17:07:41 <adamw> #startmeeting F34-blocker-review
17:07:41 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Feb 22 17:07:41 2021 UTC.
17:07:41 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
17:07:41 <zodbot> The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:07:41 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
17:07:41 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f34-blocker-review'
17:07:41 <adamw> #meetingname F34-blocker-review
17:07:41 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'f34-blocker-review'
17:07:41 <adamw> #topic Roll Call
17:07:45 <frantisekz> .hello2
17:07:46 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com>
17:07:50 <tablepc> .hello2
17:07:51 <zodbot> tablepc: tablepc 'Pat Kelly' <pmkellly@frontier.com>
17:07:56 <adamw> ahoyhoy folks! welcome to the first blocker review meeting for f34 cycle
17:08:08 * coremodule is here, willing to act as secretary
17:08:16 <bcotton> .hello2
17:08:17 <zodbot> bcotton: bcotton 'Ben Cotton' <bcotton@redhat.com>
17:08:31 <lruzicka[m]> .hello lruzicka
17:08:32 <zodbot> lruzicka[m]: lruzicka 'Lukáš Růžička' <lruzicka@redhat.com>
17:08:44 <Southern_Gentlem> .hello2 jbwillia
17:08:45 <zodbot> Southern_Gentlem: Sorry, but you don't exist
17:08:51 <Southern_Gentlem> .hello jbwillia
17:08:52 <zodbot> Southern_Gentlem: jbwillia 'Ben Williams' <vaioof@gmail.com>
17:09:31 <pwhalen> .hello pwhalen
17:09:32 <zodbot> pwhalen: pwhalen 'Paul Whalen' <pwhalen@redhat.com>
17:10:20 <adamw> thanks coremodule
17:10:29 <adamw> how's everyone doing on this, the greatest holiday of the year?
17:10:45 <pwhalen> er, which holiday?
17:10:51 <tablepc> Holiday?
17:10:56 <bcotton> It's AdamW Day
17:11:19 <tablepc> Oh and much deserved!
17:11:31 <pwhalen> happy birthday adamw :D . Shall we all sing?
17:11:49 <adamw> it's the start of the worldwide month-long bacchanal of celebration that marks my birthday
17:12:30 <tablepc> So Party and gifts every day then?
17:12:48 <bcotton> i mean, the Beta freeze is kind of like a bacchanal
17:13:15 <adamw> it's like https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/09/26 only bigger
17:13:56 <adamw> alrighty
17:13:58 <adamw> boilerplate time!
17:14:21 <adamw> #chair pwhalen lruzicka
17:14:21 <zodbot> Current chairs: adamw lruzicka pwhalen
17:14:29 * adamw sent a long message:  < https://matrix.org/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/GBFhGWWTWyxTTgrzwRaDCBuv/message.txt >
17:14:53 <adamw> #info for Beta, we have:
17:14:58 <adamw> #info 6 Proposed Blockers
17:15:03 <adamw> #info 2 Proposed Freeze Exceptions
17:15:17 <adamw> #info for Final, we have:
17:15:22 <adamw> #info 2 Proposed Blockers
17:15:22 <adamw> #info 3 Accepted Blockers
17:15:48 <adamw> #info coremodule will secretarialize, thanks!
17:16:05 <coremodule> you got it! :)
17:16:06 <adamw> so let's get started with:
17:16:06 <adamw> #topic Proposed Beta blockers
17:16:13 * adamw sent a long message:  < https://matrix.org/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/TsIoKmvYDUvQLDaRWeMimnfD/message.txt >
17:17:25 <Southern_Gentlem> yuck
17:17:30 <adamw> there are four +1s in the ticket now, so unless anyone objects we can go ahead
17:17:31 <adamw> sorry, i didn't get time to check through tickets before the meeting
17:17:32 <lruzicka[m]> adamw: OTP, do you also respond to the happyassasin[m] channel?
