2024-10-24 17:02:27 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !startmeeting F41 Final Go/No-Go meeting
2024-10-24 17:02:27 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2024-10-24 17:02:27 UTC
2024-10-24 17:02:28 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'F41 Final Go/No-Go meeting'
2024-10-24 17:02:34 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !roll call
2024-10-24 17:02:41 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Hmmm
2024-10-24 17:02:48 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Roll call
2024-10-24 17:02:52 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !hi
2024-10-24 17:02:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Aoife Moloney (amoloney)
2024-10-24 17:02:55 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> !hi 
2024-10-24 17:02:56 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> morning everyone.
2024-10-24 17:03:00 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Geraldo S. Simião Kutz (geraldosimiao) - he / him / his
2024-10-24 17:03:12 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !hi
2024-10-24 17:03:14 <@zodbot:fedora.im> František Zatloukal (frantisekz)
2024-10-24 17:03:24 <@smilner:fedora.im> !hi
2024-10-24 17:03:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> None (smilner)
2024-10-24 17:03:29 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Princ Hiyaya
2024-10-24 17:03:43 <@farchord:fedora.im> !hi
2024-10-24 17:03:45 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Steve Cossette (farchord) - he / him / his
2024-10-24 17:04:04 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Morning Kevin! Evening Europeans! Afternoon and good night other geographically located attendees!
2024-10-24 17:04:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> !hi
2024-10-24 17:04:09 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
2024-10-24 17:04:20 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> !hi
2024-10-24 17:04:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Lukáš Růžička (lruzicka)
2024-10-24 17:04:24 <@coremodule:fedora.im> !hi
2024-10-24 17:04:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Geoffrey Marr (coremodule)
2024-10-24 17:04:39 <@tmus:matrix.org> !hi
2024-10-24 17:04:41 <@zodbot:fedora.im> No Fedora Accounts users have the @tmus:matrix.org Matrix Account defined
2024-10-24 17:05:35 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Purpose of this meeting is to check whether or not F41 Final is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria
2024-10-24 17:06:00 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info This is determined in a few ways
2024-10-24 17:06:13 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Release candidate compose is available
2024-10-24 17:06:19 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info No remaining blocker bugs
2024-10-24 17:06:34 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Test matrices are fully complete
2024-10-24 17:06:41 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Fedora CoreOS and IoT are ready
2024-10-24 17:06:58 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Thats why were here, and mostly who is here :)
2024-10-24 17:07:15 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Current Status - Release Candidate
2024-10-24 17:07:20 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Do we have one?
2024-10-24 17:07:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> we have almost 2! :)
2024-10-24 17:07:30 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> not one, two of them!
2024-10-24 17:07:32 <@amoloney:fedora.im> a choice!
2024-10-24 17:07:42 <@amoloney:fedora.im> red pill or blue pill
2024-10-24 17:07:44 <@jnsamyak:matrix.org> !hi
2024-10-24 17:07:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Samyak Jain (jnsamyak) - he / him / his
2024-10-24 17:08:09 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Thank you for joining jnsamyak :)
2024-10-24 17:08:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so yes, there is a 1.3 and a 1.4 (that is finished and syncing now)
2024-10-24 17:08:35 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we're testing 1.4 already, with lruzicka and Kamil Páral 
2024-10-24 17:08:42 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> 1.4 and 1.3 are nearly identical, except for a single patch to Anaconda, as I understand it.
2024-10-24 17:08:44 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> 1.3 is well and thoroughly tested, but there is one blocker on it.
2024-10-24 17:08:49 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> Lukas Brabec: are you able to do rpi sanity testing?
2024-10-24 17:08:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> one proposed blocker
2024-10-24 17:09:08 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> with +7
2024-10-24 17:09:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> František Zatloukal: I can do so as well. Which image do you want me to boot?
2024-10-24 17:09:10 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> there's a few other changes in 1.4 also, but should be pretty minor
2024-10-24 17:09:31 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ideally all of the aarch64 blocking deliverables I'd say, do they install and boot?
2024-10-24 17:09:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so to complete this topic. we have an RC. ;) Should we move to the next?
2024-10-24 17:09:36 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> nirik: What else went into 1.4 that wasn't in 1.3?
2024-10-24 17:09:39 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Well should we continue the ceremony? Is 1.4 a contender?
2024-10-24 17:09:44 <@amoloney:fedora.im> sanp
2024-10-24 17:09:51 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> so, that'd be aarch64 everything, workstation, and kde
2024-10-24 17:10:00 <@amoloney:fedora.im> snsp
2024-10-24 17:10:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> both 1.3 and 1.4 are contenders, based on how to vote on proposed blockers
2024-10-24 17:10:04 <@amoloney:fedora.im> snap
2024-10-24 17:10:09 <@kparal:matrix.org> both 1.3 and 1.4 are contenders, based on how we vote on proposed blockers
2024-10-24 17:10:14 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> "everything" or "minimal"?
2024-10-24 17:10:31 <@amoloney:fedora.im> ok then, lets get into the Blockers topic
2024-10-24 17:10:40 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I'll start with minimal and go from there.
2024-10-24 17:10:47 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> minimal, sorry
2024-10-24 17:10:49 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12406#comment-940247
2024-10-24 17:10:51 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info We have two candidate composes, RC 1.3 and RC 1.4
2024-10-24 17:11:06 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Blockers
2024-10-24 17:11:26 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !link https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/41/final/buglist
2024-10-24 17:11:40 <@kparal:matrix.org> František Zatloukal: I assume you'll take this section
2024-10-24 17:11:41 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> gimme the mic!
2024-10-24 17:11:42 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Who shall I turn the reins over to from QA?
2024-10-24 17:11:46 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> :D
2024-10-24 17:11:52 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Its yours František Zatloukal !
2024-10-24 17:11:59 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> We have:
2024-10-24 17:12:00 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info 2 Proposed Blockers
2024-10-24 17:12:06 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info 0 Accepted Blockers
2024-10-24 17:12:09 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info 0 Accepted 0-day Blockers
2024-10-24 17:12:15 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info 0 Accepted Previous Release Blockers
2024-10-24 17:12:20 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info 5 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
2024-10-24 17:12:24 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info 7 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
2024-10-24 17:12:35 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !topic Proposed Blockers
2024-10-24 17:12:40 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !topic (2320821) GNOME Clocks hangs when an alarm is triggered
2024-10-24 17:12:45 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2320821
2024-10-24 17:12:49 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1730
2024-10-24 17:12:54 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, gtk4, POST
2024-10-24 17:12:58 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,0,-6) (+kparal, +lruzicka, +catanzaro, -kevin, -frantisekz, -augenauf, -vwbusguy, -pbrobinson, -geraldosimiao)
2024-10-24 17:13:04 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+4,0,-0) (+sgallagh, +adamwill, +kevin, +frantisekz)
2024-10-24 17:13:08 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: 0Day (+1,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao)
2024-10-24 17:14:08 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I retain my -1 blocker vote.
