2025-04-10 17:01:08 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !startmeeting Fedora Linux Final Go/No-Go Meeting
2025-04-10 17:01:10 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2025-04-10 17:01:08 UTC
2025-04-10 17:01:10 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'Fedora Linux Final Go/No-Go Meeting'
2025-04-10 17:01:23 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> good morning everyone.
2025-04-10 17:01:40 <@amoloney:fedora.im> good afternoon sir, and others!
2025-04-10 17:02:00 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Ill just do the boilerplate 'info what this meeting is for' etc
2025-04-10 17:03:07 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info the purpose of this meeting is to check whether or not F42 Final is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria 
2025-04-10 17:03:09 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria
2025-04-10 17:03:34 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info This is determined in this meeting in a few ways:
2025-04-10 17:03:51 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info 1. A release candidate compose is available
2025-04-10 17:04:00 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info 2. No remaining blocker bugs
2025-04-10 17:04:09 <@adamwill:fedora.im> hi hi
2025-04-10 17:04:13 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info 3. Test matrices are fully complete
2025-04-10 17:04:20 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info 4. Fedora CoreOS and IoT are ready
2025-04-10 17:04:25 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Roll Call
2025-04-10 17:04:37 <@amoloney:fedora.im> feel free to record your presence in this hallowed meeting now :p
2025-04-10 17:04:42 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-10 17:04:43 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Adam Williamson (adamwill) - he / him / his
2025-04-10 17:04:46 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-10 17:04:47 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Aoife Moloney (amoloney)
2025-04-10 17:04:52 <@derekenz:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-10 17:04:52 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !hi
2025-04-10 17:04:53 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Derek Enz (derekenz)
2025-04-10 17:04:59 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Kevin Fenzi (kevin) - he / him / his
2025-04-10 17:05:14 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-10 17:05:16 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Geraldo S. Simião Kutz (geraldosimiao) - he / him / his
2025-04-10 17:05:54 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-10 17:05:57 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2025-04-10 17:05:59 <@curtiss:matrix.org> Hello everybody!
2025-04-10 17:06:13 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> hello
2025-04-10 17:06:36 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-10 17:06:37 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Christopher Boni (boniboyblue)
2025-04-10 17:06:39 <@amoloney:fedora.im> hello folks!
2025-04-10 17:07:00 <@amoloney:fedora.im> nice to see everyone....or well, read everyone :)
2025-04-10 17:07:51 <@amoloney:fedora.im> I think we can crack on with the agenda, so first up is whether we have a release candidate to discuss
2025-04-10 17:07:59 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Release Candidate Availability
2025-04-10 17:08:12 <@amoloney:fedora.im> So, releng & QA, do we have one?
2025-04-10 17:08:25 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> We do! 1.1
2025-04-10 17:08:45 <@amoloney:fedora.im> a .1 one??? this is a first for me :)
2025-04-10 17:08:50 <@amoloney:fedora.im> excellent
2025-04-10 17:09:04 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, strange, but here we are. ;)
2025-04-10 17:09:07 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we have released a 1.1 before...i think once? :D
2025-04-10 17:09:08 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah
2025-04-10 17:09:30 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Aloha
2025-04-10 17:09:34 <@amoloney:fedora.im> its exciting, Ive never seen one in the wild before :p
2025-04-10 17:09:54 <@amoloney:fedora.im> quick reminder for me, do I write it as RC-1.1 for the bot?
2025-04-10 17:10:06 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> We have. Occasionally.
2025-04-10 17:10:07 <@amoloney:fedora.im> sorry my brain has deleted that particular phrasing :(
2025-04-10 17:10:35 <@adamwill:fedora.im> "RC-1.1" is a correct name for it, yeah
2025-04-10 17:10:43 <@amoloney:fedora.im> cool thank you
2025-04-10 17:10:46 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info The release candidate available is RC-1.1
2025-04-10 17:10:56 <@jnsamyak:matrix.org> O/
2025-04-10 17:11:05 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Current status - blockers
2025-04-10 17:11:19 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !link https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/42/final/buglist
2025-04-10 17:11:37 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Ill turn this over to our good qa folks
2025-04-10 17:11:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> alrighty!