17:17:33 <adamw> #info +4 votes in ticket from frantisekz, bcotton, imsedgar and lruzicka
17:18:23 <adamw> lruz: i don't know what OTP means and i don't know what or where that channel is :P if people PM me I do get that
17:18:34 <Southern_Gentlem> +1 Beta
17:18:50 <lruzicka[m]> I pinged happyassassin[m], so I wanted to know you got the message :D
17:19:07 <pwhalen> +1 BB
17:19:25 <adamw> lruzicka: it seems not...
17:20:57 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1929940 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - violates Basic criterion "It must be possible to configure a Fedora Server system installed according to the above criteria as a FreeIPA domain controller, using the official deployment tools provided in the distribution FreeIPA packages"
17:21:02 <frantisekz> ack
17:21:06 <bcotton> ack
17:21:07 <lruzicka[m]> ack
17:21:09 <coremodule> ack
17:21:11 <pwhalen> ack
17:21:24 <adamw> #agreed 1929940 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - violates Basic criterion "It must be possible to configure a Fedora Server system installed according to the above criteria as a FreeIPA domain controller, using the official deployment tools provided in the distribution FreeIPA packages"
17:21:35 * adamw sent a long message:  < https://matrix.org/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/zAghsfrTSQUEIXeoIlEomUKv/message.txt >
17:21:58 <Southern_Gentlem> adamw, your long messages are a PITA
17:22:48 <adamw> sorry?
17:22:51 <adamw> which messages?
17:22:53 * pwhalen can paste them here
17:23:03 <pwhalen> — adamw sent a long message:  < https://matrix.org/_matrix/media/r0/download/matrix.org/zAghsfrTSQUEIXeoIlEomUKv/message.txt >
17:23:05 <tablepc> Are we all supposed to be using Matrix now?
17:23:11 <pwhalen> that's what we see
17:23:12 <adamw> oh dang
17:23:15 <adamw> i didn't know it was doing that
17:23:22 <adamw> no, not officially
17:23:30 <adamw> hold on, i'll switch to an irc client then
17:23:57 <pwhalen> Doesn't look liek the topic changes either
17:24:15 <adamw> ah, or i can just paste line by line and it should work
17:24:16 <adamw> let me see if i can fix things :(
17:24:25 <adamw> #topic (1929940) FreeIPA server deployment fails in current F34 and Rawhide composes
17:24:33 <pwhalen> I can repaste for you too, no worries
17:24:39 <adamw> #agreed 1929940 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - violates Basic criterion "It must be possible to configure a Fedora Server system installed according to the above criteria as a FreeIPA domain controller, using the official deployment tools provided in the distribution FreeIPA packages"
17:24:51 <adamw> #topic (1929564) [abrt] gnome-control-center: g_settings_set_property(): gnome-control-center killed by SIGTRAP
17:25:00 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929564
17:25:06 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/237
17:25:14 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-control-center, NEW
17:25:33 <adamw> did that work
17:25:34 <adamw> ?
17:25:50 <coremodule> yes
17:26:05 <adamw> eexcellent
17:26:20 <adamw> so, this is gcc crashing on certain panels i think...probably +1 Beta FE +1 Final blocker for me
17:26:30 <adamw> we should be able to fix it with a backport by the looks of things
17:27:07 <lruzicka[m]> +1 BetaFE, +1 FinalBlocker ... seems applicationwise
17:27:08 <pwhalen> +1 Beta FE +1 Final blocker as well
17:27:27 <bcotton> +1 Beta FE +1 Final blocker
17:28:50 <frantisekz> +1 Beta FE +1 Final blocker
17:30:28 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1929564 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) AcceptedBlocker (Final) - we agree this doesn't quite violate the Basic or Beta criteria, but does violate Final criterion "All applications...must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test", and as it's a significant visible bug it would be desirable to fix it for Beta also
17:30:35 <bcotton> ack
17:30:43 <coremodule> ack
17:30:46 <lruzicka[m]> ack
17:30:47 <pwhalen> ack
17:30:52 <tablepc> It does seem to be an issue with the GUI I can change things with gsettings
17:31:26 <lruzicka[m]> tablepc: you should be able to reset to the last working tab also and then the gui might start working again.
