QA/Meetings/20131014

Attendees

• adamw (148)
• tflink (41)
• Viking-Ice (40)
• jreznik (25)
• satellit (12)
• jskladan (9)
• dgilmore (9)
• handsome_pirate (8)
• roshi (8)
• brunowolff (7)
• zodbot (5)
• robatino (3)
• Martix (2)
• pbrobinson (2)
• mkrizek (1)
• pjones (1)

Agenda

• Previous meeting follow-up
• Fedora 20 Beta status
• Test Day result tracking
• Open floor

Previous meeting follow-up

• adamw to co-ordinate with anaconda team to get a new anaconda build done and roll TC2 - this was done, TC2 went ahead and by meeting time we were on TC3/TC4
• tflink and handsome_pirate to write up detailed proposals for projects to be worked on in a possible longer f21 schedule and post / link to them in the trac ticket - tflink wrote up his proposal and submitted it to FESCo; viking-ice floated his on anaconda-devel-list but had little response from developers. tflink's proposal was viewed favourably by FESCo and it appears there will be at least some extension of the F21 schedule in response to it and other considerations: F21 release no earlier than August 2014

Fedora 20 Beta status

• TC2 was built and quite comprehensively tested, gave us a good overview of current status
• TC3 was built but the DVD compose failed as the attempt to remove gimp-help subpackages to save space caused compose problems. TC4 was immediately built with the gimp-help subpackage removal reverted to ensure a successful compose, so TC4's DVD image is over-size, but it is otherwise fully testable, and TC3 is a dead letter
• TC4 should work on the Beaglebone Black and ought to be tested on it
• We agreed that in principle we would support a freeze exception proposal for GNOME 3.10.1 to land just after Beta freeze

Test Day result tracking

• jskladan wrote a webapp for tracking Test Day results, documented here
• We agreed that the Test Day SOP should be updated to recommend use of the webapp for tracking Test Day results (only), with the results to be copied into the Test Day wiki page soon after the event ends (so as not to rely on the app as a long term data store)

Open floor

N/A

Action items

• roshi will update the Test Day SOP as agreed (encourage use of webapp for tracking test day results)

