From Fedora Project Wiki

< QA‎ | Meetings

(create initial page for 10-08 meeting)
 
(update page with the results of the meeting)
 
Line 3: Line 3:
= Agenda =
= Agenda =
* Previous meeting follow-up
* Previous meeting follow-up
* Release criteria proposals
* Fedora 18 Beta status / mini blocker review
* Fedora 18 Beta status / mini blocker review
* Open floor
* Open floor
Line 8: Line 9:
== Previous meeting follow-up ==
== Previous meeting follow-up ==
* ''adamw to propose a criterion covering basic (not advanced) re-use of /home for Beta'' - not done yet, sorry
* ''adamw to propose a criterion covering basic (not advanced) re-use of /home for Beta'' - not done yet, sorry
* ''adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion'' - not done yet
* ''tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down'' - not done yet
== Release criteria proposals ==
* Proposed changes to the upgrade criteria for Beta and Final were accepted (see log for exact text)


== Fedora 18 Beta status / mini blocker review ==
== Fedora 18 Beta status / mini blocker review ==
* FESCo pre-freeze meeting is happening again, so let's see whether we think current status is freezeable, and look at blocker status
* Agreed that we recommended slipping of freeze due to no currently testable upgrade tool for F18
* Outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS was another potential issue that needs re-testing


== Open floor ==
== Open floor ==
N/A
== Action items ==
* adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion
* tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down


== IRC Log ==
== IRC Log ==
{|
|- id="t15:02:00"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #startmeeting fedora-qa
|| [[#t15:02:00|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:00"
! style="background-color: #42427e" | zodbot
| style="color: #42427e" | Meeting started Mon Oct  8 15:02:00 2012 UTC.  The chair is tflink. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
|| [[#t15:02:00|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:00"
! style="background-color: #42427e" | zodbot
| style="color: #42427e" | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
|| [[#t15:02:00|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:06"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #meetingname fedora-qa
|| [[#t15:02:06|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:06"
! style="background-color: #42427e" | zodbot
| style="color: #42427e" | The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa'
|| [[#t15:02:06|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:13"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #topic Roll Call
|| [[#t15:02:13|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:17"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #chair kparal
|| [[#t15:02:17|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:17"
! style="background-color: #42427e" | zodbot
| style="color: #42427e" | Current chairs: kparal tflink
|| [[#t15:02:17|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:33"
| colspan="2" | * Martix is here
|| [[#t15:02:33|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:34"
| colspan="2" | * pschindl is here
|| [[#t15:02:34|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:43"
| colspan="2" | * satellit listening
|| [[#t15:02:43|15:02]]
|- id="t15:02:45"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | oh, so it's here again
|| [[#t15:02:45|15:02]]
|- id="t15:03:07"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | kparal: the meeting? Did I start in the wrong channel?
|| [[#t15:03:07|15:03]]
|- id="t15:03:07"
| colspan="2" | * mkrizek is here
|| [[#t15:03:07|15:03]]
|- id="t15:03:08"
! style="background-color: #854685" | joat
| style="color: #854685" | here
|| [[#t15:03:08|15:03]]
|- id="t15:03:11"
| colspan="2" | * kparal is confused by channel changes
|| [[#t15:03:11|15:03]]
|- id="t15:03:28"
| colspan="2" | * spoore is listening...or trying to..may have to read log later
|| [[#t15:03:28|15:03]]
|- id="t15:03:31"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | tflink: I don't really know, sometimes it's here and sometimes it's in fedora-qa
|| [[#t15:03:31|15:03]]
|- id="t15:03:43"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | maybe blocker bug meetings are in #fedora-qa? I don't know
|| [[#t15:03:43|15:03]]
|- id="t15:04:00"
| colspan="2" | * Viking-Ice runs for a cup of coffee
|| [[#t15:04:00|15:04]]
|- id="t15:04:18"
| colspan="2" | * kparal thinks #fedora-meeting is better anyway