2024-10-24 17:14:21 <@kparal:matrix.org> There are a lot of -1 votes, but I believe those rather mean "I don't think this should block the release" than "I don't think the criterion is violated"
2024-10-24 17:14:24 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> So, just to note, this one isn't fixed by the 1.4 compose
2024-10-24 17:14:44 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> I don't think this should block the release = not a blocker :D
2024-10-24 17:14:48 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I am staying with -1 with all of its implications
2024-10-24 17:14:56 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Kamil Páral: I'll go ahead and say that I don't consider it "basic functionality" of a clock.
2024-10-24 17:14:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I think there's also some discussion about if this is 'basic functionality; or not?
2024-10-24 17:15:14 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> And I'm against considering it a blocker, even one that we waive for being late.
2024-10-24 17:15:26 <@kparal:matrix.org> that's the basis for the proposed blocker, whether the basic functionality is broken
2024-10-24 17:15:53 <@kparal:matrix.org> if people are overall -1, it looks like we should change the criterion. Can be done post-release, but still.
2024-10-24 17:16:18 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we can discuss this post-release for sure
2024-10-24 17:16:35 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Kamil Páral: I think there has to be some reasonable exception mechanism to the effect of "this might violate a strict reading of a criterion, but it's not realistically something worth blocking on"
2024-10-24 17:16:45 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Is there someone here from Workstation SIG?
2024-10-24 17:16:49 <@kparal:matrix.org> mcatanzaro from Workstation WG was +1, though, and we didn't receive more votes from them
2024-10-24 17:16:58 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> If so, what is their stand point?
2024-10-24 17:17:04 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ok
2024-10-24 17:17:04 <@amoloney:fedora.im> fwiw to me 'basic functionality' for my clock on my OS is - It tells the right time, I can set an alarm. Does it do those things? I think most end users would just need those ....
2024-10-24 17:17:23 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Aoife Moloney: It does not, Aoife
2024-10-24 17:17:23 <@kparal:matrix.org> Aoife Moloney: nicely said... the alarm is broken
2024-10-24 17:17:32 <@amoloney:fedora.im> well then!
2024-10-24 17:17:50 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Aoife Moloney: Setting one is fine! It just hangs when the alarm fires...
2024-10-24 17:18:04 <@amoloney:fedora.im> but does it readjust to the right time?
2024-10-24 17:18:17 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> well, Aoife Moloney you can set the alarm, it only goes off with a notification, no sound, no snooze possible. Ok, for you?
2024-10-24 17:18:19 <@kparal:matrix.org> you get a notification but no sound, and the app hangs
2024-10-24 17:18:43 <@amoloney:fedora.im> oh no, I *need* a snooze option (personally) 
2024-10-24 17:18:45 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> !hi
2024-10-24 17:18:47 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> you can however restart the app, the you get the sound :D
2024-10-24 17:18:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fábio Ribeiro (farribeiro) - he / him / his
2024-10-24 17:18:57 <@amoloney:fedora.im> and sound is....kind of the point?
2024-10-24 17:18:58 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> side note: not sure who would use this in a live boot, and we can fix it in updates (but I know thats a side note)
2024-10-24 17:19:04 <@salimma:fedora.im> !hi
2024-10-24 17:19:06 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
2024-10-24 17:19:35 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> yeah, I think this could be fixed in updated, pretty easily. Common Bugs if needed.
2024-10-24 17:19:47 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> yeah, I think this could be fixed in updates, pretty easily. Common Bugs if needed.
2024-10-24 17:19:53 <@amoloney:fedora.im> could it be a zero day update? or listed as a known bug with fix available? We just dont have time to do it now if we want to release next week?
2024-10-24 17:19:57 <@kparal:matrix.org> the current fix is risky, it's in gtk, and we weren't ready to push it stable
2024-10-24 17:20:04 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> proposal: reject as blocker now, revisit critera after release?
2024-10-24 17:20:09 <@kparal:matrix.org> so the fix might arrive some day, but not at release time
2024-10-24 17:20:13 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> nirik: +1
2024-10-24 17:20:15 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> in my opinion - basic functionality of the clock app is to show the clock, alarm is better to have than not, but not breaking a basic functionality as described
2024-10-24 17:20:30 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> František Zatloukal: I could get behind that.
2024-10-24 17:20:48 <@jbwillia:fedora.im> nirik +1
2024-10-24 17:20:52 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Well, Stephen Gallagher nirik we have just heard people expect that functionality. Blocker, waive it, common bugs -> my solution.
2024-10-24 17:21:19 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Thats another option, but can we get enough people to change -1 votes for that? ;)
2024-10-24 17:21:36 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> lruzicka: I still don't think it's a blocker. If someone wanted to pitch it as an F42 blocker today, I'd tell them "no".
2024-10-24 17:21:53 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> I am not sure, we just need to be aware of the thing that if we lower the bar each time, finally we'll arrive at a point of no bars.
2024-10-24 17:22:30 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ok, so if everybody stand by their web vote, this should be dismissed.
2024-10-24 17:23:04 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> so, we're standing at +3/-6, did I forget anybody?
2024-10-24 17:23:12 <@kparal:matrix.org> sadly, it looks like we're not going to get consensus here
2024-10-24 17:23:25 <@kparal:matrix.org> which basically means not a blocker
2024-10-24 17:23:43 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> the blockery guys lost terribly, England falls for the French.
2024-10-24 17:24:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ok, so...what shall we do here? just use the existing votes since no one wants to change?
2024-10-24 17:24:37 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> nirik: I guess so
2024-10-24 17:24:42 <@kparal:matrix.org> Stephen Gallagher: I hope we'll get a well thought-out proposal on how to adjust the criteria, once the release is over
2024-10-24 17:24:42 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I have the text ready...
2024-10-24 17:24:52 <@amoloney:fedora.im> If this is the worst blocker then I could get behind dismissing. I just do like the idea of mentioning it in commonbugs so people are at least aware 
2024-10-24 17:24:57 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Kamil Páral: the one you will write :D
2024-10-24 17:25:09 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Kamil Páral: I'll give it some thought
2024-10-24 17:25:19 <@farchord:fedora.im> Yeah imo as far as blockers go, this is a very light one....
2024-10-24 17:25:20 <@kparal:matrix.org> ok
2024-10-24 17:25:26 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2320821 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - this doesn't violate the proposed criterion "https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_app_basic" as discussed by the stakeholders. While alarm is an important function of a Clocks application, it wasn't deemed that it fits the basic functionality criterion.
2024-10-24 17:25:33 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> ack
2024-10-24 17:25:33 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Wait for it 🐘
2024-10-24 17:25:43 <@kparal:matrix.org> patch
2024-10-24 17:26:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I would say there's no consensus if it is or not.
2024-10-24 17:26:18 <@kparal:matrix.org> Replace "this doesn't violate" with "we didn't reach consensus that it violates"
2024-10-24 17:26:18 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Yeah, same.
