17:00:27 <bcotton> #startmeeting F29 Final Go/No-Go meeting
17:00:27 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Oct 18 17:00:27 2018 UTC.
17:00:27 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
17:00:27 <zodbot> The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:00:27 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:00:27 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f29_final_go/no-go_meeting'
17:00:28 <bcotton> #meetingname F29-Final-Go_No_Go-meeting
17:00:28 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f29-final-go_no_go-meeting'
17:00:29 <nils> \o/
17:00:31 <coremodule> Let's party!
17:00:37 <bcotton> #topic Roll Call
17:00:37 <frantisekz> .hello2
17:00:38 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com>
17:00:39 <contyk> .hello psabata
17:00:42 <zodbot> contyk: psabata 'Petr Šabata' <psabata@redhat.com>
17:00:43 <nils> .hello nphilipp
17:00:45 <zodbot> nils: nphilipp 'Nils Philippsen' <nphilipp@redhat.com>
17:00:47 <Pharaoh_Atem> .hello ngompa
17:00:48 <zodbot> Pharaoh_Atem: ngompa 'Neal Gompa' <ngompa13@gmail.com>
17:00:51 <coremodule> .hello2
17:00:52 <zodbot> coremodule: coremodule 'Geoffrey Marr' <gmarr@redhat.com>
17:01:20 <mkonecny> .hello mkonecny
17:01:21 <zodbot> mkonecny: Sorry, but you don't exist
17:01:30 <dmoluguw> .hello2
17:01:31 <zodbot> dmoluguw: dmoluguw 'Dinesh Prasanth Moluguwan Krishnamoorthy' <dmoluguw@redhat.com>
17:02:13 <sgallagh> .hello2
17:02:14 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com>
17:02:18 <mboddu> .hello mohanboddu
17:02:19 <zodbot> mboddu: mohanboddu 'Mohan Boddu' <mboddu@bhujji.com>
17:03:05 <bcotton> i think we have enough to get started here
17:03:19 <bcotton> #topic Purpose of this meeting
17:03:20 <bcotton> #info Purpose of this meeting is to check whether or not F29 Final is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria.
17:03:25 <bcotton> #info This is determined in a few ways:
17:03:27 <bcotton> #info 1. No remaining blocker bugs
17:03:32 <bcotton> #info 2. Release candidate compose is available
17:03:33 <bcotton> #info 3. Test matrices for Beta are fully completed
17:03:45 <coremodule> bcotton, are you going to run the blocker review?
17:03:52 <bcotton> coremodule: unless you want to
17:04:04 <bcotton> but before we get to that point
17:04:24 <bcotton> i haven't seen announcement of an RC compose. is one available?
17:04:35 <coremodule> no, nothing
17:04:36 <frantisekz> no
17:04:47 <mboddu> bcotton: Nope, we are still working out on blocker bugs
17:04:50 <bcotton> so, i think that make it pretty clear what the decision will be
17:04:51 <frantisekz> RC composes will start emerging once we solve all the blockers
17:05:10 <coremodule> go, obviously. ;P
17:05:11 <nirik> morning
17:05:18 <bcotton> the question is now do we want to run a blocker review meeting now, or handle it in the regular monday meeting?
17:05:21 <bowlofeggs> .hello2
17:05:22 <zodbot> bowlofeggs: bowlofeggs 'Randy Barlow' <rbarlow@redhat.com>
17:05:30 * nirik thinks it might be good to run now.
17:05:31 <sgallagh> bcotton: We should run the blocker review
17:05:37 <zbyszek> .hello2
17:05:41 <zodbot> zbyszek: zbyszek 'Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek' <zbyszek@in.waw.pl>
17:05:42 <coremodule> bcotton, lets run a mini one now for the 4 proposed and we can review the others on monday
17:05:42 <mboddu> bcotton: Generally we will use this time for blocker review
17:05:50 <sgallagh> Ideally we want to have an RC by Monday to have enough time for testing
17:05:57 <bcotton> worksforme
17:06:01 <sgallagh> Waiting until then to decide blockers is tantamount to deciding to slip another week
17:06:12 <bcotton> #topic Blocker review
17:06:16 <frantisekz> coremodule: will you lead the blocker bug meeting or should I handle it?
