2024-04-01 16:01:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !startmeeting F40-blocker-review
2024-04-01 16:01:53 <@meetbot:fedora.im> Meeting started at 2024-04-01 16:01:52 UTC
2024-04-01 16:01:53 <@meetbot:fedora.im> The Meeting name is 'F40-blocker-review'
2024-04-01 16:01:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Roll Call
2024-04-01 16:02:01 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> !hi 
2024-04-01 16:02:02 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon (neil) - he / him / his
2024-04-01 16:02:04 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> !hi
2024-04-01 16:02:06 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Fábio Ribeiro (farribeiro) - he / him / his
2024-04-01 16:02:07 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> !hi
2024-04-01 16:02:07 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Brandon Nielsen (nielsenb)
2024-04-01 16:02:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ahoyhoy, who's around for blocker meeting fun
2024-04-01 16:02:59 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> !hi
2024-04-01 16:03:00 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Geraldo S. Simião Kutz (geraldosimiao) - he / him / his
2024-04-01 16:04:38 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> !hi
2024-04-01 16:04:39 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher (sgallagh) - he / him / his
2024-04-01 16:04:44 <@pboy:fedora.im> !hi
2024-04-01 16:04:45 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Peter Boy (pboy)
2024-04-01 16:05:11 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> The QA meeting continues
2024-04-01 16:05:12 <@adamwill:fedora.im> hi hi everyone
2024-04-01 16:06:38 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> it's a good thing we like/tolerate one another
2024-04-01 16:06:41 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ;) 
2024-04-01 16:06:43 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Not anymore
2024-04-01 16:07:06 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> !hi
2024-04-01 16:07:08 <@zodbot:fedora.im> Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
2024-04-01 16:08:45 <@adamwill:fedora.im> haha
2024-04-01 16:08:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> alrighty, boilerplate time
2024-04-01 16:10:26 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Introduction
2024-04-01 16:10:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Why are we here?
2024-04-01 16:10:33 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !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.
2024-04-01 16:10:36 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info We'll be following the process outlined at:
2024-04-01 16:10:39 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
2024-04-01 16:10:41 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info The bugs up for review today are available at:
2024-04-01 16:10:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current
2024-04-01 16:10:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at:
2024-04-01 16:10:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria
2024-04-01 16:10:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Beta_Release_Criteria
2024-04-01 16:10:55 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria
2024-04-01 16:11:17 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info for Final, we have:
2024-04-01 16:11:21 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 3 Proposed Blockers
2024-04-01 16:11:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 2 Accepted Blockers
2024-04-01 16:11:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 1 Accepted Previous Release Blockers
2024-04-01 16:11:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 1 Accepted Freeze Exceptions
2024-04-01 16:11:38 <@adamwill:fedora.im> does someone want to secretarialize?
2024-04-01 16:14:04 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> I will volunteer
2024-04-01 16:14:21 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> having quickly reviewed the SOP :D 
2024-04-01 16:14:29 <@adamwill:fedora.im> thanks neil! i'll double check
2024-04-01 16:14:41 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Neil Hanlon will secretarialize, thanks neil
2024-04-01 16:14:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> let's get started with:
2024-04-01 16:14:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Proposed Final blockers
2024-04-01 16:14:55 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2271837) The KDE help center does not show the documentation for KDE applications.
2024-04-01 16:14:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2271837
2024-04-01 16:15:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1544
2024-04-01 16:15:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, khelpcenter, NEW
2024-04-01 16:15:07 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-nielsenb)
2024-04-01 16:15:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> on the face of it this does look blockery...
2024-04-01 16:15:55 <@adamwill:fedora.im> "For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following applications must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test:  ... help viewer"
2024-04-01 16:16:20 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Yeah, that one
2024-04-01 16:17:23 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> +1 FinalBlocker
2024-04-01 16:18:23 <@adamwill:fedora.im> +1
2024-04-01 16:18:31 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Honestly, a help center app is pretty critical, especially for how complex KDE can be.
