From Fedora Project Wiki

< QA‎ | Meetings


  • adamw (136)
  • nirik (44)
  • jreznik (41)
  • j_dulaney (35)
  • tflink (26)
  • kparal (11)
  • pwhalen (10)
  • rdieter (10)
  • zodbot (5)
  • Martix (4)
  • brunowolff (4)
  • pingou (4)
  • satellit (2)
  • Martix_ (1)
  • mkrizek (1)
  • halfline (1)
  • pschindl (1)


  • Previous meeting follow-up
  • Fedora 19 schedule
  • Test Days
  • Criteria re-design
  • Open floor

Previous meeting follow-up

  • adamw to push the blocker meeting changes live this week - this was done, and the next review meeting will be in #fedora-blocker-review. nirik will make #fedora-bugzappers redirect to #fedora-qa for now
  • viking-ice or adamw to file a trac ticket for the smoke-test-for-spins idea - this was done by adamw
  • adamw to propose RATS/TC1 dates on the list - this was done and would be discussed later
  • tflink to announce first blocker meeting for wednesday, and get blocker bug tracker app ready - meeting was cancelled due to lack of bugs, but the app is ready
  • jreznik to pencil in QA changes as discussed - this was done, we will finalize the changes during the meeting
  • adamw to draft up changes to the test day process docs to accommodate test days being on any day, test day co-ordinator to ensure they're balanced out - this was put into production immediately as it turned out to be a small change

Fedora 19 schedule

Test Days

  • We'll need to do some special care and feeding of a KDE test day image for this week
  • The rest of the test day topic is tabled for next week (or whenever martix is around)

Criteria re-design

  • adamw's proposal was discussed: generally positive response
  • There was some discussion of numbering the criteria, j_dulaney withdrew the suggestion
  • pwhalen raised the topic of 'ARM friendliness', adam said he'd been working with that in mind to ensure the revamped criteria are easily applicable to ARM when it goes primary
  • adamw planned to keep working on refining the re-design

