From Fedora Project Wiki

< ReleaseEngineering‎ | Meetings

Revision as of 18:37, 17 February 2014 by Holmja (talk | contribs) (→‎Full IRC Transcript (timestamp EDT): Removed some HTML markup.)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Fedora Release Engineering Meeting :: Monday 16-APR-07


Executive Summary

1. Freezing for Test4 tomorrow (17-APR-07)

  • f13 to create tag and start signing packages on 17-APR-07
  • start of continuous freeze until Fedora 7 goes GOLD
  • potential checkins for F8 starting in June (assuming all goes well)
  • any builds will have to be brought to before it'll get included in:

a. Rawhide a. the final release.

  • Eventually need documentation surrounding the freeze and distro build process

1. Merge of extras and core

  • will not delay F7
  • will most likely to be completed before F7 final is released
  • held up because of equipment needed in the colo
  • post-merge some packages will need to be rebuilt to pick up deps that used to be in Extras

1. In the future we should consider a mass rebuild of all packages around, but no later than test2 for technical reasons only (toolchain changes, rpm changes, etc..) 1. Still working on increasing build capacity 1. Discussion of Features

  • incomplete features at this stage of the release will be dropped
  • incomplete features will not block the release
  • poelcat will go ping feature owners and update the wiki
  • Unclear whether codecbuddy is in or out: controversy over whether it should block the release or not
  • Known feature which are OUT: boot/shutdown, customdistro (as written) fix wakeups, newinit, syslogng, texlive
  • Known feature which are IN: fast-user-switching, fds, everything, kde, prime, targeted spins, firewire, libata, livecd, nouveau, rpm/yum, wireless, tickless, pungi, firmware, smolt

1. wwoods reported on the state of the trees + discussion of important areas needing testing

  • looking pretty solid
  • most concerned about the pata/libata changeover
  • concerns about iwlwifi and e1000 changes
  • upgrade testing from FC6 and FC5
  • automated testing is being conducted using KATE
  • SNAKE scheduled for release around May 3
  • Friday is a kernel bug triaging day
  • bad mkinitrd bug which hoses scsi *BZ 220470

1. wwoods will write the test4 announcement which will include known problems, newly added features, and upgrade issues 1. Blocker bugs

1. Potential schedule slips

  • none known at this time

1. Open discussion

  • cdrkit
  • need to decide what to do with it
  • Extras vs. Core and when to merge
  • wwoods "I got confirmation from the bluez maintainer that the firmware is freely redistributable (although non-modifiable), just like the intel firmware"

1. Next Release Engineering Meeting

  • Thursday 19-APR-07 at 18:00 UTC (14:00 EDT)
  • Coordination of sub-groups
  • Test4 status
  • When should we branch for F8?

Full IRC Transcript (timestamp EDT)

