14:00:34 <jkurik> #startmeeting Prioritized_bugs_and_issues
14:00:34 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed May 24 14:00:34 2017 UTC.  The chair is jkurik. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:34 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:00:34 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'prioritized_bugs_and_issues'
14:00:36 <jkurik> #meetingname Fedora Prioritized bugs and issues
14:00:36 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_prioritized_bugs_and_issues'
14:00:45 <jkurik> #topic Purpose of this meeting
14:00:47 <jkurik> #info The purpose of this process is to help with processing backlog of bugs and
14:00:48 <jkurik> #info   issues found during the development, verification and use of Fedora distribution.
14:00:50 <jkurik> #info The main goal is to raise visibility of bugs and issues to help
14:00:57 <jkurik> #info   contributors focus on the most important issues.
14:00:58 <jkurik> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Program_Management/Prioritized_bugs_and_issues_-_the_process
14:01:00 <jkurik> #info Currently we have 2 proposed bugs for evaluation and 8 bugs already approved for review.
14:01:08 <jkurik> #topic Roll Call
14:01:10 <jkurik> #chair jkurik mattdm mcatanzaro dustymabe sgallagh roshi
14:01:10 <zodbot> Current chairs: dustymabe jkurik mattdm mcatanzaro roshi sgallagh
14:01:11 <jkurik> do we have someone around today ?
14:01:16 <mattdm> I'm here
14:01:28 <sgallagh> .hello sgallagh
14:01:29 <zodbot> sgallagh: sgallagh 'Stephen Gallagher' <sgallagh@redhat.com>
14:01:41 <jkurik> Hi sgallagh and mattdm
14:01:54 <jkurik> #topic Evaluation of bug #1306992: PackageKit accumulate over 18GBytes of RPM packages in /var/cache/PackageKit/metadata and fill my root filesystem with unused RPM files
14:01:56 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1306992
14:02:16 <mattdm> I talked to hughsie about this briefly
14:02:45 <mattdm> filed upstream issue
14:02:47 <mattdm> #link https://github.com/hughsie/PackageKit/issues/194
14:03:02 <roshi> .hello roshi
14:03:03 <zodbot> roshi: roshi 'Mike Ruckman' <mruckman@redhat.com>
14:03:17 <roshi> morning folks :)
14:03:22 <mattdm> some of this is "needs coordination with dnf"
14:03:30 <jkurik> good afternoon roshi
14:03:31 <mattdm> which aiui is ironically waiting on DNF to move to libdnf
14:03:40 <mattdm> not a typo :)
14:04:33 <jkurik> do you know whether we have a ticket describing what needs to be moved to libdnf ?
14:04:36 <mattdm> Anyway I'm +1 to making this a prioritized bug. It's clearly problematic
14:05:04 <mattdm> jkurik: that I don't know. Possibly worth a meeting with the DNF team
14:05:31 <mattdm> the "needs coordination with" part is not really a blocker for this particular issue, but with that they could share cache
14:06:11 <jkurik> mattdm:  thanks for getting the status
14:06:25 <mattdm> jkurik: np!
14:06:51 <jkurik> ok, so finaly I am +1 to make it as a prioritized bug
14:07:03 <mattdm> $ sudo du -sh  /var/cache/PackageKit
14:07:04 <jkurik> sgallagh, roshi: what is your POV ?
14:07:04 <mattdm> [sudo] password for mattdm:
14:07:06 <mattdm> 9.5G /var/cache/PackageKit
14:07:08 <mattdm> :-(
14:07:16 <sgallagh> Sorry, got distracted.
14:07:18 * sgallagh reads
14:07:23 <mattdm> that's so sad it deserves a sad face with an old-school nose
14:07:59 <ignatenkobrain> IMO packagekit shouldn't download anything in advance
14:08:28 <sgallagh> ignatenkobrain: DIfferent problem, take it elsewhere please.
14:08:32 <mattdm> ignatenkobrain: I think that's a different issue.
14:08:44 <sgallagh> The problem is more that the cache isn't cleaned effectively later.
14:08:46 <sgallagh> I'm +1 here
14:09:45 <jkurik> looks like we have lost roshi
14:10:08 <jkurik> so there are +3 and no -1
14:10:41 <jkurik> #agreed The bug #1306992 has been accepted on the list of prioritized bugs
14:10:55 <jkurik> #topic Evaluation of bug #1434619: systemd-vconsole-setup.service fails to start on F26 Alpha base cloud image
14:10:56 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434619
14:12:01 <roshi> sorry
14:12:13 <roshi> in house thing needed taken care of right away
14:12:19 <mattdm> jkurik: isn't this a final blocker already?
14:12:31 <sgallagh> This is an accepted blocker. No need to put it on this list.