|| [[#t15:04:18|15:04]]
|- id="t15:04:28"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | kparal: only blocker one
|| [[#t15:04:28|15:04]]
|- id="t15:04:29"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | kparal: I think it's mostly in here. the blocker review meeting is in fedora-qa, though
|| [[#t15:04:29|15:04]]
|- id="t15:04:38"
| colspan="2" | * jskladan hides in the shadows
|| [[#t15:04:38|15:04]]
|- id="t15:04:59"
| colspan="2" | * kparal kicks jskladan
|| [[#t15:04:59|15:04]]
|- id="t15:05:06"
| colspan="2" | * jreznik is here
|| [[#t15:05:06|15:05]]
|- id="t15:05:40"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | well, it sounds like most everyone is here, let's get started
|| [[#t15:05:40|15:05]]
|- id="t15:06:16"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #topic Agenda
|| [[#t15:06:16|15:06]]
|- id="t15:06:28"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #info Previous Meeting Follow-up
|| [[#t15:06:28|15:06]]
|- id="t15:06:41"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #info Release Criteria Proposals
|| [[#t15:06:41|15:06]]
|- id="t15:06:59"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #info F18 Beta Status
|| [[#t15:06:59|15:06]]
|- id="t15:07:13"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #info F18 Beta Mini Blocker Review
|| [[#t15:07:13|15:07]]
|- id="t15:07:22"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #info Open Floor
|| [[#t15:07:22|15:07]]
|- id="t15:07:36"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #topic Previous Meeting Follow-Up
|| [[#t15:07:36|15:07]]
|- id="t15:08:10"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | "adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion" - not yet done
|| [[#t15:08:10|15:08]]
|- id="t15:08:30"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | at least I don't think it was done - did I miss a thread somewhere?
|| [[#t15:08:30|15:08]]
|- id="t15:09:01"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | I haven't seen it either
|| [[#t15:09:01|15:09]]
|- id="t15:09:49"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | neither has I
|| [[#t15:09:49|15:09]]
|- id="t15:09:52"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | adamw: we are looking at you
|| [[#t15:09:52|15:09]]
|- id="t15:09:52"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | ok, we can just put it down again for next week unless someone else wants to take it
|| [[#t15:09:52|15:09]]
|- id="t15:10:09"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Martix: he's on vacation today
|| [[#t15:10:09|15:10]]
|- id="t15:10:22"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion
|| [[#t15:10:22|15:10]]
|- id="t15:10:29"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #action adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion
|| [[#t15:10:29|15:10]]
|- id="t15:10:35"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | tflink: I know, but adamw is also responding on #fedora-qa ;-)
|| [[#t15:10:35|15:10]]
|- id="t15:10:44"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down
|| [[#t15:10:44|15:10]]
|- id="t15:10:56"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | aand fail on my part
|| [[#t15:10:56|15:10]]
|- id="t15:11:20"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I wrote the email as a draft and forgot to actually send it out
|| [[#t15:11:20|15:11]]
|- id="t15:11:42"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I'll make sure it's updated with the most recent threads on test@ and send it out today
|| [[#t15:11:42|15:11]]
|- id="t15:11:55"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #action tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down
|| [[#t15:11:55|15:11]]
|- id="t15:12:20"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I do believe that's all the things to follow up on
|| [[#t15:12:20|15:12]]
|- id="t15:12:27"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | did I miss anything?
|| [[#t15:12:27|15:12]]
|- id="t15:12:58"
| colspan="2" | * tflink takes that as a no
|| [[#t15:12:58|15:12]]
|- id="t15:13:13"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | well arguably anything of that stuff to be dialed down should not take effect until next release cycle
|| [[#t15:13:13|15:13]]
|- id="t15:13:37"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Viking-Ice: I see your point but that seems a bit harsh since we've been changing a bunch of stuff
|| [[#t15:13:37|15:13]]
|- id="t15:14:09"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | Martix: i'm not here!