2025-04-10 17:12:00 <@frantisekz:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-10 17:12:01 <@zodbot:fedora.im> František Zatloukal (frantisekz)
2025-04-10 17:12:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info let's take a look at proposed final blockers
2025-04-10 17:12:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2357836
2025-04-10 17:12:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2357836) WebUI: list index out of range
2025-04-10 17:12:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, ON_QA
2025-04-10 17:12:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1852
2025-04-10 17:12:54 <@adamwill:fedora.im> current understanding of this: in a small proportion of (possibly webui-only) installs, you can hit a race condition in keyboard layout code that makes the install crash
2025-04-10 17:13:06 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-10 17:13:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Lukas Brabec (lbrabec)
2025-04-10 17:13:09 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it's more likely to happen if you actually configure the keyboard somehow during install, but it can happen even if you don't
2025-04-10 17:13:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> from openQA test history it seems like this hits 1-2% of installs, roughly
2025-04-10 17:13:28 <@adamwill:fedora.im> from openQA test history it seems like this hits 1-2% of workstation live installs, roughly
2025-04-10 17:13:40 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Thats small, but anoying. ;(
2025-04-10 17:15:12 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> !hi
2025-04-10 17:15:14 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fábio Ribeiro (farribeiro) - he / him / his
2025-04-10 17:15:31 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so, this is obviously a conditional blocker case, where it's up to our discretion
2025-04-10 17:15:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'm not sure how to vote on this. Yeah, it's just a judgement call...
2025-04-10 17:16:08 <@adamwill:fedora.im> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ#What_about_hardware_and_local_configuration_dependent_issues?
2025-04-10 17:16:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ#What_about_hardware_and_local_configuration_dependent_issues
2025-04-10 17:16:21 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'd be inclined to -1 blocker it because it's so rare, but on the other hand, it looks really bad.
2025-04-10 17:16:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Blocker_Bug_FAQ#What_about_hardware_and_local_configuration_dependent_issues?
2025-04-10 17:16:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we do have a fix for it, obviously fixing it involves a slip
2025-04-10 17:16:55 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> CommonBugs warning could do?
2025-04-10 17:17:05 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> The bug is going to stable. Inclined to -1
2025-04-10 17:17:10 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I guess the workaround is... 'try again'?
2025-04-10 17:17:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> yea
2025-04-10 17:17:24 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> FWIW I haven't seen it, all my VM and bare metal installations were without any issues
2025-04-10 17:17:26 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> you say Bug 2357836?
2025-04-10 17:17:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> yes, that's the bug we're on
2025-04-10 17:17:47 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> the upgrade fixed it right?
2025-04-10 17:18:00 <@derekenz:fedora.im> How long before the fix is applied?
2025-04-10 17:18:05 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I guess I am a weak -1 blocker (but +1 FE if we do slip for some reason we should fix it)
2025-04-10 17:18:09 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> but the new version istn at the rc1 ?
2025-04-10 17:18:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> if we say 'not a blocker' it will not be fixed in the released version.
2025-04-10 17:18:41 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ohh i see
2025-04-10 17:18:50 <@amoloney:fedora.im> its not a high enough % to feel like we should block on it, my 2c, but I dont love the idea of this affecting user perceptions of the answer life, the universe and everything
2025-04-10 17:19:06 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I vote with nirik
2025-04-10 17:19:27 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> weak -1 FB and +1 FE
2025-04-10 17:19:31 <@amoloney:fedora.im> its not a high enough % to feel like we should block on it, my 2c, but I dont love the idea of this affecting user perceptions of the answer to life, the universe and everything
2025-04-10 17:20:08 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> -1FB and +1FE
2025-04-10 17:22:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> anyone want to argue for +1 ?
2025-04-10 17:22:51 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Adam, waht you say aboute the criteria?
2025-04-10 17:23:29 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> this kind of "30%" of time, violate it?
2025-04-10 17:23:43 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> If this only happens like 3 times out of hundred, blocking solely on this is useless.
2025-04-10 17:24:22 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> If we have other blockers than sure, add it.
2025-04-10 17:24:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> this is only webui right?
2025-04-10 17:24:36 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah, I didn't see this at any of all the times I runned the installs
2025-04-10 17:24:43 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Yeah
2025-04-10 17:26:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> geraldosimiao per the FAQ page i linked earlier, by policy this is a subjective call, we just have to work it out in the meeting like this
2025-04-10 17:26:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> there's not a hard rule
2025-04-10 17:26:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i think -1 is probably reasonable given the rarity
2025-04-10 17:26:28 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ok
2025-04-10 17:26:31 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> thanks
2025-04-10 17:26:56 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> thats fine for me
2025-04-10 17:27:56 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> FB -1
2025-04-10 17:28:09 <@robatino:fedora.im> there's the option of removing the anaconda-webui package and running the installer in GTK mode
2025-04-10 17:28:31 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that's not really discoverable
2025-04-10 17:29:15 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> theres the option to grant zero day to this upgrade with the fix, and run the upgrade at live session
2025-04-10 17:29:47 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> 🤔
2025-04-10 17:30:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh crap i just realized i have a medical appointment at :50
2025-04-10 17:30:25 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> thats not usually a good idea. The space there is limited.