17:06:21 <bcotton> #info 4 Proposed Blockers
17:06:23 <bcotton> #info 7 Accepted Blockers
17:06:31 <coremodule> frantisekz, if bcotton doesn't want to lead it, I will go ahead and do it
17:06:41 <bcotton> let's look at the proposed blockers
17:06:46 <frantisekz> oh, I forgot bcotton can run it... sorry :)
17:06:51 <bcotton> coremodule: i'll do it and you can jump in to correct me when i do it wrong ;-)
17:06:53 <coremodule> :)
17:06:54 <bcotton> #chair coremodule
17:06:54 <zodbot> Current chairs: bcotton coremodule
17:07:01 <bcotton> #topic (1640235) Unprivileged use of dnf list installed ends with a unhandled exception
17:07:03 <coremodule> haha, you got this!
17:07:03 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1640235
17:07:04 <bcotton> #info Proposed Blocker, dnf, MODIFIED
17:07:15 <frantisekz> -1 blocker, +1 FE
17:07:23 <frantisekz> it doesn't break any criteria
17:07:42 <sgallagh> I voted -1 blocker, +1 FE in the BZ
17:08:00 <frantisekz> also, this happens only with dnf 4, which is not in F29 yet
17:08:10 <coremodule> -1 blocker, +1 FE, looks like the fix is already available as well as what frantisekz said ^
17:08:20 <contyk> -1b/+1fe
17:08:23 <bcotton> -1, +1 FE from me too
17:08:40 <bowlofeggs> -1, +1 from me as well
17:08:41 <nirik> frantisekz: right ,but it will be most likely as it fixes a blocker
17:08:51 <jlanda> I propossed that bug not per the bug itself, but for the fact that dnf sent a major update version to fix some blocker and FE and we elevated the case to fesco on monday
17:08:52 <zbyszek> I'd vote +1 blocker, just because its basic functionality
17:08:58 <frantisekz> yeah, there is a fesco ticket, if we should pull the dnf 4
17:09:13 <nirik> jlanda: it's not actually a major version update
17:09:14 <jlanda> here the big thing will be what fesco decides about dnf 4 during freezing
17:09:23 <frantisekz> but shortly, there are blockers in dnf 3 and dnf team does not have time/resources to backport fixes into dnf 3
17:09:43 <sgallagh> jlanda: It's not *actually* a major version update, but it does include a bunch of changes that aren't strictly blocker/FE bugs, which is not ideal
17:09:56 <sgallagh> We'll probably end up waving it through like we did with GNOME at Beta, though
17:09:58 <frantisekz> but, dnf 4 should be counted as 3.7
17:10:00 <jlanda> nirik: nor it's a just bug fixing update as this bug has evidence it
17:10:07 <frantisekz> they just synced versioning with yum
17:10:13 <bcotton> zbyszek: i'd argue non-privleged use of dnf isn't basic functionality, but i get your point
17:10:15 <nirik> right
17:10:39 <Southern_Gentlem> -1 Blocker +fe
17:10:40 <nirik> anyhow -1 blocker, +1 FE...
17:11:00 <bcotton> okay, seems like we have a strong consensus
17:11:16 <sgallagh> zbyszek: Feel like dying on this hill, or is FE satisfactory?