Open floor

Action items

  • jreznik to ink in the proposed image schedule, and add a Test Day entry


adamw #startmeeting Fedora QA meeting 15:03
zodbot Meeting started Mon Mar 11 15:03:27 2013 UTC. The chair is adamw. Information about MeetBot at 15:03
zodbot Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:03
adamw #meetingname fedora-qa 15:03
zodbot The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa' 15:03
adamw #topic roll call 15:03
adamw note: rawhide has been displaying an adorable habit of hanging on me at random times, so i may drop out for a few minutes at some point. don't panic. hold memorial services if you like. 15:04
* satellit listening 15:04
* pwhalen waves 15:04
brunowolff I can't stay the whole time, but I was interested in knowing if gnome not working with software rendering is a blocker issue? 15:04
* mkrizek is here 15:04
brunowolff I have issues with gdm and gnome3 because software rendering is needed and is broken. 15:05
* tflink is here 15:05
* kparal waves 15:05
halfline yea sounds like a blocker issue 15:06
adamw if llvmpipe is busted, yeah, raise the panic flag on that one 15:06
brunowolff I have a couple of bugs filed, but will request them as blockers for eval at the next blocker meeting. 15:06
Martix_ Martix is here 15:07
* nirik is lurking, has a few items for open floor 15:07
adamw brunowolff: yup, we need some proposed blockers anyhow :) 15:08
adamw #chair tflink kparal 15:08
zodbot Current chairs: adamw kparal tflink 15:08
adamw okely dokely 15:10
adamw i guess viking will show up soon as per usual 15:10
adamw #topic previous meeting follow-up 15:10
adamw #info "adamw to push the blocker meeting changes live this week" - this was done, see 15:11
adamw so assuming we actually hold the first meeting this week, it should follow the new process 15:11
* pschindl is late but here (time shifting is bad thing) 15:12
adamw #info blocker review meeting on wednesday will be in #fedora-blocker-review, update your...xchat bookmarks? 15:12
nirik shall I kill off the bugzappers channel and or forward it to the new channel? 15:12
adamw pschindl: daylight savings should die a horrible death. 15:12
adamw nirik: oh right, i forgot to reply to that. what does 'killing' constitute exactly? 15:13
adamw could we get it back? 15:13
nirik well, I guess setting it to ban everyone. ;) 15:13
nirik yeah, anything that is #fedora* can be gotten back from freenode. 15:13
nirik we could just change the topic and leave it to sit. 15:13
nirik or redirect everyone who tries to join it to qa or something. 15:14
adamw redirect sounds decent for now, i guess? 15:14
* adamw doesn't really have a strong opinion 15:14
nirik ok, to #fedora-qa ? 15:14
tflink yeah, redirect sounds like a good option 15:15
tflink #fedora-qa makes the most sense to me 15:15
* nirik nods. 15:15
adamw any other opinions? 15:16
kparal +1 15:16
tflink what are we going to call the new channel? 15:16
tflink #fedora-blockerreview? 15:16
adamw see above. 15:16
adamw it was right there in the #info :) 15:17
tflink but that would require reading ... 15:17
* jreznik is here 15:17
adamw tflink: it's just work work work all the time, huh 15:17
adamw okay, nirik, make it so 15:18
adamw #info nirik will set #fedora-bugzappers to redirect to #fedora-qa for now 15:18
nirik can do 15:18
adamw #info "viking-ice or adamw to file a trac ticket for the smoke-test-for-spins idea" - did that: 15:18
adamw #info "adamw to propose RATS/TC1 dates on the list" - did that too! I'm on a roll. 15:19
adamw i put a topic on the agenda to discuss those dates later, so let's move on for now 15:20
adamw "tflink to announce first blocker meeting for wednesday, and get blocker bug tracker app ready" 15:20
adamw tflink: the meeting was cancelled, but the blocker app is ready now, right> 15:20
tflink kind of done - we didn't have the meeting but the app is working with F19 stuff now 15:20
adamw roger 15:21
adamw #info "tflink to announce first blocker meeting for wednesday, and get blocker bug tracker app ready" - meeting was cancelled due to lack of bugs, but the app is ready 15:21
tflink still working out hosting details in order to support the blocker proposal stuff w/o using self-signed certs 15:21
adamw #info tflink is working on hosting details for the blocker proposal web page 15:21
adamw "jreznik to pencil in QA changes as discussed" - jreznik? 15:23
jreznik adamw: draft schedule changes online, need review, as adamw said - let's discuss it in the meeting 15:24
jreznik 15:24
adamw roger 15:24
adamw #info "jreznik to pencil in QA changes as discussed" - this was done, we will finalize the changes during the meeting 15:24
adamw #info "adamw to draft up changes to the test day process docs to accommodate test days being on any day, test day co-ordinator to ensure they're balanced out" - this was put into 'production' immediately as it turned out to be a small change, 15:25