|| [[#t15:14:09|15:14]]
|- id="t15:14:20"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | zombies talking
|| [[#t15:14:20|15:14]]
|- id="t15:14:35"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | adamw: alright
|| [[#t15:14:35|15:14]]
|- id="t15:15:05"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | tflink, it's one thing adjusting the criteria for dropped functionality and completely another thing to tone it down to cater to bugs that wont be fixed in time
|| [[#t15:15:05|15:15]]
|- id="t15:16:03"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Viking-Ice: if we write and attempt to enforce unreasonable release requirements, we're going to be on the path towards irrelevency, I think
|| [[#t15:16:03|15:16]]
|- id="t15:16:14"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | as things stand now we have ca 25 bugs that are filed against anaconda that are either proposed blocker bugs or blocker bugs and adjusting the criteria does not fix the sorry state the installer is in
|| [[#t15:16:14|15:16]]
|- id="t15:16:37"
| colspan="2" | * tflink is of the opinion that it's a game of compromise
|| [[#t15:16:37|15:16]]
|- id="t15:17:25"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | the not-here zombie notes that this is a complete side alley since we actually have no proposals to weaken any criteria.
|| [[#t15:17:25|15:17]]
|- id="t15:17:48"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | and to me delaying the release to have these fixed ( without altering our criteria ) is better then adjust the criteria to meet some release date which we have never been able to meet anyway
|| [[#t15:17:48|15:17]]
|- id="t15:17:55"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | when do you realise that we should drop newUI? and revert to last commit before newUI merge into Anaconda master :-P
|| [[#t15:17:55|15:17]]
|- id="t15:18:08"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | it's too late in the game to drop it
|| [[#t15:18:08|15:18]]
|- id="t15:18:14"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I think we're getting really far off into the weeds here
|| [[#t15:18:14|15:18]]
|- id="t15:18:22"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | which means we only slip from here on
|| [[#t15:18:22|15:18]]
|- id="t15:18:31"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | and to me it's perfectly fine to slip
|| [[#t15:18:31|15:18]]
|- id="t15:18:41"
| colspan="2" | * tflink apologizes for the delay, didn't realize he would be leading until ~ 15 minutes before the meeting
|| [[#t15:18:41|15:18]]
|- id="t15:18:45"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | 12/25 release date workforme
|| [[#t15:18:45|15:18]]
|- id="t15:18:51"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #topic Release Criteria Proposals
|| [[#t15:18:51|15:18]]
|- id="t15:19:00"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | worst case scenario santa deliver Fedora this Christmas ;)
|| [[#t15:19:00|15:19]]
|- id="t15:19:03"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #undo
|| [[#t15:19:03|15:19]]
|- id="t15:19:03"
! style="background-color: #42427e" | zodbot
| style="color: #42427e" | Removing item from minutes: &lt;MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x11064c50&gt;
|| [[#t15:19:03|15:19]]
|- id="t15:19:13"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #topic Upgrade Release Criterion Proposal
|| [[#t15:19:13|15:19]]
|- id="t15:19:21"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | The last proposal I'm seeing is:
|| [[#t15:19:21|15:19]]
|- id="t15:19:23"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | For each one of the release-blocking package sets ('minimal', and the package sets for each one of the release-blocking desktops), it must be possible to successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the previous stable Fedora release with that package set installed, using any officially recommended upgrade mechanism. The upgraded system must meet all release criteria
|| [[#t15:19:23|15:19]]
|- id="t15:19:35"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | that one would be for final
|| [[#t15:19:35|15:19]]
|- id="t15:19:53"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | nvm, that's beta
|| [[#t15:19:53|15:19]]
|- id="t15:20:03"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | the only difference is swapping any/all
|| [[#t15:20:03|15:20]]
|- id="t15:20:15"
| colspan="2" | * kparal acks
|| [[#t15:20:15|15:20]]
|- id="t15:20:43"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | ack
|| [[#t15:20:43|15:20]]
|- id="t15:20:49"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | "setenforce 0 &amp;&amp; yum distro-sync" would be officially recommended ;-)
|| [[#t15:20:49|15:20]]
|- id="t15:21:24"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | proposed #agreed QA accepts the criteria revision posted at xx:19 for beta
|| [[#t15:21:24|15:21]]
|- id="t15:21:31"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | ack
|| [[#t15:21:31|15:21]]
|- id="t15:21:38"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Martix: you're not helping, we don't decide the recommended upgrade methods
|| [[#t15:21:38|15:21]]
|- id="t15:22:13"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | tflink: just sidenote
|| [[#t15:22:13|15:22]]
|- id="t15:22:27"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | sounds like we're pretty much agreed
|| [[#t15:22:27|15:22]]
|- id="t15:22:35"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #agreed QA accepts the criteria revision posted at xx:19 for beta
|| [[#t15:22:35|15:22]]
|- id="t15:22:44"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | and for formality/boilerplate ...