17:11:37 <zbyszek> no, plenty of other hills in sight ;)
17:11:55 <zbyszek> FE is good enough, and the whole point is moot since it seems we'll pull the update in anyway
17:12:01 <bcotton> proposed #agreed 1640235 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException (Final) This does not violate release criteria, but should be fixed if dnf 4 is included in F29
17:12:07 <coremodule> ack
17:12:09 <frantisekz> ack
17:12:13 <sgallagh> ack
17:12:15 <nirik> ack
17:12:16 <zbyszek> ack
17:12:18 <bowlofeggs> ack
17:12:20 <mboddu> ack
17:12:21 <contyk> ack
17:12:31 <nils> ack
17:12:35 <bcotton> #agreed 1640235 - RejectedBlocker AcceptedFreezeException (Final) This does not violate release criteria, but should be fixed if dnf 4 is included in F29
17:12:42 <nils> (not sure if I count but anyway)
17:12:43 <Southern_Gentlem> ack
17:13:01 <bcotton> #topic (1640626) Google Chrome repository silently disabled when upgrading to F29
17:13:02 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1640626
17:13:03 <sgallagh> nils: If you showed up, you count
17:13:04 <bcotton> #info Proposed Blocker, fedora-workstation-repositories, ON_QA
17:13:21 <nils> gotcha
17:13:28 <Southern_Gentlem> -1blocker +1 CB
17:13:29 <sgallagh> This was accepted as an FE earlier in the day, but I realized it is *probably* a blocker as well
17:13:37 <bcotton> #info 1640626 is accepted as a FreezeException
17:13:38 <sgallagh> Southern_Gentlem: CB?
17:13:40 <coremodule> sgallagh and I think this bug is a potentially good candidate for a 0day blocker
17:13:47 <Southern_Gentlem> common bug
17:13:52 <bhavin192> .hello2
17:13:53 <zodbot> bhavin192: bhavin192 'Bhavin Gandhi' <bhavin7392@gmail.com>
17:13:56 <sgallagh> coremodule: Right, that's effectively what I was proposing
17:14:03 <frantisekz> we don't need to vote for CBs imo
17:14:06 <sgallagh> Southern_Gentlem: I think it's going to hit a sizable number of our users
17:14:23 <sgallagh> I should note that it's not limited to Chrome, that was just where I discovered it
17:14:30 * nirik reads
17:14:38 <sgallagh> It affects ALL of the third-party software shipped in those repos
17:14:41 <Southern_Gentlem> and that is a tiny fix o reenable the repo
17:14:53 <mkonecny> The chrome is used by plenty of users, so this should be blocker
17:14:55 <frantisekz> anyway, I feel it should be a blocker
17:14:55 <nirik> I'm not sure how many people it would affect tho
17:14:59 <sgallagh> If you had Steam or PyCharm installed as well, it would break
17:15:20 <mkonecny> Steam could be installed from flatpak
17:15:21 <Southern_Gentlem> sgallagh,  does it block the upgrade
17:15:26 <nirik> does gnome-software actually enable those when you install from them? I know it searches them when disabled.
17:15:33 <coremodule> bcotton, side note: I will secretarialize for the meeting if there are no qualms from you
17:15:41 <bcotton> coremodule: thank you!
17:15:47 <coremodule> bcotton, no problem! :)
17:15:48 <sgallagh> Southern_Gentlem: No, it means that after the upgrade, you no longer get updates for Chome (including security updates)
17:16:00 <Southern_Gentlem> until you enable the repo
17:16:02 <bowlofeggs> i'm +1 since it's potentially dangerous
17:16:02 <sgallagh> If you aren't specifically aware of this, you're not going to know to enable it manually
17:16:18 <bowlofeggs> +1 blocker i mean
17:16:19 <sgallagh> nirik: It does
17:16:20 <Pharaoh_Atem> makes sense to mark as a common bug, but why did this happen?
17:16:33 <frantisekz> +1 blocker
17:16:46 <frantisekz> common bug doesn't make sense if it gets accepted as an blocker
17:16:48 <sgallagh> Pharaoh_Atem: Whoever wrote the fedora-workstation-repositories package installed the repo files without %config(noreplace)
17:16:52 <sgallagh> So they clobber any local changes
17:16:53 <mkonecny> +1 blocker
17:17:07 <nils> +1 blocker
17:17:13 <nirik> I suppose +1 blocker, it would be pretty bad...