2025-04-10 17:30:41 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> There are work-arounds that could be offered.
2025-04-10 17:30:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> anyhow, I don't think we have anyone arguing for +1 here.
2025-04-10 17:31:08 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah
2025-04-10 17:31:13 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> lets move aheade
2025-04-10 17:31:18 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ahead
2025-04-10 17:31:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2357836 - RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is rejected as a blocker as we think the precedence is too low to block on, it's a very uncommon bug. Anyone affected can reboot and try again. However, a freeze exception is granted as obviously it'd be best to fix this race if we slip
2025-04-10 17:31:42 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> adamw: oops. You need to leave now and have someone take over? or can you reschedule?
2025-04-10 17:31:47 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:31:51 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ack
2025-04-10 17:31:52 <@derekenz:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:32:01 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:32:04 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Lack
2025-04-10 17:32:05 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:32:10 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:32:10 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:32:51 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> #
2025-04-10 17:33:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2357836 - RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this is rejected as a blocker as we think the precedence is too low to block on, it's a very uncommon bug. Anyone affected can reboot and try again. However, a freeze exception is granted as obviously it'd be best to fix this race if we slip
2025-04-10 17:33:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ok can somebody take over?
2025-04-10 17:33:23 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i can participate from phone but not run
2025-04-10 17:34:20 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I guess I could try? or any other QE folks want to?
2025-04-10 17:34:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-5) (-boniboyblue, -kparal, -sumantrom, -farribeiro, -geraldosimiao)
2025-04-10 17:34:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !topic (2358741) Support for GNOME X sessions was dropped outgrowing the previously accepted scope of the Wayland transition
2025-04-10 17:34:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2358741
2025-04-10 17:34:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1849
2025-04-10 17:34:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !info Proposed Blocker, gdm, NEW
2025-04-10 17:35:00 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Well, we could give it a try, however we'd need more time to do the reasoning.
2025-04-10 17:35:32 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> -5
2025-04-10 17:35:39 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I am -1 blocker here. Does anyone want to argue for +1?
2025-04-10 17:35:41 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> nirik: you are doing great
2025-04-10 17:35:49 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> nope
2025-04-10 17:35:49 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> -1 FB for me, please
2025-04-10 17:35:59 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> -1
2025-04-10 17:36:03 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> I'm still -1 on this.
2025-04-10 17:36:16 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Revote -1
2025-04-10 17:36:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> -1
2025-04-10 17:37:05 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> we know someone is very upset at the list...
2025-04-10 17:37:15 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> but hes allways uppset
2025-04-10 17:37:21 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> about wayland
2025-04-10 17:37:42 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> -1
2025-04-10 17:37:44 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> proposed: !agreed RejectedBlocker(final): This is a engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker critera.
2025-04-10 17:37:58 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:38:01 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2025-04-10 17:38:02 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:38:06 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:38:06 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:38:06 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> patch
2025-04-10 17:38:12 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:38:14 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> an engineering desing?
2025-04-10 17:38:21 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> patch away. OOps. typo.
2025-04-10 17:38:22 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> design
2025-04-10 17:38:28 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Três
2025-04-10 17:38:37 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Yes
2025-04-10 17:38:54 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> proposed: !agreed RejectedBlocker(final): This is a engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker critera.
2025-04-10 17:39:10 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> or someone else do it. my client is anoying me.
2025-04-10 17:39:13 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> still patch
2025-04-10 17:39:27 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> proposed: !agreed RejectedBlocker(final): This is a engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker critera.
2025-04-10 17:39:33 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> proposed: !agreed RejectedBlocker(final): This is an engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker critera.
2025-04-10 17:39:44 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> sure. ack
2025-04-10 17:39:50 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:39:55 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:39:58 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:39:59 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> patch
2025-04-10 17:40:05 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> critera -> criteria
2025-04-10 17:40:07 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:40:07 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2025-04-10 17:40:13 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:40:17 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> proposed: !agreed RejectedBlocker(final): This is a engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker criteria.
2025-04-10 17:40:18 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> man, we just can't type today
2025-04-10 17:40:26 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> oh my, no
2025-04-10 17:40:32 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:40:37 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> patch party
2025-04-10 17:40:40 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2025-04-10 17:40:41 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> final ack? :)
2025-04-10 17:40:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:40:51 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack... again.
2025-04-10 17:40:54 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:40:57 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> proposed: !agreed RejectedBlocker(final): This is an engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker criteria.