f13hi, still waiting for folks to roll in<a href="#t13:03" class="time">13:03</a>
*jeremy is here<a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
rdieterhere<a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
*f13 has changed the topic to: <a href=""></a> -- Fedora Release Team Meeting<a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
*nirik is sitting in the rabble seats and watching in between real-work stuff. <a href="#t13:04" class="time">13:04</a>
*mclasen is here<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
*mmcgrath here<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
*spot is mostly here<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
*quaid handles the dual-meeting thing, but is here<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
*f13 summons the notting<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
*glezos is here<a href="#t13:05" class="time">13:05</a>
spotf13: dude, you need the goat for that.<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
spotand an alpha, i think.<a href="#t13:06" class="time">13:06</a>
*wwoods here<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
f13davej: ping<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
davejpong<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
*thl hands nirik some popcorn <a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
f13ok, you are here (:<a href="#t13:08" class="time">13:08</a>
jrboh, f13 is keating<a href="#t13:09" class="time">13:09</a>
f13yeah, sorry.<a href="#t13:09" class="time">13:09</a>
f13So we're going to be following <a href=""></a> somewhat<a href="#t13:09" class="time">13:09</a>
*f13 has changed the topic to: <a href=""></a> -- Fedora Release Team Meeting -- Freeze status and schedules<a href="#t13:10" class="time">13:10</a>
f13We're freezing for Test4 tomorrow, which is also the point of continuous freeze until Fedora 7 goes GOLD<a href="#t13:10" class="time">13:10</a>
f13this means that from tomorrow on, any build will have to be brought to before it'll get included in A) Rawhide and B) the final release.<a href="#t13:11" class="time">13:11</a>
mclasenmaybe I haven't payed enough attention to one of the fedora mailing lists, but has it been explained how that relates to the merge delay ?<a href="#t13:11" class="time">13:11</a>
*nirik wonders if he should try and push the Xfce 4.4.1 he has been testing before then, or if it's ok to go after that... it's all bugfixes. <a href="#t13:11" class="time">13:11</a>
f13mclasen: it hasn't been explained.  The merge delay doesn't have a lot to do with this specifically.<a href="#t13:11" class="time">13:11</a>
spotf13: i'm trying to get some last minute perl packages in (so bugzilla current will work on F-7 out of the box)<a href="#t13:11" class="time">13:11</a>
f13Oh, I should note that this only effects Core packages<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
f13that _does_ relate to the merger, thanks mclasen<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
spotf13: ah, ok.<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
mclasenf13: we have a number of bugs on the f7 milestones that were specifically deferred 'until the merge'<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
f13Until such time that we merge, or at least get Extras building with Koji, Extras is sort of still on free form.<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
bukajso I have only a few hours to rebase to gcc 4.3, right? ;)<a href="#t13:12" class="time">13:12</a>
f13mclasen: these are because you need to BuildRequire some Extras packages?<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
mclasenthings like that, yes<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
f13bukaj: bahhhh<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
mclasenor splitting off hal-info, etc<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
davejspeaking of gcc, do we have any packages that haven't been rebuilt since FC6 ?<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
f13mclasen: rel-eng and QA have agreed to give a wave on packages building to pick up things from Extras.<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
f13davej: many.<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
f13mclasen: why does the splitting of hal-info need to wait until the merge?<a href="#t13:13" class="time">13:13</a>
wwoodsbukaj: bad developer! two minutes in the penalty box!<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
davejf13: I wonder if its worth rebuilding them before GA to pick up any improvements in gcc/binutils.<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
f13davej: too late for a mass rebuild.<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
f13davej: that kind of thing would need to happen around test2, when the feature freeze would ahve been to get the new gcc/binutils feature in<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
mclasenf13: I don't think there is a technical reason, just that davidz wanted to avoid introducing a new core package 5 minutes before the merge<a href="#t13:14" class="time">13:14</a>
bukajthere haven't been any substantial changes in gcc/binutils land, only incremental improvements and fixes<a href="#t13:15" class="time">13:15</a>
nottingmclasen: spliting of the *source* package?<a href="#t13:15" class="time">13:15</a>
mclasenyes, it is a separate tarball<a href="#t13:15" class="time">13:15</a>
bukajsince FC6.  What would help is if people start building stuff where possible with -Bsymbolic-functions etc., but guess that's F8 material<a href="#t13:15" class="time">13:15</a>
nottingmclasen: split the binary package and worry about splitting the source package later?<a href="#t13:15" class="time">13:15</a>
mclasennotting: the whole point is to have independently buildable packages<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
spotpost-merge, some packages will want to rebuild to pick up deps that used to be in Extras, right?<a href="#t13:16" class="time">13:16</a>
f13yes<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
f13spot: although the big one there is KDE and we may merge that very soon now<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
spotdo we have a special process for these items, or do we just keep hand stamping them<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
f13I think all it would take is dropping the bluecurve libs out of redhat-artwork<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
f13spot: hand stamping I'm afraid, unless somebody comes up with something better<a href="#t13:17" class="time">13:17</a>
*spot shrugs<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
nottingwhere do we stand on build capacity?<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
f13notting: We've got one x86 builder coming in and mmcgrath was pricing out a ppc builder<a href="#t13:18" class="time">13:18</a>
f13mmcgrath: status?<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
mmcgrathI set a follow up to nate about 15 minutes ago about the ppc builder.<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
f13notting: with both of those builders on line we should be able to merge core/extras and limp along until we can deploy the blade center.<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
mmcgrathAFAIK the x86_64 builder is bought but I'll double check that.<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
*rdieter is hamering on redhat-artwork right now.<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
f13ok, back to the freeze<a href="#t13:19" class="time">13:19</a>
f13I plan on creating the tag at some point tomorrow, probably in the afternoon<a href="#t13:20" class="time">13:20</a>
f13at the same time I'll start the signing process<a href="#t13:20" class="time">13:20</a>
f13I'll have a test compose from tonights rawhide, hopefully synced to RDU in some way, but there are disk space issues there<a href="#t13:20" class="time">13:20</a>
bukajhope the ppc builder won't be even slower than the current sloooowish blade<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
f13I'm on a plane all of the 18th (Wed) and I'm not sure when I"ll get online on the 19th<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
jeremyf13: does it make sense to start the signing process like say tonight?  since most of the packages won't then have changed<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
jeremyf13: and then we can get a real test tree sooner<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
f13jeremy: depends on if anybody can look at it.<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