adamw alrighty 15:26
adamw #topic Fedora 19 schedule 15:26
adamw so i drafted up a schedule for the image composes for f19, following the f17/f18 model closely: 15:26
adamw it didn't get much feedback. anyone have any notes? 15:26
jreznik it's now live in schedule (more a draft, not commited yet) 15:27
tflink nothing specific but earlier is probably better for TCs, I think 15:27
jreznik and was harder to do than I thought as half of the schedule depends on release candidates... 15:28
jreznik tflink: that's what rats is for 15:28
adamw tflink: the 'do TCs early' thing was pretty much worked into the f17 schedule 15:28
jreznik and after talking to guys pre-feature freeze I think we should take a look on rats more closely and do it really for rawhide, not after branch (early TCs could serve there) 15:29
adamw this schedule gives us 22 days between tc1 and go/no-go for each milestone 15:29
jreznik adamw: for your proposed dates, I've moved go/no-gos again to thursday (so +1 day) 15:29
adamw jreznik: rats would have been of limited use this cycle because of all the changes being made to anaconda 15:29
adamw it would likely have failed a lot and not told us much 15:29
adamw jreznik: ah right, good catch 15:29
tflink jreznik: I don't see a whole lot of difference between RATS and a TC other than the name, though 15:30
jreznik adamw: for f18 it wasn't very usable, for f19 it should be better but probably the must for f20 15:30
tflink either way, I'm not particular on what we call it as long as there's stuff to test 15:30
jreznik tflink: adamw thinks about rats after branching as a quick smoke test (so how do we want to produce it?) 15:30
jreznik tflink: I agree, earlier, better 15:30
tflink smoke/rats/tc ... they all work 15:31
jreznik that's why I'm thinking about moving rats again pre-brach for f20 15:31
adamw jreznik: even for f19 - they've been doing their test builds based on f18 again, and it's been frequently broken 15:31
jreznik adamw: well, we have been using f19 build for anaconda usability lab, wasn't perfect but it gives you an overview and helps with development of installer related features 15:32
jreznik at least once a time try to "stabilize" something and give it to QA/devels 15:32
adamw sure. but running rats on it wouldn't have meant much. rats per se is just a single 'does it install' test. 15:32
jreznik but at least you would have somethin to try "does it install" 15:33
jreznik let's get back to f19 now :) 15:33
tflink we could just build smoke images as soon as the branch is complete 15:34
adamw yeah 15:34
tflink should be functionally the same 15:34
jreznik tflink: that's the idea for f19, to build smoke images this week 15:34
jreznik and branching is tomorrow, adamw proposed Thursday 15:35
jreznik as it hopefully will be completed 15:35
jreznik this time there's more time between branch and alpha change deadline 15:36
jreznik so there's some "buffer" but I agree with as early as possible one 15:36
adamw doesn't sound like anyone's unhappy with the proposed schedule? I guess we can just go with it 15:39
jreznik anything else to add to the schedule? /me would like to add Test Days for F19 as Ambassadors asked for a task connected to it 15:39
adamw what do you mean exactly? add each individual test day there? or just 'test days' as a block task lasting X days? 15:40
jreznik adamw: the second 15:41
adamw seems fine 15:41
jreznik sesivany asked for it, so they can remind ambassadors to do more marketing for Test Days 15:41
jreznik looking on older releases, Test Days are scheduled right after Feature/Branch Freeze to GA 15:42
jreznik not sure how much sense does it make right before GA, but ok for me :) 15:42
adamw basically, yeah 15:42
adamw "between the Alpha and GA milestones of a Fedora release" 15:42
adamw well what happens usually is if you pick that spot, you get a good date once the schedule delays shake out ;) 15:43
jreznik well, it's more between Feature/Branch Freeeze and GA 15:43
adamw yeah, it doesn't mean 'alpha release' 15:43
jreznik this is just clearer definition as Alpha is quite generic term 15:43
adamw #action jreznik to ink in the proposed image schedule, and add a Test Day entry 15:44
adamw yeah, i could edit that on the wiki. 15:44
jreznik thanks 15:44
* j_dulaney apologizes for tardiness 15:44
* j_dulaney is on spring break, and just woke up 15:44
* adamw hopes j_dulaney is surrounded by bottles 15:45
adamw #topic Test Days 15:45
adamw so this is left over from last week's test day topic - a couple of things there that we forgot to discuss 15:46
adamw i see someone's added "KDE Test Day - this Thursday, need build F19 KDE Live images, currently failed 03/10 - ask dgilmore?" 15:46
adamw i usually handle building GNOME test day images myself, we could do the same for KDE - building live images isn't that hard 15:46