IRC Log

adamw	#startmeeting Fedora QA meeting	15:02
zodbot	Meeting started Mon Oct 14 15:02:01 2013 UTC. The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.	15:02
zodbot	Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.	15:02
adamw	#meetingname fedora-qa	15:02
zodbot	The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'	15:02
adamw	#topic Roll call	15:02
* roshi is here		15:02
* mkrizek is here		15:02
* tflink is present		15:03
* brunowolff is lurking		15:03
adamw	#chair tflink brunowolff	15:03
zodbot	Current chairs: adamw brunowolff tflink	15:03
* jskladan lurks		15:03
adamw	dgilmore: you about? we might need to check in on tc status	15:04
dgilmore	adamw: i am	15:04
adamw	thanks	15:04
adamw	alrighty, let's get going	15:05
adamw	#topic Previous meeting follow-up	15:05
adamw	#info "adamw to co-ordinate with anaconda team to get a new anaconda build done and roll TC2" - did that, TC2 got built with the stuff we wanted, and we're now onto TC3ish	15:06
adamw	" tflink and handsome_pirate to write up detailed proposals for projects to be worked on in a possible longer f21 schedule and post / link to them in the trac ticket " - i believe this got done, but do you want to provide more details, tflink?	15:07
* jreznik is here, bit late, phone call		15:07
tflink	a proposal was submitted to fesco on wednesday to delay f21 for work on tooling and infrastructure	15:08
tflink	the proposal they reviewed from QA is: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tflink/f21_delay_taskbot_development_proposal	15:09
tflink	The current state is that f21 has been delayed 1 month with branch being no earlier than 2014-03-01	15:09
tflink	this will be re-visited in January once the WGs for fedora.next have met and produced some output on how they would like to proceed	15:10
adamw	coolbeans	15:10
tflink	so the current plan is to have autoqa replaced by 2013-03-01	15:10
jreznik	tflink: I still don't see where you get that month and time for branching	15:11
jreznik	see my comment in the ticket	15:11
tflink	jreznik: do you want to discuss here or in the ticket?	15:11
jreznik	tflink: ticket, so it's not lost in the internet	15:12
tflink	k	15:12
tflink	for coherance, jreznik thinks that branch would be later and doesn't understand where I'm getting 2013-03-01 from	15:13
tflink	discussion on that point will continue in the fesco ticket https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1178	15:13
* satellit joining late		15:14
adamw	#info "tflink and handsome_pirate to write up detailed proposals for projects to be worked on in a possible longer f21 schedule and post / link to them in the trac ticket" - this was done: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Tflink/f21_delay_taskbot_development_proposal was reviewed by FESCo among other submissions, and F21 will be delayed a minimum of one month. current plan is to have autoqa replacement in place by 2013-03-01	15:14
* jreznik can share full TaskJuggler schedule to the usual place		15:14
adamw	sorry, it's too long to detail the controversy :)	15:14
adamw	#topic Fedora 20 Beta status	15:15
adamw	so, let's see	15:15
adamw	TC2 got built and tested pretty well, coverage looks a lot better than TC1	15:15
adamw	i filed a TC3 request over the weekend and it seems like there were some complications with building, dgilmore, can you summarize?	15:15
brunowolff	Dropping gimp-help broke composes. This is been fixed in git.	15:16
jreznik	brunowolff: fixed? do you have reference?	15:18
adamw	do you mean 'is being' or 'has been'?	15:18
brunowolff	I just saw the log of dgilmore's commits to spin-kickstarts.	15:18
jreznik	brunowolff: it's not fix, it's workaround to make tc4 happen	15:19
brunowolff	The fixes were commited. Composes pull directly from git. I don't know whether or not new composes were started after the fix was commited (to rawhide and f20).	15:19
adamw	right, so it's not exactly that the bug's been fixed, but dgilmore has put gimp-help back in for the purpose of doing the compose	15:19
jreznik	brunowolff: it fixed compose but it means we still have gimp-help-*	15:20
adamw	we still kinda need to gank it, to hit the size target	15:20
jreznik	adamw: he's looking on the pungi issue	15:20
brunowolff	Well, the oversize issue is probably still there, but things should be composing again.	15:20