f13jeremy: I mean I have a tree right now that people could look at.<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
*notting tends to get woken up every 3-4 hours :P<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
jeremynotting: heh ;)<a href="#t13:21" class="time">13:21</a>
f13its just a matter of respinning to pick up the day's builds<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
f13jeremy: once the signing is done, that spin will take a while as we have to wait for all the signed packages to replace the unsigned ones in my cache<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
jeremyf13: yeah, but I want to minimize testing of trees that aren't signed packages.  since we know it's not going to be it and thus is less useful<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
f13and signing takes a while, so I should actually start signing today<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
f13oh wait<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
f13I misread "start the signing process" as "start the spinning process"<a href="#t13:22" class="time">13:22</a>
f13yes, I can start signing earlier.<a href="#t13:23" class="time">13:23</a>
jeremythen in theory, we can have a real tree spun not long after freezing and have stuff to test while you're plane-bound :)<a href="#t13:23" class="time">13:23</a>
f13er, theoretically<a href="#t13:23" class="time">13:23</a>
*glezos reminds here a request from L10n to repackage the stuff we translate before F7 and (if possible) before T4 as well to test.<a href="#t13:24" class="time">13:24</a>
f13guess that depends on how late I stay up tonight feeding the gpg key in<a href="#t13:24" class="time">13:24</a>
jeremyglezos: please send something to fedora-maintainers so that everyone sees it<a href="#t13:24" class="time">13:24</a>
tibbsAny chance of someone looking at the cdrkit issue?<a href="#t13:24" class="time">13:24</a>
glezosjeremy, OK, although I guess someone should check if it was done.<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
f13jeremy: if we're going to do that I'll have to start the freeze earlier in the day, to give a chance to get final signatures in, + distill it, + pungi it, + sync it to rdu<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
f13tibbs: we'll get to that subject.  We're still on the freeze<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
wwoodswe're still doing distill trees?<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
tibbsSorry, thought that was done.<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
f13wwoods: I use distill to get the signed packages out of the build system and into a multilib yum repo that pungi can work from<a href="#t13:25" class="time">13:25</a>
spotf13: alternately, if you document the process clearly, i could do it in your absense.<a href="#t13:26" class="time">13:26</a>
jeremyf13: all the more reason we should start signing stuff (+ getting syncs started) sooner.  if you don't get back until mid-afternoon on Thursday in Washington, then that's the end of the day here<a href="#t13:26" class="time">13:26</a>
f13Ideally the RC tree spun tomorrow would be enough to find the show stopper bugs, with a respin perhaps on Thursday, which might be good to send to mirrors then.<a href="#t13:27" class="time">13:27</a>
nottingyou are being *way* too optimistic<a href="#t13:27" class="time">13:27</a>
f13spot: yeah, documenting it clearly may take up just as much time as doing it :/<a href="#t13:27" class="time">13:27</a>
f13notting: I've been spinning trees already.  We're not being hit by any compose tool issue which is often the slow down<a href="#t13:27" class="time">13:27</a>
spotf13: perhaps, but you can do that in advance. ;)<a href="#t13:27" class="time">13:27</a>
wwoodsf13: ah. I'd be interested to hear plans for doing rawhide with pungi instead.. but that's probably a different meeting.<a href="#t13:27" class="time">13:27</a>
f13wwoods: post-merge<a href="#t13:28" class="time">13:28</a>
f13Ok, any further discussion on Freeze/Schedule before moving on to tree status?<a href="#t13:28" class="time">13:28</a>
wwoodsnaturally<a href="#t13:28" class="time">13:28</a>
wwoodsjust to be clear: the merge is happening pre-T4?<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
nottingf13: if it's just sign_unsigned in a screen, people can prod it occasionally<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
wwoodsor are we not having a merged test release?<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
f13wwoods: I don't think so<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
nirikthere are still a few broken deps and EVR issues.. I will try proding the holdouts soon.<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
f13notting: if by people you mean you and jeremy?  Does anybody else know the key?<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
wwoodsso no merged test release? that makes me sad.<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
f13wwoods: the package content wouldn't be any different.<a href="#t13:29" class="time">13:29</a>
f13wwoods: the composes of F7 from day 1 have made use of packages both in Core and Extras<a href="#t13:30" class="time">13:30</a>
poelcatf13: does the status of the targeted F7  Features affect the schedule?<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
*f13 has changed the topic to: Fedora Release Team Meeting -- Test status of current trees<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
thlf13, but some new deps might get tracked in when new "core" stuff ges rebuilds against stuff in extras  (but that shouldn't mattter much)<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
jeremypoelcat: generally, no.  fedora releases are time based, not feature based<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
jeremypoelcat: if a feature isn't ready, then it just doesn't maek the release<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
f13poelcat: if the feature is not ready, dropo.<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
wwoodsf13: ave they? because some stuff (e.g. sound-juicer) lacks features because of missing builddeps on Extras packages<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
f13wwoods: this topic is right up your alley.<a href="#t13:31" class="time">13:31</a>
f13wwoods: there are some package features that are missing yes, but we are taking into account both package trees<a href="#t13:32" class="time">13:32</a>
wwoodsOkay, so we've said that stuff gets a pass?<a href="#t13:32" class="time">13:32</a>
f13*** Topic Test status of current trees ***<a href="#t13:32" class="time">13:32</a>
f13wwoods: yes<a href="#t13:32" class="time">13:32</a>
f13wwoods: how do our trees look?<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
wwoodsso we are going to allow rebuilds of stuff to pull in new 'features' from extras, which creates churn during a freeze, which makes me wish for test releases.<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
wwoodsThe trees look pretty solid - most of the bugs being reported most frequently will be fixed in t4<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
nottingon all arches?<a href="#t13:33" class="time">13:33</a>
wwoodsI am most concerned about the pata/libata changeover<a href="#t13:34" class="time">13:34</a>
poelcatjeremy: do we have a summary of which features are in/out?<a href="#t13:34" class="time">13:34</a>
wwoodsthere are a lot of weird bugs centering around that<a href="#t13:34" class="time">13:34</a>
davejwwoods: if you could round up any of those, and send a summary to me,alan and jgarzik, that would help.<a href="#t13:34" class="time">13:34</a>
f13wwoods: Either we give them a pass, or we just don't allow those rebuilds at all for F7.  But we're not going to slip any more or have another test release.<a href="#t13:34" class="time">13:34</a>
wwoodsmany of the reports don't contain enough info for them to be properly tracked / duped<a href="#t13:34" class="time">13:34</a>
wwoodsand we don't have the hardware to reproduce<a href="#t13:35" class="time">13:35</a>
wwoodsdavej: yeah, I'd be happy to.<a href="#t13:35" class="time">13:35</a>
wwoodsactually I was thinking we should have a big sata/pata bug day<a href="#t13:35" class="time">13:35</a>
f13I'm pretty concerned about iwlwifi and the e1000 stuff<a href="#t13:35" class="time">13:35</a>
wwoodshopefully with the assistance of chuck or davej<a href="#t13:35" class="time">13:35</a>
davejiwlwifi needs love.   e1k I'm probably going to revert to 2.6.20<a href="#t13:35" class="time">13:35</a>
wwoodsf13: i've heard iwlwifi is getting much better recently<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