nirik the kde images are currently failing due to mysql fallout 15:47
j_dulaney adamw: Actually ... 15:47
j_dulaney adamw: Home made meade 15:47
adamw outstanding. it's not a dulaney spring break without home-made mead. 15:47
* satellit anaconda fails to show spokes from liveinst in nightlys FYI 15:48
jreznik nirik: I see rdieter commited one mariadb deps fix today 15:48
j_dulaney nirik: What sort of mysql explosion is going on? 15:48
nirik jreznik: I don't think it worked. ;) 15:48
nirik j_dulaney: the mariadb replacement stuff. 15:48
jreznik rdieter: ^^^? 15:48
nirik discussion is ongoing on devel list 15:48
j_dulaney nirik: Ah 15:48
* nirik doesn't think we will solve it here, just informational. 15:49
* j_dulaney looks 15:49
jreznik ok 15:49
* nirik guesses adamw's machine locked up. :) 15:51
adamw so it's mkrizek who wanted to discuss this stuff, but he's not around 15:51
adamw no, i'm just reading /. 15:51
adamw so i guess we can just make some notes and move on 15:52
adamw #info we'll need to do some special care and feeding of a KDE test day image for this week 15:52
adamw let's punt the other two things to next week, assuming martix will be here 15:53
adamw er, martix and mkrizek are the same person, for anyone who didn't get that. 15:53
adamw #info the rest of the test day topic is tabled for next week (or whenever martix is around) 15:53
kparal no they are not :) 15:53
adamw where did I get that idea from? sigh. 15:54
kparal martix == mholec 15:54
adamw #undo 15:54
zodbot Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Info object at 0x269fff90> 15:54
adamw d'oh. 15:54
adamw no, wait, that one was right. 15:54
j_dulaney LOL 15:54
adamw you know what, I'm going to bed 15:54
adamw #info the rest of the test day topic is tabled for next week (or whenever martix is around) 15:54
* j_dulaney wonders who is the more hung over 15:54
adamw disregard all mentions of mkrizek above, because adamw is an idiot monkey. 15:54
pingou info? 15:55
adamw #info disregard all mentions of mkrizek above, because adamw is an idiot monkey. 15:55
adamw there, would you like me to put it on a billboard? :) 15:55
pingou ^^ 15:55
pingou yes, please :) 15:55
* adamw calls clear channel 15:55
nirik you must pay to have an add in the new york times. ;) 15:55
* pingou goes back to his corner 15:55
* adamw golf claps 15:55
adamw alrighty, moving on, adam wilson has a proposal to edit the release critera...:P 15:56
adamw #topic Criteria re-design 15:56
adamw so I wrote a giant proposal for editing the release criteria. 15:57
* j_dulaney is +1, btw 15:57
adamw i was expecting at least one person to advocate burning me at the stake for it, but not so far. 15:57
adamw we're a bit short on time now, but any quick thoughts? 15:57
j_dulaney Sorry for not posting on the list 15:58
* nirik thought it looked ok. We can always adjust as we go if needed. 15:58
tflink I'm +1 on the general idea but I shudder at the thought of using the new layout for blocker review meetings 15:58
adamw tflink: how do you mean? 15:58
tflink adamw: finding 15:59
tflink adamw: finding criteria 15:59
* j_dulaney is +1 adding numbers 15:59
kparal it's true that the hidden text can't be searched through 15:59
kparal if that's what you mean 15:59
tflink kparal: that's pretty much it, yeah 15:59
pwhalen Had a couple of release criteria related questions. For ARM to move to PA, we need to start following the guidelines, which for the most part we do. We do however have a challenge when it comes to the release blocking desktops and installer related criteria. 15:59
j_dulaney Even if they do change between releases, numbers still makes reference easier 15:59
Martix I'm back 16:00
pwhalen could the release blocking desktops be defined for the architecture? ie GNOME and KDE for x86. XFCE for arm? 16:00
tflink numbers haven't really been helpful in the past, though 16:00
* j_dulaney thought they were 16:00
kparal numbers change in time 16:01
* tflink couldn't tell you what alpha criterion 7 vs final #7 are 16:01
adamw tflink: i figured the reliable 'names' for criteria and the clearer text would make it easier, but maybe not... 16:01
j_dulaney Not for memorizing, but for in meeting use 16:01
j_dulaney It saves typing 16:01
adamw tflink: i would like if we could have an 'expand all' link but i'm not sure we can with this particular wiki thing 16:01
jreznik pwhalen: so you mean pre-PA, or even post-PA for the desktops stuff? 16:01
adamw yeah, the numbers are pretty much useless the way we currently do it 16:01
jreznik (and we could expect different primary desktops based on arch) 16:02
nirik pwhalen: if arm wants Xfce as release blocking, we might also want to try and add it to primary... 16:02
adamw pwhalen: in theory they can be, sure. 16:02