2025-04-10 17:41:05 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> No
2025-04-10 17:41:05 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> now we have it, I hope
2025-04-10 17:41:07 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:41:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> You gotta put the bug number in there
2025-04-10 17:41:31 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ha, so no, we don't have it.
2025-04-10 17:41:48 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:41:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Makes it easier on the secretary
2025-04-10 17:42:33 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> I'm with Adam
2025-04-10 17:42:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> proposed: !agreed 2358741 - RejectedBlocker(final): This is an engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker criteria.
2025-04-10 17:42:43 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> hows that?
2025-04-10 17:42:46 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:42:50 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack 
2025-04-10 17:42:54 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Good enough 🤣
2025-04-10 17:42:56 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:43:12 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ackack
2025-04-10 17:43:21 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Double ack
2025-04-10 17:43:21 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:43:28 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:43:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !agreed 2358741 - RejectedBlocker(final): This is an engineering design decision and doesn't violate any blocker criteria.
2025-04-10 17:43:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !topic (2358880) Live install sometimes gets stuck during rsync, launching another application unsticks it
2025-04-10 17:43:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !info Proposed Blocker, kernel, NEW
2025-04-10 17:43:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2358880
2025-04-10 17:43:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1850
2025-04-10 17:44:48 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> Another one that happens with about 1-2% of the time.
2025-04-10 17:44:59 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> surprise surprise
2025-04-10 17:45:08 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> same as with the first one, I haven't seen it yet...
2025-04-10 17:45:20 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> me neither
2025-04-10 17:45:30 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> This one seems to be vm's only?
2025-04-10 17:45:39 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> me neither
2025-04-10 17:45:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> So far yes. It's a bit more common though
2025-04-10 17:46:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> And affects all lives (not webui only)
2025-04-10 17:46:09 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> as said on ticket, only found at VM by now
2025-04-10 17:46:23 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ĩ think
2025-04-10 17:46:32 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>  think
2025-04-10 17:46:40 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I think
2025-04-10 17:46:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> It's kinda worse in a way because it just hangs, no clear indication that it's broken. But kinda better in a way because you can "fix" it by doing something
2025-04-10 17:47:10 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, but you might not know that so you wait... and wait...
2025-04-10 17:47:21 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Yeah
2025-04-10 17:47:28 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> this one seems worse to me than the last one...
2025-04-10 17:48:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Eh, if it's really virt only (and possibly qemu/virtio only) that kinda helps, for me
2025-04-10 17:48:31 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yeah, thats definitely good.
2025-04-10 17:48:40 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> commom bugs: "if you think th install is taking too long, try to do something like open another app or hit the meta key"
2025-04-10 17:48:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> The combination of the two is kinda sucky for workstation live installs to VM though. About 5% hit one bug or the other in openqa
2025-04-10 17:48:58 <@derekenz:fedora.im> hmmmm
2025-04-10 17:49:54 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Sorry I didn't report this sooner 😐 every time it showed up something else was on fire so I just reran the test and figured I'd look at it latet
2025-04-10 17:50:00 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I guess I would say the same as the last one... weak -1 blocker, but definitely +1 FE if we need to slip (although the fix isn't known, may not be easy to find)
2025-04-10 17:50:28 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Yeah, this feels like it'll be tricky to isolate and fix
2025-04-10 17:50:47 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> we can write a good commom issue about it
2025-04-10 17:50:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I'm ok with a -1 on it probably, it sucks but...
2025-04-10 17:50:58 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Kamil Páral: wdyt?
2025-04-10 17:51:31 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this rather sucks, but it's also kind of on a thread for me to
2025-04-10 17:51:37 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> this rather sucks, but it's also kind of on a thread for me too
2025-04-10 17:51:39 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> adamw: Kamil said he wont be joining .. 
2025-04-10 17:51:41 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> Yes, we should document it well and if we do, we mitigate the impact.
2025-04-10 17:51:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so... weak -1 FB, +1 FE
2025-04-10 17:51:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Oh right, forgot
2025-04-10 17:52:05 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> weak -1 FB, +1 FE
2025-04-10 17:52:13 <@derekenz:fedora.im> Agree with Neal
2025-04-10 17:52:22 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> -1 FB
2025-04-10 17:52:22 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> +1 FE
2025-04-10 17:52:29 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> weak -1FB and +1FE , needs to be documented well 
2025-04-10 17:52:40 <@derekenz:fedora.im> -1 FB, +1 FE
2025-04-10 17:52:52 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> -1 blocker, +1 fe
2025-04-10 17:53:41 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> proposed: !agreed 2358880 - RejectedBlocker(final):  this is rejected as a blocker as we think it is too infrequent to block on, it's rare and only on vm installs. Anyone affected can reboot and try again. However, a freeze exception is granted as obviously it'd be best to fix this if we slip
2025-04-10 17:53:50 <@derekenz:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:53:55 <@amoloney:fedora.im> really sorry Im going to need to step away for 10 mins max, should be back real soon
2025-04-10 17:54:12 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:54:13 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:54:19 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2025-04-10 17:54:20 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:54:20 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 17:54:21 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:54:38 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Um, oh. Is this the right bug number?