spotdavej: the sooner we do that, the better.<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
davejhopefully that'll fix the lockups<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
davejspot: 'today'<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
wwoodsand linville says there's a pretty big chunk of fixes coming down the pipe RSN<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
blizzardis iwlwifi the new intel code?<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
jeremywwoods: it was getting better, and then got updated and regressed again<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
jeremyblizzard: yes<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
spotdavej: 2.6.20-1.2933.fc6 is solid as a rock<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
blizzardfor the 3945?<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
davejblizzard: yeah, for 3945<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
blizzardahh<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
blizzardcool<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
blizzardextra points for trying early!<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
blizzardfor intel!<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
wwoodsso.. yeah, it might be that the new fixes/features destabilized it, and it will get hammered back into shape RSN<a href="#t13:36" class="time">13:36</a>
jeremyI think for iwlwifi, going forward with it in test4 and trying to get stuff happy is the right approach.  and then if we're not comfortable with it closer to the final freeze, we just turn it off<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
f13k<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
nottingpoelcat: off the top of my head: out: boot/shutdown, customdistro (as written) fix wakeups, newinit, syslogng, texlive<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
wwoodslinville seems to think that it's going to be OK for release<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
jeremypoelcat: not really... need to go through the list at some point<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
f13notting: codecbuddy<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
nottingf13: is out?<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
f13notting: we haven't seen a package yet in the repos and well it's test 4<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
poelcatjeremy: i'd be glad to go through it and ping people<a href="#t13:37" class="time">13:37</a>
poelcatand then update wiki pages<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
jeremypoelcat: sounds good<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
wwoodspoelcat: yeah, it'd be excellent if someone went through and got the final disposition of all the features for F7<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
f13poelcat: if you're going to ping people, it's more of "Is this done?" not a "please get this done".  It's too late for things that aren't done.<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
wwoodsand we can defer things to F8<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
mclasenf13: codecbuddy has been delayed to death...<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
poelcatand any others we know are DOA would save me some time<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
poelcatf13: understood :)<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
wwoodsanything that isn't nearly fully-baked now is too late<a href="#t13:38" class="time">13:38</a>
f13mclasen: obviously.  We'll try again for F8<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
nottingpoelcat: in:  fast-user-switching, fds, everything, kde, prime, targeted spins, firewire, libata, livecd, nouveau, rpm/yum, wireless, tickless, pungi, firmware, smolt<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
mclasenf13: we'll see<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
wwoodsdavej: what's a good day for you to keep an eye on IRC when needed to help people triage kernel bugs?<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
f13What I don't necessarily want to see is these missed features just being tossed in as updates to F7, as that somewhat misses the point<a href="#t13:39" class="time">13:39</a>
davejwwoods: anything other than today/tomorrow<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
wwoodssomeday we need to have a serious discussion about adding features to a released distro<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
*nirik wonders if x86_64 is also tickless now? or just i386? what about ppc?<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
jeremywwoods: indeed<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
davejnirik: no<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
jeremynirik: just i386 afaik<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
davejnirik: just 32bit x86<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
wwoodsdavej: friday is traditional, so if that works for you<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
f13wwoods: yeah, thats going to be a "fun" conversation.<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
davejwwoods: sounds like a plan<a href="#t13:40" class="time">13:40</a>
nirikdavej: bummer. Any news of when the others might go? we should make sure and mark that feature as 'i386' only...<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
wwoodsrawhide is (still) installable right now, which is always a good sign<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
f13yeah, making it clear that it's i386 only would help<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
f13wwoods: automated testing, is that still happening?<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
davejnirik: not sure, I sent a mail to the tickless developers yesterday asking about x86-64, but no word back yet.<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
davejnirik: afaik, the code isn't written yet, so it's not even in -mm<a href="#t13:41" class="time">13:41</a>
davejnirik: though I've not looked there in a while, so I could be wrong<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
nirikdavej: :( So, looking like no way for f7 then. ;(<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
thlnirik, tickeless x86_64 is afaik waiting for 2.6.22 to open<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
f13nirik: I certainly wouldn't want to take any as of yet unwritten code in.<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
wwoodsf13: the old KATE code is still running and still manages to test the distill-built trees<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
davejextremely unlikely.  It's a pretty big change.<a href="#t13:42" class="time">13:42</a>
thlnirik, the developer told be that three weeks ago<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
wwoodsf13: I had a long conversation with a patent lawyer Friday about SNAKE<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
f13wwoods: cool.  Keep us informed of the nightly status would you?<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
wwoodswe're on track to have that released around May 3<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
f13ok<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
wwoodsI'm working on a rawhide doom-o-meter<a href="#t13:43" class="time">13:43</a>
davejwwoods: current status: Elmo.<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
wwoodsactually a whole dashboard status page - notting pointed me at the sources for the EVR reports and build reports<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
f13wwoods: what would you like folks to be focused on for the next few days?<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
wwoodsfor testing? tracking down sata and other disk-related bugs<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
f13(and how are we going to communicate that...)<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
wwoodsand.. oh god, upgrades from FC6<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
davej"doesn't boot" bugs should be getting priority right now wrt kernel bugs.<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
f13I was just going to ask that (:<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
notting... and fc5<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
wwoodsbasically it's all been fingers-crossed hopefulness and most of my test cases Just Work<a href="#t13:44" class="time">13:44</a>
f13upgrades are going to suck  I think big time.<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
