16:01:58 #startmeeting F21-blocker-review 16:01:58 Meeting started Wed Sep 17 16:01:58 2014 UTC. The chair is roshi. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:58 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 16:02:01 #meetingname F21-blocker-review 16:02:01 The meeting name has been set to 'f21-blocker-review' 16:02:04 #topic Roll Call 16:02:08 * roshi is here, obviously 16:02:08 * kparal is here 16:02:20 * danofsatx es ahi 16:02:26 that was a copy-paste, wonder why there was an extra # 16:02:26 * satellit afk 16:02:46 .hellomynameis sgallagh 16:02:47 sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' 16:02:48 #chair kparal danofsatx satellit_e adamw tflink sgallagh 16:02:48 Current chairs: adamw danofsatx kparal roshi satellit_e sgallagh tflink 16:02:55 * pschindl is here 16:03:11 #chair pschindl 16:03:11 Current chairs: adamw danofsatx kparal pschindl roshi satellit_e sgallagh tflink 16:03:22 #topic Introduction 16:03:22 Why are we here? 16:03:23 #info Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and nice-to-have bugs. 16:03:26 #info We'll be following the process outlined at: 16:03:29 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting 16:03:31 #info The bugs up for review today are available at: 16:03:34 #link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current 16:03:36 #info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at: 16:03:39 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Alpha_Release_Criteria 16:03:42 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Beta_Release_Criteria 16:03:44 * pwhalen is here 16:03:45 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_21_Final_Release_Criteria 16:04:08 #chair pwhalen 16:04:08 Current chairs: adamw danofsatx kparal pschindl pwhalen roshi satellit_e sgallagh tflink 16:04:17 well, we've got one proposed blocker 16:04:33 #topic (1142862) Installation progress is not redrawn in KDE 16:04:33 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1142862 16:04:33 #info Proposed Blocker, anaconda, NEW 16:05:53 it worked for me in a KDE live install yesterday, I think 16:06:02 interesting 16:06:16 * adamw tests again 16:06:27 kparal: Was this a physical system or VM? 16:06:35 would this fall under the caveat documented in "showstoppers?" 16:06:36 sgallagh: both tested, both problematic 16:07:34 can somebody try real quick? 16:07:53 seeing something similar with vnc installs on arm, the progress bar doesnt get redrawn at all unless you move to the useradd or rootpaswd screen. eventually when its finished reboot does come up but the var itself remains 'unfinished' 16:07:59 * roshi doesn't have KDE downloaded 16:08:22 s/var/bar 16:08:29 that could be the same issue 16:09:24 * adamw is looking at the install progress screen in a VM now... 16:09:33 downloading now, gonna take 10 minutes or so though 16:10:01 if it works for adamw, it's not a generic bug 16:10:02 * satellit on i7 here with USB installer to HD saw user and root at top and it did finidh for reboot (live i386 I think) do not remember the bar at bottom sorry 16:10:16 kparal: odd we're both testing in VMs, though. is your VM SPICE or VNC? 16:10:18 adamw: how many CPUs do you have allocated? 16:10:19 i checked on an x86 vm and it was okay. the arm issue isnt kde specific, occurred with either workstation or server 16:10:30 pwhalen: is that just the progress bar, though? not the entire screen? 16:10:31 adamw: spice and qxl 16:10:43 the bottom banner keeps refreshing 16:10:43 kparal: same here. 2 CPUs and 2GB of RAM 16:10:53 pwhalen: kparal seems to say the entire screen is not visible 16:10:59 just the progress bar is locked 16:11:09 ah, missed that 16:11:18 the screenshot shows what's visible 16:11:25 it doesn't change for the whole installation period 16:11:50 indeed different 16:11:59 * jskladan is late to the party, but here :) 16:12:06 haha, now I see it 16:12:20 I don't know what changed 16:12:29 sounds like maybe an intermittent bug? 16:12:35 the bug is scared of too many people looking at it at the same time 16:12:38 stage fright 16:12:49 could be. but affecting machines regardless of hardware 16:13:47 I just added a screen from tc7, but this also appears in rc1 16:14:40 my instinct would be commonbugs for both 16:14:56 sesms intermittent 16:15:00 seems, even 16:15:10 +1 commonbugs 16:15:16 -1 blocker 16:15:23 -1 blocker 16:15:29 Yeah, commonbugs makes sense 16:15:44 -1 blocker, +1 common bugs 16:15:53 it depends on how often we'll see it, but yeah, it seems to be the best approach right now 16:16:12 yeah, let's keep an eye out in the rest of testing 16:16:34 who wants to secretarialize? 16:16:46 -1 blocker, +1 FE 16:16:52 * roshi wants to get that word accepted into the Oxford english dictionary 16:16:52 i can 16:16:56 =) 16:17:55 I'm -1 on FE as well, for the record. Any change made to anaconda is potentially destabilizing at this point. 