17:31:56 <adamw> #agreed 1929564 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) AcceptedBlocker (Final) - we agree this doesn't quite violate the Basic or Beta criteria, but does violate Final criterion "All applications...must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test", and as it's a significant visible bug it would be desirable to fix it for Beta also
17:32:49 <adamw> #topic (1930977) [abrt] gnome-shell: nouveau_fence_signalled(): gnome-shell killed by SIGSEGV
17:32:55 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1930977
17:33:02 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/241
17:33:07 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-shell, NEW
17:34:11 <coremodule> violates "No part of any release-blocking desktop's panel (or equivalent) configuration may crash on startup or be entirely non-functional."?
17:34:18 <pwhalen> +1 here, device boots to a black screen
17:34:45 <coremodule> +1 blocker here based on the above
17:34:45 <adamw> ah, if this affects a supported ARM platform, +1
17:35:25 <adamw> i'd say "A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility"
17:35:46 <bcotton> +1 BetaBlocker based on the criterion adam proposed
17:35:56 <coremodule> wfm
17:36:00 <lruzicka[m]> +1 BB
17:37:29 <frantisekz> +1 Beta Blocker
17:38:46 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1930977 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - violates Basic criterion "A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility" for a supported aarch64 platform
17:39:16 <pwhalen> ack
17:39:21 <coremodule> ack
17:39:23 <lruzicka[m]> ack
17:40:05 <adamw> #agreed 1930977 - AcceptedBlocker (Beta) - violates Basic criterion "A system installed with a release-blocking desktop must boot to a log in screen where it is possible to log in to a working desktop using a user account created during installation or a 'first boot' utility" for a supported aarch64 platform
17:40:13 <adamw> #topic (1931070) sddm crashes with mesa-21 on VMware
17:40:19 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931070
17:40:24 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/236
17:40:29 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, mesa, NEW
17:41:00 <adamw> so, vmware is not a supported virt stack per the criteria. but we *could*, i suppose, consider it as a conditional violation of the same criterion as above, conditional on the "hardware" being vmware...
17:41:57 <pwhalen> +1 BB I think I saw this on aarch64 as well, need to circle back and  file a bug
17:42:30 <frantisekz> there is a fix in dist-git already
17:42:38 <frantisekz> or something that appears to be fixing that
17:42:57 <bcotton> for Beta, i'm less inclined to block on VMWare-specific issues. so I think I'm
17:43:10 <bcotton> -1 BB, +1 FE
17:43:44 <adamw> at least +1 FE for me anyhow
17:43:58 <frantisekz> -1 BB, +1 FE as in review ticket from me
17:43:58 <adamw> pwhalen: we don't block for KDE on aarch64 do we?
17:44:25 <lruzicka[m]> -1 BB, +1FE, +1 FB in case
17:44:37 <bcotton> adamw: KDE only blocks on x86_64 unless someone forgot to tell me about a change :-)
17:44:42 <pwhalen> no, thankfully.
17:45:01 <pwhalen> has anyone tested kde on x86 hw?
17:45:34 <bcotton> i tested it on kvm x86_64, but not bare metal
17:45:59 <bcotton> but that may predate the mesa update
17:46:38 <adamw> it's working in openqa, i think, but openqa doesn't have hw accell
17:46:55 <pwhalen> ok, it seemed like a more general issue. I can be -1 BB, +1 FE until we find out otherwise
17:48:19 <adamw> we can punt on bb while we test, i guess
17:50:24 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1931070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta), punt (delay decision) on blocker status - we think this is serious enough to be an FE at least, but not sure yet if it's wide enough in impact to constitute a blocker. punting for more testing and also to look at fixing it
17:50:42 <lruzicka[m]> ok, ack
17:50:52 <frantisekz> ack
17:50:58 <bcotton> ack
17:51:07 <pwhalen> ack
17:53:05 <adamw> #agreed 1931070 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta), punt (delay decision) on blocker status - we think this is serious enough to be an FE at least, but not sure yet if it's wide enough in impact to constitute a blocker. punting for more testing and also to look at fixing it
17:53:15 <adamw> #topic (1931384) No audio on Fedora 34 after pipewire 0.3.22-4 has been installed.
