<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:00:46
!startmeeting Quality
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
15:00:48
Meeting started at 2024-09-16 15:00:46 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
15:00:48
The Meeting name is 'Quality'
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:00:51
!topic Roll Call
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
15:01:36
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:01:37
Brandon Nielsen (nielsenb)
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
15:01:49
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:01:49
Derek Enz (derekenz)
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:01:52
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:01:53
František Zatloukal (frantisekz)
<@pboy:fedora.im>
15:02:22
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:02:23
Peter Boy (pboy)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:03:15
hi hi hi
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:03:18
how's everyone doing
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
15:03:43
!good
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
15:03:58
you Adam?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:04:52
not too bad thanks
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:05:17
not flooded, so fine 🤩🎉🎉
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:05:23
whew!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:05:29
stay dry everybody
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:05:49
alrighty, let's get started
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:05:54
!topic Previous meeting follow-up
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:06:29
!info "sumantrom to publish F40 community stats on commblog" - looks like that happened: https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/heroes-of-fedora-fedora-40-contributions/
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:07:52
any other followup?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:09:11
alright
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:09:25
!topic Fedora 41 status
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:09:41
!info Fedora 41 Beta-1.2 is signed off for release as Beta, will be released tomorrow
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
15:10:12
Woo
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:11:24
with tiny bit of magic, waiving, and so on... business as usual for beta
<@lruzicka:matrix.org>
15:13:29
hello
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:14:21
hi hi
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:14:30
it looks like we still need to add common issues posts
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:15:14
some are proposed, not sure if it's all of them
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:15:29
!action kparal and adamw to work on common issues ahead of Beta release tomorrow
<@kparal:matrix.org>
15:16:00
right, I forgot about them a bit
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:17:14
anything else on f41? any concerning issues or anything?
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:18:40
just a note maybe, we still haven't got the gnome mega update since beta
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:18:51
that may come with bunch of new changes
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
15:18:52
One I ran into that I didnt see documented or discussed was - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2303727
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
15:19:27
I wasn't able to pxe boot the Beta, had to replace the grub bits with the fix in rawhide
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:19:39
František Zatloukal: yeah, they didn't ask for an FE and i didn't suggest one, it was late
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:20:59
pwhalen: huh, openqa does test pxe on uefi and bios, it worked on x86_64...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:21:19
...and aarch64
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:21:25
https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/2873548
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:21:35
oh, but that's showing grub 2.06
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:21:37
hum
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:21:57
ah, right, i remember now
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:22:06
we consider *client* PXE functionality as blocking, not *server*
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:22:12
the server is running on latest stable (f40)
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
15:22:14
Right, I checked there too, I had to replace `/boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubaa64.efi`
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
15:23:26
@adamw ok, makes sense. We might want to document it , fix for final
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:23:36
yeah, agreed
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:25:36
aand obvious llvm update is coming sometime somewhen
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:26:04
it's not in rawhide yet, but seems almost ready there...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:26:05
sure, i was getting bored
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:26:23
note: i am rebuilding mesa there too
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:26:23
!info pwhalen notes that PXE server functionality is broken in f41 (and rawhide) currently - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2303727
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:26:34
!info fzatlouk notes that an LLVM rebuild will be coming
<@frantisekz:fedora.im>
15:26:40
to avoid needing to do a compat spirv-llvm every release
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
15:27:42
@adamw the latest grub2 in rawhide fixes the pxe issue
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:28:20
pwhalen: it's a scratch build, afaict
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
15:28:33
oh, sorry
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:28:36
oh no, hmm, i see it in koji
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:28:38
but not in bodhi
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:28:39
that's odd?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:28:44
ah
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:28:49
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2543243
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:29:02
not a scratch build, but not tagged. it's tagged only for garbage collection.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:29:06
wonder how that happened?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:29:14
ohhh
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:29:17
maybe we untagged it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:29:35
no...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:29:36
huh.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:30:50
anyway, i've pinged leo
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:30:52
anything else?
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
15:31:22
thanks adamw, nothing else from me
<@lruzicka:matrix.org>
15:32:43
I do not have anything.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:33:00
okay then
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:33:07
!topic Criteria ideas from Beta
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:33:24
so i totally meant to go back and look at the logs and remember what specifically we talked about here. and i didn't. go me
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:33:55
oh, right, there's the upgrade criterion footnote we re-discovered
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:34:37
"The upgraded system must include all packages that would be present on the system after a default installation from install media, plus any packages the user previously had (minus any obsolete content)."