17:17:35 <sgallagh> Anyway, the fix is ready. I just think that if it turns out I made a mistake, it's serious enough that it's worth blocking to correct it.
17:17:55 <sgallagh> Or rather 0day blocking
17:17:56 <contyk> uh, +1 blocker
17:17:59 <Southern_Gentlem> not that bad imho but not a hill i want to die on either
17:18:02 <bhavin192> +1 blocker
17:18:22 <zbyszek> sgallagh: when upgrading from the old package (without %config(noreplace)) to the new one (with it), does the old content get preserved?
17:18:35 <zbyszek> Or does the %config(noreplace) only work going forward?
17:18:36 <Pharaoh_Atem> ^ I didn't think of that
17:18:58 <nils> should get an .rpmsave if it's marked %config
17:18:59 <bcotton> #proposed agreed 1640626 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - This would silently disable third-party repos shipped in the fedora-workstation-repositories package, preventing upgrades and security patches to thoes packages.
17:19:00 <mboddu> +1 blocker since if people dont know what happened, then probably they wont get any updates esp security updates
17:19:01 <nils> AIUI
17:19:09 <frantisekz> ack
17:19:11 <mboddu> ack
17:19:12 <nirik> ack
17:19:13 <sgallagh> nils: I *think* the new package would see that it differs and not replace it.
17:19:21 <contyk> ack
17:19:22 <sgallagh> I'm going to test it exhaustively
17:19:24 <Southern_Gentlem> ack
17:19:31 <nils> uhm no it doesn't
17:19:33 <sgallagh> Should just get a .rpmnew next to it
17:19:36 <bcotton> (apart from my misplaced #)
17:19:41 <sgallagh> nils: argh, what?
17:19:41 <bowlofeggs> ack
17:19:52 <mkonecny> ack
17:19:55 <nils> sgallagh, I only have the new repo file from the pkg here
17:19:57 <coremodule> ack
17:20:03 <bcotton> #agreed 1640626 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - This would silently disable third-party repos shipped in the fedora-workstation-repositories package, preventing upgrades and security patches to thoes packages.
17:20:04 <nils> ack
17:20:16 <bcotton> #topic (1633133) [abrt] gjs: gtk_box_pack(): gjs-console killed by SIGSEGV
17:20:17 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1633133
17:20:19 <bcotton> #info Proposed Blocker, gjs, NEW
17:20:20 <sgallagh> nils: I will do some further testing.
17:20:25 <sgallagh> If it's not complete, I'll offer new updates.
17:20:35 <sgallagh> That's why I wanted the blocker decision...
17:20:41 <frantisekz> this should be probably re-asigned to gnome-maps
17:20:50 <frantisekz> as it is the only app it triggers the crash
17:21:03 <sgallagh> Workstation WG is going to vote on Monday about whether to stop shipping Maps in the default install
17:21:16 <bcotton> #info Workstation WG is going to vote on Monday about whether to stop shipping Maps in the default install
17:21:16 <coremodule> this is very similar to
17:21:18 <sgallagh> I think this is a dupe of the other one we already approved.
17:21:22 <coremodule> .bug 1637751
17:21:23 <zodbot> coremodule: Bug 1637751 – Display gets messed up when routing panel is active - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1637751
17:21:26 <frantisekz> and as such (if this gets accepted), we'll have 2 blockers for gnome-maps
17:21:51 <contyk> do these repos expand the Fedora release version in the link or will people stick with f28 repos until they update their configs?
17:22:39 <nirik> so, I guess the question here is if the thing that causes it to crash is 'basic functionality'
17:22:45 <bowlofeggs> i'm +1 if f29 ships with gnome maps, and +1 FE if it doesn't
17:22:54 <frantisekz> :D
17:23:16 <bcotton> as of this moment, f29 will ship with gnome maps
17:23:25 <frantisekz> I am +1 b here, not that I would want gnome-maps out of default install, but...
