15:03:16 <adamw> #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting
15:03:16 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Oct 28 15:03:16 2019 UTC.
15:03:16 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
15:03:16 <zodbot> The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:03:16 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:03:16 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_qa_meeting'
15:03:20 <adamw> #meetingname fedora-qa
15:03:20 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
15:03:24 <adamw> #topic Roll call
15:03:28 <tablepc> Happy Release day tomorrow!
15:03:30 <adamw> ahoyhoy, who's around for qa meeting fun?
15:03:38 <bcotton> .hello2
15:03:39 <zodbot> bcotton: bcotton 'Ben Cotton' <bcotton@redhat.com>
15:03:41 <tablepc> .hello2
15:03:41 <zodbot> tablepc: tablepc 'Pat Kelly' <pmkellly@frontier.com>
15:03:55 <coremodule> .hello2
15:03:56 <zodbot> coremodule: coremodule 'Geoffrey Marr' <gmarr@redhat.com>
15:04:28 * cmurf is joining from Lille, France
15:05:20 <bcotton> tablepc: correct. if you have questions/comments, let's move that conversation to #fedora-magazine
15:05:30 <coremodule> .weather
15:06:00 <adamw> well too bad, because there will be ZERO FUN
15:07:20 <cmurf> coremodule it might want a zip or city
15:07:32 <adamw> #topic Previous meeting follow-up
15:08:15 <adamw> #info "adamw to check with desktop team that they're confident about resolving all the outstanding GNOME-related blockers" - I did that, and hey, in the end, turns out they did get resolved
15:08:36 <adamw> #info "adamw to go ahead and add the basic desktop background criterion to 'automatic blockers' as that proposal received no objections" - I think I forgot to do that, I'll do it this week
15:08:44 <adamw> #action adamw to go ahead and add the basic desktop background criterion to 'automatic blockers' as that proposal received no objections
15:08:48 <adamw> any other follow up, folks?
15:09:56 * cmurf is super impressed by all the hard work to make the release happen
15:10:12 <adamw> me too!
15:11:06 <tablepc> Me too! You folks always manage to make it happen!
15:11:25 <adamw> allllrighty then
15:11:38 <adamw> #topic Fedora 31 status and final actions
15:11:47 <adamw> so, as we just said - thanks to everyone for helping get F31 ready!
15:12:01 <adamw> #info many thanks to all who helped test F31 and participate in the blocker process
15:12:16 <adamw> #info the release is set for tomorrow, 2019-10-29
15:13:12 <adamw> it looks like the upgrade fixes for F29 and F30 went stable over the weekend, so that's sorted out
15:13:37 <cmurf> *whew*
15:13:56 <adamw> #info the libdnf, gnome-software and dnf-plugins-extras updates with the workarounds for upgrades when libgit2 module is enabled went stable for F29 and F30 over the weekend, so that AcceptedPreviousReleaseBlocker is addressed
15:14:20 <adamw> i believe that means all we have to worry about is the common bugs page, which i'll work on today
15:14:50 <adamw> #info please tag any unfixed bugs you believe are likely to pop up for a significant number of f31 users with the 'CommonBugs' keyword
15:15:17 <tablepc> The Gnome folks are even making progress on my favorite big.
15:16:24 <tablepc> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1694782
15:16:26 <adamw> yeah, i saw that
15:16:30 <adamw> i just updated the link and stuff
15:16:32 <adamw> thanks for keeping an eye on it
15:18:17 <adamw> so, anyone have anything else on f31?
15:19:04 <tablepc> Just installations :)
15:19:35 <adamw> heh, sounds good
15:19:39 <adamw> alrighty then
15:19:45 <adamw> #topic Criteria proposals status
15:20:02 <adamw> so, yeah, these sort of got dropped when f31 heated up, but we still have a few lying around we need to decide what to do with
15:20:45 <adamw> the main one is the idea to drop the xen criterion, which morphed into 'make the ec2 requirements a bit more specific, and cover xen-based ec2 instances'
15:21:22 <adamw> if no-one minds, i think at this point there's enough info lying around in the existing threads that i think i can put together a comprehensive proposal, so i can do that this week
15:21:59 <coremodule> the irony
15:22:16 <coremodule> it started as "remove xen", now it's "better define xen and add more tests"
15:22:37 <Southern_Gentlem> which no one will run
15:22:57 <adamw> not really
15:23:03 <adamw> ec2 is a thing people actually use
15:23:06 <adamw> ...unlike xen :P
15:23:21 <cmurf> yeah and there are things in AWS that still use xen I guess
15:23:30 <adamw> yeah, that's the main thing we found out from the proposal
15:23:35 <adamw> that there are still quite a lot of xen-based ec2 instance types.