2024-04-01 16:18:34 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> It's pretty clear cut +1 FB
2024-04-01 16:18:34 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> +1 FinalBlocker
2024-04-01 16:18:43 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> +1 
2024-04-01 16:19:01 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> Yeah, while I agree with the sentiment from nielsenb, I think it is also clearly a blocker. +1
2024-04-01 16:19:03 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> A help center app is necessary in any environment because you cannot assume anything about user intuition
2024-04-01 16:19:07 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: yeah, that's why it's in the list
2024-04-01 16:19:10 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I'd vote not to waive this if it was the last blocker at Go/No-Go
2024-04-01 16:19:11 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> GNOME is just as complex and mysterious to users as KDE is
2024-04-01 16:19:18 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I feel like almost everyone will just Google
2024-04-01 16:19:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> just in different ways
2024-04-01 16:19:28 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I have never used a help app since like, Windows 98
2024-04-01 16:19:29 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Conan Kudo: I wasn't trying to be partisan, sorry.
2024-04-01 16:19:53 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2271837 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of Final criterion "For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following applications must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test: ... help viewer"
2024-04-01 16:19:54 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Stephen Gallagher: no worries :)
2024-04-01 16:19:55 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> It's definitely a slam dunk blocker by the criteria though
2024-04-01 16:20:06 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-04-01 16:20:07 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:20:10 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> ack
2024-04-01 16:20:16 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2024-04-01 16:20:16 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> Ack
2024-04-01 16:20:30 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> yeah mostly I get confused when a help menu opens. "what did I just click by accident?"
2024-04-01 16:20:31 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:20:47 <@pboy:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:20:52 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> "I'm beyond help, but thank you"
2024-04-01 16:22:03 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2271837 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of Final criterion "For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following applications must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test: ... help viewer"
2024-04-01 16:22:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2272149) Loupe cannot open JPEG images
2024-04-01 16:22:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2272149
2024-04-01 16:22:20 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1545
2024-04-01 16:22:23 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, loupe, NEW
2024-04-01 16:22:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao, +catanzaro, +nielsenb)
2024-04-01 16:22:30 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Zodbot didn't get the message
2024-04-01 16:22:40 <@adamwill:fedora.im> @farribeiro:matrix.org: that's because it was a proposal
2024-04-01 16:22:44 <@adamwill:fedora.im> the final version is above
2024-04-01 16:22:51 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Yeah, this is blockery. That's a pretty basic requirement.
2024-04-01 16:22:55 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> +1 FinalBlocker
2024-04-01 16:22:57 <@adamwill:fedora.im> ok, so this has +3 already, but i didn't get to accepting it yet because of...fire
2024-04-01 16:23:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> anyone want to argue -1?
2024-04-01 16:23:22 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2024-04-01 16:23:29 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> nope
2024-04-01 16:23:48 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> +1.
2024-04-01 16:24:07 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> +1 FinalBlocker
2024-04-01 16:24:24 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> (I also just reproduced it on my aarch64 system, if anyone wanted another data point)
2024-04-01 16:24:37 <@adamwill:fedora.im> @farribeiro:matrix.org: i used to just go straight to !agreed, but sometimes folks disagree with the summary i write, so the proposal/ack thing gives people a chance to edit it
2024-04-01 16:24:41 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> +1
2024-04-01 16:25:29 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ok
2024-04-01 16:25:47 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2272149 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a clear violation of "For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following applications must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test: ... image viewer"
2024-04-01 16:25:59 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2024-04-01 16:25:59 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:26:01 <@adamwill:fedora.im> (we don't need to get to the 'all applications for GNOME' bit, since image viewer is in the restricted list already...