|| [[#t15:22:44|15:22]]
|- id="t15:22:50"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Proposed final criterion:
|| [[#t15:22:50|15:22]]
|- id="t15:23:08"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | For each one of the release-blocking package sets ('minimal', and the package sets for each one of the release-blocking desktops), it must be possible to successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the previous stable Fedora release with that package set installed, using all officially recommended upgrade mechanisms. The upgraded system must meet all release criteria.
|| [[#t15:23:08|15:23]]
|- id="t15:23:35"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | proposed #agreed QA accepts the proposed upgrade criterion listed at XX:23 for F18 Final
|| [[#t15:23:35|15:23]]
|- id="t15:24:16"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | ack
|| [[#t15:24:16|15:24]]
|- id="t15:24:22"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | ack
|| [[#t15:24:22|15:24]]
|- id="t15:24:50"
! style="background-color: #4d4d93" | jskladan
| style="color: #4d4d93" | ack
|| [[#t15:24:50|15:24]]
|- id="t15:25:10"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #agreed QA accepts the proposed upgrade criterion listed at XX:23 for F18 Final
|| [[#t15:25:10|15:25]]
|- id="t15:25:27"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I think that was all of the changes since last week
|| [[#t15:25:27|15:25]]
|- id="t15:25:39"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | unless I'm missing one in the partitioning thread
|| [[#t15:25:39|15:25]]
|- id="t15:26:59"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #topic F18 Beta Status
|| [[#t15:26:59|15:26]]
|- id="t15:27:30"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #info F18 Beta Freeze Entrance Readiness Meeting today @ 17:00 UTC
|| [[#t15:27:30|15:27]]
|- id="t15:28:00"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | so the upgrade tool is still nowhere to be seen
|| [[#t15:28:00|15:28]]
|- id="t15:28:09"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | yup so not freeze ready
|| [[#t15:28:09|15:28]]
|- id="t15:29:00"
| colspan="2" | * kparal wasn't exactly implying that
|| [[#t15:29:00|15:29]]
|- id="t15:29:00"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | what are our reasons for saying that we don't think beta is ready for freeze (assuming that's pretty much the consensus here)?
|| [[#t15:29:00|15:29]]
|- id="t15:29:47"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | the two that I can think of is the number of anaconda bugs around partitioning and the lack of a release for the upgrade tool
|| [[#t15:29:47|15:29]]
|- id="t15:29:54"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | yu&amp;#240;
|| [[#t15:29:54|15:29]]
|- id="t15:29:58"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | mean yup
|| [[#t15:29:58|15:29]]
|- id="t15:29:59"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | Is LVM, LUKS and RAID required for Beta? If not, purportedly in Beta TC2 those aren't available.
|| [[#t15:29:59|15:29]]
|- id="t15:30:14"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: I think that was put off to final
|| [[#t15:30:14|15:30]]
|- id="t15:30:15"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | if they aren't they should be
|| [[#t15:30:15|15:30]]
|- id="t15:30:20"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | but I'm not 100% sure
|| [[#t15:30:20|15:30]]
|- id="t15:30:33"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | not-here zombie pop-up: we did not entirely decide it
|| [[#t15:30:33|15:30]]
|- id="t15:30:39"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | Creating encrypted partitions  is in Beta
|| [[#t15:30:39|15:30]]
|- id="t15:30:45"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | we agreed that the criteria put into place last week were the *minimum* we needed
|| [[#t15:30:45|15:30]]
|- id="t15:31:09"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | raid is also mentioned in Beta criteria (still)
|| [[#t15:31:09|15:31]]
|- id="t15:31:28"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | oh yeah, we have an explicit criterion for raid
|| [[#t15:31:28|15:31]]
|- id="t15:31:29"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | so that's clear
|| [[#t15:31:29|15:31]]
|- id="t15:31:31"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | did I miss a discussion around the partitioning criteria?