17:23:35 <bcotton> +1 blocker
17:23:50 <bcotton> mostly because we've already decided this is a blocker in 1637751
17:24:09 <mboddu> +1 blocker for the same reason ^
17:24:10 <contyk> +1
17:24:24 <coremodule> +1 blocker
17:24:31 <sgallagh> +1 blocker
17:24:47 <nils> +1
17:24:48 <nirik> so this is when you click on it? or ?
17:25:15 <frantisekz> nirik: you open routing, then right click somewhere and then click on "what's here"
17:25:22 <zbyszek> contyk: there's no version embedded in the file, so it's "updated automatically"
17:25:35 <mkonecny> +1 blocker
17:25:45 <zbyszek> +1 blocker
17:25:58 <bcotton> proposed #agreed 1633133 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - the issues mentioned in the bug are widely reproducible and agreed to violate "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test". We note that dropping the app from Workstation is acceptable if a fix is
17:26:00 <bcotton> not available
17:26:04 <Southern_Gentlem> ack
17:26:04 <nirik> I can't get it to do that here in rawhide, but ok... blocker I suppose.
17:26:12 <frantisekz> ack
17:26:14 <nirik> ack
17:26:25 <contyk> ack
17:26:25 <bcotton> i'll cut a few characters out to get it fit on one line, apparently
17:26:31 <zbyszek> ack, even though I can't reproduce it
17:27:30 <bcotton> #agreed 1633133 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - the issues mentioned in the bug are widely reproducible and violate "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test". We note that dropping the app from Workstation is acceptable if a fix is not available
17:27:43 <bcotton> thanks for the wording, adamw :-)
17:28:04 <bcotton> #topic (1640701) GNOME Software "update and restart" button appears to do nothing
17:28:05 <bcotton> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1640701
17:28:07 <bcotton> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-software, NEW
17:28:44 <frantisekz> that sounds terrible, too bad We didn't catch this one earlier
17:29:10 <Southern_Gentlem> +1 B
17:29:18 <bcotton> +1 blocker
17:29:18 <zbyszek> yeah, +1 blocker
17:29:18 <frantisekz> +1b for sure
17:29:21 <sgallagh> kalev confirmed that this is an issue and is working on it
17:29:40 <nils> +1 blocker
17:29:52 <contyk> +1
17:29:55 <Pharaoh_Atem> hold on
17:30:06 <Pharaoh_Atem> wait, why would this matter for GA vs an FE?
17:30:07 <bcotton> holding on
17:30:17 <mkonecny> +1
17:30:20 <frantisekz> all basic apps must work crit
17:30:27 <sgallagh> Pharaoh_Atem: See the criterion I cited in the BZ
17:30:29 <Pharaoh_Atem> oh right, duh
17:30:34 <mboddu> +1 Blocker
17:30:41 <coremodule> +1 blocker
17:30:43 * Pharaoh_Atem was waiting for bz to load :)
17:30:54 <sgallagh> More specifically, the Beta one about the graphical default package manager needing to work
17:31:04 <Pharaoh_Atem> right, right
17:31:11 <sgallagh> While it *does* work, it takes so long that any reasonable person would assume it's hung
17:31:12 <Pharaoh_Atem> yeah, so then I agree on its blocker-ness
17:31:21 <bcotton> proposed #agreed 1640701 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - Violates: The installed system must be able appropriately to install, remove, and update software with the default tool for the relevant software type in all release-blocking desktops
17:31:21 <nirik> +1 Blocker
17:31:22 <Pharaoh_Atem> it's not borked, just... slow
17:31:26 <frantisekz> ack
17:31:27 <mboddu> ack
17:31:29 <nirik> ack
17:31:30 <Southern_Gentlem> ack
17:31:31 <Pharaoh_Atem> ack
17:31:33 <sgallagh> ack
17:31:40 <nils> ack
17:31:47 <coremodule> ack
17:31:48 <contyk> ack
17:31:59 <bcotton> #agreed 1640701 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - Violates: The installed system must be able appropriately to install, remove, and update software with the default tool for the relevant software type in all release-blocking desktops
17:32:17 <bcotton> okay, that's the end of proposed blockers
17:32:25 <Pharaoh_Atem> welp
17:32:33 <bcotton> #topic Current status
17:32:58 <bcotton> #info 11 open blockers (including 4 accepted in this meeting)
17:33:12 <bcotton> #info No RC compose is available
17:33:31 <Pharaoh_Atem> sounds like a No-Go then?
