From Fedora Project Wiki
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Fedora Release Engineering Meeting :: Monday 2008-04-28

Fedora 9

  • over 300 packages in dist-f9 that are not f9-final
  • 50-55 bugs on the blocker list that aren't in MODIFIED
  • serious blocker: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=443445
  • Cannot install packages from repositories from which RPM-GPG-KEYs have not been installed
  • See log for more details

Release Candidate

  • start spinning RCs on Thursday or Friday of this week

IRC Transcript

-!- f13 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Fedora Release Engineering Meeting - ROll Call13:03
rdieteryo13:03
f13ping: spot rdieter lmacken13:04
nottingrdieter: whoops, knew i forgot someone. sorry.13:04
* spot is here13:04
* wwoods in the house like furniture13:04
skvidalwwoods: nailed to the floor and covered with rubber?13:05
-!- f13 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: rel-eng meeting: F9!13:05
f13so... I've been gone for a few days, how's F9?13:05
warrennotting pointed out over 300 packages in dist-f9 that are not f9-final.  Should we be concerned?13:05
warrenis the buildroot f9-final or dist-f9?13:06
f13warren: buildroot is f9-final13:06
warrenk13:06
f13I sent out a call to arms a week ago to help with this, a more targetted look13:06
nottingwe've got ~50-55 bugs on the blocker list that aren't in MODIFIED13:06
f13what I really want is to look through the blocker list, see what has been closed since the freeze, and which of those packages are in teh 300 list13:06
wwoodsF9 is... worrying me a bit. I've been monitoring the blocker list13:06
wwoodsAFAICT: in the past week, we've closed 20-30 blockers13:07
wwoodsand added the same number13:07
nottingre: those 300 packages. i was going to send mail with the list. should i take the time to do individual mails to the package maintainers, or just dump to -devel-list?13:07
f13wwoods: are they actual "blockers"?  I haven't done any incoming review of them13:07
f13notting: hrm, I assume you'd rather just dump to the list right?13:08
nottingf13: yes :)13:08
wwoodson the bright (?) side I think we found our traditional "oh shit oh shit" last-minute nastybug13:08
wwoodsbug 44344513:08
buggbotBug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=443445 low, urgent, ---, Robin Norwood, ASSIGNED , Cannot install packages from repositories from which RPM-GPG-KEYs have not been installed.13:08
f13wwoods: which is funny as "last minute" given that we had signed packages over a week ago13:08
wwoodsI'd say.. probably half the bugs on the blocker list are actually blockerworthy13:08
wwoodswell, okay, maybe there's still room for another last-minute doombug13:10
* rdieter covers ears, la la la13:11
nottingf13: also, when sending this mail, should we move the pkgs to updates-candidate?13:11
wwoodsbut in my estimation that's the only bug on the list that is both a) a non-negotiable release blocker, and b) the correct fix would definitely take longer than we have13:12
f13notting: getting to that later13:12
wwoodspretty much everything else is, you know.. a one-line fix. it just takes a week to figure out which line to change.13:13
* wwoods exaggerating and oversimplifying13:13
f13heh13:14
wwoodsspeaking of signed packages: did someone sign the 3 unsigned packages (control-center, gnome-desktop, gnome-settings-daemon)13:14
f13ok, I'll try to roll my sleeves up and do some review/culling today13:14
f13wwoods: I do believe notting took care of that13:14
nottingyes13:14
wwoodskcool.13:14
f13(and also, wasn't that a great test of what the tools will do when an unsigned package is encountered?)13:14
wwoodsheh. yes!13:14
wwoodsclever move, that13:14
warrendo we know how unsigned packages are making it into the mirrors?13:15
warrenthose 3 weren't the only unsigned13:16
* poelcat was just going to ask about those :)13:16
f13warren: the mash output will tell us when there is something unsigned.13:16
warrenf13: was mash doing so a few days ago?13:16
nottingthose 3 was because they were tagged on saturday (?) and neither f13 nor I got around to signing them before rawhide went out13:16
wwoodsa few days ago we weren't requiring signed packages13:16
warrennotting: and the case where ltsp went out unsigned is a mystery?13:16
f13wwoods: yea we were13:16
nottingwarren: yeah13:16
wwoodsonly after we changed fedora-release13:17
f13wwoods: right, which was nearly a week ago13:17
wwoodswarren: the basic problem here is that the f9 repo is actually just a redirect to rawhide13:17
warrenFor the reason of those 3 packages I'm afraid of tagging anything myself now.13:18
warrenThat's why my participation on rel-eng list dropped off13:18
wwoodsso if a package gets tagged without being signed it goes out unsigned13:18
wwoodswhich is a problem13:18
warrenThere is no guarantee that f13 or notting will be around13:18
wwoodsso, yeah, the tag has to be done by someone with the signing key13:18
* wwoods not tagging anything unless a signer is around anymore13:18
f13or just don't do a fire-forget13:18
warrenwwoods: there are two separate issues, that, and ltsp which was signed but went out unsigned anyway.13:18
wwoodsyeah I don't know anything about that13:19
f13warren: what day did it go out unsigned?13:19
warrenf13: I don't know, only noticed it yesterday13:19
nottingf13: it has cached signatures from 04-18. dunno if it had signed packages, because apparently calling write-signed-rpms rewrites them13:19
f13warren: what arch?13:20
warrenf13: x86_64 for sure, I didn't look at others13:20
