17:32:59 <tflink> #topic (862801) Anaconda hangs when 'Configuring installed system'
17:32:59 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862801
17:32:59 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, POST
17:35:08 <adamw> sounds like the updates.img for this is good
17:35:20 <adamw> it'd be nice to have an 18.16 with this fix as it's one of the 'greatest hits'
17:36:12 <tflink> #info it sounds like this has been fixed with the updates.img linked in the bug
17:37:42 <tflink> #info waiting for a new anaconda build with a fix for this included
17:37:55 <tflink> #topic (862612) anaconda freezes after clicking on "+" in keyboard layout settings
17:37:58 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862612
17:38:01 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, VERIFIED
17:38:28 <adamw> this one's fine, nothing to say, can be closed when the build goes stable.
17:39:36 <tflink> #info this is fixed, will be closed when the build is pushed to stable
17:39:54 <Viking-Ice> uh wait what we are done with proposed blocker HURRAY!
17:39:55 * tflink is skipping other VERIFIED bugs
17:40:31 * tflink is tempted to skip ON_QA accepted blockers, too
17:41:11 <tflink> #topic (851114) RepoError: SQLite objects created in a thread can only be used in that same thread
17:41:14 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851114
17:41:17 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, ON_QA
17:41:55 <tflink> #info this should be fixed in anaconda-18.14-1 which is in F18 beta TC3
17:42:09 <adamw> Viking-Ice: we are!
17:42:14 <tflink> #info verification of the fix is needed
17:42:24 <tflink> I probably should have done proposed NTH before accepted blockers, though'
17:42:42 <tflink> #undo
17:42:42 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x176257d0>
17:42:48 <tflink> #info verification of the fix is needed - request testing in bug
17:43:00 <tflink> #topic (862613) ValueError: cannot initialize a disk that has partitions
17:43:00 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862613
17:43:00 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:44:42 <adamw> dlehman: any news on this one?
17:47:10 * tflink assumes not
17:47:16 <kparal> I can re-test soon, I still have the harddrive intact
17:47:29 <tflink> #info There has been no movement on this bug since the last meeting
17:47:51 <tflink> #info re-testing w/ new anaconda might be interesting with the changes that have been pushed recently
17:48:29 <tflink> moving on
17:48:33 <tflink> #topic (862742) TypeError: coercing to Unicode: need string or buffer, NoneType found
17:48:36 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862742
17:48:39 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, VERIFIED
17:48:45 <tflink> damnation
17:48:47 <tflink> #undo
17:48:47 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x25e37390>
17:48:49 <tflink> #undo
17:48:49 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Link object at 0x26964b50>
17:48:50 <tflink> #undo
17:48:50 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x26964750>
17:49:14 <tflink> #topic (824191) nfsiso install hangs during reboot
17:49:14 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824191
17:49:14 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, NEW
17:50:01 <kparal> we adjusted Beta criteria
17:50:12 <tflink> did that go through yet?
17:50:16 <kparal> yes
17:50:22 <kparal> NFS or NFSISO must work for Beta
17:50:24 <adamw> "When using a direct kernel boot, repo=nfs: (mounting an exploded install tree) is also affected by this bug."
17:50:27 <adamw> kparal, comment #20 :)
17:50:45 <adamw> but this is a very old bug
17:50:50 <kparal> that's F17
17:50:53 <adamw> yeah
17:51:11 <adamw> we have 853508 for the straightforward 'nfsiso is utterly broken' bug, so we can disregard it for _this_ bug
17:51:17 <tflink> retest to make sure that nfs or nfsiso works?
17:51:36 <kparal> I think 853508 blocks this one
17:51:47 <adamw> well that, and check with anaconda team that the fix from comment #33 is in the anaconda 18 codebase
17:51:49 <kparal> but according to the new criteria, it is no longer Beta blocker
17:51:51 <adamw> if it is, we can probably close this
17:52:28 <kparal> so I say reject Beta, accept Final, add dependson:853508
17:52:43 <adamw> how does 853508 block it, if this one also affects regular NFS?
