#fedora-blocker-review: F31-blocker-review

Meeting started by adamw at 16:02:42 UTC (full logs).

Meeting summary

  1. Roll Call (adamw, 16:02:43)
  2. Introduction (adamw, 16:04:43)
    1. 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. (adamw, 16:04:43)
    2. We'll be following the process outlined at: (adamw, 16:04:43)
    3. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting (adamw, 16:04:45)
    4. The bugs up for review today are available at: (adamw, 16:04:45)
    5. http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current (adamw, 16:04:47)
    6. The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at: (adamw, 16:04:49)
    7. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria (adamw, 16:04:53)
    8. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Beta_Release_Criteria (adamw, 16:04:55)
    9. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_31_Final_Release_Criteria (adamw, 16:04:57)
    10. for Beta, we have: (adamw, 16:05:03)
    11. 3 Proposed Blockers (adamw, 16:05:05)
    12. 2 Accepted Blockers (adamw, 16:05:07)

  3. (1731415) Network spoke doesn't work on ARM initial-setup (adamw, 16:07:14)
    1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731415 (adamw, 16:07:14)
    2. Proposed Blocker, initial-setup, NEW (adamw, 16:07:14)
    3. AGREED: 1731415 - RejectedBlocker (Beta) - the network spoke not working in itself is not a blocker per the criteria (so long as user and root spokes work). testing during the meeting by multiple testers did not reproduce the bug or find any criteria-violating cases in other scenarios (adamw, 16:25:03)

  4. (1733388) Circular locking often causes btrfs installs to hang with kernel-5.3.0-0.rc0.git7.1.fc31 and later (adamw, 16:25:37)
    1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1733388 (adamw, 16:25:37)
    2. Proposed Blocker, kernel, NEW (adamw, 16:25:37)
    3. AGREED: 1733388 - punt (delay decision) - this seems fairly likely to be a blocker under current policy, but anaconda team believes current policy casts too wide a net. we will start a(nother) discussion of storage criteria on the mailing lists and see where that goes (adamw, 16:40:29)

  5. (1715699) LiveOS boot, journalctl is missing many early messages (adamw, 16:40:42)
    1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1715699 (adamw, 16:40:42)
    2. Proposed Blocker, systemd, POST (adamw, 16:40:42)
    3. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria#System_logging (kparal, 16:50:53)
    4. AGREED: 1715699 - RejectedBlocker (Beta) - as the criteria are currently written, this is not a blocker as the logging requirement applies only post-install. Opinions on whether this bug should be a blocker if the criteria were to apply to live environments were split, so we may revisit the bug once more if the criteria are changed and the bug is not fixed by then (adamw, 17:06:15)
    5. ACTION: tablepc to draft a criteria amendment (others are also welcome to draft their own versions if they like) (adamw, 17:07:40)

  6. Accepted Beta blockers (adamw, 17:10:55)
  7. (1728419) bes not installable: needs rebuild, probably update to 3.20.5 (adamw, 17:11:08)
    1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1728419 (adamw, 17:11:08)
    2. Accepted Blocker, bes, NEW (adamw, 17:11:08)
    3. this appears to be fixed now, we'll close it (adamw, 17:15:47)

  8. (1727343) [abrt] PackageKit: libdnf::Repo::Impl::detachLibsolvRepo(): packagekitd killed by SIGSEGV (adamw, 17:16:49)
    1. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1727343 (adamw, 17:16:49)
    2. Accepted Blocker, libdnf, ON_QA (adamw, 17:16:49)
    3. this is fixed in Rawhide, so we'll drop the blocker metadata. bug is filed against F30 so it can't be closed yet (adamw, 17:18:11)

  9. Open floor (adamw, 17:18:16)
    1. coremodule secretarialized, but i forgot to mention it earlier (adamw, 17:26:22)


Meeting ended at 17:26:24 UTC (full logs).

Action items

  1. tablepc to draft a criteria amendment (others are also welcome to draft their own versions if they like)


Action items, by person

  1. tablepc
    1. tablepc to draft a criteria amendment (others are also welcome to draft their own versions if they like)


People present (lines said)

  1. adamw (163)
  2. cmurf (79)
  3. kparal (30)
  4. lruzicka (16)
  5. zodbot (15)
  6. pwhalen (13)
  7. bcotton (13)
  8. coremodule (13)
  9. tablepc (8)
  10. frantisekz (7)
  11. sgallagh (5)
  12. lbrabec (4)


Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.