2025-04-10 17:54:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I think we closed my report as a dupe
2025-04-10 17:54:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> We should set status on the one that isn't a dupe
2025-04-10 17:54:58 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2358880
2025-04-10 17:55:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Oh nm
2025-04-10 17:55:04 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> thats the open one...
2025-04-10 17:55:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> That was the keyboard bug
2025-04-10 17:55:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Ack
2025-04-10 17:55:19 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !agreed 2358880 - RejectedBlocker(final):  this is rejected as a blocker as we think it is too infrequent to block on, it's rare and only on vm installs. Anyone affected can reboot and try again. However, a freeze exception is granted as obviously it'd be best to fix this if we slip
2025-04-10 17:55:23 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Doing stuff on a phone is hard!
2025-04-10 17:55:32 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 17:55:35 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> so, we have a bunch of verified ones, do we want to go through those?
2025-04-10 17:55:42 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> and one thats going to be harder.
2025-04-10 17:55:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Maybe just a single info that they're all verified fixed in rc
2025-04-10 17:56:27 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !info 5 verified accepted blockers that are fixed in RC-1.1
2025-04-10 17:56:38 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !info Accepted Blocker, libdnf, NEW
2025-04-10 17:56:38 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2354865
2025-04-10 17:56:38 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1812
2025-04-10 17:56:38 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> !topic (2354865) libdnf (DNF4) should read DNF5 repo overrides
2025-04-10 17:57:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I think we want to consider waiving this as hard to fix
2025-04-10 17:57:28 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah
2025-04-10 17:57:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Sorry checking in at the clinic
2025-04-10 17:57:31 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> yep. Was just gonna suggest that. Keep as blocker, but waive later as too hard to fix
2025-04-10 17:57:36 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> given the comments bby the devs
2025-04-10 17:58:12 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> anyone want to argue this isn't a blocker?
2025-04-10 17:59:17 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> We have already decided this to be a blocker :D
2025-04-10 17:59:33 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Me too
2025-04-10 17:59:34 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> yeah
2025-04-10 17:59:44 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> so lets waive it now
2025-04-10 18:00:11 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> and document it
2025-04-10 18:00:28 <@kparal:matrix.org> hard-to-fix waive -> blocker for F43 Beta. Sounds reasonable to me.
2025-04-10 18:00:32 <@adamwill:fedora.im> We could reconsider blocker status. But waiving on the whole seems reasonable. It seems the "fix" will be porting g-s to libdnf5 but it's not really reasonable to land that in f42 now
2025-04-10 18:00:38 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> children sleeping? no way :D
2025-04-10 18:00:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I'm guessing this is also present in 41?
2025-04-10 18:00:51 <@kparal:matrix.org> don't be naive
2025-04-10 18:00:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> since we went to dnf5 in 41...
2025-04-10 18:01:23 <@kparal:matrix.org> I believe so, yes, in F41 too
2025-04-10 18:01:34 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ok, the waive will come later in the meeting. This is just deciding it's a blocker. ;)
2025-04-10 18:01:34 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so for process...we would be waiving this under "Difficult to fix blocker bugs - bugs which it may not be practical to fix within a reasonable time frame for the release to be made (due to e.g. complexity or resource constraints)"
2025-04-10 18:01:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> oh, sorry
2025-04-10 18:01:47 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> afaik
2025-04-10 18:01:50 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ok
2025-04-10 18:01:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well, wait. isn't it now we do this?
2025-04-10 18:01:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> let me check the script
2025-04-10 18:02:02 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> let's go ahead then
2025-04-10 18:02:12 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> oops
2025-04-10 18:02:16 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> lets wait then
2025-04-10 18:02:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> sigh, pagure
2025-04-10 18:02:36 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> it's really not loaded.
2025-04-10 18:02:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i think we would usually do it here
2025-04-10 18:02:51 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ok
2025-04-10 18:02:56 <@mattdm:fedora.im> are we go yet? :)
2025-04-10 18:03:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> we're working on it!