17:53:01 <adamw> we don't need to fix NFSISO to test whether this bug is still present in 18 or not
17:53:08 <kparal> I thought that got resolved
17:53:45 <kparal> ok, give me an #action to re-test with nfs
17:53:54 <kparal> but we need nfsiso to work in order to fully verify this bug
17:54:06 <tflink> #info this may not be a blocker any more with the recently revised criteria
17:54:30 <kparal> patch: Beta blocker
17:54:30 <adamw> #action kparal to re-test 824191 and check with anaconda team that the fix made it into the f18 codebase
17:54:30 <tflink> #info if nfs package source works (mounting exploded pkg tree w/ nfs), this is not a beta blocker
17:54:38 <tflink> #undo
17:54:38 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x28d83450>
17:54:39 <tflink> #undo
17:54:39 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Action object at 0x1b874f90>
17:54:46 <tflink> #info this may not be a beta blocker any more with the recently revised criteria
17:54:49 <adamw> it's also worth noting we rejected it for f17 because it's just a hang during final reboot and the installed system works
17:54:54 <tflink> #info if nfs package source works (mounting exploded pkg tree w/ nfs), this is not a beta blocker
17:55:05 <adamw> it feels pretty -1 blocker to me, tbh, i'd probably want to kill it at the next meeting.
17:55:11 <kparal> tflink: return me my #action?
17:55:24 <tflink> damnation
17:55:28 <tflink> #undo
17:55:28 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x28d83450>
17:55:29 <tflink> #undo
17:55:29 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x1b8747d0>
17:55:32 <tflink> #undo
17:55:32 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x1d80b650>
17:55:36 <tflink> #info this may not be a beta blocker any more with the recently revised criteria
17:55:39 <tflink> #info if nfs package source works (mounting exploded pkg tree w/ nfs), this is not a beta blocker
17:55:48 <kparal> "we need to go deeper"
17:55:55 <kparal> no, it's OK now :)
17:55:58 <tflink> #action kparal to re-test 824191 and check with anaconda team that the fix made it into the f18 codebase
17:56:29 <tflink> ok, moving on past the #undo forest
17:56:32 <tflink> #topic (855526) f18a tc6 anaconda cannot connect to a protected wireless network
17:56:35 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855526
17:56:38 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, POST
17:57:25 <tflink> #info an updates.img was just posted in the bug yesterday
17:57:47 <tflink> #info request testing w/ the updates.img in the bug
17:58:43 <tflink> hrm, this kind of sounds like a temp. band-aid
17:58:45 <adamw> seems simple enough
17:58:46 <tflink> which works
17:59:09 <tflink> #topic (853877) anaconda ignores keyboard settings
17:59:09 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853877
17:59:09 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, anaconda, POST
17:59:54 <tflink> #info patch has been submitted but hasn't made it into an anaconda build yet
18:00:04 <adamw> so far as we know
18:00:14 <tflink> #undo
18:00:14 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x2d1c1090>
18:00:23 <tflink> #info patch has been submitted but may not have made it into an anaconda build yet
18:01:28 <adamw> looks like vpodzime has a few keymap-related patches on the list
18:01:34 <adamw> i see an ack for one of them from bcl two days ago, but that's all
18:01:45 <adamw> #action adamw to ping anaconda team to review patches for 853877
18:02:07 <tflink> sounds like a plan
18:02:10 <tflink> #topic (862557) repoclosure failure on 18 Beta TC2 DVDs (kernel)
18:02:10 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862557
18:02:10 <tflink> #info Accepted Blocker, kernel, MODIFIED
18:03:09 <tflink> #info according to comment#12, this has been fixed
18:03:33 <tflink> #info since the affected kernel build is in stable, this can be closed
18:04:15 <adamw> indeed
18:04:24 <tflink> OK, that's all of the accepted blockers
18:04:32 <tflink> do we want to do NTH today?