14:12:49 <jkurik> correct
14:12:49 <mattdm> although I think dusty's frustration is that no one has looked at it
14:13:00 <mattdm> sgallagh: can you talk to the systemd folks?
14:13:11 * roshi is retroactively +1 :)
14:13:14 <roshi> and here now
14:13:39 <sgallagh> mattdm: I'm not sure what I can do past pinging them and saying "hey, this is a blocker... any input"?
14:13:41 <sgallagh> But sure
14:13:46 <roshi> dusty put it on the list to see if we could get a fix in before beta, iirc
14:13:49 <mattdm> sgallagh: it's a good start :)
14:14:12 <mattdm> if that doesn't get any response, we can escalate
14:14:14 <sgallagh> roshi: That would necessitate a Freeze Exception as well
14:14:42 <jkurik> #agreed The bug #1306992 has not been accepted on the Prioritized list as it is already on the list of Accepted Blockers
14:16:07 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #893179: Automatic MacOSX grub entries are broken (and weird)
14:16:08 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893179
14:16:12 <roshi> sure
14:17:30 <jkurik> I do not have any update on the bug #893179, so I will ask Alberto to provide some.
14:17:37 <sgallagh> Remind me what we said our selection criteria was going to be, again?
14:17:45 <mattdm> thanks jkurik. looks like he's waiting on pjones
14:18:12 <mattdm> sgallagh: "
14:18:14 <mattdm> Issues eligible for this status would be those which do not necessarily fail a release criterion but which have critical impact on a Fedora Edition or on a council-approved Fedora Objective. Issues may also be nominated from the Common Bugs list when they are deemed by QA to have critical impact."
14:18:28 * pjones looks
14:18:42 <mattdm> yay pjones
14:19:01 <jkurik> Hi pjones, shall we ask you to look at the https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=893179 ?
14:19:05 <sgallagh> mattdm: In our first meeting, we listed some criteria we agreed upon
14:19:14 <pjones> jkurik: I literally just said I was looking, geez.
14:19:16 <sgallagh> But that never made it to the "Evaluation" section of the page on this
14:19:38 <jkurik> pjones: sorry :)
14:20:53 <pjones> I would think something like what christian kellner posted is the right thing.  I *think* we're just creating whatever os-prober tells us to?
14:21:13 <sgallagh> "The general criteria should be something like: "Failure to resolve this bug will result in unpleasantness for a subjectively large subset of users""
14:21:18 <sgallagh> That's what I was looking for
14:21:41 <sgallagh> Which I guess did make it to that page.
14:21:46 <mattdm> I'm not sure this should be on the prioritized list. Especially since the proposed resolution seems to be "tell people to do the thing that they currently need to do"
14:21:47 <sgallagh> I just thought I remembered it being less vague
14:21:56 <pjones> hm.  yeah, probably not even hard to fix.
14:22:04 <mattdm> although I'm glad for pjones to fix it :)
14:22:47 <sgallagh> Correct me if I'm wrong, but this doesn't even hit a majority of Apple users, does it?
14:23:20 <pjones> I would expect most of them hold down option or whatever to get the mac bootloader screen, which we do install an entry into, and thus no.
14:23:48 <pjones> why you would want to add grub into the macos boot path is beyond me.
14:24:11 <mattdm> proposal: drop this from the list, document the thing pjones said, move on, and pjones to fix the grub thing to tie it off
14:24:49 <pjones> Oh, I see - it's because we're becoming the default, I guess, and so you need to hit option in order to boot macos.
14:25:03 <jkurik> I am OK to remove this bug from the list
14:25:08 <pjones> so the reason people are using grub is basically path of least resistance
14:25:09 <sgallagh> mattdm: +1
14:25:44 <roshi> +1 from me as well
14:26:04 * roshi isn't quite sure if he's a voting member of this group (does it have a name?)
14:26:05 <jkurik> #agreed Bug #893179 is removed from the list of prioritized bugs as it hits just minority of users
14:26:08 <mattdm> and then pjones to come up with whatever fix he thinks is best :)
14:26:44 <jkurik> roshi: it is the same as on blocker meeting - who appears have the permission to vote
14:26:49 <mattdm> roshi: Prioritized Bugs Evaluation Team. ANd you're on the list if you have a stake and show up :)
14:26:57 <roshi> :D
14:27:15 <jkurik> #action pjones to come up with whatever fix he thinks is best for bug #893179
14:27:24 <jkurik> ok, moving on...