wwoodsbut I'm sure there's a million people with mutant weirdo setups, not using filesystem labels<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
f13especially if people use the Prime^WFedora spin<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
wwoodswhose systems are going to explode in fiery halls of unpleasant death and shoutiness<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
nottingupgrades *need*  to work, and this is our last chance to test them well<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
wwoodsso yeah, upgrades need to be tested *hard*<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
spotperhaps a plea to the mailing list for "odd" cases?<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
wwoodsespecially wrt the disk controllers<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
f13jeremy: any thoughts on upgrades?<a href="#t13:45" class="time">13:45</a>
glezoslet's make sure in the F8 announcement we mention this big change.<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
jeremyf13: there's one really ugly outstanding case.  clumens is working on it.  I think we really need to have the fix for it in test4<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
davejoh, speaking of disk controllers, there's an outstanding mkinitrd bug, which hoses scsi. that *must* be fixed for test4<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
*davej tries to find bug id<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
wwoodsbasically we need to work on categorizing and grouping the existing pata/sata bug reports and make a call for anyone with funky hardware to come report bugs<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
f13the Fedora spin (yes we're renaming it) should have most the packages from FC6 on it, but I'm sure some things are missing<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
davej220470<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
jeremyf13: if you have a current tree, it should be easy enough to diff package lists<a href="#t13:46" class="time">13:46</a>
f13jeremy: is there any way to add additional repos when doing an upgrade?<a href="#t13:47" class="time">13:47</a>
wwoodsand then we also need to test the sweet fancy moses out of upgrades from FC{5,6}<a href="#t13:47" class="time">13:47</a>
f13jeremy: because a diff won't help folks that have Extras packages installed<a href="#t13:47" class="time">13:47</a>
jeremyf13: nope.  but the post-upgrade update will catch those<a href="#t13:47" class="time">13:47</a>
f13wwoods: can you take care of communicating that to the masses, as well as making sure that makes it into the test release announcement?<a href="#t13:47" class="time">13:47</a>
f13jeremy: k, the system will just be a bit messy until that's done.<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
wwoodswho writes the test release announcements, and where do they pull info from?<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
jeremyf13: yeah.  same as it's always been<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
wwoodsor rather, who's gonna do the test4 one? we kinda switch itup<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
jeremywwoods: are you volunteering to write it? ;-)<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
f13wwoods: I did 1/2, Jeremy did 3, you could do 4!<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
davejis there a test4 blocker bug? Or just the GA one?<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
f13davej: just the GA one at this point, which is kind of a joke<a href="#t13:48" class="time">13:48</a>
wwoodsI'm volunteering to write the "known issues and testing focus" bit at the very least<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
f13davej: "BLocking Bugs" is the next topic.<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
davejok<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
wwoodsif you want me to write the test4 announcement I'm OK with that<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
f13quaid: Do the docs guys want a crack at writing a test release announcement?<a href="#t13:49" class="time">13:49</a>
f13wwoods: looks like you're "it" unless somebody takes it off your hand.<a href="#t13:50" class="time">13:50</a>
f13wwoods: I used a wiki page for the template, I don't recall off the top of my head wha tpage it was, but ping me after and I'll find it.<a href="#t13:50" class="time">13:50</a>
wwoodsf13: okay, will do<a href="#t13:50" class="time">13:50</a>
f13Anything else on the Test status of current trees before we move on to "Blocker Bugs" ?<a href="#t13:51" class="time">13:51</a>
*f13 has changed the topic to: Fedora Release Team Meeting -- Blocking bugs<a href="#t13:51" class="time">13:51</a>
nottingf13: size of live isos?<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
quaidf13: not me personally :), but we could drop a request to f-docs-l<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
f13We don't have test4 blocker bugs right now.  I'm somewhat reluctant to create them as blocker bugs usually get abused.<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
bukajnotting: working on it<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
wwoods<a href=""></a> is the big blocker for FC7<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
bukajnotting: at least on saving 70MB out of it or so<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
jeremybukaj: the locale-archive duplication?<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
f13If we did create a blocker bug, we (the release team) would have to manage the heck out of it.<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
wwoodsnormally we create a TreeTesting page on the wiki to track the stuff we need find for testX<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
bukajjeremy: yeah<a href="#t13:52" class="time">13:52</a>
jeremynotting: we fit for the desktop i386 one last week<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
f13I'm almost wondering if we'd rather have a limited editable wiki page to list the "blockers" for test4<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
wwoodsso it serves as a blocker list, and the stuff that doesn't get fixed turns into the "known issues" list<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
jeremynotting: haven't tried yet this morning (waiting on the molasses slow mirror process)<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
wwoodse.g. <a href=""></a><a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
f13wwoods: right, something like that, although more clear as "these are the blockers"<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
bukajjeremy: hopefully will start testing in an hour or two, so that it could make it into tonight's glibc build<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
f13wwoods: becuase we let anybody in EditGroup touch those Test pages.<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
wwoodsf13: ah, I understand<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
jeremybukaj: awesome<a href="#t13:53" class="time">13:53</a>
jeremybukaj: I'll watch for it and test it out :)<a href="#t13:54" class="time">13:54</a>
f13but I want to get the opinions of those actualy handling the bugs.<a href="#t13:54" class="time">13:54</a>
davej"pcspkr beep is WAY too loud."  how the hell did that get on the blocker list? :)<a href="#t13:54" class="time">13:54</a>
bukajjeremy: yeah, testers will be appreciated<a href="#t13:54" class="time">13:54</a>
f13Would ya'all prefer a real bugzilla blocker bug, or some other way to track the actual blockers?<a href="#t13:54" class="time">13:54</a>, eh<a href="#t13:54" class="time">13:54</a>
f13davej: anybody can add whatever they want to the Blocker bug, we don't have any real policing of it.  No blocker meetings of doom like RHEL<a href="#t13:54" class="time">13:54</a>
nottingdavej: warren added that, i think<a href="#t13:55" class="time">13:55</a>
davejf13: needs to have someone doing a regular sweep-n-clear I guess.<a href="#t13:55" class="time">13:55</a>
f13not it<a href="#t13:55" class="time">13:55</a>
davejjust to keep the crap off it<a href="#t13:55" class="time">13:55</a>
warrenadded what?<a href="#t13:55" class="time">13:55</a>
warrenno, I didn't add that to the blocker.<a href="#t13:55" class="time">13:55</a>
wwoodsdavej: yeah, I try to go through it weekly<a href="#t13:55" class="time">13:55</a>
f13a big topic for F8 is better handling of bugs, bugzilla, etc...<a href="#t13:56" class="time">13:56</a>
wwoodsweekly triage tasks are usually.. this week's devel bugs, the blocker list, and.. Bonus Stage<a href="#t13:56" class="time">13:56</a> added the "way too loud" bug to the blocker.<a href="#t13:56" class="time">13:56</a>