adamw	yes.	15:21
* satellit TC4 is up		15:21
adamw	so, let me summarize	15:21
adamw	#info TC3 compose was done, but the attempt to remove gimp-help from the DVD to save space caused major problems	15:21
adamw	#info TC4 was then composed with gimp-help-* restored to the DVD image to ensure a successful (but over-size) compose	15:21
brunowolff	Well, if one wanted to do that, presumably gimp would need to be changed not to require gimp-help. I don't know if that is happening as I don't following dimp packaging. I do notice stuff with spin-kickstarts ocassionally, as I follow that.	15:22
adamw	#info TC3 is a dead letter, TC4 has oversize DVD image but should be fully testable	15:22
adamw	brunowolff: we wanted to yank the localized gimp-help *subpackages*, not gimp-help *itself*	15:22
adamw	aiui, anyway	15:22
dgilmore	adamw: so the issues is that when we remove gimp-help* pungi pukes	15:24
dgilmore	adamw: TC3 i pulled in the wrong anaconda	15:24
dgilmore	so i redid the compose will all the correct builds	15:24
* handsome_pirate rolls in late		15:25
adamw	dgilmore: right, but it seems to be a pungi issue of some kind not just a straight forward dependency fail, right?	15:26
adamw	ahoy, pirate	15:26
jreznik	maybe one question is why we have gimp-help-* now being pulled into compose, I don't see any change in packages compared to f19	15:26
dgilmore	adamw: unknown	15:27
dgilmore	jreznik: pungi changes from dmach	15:27
adamw	still, we can work on that outside of the meeting	15:27
adamw	just wanted to nail down the status	15:27
dgilmore	jreznik: he gave me some patches to pull in langpacks	15:27
dgilmore	and that is where pungi is puking	15:27
adamw	so we want to be testing tc4 now, and really making sure we get full coverage and catch as many blockers as possible	15:28
adamw	freeze is this wednesday	15:28
jreznik	dgilmore: ok, I can ask him	15:28
jreznik	(to take a quick look if it helps)	15:28
dgilmore	jreznik: not really but thanks	15:29
adamw	anyone have any notes on test coverage? anything we're worried about not being able to cover?	15:29
jreznik	dgilmore: at least he will be aware of it...	15:29
adamw	one important note is that tc4 ought to work on the beaglebone black: some of us have those boards, so we should definitely check that	15:29
adamw	#info TC4 should be tested on the beaglebone black	15:30
* handsome_pirate will hit that		15:32
adamw	thanks pirate	15:32
* handsome_pirate gave a scratch build a go this weekend on BBB and it worked		15:32
adamw	i'm not in the same continent as my BBB so it'll have to wait for me to test it :/	15:32
adamw	well, pbrobinson probably has one here.	15:32
adamw	handsome_pirate: nice	15:32
roshi	I'll test that too	15:32
adamw	thanks folks	15:32
handsome_pirate	It was basically TC2 with the new kernel	15:33
adamw	so the other note I have is to consider doing a freeze exception for GNOME 3.10.1	15:33
adamw	it seems like we always wind up with a sucky schedule conflict with GNOME's schedule - they'll be doing 3.10.1 right around the freeze date	15:33
handsome_pirate	Could we do a scratch build to test before that?	15:33
adamw	of course	15:33
adamw	i usually do one	15:33
adamw	easy enough to spin up a live image	15:33
handsome_pirate	Okay, so, we're all going to lunch	15:33
pbrobinson	adamw: I do	15:33
handsome_pirate	adamw: I'd like to talk about OPW at some point, but we're off	15:34
adamw	it'll include fixes for lots of stuff including blockers in gnome-software	15:34
adamw	handsome_pirate: who's 'we'?	15:34
handsome_pirate	adamw: The folks I work with	15:34
adamw	okay	15:34
adamw	thanks for dropping by	15:34
adamw	so it's probably just sensible to pull 3.10.1 in wholesale, we have the whole of freeze period to stabilize it and it's a bugfix release anyway, so shouldn't be a problem	15:35
adamw	would anyone be particularly opposed to doing that?	15:35
tflink	yeah, I don't think it's been a huge problem in the past	15:35
adamw	obviously for the future we really ought to look at making sure we don't have this silly schedule overlap, but for f20 we're stuck with it	15:35
jreznik	we did it several times, worked pretty well... so it s*word be ok	15:35
adamw	:)	15:36
tflink	:)	15:36