2024-10-24 17:26:19 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Aoife Moloney: there is one more, maybe bigger
2024-10-24 17:26:39 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2320821 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - Consensus could not be reached that this violates the proposed criterion "https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_app_basic" as discussed by the stakeholders. While alarm is an important function of a Clocks application, it wasn't deemed that it fits the basic functionality criterion.
2024-10-24 17:26:53 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> ack
2024-10-24 17:26:59 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> ack
2024-10-24 17:27:01 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-10-24 17:27:02 <@kparal:matrix.org> well you could've dropped the last sentence, but whatever
2024-10-24 17:27:03 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2024-10-24 17:27:05 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2024-10-24 17:27:11 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ack
2024-10-24 17:27:16 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> I am the most frightening acker
2024-10-24 17:27:19 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !agreed 2320821 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - Consensus could not be reached that this violates the proposed criterion "https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_app_basic" as discussed by the stakeholders. While alarm is an important function of a Clocks application, it wasn't deemed that it fits the basic functionality criterion.
2024-10-24 17:27:29 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !topic (2321249) Anaconda over VNC doesn't accept any input (bare metal with native video driver only)
2024-10-24 17:27:34 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2321249
2024-10-24 17:27:38 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1733
2024-10-24 17:27:44 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, tigervnc, MODIFIED
2024-10-24 17:27:49 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+9,0,-0) (+asciiwolf, +kparal, +ngompa, +vwbusguy, +pbrobinson, +geraldosimiao, +sumantrom, +mattdm, +kevin)
2024-10-24 17:27:53 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> And this is it.
2024-10-24 17:28:02 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we have plenty of consensus here...
2024-10-24 17:28:03 <@farchord:fedora.im> Didn'T this get fixed?
2024-10-24 17:28:05 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, this seems like a blocker to me...
2024-10-24 17:28:06 <@amoloney:fedora.im> 9 +'s?! 👀
2024-10-24 17:28:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> this one is broken in 1.3 and fixed in 1.4 (in my testing)
2024-10-24 17:28:12 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> this is fixed in 1.4
2024-10-24 17:28:14 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> this is fixed in 1.4
2024-10-24 17:28:35 <@kparal:matrix.org> there's a workaround for 1.3 to use nomodeset, but it has side-effects (especially it configures the target system to also use nomodeset)
2024-10-24 17:28:39 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I don't think this one is debatable. It's critical for headless deployments.
2024-10-24 17:28:41 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> (which BTW, is now synced out and open)
2024-10-24 17:28:43 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> But, there is an easy and safe workaround so anybody could use VNC to install their stuff.
2024-10-24 17:28:58 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi
2024-10-24 17:29:00 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2024-10-24 17:29:15 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Everything works with "nomodeset" grub option.
2024-10-24 17:29:20 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yeah, on server/headless, nomodeset is a viable option
2024-10-24 17:30:11 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so, lets accept this one and move on? or is anyone saying -1?
2024-10-24 17:30:48 <@kparal:matrix.org> is anyone arguing for releasing 1.3 and documenting the workaround, rather than having it fixed in 1.4?
2024-10-24 17:31:08 <@kparal:matrix.org> note: 1.4 isn't sufficiently tested at this point
2024-10-24 17:31:13 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> I am, because the 1.3 is well tested.
2024-10-24 17:31:29 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> If 1.4 have only this change... 
2024-10-24 17:31:36 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I think it's definitely a blocker, but we could consider waiving it under the  "late blocker" policy if we so chose
2024-10-24 17:31:38 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> well, do we have that discussion now?
2024-10-24 17:31:48 <@amoloney:fedora.im> I think we should
2024-10-24 17:31:50 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> We have covered the installability of 1.4 and that VNC bug is fixed.
2024-10-24 17:31:53 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> how do you tell? we should discuss the "sufficient"
2024-10-24 17:31:55 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> there are ways we could address this as a blocker: say it's too late, use 1.4, etc
2024-10-24 17:31:56 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> The rest has not been covered.
2024-10-24 17:32:09 <@kparal:matrix.org> my proposal is to release 1.4. Basic tests for 1.4 will only take us a few hours, and we can have GO tomorrow. If it's possible.
2024-10-24 17:32:30 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> Workstation 1.4 boots as expected on RPi4
2024-10-24 17:32:33 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> the basic sanity tests were done, or are promised, as I understood it, during the meeting
2024-10-24 17:32:38 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 1.4 have any other changes? 
2024-10-24 17:32:41 <@conest:transfem.dev> For me bluetooth on newer kernel require manually pairing through bluetoothctl --> scan on --> connect [mac address here] . then only it would work connecting again through gnome bt ui. Pretty frustrating for a person trying fedora for the first time.
2024-10-24 17:32:44 <@zodbot:fedora.im> No Fedora Accounts users have the @lbrabec:matrix.org Matrix Account defined
2024-10-24 17:32:45 <@kparal:matrix.org> well first of all, there's no matrix. So we don't even have overview what was tested already and what wasn't.
2024-10-24 17:33:14 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> I will not have time to devote that much to testing as I could do yesterday and today, so I do not want to promise anything on 1.4
2024-10-24 17:33:19 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we don't need the matrix, you said off chat you did UEFI, lruzicka and myself did BIOS, aarch64 sanity is in progress
2024-10-24 17:33:38 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> note that the next section of this meeting talks about test coverage...
2024-10-24 17:33:48 <@kparal:matrix.org> Frantisek, at the same time, I can't recommend GO without seeing the matrix populated
2024-10-24 17:33:53 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> yes, I and Frantisek covered the USB sanity installations.
2024-10-24 17:33:53 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> can we just decide the blockeryness of this bug first?
2024-10-24 17:33:54 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yeah, good point nirik 
2024-10-24 17:33:57 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> on bare metal
2024-10-24 17:34:15 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> so, I assume we still have consensus for +1
2024-10-24 17:34:15 <@pwhalen:fedora.im> aarch64 server iso install with usb worked
2024-10-24 17:34:21 <@pwhalen:fedora.im> of 1.4
2024-10-24 17:34:40 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Yes this makes more sense. Lets sort through the list and have a deeper dive then on the testing part
2024-10-24 17:34:41 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, I think this is a clear blocker. we can decide what to do to address it, but it's pretty clear
2024-10-24 17:34:43 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> We have done this before, used a new rc that only did change one or tho things, to use the prior matrix 
2024-10-24 17:34:57 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> I can be -1 with the documented workaround, because the VNC works this way and therefore does not violate the criterion any more.
2024-10-24 17:35:33 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> but who is going to know to do that? they are going to try and install as usual and say 'man, fedora is broken'
2024-10-24 17:35:33 <@kparal:matrix.org> a documented workaround only helps a fraction of users
2024-10-24 17:35:39 <@conest:transfem.dev> dnf5 also makes most fedora guides obsolete since commands like `fedora group update` are missing and it's rather complex to maintain dnf4 and dnf5 packages at the same time. Even rpmfusion does not have dedicated 41 section as we speak.