davejstuff like 'Stop starting hardware related daemons as a service.' should probably be moved to F8Target at this point too ?<a href="#t13:57" class="time">13:57</a>
*f13 notes the distinct lack of opinions.<a href="#t13:57" class="time">13:57</a>
jeremydavej: yeah<a href="#t13:57" class="time">13:57</a>
warrendavej, they would be started by hal or something?<a href="#t13:58" class="time">13:58</a>
davejwarren: yeah<a href="#t13:58" class="time">13:58</a>
davejneeds dbus changes iirc, that won't land until post F7<a href="#t13:58" class="time">13:58</a>
wwoodsf13: yes, the bugzilla stuff for f8 is huge. luckily, is going to be moving to bugzilla 3.0<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
f13So, opinions?  Do we want an real bugzilla test4 blocker, or will a wiki page suffice?<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
wwoodsstarting shortly after the release of F7 and completing (fingers crossed) sometime before F8<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
f13or do you just not care?<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
warrenf13, flags! =)<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
nottingf13: i want *something*<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
jeremyf13: either way works for me<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
*warren hides.<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
*jwb needs to lear to read a clock<a href="#t13:59" class="time">13:59</a>
davejf13: being able to view them in a tree in bz is 'nice'<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
wwoodshave we created tracker bugs in the past for test releases? should we do it this once as an experiment?<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
f13wwoods: I don't know, I haven't in my tenure<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
wwoodslet's do it and see how it goes<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
f13or I don't remember doing so recently<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
f13sure.<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
jwbtracker bugs work well<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
f13wwoods: do you want to create it or should I?<a href="#t14:00" class="time">14:00</a>
wwoodsf13: I'll do it<a href="#t14:01" class="time">14:01</a>
davejbefore using it, we might want to make sure people know the criteria for stuff on that list before it turns into a crazyfest.<a href="#t14:01" class="time">14:01</a>
f13ok.  Lets get a lot of people to cc it to police it<a href="#t14:01" class="time">14:01</a>
wwoods<a href=""></a> is supposed to be some guidelines for that sort of thing<a href="#t14:01" class="time">14:01</a>
f13davej: that would be good contents for the bug itself, but I don't expect the masses to really pay attention.<a href="#t14:01" class="time">14:01</a>
davejadding some of the obvious "cant install/boot" bugs off of FC7Blocker is probably a good start<a href="#t14:01" class="time">14:01</a>
wwoodsanything listed there as a "MUST" is required for test4, so anything blocking one of those things counts as.. a blocker!<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
davejf13: we need tasers.<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
jeremydavej: people adding to it is okay.  we just have to watch and remove things which don't meet the criteria<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
wwoods(comments/additions welcomed and encouraged)<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
davejjeremy: ack<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
wwoodsI'll have a link to the release criteria in the bug text<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
mclasenbut this tracker would only last a few days anyway,<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
f13davej: and "can't install/boot" for bob, is a blocker, but when nobody but bob can repro it....<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
f13mclasen: right, and we might as well just not advertise it either<a href="#t14:02" class="time">14:02</a>
f13_we_ know it exists and we can add to it as needed.<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
davejwell, bob might have hardware that everyone rushes out to buy on day of F7GA release ;-)<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
davejwe shouldn't punish bob for being an early adopter :)<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
f13davej: but if we can't fix it for a week or two, do you want to hold up the test release for bob?<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
davejbest effort.<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
jwbf13, it will become known fairly quickly that there is a tracker bug<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
davejsame as always.<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
davejwe never fix *all* the bugs on the blocker list anyway<a href="#t14:03" class="time">14:03</a>
f13So perhaps we should nave it F7Test4BestEffort instead of Blocker (:<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
davejpfft, too much typing ;)<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
jeremyjust make it F7Test4<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
f13or just state that our Blocker bugs are Best Effort and we won't always fix every "BLocker"<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
f13jeremy: there you go, being all simple and easy<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
davejI'd be ok with that<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
f13+<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
f13+1 even.<a href="#t14:04" class="time">14:04</a>
f13ok, lets move on<a href="#t14:05" class="time">14:05</a>
f13Fedora Release Team Meeting -- Potential slips<a href="#t14:05" class="time">14:05</a>
f13er<a href="#t14:05" class="time">14:05</a>
*f13 has changed the topic to: Fedora Release Team Meeting -- Potential slips<a href="#t14:05" class="time">14:05</a>
f13_I_ don't know of any right now.<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
f13anybody else?<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
mlumI had some questions..<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
mlumbut I can wait until the very end<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
jeremyf13: upgrades could be a cause<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
nottingf13: 'various broken arches'.  'upgrades'<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
davejthere's some scary bits still looming in libata. (HPA handling for eg)<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
jeremyf13: since the amount of testing they see is ... minimal<a href="#t14:06" class="time">14:06</a>
f13sure, but do we know of anything right now?<a href="#t14:07" class="time">14:07</a>
f13this topic might be more interesting on Thursday<a href="#t14:07" class="time">14:07</a>
*f13 looks at time<a href="#t14:07" class="time">14:07</a>
spotif for whatever reason the e1000 backport doesn't fix the thinkpad lockups...<a href="#t14:07" class="time">14:07</a>
davejI wouldn't slip test4 over anything I'm aware of, but there's definitly some 'mustfix' stuff for GA from the kernel.<a href="#t14:08" class="time">14:08</a>
spotbut i'm 99.9999% sure it will.<a href="#t14:08" class="time">14:08</a>
jwbspot, backport?<a href="#t14:08" class="time">14:08</a>
jwbspot, you mean taking the fc-6 e1000 and up-porting it to rawhide?<a href="#t14:08" class="time">14:08</a>
spotyeah. sorry. :)<a href="#t14:08" class="time">14:08</a>
jwbnp.  was just confused.  are we doing that now?<a href="#t14:08" class="time">14:08</a>
spotjwb: yes.<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
jwbk<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
spotor we will, today.<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
f13Ok, we already covered the Feature list<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
spotdo we want to consider slipping for codec buddy?<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
spotthats a big hype item.<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
nottingi want to know wtf is going on with it<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
f13last topic is Coordination of subgroups, which I think is a longer topic that we can't cover today<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
spoti know some code exists<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