18:04:41 * dgilmore wants dinner
18:05:28 <Viking-Ice> tflink, yeah let's finish the proposed nth
18:05:35 <Viking-Ice> we can skip accepted
18:05:51 <tflink> we usually don't bother with accepted nth during the review meetings
18:06:10 <tflink> eh, there are only 6 - the more we do today, the fewer we have to do next week
18:06:15 <tflink> #topic (853913) [de_DE] dialogs are trimmed in some languages
18:06:15 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853913
18:06:16 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, anaconda, MODIFIED
18:06:18 <adamw> i don't mind blowing through the proposed nth
18:07:41 <adamw> this seems like it might be best not touched in a freeze
18:07:45 <adamw> seems like kind of a big change
18:07:58 <adamw> but, it's been MODIFIED since 09-12, so it's probably done by now =)
18:08:10 <dgilmore> adamw: there is no freeze right now but yeah its a kinda big change
18:08:26 <adamw> dgilmore: the point of accepting bugs as NTH is that they'll be taken through a freeze
18:08:44 <adamw> even though we're not in freeze right now, the question when evaluating NTH bugs is always 'would we take this through a freeze', since that's what NTH means :)
18:08:55 * adamw checking with clumens that this should just be closed
18:09:07 <dgilmore> adamw: right, but the freeze hasnt started yet
18:09:38 <dgilmore> adamw: but i agree i wouldnt want to pull it in
18:09:42 <adamw> dgilmore: that's entirely irrelevant to the case of NTH review. the sole purpose of NTH status is to denote bugs whose fixes we would take through a freeze.
18:09:54 <adamw> it's not like, if we reject a bug as NTH, it means the fix can't be done *outside* the freeze.
18:10:12 <tflink> I would rather get more input from developers before deciding on this
18:10:25 <adamw> anyway, this bug is done and closed.
18:10:28 <adamw> move on.
18:10:32 <tflink> oh, ok
18:10:36 <adamw> i checked with clumens and i just tested it with tc3. the dialog in question wraps.
18:10:46 <tflink> #info this bug is fixed and due to be closed, review is not needed
18:10:54 <tflink> #topic (857412) cannot set up time sync, couldn't write /etc/ntp.conf
18:10:54 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857412
18:10:54 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, system-config-date, NEW
18:11:30 <tflink> we seem to have this problem in every release :-/
18:12:17 <tflink> eh, it depends on the fix for this one
18:12:45 <dgilmore> honestly id reject as NTH we install chrony by default not ntp. most users shouldnt see it
18:12:48 <adamw> it looks like this may be fixed with recent firstboot anyhow
18:13:03 <adamw> dgilmore: well i think the problem here was that firstboot was trying to write ntpd config even when chrony was installed
18:13:04 <Viking-Ice> -1 nth
18:13:20 <adamw> but in any case, probably -1 nth, as this is a non-vital firstboot function that can be changed post-install easily enough
18:13:38 <dgilmore> adamw: ok
18:14:11 <tflink> proposed #agreed 857412 - RejectedNTH - NTP is a non-vital firstboot function and this can be fixes without much effort post-install. Therefore, it is rejected as NTH for F18 beta.
18:14:54 <tflink> ack/nak/patch?
18:14:57 <dgilmore> ack
18:15:19 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:15:40 <adamw> er
18:15:41 <adamw> patch
18:15:46 <adamw> now i look at it, is this firstboot at all?
18:15:56 <adamw> the first post just talks about system-config-date...
18:16:23 <tflink> good point
18:16:23 <adamw> so...
18:16:25 <tflink> still -1 NTH
18:16:45 <adamw> propose #agreed 857412 - RejectedNTH - network time sync is a non-vital function and this can be acceptably fixed with an update. Therefore, it is rejected as NTH for F18 beta.
18:16:46 <Viking-Ice> same here
18:17:00 <adamw> Viking-Ice: this is why we do the votes then the acks =)
18:17:00 <tflink> ack
18:17:03 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:19:30 <tflink> adamw: I hope you're not waiting for me to do the #agreed - I'm too lazy to reformat your proposal and you're already #chair
18:19:43 <adamw> oh sorry
18:19:46 <adamw> #agreed 857412 - RejectedNTH - network time sync is a non-vital function and this can be acceptably fixed with an update. Therefore, it is rejected as NTH for F18 beta.