2024-10-24 17:35:48 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I think it's still a blocker, but that's an argument to waive with a workaround
2024-10-24 17:35:54 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> the others will probably use a different method anyway
2024-10-24 17:36:28 <@kparal:matrix.org> conest 🏳️‍⚧️: thanks for feedback, but now we only discuss proposed blockers
2024-10-24 17:36:53 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> yeah, no problem with that :D For me, it makes perfect logic because the 1.3 matrices are fully coeverfd
2024-10-24 17:37:02 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> yeah, no problem with that :D For me, it makes perfect logic because the 1.3 matrices are fully covered
2024-10-24 17:37:25 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> The thing is: does a blocker with a good workaround still blockery? 
2024-10-24 17:37:50 <@kparal:matrix.org> the answer it "it depends"
2024-10-24 17:38:06 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 👀
2024-10-24 17:38:12 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Yeah 
2024-10-24 17:38:13 <@kparal:matrix.org> ok, so, should we vote again?
2024-10-24 17:38:34 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> It's a judgment call; is the set of people likely to encounter the issue also likely to be able to discover the workaround.
2024-10-24 17:38:40 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> It's a judgment call; is the set of people likely to encounter the issue also likely to be able to discover the workaround?
2024-10-24 17:39:05 <@kparal:matrix.org> I don't understand why you'd want to release with the bug when we fixed it and even tested the fix
2024-10-24 17:39:10 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> and is the set of people likely to hit it large.
2024-10-24 17:39:52 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> That's a fair point; this is mostly useful for headless deployments, but what percentage of them will do interactive vs. kickstart?
2024-10-24 17:39:57 <@kparal:matrix.org> we know that we can test 1.4 in a few hours max, maybe even still today (tomorrow would be safer)
2024-10-24 17:40:06 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I mean, preferring longer-tested 1.3 with viable workaround for the blocker is a valid preference
2024-10-24 17:40:09 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> FWIW, we use this method to install in fedora infra... boot and use vnc to adjust storage if it's a non standard config we don't want to make a kickstart for
2024-10-24 17:40:14 <@kparal:matrix.org> we'd only do basic tests and everything else stayed the same
2024-10-24 17:40:19 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> 👀
2024-10-24 17:40:29 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> what are the basic tests?
2024-10-24 17:40:36 <@kparal:matrix.org> basic installation
2024-10-24 17:40:45 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> that's done
2024-10-24 17:40:48 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> All in all, I'm still a +1 to block on it, but it's a weaker +1 than yesterday.
2024-10-24 17:40:48 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> these are done or in progress for aarch64
2024-10-24 17:40:55 <@kparal:matrix.org> and vnc of course, but I already performed it. More testing is of course welcome.
2024-10-24 17:41:06 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yeah, weak +1 , so +0.666..666
2024-10-24 17:41:10 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> František Zatloukal: aarch64 minimal is good. I just haven't updated the matrix yet
2024-10-24 17:41:22 <@kparal:matrix.org> that's why I'm saying a couple of hours max
2024-10-24 17:41:26 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> so, that's just KDE @ aarch64 missing now
2024-10-24 17:41:40 <@zodbot:fedora.im> frantisekz gave a cookie to sgallagh. They now have 243 cookies, 18 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 17:41:42 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Starting KDE now
2024-10-24 17:41:51 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> who is going to do it? we are heading into the night.
2024-10-24 17:41:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to sgallagh. They now have 244 cookies, 19 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 17:42:03 <@kparal:matrix.org> we just need to convince relval to create a new matrix, populate it with whatever we already did, and look at the blanks, whether something else is needed
2024-10-24 17:42:07 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> doing...
2024-10-24 17:42:54 <@kparal:matrix.org> seems we're stuck, let's start the vote and see
2024-10-24 17:42:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> So, I think even with one -1 this is still largely thought to be a blocker?
2024-10-24 17:43:59 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I think "the installer doesn't work without a workaround in cases we know at least one major consumer uses" is enough for me to stay +1 blocker.
2024-10-24 17:44:29 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Still +1 blocker here.
2024-10-24 17:44:44 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Ok, then let's block on this and then talk how to solve it.
2024-10-24 17:44:53 <@conest:transfem.dev> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2319597  can we talk about this? It was said to be fixed with 6.11.4-301 but I still have to opt for workaround ? bt devices would only pair after I do bluetoothctl --> scan on --> connect [mac address here]
2024-10-24 17:44:58 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> +1 blocker
2024-10-24 17:44:59 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> anybodye else?
2024-10-24 17:45:30 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we have +4 at the live session now
2024-10-24 17:45:35 <@jbwillia:fedora.im> +1 blocker
2024-10-24 17:45:36 <@kparal:matrix.org> conest 🏳️‍⚧️: sorry, it's fixed for most people, so it's no longer a blocker for the whole release
2024-10-24 17:45:53 <@kparal:matrix.org> +1 blocker
2024-10-24 17:45:58 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2321249 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - VNC installations are required to work as per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_User_Interface_VNC criterion. While we do have workaround for the issue by disabling the mode-setting, it's not enough to take the criterion as fulfilled.
2024-10-24 17:46:10 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Where talking about the anaconda vnc bug right.
2024-10-24 17:46:14 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ? 
2024-10-24 17:46:24 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yep yep, anaconda vnc bug now
2024-10-24 17:46:25 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> O think so
2024-10-24 17:46:29 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> So I still +1
2024-10-24 17:46:30 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2024-10-24 17:46:31 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yes
2024-10-24 17:46:32 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ack
2024-10-24 17:46:36 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> I think so
2024-10-24 17:46:38 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2024-10-24 17:46:39 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2024-10-24 17:46:42 <@coremodule:fedora.im> ack
2024-10-24 17:46:44 <@jbwillia:fedora.im> ack
2024-10-24 17:46:48 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Ack 
2024-10-24 17:46:58 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> ack
2024-10-24 17:46:58 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !agreed 2321249 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - VNC installations are required to work as per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_Anaconda_User_Interface_VNC criterion. While we do have workaround for the issue by disabling the mode-setting, it's not enough to take the criterion as fulfilled.
2024-10-24 17:47:08 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> KDE 1.4 boots as expected on RPi4
2024-10-24 17:47:15 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> And now let's heroe the 1.4 
2024-10-24 17:47:23 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 🎆
2024-10-24 17:47:26 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> (late ack)
2024-10-24 17:47:43 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> so, normally we'd the the freeze exceptions now, we've thought with Kamil Páral that we may skip those?
2024-10-24 17:47:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so... do we want to go over accepted FEs then? or punt on them?
2024-10-24 17:47:50 <@conest:transfem.dev> You would find atleast 4 posts on fedora subreddit under a day talking about the same. Everyone is settling for the workaround of the terminal. Should not be the case tbh. https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/1g685o9/bluetooth_headphones_pairing_bug_workaround/  https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/1gajodp/fedora_40_kde_621_bluetooth_problems/  https://www.reddit.com/r/Fedora/comments/1gab16o/cant_connect_sony_phones_to_bluetooth/
2024-10-24 17:48:01 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> We don't do FEs at Go/No-Go I thought.