|| [[#t15:31:31|15:31]]
|- id="t15:31:32"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | lvm is the grey area.
|| [[#t15:31:32|15:31]]
|- id="t15:31:37"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | this things must be working if upgrade is required to work
|| [[#t15:31:37|15:31]]
|- id="t15:31:45"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | this/these
|| [[#t15:31:45|15:31]]
|- id="t15:32:07"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | we know that there are bugs. I'm not sure that means we can't enter Beta freeze
|| [[#t15:32:07|15:32]]
|- id="t15:32:08"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | oh, that's a wrinkle that I hadn't thought about
|| [[#t15:32:08|15:32]]
|- id="t15:32:17"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | F17 default install used LVM
|| [[#t15:32:17|15:32]]
|- id="t15:32:24"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | In beta release, LVM is only mentioned for the installer rescue mode so creating them doesn't appear required. For beta.
|| [[#t15:32:24|15:32]]
|- id="t15:32:32"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | but we definitely still haven't seen the upgrade tool
|| [[#t15:32:32|15:32]]
|- id="t15:32:49"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | how well is upgrade going to work w/ LVM?
|| [[#t15:32:49|15:32]]
|- id="t15:32:54"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | tflink: my understanding is that there won't be LVM by default. Either it's ext4 on separate partitions, or btrfs plus subvols.
|| [[#t15:32:54|15:32]]
|- id="t15:33:18"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | tflink: I don't know, but I'd like to think that's expected to work or it's a problem.
|| [[#t15:33:18|15:33]]
|- id="t15:33:20"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: for F18+, sure. I'm concerned about upgrades from F17
|| [[#t15:33:20|15:33]]
|- id="t15:33:36"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | so, the things that we're concerned about are:
|| [[#t15:33:36|15:33]]
|- id="t15:33:42"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | yes but the upgrade path must support LVM since LVM was the default before F18
|| [[#t15:33:42|15:33]]
|- id="t15:33:55"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | 1. We aren't aware of a release for the upgrade tool
|| [[#t15:33:55|15:33]]
|- id="t15:34:34"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | the other one was mostly RAID, no?
|| [[#t15:34:34|15:34]]
|- id="t15:35:08"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | I never tested that
|| [[#t15:35:08|15:35]]
|- id="t15:35:34"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | beta release criteria 11: installer must be able to create and install to software, hardware or BIOS RAID-0, RAID-1 or RAID-5, except for /boot
|| [[#t15:35:34|15:35]]
|- id="t15:35:52"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | I'm not seeing it in the ui
|| [[#t15:35:52|15:35]]
|- id="t15:36:01"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | kparal: yeah, neither have I. looks like I know what I'm doing in the next hour or so :)
|| [[#t15:36:01|15:36]]
|- id="t15:36:02"
| colspan="2" | * satellit note "disks" on live desktop CD cannot reformat a previous f18 install to HD  - anaconda cannot do this from Beta TC2 netinstall either (just tested it)
|| [[#t15:36:02|15:36]]
|- id="t15:36:05"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | but i could be confused
|| [[#t15:36:05|15:36]]
|- id="t15:36:20"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | iirc it's not expressed as RAID exactly, but there are checkboxes for 'redundancy' or something like that. it's in custom part.
|| [[#t15:36:20|15:36]]
|- id="t15:36:42"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | satellit:  yeah, I think that one's known. there was a new anaconda build on friday but it had more issues and a new TC wasn't built
|| [[#t15:36:42|15:36]]
|- id="t15:36:54"
! style="background-color: #9b519b" | satellit
| style="color: #9b519b" | ok
|| [[#t15:36:54|15:36]]
|- id="t15:37:48"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | is there any reason to be concerned about the functionality of the partitioning UI (outside of RAID) to the point that freeze might not be wise?
|| [[#t15:37:48|15:37]]
|- id="t15:38:23"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | is the intention of beta release criteria 11 to mean that the creation of software RAID 5 is required for / or /home?