18:19:51 * adamw was updating the bug again
18:19:54 <tflink> #topic (857076) reboot after Live installation hangs
18:19:55 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857076
18:19:55 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, systemd, NEW
18:20:17 <adamw> this bug does look kinda bad, so i can see +1 nth for it.
18:21:24 <kparal> it's unfortunate that it hangs before unmounting disks, therefore hard reboot might corrupt some data
18:21:40 <kparal> ctrl+alt+del from console work, but not so many people might know this
18:22:01 <tflink> yeah, this might even be blocker worthy, depending on how many are affected
18:22:24 <kparal> I think all Live installations?
18:22:37 <kparal> except VM
18:23:06 <tflink> accept as nth, propose as blocker if testing reveals that to be true
18:23:14 <kparal> hmm, "Until now, I have seen the hang when installing from Live using optical media or PXE, but not using USB stick (created by any conversion method)."
18:23:18 <kparal> that was written by me
18:23:25 <kparal> so not all Live installations
18:23:45 <kparal> it seems to be a race-condition
18:23:55 <tflink> fun
18:24:00 <kparal> anyway I hit it with e.g. 50% chance
18:24:01 <Viking-Ice> did we block a bug similar to this one?
18:24:03 <tflink> nth works for now
18:25:16 <dgilmore> adamw: i vaguely remeber we hit a bug like that in f17 and rejected it because the rebooted system booted
18:25:44 <tflink> proposed #agreed 857076 - AcceptedNTH - This doesn't seem to affect all installations but it is rather sever and has the potential to cause data corruption. Accepted as NTH for F18 beta, please propose as a blocker if it turns out to be more severe than currently understood
18:26:02 <tflink> dgilmore: I think we had one for alpha, to be honest
18:26:05 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:26:11 <dgilmore> tflink: ok.
18:26:15 * dgilmore will ack it
18:26:25 <dgilmore> just thought we had precident to reject it
18:26:31 <tflink> as a blocker, probably
18:26:41 <adamw> ack
18:26:51 <adamw> dgilmore: yeah i think that was probably a blocker not nth
18:26:59 <adamw> imbw though, we can always revisit if you can cite precedent
18:27:03 <dgilmore> adamw: :) it was vague in my mind
18:27:06 <tflink> I don't think that I would be +1 beta blocker on this as I currently understand it
18:27:14 <tflink> #agreed 857076 - AcceptedNTH - This doesn't seem to affect all installations but it is rather sever and has the potential to cause data corruption. Accepted as NTH for F18 beta, please propose as a blocker if it turns out to be more severe than currently understood
18:27:25 <tflink> #topic (863676) /etc/localtime link overwritten with incorrect timezone file during firstboot
18:27:28 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863676
18:27:30 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, system-config-date, NEW
18:28:24 <Viking-Ice> +1 nth
18:29:09 <adamw> this is what causes the timezone you set in anaconda not to be respected?
18:29:19 <dgilmore> +1 nth
18:29:31 <dgilmore> adamw: seems so
18:29:55 <adamw> +1 then
18:30:11 <adamw> it's not a terribly important function, but it does mean it can't be fixed with an update
18:30:41 <tflink> proposed #agreed 863676 - AcceptedNTH - While this doesn't violate any of the release criteria for F18 beta, it would lead to confusion of users and can't be fixed with an update. Therefore, it is accepted as NTH for F18 beta.
18:30:57 <dgilmore> ack
18:30:59 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:31:12 <adamw> ack
18:31:17 <tflink> #agreed 863676 - AcceptedNTH - While this doesn't violate any of the release criteria for F18 beta, it would lead to confusion of users and can't be fixed with an update. Therefore, it is accepted as NTH for F18 beta.
18:31:21 <tflink> last one!