2024-10-24 17:48:02 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah... I'm ok with not right now.
2024-10-24 17:48:03 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> so, normally we'd do the freeze exceptions now, we've thought with Kamil Páral that we may skip those?
2024-10-24 17:48:05 <@kparal:matrix.org> if we decide to release 1.4 today/tomorrow, then there's no point in discussing FEs
2024-10-24 17:48:21 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> well, if something comes up we will still need them for the next rc...
2024-10-24 17:48:25 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> but yeah, that
2024-10-24 17:48:33 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> conest 🏳️‍⚧️: Please stop derailing the Go/No-Go meeting. Please take your discussion to #quality:fedoraproject.org 
2024-10-24 17:49:08 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so on to test coverage?
2024-10-24 17:49:11 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> Aoife Moloney: this would be all for the blocker review
2024-10-24 17:49:15 <@kparal:matrix.org> I'd not waste time on FEs right now, only when we know we'll slip
2024-10-24 17:49:36 <@amoloney:fedora.im> sorry just scrolling back
2024-10-24 17:49:39 <@amoloney:fedora.im> thank you!
2024-10-24 17:50:25 <@amoloney:fedora.im> so should we move on with the rest of the meeting? If we are not cleared of all release blockers, that sounds like we should make a decision?
2024-10-24 17:50:53 <@amoloney:fedora.im> (and one is unfortunately apparent)
2024-10-24 17:51:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> let's see the test coverage, and then decide what to do about RC1.4
2024-10-24 17:51:18 <@amoloney:fedora.im> ok, makes sense
2024-10-24 17:51:28 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Current Status - Test Matrices
2024-10-24 17:51:45 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_41_Test_Results
2024-10-24 17:51:54 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yes, test coverage, then see
2024-10-24 17:52:08 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> We're missing some at 1.3
2024-10-24 17:52:44 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> QA:Testcase_install_to_hardware_RAID ; QA:Testcase_install_to_SAS
2024-10-24 17:52:46 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I see those
2024-10-24 17:53:03 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> OK, those which we often handwave because they're uncommon hardware
2024-10-24 17:53:14 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> otherwise full it seems
2024-10-24 17:53:19 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> for 1.4, everything should translate over except... vnc cases?
2024-10-24 17:53:37 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> and basic sanity - does it boot, install, boot?
2024-10-24 17:53:44 <@amoloney:fedora.im> which ones are we short František Zatloukal ?
2024-10-24 17:53:49 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> nirik: Was anything besides anaconda added to 1.4? You indicated that there was something else earlier in another channel
2024-10-24 17:53:57 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> these two: QA:Testcase_install_to_hardware_RAID ; QA:Testcase_install_to_SAS
2024-10-24 17:54:00 <@amoloney:fedora.im> sorry my screen didnt udate, ignore
2024-10-24 17:54:16 <@amoloney:fedora.im> sorry my screen didnt update, ignore
2024-10-24 17:54:16 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> as Stephen Gallagher said, we do usually just behave like those didn't exist :)
2024-10-24 17:54:20 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> we do not have the hardware and nobody who has did it
2024-10-24 17:54:29 <@kparal:matrix.org> this was also added in 1.4: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4ccf448f63
2024-10-24 17:54:47 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> doesn't affect any of the blocking deliverables I think?
2024-10-24 17:54:55 <@kparal:matrix.org> but nothing else was added compared to 1.3
2024-10-24 17:55:01 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> that does not seem like blocking
2024-10-24 17:55:15 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> right, that should only affect the miracle spin.
2024-10-24 17:55:27 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12406#comment-940247
2024-10-24 17:55:35 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> VNC installation
2024-10-24 17:55:35 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> so - let's start with definition of the tests we need to do over again over 1.3:
2024-10-24 17:55:35 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> 
2024-10-24 17:55:35 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> Boot and Installation of all blocking deliverables
2024-10-24 17:55:47 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we'll make the mini-matrix here.. :D
2024-10-24 17:55:54 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> you mean 1.4?
2024-10-24 17:56:14 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I've meant again on 1.4... sorry my wording
2024-10-24 17:56:46 <@kparal:matrix.org> does anyone know how to do it?
2024-10-24 17:56:55 <@kparal:matrix.org> I'm getting auth issues
2024-10-24 17:57:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'm not fully sure... let me look around.
2024-10-24 17:58:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> So, it sounds like folks are of the opinion of testing 1.4 quickly and go on that?
2024-10-24 17:58:35 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> how long would be needed to get enough coverage for us to be happy with a go on 1.4?
2024-10-24 17:58:37 <@kparal:matrix.org> it works now
2024-10-24 17:58:41 <@kparal:matrix.org> I'm creating 1.4 matrix
2024-10-24 17:59:03 <@kparal:matrix.org> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_41_RC_1.4_Summary
2024-10-24 17:59:18 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 💯
2024-10-24 17:59:19 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I am happy now, but... you know my yolo style...
2024-10-24 17:59:29 <@kparal:matrix.org> so, should we try to fill it out now, or until tomorrow, to avoid 2 week slip?
2024-10-24 17:59:54 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> KDE on aarch64 raw image works fine too. (I know Lukas Brabec also tested it, but I was mid-write of the disk image already, so I double-checked)
2024-10-24 18:01:00 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> It's late to ask for testing today, so I propose we re-convene tomorrow for a final decision to give QA a day to recheck.
2024-10-24 18:01:15 <@kparal:matrix.org> sound fine to me, if releng is ok with it
2024-10-24 18:01:32 <@amoloney:fedora.im> That feels wrong...
2024-10-24 18:01:33 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I'd prefer making the call today or slipping
2024-10-24 18:01:44 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> ok
2024-10-24 18:02:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> but I suppose we could make it work if needed. just doesn't give too much time...
2024-10-24 18:02:15 <@kparal:matrix.org> I'm also fine with spending a few hours today testing, if that helps
2024-10-24 18:02:16 <@amoloney:fedora.im> I would like to check in with IoT and Fedora CoreOS for 1.4 though too
2024-10-24 18:02:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, would be good to get their input
2024-10-24 18:02:37 <@amoloney:fedora.im> I know thats technically part of this anyway, but is it too late for them to verify its ok?
2024-10-24 18:02:38 <@kparal:matrix.org> (a few *more* hours) 🙂 
2024-10-24 18:03:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> for IoT, we have coremodule here
2024-10-24 18:03:18 <@kparal:matrix.org> the current IoT matrix is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora-IoT_41_RC_20241023.1_Summary
2024-10-24 18:03:27 <@amoloney:fedora.im> define 'few' 😋
2024-10-24 18:03:38 <@coremodule:fedora.im> Yes, IoT is looking good.
2024-10-24 18:03:40 <@kparal:matrix.org> I somewhat forgot about CoreOS, oops
2024-10-24 18:04:57 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> does we have 1.4 workstation live aarch64?