|| [[#t15:38:23|15:38]]
|- id="t15:38:58"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: I believe so, yes
|| [[#t15:38:58|15:38]]
|- id="t15:39:50"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | interesting.
|| [[#t15:39:50|15:39]]
|- id="t15:40:02"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | ok about freeze, i felt that alpha freeze came too soon expecially for anaconda.
|| [[#t15:40:02|15:40]]
|- id="t15:40:04"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | ok, wwoods seems to be still working on fedupg - that means no release
|| [[#t15:40:04|15:40]]
|- id="t15:40:15"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | is there an opinion from the anaconda team on freeze status for beta?
|| [[#t15:40:15|15:40]]
|- id="t15:40:21"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | cmurf: yep and that's the reason for this special meeting
|| [[#t15:40:21|15:40]]
|- id="t15:40:22"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | is there an interest in coming up with a recommendation from QA for freeze readiness?
|| [[#t15:40:22|15:40]]
|- id="t15:40:51"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | tflink: it would be great if qa could do it
|| [[#t15:40:51|15:40]]
|- id="t15:40:59"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | jreznik, that and the the share number of bugs against Anaconda that either are blocking or proposed as blocking should be sufficiant to raise the alarms and slip ;)
|| [[#t15:40:59|15:40]]
|- id="t15:41:42"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | I believe QA should get a chance to play with the upgrade tool before entering the freeze
|| [[#t15:41:42|15:41]]
|- id="t15:41:49"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | that would be my proposal
|| [[#t15:41:49|15:41]]
|- id="t15:41:50"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | jreznik: yes i know that, my question is if the anaconda team has an opinion on freeze causing them more work that's unnecessary/not helpful
|| [[#t15:41:50|15:41]]
|- id="t15:42:00"
! style="background-color: #4b904b" | adamw
| style="color: #4b904b" | not-here zombie is also for slipping the freeze, on fedup grounds.
|| [[#t15:42:00|15:42]]
|- id="t15:42:43"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | kparal: not "play" but it should be released as a real release - packaged etc.
|| [[#t15:42:43|15:42]]
|- id="t15:42:43"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | ok, sounds like we're pretty much pro-freeze slip
|| [[#t15:42:43|15:42]]
|- id="t15:42:48"
| colspan="2" | * tflink got a phone call
|| [[#t15:42:48|15:42]]
|- id="t15:42:57"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | we are still waiting for fedup, we should slip freeze and poke Anaconda and fedup developers
|| [[#t15:42:57|15:42]]
|- id="t15:43:33"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | proposed #agreed QA Recommends slipping of freeze at this time due to no currently testable upgrade tool for F18
|| [[#t15:43:33|15:43]]
|- id="t15:43:34"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | Martix: already doing - the poking stuff
|| [[#t15:43:34|15:43]]
|- id="t15:43:53"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | We must be able to evaluate the readiness of the upgrade tool before we freeze and to do so it must be present :)
|| [[#t15:43:53|15:43]]
|- id="t15:43:54"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | ack
|| [[#t15:43:54|15:43]]
|- id="t15:43:56"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | ack
|| [[#t15:43:56|15:43]]
|- id="t15:44:30"
| colspan="2" | * tflink wants more than 2 acks before doing the #agreed
|| [[#t15:44:30|15:44]]
|- id="t15:44:37"
! style="background-color: #a25555" | mkrizek
| style="color: #a25555" | ack
|| [[#t15:44:37|15:44]]
|- id="t15:44:37"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | ack
|| [[#t15:44:37|15:44]]
|- id="t15:44:42"
! style="background-color: #57a657" | Southern_Gentlem
| style="color: #57a657" | ack
|| [[#t15:44:42|15:44]]
|- id="t15:45:29"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #agreed QA Recommends slipping of freeze at this time due to no currently testable upgrade tool for F18
|| [[#t15:45:29|15:45]]
|- id="t15:45:43"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | jreznik: we should start kicking in their arses! :-)
|| [[#t15:45:43|15:45]]
|- id="t15:46:05"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | is qa going to talk also about part. requirements or thinks missing upgrade tool is enough?