jreznik	adamw: how? ;-) not sure we are able to schedule in week detail to make it happen... at least I'm trying for bigger picture overlap of schedules that it makes sense but even that is lottery :)	15:37
brunowolff	I think pulling in the whole thing makes more sense than pulling in just parts. That seems like it might introduce more problems.	15:37
adamw	jreznik: i dunno precisely, but it seems like something we should fix. the 'we' that isn't me. :P	15:38
adamw	brunowolff: right, we'd have to pull in at least gnome-software changes to fix blockers, and probably wind up with something else too. this seems simpler	15:38
* Viking-Ice joins in late and points out that the QA proposal did not included Anaconda or other QA way's to handle multiple products		15:38
adamw	#agreed in principle we'll support a freeze exception proposal for GNOME 3.10.1 to land just after beta freeze	15:39
adamw	Viking-Ice: well, we said right in the last meeting, if you have ideas for stuff to do during a longer F21 schedule, write them up for FESCo	15:39
adamw	iirc that was your idea...did you write it up for fesco?	15:39
Viking-Ice	adamw, to few responses from Anaconda team to write anything up really	15:40
adamw	tflink's proposal wasn't labelled Official QA Team Proposal List, it was just his own proposal for an idea to work on	15:40
adamw	Viking-Ice: yeah, i saw you didn't really get much traction :/	15:41
Viking-Ice	it's not like we can "force" them to alter their development cycle nor were any alternatives proposed	15:41
Viking-Ice	"the proposal they reviewed from QA is"	15:41
adamw	yeah. if you had made a proposal, tim would've included it in that list.	15:41
adamw	you didn't, so he didn't...	15:41
jreznik	if fedora changes, anaconda would have to follow it up...	15:41
Viking-Ice	adamw, no traction just means no go from QA on multiproduct proposal	15:42
adamw	he listed all the proposal that, in the end, QA folks sent to fesco and fesco looked at.	15:42
tflink	Viking-Ice: which is factually correct - they didn't review any other proposals from QA	15:42
Viking-Ice	I dont know if anaconda has discussed the move to their own development cycle internally	15:43
adamw	i don't know either	15:43
adamw	does anyone?	15:43
jreznik	as I stated above - they will have to follow new model, if Fedora would have new model and we don't know anything about it yet, nothing was decided/agreed on yet	15:44
Viking-Ice	in anycase anything on our side ( dedicated tester/reporter/triager etc team from QA is on hold until )	15:44
Viking-Ice	as in coming up with ( or try to ) dedictated QA anaconda team	15:45
adamw	jreznik: this is more about a specific proposal viking suggested to change the anaconda development schedule	15:45
adamw	jreznik: if you check anaconda-devel-list he proposed it there but didn't get much response from actual anaconda team	15:45
adamw	as he says, the proposal is a bit stuck if anaconda team doesn't buy in	15:46
jreznik	I saw it, of course	15:46
Viking-Ice	one ( Chris ) or two ( if Jens is part of it )	15:46
Viking-Ice	we are stuck until Anaconda team responds so we can try to provide resources or try find alternative methods to solve the dilemma	15:47
adamw	Viking-Ice: so, i don't think the 21 schedule question is settled yet, as per above	15:47
adamw	just that so far they've already definitely decided on _at least_ a one month push bacl	15:47
adamw	so you still have time to try and get buy-in on the idea and send it up to fesco if that happens	15:47
Viking-Ice	I dont run after people and get buy ( I had my fill with that with the systemd migration in F16 ) in the developers can simply respond to that topic if it's in or out	15:49
adamw	Viking-Ice: fair enough	15:49
adamw	jreznik: can we ask anaconda folks to give some feedback on the idea so we know whether it's viable or not?	15:49
Viking-Ice	if they dont respond to that after this week it's off the table and I proposed that QA votes against multiproduct proposal	15:49
Viking-Ice	because there is no way we can handle anaconda + multi products	15:50
Viking-Ice	on the same release cycle	15:50
adamw	welp, we can burn that bridge when we get to it	15:50
jreznik	adamw: yep but again - if we change to multiple products, they have to follow it because otherwise not only qa guys would get mad from testing...	15:50