2024-10-24 18:05:04 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> no.
2024-10-24 18:05:21 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> We could still ship 1.3 with common bugs.
2024-10-24 18:05:27 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> oh, and didnt have it at 1.3 too
2024-10-24 18:05:31 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> so, no regressions
2024-10-24 18:05:54 <@jbwillia:fedora.im> or 1.4 whith the same common bugs
2024-10-24 18:06:11 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> We could also just YOLO 1.4 without further re-testing... :-)
2024-10-24 18:06:13 <@kparal:matrix.org> no, we made the vnc bug a blocker
2024-10-24 18:06:20 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> we could have that discussion. I am not in favor personally, but we could see what people think?
2024-10-24 18:06:39 <@kparal:matrix.org> in a few hours openqa should populate lots of those 1.4 results
2024-10-24 18:06:39 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> well, thats a blocker, but we could waive it on the 'late bug' thing
2024-10-24 18:06:44 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Kamil Páral: Blocker yes, but we *could* waive it as late. Let's not, though.
2024-10-24 18:06:46 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> that we could waive. also qualifies as a late blocker.
2024-10-24 18:06:50 <@amoloney:fedora.im> to play devils advocate - is the vnc blocker likely to be resovled if we are no go and then wait ~2 weeks to the next go/no-go date?
2024-10-24 18:06:53 <@kparal:matrix.org> correct
2024-10-24 18:06:58 <@jbwillia:fedora.im> so the vnc bug exists in 1.4 but there is a work aorund correct 
2024-10-24 18:07:00 <@kparal:matrix.org> it can be waived
2024-10-24 18:07:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> SouthernG: no, it's fixed in 1.4. 1.3 has a workaround
2024-10-24 18:07:20 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> the basic sanity checks for 1.4 could be done today (central europe time), right?
2024-10-24 18:07:25 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> no. VNC is ok in 1.4, the bug only exists in 1.3
2024-10-24 18:07:28 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> The VNC blocker bug fix is in 1.4
2024-10-24 18:07:37 <@jbwillia:fedora.im> so why not use 1.4
2024-10-24 18:07:55 <@amoloney:fedora.im> theres a risk of not enough testing I guess
2024-10-24 18:08:02 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> SouthernG: It completed only a few minutes prior to the start of this meeting. It hasn't been fully re-tested.
2024-10-24 18:08:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> coconut is busy adding results.
2024-10-24 18:08:13 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> it seems the openqa finished for 1.4? https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/overview?distri=fedora&version=41&build=Fedora-41-20241024.0&groupid=1
2024-10-24 18:08:29 <@amoloney:fedora.im> this is a tricky little situation, isnt it?😅
2024-10-24 18:08:33 <@jbwillia:fedora.im> in the past we brought the testing from the previous rc why cant we now 
2024-10-24 18:08:53 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> SouthernG: Please read the scrollback; we covered this earlier.
2024-10-24 18:09:08 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah, that is what I thought
2024-10-24 18:09:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> some of the failures are the clocks bug.
2024-10-24 18:09:19 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> a few others need retry/testing.
2024-10-24 18:09:22 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> yes, some small number of tests is still running, but otherwise looks good
2024-10-24 18:09:45 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> yeh, maybe a failed needle or something
2024-10-24 18:10:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> there are a few failed in openqa that we need to re-run or investigate
2024-10-24 18:10:09 <@kparal:matrix.org> there are a few failed tests in openqa that we need to re-run or investigate
2024-10-24 18:10:20 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Shall we adjourn for 50 minutes, let QA examine the automated test results and then reconvene to decide?
2024-10-24 18:10:26 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> +1
2024-10-24 18:10:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'm fine waiting a hour or two, but that makes it really late for some folks. ;)
2024-10-24 18:10:52 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Can we make a decision to rule out a follow on Go/No-Go tomorrow then? At least that leaves us to decide the fate of the next few hours
2024-10-24 18:10:57 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I am night owl... 😎
2024-10-24 18:11:17 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we can Aoife Moloney 
2024-10-24 18:11:30 <@amoloney:fedora.im> if were not doing another meeting tomorrow, we can decide to run a few tests now for a while, or just call it
2024-10-24 18:11:41 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> let's do it now
2024-10-24 18:11:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I would prefer to decide today if we can...
2024-10-24 18:11:59 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> lruzicka: Please be more specific about "it"
2024-10-24 18:12:21 <@conest:transfem.dev> better safe than sorry..
2024-10-24 18:12:25 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Aoife Moloney: if you need to head out, I can try and run things... dunno how late it is there.
2024-10-24 18:12:51 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Let's wait some time and I'll restart the tests and see, how many I can fix.
2024-10-24 18:13:07 <@amoloney:fedora.im> proposal: We will not have another Go/No-Go meeting on Friday 25th October. Instead we will allow some time, 1-2 hours (please advise here the amount) to allow QA to do some additional testing on 1.4
2024-10-24 18:13:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> lets try Stephen Gallagher's idea and keep meeting open and reconvene in 45min or so to see where we are?
2024-10-24 18:13:23 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1 to that
2024-10-24 18:13:24 <@amoloney:fedora.im> nirik: thank you but I have literally nowhere else to be :p
2024-10-24 18:13:42 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ha. This is the exciting place to be anyhow. ;)
2024-10-24 18:13:55 <@amoloney:fedora.im> riveting!
2024-10-24 18:14:29 <@farchord:fedora.im> How about we have a testing party in the Fedora Social Hour Video Chat channel in the mean time, like a bunch of people waiting for election results!
2024-10-24 18:14:38 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Im ok with this too but its QA who are on the hook here so please let us know if this is something you folks are ok with?
2024-10-24 18:15:21 <@conest:transfem.dev> I, who could not patiently wait for 29th is seeing what the experts talk about. I apologize for any incovenience. This is very exciting for me.
2024-10-24 18:18:18 <@amoloney:fedora.im> ok lets do that then, Ill set the topic to waiting
2024-10-24 18:20:09 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic This meeting is currently in a WAITING period while Fedora QA run some additional testing on RC 1.4. We expect this meeting to resume in one hour
2024-10-24 18:20:23 <@robatino:fedora.im> While waiting, I have a question about https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_partitioning_custom_btrfs_preserve_home . It implies that it's not possible to preserve /home when using the 41 Workstation Live. Is that still accurate? I haven't looked at the latest live.
2024-10-24 18:21:00 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> FYI, coreos folks say they are ready.
2024-10-24 18:21:44 <@amoloney:fedora.im> excellent, thank you nirik !