17:53:20 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1931384
17:53:25 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/239
17:53:29 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, pipewire, ASSIGNED
17:54:03 <frantisekz> -1 beta blocker, at least what it seems like from comments, you need to manually change configuration and then upgrade to latest pipewire
17:54:30 <lruzicka[m]> It showed that config files were changed and the old configs were not compatible with the new update
17:54:46 <lruzicka[m]> I can confirm, audio is working without issues on my machine now
17:55:19 <adamw> so it definitely only happens if you manually edited the config file?
17:55:25 <adamw> sigh, they need to learn about dropin configs
17:55:26 <adamw> anyhoo
17:55:39 <lruzicka[m]> no, it happens when you upgrade with old config files from previous releases
17:55:44 <frantisekz> hmm
17:55:58 <frantisekz> that's a bit more worse
17:56:02 <adamw> yeah
17:56:03 <lruzicka[m]> so, when you have the 0.3.20 version and you upgrade to 0.3.22
17:56:20 <adamw> why would it not install the new config file though? that seems odd
17:56:26 <frantisekz> the problem is, steam (pretty popular package from rpmfusion) is pullng pipewire on f33
17:56:36 <adamw> mmm
17:56:44 <frantisekz> so that would mean that everybody who installed that on f33 will end up with broken audio after up to f34
17:56:47 <adamw> so, still doesn't smell blocker-y, but definitely an issue
17:57:19 <lruzicka[m]> I talked to Wim and suggested the config be changed automatically, but he said the situation was only temporary.
17:57:58 <frantisekz> I think the best way forward would be to recreate config via scriptlet on upgrade, once there are stable configs in pipewire
17:58:13 <bcotton> i'm definitely +1 FE. not sure how i feel about blocker status
17:58:14 <frantisekz> not ideal though..
17:59:14 <lruzicka[m]> we could do Common Bugs if needed
17:59:52 <adamw> yeah, it'd definitely need to go there if not fixed
17:59:54 <lruzicka[m]> and not block on config files
17:59:58 <frantisekz> I don't think it's ideal from PR perspective... probably not a blocker, but we *should* make sure it's fixed
18:00:46 <lruzicka[m]> Wim said that usually configs are not replaced, but he might be willing to do it for the better update sake, what do you think, guys?
18:01:28 <frantisekz> yeah, I'll reply in ticket, seems like a lesser evil
18:01:41 <frantisekz> (to replace config file)
18:02:12 <lruzicka[m]> please, do, frantisekz
18:02:52 <adamw> any other votes?
18:03:02 <lruzicka[m]> -1 BB
18:03:16 <bcotton> 0 BB
18:03:16 <adamw> and yes, to me i think they need to change this somehow
18:03:16 <pwhalen> -1 BB, +1 FE
18:03:24 <adamw> it does not make sense for updating the package to leave your sound broken
18:05:11 <adamw> i guess i'd be +1 fe for a sensible improvement to the upgrade case here
18:05:13 <lruzicka[m]> me2
18:05:22 <frantisekz> +1 FE
18:08:35 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1931384 - RejectedBlocker (Beta) AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - as the affected package is not installed in any default F32 or F33 install, this does not violate the release criteria, but since it is known to be pulled in by popular third-party packages, we feel it's worth an FE to improve the upgrade situation during freeze if possible
18:08:52 <lruzicka[m]> ack
18:09:00 <pwhalen> ack
18:09:16 <bcotton> ack
18:09:30 <frantisekz> ack
18:09:40 <adamw> #agreed 1931384 - RejectedBlocker (Beta) AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - as the affected package is not installed in any default F32 or F33 install, this does not violate the release criteria, but since it is known to be pulled in by popular third-party packages, we feel it's worth an FE to improve the upgrade situation during freeze if possible
18:09:57 <adamw> #topic (1930978) [abrt] xorg-x11-server-Xorg: System(): Xorg killed by SIGABRT
18:10:32 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1930978
18:10:37 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/242
18:10:42 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, xorg-x11-server, NEW
18:11:31 <adamw> is this a dupe of the other one, pwhalen?
