15:00:59 <adamw> #startmeeting Fedora QA Meeting
15:00:59 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Oct  1 15:00:59 2018 UTC.
15:00:59 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
15:00:59 <zodbot> The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:59 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:00:59 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_qa_meeting'
15:01:06 <adamw> #meetingname fedora-qa
15:01:06 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
15:01:10 <adamw> #topic Roll call
15:01:16 <adamw> morning folks, who's around for QA meeting fun?
15:02:30 * kparal is here
15:02:55 * jlanda is semiafk
15:04:25 * coremodule is here. Good morning everyone. :)
15:04:36 <adamw> ahoy to the oy
15:04:43 * adamw scratches
15:05:53 <adamw> kparal: where's the rest of brno? out celebrating promotions? :P
15:06:09 * satellit listening
15:06:17 <frantisekz> .hello2
15:06:18 <zodbot> frantisekz: frantisekz 'František Zatloukal' <fzatlouk@redhat.com>
15:06:23 <kparal> I'm in the process of prodding them
15:07:12 <Southern_Gentlem> .hell2
15:07:15 <Southern_Gentlem> .hello2
15:07:16 <zodbot> Southern_Gentlem: Sorry, but you don't exist
15:07:26 * adamw hands kparal the high-voltage prod
15:07:32 <Southern_Gentlem> .hello jbwillia
15:07:33 <zodbot> Southern_Gentlem: jbwillia 'Ben Williams' <vaioof@gmail.com>
15:08:46 * sumantro is here
15:11:06 <adamw> alrighty then
15:11:11 <adamw> guess that's everyone!
15:11:17 <adamw> #topic Previous meeting follow-up
15:12:37 <adamw> so, just one thing here:
15:13:45 <jlanda> thanks to jskladan & kparal for attending PRs, and adamw for making it possible ;)
15:14:30 <adamw> #info "adamw to make sure jlanda's PRs on fedora-qa get reviewed" - I passed those along and they're all getting responses
15:16:51 <adamw> #topic Fedora 29 status
15:17:07 <adamw> so, the big note *I* have here is I'm still trying to sort out the plan for updating DNF
15:20:00 <adamw> we've had a successful Rawhide compose with DNF 3.6 now, which is...something...but there's an outstanding question of whether we're gonna send 3.6 to F29, or do something about https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/pull/1226 first. i'm still waiting to hear back from dmach on that.
15:21:52 <sumantro> adamw dnf test day is day after tomorrow with 3.5 ... not sure if we should then do it with 3.6
15:22:01 <adamw> sumantro: uff :(
15:22:09 <adamw> i will try very hard to come up with something sane for that, sorry
15:23:37 <sumantro> its okay :)
15:24:33 <adamw> #info plans for updating DNF in F29 are still not 100% clear, adamw is trying to find out the plan in relation to https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/pull/1226
15:25:00 <adamw> that mostly ate my week last week, but at least nightly composes are appearing and mostly passing openQA. anyone have any thoughts/notes on current f29? major issues?
15:25:52 <jlanda> nop here, woprking weel on my tests. I can't either reproduce the big Pictures/ issue :S
15:26:03 <kparal> I saw some troubles rebooting my VMs, waiting two minutes before a reboot
15:26:24 <kparal> probably a race
15:28:20 <adamw> i was seeing that on my desktop for a bit, seemed to stop happening recently...
15:28:26 <adamw> some service was waiting for 90 seconds
15:28:29 <adamw> (timeout)
15:28:42 <frantisekz> regarding the grub issues with windows dualboot, it seems somebody else is also affected by that, so this is not ideal too
15:28:44 * nirik notes fesco is talking dnf now...
15:29:48 <adamw> frantisekz: i was just talking to pjones about that
15:29:58 <adamw> frantisekz: he thinks you two likely don't actually have the same bug
15:30:06 <adamw> frantisekz: the other person's bug is likely due to them having two ESPs
15:30:16 <adamw> i asked in-bug for you to check if your affected system also has two ESPs...
15:30:39 <frantisekz> ok, that's interesting, i'll handle the needinfo later on, it is on my home pc which I don't have anywhere near atm
15:31:06 <adamw> rgr
15:32:55 <adamw> so, just to be sure folks are aware of the schedule again, go/no-go for Final is in 17 days, that's not long
15:33:01 <adamw> so we *really* need to get all the validation tests run
15:33:16 <adamw> please do use https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/29/ to find ones which have not been run and run them
15:33:46 <adamw> in particular https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_desktop_menus is a big test that commonly turns up bugs and it has not yet been run in this cycle afaics
15:33:54 <adamw> we really need that run for GNOME and KDE
15:34:24 <adamw> #info we must make sure all validation tests are run ASAP to find all blockers in good time, please use https://www.happyassassin.net/testcase_stats/29/ to find not-yet-run tests and run them
15:35:01 <sumantro> adamw we have test day coming up on 5th
15:35:11 <sumantro> for Gnome.. will make sure to run them
15:35:30 <adamw> thanks a lot
15:35:48 <sumantro> np np :)
15:36:00 <adamw> sumantro: please make sure any showstoppers or near-showstoppers in default-installed apps get proposed as blockers
15:36:13 <adamw> thanks :)
15:36:28 <sumantro> adamw rgr :)
15:37:53 <adamw> anything else f29-y?
