ReleaseEngineering/Meetings/2008-apr-28

From FedoraProject

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

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 Call<a href="#t13:03" class="time">13:03</a>
rdieteryo<a href="#t13:03" class="time">13:03</a>
f13ping: spot rdieter lmacken<a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
nottingrdieter: whoops, knew i forgot someone. sorry.<a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
* spot is here<a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
* wwoods in the house like furniture<a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
skvidalwwoods: nailed to the floor and covered with rubber?<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
-!- f13 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: rel-eng meeting: F9!<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
f13so... I've been gone for a few days, how's F9?<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
warrennotting pointed out over 300 packages in dist-f9 that are not f9-final.  Should we be concerned?<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
warrenis the buildroot f9-final or dist-f9?<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
f13warren: buildroot is f9-final<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
warrenk<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
f13I sent out a call to arms a week ago to help with this, a more targetted look<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
nottingwe've got ~50-55 bugs on the blocker list that aren't in MODIFIED<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
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 list<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
wwoodsF9 is... worrying me a bit. I've been monitoring the blocker list<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
wwoodsAFAICT: in the past week, we've closed 20-30 blockers<a href="#t13:07" class="time">13:07</a>
wwoodsand added the same number<a href="#t13:07" class="time">13:07</a>
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?<a href="#t13:07" class="time">13:07</a>
f13wwoods: are they actual "blockers"?  I haven't done any incoming review of them<a href="#t13:07" class="time">13:07</a>
f13notting: hrm, I assume you'd rather just dump to the list right?<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
nottingf13: yes :)<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
wwoodson the bright (?) side I think we found our traditional "oh shit oh shit" last-minute nastybug<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
wwoodsbug 443445<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
buggbotBug <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=443445">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=443445</a> low, urgent, ---, Robin Norwood, ASSIGNED , Cannot install packages from repositories from which RPM-GPG-KEYs have not been installed.<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
f13wwoods: which is funny as "last minute" given that we had signed packages over a week ago<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
wwoodsI'd say.. probably half the bugs on the blocker list are actually blockerworthy<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
wwoodswell, okay, maybe there's still room for another last-minute doombug<a href="#t13:10" class="time">13:10</a>
* rdieter covers ears, la la la<a href="#t13:11" class="time">13:11</a>
nottingf13: also, when sending this mail, should we move the pkgs to updates-candidate?<a href="#t13:11" class="time">13:11</a>
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 have<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
f13notting: getting to that later<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
wwoodspretty much everything else is, you know.. a one-line fix. it just takes a week to figure out which line to change.<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
* wwoods exaggerating and oversimplifying<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
f13heh<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
wwoodsspeaking of signed packages: did someone sign the 3 unsigned packages (control-center, gnome-desktop, gnome-settings-daemon)<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
f13ok, I'll try to roll my sleeves up and do some review/culling today<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
f13wwoods: I do believe notting took care of that<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
nottingyes<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
wwoodskcool.<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
f13(and also, wasn't that a great test of what the tools will do when an unsigned package is encountered?)<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
wwoodsheh. yes!<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
wwoodsclever move, that<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
warrendo we know how unsigned packages are making it into the mirrors?<a href="#t13:15" class="time">13:15</a>
warrenthose 3 weren't the only unsigned<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
* poelcat was just going to ask about those :)<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
f13warren: the mash output will tell us when there is something unsigned.<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
warrenf13: was mash doing so a few days ago?<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
nottingthose 3 was because they were tagged on saturday (?) and neither f13 nor I got around to signing them before rawhide went out<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
wwoodsa few days ago we weren't requiring signed packages<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
warrennotting: and the case where ltsp went out unsigned is a mystery?<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
f13wwoods: yea we were<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
nottingwarren: yeah<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
wwoodsonly after we changed fedora-release<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
f13wwoods: right, which was nearly a week ago<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
wwoodswarren: the basic problem here is that the f9 repo is actually just a redirect to rawhide<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
warrenFor the reason of those 3 packages I'm afraid of tagging anything myself now.<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
warrenThat's why my participation on rel-eng list dropped off<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
wwoodsso if a package gets tagged without being signed it goes out unsigned<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
wwoodswhich is a problem<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
warrenThere is no guarantee that f13 or notting will be around<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
wwoodsso, yeah, the tag has to be done by someone with the signing key<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
* wwoods not tagging anything unless a signer is around anymore<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
f13or just don't do a fire-forget<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
warrenwwoods: there are two separate issues, that, and ltsp which was signed but went out unsigned anyway.<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
wwoodsyeah I don't know anything about that<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
f13warren: what day did it go out unsigned?<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
warrenf13: I don't know, only noticed it yesterday<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
nottingf13: it has cached signatures from 04-18. dunno if it had signed packages, because apparently calling write-signed-rpms rewrites them<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
f13warren: what arch?<a href="#t13:20" class="time">13:20</a>
warrenf13: x86_64 for sure, I didn't look at others<a href="#t13:20" class="time">13:20</a>
f13checking the mash archives, it doesn't appear to have been sinced since before 4/20 at least<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
warrenif it is happening for this one package, perhaps it is happening to others/<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
f13warren: I don't think so.<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