adamw	well, aiui this is a specific idea of viking's as to what they could change to make things easier with the multi-product proposal	15:51
adamw	if multi-product is actually going to go ahead obviously anaconda's going to have to respect it in SOME way	15:51
adamw	like viking, i don't know if they've actually looked at that whole thing yet at all	15:52
Viking-Ice	afaik anaconda needs to be on own release cycle or anaconda + base coreOS on it's own release cycle or every product on it's own release cycle	15:52
jreznik	ok, in this words, it makes sense	15:52
pjones	that hasn't ever worked before.	15:53
adamw	it sounds like there's quite a lot of uncertainty going around and we've got 7 minutes left	15:53
jreznik	I try to use some of my own ways (no conspiracy) how to get to the answer	15:53
Viking-Ice	jreznik, use what every means you can	15:53
Viking-Ice	ship them whiskey if you have too ;)	15:54
adamw	so maybe for now we can just at least check if anaconda team is aware of this multi-product proposal thing and whether they already have some plan to work with it or are planning to object to it or whatever...and then we might be on slightly more clear ground	15:54
Viking-Ice	( surely they must be tired of wwoods monshine by now )	15:54
adamw	heh	15:54
jreznik	adamw: yep	15:54
Viking-Ice	regardless of whatever comes out of wg we in QA need to find a way to handle multiple products as effective as possible	15:54
adamw	viking's mail did mention the multi-product stuff, but sort of in a way that assumes the reader already knows what's going on there - it's easy to miss it if you aren't actually aware of that	15:55
adamw	Viking-Ice: if it's going to happen, we certainly do	15:55
adamw	Viking-Ice: proposals welcome for sure...	15:55
adamw	for next week's agenda or the list or anything	15:55
adamw	as a Public Service Announcement: remember you can stick topics into the meeting agenda in the wiki ahead of the meeting if you want to	15:55
adamw	or send 'em to the list in reply to a meeting thread	15:56
Viking-Ice	yeah	15:56
Viking-Ice	let's move to Josef	15:56
Viking-Ice	and new test day	15:56
Viking-Ice	stuff	15:56
adamw	yup	15:56
adamw	#topic Test Day result tracking	15:56
adamw	I actually put this one in, just as it seemed sensible to discuss it after the list thread	15:56
Viking-Ice	for the first is it ready ( enough )	15:56
tflink	Viking-Ice: define ready	15:57
Viking-Ice	of so let's move all activity to it, if not let's stick with the wiki until it's ready	15:57
adamw	so it was suggested on the list - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2013-October/118284.html - that we 'stop using the wiki' for tracking test day results	15:57
Viking-Ice	tflink, on par with wiki usage or better	15:57
adamw	atodorov had used the little tool jskladan wrote to track results for a test day, and liked it much more than the wiki, so he suggested we push it more heavily as the default for test days in future	15:58
tflink	Viking-Ice: I meant ready for what - do all result tracking or just test days	15:58
adamw	as of right now it kinda exists and has been used	15:58
adamw	tflink: for now i was figuring just test days	15:58
adamw	tracking validation test results is a bit different	15:58
adamw	it seems to be a nice fit for test days, though	15:58
tflink	IIRC, the original idea was to ease transition into something different	15:58
* adamw doesn't remember for sure		15:58
tflink	so the test day app could record results in a better way and dump everything to wiki format	15:58
adamw	jskladan: still there?	15:58
Viking-Ice	well I dont think we should disrupt that release workflow in the midst of the cycle	15:58
adamw	still, if it's better than the wiki right now, we can certainly consider it, and using it might encourage work on something even better	15:59
tflink	that way we could have a better way to record results while maintaining the same method for historical results	15:59
roshi	use of that app for the GNOME test day was smooth	15:59
tflink	Viking-Ice: it's not a new tool, it's been around for a while just not discussed all that much	15:59
tflink	IIRC, it came out of some issues in the F18 power management test day during devconf that year	15:59
adamw	well, there's various ways we could do it	16:00