|| [[#t15:46:05|15:46]]
|- id="t15:46:18"
! style="background-color: #5959a9" | jwb
| style="color: #5959a9" | Martix, please refrain from using language like that.
|| [[#t15:46:18|15:46]]
|- id="t15:46:28"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | jwb: ok, my appologize
|| [[#t15:46:28|15:46]]
|- id="t15:46:29"
! style="background-color: #adad5b" | pjones
| style="color: #adad5b" | Martix: I don't think that will make things more likely to go a way you're happy with.
|| [[#t15:46:29|15:46]]
|- id="t15:46:37"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | Martix: no, please - what we need is to explain what we need/require
|| [[#t15:46:37|15:46]]
|- id="t15:47:33"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | any thoughts on the partitioning requirements?
|| [[#t15:47:33|15:47]]
|- id="t15:47:48"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | jreznik: ok: testable fedup, abbility to remove partitions in Anaconda, abbility to upgrade on LVM/LUKS/RAID
|| [[#t15:47:48|15:47]]
|- id="t15:48:05"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | ability to install w/ RAID
|| [[#t15:48:05|15:48]]
|- id="t15:48:14"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | abbility to create LUKS partitions
|| [[#t15:48:14|15:48]]
|- id="t15:48:38"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | but I can't remember off the top of my head whether that funtionality already exists
|| [[#t15:48:38|15:48]]
|- id="t15:49:16"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | and I'm not convinced that the current issue of anaconda not doing well at removing existing partitions is enought to justify slipping freeze
|| [[#t15:49:16|15:49]]
|- id="t15:49:44"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | so other than the missing upgrade tool (which I do think is enough to justify slipping freeze, personally)
|| [[#t15:49:44|15:49]]
|- id="t15:49:45"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | tflink: so could you guys please retest? if functionality exists before mtg? or maybe better to ask anaconda guys directly :)
|| [[#t15:49:45|15:49]]
|- id="t15:49:58"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | jreznik: I'm planning to do so
|| [[#t15:49:58|15:49]]
|- id="t15:50:42"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | the potentially problematic areas (pending re-test) as I see them are:
|| [[#t15:50:42|15:50]]
|- id="t15:50:46"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | LUKS and RAID
|| [[#t15:50:46|15:50]]
|- id="t15:51:13"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | fedup should be testable by the enf of the week
|| [[#t15:51:13|15:51]]
|- id="t15:51:32"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | It's a bit awkward having RAID in custom partitioning, but perhaps that's a squawk for F19. RAID != partitioning.
|| [[#t15:51:32|15:51]]
|- id="t15:52:12"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | it belongs in the advanced storage spoke
|| [[#t15:52:12|15:52]]
|- id="t15:52:14"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | proposed #agreed outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS is another potential issue that needs re-testing
|| [[#t15:52:14|15:52]]
|- id="t15:52:34"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | ack
|| [[#t15:52:34|15:52]]
|- id="t15:52:37"
| colspan="2" | * kparal is testing LUKS now
|| [[#t15:52:37|15:52]]
|- id="t15:53:14"
| colspan="2" | * tflink will test RAID right after the meeting
|| [[#t15:53:14|15:53]]
|- id="t15:53:18"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | jreznik: deja vu
|| [[#t15:53:18|15:53]]
|- id="t15:53:35"
| colspan="2" | * tflink demands more ack/nak/patch !!!
|| [[#t15:53:35|15:53]]
|- id="t15:53:36"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | ack
|| [[#t15:53:36|15:53]]
|- id="t15:53:42"
| colspan="2" | * satellit yum installed gparted to desktop live added msdos partition table  will retry  TC2 Netinstall on  the HD
|| [[#t15:53:42|15:53]]
|- id="t15:53:58"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | i'm testing it now and my biggest issue is UI confusion honestly
|| [[#t15:53:58|15:53]]
|- id="t15:54:00"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | luks fails, it doesn't ask for password and creates a standard unencrypted partition
|| [[#t15:54:00|15:54]]
|- id="t15:54:03"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | it = RAID
|| [[#t15:54:03|15:54]]
|- id="t15:54:09"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | at least it seems so
|| [[#t15:54:09|15:54]]
|- id="t15:54:39"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | keep in mind that we aren't asking everything to _work_ 100% for freeze entrance
|| [[#t15:54:39|15:54]]
|- id="t15:54:52"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | yep
|| [[#t15:54:52|15:54]]
|- id="t15:54:52"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | just that the functionality is testable and somewhat present
|| [[#t15:54:52|15:54]]
|- id="t15:54:55"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | sure. is the testing to be based on TC2?