15:24:09 <adamw> i'm gonna propose we simply pick one nitro instance type and one xen instance type and require that fedora boot on both of those, and have each as a column in the Cloud matrix
15:24:12 <adamw> i think that ought to cover it
15:24:15 <adamw> sound good?
15:24:23 <coremodule> sure
15:24:26 <cmurf> I'm not sure how to recruit more help - my email on devel@ about dropping the xen criterion didn't get any replies
15:24:38 <coremodule> it's easy enough to spin up a xen ec2 instance
15:24:46 <cmurf> so it's still a bit tenuous, supporting xen
15:25:31 <cmurf> maybe go directly to xen users or devel lists next time around? *shrug*
15:26:37 <adamw> well, the idea is to focus much more on 'supporting ec2' than 'supporting xen'
15:26:49 <cmurf> understood
15:26:57 <adamw> the word 'xen' isn't going to appear anywhere, it's just going to be two ec2 instance types
15:27:45 <adamw> #action adamw to refresh the proposal to replace the xen criterion with more specific ec2 requirements (including requirement for a xen-based instance type to work)
15:27:59 <adamw> ok, so other than that...we have the 'toggle key criterion', proposed by bcotton
15:28:16 <tablepc> Is there anything newer and more loved that does the same things xen does?
15:28:16 <adamw> last status on that was that kparal suggested modifying it based on our discussion in a go/no-go meeting
15:28:47 <adamw> tablepc: sure, kvm. and also virtualbox which is what most people actually use, though we don't block on it.
15:29:03 <adamw> bcotton: did you see kparal's mail?
15:29:15 <bcotton> adamw: not that i recall, let me look
15:29:40 <bcotton> ah, yes i did
15:29:52 <bcotton> i think the light state is important from a user perspective
15:30:06 <bcotton> but i understand that it's a little more difficult, so i won't object to dropping it
15:31:12 <adamw> can you send a modified proposal? or do you want kparal to take the bullet? :P
15:31:19 <bcotton> i can do it
15:32:08 <adamw> thanks
15:32:21 <adamw> #action bcotton to refresh toggle key criterion proposal with modification suggested by kparal
15:32:56 <adamw> we also have a proposal by dustymabe to add some container requirements to the criteria, under the topic "Proposing new release criteria"
15:33:03 <tablepc> Is it that the software that touched the keyboard is several layers deep, or is it the some keyboards don't report the light status?
15:33:12 <adamw> i believe that one's currently 'waiting for feedback', so if folks can read and respond that'd be good
15:33:35 <adamw> tablepc: it's more that lots of layers get a vote, including the firmware, and i think there's no mechanism for the OS to ask "what state is the light *currently* in"
15:34:24 <adamw> (there's also fun stuff like, what do you do about VMs? when someone hits 'caps lock' in a VM do you toggle the light on the host system keyboard? if they make a different window active do you try and flip it again? stuff like that)
15:35:52 <adamw> i think years and years ago the lock toggles were actually handled *in the keyboard itself*, i.e. it just sent different keycodes to the computer when they were toggled, so it also handled the light status itself and everything stayed in sync fine. but that isn't how it works any more. anyway, dubious computing history lesson ends here!
15:36:56 <tablepc> I bet that's why mine always works. I always use those nice old Big IBM keyboards
15:37:06 <cmurf> yeah i've got an apple keyboard without a caps lock, and on Windows and macOS the keypad just works and I'm a occasionally slightly frustrated it doesn't work on Fedora
15:37:12 <adamw> tablepc: so do i, but all the lights stay on all the time on mine for some reason. annnnyhoo
15:37:42 <adamw> on the image size criterion, the 'report bug when image is oversize' mechanism i hooked up seems to be working, so that *should* mean we can keep the criterion at Beta for now
15:38:15 <cmurf> does that set it as an automatic blocker?
15:38:15 <adamw> #info dustymabe proposed some container requirements under the topic "Proposing new release criteria", please read and respond to those
15:38:28 <adamw> cmurf: it automatically proposes the bug as a blocker if it's a blocking image.