2024-04-01 16:26:01 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:26:22 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-04-01 16:26:22 <@pboy:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:26:26 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-04-01 16:26:45 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> @farribeiro:matrix.org: Basically, there are three responses that people might give: ack (I approve), nack (that's completely wrong, e.g copy-paste error) and patch (I have a suggestion for better phrasing)
2024-04-01 16:27:05 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2272149 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a clear violation of "For all release-blocking desktop / arch combinations, the following applications must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test: ... image viewer"
2024-04-01 16:27:13 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic (2270209) Firmware RAID set not usable in anaconda when booting native UEFI: "ERROR:blivet:failed to determine name for the md array a7ff7f19-f142-4329-6b52-1dbafa835906"
2024-04-01 16:27:16 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270209
2024-04-01 16:27:19 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1533
2024-04-01 16:27:22 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Proposed Blocker, python-blivet, ASSIGNED
2024-04-01 16:27:25 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-nielsenb)
2024-04-01 16:27:27 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+2,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao, +ngompa)
2024-04-01 16:27:35 <@adamwill:fedora.im> unfortunately, looks like we didn't get any testing on other systems yet
2024-04-01 16:27:41 <@adamwill:fedora.im> or feedback from the blivet dev
2024-04-01 16:28:03 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I don't think we can make a blocker decision right now
2024-04-01 16:28:09 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but I'm comfortable granting FE for this
2024-04-01 16:28:33 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i think last week we said we'd want some idea of what the fix would be
2024-04-01 16:28:39 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I would personally lean toward blocking but only because not being able to see RAID arrays and use them is pretty bad
2024-04-01 16:29:01 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> but since we don't have more details, I don't know what to say here
2024-04-01 16:30:14 <@adamwill:fedora.im> yeah, if this actually e.g. affected *all* firmware RAID installs on UEFI i'd lean towards blocking. but we just don't know that
2024-04-01 16:30:23 <@adamwill:fedora.im> it's entirely likely it's rather some quirk of my test system
2024-04-01 16:30:50 <@adamwill:fedora.im> that's why i was hoping other folks could test :/ i only have this one system with firmware RAID support that I can test on (all my other systems are laptops at this point)
2024-04-01 16:31:05 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I don't even _have_ systems like this anymore
2024-04-01 16:31:11 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that was two jobs ago :(
2024-04-01 16:31:13 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Remind me: firmware RAID is a RAID array on a dedicated PCI card?
2024-04-01 16:31:15 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I don't have anything with firmware RAID anymore
2024-04-01 16:31:37 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> And even if I did, I think it's the same as the chip noted here
2024-04-01 16:31:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Stephen Gallagher: no, it's RAID array backed by motherboard firmware
2024-04-01 16:31:56 <@pboy:fedora.im> Not necessary, it's very often bios build in 
2024-04-01 16:32:37 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> I thought the mainboard one was `fakeraid`.
2024-04-01 16:32:41 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there's a dedicated storage controller chip in the motherboard enhanced by the board firmware to be able to glue storage ports
2024-04-01 16:32:44 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> Or maybe I'm just dating myself
2024-04-01 16:33:11 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> fakeraid is the one where the card/chip is controlled and configured from the OS, I believe
2024-04-01 16:33:24 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> that's the dmraid stuff from the days of youre
2024-04-01 16:33:27 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> *yore even
2024-04-01 16:34:49 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Stephen Gallagher: we're using "firmware RAID" to mean a RAID array managed by the mainboard firmware, as distinct from "software RAID" managed by the OS, or "hardware RAID" managed by a separate dedicated hw controller
2024-04-01 16:34:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> it's all confusing :(
2024-04-01 16:35:54 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> adamw: Thanks. So, I think I have a (very old) system that meets that description gathering dust under my desk in the office. I can probably try to do some testing there if needed.
2024-04-01 16:35:59 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> It doesn't help right now, but I think I can check this out on my older desktop which appears to have such support
2024-04-01 16:36:38 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> my desktop has it, but it doesn't work with Linux anyway
2024-04-01 16:36:41 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> No, wait. Scratch that; looking at the specs on it, it has an add-in card. Never mind.
2024-04-01 16:36:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> Linux cannot see the disks on the controller at all
2024-04-01 16:37:00 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> and my even older desktop has a broken UEFI
2024-04-01 16:37:04 <@adamwill:fedora.im> well, fun
2024-04-01 16:37:08 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> https://rog.asus.com/us/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-b450-f-gaming-model/ is the board I have
2024-04-01 16:37:10 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> so I can't even boot Linux on UEFI
2024-04-01 16:37:16 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> :( boo
2024-04-01 16:37:46 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Yeah, I don't think the AMD solutions have ever worked on Linux
2024-04-01 16:38:14 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> I don't think they're very good on Windows either
2024-04-01 16:38:33 <@adamwill:fedora.im> that board supports "NVM Express RAID". I'm not sure exactly how that's implemented or which bucket we'd put it in. it's probably the same as "firmware RAID", but I'd have to look into ti
2024-04-01 16:38:40 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> The Intel ones have always worked for me, but were inferior to mdraid so I don't really see the point
2024-04-01 16:39:00 <@adamwill:fedora.im> probably the best test is another intel board with classic intel firmware RAID, though. if someone has one.