tflink I don't remember the last time we referenced criterion numbers in meeting 16:02
j_dulaney pwhalen: That's vagualy a FESCo-ish question, to 16:02
j_dulaney s/to/too 16:02
adamw pwhalen: one does not simply 'define' release blocking desktops, however ;) 16:02
pwhalen jreznik, even post. The hardware is limited and GNOME/KDE will not work. Most systems lack a desktop altogether 16:02
tflink it adds a layer of indirection that I'm not a huge fan of - makes things more confusing 16:02
* nirik realizes his reply didn't fully make sense there. 16:02
adamw as j_dulaney says, it's kind of a project wide thing, not just something QA Decides 16:02
adamw you'd probably want to make it an issue in the ARM-as-primary process 16:02
j_dulaney Alright, 16:03
* j_dulaney withdraws desire for criteria numbers 16:03
tflink adamw: yeah, I don't have a better solution with the constraint of staying inside the wiki - we'll manage :) 16:03
adamw tflink: well if you can think of an alternative design that keeps the metadata separate from the simplified criteria but easily accessible and clearly linked, i'm all ears 16:04
jreznik pwhalen: btw about being close to the current PA - would you like to have my help too as a program manager? (OT here, we can discuss seperately) 16:04
adamw there's probably some kind of way to do it with footers and *s or something 16:04
pwhalen adamw, alright, that makes sense. For the installer related criteria, since we do not have an installer, those items wouldn't apply. Is the wording sufficient as is? 16:04
pwhalen jreznik, that would be greatly appreciated 16:04
tflink adamw: like I said, I don't have a better idea inside the wiki and am +1 in general - just realizing that it'll be an adjustment 16:04
adamw pwhalen: more or less. i think rather than tweak individual criteria wording it's an 'overall flow of the criteria' question. i'm trying to keep it in mind as I go, but we only really need to fully deal with it once ARM actually *is* a primary arch 16:05
adamw and trying to account for it before ARM is a primary arch is putting the horse before the cart to a degree 16:05
adamw i'm trying to bear in mind both 'ARM is probably going to be a primary arch at some point' and 'ARM is not in fact currently a primary arch' 16:05
adamw and also consider the case of the EC2 image etc. 16:05
pwhalen adamw, understood 16:06
adamw but in general, read the criteria as meaning 'when the installer is present it must fulfil conditions X, Y and Z' than 'there must always be an installer'. 16:06
j_dulaney +1 16:06
pwhalen much more arm friendly. sounds good on both concerns, thanks 16:06
j_dulaney pwhalen: I didn't see anything major with the arm-specific criteria you'd come up wiht 16:07
* j_dulaney will poke at that list today for you 16:07
pwhalen just those two items so far, will forward to the arm list after the meeting for discussion 16:08
j_dulaney pwhalen: Anyway, a few things occur to me that I'd like to discuss after the meeting, maybe in #fedora-arm 16:08
pwhalen j_dulaney, sure 16:08
adamw okay, we're a bit over time, thanks for the feedback 16:09
adamw i'll keep working on the proposal 16:09
adamw #topic open floor 16:09
adamw anything for open floor? 16:09
nirik I had two quick items. 16:09
nirik item the first: I have drafted a replacement for our Rawhide wiki page. Feedback welcome. I will probibly move it in place soon if I don't hear any complaints. 16:10
adamw fire away, fire away 16:10
nirik 16:10
adamw (TIGH TAY NEEEEEE UM) 16:10
adamw did you send it out anywhere for comments? 16:10
kparal was that a canadian war cry? 16:10
nirik yes, I mentioned it on the test list and devel lists. 16:10
j_dulaney adamw: It's on the list 16:10
adamw kparal: no, it was that song that was all over everywhere 16:10
j_dulaney Long thread 16:10
adamw shows you how much mail I read over the weekend... 16:11
adamw looks fine at a once-over. 16:11
nirik I might also do another rework for the branched page soon. 16:11
nirik item the second: 16:11
nirik What would folks think about a rawhide blocker bug? At a first start it could block bugs that prevent rawhide compose, but we could also add further critera for it. 16:11
* j_dulaney thinks it's an improvement, and is +1 for it 16:11
adamw i prefer calling them 'tracker bugs', as the term 'blocker' is a bit overloaded 16:12
nirik yeah, sorry. 16:12
adamw a tracker for issues that are breaking rawhide completely seems like a good thing to have 16:12
j_dulaney nirik: BTW, apologies for never getting back to you on those nightlies, they never quite booted 16:12
nirik I can send a proposal out on that too, but thought I would see if folks thought it was dead in the water first, etc. 16:12
* jreznik is going to read it 16:12
adamw naw, i like it. it shouldn't have any kind of 'proposal/acceptance' process like the release blocker trackers though. 16:13