17:33:39 <bcotton> anything else we want to enter as current status before we put the official decision down?
17:33:51 <sgallagh> bcotton: I'd like to hear the state of testing
17:34:06 <coremodule> sgallagh, bcotton sure, standby while I gather the results.
17:34:08 <sgallagh> Most of the blockers are concentrated in specific areas; how's our testing outside that?
17:34:09 <nirik> it would be super awesome to get a rc before the weekend, but not sure how practical that is.
17:34:11 <bcotton> standing by
17:34:25 <Pharaoh_Atem> what I'm a bit concerned about is how did we not notice the gnome-software issue
17:34:39 <Pharaoh_Atem> it's a matter of waiting a while, sure, but shouldn't this have come up before?
17:34:39 <frantisekz> nirik: for sure no
17:34:48 <frantisekz> we need to wait for fesco and workstation wg
17:34:50 <frantisekz> meetings
17:34:52 <Pharaoh_Atem> iirc, openqa should be able to catch these things?
17:35:12 <Southern_Gentlem> Pharaoh_Atem, so openqa should install third party repos?
17:35:35 <Pharaoh_Atem> if we support them (and we technically do by offering them), yes
17:35:39 <nirik> frantisekz: why fesco? also there could be a maps update fixing those issues... I think rishi said he might try and fix them
17:35:40 <sgallagh> Southern_Gentlem: I think he means the other one, though.
17:35:51 <sgallagh> The one where there's no progress notification and it looks like it hung
17:35:52 <Pharaoh_Atem> but yeah, I meant the g-s not doing anything one
17:36:01 <frantisekz> nirik: I was thinking about decision whether to pull dnf 4
17:36:12 <frantisekz> there is a fesco ticket for it
17:36:42 <nirik> yes, I know. we can (and should) vote in ticket tho... so it might be decided soon.
17:37:04 <Pharaoh_Atem> sgallagh: maybe I'm misunderstanding how our auto-tests work, but wouldn't we be able to tell from that?
17:37:23 <sgallagh> Pharaoh_Atem: Yes, but I suspect this specific case isn't covered.
17:37:35 <sgallagh> Probably they just have it wait until after a reboot then check the results.
17:37:50 <coremodule> testcase coverage is generally good, all the cloud/atomic test cases could use a test since the latest release, but as the last tests passes, we should be able to pull over the results if need be. I don't think we need to though, because of the obvious outcome of this meeting; we have time.
17:38:07 <coremodule> view the testcase coverage here: https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/29/
17:38:19 <bcotton> #info testcase coverage is generally good, all the cloud/atomic test cases could use a test since the latest release
17:38:26 <bcotton> #link https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/29/
17:38:45 <bcotton> any questions or comments on testing?
17:39:09 <Pharaoh_Atem> I didn't know this actually existed
17:39:27 <Pharaoh_Atem> shouldn't we have this somewhere more prominent on an fp.o website?
17:39:31 <nirik> I think the openqa test is just a) faster and b) waiting
17:39:47 <coremodule> nothing special here! adamw is away, so bear with the QA team as 5 work together to do the job of 1 ;P
17:39:59 <bcotton> coremodule++
17:39:59 <zodbot> bcotton: Karma for coremodule changed to 3 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:40:02 <frantisekz> Pharaoh_Atem: We (Fedora QA) are working on something to make all our tools/sites more visible to the public
17:40:09 <Conan_Kudo> coremodule++
17:40:09 <zodbot> Conan_Kudo: Karma for coremodule changed to 4 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:40:11 <Conan_Kudo> frantisekz++
17:40:12 <zodbot> Conan_Kudo: Karma for frantisekz changed to 2 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:40:44 <nirik> https://openqa.fedoraproject.org/tests/297997 is one I think... took ~4min there.