15:38:37 <cmurf> that is awesome
15:38:42 <adamw> automatically accepting is harder, but not necessary.
15:39:17 <cmurf> right, it ends up on the board at least and then when anyone sees it, they can just white board approve it under the automatic blocker policy
15:39:39 <adamw> #info proposed move of 'image size' criterion to Final is on hold as we expect the new mechanism for automatically reporting bugs when images are oversize to help us handle it properly at Beta
15:40:24 <adamw> we also have the printing proposal from like a year ago hanging around, still
15:41:44 <adamw> the most recent draft of the proposal on 2019-02-28 got a couple of responses from cmurf
15:42:10 <adamw> #action adamw to follow up on the printing criteria proposal and ask sgallagh if he thinks we should push it out as-is
15:42:22 <cmurf> seems reasonable
15:42:22 <tablepc> I finally figured how I could get gnome to set up my printers thought I'll still likelu use CUPS
15:42:57 <adamw> i think that's everything on the pending list
15:43:01 <cmurf> I think the idea is to print to any IPP Everywhere capable printer (possibly some minimal version for that), and perhaps the open question is what is the test
15:43:03 <adamw> any other notes before we move on?
15:43:25 <cmurf> nope
15:43:42 <tablepc> I'm guessing tht IPP Everywhere is what's causeing gnome set up problems.
15:43:54 <cmurf> *shrug* could be
15:44:30 <tablepc> It fines my printer but won't install it. I have to removed the one it found and go through add printer then it works.\
15:44:35 <cmurf> that capability is built into CUPS, it should just work, but there are version specific issues when it comes to IPP Everywhere over USB that I don't fully understand
15:44:55 <adamw> #topic Test Day / community event status
15:45:02 <cmurf> interesting, so like a discovery and autosetup problem
15:45:47 <adamw> #info it seems we are missing sumantro this week, so let's table this unless anyone has notes
15:45:47 <tablepc> I guess I should write a gnome issue on it.
15:47:02 <adamw> #topic Open floor
15:47:05 <adamw> welp, that's all I ahd
15:47:18 <adamw> anyone got other issues, concerns, notes, future lotto numbers?
15:48:10 <tablepc> I'll send that proposed change on disk checking back to the list. I think it got lost in the release efforts.
15:48:27 <adamw> sorry, which proposal was that? i didn't mean to leave any out
15:48:54 <tablepc> The one to be sure we're getting good dismounts.
15:49:12 <adamw> ah, ok. yes, please resend if it didn't get any responses
15:49:16 <tablepc> On restarts
15:49:33 <adamw> ideally include the string 'propos' and/or 'criter' in the topic, as those are what i search for when looking for criteria proposals :P
15:49:43 <cmurf> tablepc:  didn't see that, hmmm - devel@ or test@
15:50:10 <tablepc> Maybe three months back.
15:51:09 <tablepc> I'll send it again later today
15:51:43 <adamw> thanks
15:52:10 <bcotton> you know...if we had the criteria in docs.fp.o, we could do proposals as pull requests ;-)
15:54:22 <adamw> i still don't really see how that would be any better
15:55:12 <bcotton> let me do a little more unrelated work and then i'll be able to better make the case :-)
15:55:17 <cmurf> well, changes would be discrete
15:55:49 <cmurf> whereas with wiki history the changes are monolithic, based on date - takes some iteration to figure out specific changes, who and why
15:55:59 <adamw> eh?
15:56:21 <adamw> each wiki change is a single thing that's tracked on the history page
15:56:23 <adamw> with a description
15:56:49 <cmurf> I can do into the wiki and change every other word to German, and it'll accept that as a single change on this date, assigned to me
15:57:00 <cmurf> easy to revert but it's not a discrete change per criterion
15:57:07 <adamw> i mean, you can also make a git commit that changes everything in a repository
15:57:51 <cmurf> the git commit workflow is inherently narrowly focused in practice
15:58:13 <tablepc> Maybe a system like Magazine uses to start a proposal and track comments.
15:58:22 <cmurf> but whatever, i don't really care
15:58:27 <cmurf> adamw is the gatekeeper
15:58:39 <cmurf> the gatekeeper gets to choose the method
15:58:40 <cmurf> :D
16:01:11 <adamw> welp, that's our time, folks
16:01:13 <adamw> thanks for coming
16:01:21 <tablepc> Have a Great Day!
16:01:41 <adamw> #endmeeting