16:18:02 proposed #agreed - 1142862 - RejectedBlocker - This bug seems to only manifest it self at random intervals and the installation doesn't *fail.* Will document as Common Bug and keep an eye out going forward. 16:18:18 s/it self/itself 16:18:47 ack 16:19:01 ack 16:19:04 ack 16:19:10 ack 16:19:11 ack 16:19:16 ack 16:19:17 ack 16:19:23 * amita joins late 16:20:20 #agreed - 1142862 - RejectedBlocker - This bug seems to only manifest it self at random intervals and the installation doesn't *fail.* Will document as Common Bug and keep an eye out going forward. 16:20:30 onto the FEs 16:20:49 it's the Day of the Freeze Exception, it seems 16:21:09 11 of them 16:21:09 Half of these seem to be "non-blocking spin is over its size maximum" 16:21:10 #topic (1136050) add ppc64le as supported architecture for crash package 16:21:13 #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1136050 16:21:15 #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, crash, ON_QA 16:21:24 true 16:21:52 how does it look right now, does the current RC look like it's going to be shipped? 16:22:03 might not even have to go through the freeze exceptions if that's the case 16:22:56 * adamw whistles at the ceiling 16:23:05 kalev: i refuse to believe it till we see it... 16:23:11 :) 16:23:20 I could see it happening, but I'm also not a betting man :p 16:23:23 * satellit USB installs work 16:23:55 * satellit lives that I tested 16:24:27 netinstalls are no longer blocking for alpha, as per fesco decision 16:24:53 the oversize issues don't matter that much 16:25:21 I don't see a reason to not allow this FE, but it doesn't seem to break anything on a primary arch 16:25:30 the libvirt fix is nice but i don't know if we'd want to pull it into a last-minute respin 16:25:41 oh, we're doing the FEs? 16:25:46 i was still in 'should we bother' mode 16:25:53 that was what I was doing 16:26:02 no idea what the rest of you guys were doing :p 16:26:25 * jreznik_ is here a bit late, the same meeting as every wednesday :) 16:26:29 well, the fix is a new release, so it's clearly not just an arch change 16:26:33 do we want to not go through the FEs and just get back to testing? 16:26:43 if crash is included in any images i'd be -1 at this point 16:26:57 unless anyone sees anything on the FEs they'd really want to pull into a last-minute RC2, that'd be my vote 16:27:11 if we wind up slipping we can do an out-of-cycle review on friday or something to catch any we want 16:27:24 I have tons of things I would want to pull in if we slip for one more week, but none if we ship tomorrow 16:27:32 same here 16:27:56 I'd almost do a blanket -1 FE unless we slip and then do a meeting on Friday to go through stuff 16:28:19 yep, let's be conservative with changes this time 16:28:40 aside from the oversize stuff, I guess - but that's less of an issue 16:28:51 could do a mini-FE meeting at go-no/go time if we end up slipping 16:28:54 roshi: the oversize stuff can skip for now, it's fine 16:29:00 kalev: it wouldn't be so 'mini' :P 16:29:03 :P 16:29:15 yeah - 11 is a bit much for mini 16:29:34 what we could do, is vote on the bugs under the presumption that votes will count if slippage occurs 16:29:37 anyhoo, i'm +1 to skipping review for now 16:29:46 roshi: that's a lot of wasted time if we wind up shipping, though 16:29:49 time we could spend testing 16:29:53 we still have a lot of matrix to fill out 16:29:57 I'm +1 to skipping too, most of my votes would depend on if we slip or not and we don't know that yet 16:30:02 +1 skip 16:30:09 +1 skip 16:30:22 so, endmeeting and roll on with testing? 16:31:00 for that kde bug above, I saw it today with QXL/Spice, not with VNC/Cirrus and we had similar "it looks like locked-up" for years on KDE spin if my memory serves well... so maybe document it - use VNC/Cirrus 16:31:20 jreznik_: it wfm with spice 16:31:32 seems intermittent though 16:31:49 end meeting or review accepted blockers? 16:33:09 * jreznik_ needs docking station, running out of batter, be back in moment 16:34:09 nobody wants to say "review accepted blockers" 16:34:10 i don't see anything needing review in accepted blockers 16:34:17 i think we know where we are on netinst 16:34:25 anaconda does seem to be DTRT, we need mirrormanager fixing 16:34:37 though i probably should test the metadata-collision with hand-made repo definitions... 16:34:44 well, then lets call it and get back to testing 16:34:54 and fesco agreed on netinst ticket, thanks sgallagh 16:36:16 well, I'll set the fuze 16:36:27 anything else anyone wants to bring up? 16:36:38 pzzzzzzzz...... (that's the noise a fuse does when burning from one end) 16:37:16 * satellit where is mate spin? 16:38:58 no idea satellit_e 16:39:16 it failed in koji 16:40:27 well, thanks for coming folks! 16:40:34 #endmeeting