2024-04-01 16:39:01 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> me either. i'll poke around a bit. i've got an even older intel board which also might have some support. we'll see :)
2024-04-01 16:39:15 <@adamwill:fedora.im> anyhow, it can't *hurt* to test on anything you've got that's some kind of RAID :D
2024-04-01 16:39:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i guess for now we'll have to punt this again?
2024-04-01 16:39:30 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> yeah
2024-04-01 16:39:37 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> adamw: Spoken like someone who's never tried *using* RAID ✌️
2024-04-01 16:42:14 <@adamwill:fedora.im> heh
2024-04-01 16:42:24 <@adamwill:fedora.im> i did say *test on*
2024-04-01 16:43:02 <@adamwill:fedora.im> proposed !agreed 2270209 - punt (delay decision) - unfortunately we have to punt on this again as we still do not have sufficient information to make an informed decision. testing on more hardware would be very valuable here
2024-04-01 16:43:14 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> ack
2024-04-01 16:43:14 <@sgallagh:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:43:19 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack
2024-04-01 16:43:21 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> ack
2024-04-01 16:43:25 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Ack
2024-04-01 16:43:31 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !agreed 2270209 - punt (delay decision) - unfortunately we have to punt on this again as we still do not have sufficient information to make an informed decision. testing on more hardware would be very valuable here
2024-04-01 16:43:46 <@adamwill:fedora.im> okay, checking in quickly on accepted blockers:
2024-04-01 16:43:56 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Accepted blocker check-in
2024-04-01 16:44:11 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 2269412 is on the way to being fixed, fixed update is in testing and some testers have confirmed the fix
2024-04-01 16:45:06 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !info 2269286 - it turns out this needs a bunch of deps to be updated for an optimal fix. Fabio is working on that; if it can't be completed in time, we have the fallback option of building snapshot with some deps bundled in
2024-04-01 16:46:18 <@adamwill:fedora.im> any other notes on those?
2024-04-01 16:46:26 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> point of inquiry: does the secretary need to record updates for these check-ins? 
2024-04-01 16:46:35 <@adamwill:fedora.im> Neil Hanlon: nope
2024-04-01 16:46:39 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> ack. 
2024-04-01 16:46:45 <@adamwill:fedora.im> unless i specifically say something about that
2024-04-01 16:47:07 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> that was my read as well. "If the meeting discussion does not add anything substantive to what is already covered in the bug report, it is not necessary for the secretary to make any change or add any comment to the bug report."
2024-04-01 16:47:48 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !topic Open floor
2024-04-01 16:47:52 <@adamwill:fedora.im> alrighty, any other business, folks?
2024-04-01 16:48:19 <@nhanlon:beeper.com> not from I.
2024-04-01 16:48:39 <@nielsenb:fedora.im> Me either
2024-04-01 16:48:39 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> nope
2024-04-01 16:48:46 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> the world burned for three days and three nights
2024-04-01 16:48:50 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> I'm good now
2024-04-01 16:49:04 <@geraldosimiao:matrix.org> nope
2024-04-01 16:49:07 <@adamwill:fedora.im> still feels toasty over here!
2024-04-01 16:49:25 <@conan_kudo:matrix.org> there are definitely some licks of flames here :)
2024-04-01 16:49:39 <@farribeiro:matrix.org> Nope
2024-04-01 16:54:23 <@adamwill:fedora.im> thanks everyone!
2024-04-01 16:55:08 <@adamwill:fedora.im> now to fix openqa message consumers...sigh...
2024-04-01 16:55:16 <@adamwill:fedora.im> !endmeeting