2025-04-10 18:03:10 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Hi Matthew
2025-04-10 18:03:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> yeah, i think accepted blocker review is the appropriate place to consider waivers
2025-04-10 18:03:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> so...i'm +1 to waive this to 43 beta
2025-04-10 18:03:48 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ok lets vote
2025-04-10 18:03:57 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> proposed !agreed 2354865 - We agree this is a blocker, but are waiving it under the 'difficult to fix' clause as developers do not wish to fix this in f42.
2025-04-10 18:03:59 <@kparal:matrix.org> +1 waive
2025-04-10 18:04:08 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> +1 waive
2025-04-10 18:04:09 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> +1 naive waive
2025-04-10 18:04:09 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> sorry, getting ahead of myself
2025-04-10 18:04:11 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1 waie
2025-04-10 18:04:15 <@kparal:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 18:04:16 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1 wave
2025-04-10 18:04:19 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> +1 & ack
2025-04-10 18:04:20 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> +1 waive
2025-04-10 18:04:20 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> +1 waive
2025-04-10 18:04:21 <@derekenz:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 18:04:24 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1 waive
2025-04-10 18:04:25 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2025-04-10 18:04:28 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> +1 ack
2025-04-10 18:04:35 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 18:04:40 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 18:04:43 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 18:04:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well
2025-04-10 18:04:50 <@lbrabec:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 18:04:57 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 18:05:04 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> adamw: if you are back at a keyboard, feel free to take over. ;)
2025-04-10 18:05:10 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> its a mix LOL
2025-04-10 18:05:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> only while i'm sitting in the waiting room
2025-04-10 18:06:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i might say proposed !agreed 2354865 - blocker status is waived to Fedora 43 Beta under the "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" category per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process#Exceptional_cases , as the intended fix (porting gnome-software to libdnf5) is not appropriate to land in Fedora 42 at this stage of development
2025-04-10 18:06:39 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> ack
2025-04-10 18:06:44 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 18:06:48 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 18:07:04 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 18:07:07 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> ack
2025-04-10 18:07:12 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> ack
2025-04-10 18:07:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2354865 - blocker status is waived to Fedora 43 Beta under the "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" category per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process#Exceptional_cases , as the intended fix (porting gnome-software to libdnf5) is not appropriate to land in Fedora 42 at this stage of development
2025-04-10 18:07:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ok, back to Aoife Moloney
2025-04-10 18:07:30 <@amoloney:fedora.im> and im back
2025-04-10 18:07:30 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well, let's note
2025-04-10 18:07:36 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 🎉
2025-04-10 18:07:36 <@amoloney:fedora.im> that was verrrry good timing!
2025-04-10 18:07:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info with that, there are no unaddressed final blockers
2025-04-10 18:07:38 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> (note that the proposed "fix" doesn't help for plasma discover)
2025-04-10 18:07:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Conan Kudo well, presumably the answer would be the same? port it to dnf5...
2025-04-10 18:08:01 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> there's a bunch of accepted FE's and proposed FE's, but we can skip those. ;)
2025-04-10 18:08:16 <@adamwill:fedora.im> yeah, we don't need to do those
2025-04-10 18:08:56 <@amoloney:fedora.im> shall we continue to test matrices then?
2025-04-10 18:09:16 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I'll also note I am sad that I didn't get to looking at initial setup on Xfce before now... so it will be broken in 42. ;( 😢
2025-04-10 18:09:35 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we'll get to it for F43
2025-04-10 18:09:49 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> or maybe make a special build for people later
2025-04-10 18:10:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> at least it's easy now to make images :)
2025-04-10 18:10:58 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> respins...
2025-04-10 18:11:03 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> :)
2025-04-10 18:11:32 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> sure, lots of options... anyhow, lets move on
2025-04-10 18:12:01 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Current Status - Test Matrices
2025-04-10 18:12:13 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_42_Test_Results
2025-04-10 18:13:02 <@amoloney:fedora.im> are we in good coverage for testing? or are there tests needed in cloud (and other architectures)
2025-04-10 18:14:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Sorry, having technical issues at the clinic. I appear to have no blood
2025-04-10 18:15:00 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I hate it when that happens.
2025-04-10 18:15:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I had a quick look at the matrices earlier and they mostly look good
2025-04-10 18:15:12 <@amoloney:fedora.im> how are you with garlic?
2025-04-10 18:15:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I think we were still missing arm iso USB tests?
2025-04-10 18:15:17 <@amoloney:fedora.im> :p
2025-04-10 18:15:21 <@pwhalen:fedora.im> I covered some of the missing aarch64 tests (usb etc) 
2025-04-10 18:17:40 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> So, I think we look pretty good, but I could be missing how to read these. ;)
2025-04-10 18:17:48 <@amoloney:fedora.im> so are we comfortable to confirm that we have sufficient testing coverage? 