2024-10-24 18:27:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> kparal gave a cookie to kevin. They now have 690 cookies, 31 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 18:27:59 <@kparal:matrix.org> Andre Robatino: let's look into that some other day, sorry 🙂 
2024-10-24 18:30:17 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> relval size-check done
2024-10-24 18:42:45 <@jskladan:fedora.im>  👋 /me lurks while wrangling the little critters to bed
2024-10-24 19:10:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> dustymabe gave a cookie to kevin. They now have 691 cookies, 32 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:11:20 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> [@nirik:matrix.scrye.com](https://matrix.to/#/@nirik:matrix.scrye.com)- what to do with all of those cookies
2024-10-24 19:11:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farchord gave a cookie to kevin. They now have 692 cookies, 33 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:12:10 <@jcline:fedora.im> The cloud stuff looks good on 1.4 FWIW (On Azure, anyway)
2024-10-24 19:12:14 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I plan to open a bakery
2024-10-24 19:13:57 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> a bakery that sells cookies but doesn't make them? sounds sus :) 
2024-10-24 19:14:24 <@smilner:fedora.im> He's a trend setter.
2024-10-24 19:14:51 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> 😀
2024-10-24 19:14:55 <@farchord:fedora.im> Hey, we give out software but we don't "make" it XD
2024-10-24 19:15:03 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ok, so where are we quality folks? ;)
2024-10-24 19:15:51 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> hey, it's called GNU Make, not GNU Bake
2024-10-24 19:16:24 <@farchord:fedora.im> Yeah but isn't compiling technically "baking"?
2024-10-24 19:16:26 <@farchord:fedora.im> XD
2024-10-24 19:19:56 <@kparal:matrix.org> the current status of 1.4 is that OpenQA tested everything it tested with 1.3 and found no new issues. The 1.4 matrices are not yet populated with openqa results, sadly, we're not sure how to make it happen asap. But we see in openqa interface that everything's fine.
2024-10-24 19:20:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> so every coconut pass in 1.3 is also pass in 1.4
2024-10-24 19:20:16 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> fine == softfailed :D
2024-10-24 19:20:37 <@kparal:matrix.org> we've also run basic install sanity tests on most images, and they install fine
2024-10-24 19:21:04 <@kparal:matrix.org> they have exactly the same results in 1.3
2024-10-24 19:21:07 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> we did confirm the vnc fix already right?
2024-10-24 19:21:11 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> yes
2024-10-24 19:21:27 <@kparal:matrix.org> I confirmed it on Server dvd, netinst and Everything netinst
2024-10-24 19:21:35 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> excellent.
2024-10-24 19:22:14 <@kparal:matrix.org> we have some basic arm install results as well, even though those are slower to perform
2024-10-24 19:22:55 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> So are there gaps/more time needed? or do we feel 1.4 is solid and we can be go with it?
2024-10-24 19:23:10 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> we should go I'd say
2024-10-24 19:23:19 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> Kamil Páral: lruzicka ?
2024-10-24 19:23:35 <@kparal:matrix.org> Lukas Brabec: coremodule pwhalen do you feel we need more arm tests for 1.4?
2024-10-24 19:24:25 <@kparal:matrix.org> for x86_64, I think we're reasonably covered
2024-10-24 19:24:40 <@coremodule:fedora.im> Personally no, I have been working on 1.4 for the last 30 minutes or so with no issues. Haven't logged anything yet, but it looks good from my chair here.
2024-10-24 19:27:41 <@pwhalen:fedora.im> I think the big change was anaconda? I did an install of 1.4 so thats covered. The disk images shouldnt really be affected
2024-10-24 19:28:16 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I wouldn't say big, the only change related to the blocking deliverables was anaconda
2024-10-24 19:28:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> frantisekz gave a cookie to pwhalen. They now have 70 cookies, 2 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:28:33 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farchord gave a cookie to pwhalen. They now have 71 cookies, 3 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:28:42 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> that would be my assessment as well
2024-10-24 19:29:50 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah.
2024-10-24 19:30:57 <@kparal:matrix.org> we're still waiting for an EC2 sanity check, if I'm not mistaken
2024-10-24 19:31:23 <@kparal:matrix.org> after that, I think we're ready
2024-10-24 19:32:49 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Just to be super clear - we are voting on a reasonably solid, 'freshly minted' RC - 1.4 that the only drawback is the risk that this had time in open testing?
2024-10-24 19:33:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yep. It does address the blocker however.
2024-10-24 19:33:42 <@amoloney:fedora.im> and we are confident that this rc is good enough that we wont regret this next week?🤞
2024-10-24 19:34:09 <@kparal:matrix.org> such word is not in QA vocabulary 🙂 
2024-10-24 19:34:27 <@amoloney:fedora.im> 😅regret? or confident? 
2024-10-24 19:34:36 <@amoloney:fedora.im> 😅 regret? or confident? 
2024-10-24 19:34:40 <@kparal:matrix.org> regret is there on each page 😄 
2024-10-24 19:35:41 <@kparal:matrix.org> it would certainly be better to have more time. But I think the risk is low, given that we had enough time for 1.3 and the changes are minimal
2024-10-24 19:35:53 <@kparal:matrix.org> also all openqa tests passed and our manual sanity tests passed
2024-10-24 19:35:56 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> 1.3 did have a fair bit of time to soak
2024-10-24 19:36:01 <@amoloney:fedora.im> that sounds reasonable
2024-10-24 19:36:37 <@amoloney:fedora.im> have we the EC2 results in?
2024-10-24 19:36:41 <@kparal:matrix.org> EC2 works
2024-10-24 19:36:47 <@kparal:matrix.org> thanks lruzicka 
2024-10-24 19:36:52 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> kde and workstation x86_64 seem OK
2024-10-24 19:36:52 <@amoloney:fedora.im> then, it is time.
2024-10-24 19:36:59 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> on VM
2024-10-24 19:37:13 <@zodbot:fedora.im> amoloney gave a cookie to kparal. They now have 75 cookies, 5 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:37:13 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> redoing desktop testings
2024-10-24 19:37:44 <@amoloney:fedora.im> geraldosimiao: we can wait a few more mins if you want to give an All Clear when youre done
2024-10-24 19:37:52 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> My children will not get sweets for at least a weak, until I have paid for the EC instance.
2024-10-24 19:38:03 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> 🛳️
2024-10-24 19:38:15 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> My children will not get sweets for at least a week, until I have paid for the EC instance.
2024-10-24 19:39:09 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> just a couple more tests here and Im done
2024-10-24 19:39:25 <@amoloney:fedora.im> np, thank you!
2024-10-24 19:40:11 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> So, is the vnc test one we normally run manually? just wondering why it was found so late... but I know there's a ton of tests to do.
2024-10-24 19:40:42 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> no
2024-10-24 19:40:45 <@kparal:matrix.org> the vnc test worked in VMs, that's we openqa claimed it works
2024-10-24 19:40:50 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> it works in vms/without 3d accel
2024-10-24 19:40:52 <@kparal:matrix.org> the problem was just on bare metal
2024-10-24 19:40:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ah... right ok.
2024-10-24 19:41:09 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> The VNC test runs on openQA, but the issue only manifested on bare metal. Peter Boy caught it.