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:34:42
i'm gonna say we should remove or reword that
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:34:59
per Stephen Gallagher it was added during fedora.next to address a specific concern that upgrades might do the wrong thing
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
15:35:36
I agree it should at a minimum be reworded
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
15:36:48
It doesn't really even make sense to me as is, what if a user had uninstalled things? Do they get reinstalled on update?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:36:54
maybe we could reword it to "The upgrade process must not unnecessarily change the payload of the system (e.g. remove or add packages unless necessitated by dependencies and obsoletions)"
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:37:22
Brandon Nielsen: that actually gets a bit complicated iirc, but i don't think this wording is what we currently need to address it
<@kparal:matrix.org>
15:37:44
Wasn't the idea that upgraded system might not miss important new functionality present in fresh installs, i.e. new software etc must be pulled in through dependencies?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:38:18
let me go read the reference stephen found again
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
15:38:23
I thought, based on the previous discussion, there was concern about the "edition" changing
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:38:26
*late
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:39:13
Brandon Nielsen: right
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:41:09
hmm, https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/5A3J4EEWUWGH7KO7LPOCUH6QT6DVP5QK/ seems to be the thread, though it's not got *all* the context
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:41:27
it cites https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1153813
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:41:36
so it definitely was tied to the Edition stuff
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:43:06
and there's the updates-testing thing, of course. do we want to add a criteria requirement that u-t be enabled at beta
<@lruzicka:matrix.org>
15:44:59
This was not a requirement yet?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:45:19
no, as we noticed.
<@lruzicka:matrix.org>
15:45:30
I would support the idea that the repos would remain allowed according to the user's choice.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:45:33
my position is that it's kinda intentional and fine, but we can talk about it :
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:45:35
my position is that it's kinda intentional and fine, but we can talk about it :D
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:45:37
I thought UT was always enabled in beta
<@lruzicka:matrix.org>
15:45:42
s/allowed/set/
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:45:47
Sumantro Mukherjee: it is, but there isn't a rule that it has to be.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:45:54
Sumantro Mukherjee: it is supposed to be, but there isn't a rule that it has to be.
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:46:03
we really should put that in the rule then
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:46:21
if it didn't break anything until today, probably wont :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:47:30
my point is that it's not actually terrible if we forget to do it. all we have to do is ship a stable update that turns it on.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:47:42
but if people want to add a criterion, i won't object
<@lruzicka:matrix.org>
15:48:42
it is not terrible, but it would be better if it was on by default
<@lruzicka:matrix.org>
15:48:56
so, I would be in favour of a criterion
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
15:49:14
I would trade the criterion we were talking about updating or removing, for one with UT enabled
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
15:49:18
:D
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:49:45
I am in favor of the criterion
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:49:52
heh
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:50:04
does someone want to wordsmith a criterion, then, and send it to the list?
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:50:46
I can volunteer
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:50:51
you could model it on the one for final that requires u-t not be enabled - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_41_Final_Release_Criteria#Release_identification
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:51:05
awesome! thank you :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:51:22
!action sumantro to draft a beta criteria requiring updates-testing to be enabled
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:51:43
!action adamw and/or kparal to propose rewording of the beta upgrade criterion footnote about package sets
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:52:02
alright, any other criteria stuff?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:53:26
ok
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:53:31
!topic Test Day / community event status
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:53:35
Sumantro Mukherjee: where are we at?
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:54:07
We had Tuned Test Day that happened https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/196
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:54:25
significant participation , all good
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:54:51
awesome
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:54:53
i18n is underway https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/195 .. all good for now
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:55:18
fcos , virtualization, dnf plugins to follow
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:55:24
I might have few others in the mix
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:55:26
!info tuned test day happened last week - https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/196 , http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2024-09-09_Fedora_41_Tuned . participation was good
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:55:38
!info i18n test week is underway now, join in at https://testdays.fedoraproject.org/events/195
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:55:49
!info fcos, virtualization and dnf plugin test days are upcoming
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:56:35
for community events, I am planning to do a onboarding call soon
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:56:48
I will call for whenisgood on test
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:58:53
thanks
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:59:02
!info an onboarding call is coming soon also, look out for a test@ mail
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:59:08
!topic Open floor
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:59:10
anything else, folks?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
15:59:15
sorry, rushing as we have blocker review in one minute :)
<@sumantrom:fedora.im>
15:59:39
I will be around the blocker-review :D
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
16:01:17
everyone over to #blocker-review:fedoraproject.org then :D
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
16:01:20
thanks for coming, folks
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:10:37
oops
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:10:38
!endmeeting