2025-04-10 18:18:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Ok I'm out
2025-04-10 18:18:59 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Let me take a quick look
2025-04-10 18:19:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> I believe we have very good coverage
2025-04-10 18:19:22 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> I think we have yes
2025-04-10 18:19:38 <@kparal:matrix.org> We should also not forget IoT and CoreOS, which are separate
2025-04-10 18:19:50 <@kparal:matrix.org> IoT matrix is here, I believe: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora-IoT_42_RC_20250409.0_General
2025-04-10 18:20:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> and for CoreOS, we need to ask somebody from the team
2025-04-10 18:20:32 <@kparal:matrix.org> regarding general Quality coverage, I believe we're good to go
2025-04-10 18:20:45 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> marmijo I think was going to try and make it here to represent coreos?
2025-04-10 18:20:48 <@pwhalen:fedora.im> Right, IoT coverage looks good
2025-04-10 18:20:58 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Yeah, all looks good to me
2025-04-10 18:21:01 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> I think we have good coverage ... FCOS looked good from the test day perspective  
2025-04-10 18:21:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> We're missing fcoe, that's all
2025-04-10 18:21:18 <@marmijo:fedora.im> !hi
2025-04-10 18:21:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> And that's hardware constrained
2025-04-10 18:21:20 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Michael Armijo (marmijo)
2025-04-10 18:21:23 <@marmijo:fedora.im> CoreOS is good to go!
2025-04-10 18:21:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> So, matrices look good
2025-04-10 18:21:35 <@amoloney:fedora.im> fcos are in good shape, I was talking to dusty mabe earlier
2025-04-10 18:21:35 <@adamwill:fedora.im> IoT and coreos checkin come next
2025-04-10 18:21:38 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Separate topics
2025-04-10 18:22:03 <@amoloney:fedora.im> oops sorry was ahead of myself
2025-04-10 18:22:10 <@kparal:matrix.org> sorry, I didn't know the protocol 🙂
2025-04-10 18:23:52 <@kparal:matrix.org> a notable thing missing from the coverage is macos dual-boot, we no longer have the hardware
2025-04-10 18:24:41 <@kparal:matrix.org> however, I believe the days of that test case is over, and will propose to demote it after this cycle, so I don't consider it a big issue
2025-04-10 18:24:53 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> +1
2025-04-10 18:25:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Oops, I missed that. Didn't we already propose that?
2025-04-10 18:25:18 <@kparal:matrix.org> I haven't, no
2025-04-10 18:26:58 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> Aoife Moloney: shall we move on?
2025-04-10 18:27:11 <@amoloney:fedora.im> yes, ready when you all are!
2025-04-10 18:27:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Ah, well
2025-04-10 18:27:50 <@amoloney:fedora.im> or maybe, ready when Adam is ;)
2025-04-10 18:28:13 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> XD
2025-04-10 18:28:16 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 🤞
2025-04-10 18:28:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> I'm fine, don't wait on me...
2025-04-10 18:29:13 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> (aside from the lack of blood)
2025-04-10 18:29:32 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info We have sufficient test coverage in place for F42 final release candidate rc-1.1
2025-04-10 18:29:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> It's okay, they found some in the end
2025-04-10 18:29:48 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Fedora CoreOS and IoT Release Readiness Check-in
2025-04-10 18:30:20 <@amoloney:fedora.im> pwhalen: is IoT prepared for the release?
2025-04-10 18:30:38 <@pwhalen:fedora.im> IoT is good, test coverage complete 
2025-04-10 18:30:59 <@amoloney:fedora.im> dustymabe: is Fedora CoreOS ready for the release? 
2025-04-10 18:31:12 <@dustymabe:matrix.org> Aoife Moloney: I think we're good to go. 
2025-04-10 18:31:15 <@amoloney:fedora.im> If Dusty is not about, someone else from Fedora CoreOS can also confirm :) 
2025-04-10 18:31:18 <@amoloney:fedora.im> yaaay!
2025-04-10 18:31:27 <@marmijo:fedora.im> +1 from me for Fedora CoreOS
2025-04-10 18:31:33 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info Both Fedora CoreOS and IoT are release ready
2025-04-10 18:31:44 <@amoloney:fedora.im> okely dokely, its time to poll!
2025-04-10 18:31:59 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Go/No-Go decision
2025-04-10 18:32:15 <@mattdm:fedora.im> Wheeee!