2024-10-24 19:41:14 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> that gets to point if we shouldn't try to leverage virtio in openQa
2024-10-24 19:41:20 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> to get closer to the real workloads
2024-10-24 19:41:29 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> idk if that's stable enough
2024-10-24 19:42:11 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> that gets to point if we shouldn't try to leverage virtio with OpenGL passed through in openQA
2024-10-24 19:42:24 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> gpu passthrough is not easy... but anyhow.
2024-10-24 19:42:54 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to lruzicka. They now have 29 cookies, 4 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:42:58 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> (I didn't mean the whole pci device pass, just the virtualized thingie)
2024-10-24 19:43:54 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ok, finished here
2024-10-24 19:45:01 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so, then, I guess that covers test coverage and on to go/nogo?
2024-10-24 19:45:02 <@amoloney:fedora.im> I think we need a summary
2024-10-24 19:45:33 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info all test matrices are now complete for rc-1.4
2024-10-24 19:45:34 <@kparal:matrix.org> a QA summary? František Zatloukal want to write one?
2024-10-24 19:45:46 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Fedora CoreOS & IoT Check-in
2024-10-24 19:45:55 <@kparal:matrix.org> ah, a meetbot summary, ok 🙂
2024-10-24 19:45:59 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Can I confirm CoreOS is good to go?
2024-10-24 19:46:21 <@kparal:matrix.org> nirik: you were in contact with them, right?
2024-10-24 19:46:39 <@amoloney:fedora.im> oh sorry Kamil Páral , feel free to still author a test matrices summary for the meeting if youd like! otherwise we can keep going :)
2024-10-24 19:47:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yes.
2024-10-24 19:47:36 <@kparal:matrix.org> we can keep going, Aoife 🙂 
2024-10-24 19:47:43 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Fedora CoreOS are good to go
2024-10-24 19:47:56 <@amoloney:fedora.im> pwhalen:  IoT still a-ok?
2024-10-24 19:48:01 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> dusty said: I’m AFK today but I can tell you we’’re ready
2024-10-24 19:48:35 <@coremodule:fedora.im> Yes, IoT is OK!
2024-10-24 19:48:45 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Fedora IoT are good to goo too
2024-10-24 19:49:00 <@pwhalen:fedora.im> We are
2024-10-24 19:49:14 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Go/No Decision
2024-10-24 19:49:35 <@amoloney:fedora.im> I will now poll each team. Please reply with 'Go' or 'No-Go'
2024-10-24 19:49:39 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Releng?
2024-10-24 19:49:48 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> go
2024-10-24 19:49:59 <@amoloney:fedora.im> FESCo?
2024-10-24 19:50:00 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> (since I hope jnsamyak went to sleep)
2024-10-24 19:50:21 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> go (unless Stephen Gallagher is still here to say it)
2024-10-24 19:50:25 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Go
2024-10-24 19:50:34 <@amoloney:fedora.im> He also emoji-d it :)
2024-10-24 19:50:37 <@amoloney:fedora.im> QA?
2024-10-24 19:50:40 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Go
2024-10-24 19:50:45 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> go
2024-10-24 19:51:02 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !agreed Fedora Linux 41 Final is GO
2024-10-24 19:51:29 <@kparal:matrix.org> thanks everyone
2024-10-24 19:51:29 <@farchord:fedora.im> Congrats!
2024-10-24 19:51:29 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 🎉
2024-10-24 19:51:34 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info info Fedora Linux 41 Final will release on the current target date 2024-10-29
2024-10-24 19:51:51 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !action @amoloney to announce decision
2024-10-24 19:51:51 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao gave a cookie to kparal. They now have 76 cookies, 6 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:52:05 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor
2024-10-24 19:52:15 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Anything else to talk about?
2024-10-24 19:52:18 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> cookie time?
2024-10-24 19:52:25 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Kamil Páral: if you could put in a stable push request with the things from rc 1.4 that would be great.
2024-10-24 19:52:27 <@amoloney:fedora.im> I really wasnt sure how this would go 😅
2024-10-24 19:52:42 <@zodbot:fedora.im> amoloney gave a cookie to geraldosimiao. They now have 29 cookies, 8 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:52:45 <@kparal:matrix.org> ok, will do
2024-10-24 19:52:53 <@zodbot:fedora.im> amoloney has already given cookies to kparal during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:52:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro has already given cookies to geraldosimiao during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:53:02 <@zodbot:fedora.im> kevin gave a cookie to geraldosimiao. They now have 30 cookies, 9 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:53:05 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> I'll do the secretary duties around blockers in bz when I get home
2024-10-24 19:53:10 <@zodbot:fedora.im> kparal gave a cookie to geraldosimiao. They now have 31 cookies, 10 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:53:15 <@decathorpe:fedora.im> does it count as an October Surprise? 😅
2024-10-24 19:53:21 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro has already given cookies to kparal during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:53:24 <@farchord:fedora.im> Updated #fedora:fedoraproject.org MOTD.
2024-10-24 19:53:25 <@zodbot:fedora.im> amoloney has already given cookies to frantisekz during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:53:31 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao has already given cookies to frantisekz during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:53:31 <@zodbot:fedora.im> kparal has already given cookies to frantisekz during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:53:34 <@zodbot:fedora.im> m4rtink gave a cookie to frantisekz. They now have 63 cookies, 14 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:53:38 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farchord gave a cookie to frantisekz. They now have 64 cookies, 15 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:53:43 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> everybody++
2024-10-24 19:53:45 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Why not :)
2024-10-24 19:53:45 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Sorry, but Fedora Accounts user 'everybody' does not exist
2024-10-24 19:53:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> kevin gave a cookie to frantisekz. They now have 65 cookies, 16 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:53:48 <@zodbot:fedora.im> m4rtink gave a cookie to kparal. They now have 77 cookies, 7 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:53:51 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> also, we'd need karma
2024-10-24 19:53:55 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro has already given cookies to frantisekz during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:54:02 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> for https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-69a60846ec
2024-10-24 19:54:13 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao gave a cookie to amoloney. They now have 54 cookies, 21 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:54:14 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro has already given cookies to amoloney during the F40 timeframe
2024-10-24 19:54:18 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> and then stable request for it (I'll ask when its karmed)
2024-10-24 19:54:19 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Thanks everyone. ;)
2024-10-24 19:54:40 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> thank you everybody, and Aoife Moloney for organizing this little party! :)
2024-10-24 19:54:47 <@amoloney:fedora.im> huge thank you everyone too!
2024-10-24 19:55:03 <@farchord:fedora.im> Thank you everyone, and specially the QA people!
2024-10-24 19:55:08 <@farchord:fedora.im> I know we don't make it easy on you all!
2024-10-24 19:55:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> amoloney gave a cookie to lruzicka. They now have 30 cookies, 5 of which were obtained in the Fedora 40 release cycle
2024-10-24 19:55:40 <@amoloney:fedora.im> we ate, and left 'no crumbs' as the kids would say these days 😆
2024-10-24 19:55:49 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Thanks again all, ending the meeting now!
2024-10-24 19:55:52 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !endmeeting