wwoodsWe might have to get Max's opinion on that one<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
f13spot: too late.<a href="#t14:09" class="time">14:09</a>
f13spot: A) it's not even seein the light of our repos, B) it apparently doesn't act at all like what we envisioned<a href="#t14:10" class="time">14:10</a>
wwoodsf13: who has the final call on what is and is not a blocker? the QA/release engineering teams?<a href="#t14:10" class="time">14:10</a>
f13wwoods: yeah, I'd say consensus from QA and rel-eng<a href="#t14:10" class="time">14:10</a>
f13wwoods: I'm trying really hard to not have flags<a href="#t14:10" class="time">14:10</a>
mclasenf13: "we envisioned" is a bit tough, considering hadess did not get any feeback<a href="#t14:10" class="time">14:10</a>
jrbI don't think we should slip for it<a href="#t14:10" class="time">14:10</a>
jwbto me, it's not a feature worth holding the release up for<a href="#t14:10" class="time">14:10</a>
spoti just know that the ambassadors have been talking it up<a href="#t14:11" class="time">14:11</a>
f13mclasen: "we envisioned" is what we came up with for a feature at the Fedora Summit<a href="#t14:11" class="time">14:11</a>
jwbspot, it can still go in post-release<a href="#t14:12" class="time">14:12</a>
f13mclasen: where it went from there.... max is already taking the blame for this one.<a href="#t14:12" class="time">14:12</a>
jrbwe can do it as an update..<a href="#t14:12" class="time">14:12</a>
jwbthat's what i meant<a href="#t14:13" class="time">14:13</a>
spotyeah, but it wouldn't be on the live cd without a respin<a href="#t14:13" class="time">14:13</a>
wwoods<a href=""></a> created<a href="#t14:14" class="time">14:14</a>
jeremyfrom my pov, it's an unfortunate thing.... but at the same time, are we time or feature driven?  (time).  which means that since it's not done, it comes around next time<a href="#t14:15" class="time">14:15</a>
nottingyeah, but i would like a full post-mortem as to why it didn't happen<a href="#t14:16" class="time">14:16</a>
jwbthe rhel load?<a href="#t14:17" class="time">14:17</a>
davejthat would probably be preferred by peter, but is probably more unlikely to happen ;)<a href="#t14:18" class="time">14:18</a>
jwb:)<a href="#t14:18" class="time">14:18</a>
davejat least one of the mkinitrd bugs has a patch which aparently works too.<a href="#t14:18" class="time">14:18</a>
jeremydavej: I can try to look through them this afternoon<a href="#t14:19" class="time">14:19</a>
davejPeter wanted to do it in some cleaner way or something, but if he doesn't have time, I'm inclined to say we should roll with the ugly fix<a href="#t14:19" class="time">14:19</a>
wwoodsno matter how ugly.. "your system no longer boots" is always worse<a href="#t14:22" class="time">14:22</a>
jeremyyes<a href="#t14:22" class="time">14:22</a>
jwbwell...<a href="#t14:22" class="time">14:22</a>
wwoodswhere does the LiveCD release planning happen?<a href="#t14:22" class="time">14:22</a>
nottinghere!<a href="#t14:22" class="time">14:22</a>
wwoodsare we considering it to be just another part of the release?<a href="#t14:23" class="time">14:23</a>
jeremywwoods: we are<a href="#t14:23" class="time">14:23</a>
f13wwoods: just another part yeah<a href="#t14:23" class="time">14:23</a>
f13jrb: I think we'd want to review it (as in teh board/rel-eng/etc..) before it goes out as an update<a href="#t14:23" class="time">14:23</a>
wwoodsjeremy: excellent. at some point we need to talk about how we can do automated testing on the LiveCD<a href="#t14:23" class="time">14:23</a>
f13wwoods: KVM!  QEMU!<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
jrbf13: sure.  But it feels like the class of thing we could do as an update<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
wwoodsjlaska and I had some good ideas about this earlier, but there might be some code changes required<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
f13probably<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
wwoodsf13: the number of systems we have with that hardware is pretty small<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
*f13 has changed the topic to: Fedora Release Team Meeting -- Open Discussion<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
f13wwoods: qemu runs on anything<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
jeremywwoods: all systems can run qemu.  just slowly ;-)<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
f13just... slowly<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
*jeremy hears an echo...<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
nottingis that a challenge to crash qemu?<a href="#t14:24" class="time">14:24</a>
jeremynotting: want a few ways?  I know some :)<a href="#t14:25" class="time">14:25</a>
jeremywwoods: we can talk about it as a side topic...  lots of code changes for the livecd-creator sort of scare me at this point, although at the same time, I know there's going to be a lot of post f7 stuff going on there<a href="#t14:25" class="time">14:25</a>
warrenTry to boot a xen kernel within qemu if you want a nice crash.<a href="#t14:25" class="time">14:25</a>
*rdieter needs to run, to FedEx house-closing docs.<a href="#t14:25" class="time">14:25</a>
davejhow has kvm been holding up? I've not tried it in a month or two<a href="#t14:25" class="time">14:25</a>
tibbsAh, can we touch on cdrkit now?<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
wwoodsjeremy: yeah, this might be post-F7 but I feel like the changes are fairly minimal. but yeah, it's a side discussion.<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
jeremydavej: it's doing okay... hopefully the virt-manager fixes will be built today.  danpb keeps promising them to me<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
f13tibbs: sure.<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
davejjeremy: I was tempted to pull in the pending patches that aparently give it a stable ABI (queued for .22)<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
davejjeremy: not sure if that would require userspace updates though<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
f13tibbs: have at it<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
bukajjeremy: not all systems can run qemu, only those where it actually compiles<a href="#t14:26" class="time">14:26</a>
tibbsWhat's going to happen to cdrecord and the other three packages cdrkit obsoletes?<a href="#t14:27" class="time">14:27</a>
jeremydavej: it would.  let's talk about it after?<a href="#t14:27" class="time">14:27</a>
bukajjeremy: which is very different, given its abuse of global register variables<a href="#t14:27" class="time">14:27</a>
davejjeremy: ok<a href="#t14:27" class="time">14:27</a>
jeremybukaj: indeed<a href="#t14:27" class="time">14:27</a>
tibbsBasically, either cdrkit needs to be pulled from Extras or we need to go ahead and pull those other packages from core like I thought was going to happen months ago.<a href="#t14:27" class="time">14:27</a>
nottingtibbs: they should go away.<a href="#t14:27" class="time">14:27</a>
*notting looks at f13<a href="#t14:28" class="time">14:28</a>
tibbsI'm getting the feeling it's too late now, though.<a href="#t14:28" class="time">14:28</a>
nottingnah<a href="#t14:28" class="time">14:28</a>
wwoodsI think maybe the groundwork for this was already laid, and it's just been waiting for The Merge<a href="#t14:28" class="time">14:28</a>
nottingwe're not frozen yet! *ducks*<a href="#t14:28" class="time">14:28</a>
tibbsI know cdrkit is supposed to be the future but I'm concerned that it hasn't gotten any testing.<a href="#t14:28" class="time">14:28</a>
wwoodsassuming that.. oh<a href="#t14:28" class="time">14:28</a>
f13I think the reason we didn't pull them yet was that there was Core packages that either required it or build rquired it<a href="#t14:29" class="time">14:29</a>
f13and pulling the things from core would make the nightly report go bonkers and could break some builds<a href="#t14:29" class="time">14:29</a>
f13really cdrkit should have gone into Core instead of Extras<a href="#t14:29" class="time">14:29</a>
f13does harold own cdrkit?<a href="#t14:29" class="time">14:29</a>
tibbsYes.<a href="#t14:29" class="time">14:29</a>
wwoodswasn't cdrkit one of the requirements for having full FSF license compliance?<a href="#t14:29" class="time">14:29</a>
jwbwwoods, not exactly<a href="#t14:30" class="time">14:30</a>
f13tibbs: so I think this one will get taken care of at merge time, we just won't merge those replacements<a href="#t14:30" class="time">14:30</a>
f13er those that are getting replaced<a href="#t14:30" class="time">14:30</a>
tibbsIs merge time sooner than release time?  I'm still unclear on that.<a href="#t14:31" class="time">14:31</a>