2025-04-10 18:32:21 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> 🥁
2025-04-10 18:32:28 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> big time
2025-04-10 18:32:28 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !info I will now poll each group - Releng, QA & FESCo. Please relpy Go or No-Go
2025-04-10 18:32:33 <@amoloney:fedora.im> Releng?
2025-04-10 18:32:36 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> 🚩go
2025-04-10 18:32:42 <@amoloney:fedora.im> QA?
2025-04-10 18:32:47 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> go
2025-04-10 18:32:48 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> go
2025-04-10 18:32:51 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> go
2025-04-10 18:32:55 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im>  go
2025-04-10 18:32:57 <@amoloney:fedora.im> And finally, FESCo?
2025-04-10 18:32:59 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> 🚅 go
2025-04-10 18:33:03 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Go! 🚀
2025-04-10 18:33:12 <@derekenz:fedora.im> GO
2025-04-10 18:33:41 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !agreed Fedora Linux 42 Final is GO and will be shipped on Tuesday, April 15 on the early target
2025-04-10 18:33:44 <@mattdm:fedora.im> extra bonus GO
2025-04-10 18:33:57 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 🎉
2025-04-10 18:34:04 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> 🚀
2025-04-10 18:34:07 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !action @amoloney to announce decision and update the schedule accordingly
2025-04-10 18:34:09 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> 🚢
2025-04-10 18:34:09 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it's a tax day miracle 💸
2025-04-10 18:34:10 <@boniboyblue:fedora.im> 🍻
2025-04-10 18:34:16 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> 🎆
2025-04-10 18:34:17 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> thanks for everyone's hard work
2025-04-10 18:34:19 <@amoloney:fedora.im> well done everyone!
2025-04-10 18:34:29 <@lruzicka:matrix.org> 🫏
2025-04-10 18:34:32 <@derekenz:fedora.im> 🛳️
2025-04-10 18:34:36 <@sumantrom:fedora.im> thanks everyone for testing!!
2025-04-10 18:34:38 <@amoloney:fedora.im> and early, rc2-1.1 release! 
2025-04-10 18:34:45 <@amoloney:fedora.im> an early, rc2-1.1 release! 
2025-04-10 18:34:51 <@amoloney:fedora.im> 🎉
2025-04-10 18:35:00 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !topic Open Floor
2025-04-10 18:35:14 <@amoloney:fedora.im> final few moments to air out anything else about this release?
2025-04-10 18:36:20 <@mattdm:fedora.im> thank you everyone!!!
2025-04-10 18:36:29 <@amoloney:fedora.im> is there anything specific I should note  to the website folks too actually? 
2025-04-10 18:37:09 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> we'll need to update the website to take down the fedora kde spin thing now
2025-04-10 18:37:22 <@amoloney:fedora.im> yes, thank you 
2025-04-10 18:37:29 <@amoloney:fedora.im> that needs to be moved to edition part
2025-04-10 18:37:30 <@nirik:matrix.scrye.com> I think thats all ready/in process... but we can check with them
2025-04-10 18:37:35 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> cookie for everyone
2025-04-10 18:37:46 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao has already given cookies to amoloney during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-10 18:37:50 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao gave a cookie to mattdm. They now have 169 cookies, 5 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-04-10 18:37:51 <@kparal:matrix.org> this should get updated and KDE added: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Editions
2025-04-10 18:38:04 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao has already given cookies to derekenz during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-10 18:38:07 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yup that too
2025-04-10 18:38:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao has already given cookies to ngompa during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-10 18:38:15 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there's a ticket about a proper web icon for kde edition too
2025-04-10 18:38:31 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao has already given cookies to kparal during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-10 18:38:34 <@amoloney:fedora.im> ack, will follow up with that and we can continue with the to-do dicsussion in the release-day chat room. Let me know if anyone is not in there that wants to/should be in there
2025-04-10 18:38:42 <@zodbot:fedora.im> geraldosimiao has already given cookies to kevin during the F41 timeframe
2025-04-10 18:38:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> 👍️
2025-04-10 18:38:56 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to kparal. They now have 82 cookies, 4 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-04-10 18:38:59 <@amoloney:fedora.im> with that, and in record time, we are done!!
2025-04-10 18:39:15 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to mattdm. They now have 170 cookies, 6 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-04-10 18:39:19 <@amoloney:fedora.im> thank you all again for your continued hard work each and every fedora release
2025-04-10 18:39:22 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to amoloney. They now have 77 cookies, 23 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle
2025-04-10 18:39:23 <@amoloney:fedora.im> !endmeeting
2025-04-10 18:39:23 <@zodbot:fedora.im> farribeiro gave a cookie to ngompa. They now have 166 cookies, 19 of which were obtained in the Fedora 41 release cycle