14:27:30 <jkurik> pjones: thanks
14:27:39 <mattdm> oh ugh. i have to run away for something. I'll follow up with  the minutes here later. if you need me to track something down for any of the open bugs, give me a an action
14:27:48 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1366004: [abrt] setroubleshoot-server: service.py:647:_message_cb:SystemError: <built-in function isinstance> returned a result with an error set
14:27:50 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366004
14:29:58 <jkurik> I do not see any progress, just more occurences appears
14:30:11 <sgallagh> Yeah
14:30:28 <roshi> looks like
14:31:25 <jkurik> #action jkurik to ping the assignee and ask for a status
14:31:45 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1340203: goa-daemon not stopped on logout, and gnome-keyring unusable on next log in
14:31:46 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1340203
14:32:26 <sgallagh> This one's been marked a Final Blocker.
14:32:36 <sgallagh> I'm not sure why it's on our list at that point
14:32:40 <sgallagh> We should probably drop it
14:33:28 <jkurik> it was on the Prioritized list first and then it was accepted as the blocker
14:34:02 <sgallagh> proposal: Drop it from our list since it's now a blocker
14:34:23 <jkurik> ack
14:34:29 <roshi> ack
14:34:31 <jkurik> #agreed Drop it from our list since it's now a blocker
14:34:46 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1146232: no VM networking; 'default' network in the VM conflicts with 'default' network on the host
14:34:47 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1146232
14:36:34 <sgallagh> No progress on this
14:37:58 <jkurik> I will ping the assignee
14:38:10 <jkurik> #action jkurik to ping the assignee
14:38:25 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1375468: [abrt] nautilus: nautilus_window_slot_get_allow_stop(): nautilus killed by SIGSEGV
14:38:27 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375468
14:39:25 <jkurik> No progress and the assignee has already been asked to provide a status
14:39:32 <pjones> just to track back, was there somebody here who can actually test #893179?
14:39:40 * pjones has needinfo'd it
14:40:23 <roshi> sgtm
14:40:35 * roshi has not been tracking any of these bugs, aside from the blockers
14:41:04 <jkurik> pjones: I am aware of the reporter only
14:42:35 <jkurik> #action jkurik to ask Matthias about status
14:42:48 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1405539: changing the default keyboard layout changes also disk decryption in plymouth, but only after kernel update, long after
14:42:49 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1405539
14:43:29 * roshi remembers this one
14:44:33 * sgallagh hates this one
14:44:44 <roshi> me too
14:45:08 <roshi> so, I dunno
14:45:24 <sgallagh> Honestly, I'm not sure this is an actual solvable problem :-(
14:45:28 <roshi> we could bikeshed on the wording forever, basically
14:46:44 <roshi> there's no good solution from what I can tell
14:47:28 <roshi> have a link to some mega document that explains luks and keyboard layouts?
14:47:36 <jkurik> makes sense to put this on common bugs list and close it ?
14:47:46 <roshi> I guess?
14:47:54 <roshi> I'm not convinced this is a bug
14:49:12 <jkurik> sgallagh: what is your POV ?
14:52:05 <sgallagh> I'd just drop this from our list
14:52:36 <sgallagh> But I'm unsure.
14:52:43 <sgallagh> I mean, when this happens, it's *bad*
14:52:59 <sgallagh> But at the same time, a lot of people smarter about this than I am haven't found a solution.
14:53:08 <roshi> but the issue at hand is changing the wording
14:53:11 <roshi> isn't it?
14:53:22 <roshi> I mean, the best we could come up with was have a warning
14:53:33 <sgallagh> I don't think that's a real solution
14:55:17 <jkurik> I might support the idea of dropping it from the list as it does not impact large set of users and it does not have a good solution, so having it on the list does not help to solve the issue
14:55:37 <sgallagh> jkurik: +1
14:56:48 <jkurik> roshi: are you fine to drop it ?
14:56:53 <roshi> yeah, I guess
14:57:02 <jkurik> #agreed Drop bug #1405539 from the list as it does not impact large set of users and it does not have a good solution, so having it on the list does not help to solve the issue
14:57:17 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1385432: Dracut exhibits numerous AVC denied errors during cleanup, takes long time to power off
14:57:19 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1385432
14:59:18 <jkurik> I might ask assignee to provide some status as it seems stalled
14:59:47 <roshi> that works
14:59:52 <jkurik> #action jkurik to ping assigne to provide a status update
15:00:05 <jkurik> last one....
15:00:09 <jkurik> #topic Review of bug #1413306: Pointer speed on some Dell laptops (XPS 13, Precision 5510...) too slow with recent libinput (inc. 1.6)
15:00:10 <jkurik> #link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1413306
15:00:46 <jkurik> fix has been pushed, so lets wait for the verification ...
15:01:19 <roshi> sgtm
15:01:42 <jkurik> #info The bug is already in ON_QA, we will review it once more once it is verified.
15:01:54 <jkurik> sgallagh, roshi, mattdm: Thanks
15:02:02 <jkurik> #endmeeting