f13checking the mash archives, it doesn't appear to have been sinced since before 4/20 at least13:21
warrenif it is happening for this one package, perhaps it is happening to others/13:21
f13warren: I don't think so.13:21
f13but we can quickly check13:22
f13$ find /pub/fedora/linux/development/ -name "*.rpm"|xargs rpmdev-checksig |grep -v 4f2a6fd213:22
f13that's running on releng1, it'll tell us what things are unsigned.  I only expect ltsp13:23
nottingf13: hey, ok if i clean out a couple months of ancient rawhide trees?13:23
f13notting: yes13:23
f13ok, we're actually finding a bit more unsigned, I"ll clean these up today13:24
wwoodsare there signers other than f13 and notting?13:25
warrenf13: what type of unsigned?  tagged but not signed, or like ltsp?13:25
f13warren: it wouldn't be in the development/ directory if it weren't tagged.13:26
nottingf13: i wonder if it's generally unsigned, or write-signed-rpms failed somewhere13:26
f13warren: likely it's another case where the cached signature exists, but the written copy doesn't for reasons of signed_unsigned being a steaming pile of shit.13:26
nottinghaha. markmc already sent the list of new stuff to fedora-devel13:26
f13notting: nice13:27
wwoodsdoh! I'm on the list13:28
f13hah, somehow I am too13:28
f13well nwo that we've talked the signing issue to death, lets move on a bit13:30
-!- f13 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: rel-eng meeting: dist-f9-updates-candidate13:30
nottingf13: it's created, but unpopulated (and not the default)13:30
f13we really need to start directing builds to go there, and make bodhi start accepting update requests13:30
f13however that means we would then have to do two steps when tagging things, move-pkg from dist-f9-updates-candidate to dist-f9, and then tag for f9-final13:31
f13well, I guess we don't /have/ to, but it does make things cleaner13:32
lmackenso shall I add F9 to bodhi, and allow for submissions ?13:32
wwoodspeople have already tried to build f-9 updates13:32
f13lmacken: only once we've setup dist-f9-updates-candidate with allt he pending things in dist-f913:33
lmackenok13:33
nottingf13: shall i move over all these things?13:33
f13and, you'll have to keep it from showing up in teh push lists so that we can continue pusing f7/8 updates13:33
lmackenf13: yep, there is a 'locked' boolean for each release that does just that13:33
f13notting: sure, just remember we have to do move-pkg when tagging now13:33
warrenmove-pkg from dist-f9-updates-candidate to dist-f9?13:34
f13warren: yes, and then tag-pkg f9-final13:35
warrenf13: is there any time of night we should be able to tag until without fear?13:36
nottingwhen did we move rawhide to?13:37
warrennotting: I was referring to "will f13 or notting sign stuff"13:37
f13warren: just make sure one of us is around to sign.13:38
nottingwarren: right, but that's still a relevant data point13:38
nottingmidnight eastern should be fine13:38
warrenok13:39
nottingand possibly later if i'm paying attention13:39
nottingoh good. packages that abort in %post . *sigh*13:39
f13WHAM13:40
nottingwwoods: one more blocker for you!13:40
wwoodsexpletives!13:40
wwoodsoh yeah: the mouse capplet needs a package which wasn't submitted for review until saturday13:41
wwoodsha ha ha!13:41
nottingf13: ok, will send mail about the shuffle to devel-announce & -evel13:41
wwoodswho do we poke to get that through with the quickness?13:42
f13wwoods: any packager can review it13:42
f13wwoods: including you!  (:13:42
wwoodsaw dammit13:43
-!- f13 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: rel-eng meeting: release candidates13:43
f13The schedule has us spinning RCs as of Thursday/Friday of this week13:44
f13The box that I use to do composes was supposed to get moved into the Boston lab, and subsequently moved early over to the new building and thus be available over the weekend13:44
f13As of yet, I cannot reconnect to said box13:44
f13jeremy was handling this, and I do not know what the expected state of things is, so I'm not in panic mode yet13:45
wwoodswhat happens if it turns out the box is on fire or something?13:48
wwoodsis there a backup plan?13:48
f13yeah13:48
nottingwe find a different box :)13:49
f13all I need is an x86_64 machine that can run mock13:49
wwoodsI assume it's just "grab another machine with fat disks"13:49
wwoodsyeah13:49
f13I think we have... a few of those.13:49
wwoods'kay13:49
f13hey guess what?  more corrupted packages!13:49
f13paraview needs a rebuild.13:49
notting*sigh*13:49
warrenHow dangerous is it to add the entire list of new packages to f9-final?13:50
nottingwarren: i wouldn't13:50
pingou!13:51
f13warren: uh, no.13:52
f13pingou: that's not necessary in this meeting.13:52
pingousorry I have just seen that <f13> wwoods: any packager can review it but if you need help why not ask around ? I believe you have other things to do than a review no ?13:52
warrenI wasn't suggesting it, just asking about the danger.13:53
wwoodsyeah, I'll probably just ask around in #fedora-devel13:53
f13warren: thats a rather giant pile of untested packages and we've got 4 working days until RC13:53
wwoodsokay so candidates will get built later this week and we should rock on down the blocker list until then13:57
wwoodsanything else we need to cover? I asked all the questions I've got, I think13:58
rdieterwwoods: can I have a sec (after meeting is ok)?13:59
wwoodsrdieter: sure14:00
nottinglmacken: want me to poke you when i'm done moving stuff to updates-candidate?14:00
f13I think that's it14:00

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!