jreznik (missed before) 16:13
tflink would it involve reviewing the rawhide "blockers"? 16:13
nirik adamw: yeah, but it shouldn't allow anything to be added. 16:13
jreznik tflink: could be your app used for it then? 16:13
adamw it should just be for rawhide gardeners to follow and deal with directly. 16:13
j_dulaney nirik: It should be anyone can propose against it 16:13
adamw nirik: how would you implement that? 16:13
kparal I'd love to see rawhide tracker bug that would list most problematic bugs (like systemd doesn't boot or gdm doesn't start). this way I could quickly find a relevant bug and maybe even a workaround if rawhide didn't work for me 16:13
tflink jreznik: probably, but it would likely require some code changes 16:14
kparal s/systemd/system 16:14
nirik adamw: I'd list critera that should be used to add things to it... if something doesn't match that I'd remove the bug and tell the person who added it to not do that. ;) 16:14
* j_dulaney doesn't think that there should be a review process for rawhide bugs, though 16:14
adamw that sounds fine. 16:14
nirik kparal: yeah, that was my thought too. 16:14
j_dulaney Not unless they are going to hit the next release 16:14
nirik kparal: give better visibility for rawhide users to find breakage quickly. 16:14
* kparal thinks it's a great idea 16:15
adamw obviously it's kind of creating the position of 'head rawhide herder', though, which you'd probably want to quantify in some way for raptor proofing purposes... 16:15
adamw or have a group of 'rawhide herders', or whatever. 16:15
nirik yeah. 16:15
nirik I'll whip up a proposal to the list for discussion/refinement 16:15
adamw but yeah, keep it light and informal, no big meetings or lists of criteria or any of that nonsense ;) 16:15
j_dulaney +1 16:15
nirik right. I completely agree. 16:15
* jreznik thinks about being such rawhide herder, it could push him to use rawhide on daily basis 16:17
adamw you too can enjoy random kernel hangs! 16:17
adamw nirik: was there something else or was that both your topics? 16:17
nirik thats it from me. :) 16:17
* nirik is not seeing kernel hangs here. 16:17
adamw #info nirik has a Rawhide wiki page proposal out for discussion - 16:18
jreznik wow, :) 16:18
adamw #agreed we like nirik's idea of a tracker bug for Rawhide showstoppers 16:18
nirik yeah. ;) more history welcome if anyone remembers it. 16:18
adamw alrighty, let's wind this puppy up 16:19
* adamw sets fuse for 2 minutes 16:19
Martix 16:19
Martix jreznik: regarding mariadb KDE fix, will it hit image composes tomorrow? 16:19
nirik Martix: there's not a fix yet. 16:20
nirik hopefully soon 16:20
Martix [16:48] <jreznik> nirik: I see rdieter commited one mariadb deps fix today 16:20
nirik it didn't help/work 16:20
nirik 16:20
j_dulaney jreznik or nirik: When there is something testable, could you drop an email on the test list? 16:20
j_dulaney For KDE, that is 16:20
* j_dulaney will happily test 16:21
rdieter the only "fix" I applied was changing one place that previously: Requires: mysql-server to Requires: mariadb-server 16:21
rdieter I highly suspect it won't help 16:21
nirik rdieter: it didn't. see above. (that was after your commit) 16:21
rdieter I suspect something requires libmysqlclient, and MySQL-libs wins 16:21
jreznik rdieter: could you take a look on that so guys could prepare the image for Thursday (also a reminder for the whole KDE SIG ;-) 16:22
rdieter (probably due to the last fallback of shortest name) 16:22
rdieter hence, my query onlist to simply exclude MySQL from composing, but that may be overkill 16:23
rdieter unless someone else has a better idea 16:23
* nirik wishes the mariadb maintainers would actually chime up 16:23
adamw it'd be easy enough just to exclude mysql from a kickstart to build a test day image. it's like one line. 16:23
adamw well, it might be. 16:23
rdieter adamw: how? repo ... --exclude ? 16:24
* rdieter already tried naive: -MySQL* in pkg list 16:24
adamw you can try just -mysql-libs (or whatever), but i guess dependencies can override that 16:24
adamw ah 16:24
adamw yeah, it may be possible to exclude it from the repo definition then 16:24
rdieter I can't think of any sane way to do this as long as mariadb and MySQL aren't parallel-installable 16:25
adamw alright. well, i think we've identified the problem anyway 16:26
brunowolff I think things have changed so that when you use - the package is virtually removed from the repo so that other dependencies can't bring it in. The compose will fail instead. 16:26
rdieter brunowolff: that does not seem to be the case 16:26
adamw i think we can work on fixing it outside the meeting 16:26
adamw thanks for coming, folks - further discussion to #fedora-qa or #fedora-kde i guess 16:27
adamw #endmeeting 16:27

Generated by 2.11.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!