17:41:39 <bcotton> okay, well let's make this official i guess
17:41:53 <bcotton> #topic Go/No-Go decision
17:42:06 <bcotton> normally, i'd poll FESCo, RelEng, and QA individually
17:42:11 <bcotton> but i think it's pretty clear
17:42:25 <bcotton> so raise your hand if you object to a No-Go decision
17:42:34 <mboddu> No RC, No-Go
17:42:52 <coremodule> Accepted Blockers, No-Go
17:42:54 <Southern_Gentlem> ^
17:43:04 <nirik> pretty clear. no-go
17:43:04 <bcotton> #agreed Fedora 29 Final is NO-GO
17:43:09 <Southern_Gentlem> i object to the No-GO but that is life :)
17:43:11 <bcotton> #info The next F29 Final Go/No-Go meeting will be Thursday, 2018-10-25 at 1700 UTC
17:43:21 <sgallagh> Go.... to the bar
17:43:25 <sgallagh> (No Go)
17:43:26 <bcotton> #action bcotton to announce decision
17:43:37 <bcotton> #action bcotton to update schedule
17:43:51 <bcotton> #topic Open floor
17:43:52 <bcotton> Anything else we need to discuss before closing?
17:43:57 <Pharaoh_Atem> alas, we couldn't repeat the awesomeness of F28 release
17:44:04 <Pharaoh_Atem> but hopefully we won't slip again :)
17:44:10 <nirik> Note for phoronix readers: This is not a slip, it's just using the second of our possible release dates. Completely fine.
17:44:12 <frantisekz> we can still make the second target date
17:44:14 <bhavin192> Pharaoh_Atem, :)
17:44:17 <contyk> ;)
17:44:19 <bcotton> nirik++
17:44:26 <Conan_Kudo> nirik++
17:44:26 <zodbot> Conan_Kudo: Karma for kevin changed to 35 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:44:27 <sgallagh> Nothing to see here. Move along.
17:44:31 <frantisekz> nirik++
17:44:31 <zodbot> frantisekz: Karma for kevin changed to 36 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:44:31 <mboddu> nirik++
17:44:34 <mkonecny> nirik++
17:44:36 <nils> nirik++
17:44:37 <zodbot> nils: Karma for kevin changed to 37 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:44:45 <bcotton> so many cookies for nirik
17:44:46 <Southern_Gentlem> nirik++
17:44:46 <zodbot> Southern_Gentlem: Karma for kevin changed to 38 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:44:53 * nirik likes cookies.
17:44:55 <Conan_Kudo> bcotton++
17:45:01 <bhavin192> nirik++
17:45:01 <zodbot> bhavin192: Karma for kevin changed to 39 (for the current release cycle):  https://badges.fedoraproject.org/tags/cookie/any
17:45:16 <Pharaoh_Atem> bcotton: I think we've given you all the cookies already :P
17:45:20 <bcotton> okay, last call before i close the meeting
17:45:25 <coremodule> nothing here!
17:45:31 <Pharaoh_Atem> nothing here
17:45:32 <frantisekz> bcotton, thanks for leading the meeting!
17:45:33 * bhavin192 thinks nirik will share all the cookies :P
17:45:37 <bcotton> you're all welcome to join us back here in 75 minutes for the release readiness meeting
17:45:51 <coremodule> yes, thank you bcotton for hosting this
17:45:54 <Southern_Gentlem> bhavin192,  share what the cookies are gone
17:45:58 <Pharaoh_Atem> 👍
17:46:02 <nils> 👍
17:46:06 * bcotton bangs gavel
17:46:09 <bcotton> #endmeeting