adamw	we could simply update the test day SOP to encourage using the app for tracking results	16:00
jskladan	adamw: sorry, I got distracted by dinner (bad me)	16:00
adamw	and then whoever's looking after test days for F21 could make sure the person running each test day is aware of it	16:00
adamw	you're not allowed to eat!	16:00
tflink	I'm not a huge fan of supporting it in any official capacity in it's current state, though; it's a TG2 app	16:00
tflink	s/any/much of any/	16:00
adamw	what's the implication of that, for us monkeys? :)	16:01
adamw	TG2 = TurboGears 2, right?	16:01
tflink	it's a web framework that we don't have much experience with	16:01
Viking-Ice	let´ s swap it out for test days, see how it turns out and shapes then consider it swapping it out tracking validation test results next cycle	16:01
jskladan	tflink: adamw: Viking-Ice: it's in no shape to track validation - it was not designed to do that, and validation IMHO needs a bit different approach	16:02
adamw	right, for now i was only thinking about test days	16:02
tflink	jskladan: yeah, sorry if it sounds like I was implying anything outside that	16:02
adamw	it seems to be written specifically to the test day workflow, right? it seems like a nice fit for that	16:02
jskladan	I've put together some short wiki page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jskladan/Sandbox:TestdayApp	16:02
Viking-Ice	anyone against swapping this out for testday raise your hand ?	16:02
roshi	it's an easy enough thing to add to the test day SOP - and it works	16:02
jskladan	on how things work	16:02
jskladan	adamw: yup	16:03
roshi	+1 for test day usage	16:03
adamw	#info jskladan wrote a webapp for tracking test day results that is documented at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jskladan/Sandbox:TestdayApp	16:03
* adamw is +1 in principle, but at least it should probably live on a Real System in a recognized fedora domain rather than an IP address, if that's not too difficult		16:03
adamw	and only for test days	16:03
tflink	it should be available at testdays.cloud.fedoraproject.org	16:03
jskladan	adamw: it lives on http://testdays.qa.fedoraproject.org/testdays/all_events	16:03
adamw	OK cool - when i looked the test day page was using an IP address link, iirc	16:04
adamw	awesome, that seems fine	16:04
Viking-Ice	+1 test day usage ( and placed somewhere under qa.fedoraproject.org/<test_day or similar )	16:04
jskladan	the ip is a residue from the old times	16:04
adamw	roger	16:04
tflink	but I do have some concerns about it being in the cloud, not being backed up and being managed by hand	16:04
adamw	tflink: well, in the end the idea is that the results are copied back into the test day page, right?	16:04
adamw	that's why it spits them out in wiki format	16:04
tflink	if the lifetime of the data is only a couple of days, I'm much less concerned	16:05
adamw	if we do that, then the risk of breakage doesn't seem too terrible	16:05
adamw	it doesn't matter if it breaks outside of a test day being 'active' and we don't lose the data from previous test days if it does	16:05
Viking-Ice	let's keep it under qa.fedoraproject.org as opposed to it's own domain we want the same landing page for all qa community members ( I would think )	16:05
adamw	Viking-Ice: sure, that domain is fine, i was just worried about it being an ip address	16:05
tflink	Viking-Ice: that's not possible for the short term	16:05
adamw	oh, i thought by 'under' viking meant a subdomain, i.e. the way it is	16:06
Viking-Ice	tflink, ?	16:06
tflink	I can go through infra policy and details for why that can't happen if you'd like but I think that's out of scope for this meeting	16:06
adamw	testdays.qa.fp.o is 'under' qa.fp.o as I see it	16:06
tflink	adamw: it's testdays.cloud.fedoraproject.org	16:06
adamw	<jskladan> adamw: it lives on http://testdays.qa.fedoraproject.org/testdays/all_events	16:06
tflink	nvm, I forgot that josef got around the normal policy :)	16:06
adamw	seems to work	16:07
adamw	:P	16:07
Viking-Ice	tflink, we should be able to fake the actual address ( proxypass rewrite rules what not )	16:07
adamw	I think we're ok there, sorry for the confusion :)	16:07
tflink	Viking-Ice: you mean to use something like qa.fedoraproject.org/testdays/... ?	16:07
Viking-Ice	tflink, yes	16:07
adamw	*sigh*	16:07