18:31:26 <tflink> #topic (865031) Black screen when booting on iMac12,2 (27" 2011 model)
18:31:26 <tflink> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=865031
18:31:26 <tflink> #info Proposed NTH, xorg-x11-drv-ati, NEW
18:32:15 <Viking-Ice> adamw, this could be same symptom as my bug
18:32:30 <tflink> more NTH graphics bugs that have no proposed fix
18:32:34 <Viking-Ice> let's punt for more info
18:32:43 <tflink> per precident, it sounds like +1 NTH
18:32:53 <adamw> Viking-Ice: 'black screen when booting' is a very generic symptom, can be caused by all sorts of bugs
18:33:05 <adamw> Viking-Ice: we really need some more detailed data to figure out which cases are dupes and which aren't
18:33:19 <dgilmore> tflink: yeah im +1 to nth
18:33:34 <adamw> so i've been asking people with this symptom but different cards to report separately and hopefully provide enough data to diagnose accurately whether any of the cases are in fact the same bug as others
18:33:52 <tflink> isn't this a case of using blocker/nth as to-dos?
18:34:09 <Viking-Ice> adamw, mine broke with the kernel final 3.6 and onwards
18:34:16 <Viking-Ice> +1 nth
18:34:23 <tflink> either way, I see +2 NTH
18:34:29 <Viking-Ice> I'm all for fixing this if we can
18:34:54 * tflink is +0 NTH - I recognize precident but I still don't agree with it
18:35:30 <adamw> +1 nth sure
18:35:59 <adamw> tflink: no, not really. a graphics showstopper is a _showstopper_. it's always good to fix showstoppers.
18:36:08 <adamw> okay, you can use vesa, maybe. but still.
18:36:27 <tflink> proposed #agreed 865031 - AcceptedNTH - graphical problems on boot are considered severe enough to be accepted as NTH. A well tested fix would be accepted past freeze.
18:36:34 <adamw> ack
18:36:36 <Viking-Ice> ack
18:36:46 <dgilmore> ack
18:37:11 <tflink> adamw: I'm _not_ saying that the bug isn't severe enough to be nth - I'm saying that taking NTH bugs when there is no proposed fix and no information on how widespread the problem is is stupid
18:37:27 <tflink> #agreed 865031 - AcceptedNTH - graphical problems on boot are considered severe enough to be accepted as NTH. A well tested fix would be accepted past freeze.
18:37:58 <adamw> tflink: again, my position has always been that only the nature of the issue needs to be considered for NTH status. the messiness of the fix can be considered when deciding whether to actually *take* an NTH fix for any given buil.d
18:37:59 <tflink> anyhow, that's all of the bugs on my list for today
18:38:08 <Viking-Ice> yay!
18:38:19 <dgilmore> woohoo
18:38:25 * dgilmore goes to seek out dinner
18:38:25 <Viking-Ice> perhaps we are lucky enough to have just an hour or two meeting next week ;)
18:38:35 <adamw> i'm still seeing 4 proposed nth?
18:38:36 <tflink> adamw: and I don't think that's enough justification for tracking an NTH bug
18:38:40 <tflink> that makes it a todo
18:38:41 <adamw> oh n/m
18:38:45 <adamw> just the list hasn't updated yet
18:38:54 * Viking-Ice clocks out from work and heads home later...
18:39:02 <adamw> cya viking
18:39:08 <tflink> #topic Open Floor
18:39:16 <tflink> Anything else that should be brought up today?
18:40:08 <dgilmore> tflink: maybe just that ill be travelling wednesday next week and afk tuesday
18:40:28 <dgilmore> so please communicate early when wanting a TC or RC
18:40:39 <tflink> dgilmore: ok, thanks for the heads up
18:41:28 <tflink> #info The next blocker review meeting will be 2012-10-17 @ 16:00 UTC
18:43:01 <tflink> if there's nothing else ...
18:43:32 * tflink sets the fuse for some reasonable length of time
18:44:16 <adamw> yay
18:44:31 <tflink> eh, this has been reasonable enough
18:44:38 * tflink will send out minutes shortly
18:44:44 <tflink> Thanks for coming, everyone!
18:44:47 <tflink> #endmeeting