18:12:05 <pwhalen> adamw: it might be, we can punt for now until I update it
18:12:30 <pwhalen> its the same hw as the other
18:12:37 <adamw> ok
18:14:00 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1930978 - punt (delay decision) - we suspect this may be a dupe of #1930977, we will punt while pwhalen works that out
18:14:07 <bcotton> ack'
18:14:11 <lruzicka[m]> ack
18:14:16 <pwhalen> ack
18:14:32 <adamw> #agreed 1930978 - punt (delay decision) - we suspect this may be a dupe of #1930977, we will punt while pwhalen works that out
18:14:46 <adamw> that's all the proposed Beta blockers, moving on to:
18:14:51 <adamw> #topic Proposed Beta freeze exceptions
18:14:57 <adamw> #topic (1909556) reboot hangs for 2 minutes: stop job is running for User Manager for UID 1000
18:15:04 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1909556
18:15:20 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/238
18:15:22 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, gnome-session, POST
18:15:32 <adamw> this is the thing that makes shutdown sit and wait for 90 seconds every time, i think, it's very annoying
18:15:45 <adamw> it could be fixed with an update, but i guess it affects lives
18:16:41 <tablepc> Yes that's true
18:17:39 <pwhalen> BetaFE +1
18:17:49 <bcotton> +1 FE
18:17:52 <lruzicka[m]> BetaFE +1
18:18:08 <frantisekz> FE +1
18:19:29 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1909556 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this affects live images, and is rather annoying
18:19:38 <bcotton> ack
18:19:44 <adamw> (i guess it also inevitably affects the first time you shut down after install too)
18:19:44 <lruzicka[m]> ack
18:19:44 <pwhalen> ack
18:19:58 <adamw> #agreed 1909556 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this affects live images, and is rather annoying
18:20:07 <adamw> #topic (1924908) Gnome session fails to start with "Oops, something went wrong" on first boot
18:20:13 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924908
18:20:17 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/240
18:20:21 <adamw> #info Proposed Freeze Exceptions, gnome-session, NEW
18:21:21 <adamw> openqa sees this too
18:21:37 <adamw> everything eventually works as intended - g-i-s runs, then you get to the desktop
18:21:47 <adamw> but for some reason the 'oops! something went wrong' screen shows up for a while before g-i-s appears
18:21:50 <adamw> definitely +1 fe for me
18:23:09 <lruzicka[m]> +1fe
18:23:29 <frantisekz> +1 FE
18:23:51 <pwhalen> +1 FE
18:24:22 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1924908 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this doesn't prevent anything working in the end, but looks very bad as a first impression
18:24:38 <frantisekz> ack
18:24:48 <lruzicka[m]> ack
18:26:31 <adamw> any more acks
18:26:32 <adamw> any more acks
18:26:35 <adamw> any any any more acks
18:26:45 <tablepc> ack
18:26:47 <cmurf> whoops! no i didn't forget, why do you ask?