Viking-Ice	anywho that's technical	16:07
tflink	Viking-Ice: that can't happen for other reasons, but we're off topic for an over time meeting	16:07
adamw	i think we're just crossing wires and everyone is actually fine with http://testdays.qa.fedoraproject.org/	16:08
adamw	but let me know if i'm wrong	16:08
adamw	i may have sounded like i was proposing moving it, but I wasn't; tflink thought it wasn't available there, but it is. that's my current understanding.	16:08
Viking-Ice	that's another topic	16:08
adamw	OK	16:08
adamw	for now:	16:08
Viking-Ice	let's agree with switching to start using it	16:08
Viking-Ice	for test days	16:09
roshi	+1	16:09
jreznik	it's not IP adress, lives in qa space, so pretty good for me	16:09
jreznik	+1	16:09
adamw	proposed #agreed we will update the Test Day SOP to encourage use of the webapp at http://testdays.qa.fedoraproject.org/ for tracking test day results, with the results to be copied back into the test day wiki page within a few days of the end of the test day	16:09
Viking-Ice	+1	16:09
Viking-Ice	ack	16:09
tflink	ack and +1	16:09
roshi	ack	16:09
* jskladan is all in		16:09
adamw	awesome	16:09
adamw	#agreed we will update the Test Day SOP to encourage use of the webapp at http://testdays.qa.fedoraproject.org/ for tracking test day results, with the results to be copied back into the test day wiki page within a few days of the end of the test day	16:09
adamw	big vote of thanks to jskladan for the app	16:09
adamw	does anyone want to take an action to update the SOP? roshi?	16:10
roshi	I got it :)	16:10
adamw	#action roshi will update the Test Day SOP as agreed (encourage use of webapp for tracking test day results)	16:11
adamw	okay, quickly...:)	16:11
adamw	#topic Open floor	16:11
adamw	anything vitally important that we missed?	16:11
satellit	1015731 is still listed as proposed FE (sugar) I thought it was voted on last time to be accepted at the end of the meeting .https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/20/beta/buglist	16:11
satellit	but looks removed now	16:11
tflink	.bug 1015731	16:11
zodbot	tflink: Bug 1015731 netinstall f20 Beta TC-1 x86_64 of sugar-desktop boots to console login - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1015731	16:11
tflink	satellit: it was closed	16:12
satellit	this is not livesoas but install from netinatall of sugar-desktop diferent	16:12
tflink	I just deployed a fix to the blocker tracking app to remove closed bugs from the lists	16:12
satellit	?	16:13
tflink	satellit: the bug is CLOSED NEXTRELEASE	16:13
tflink	so it should be fixed	16:13
satellit	ok so sugar-desktop works in TC4? have not tested yet	16:13
adamw	depends on the exact status of the fix i guess	16:14
* adamw looks		16:14
tflink	satellit: I'm not sure it's fixed, I was just explaining why it hadn't moved and why it disappeared	16:14
satellit	ok ok	16:14
satellit	confusion of SoaS live bug and sugar-desktop here?	16:15
adamw	"I was sure I closed this bug. I've added lightdm as a default DM in comps for F-20+ which will fix the problem. It was pushed on Oct 8th so should already be fixed in the latest compose."	16:15
adamw	sounds clear enough	16:15
adamw	so yeah, TC4 should be good, pbrobinson thinks	16:15
satellit	thanks	16:15
jreznik	tflink: thanks for blocker tracking app fix!	16:16
tflink	np, I still don't understand why it stopped working like that but it's fixed now :)	16:16
pbrobinson	adamw: satellit: I added lightdm into the sugar-desktop group as a DM, I dropped gdm from the list a while a go due to issues but the idea was to give people a choice of DM but I missed the "install from anaconda" options without thinking that people wouldn't think to choose a DM so I defaulted to lightdm	16:18
satellit	thanks....	16:18
adamw	satellit: check out TC4 and get back to us :)	16:19
adamw	OK, sounds like that's all	16:19
* adamw sets the quantum fuse		16:19
satellit	ok	16:22
robatino	oh, there's no place to put checksum results for Images/i386 and Images/x86_64	16:23
robatino	the install test matrix template needs to be updated	16:24
* Martix is here		16:26
Martix	:-P	16:26
robatino	pwhalen pointed it out to me	16:27
adamw	#endmeeting	16:32

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.12.1 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!