nottingf13: just move more stuff to extras now!<a href="#t14:31" class="time">14:31</a>
f13nggah<a href="#t14:31" class="time">14:31</a>
f13notting: things like nautilus?<a href="#t14:31" class="time">14:31</a>
davejI have to head out for a bit soon, is there anything else on the agenda that I need to be around for?<a href="#t14:31" class="time">14:31</a>
f13tibbs: merge time we're really really really trying to be done before F7 final<a href="#t14:31" class="time">14:31</a>
f13tibbs: it depends on how soon mmcgrath can get machines into the colo<a href="#t14:32" class="time">14:32</a>
nottingf13: everything. screw build power :)<a href="#t14:32" class="time">14:32</a>
f13...<a href="#t14:32" class="time">14:32</a>
warrenGet Mike on an exercise bike in the colo<a href="#t14:32" class="time">14:32</a>
mmcgrath:)<a href="#t14:33" class="time">14:33</a>
f13mlum: you had something to bring up?<a href="#t14:33" class="time">14:33</a>
nottingf13: put cdrkit* as default in prime comps, then, so it at least gets tested<a href="#t14:34" class="time">14:34</a>
jeremyf13: crazy idea for the cdrkit stuff... what if we change the defaults and also block things from the test tag<a href="#t14:34" class="time">14:34</a>
jeremyf13: that way test4 only has the new cdrkit stuff.  we could also block them from dist-rawhide and keep them available for building.  </evil hack idea><a href="#t14:34" class="time">14:34</a>
f13jeremy: maaaaybe.  Something to try after Test4?  The nightly report will probably go bonkers but that's ignorable.<a href="#t14:36" class="time">14:36</a>
f13well, we can block it from f7-test4 tag for sure<a href="#t14:36" class="time">14:36</a>
f13and change comps<a href="#t14:36" class="time">14:36</a>
nottingf13: would need to be before test4 to get proper testing<a href="#t14:37" class="time">14:37</a>
jeremyf13: what's the worst that happens?  we hose tomorrow's rawhide and then undo it<a href="#t14:37" class="time">14:37</a>
f13notting: I'll see what we can do today<a href="#t14:37" class="time">14:37</a>
nottingtibbs: what binaries does cdrkit build?<a href="#t14:37" class="time">14:37</a>
nottingerm, binary packages<a href="#t14:38" class="time">14:38</a>
f13things that sound nothing like cd burning IIRC<a href="#t14:38" class="time">14:38</a>
nottingrepoquery does not help here<a href="#t14:38" class="time">14:38</a>
f13hrm.<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
f13is cdrkit actually in Extras yet?<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
mlumah yes, certificate system is a peer project of directory server<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
f13[jkeating@mentok creator] $ rpm -q cdrkit<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
f13package cdrkit is not installed<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
f13Excluding Packages in global exclude list<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
f13Finished<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
f13Nothing to do<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
f13this is on a rawhide x86_64 system<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
nottingf13: is source package. builds binaries of other names<a href="#t14:39" class="time">14:39</a>
mlumat some point, we'd like to get that into Fedora.  I'm wondering when/what we need to do to get that in to the Fedora release cycle..  Not all our components are in there, so..<a href="#t14:40" class="time">14:40</a>
nirikwodim genisoimage<a href="#t14:40" class="time">14:40</a>
tibbsnotting: It builds wodim, genisoimage and icedax, for whatever reason<a href="#t14:40" class="time">14:40</a>
nirikicedax<a href="#t14:40" class="time">14:40</a>
mlumf13: maybe you and I can talk about this outside this meeting.<a href="#t14:40" class="time">14:40</a>
wwoodsblarg. why doesn't it create cdrkit-{wodim,icedax,genisoimage}?<a href="#t14:41" class="time">14:41</a>
tibbsI've no idea; that's what upstream picked.<a href="#t14:41" class="time">14:41</a>
tibbsIt's not too late to change it if someone can convince Harald.<a href="#t14:41" class="time">14:41</a>
f13mlum: well, once Fedora 8 development cycle opens up you should start adding the functional opensource bits you have<a href="#t14:42" class="time">14:42</a>
wwoodsoh! I had something<a href="#t14:42" class="time">14:42</a>
wwoodsI got confirmation from the bluez maintainer that the firmware is freely redistributable (although non-modifiable), just like the intel firmware<a href="#t14:43" class="time">14:43</a>
nottingicedax == cdda2wav?<a href="#t14:43" class="time">14:43</a>
f13don't we need a license file or such that makes this clear in order to actually redistribute it?<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
nottingYES<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
notting(hence, why we have no ralink firmware)<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
mlumwhen is FC8 opening up?<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
tibbsnotting: I believe so.<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
wwoodsf13/notting: gotcha<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
bukajmlum: when F7 is done?<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
mlumf13: (so, sorry for the dumb question -- FC-7 is closed?)<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
wwoodsI'll try to get the ball rolling for that for F8.<a href="#t14:44" class="time">14:44</a>
nottingwe can branch as soon as scm is merged<a href="#t14:45" class="time">14:45</a>
f13thats a subject for next meeting I think, when to branch<a href="#t14:45" class="time">14:45</a>
mlumI just need dates.  So I can add that to our schedules.<a href="#t14:45" class="time">14:45</a>
f13mlum: end of may<a href="#t14:45" class="time">14:45</a>
mlumso potentially FC8 checkins can start in the beginning of June?<a href="#t14:46" class="time">14:46</a>
f13yes, that sounds right<a href="#t14:46" class="time">14:46</a>
f13provided we don't slip<a href="#t14:46" class="time">14:46</a>
nottingadministrivia - is anyone writing a report for board/fesco? and do we want to meet again before next monday to discuss test4 status?<a href="#t14:47" class="time">14:47</a>
f13ok, I'm ending this weeks meeting.<a href="#t14:47" class="time">14:47</a>
f13poelcat: would you be able to wrap up the notes and send a report, or is that not part of your new tasks?<a href="#t14:48" class="time">14:48</a>
f13notting: I"d like to meet again on Thursday to discuss Test4 status<a href="#t14:48" class="time">14:48</a>
f13except that day blows for meetings :/<a href="#t14:48" class="time">14:48</a>
f13  I have a 2-3pm EDT opening<a href="#t14:49" class="time">14:49</a>
notting... assuming fesco doesn't run late :)<a href="#t14:49" class="time">14:49</a>
f13yeah<a href="#t14:49" class="time">14:49</a>
f13Should we plan for sticking around after FESCO to hit up Test4 status?<a href="#t14:49" class="time">14:49</a>
f13send mail to ad-hoc list of folks?<a href="#t14:50" class="time">14:50</a>
jeremythat's probably reasonable<a href="#t14:50" class="time">14:50</a>
jeremyand we'll try to keep it short<a href="#t14:50" class="time">14:50</a>
notting'whenever fesco ends'? sure.<a href="#t14:50" class="time">14:50</a>
wwoodstime: (end of FESCo) + (1 beer)<a href="#t14:51" class="time">14:51</a>
f13notting: I have IRC logs if nobody else steps up to send the mail.<a href="#t14:52" class="time">14:52</a>
wwoodswe could do the Test4 status during the QA team slot on Thursday<a href="#t14:52" class="time">14:52</a>
f13notting: I'll try to summerize what we discussed, but brain all hurty right now.<a href="#t14:52" class="time">14:52</a>
poelcatf13: I can help :)  still ironing out exact stuff<a href="#t14:52" class="time">14:52</a>
wwoodssince we'll essentially be talking testing status anyway<a href="#t14:52" class="time">14:52</a>
poelcatf13: that I am responsible for <a href="#t14:52" class="time">14:52</a>
nottingf13: anything else?<a href="#t14:53" class="time">14:53</a>
poelcatf13: in terms of notes from the meeting... summarize decisions and action items for followup?<a href="#t14:53" class="time">14:53</a>
f13poelcat: that would be sufficient<a href="#t14:54" class="time">14:54</a>
f13notting: I don't think so, we're way over on time anyway<a href="#t14:54" class="time">14:54</a>
nottingsorry, gotta run. thx all.<a href="#t14:54" class="time">14:54</a>
f13poelcat: thanks!<a href="#t14:54" class="time">14:54</a>
glezosf13, notting, all; thanks for organizing this meeting. gtg.<a href="#t15:14" class="time">15:14</a>

Generated by 2.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!