18:27:02 * cmurf forgot
18:27:54 <adamw> #agreed 1924908 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this doesn't prevent anything working in the end, but looks very bad as a first impression
18:28:20 <adamw> finally, moving on to:
18:28:24 <adamw> #topic Proposed Final Blockers
18:28:42 <adamw> #topic (1930401) No update notifications shown when updates available (F34, Rawhide)
18:28:46 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1930401
18:28:51 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/234
18:28:55 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, gnome-software, NEW
18:29:01 <frantisekz> +1 Final Blocker
18:29:12 <adamw> this one may just be a case of "they made their stupid clever heuristics even stupider and cleverer and now the test is invalid"
18:29:14 <adamw> so i'd suggest punting
18:29:42 <lruzicka[m]> ok
18:29:51 <frantisekz> mhm
18:30:03 <frantisekz> yeah, reading through comments... let's punt and decide later
18:30:05 <lruzicka[m]> +1 punt then and we'll see
18:30:44 <pwhalen> +1 punt
18:31:50 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1930401 - punt (delay decision) - this may not be broken but rather the test may need updating for new heuristics in GNOME 40, delaying decision while we work that out
18:32:20 <frantisekz> ack
18:32:44 <adamw> #topic (1929643) logout after switch returns the user to console instead of sddm
18:32:44 <lruzicka[m]> ack
18:32:45 <adamw> d'oh
18:32:45 <adamw> #undo
18:32:45 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x7fd4a14a45d0>
18:34:38 <adamw> any more acks?
18:35:32 <lruzicka[m]> my wife says ack, too
18:36:42 <adamw> https://giphy.com/gifs/NCjISbEPFxm48/html5
18:37:43 <adamw> okay in the interests of moving on
18:37:48 <adamw> #agreed 1930401 - punt (delay decision) - this may not be broken but rather the test may need updating for new heuristics in GNOME 40, delaying decision while we work that out
18:38:11 <adamw> #topic (1929643) logout after switch returns the user to console instead of sddm
18:38:15 <adamw> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1929643
18:38:24 <adamw> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/235
18:38:29 <adamw> #info Proposed Blocker, sddm, NEW
18:38:43 <lruzicka[m]> I guess +1 FB
18:39:11 <lruzicka[m]> nobody wants to arrive at the console unexpectedly :D
18:39:35 <frantisekz> +1 FB
18:39:52 <tablepc> If you do just type systemctl reboot
18:40:20 <lruzicka[m]> yeah, that helps but sort of pulls juices out :D
18:41:04 <adamw> i think i'd be +1 final blocker, yeah
18:41:06 <pwhalen> +1 FB
18:41:07 <adamw> seems reasonable to combine the criteria
18:44:16 <adamw> proposed #agreed 1929643 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is held to violate a combination of the "Shutting down, rebooting, logging in and logging out must work..." and "User switching must work using the mechanisms offered..." criteria as proposed in the bug; it seems reasonable to expect both to work together.
18:44:36 <lruzicka[m]> ack
18:44:52 <coremodule> ack
18:45:41 <pwhalen> ack
18:45:43 <frantisekz> ack
18:45:55 <adamw> oh lots of acks for the last bug HUH
18:46:04 <adamw> #agreed 1929643 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is held to violate a combination of the "Shutting down, rebooting, logging in and logging out must work..." and "User switching must work using the mechanisms offered..." criteria as proposed in the bug; it seems reasonable to expect both to work together.
18:46:21 <lruzicka[m]> my wife kept quiet this time :D
18:46:28 <adamw> are there really no accepted beta blockers? this feels suspicious :D
18:46:45 <lruzicka[m]> yeah, it felt for tablepc too
18:47:46 <tablepc> I've been trained to be suspicious
18:48:00 <lruzicka[m]> but an opossum might still jump out from the bush
18:48:11 <coremodule> my ack was for adamw's birthday present
18:48:51 * adamw dusts off his old bz saved search
18:49:00 <lruzicka[m]> coremodule: did you buy it and made Jeff Bezos even richer?
18:50:11 <coremodule> this ack was hand-made by an old Slavic woman and passed down to me through the generations, which I now bestow upon adamw
18:50:36 <adamw> thanks, i hate it
18:50:42 <coremodule> i lol'ed
18:50:47 <adamw> #topic Open floor
18:50:54 <adamw> alrighty, looks like we're done here
18:51:07 <frantisekz> yay!
18:51:08 <tablepc> We're never done.
18:51:15 <cmurf> lol and i had nothing to do with any of it
18:51:21 <frantisekz> need to run, thanks adamw and others!
18:51:22 <cmurf> i kept getting distracted
18:51:37 <tablepc> Have a Great Day!
18:54:26 <adamw> #endmeeting