f13but we can quickly check<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
f13$ find /pub/fedora/linux/development/ -name "*.rpm"|xargs rpmdev-checksig |grep -v 4f2a6fd2<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
f13that's running on releng1, it'll tell us what things are unsigned.  I only expect ltsp<a href="#t13:23" class="time">13:23</a>
nottingf13: hey, ok if i clean out a couple months of ancient rawhide trees?<a href="#t13:23" class="time">13:23</a>
f13notting: yes<a href="#t13:23" class="time">13:23</a>
f13ok, we're actually finding a bit more unsigned, I"ll clean these up today<a href="#t13:24" class="time">13:24</a>
wwoodsare there signers other than f13 and notting?<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
warrenf13: what type of unsigned?  tagged but not signed, or like ltsp?<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
f13warren: it wouldn't be in the development/ directory if it weren't tagged.<a href="#t13:26" class="time">13:26</a>
nottingf13: i wonder if it's generally unsigned, or write-signed-rpms failed somewhere<a href="#t13:26" class="time">13:26</a>
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.<a href="#t13:26" class="time">13:26</a>
nottinghaha. markmc already sent the list of new stuff to fedora-devel<a href="#t13:26" class="time">13:26</a>
f13notting: nice<a href="#t13:27" class="time">13:27</a>
wwoodsdoh! I'm on the list<a href="#t13:28" class="time">13:28</a>
f13hah, somehow I am too<a href="#t13:28" class="time">13:28</a>
f13well nwo that we've talked the signing issue to death, lets move on a bit<a href="#t13:30" class="time">13:30</a>
-!- f13 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: rel-eng meeting: dist-f9-updates-candidate<a href="#t13:30" class="time">13:30</a>
nottingf13: it's created, but unpopulated (and not the default)<a href="#t13:30" class="time">13:30</a>
f13we really need to start directing builds to go there, and make bodhi start accepting update requests<a href="#t13:30" class="time">13:30</a>
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-final<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
f13well, I guess we don't /have/ to, but it does make things cleaner<a href="#t13:32" class="time">13:32</a>
lmackenso shall I add F9 to bodhi, and allow for submissions ?<a href="#t13:32" class="time">13:32</a>
wwoodspeople have already tried to build f-9 updates<a href="#t13:32" class="time">13:32</a>
f13lmacken: only once we've setup dist-f9-updates-candidate with allt he pending things in dist-f9<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
lmackenok<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
nottingf13: shall i move over all these things?<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
f13and, you'll have to keep it from showing up in teh push lists so that we can continue pusing f7/8 updates<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
lmackenf13: yep, there is a 'locked' boolean for each release that does just that<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
f13notting: sure, just remember we have to do move-pkg when tagging now<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
warrenmove-pkg from dist-f9-updates-candidate to dist-f9?<a href="#t13:34" class="time">13:34</a>
f13warren: yes, and then tag-pkg f9-final<a href="#t13:35" class="time">13:35</a>
warrenf13: is there any time of night we should be able to tag until without fear?<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
nottingwhen did we move rawhide to?<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
warrennotting: I was referring to "will f13 or notting sign stuff"<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
f13warren: just make sure one of us is around to sign.<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
nottingwarren: right, but that's still a relevant data point<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
nottingmidnight eastern should be fine<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
warrenok<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
nottingand possibly later if i'm paying attention<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
nottingoh good. packages that abort in %post . *sigh*<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
f13WHAM<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
nottingwwoods: one more blocker for you!<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
wwoodsexpletives!<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
wwoodsoh yeah: the mouse capplet needs a package which wasn't submitted for review until saturday<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
wwoodsha ha ha!<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
nottingf13: ok, will send mail about the shuffle to devel-announce & -evel<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
wwoodswho do we poke to get that through with the quickness?<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
f13wwoods: any packager can review it<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
f13wwoods: including you!  (:<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
wwoodsaw dammit<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
-!- f13 changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: rel-eng meeting: release candidates<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
f13The schedule has us spinning RCs as of Thursday/Friday of this week<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
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 weekend<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
f13As of yet, I cannot reconnect to said box<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
f13jeremy was handling this, and I do not know what the expected state of things is, so I'm not in panic mode yet<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
wwoodswhat happens if it turns out the box is on fire or something?<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
wwoodsis there a backup plan?<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
f13yeah<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
nottingwe find a different box :)<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
f13all I need is an x86_64 machine that can run mock<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
wwoodsI assume it's just "grab another machine with fat disks"<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
wwoodsyeah<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
f13I think we have... a few of those.<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
wwoods'kay<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
f13hey guess what?  more corrupted packages!<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
f13paraview needs a rebuild.<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
notting*sigh*<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
warrenHow dangerous is it to add the entire list of new packages to f9-final?<a href="#t13:50" class="time">13:50</a>
nottingwarren: i wouldn't<a href="#t13:50" class="time">13:50</a>
pingou!<a href="#t13:51" class="time">13:51</a>
f13warren: uh, no.<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
f13pingou: that's not necessary in this meeting.<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
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 ?<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
warrenI wasn't suggesting it, just asking about the danger.<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
wwoodsyeah, I'll probably just ask around in #fedora-devel<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
f13warren: thats a rather giant pile of untested packages and we've got 4 working days until RC<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
wwoodsokay so candidates will get built later this week and we should rock on down the blocker list until then<a href="#t13:57" class="time">13:57</a>
wwoodsanything else we need to cover? I asked all the questions I've got, I think<a href="#t13:58" class="time">13:58</a>
rdieterwwoods: can I have a sec (after meeting is ok)?<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
wwoodsrdieter: sure<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
nottinglmacken: want me to poke you when i'm done moving stuff to updates-candidate?<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
f13I think that's it<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>

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