15:39:03 <adamw> alrighty then
15:39:16 <adamw> #topic Proposed release criteria discussion
15:39:26 <adamw> so, once again we don't have a whole lot of people here...but at least some *different* people from last week :)
15:39:38 <adamw> so i guess we could kick this around a bit more, then i'll try to get some concrete movement on the proposals this week
15:40:54 <adamw> once again we have three outstanding criteria proposals: 1) stop requiring release-blocking ISOs to boot from physical optical discs, 2) block on printing in some way, 3) move firmware RAID criterion from Beta to Final
15:41:00 <adamw> #info once again we have three outstanding criteria proposals: 1) stop requiring release-blocking ISOs to boot from physical optical discs, 2) block on printing in some way, 3) move firmware RAID criterion from Beta to Final
15:42:03 <adamw> 1) and 2) spawned quite a lot of discussion, 3) seems to have mostly got support, apart from one note that it may just result in us finding the issues later
15:42:23 <adamw> anyone have thoughts on any of those?
15:42:55 <kparal> re 1), that's probably not our thing to decide
15:43:10 <kparal> but of course would be nice
15:43:50 <adamw> well...the criteria process has always been sort of fuzzy
15:44:08 <adamw> there isn't actually any very clear formal rule about who decides what the criteria should be, and how
15:44:26 <adamw> in practice it's always been done just by starting a mailing list thread and making the change once there's a rough consensus
15:44:31 <kparal> well, +1 from me
15:44:47 * satellit is this because of size requirements for a DVD 1) ?
15:44:47 <adamw> i've never proposed we change this because the fuzziness actually seems to work quite well :P
15:45:02 <adamw> satellit: no, it is mainly about the inconvenience of testing combined with a belief that it's just not a common use case any more
15:45:11 <satellit> k
15:45:21 <kparal> re 2), makes sense, as long as it's completely broken and not just for a particular printer type/family
15:45:26 <adamw> we have quite a lot of release blocking ISO media, and technically we are supposed to test each both in BIOS and UEFI, which doubles the number of tests required
15:45:38 <adamw> and it takes time to burn the media and it takes quite a while to actually run an install from them
15:45:47 <adamw> and you need to actually have access to a burner, which is becoming less common
15:45:53 <kparal> re 3), shrug. It's just a bit of shuffling. I'd rather see the criterion gone :P
15:46:05 <adamw> kparal: the discussion about 2) has mostly been about the detail of exactly what to block on, indeed
15:47:04 <jlanda> and testing the optical boot stuff just in one not all? Testing would be much easyer and those who complain on the mailing will have a tested booting iso so they can continue burning dvds from their ancient coffee mahcines
15:48:33 <adamw> that's a possible compromise, yeah
15:48:36 <jlanda> the boot thing will block just on netinstall for example
15:49:35 <adamw> or just say 'we need at least one real-media test on UEFI and one on BIOS'...
15:49:40 <adamw> might be worth proposing
15:50:41 <kparal> well we have 2 images under that criterion so it's not much of a difference
15:50:59 <kparal> but yes, 1 is better than 2 :)
15:51:17 <adamw> no, we have more than that.
15:51:35 <adamw> oh, no, you're right. huh
15:51:49 <jlanda> the main complains against this proposal are those who owns ancient machines, testing UEFI worth on this case? they'll be all using BIOS :D
15:52:19 <adamw> didn't realize server didn't consider optical boot of the DVD to be blocking
15:52:34 <adamw> and the KDE live...
15:52:43 <adamw> jlanda: also a reasonable point
15:52:54 <jlanda> is there any uefi machine that can't boot from native usb?
15:53:01 <adamw> also, that page clearly needs updating for modularity. :P
15:53:13 <adamw> jlanda: i don't think that's possible.
15:53:22 <adamw> (though firmware engineers never fail to surprise me.)
15:53:32 <adamw> https://www.happyassassin.net/2013/05/03/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-firmware-engineer/
15:53:50 <adamw> ok, we're running low on time, so...
15:53:57 <adamw> #info some more discussion of proposed criteria
15:54:13 <adamw> #action adamw to try and move along outstanding criteria proposals towards resolution
15:54:16 <adamw> #topic Test Day status
15:54:19 <adamw> what's coming up, sumantro?
15:55:17 <sumantro> So, we have the regular test day schedule
15:55:31 <sumantro> only addition is Modularity on 12th Oct
15:55:53 <sumantro> Currently the Atomic and Cloud Test Day is underway
15:56:18 <adamw> and DNF is on Wednesday?
15:56:30 <sumantro> Dnf will follow day after tomorrow and followed by Gnome a day after DNF test day
15:57:56 <sumantro> adamw yep!
15:58:02 <adamw> alrighty
15:58:15 <adamw> #info Atomic/Cloud Test Day is underway in #fedora-test-day right now
15:59:02 <adamw> sumantro: isn't GNOME on Friday 10-05, not Thursday 10-04 ?
15:59:53 <sumantro> Gnome test day is on 5th
16:00:05 <sumantro> DNF is on 3rd
16:00:18 <adamw> right
16:00:33 <adamw> #info DNF Test Day is on Wednesday 10-03, GNOME is on Friday 10-05
16:00:35 <adamw> be there or be square!
16:00:44 <adamw> blocker review meeting is about to start in #fedora-blocker-review, btw
16:00:48 <adamw> #topic Open floor
16:00:54 <adamw> once again, i fail at timing!
16:00:56 <adamw> any other business?
16:01:36 <sumantro> nothing from my end :)
16:02:24 <adamw> sumantro: oh, DNF test day seems to be missing frm the calender?
16:02:26 <adamw> calendar*
16:03:14 * sumantro is sorry.... the test day got confirmed on friday ..then I slept :P
16:03:21 <sumantro> adding it rightaway
16:05:33 <sumantro> adamw added
16:06:33 <adamw> =)
16:06:34 <adamw> thanks
16:06:37 <adamw> alrighty, guess that's all
16:06:40 <adamw> thanks for coming, everyone!
16:07:14 <adamw> #endmeeting