|| [[#t15:54:55|15:54]]
|- id="t15:55:13"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | so if LUKS isn't quite working  but at least somewhat works - it's OK for freeze entrance
|| [[#t15:55:13|15:55]]
|- id="t15:55:30"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | same with RAID
|| [[#t15:55:30|15:55]]
|- id="t15:56:02"
| colspan="2" | * satellit looks like it worked  (gparted on live desktop)
|| [[#t15:56:02|15:56]]
|- id="t15:56:32"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | so ... any more votes on the proposal?
|| [[#t15:56:32|15:56]]
|- id="t15:56:34"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | tflink: ack
|| [[#t15:56:34|15:56]]
|- id="t15:56:48"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | ack
|| [[#t15:56:48|15:56]]
|- id="t15:57:07"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | proposed #agreed outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS is another potential issue that needs re-testing. We will retest these things before the freeze entrance readiness meeting.
|| [[#t15:57:07|15:57]]
|- id="t15:57:22"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | since the change isn't big, I assume that all the acks hold
|| [[#t15:57:22|15:57]]
|- id="t15:57:28"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #agreed outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS is another potential issue that needs re-testing. We will retest these things before the freeze entrance readiness meeting.
|| [[#t15:57:28|15:57]]
|- id="t15:57:37"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | well, does "it doesn't ask for password and creates a standard unencrypted partition" - means it somehow works or not at all? ;-)
|| [[#t15:57:37|15:57]]
|- id="t15:57:57"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | jreznik: do we know if the code exists?
|| [[#t15:57:57|15:57]]
|- id="t15:58:02"
| colspan="2" | * kparal just reported https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864120, logs will follow shortly
|| [[#t15:58:02|15:58]]
|- id="t15:58:13"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | jreznik: not at all, currently, it seems
|| [[#t15:58:13|15:58]]
|- id="t15:58:23"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | kparal: thx
|| [[#t15:58:23|15:58]]
|- id="t15:59:37"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | anything else about beta?
|| [[#t15:59:37|15:59]]
|- id="t16:00:09"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | if not, I propose that we skip the blocker review for today so that we can get a bit more testing done before the meeting (in ~ 1 hour)
|| [[#t16:00:09|16:00]]
|- id="t16:00:19"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | ack
|| [[#t16:00:19|16:00]]
|- id="t16:01:29"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | it's interesting to see people trail off as meetings go on :)
|| [[#t16:01:29|16:01]]
|- id="t16:01:46"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | anyhow, I assume that there are no objections
|| [[#t16:01:46|16:01]]
|- id="t16:01:48"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | I actually would like us to go through the proposed blocker bugs against anaconda
|| [[#t16:01:48|16:01]]
|- id="t16:02:10"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Viking-Ice: I don't disagree but it's difficult to do blocker review and RAID test @ the same time
|| [[#t16:02:10|16:02]]
|- id="t16:02:11"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | Viking-Ice: good idea, to have a better overview before the meeting
|| [[#t16:02:11|16:02]]
|- id="t16:02:22"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | but yeah, manpower
|| [[#t16:02:22|16:02]]
|- id="t16:02:24"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | Viking-Ice: ack
|| [[#t16:02:24|16:02]]
|- id="t16:02:27"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | jreznik: you don't get it both ways - either testing of blocker review
|| [[#t16:02:27|16:02]]
|- id="t16:02:33"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | s/of/or
|| [[#t16:02:33|16:02]]
|- id="t16:02:57"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | unless someone else is going to do lead the blocker review or do the RAID testing
|| [[#t16:02:57|16:02]]
|- id="t16:03:00"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | maybe if someone will be willing to go through the testing and the rest could do blocker review
|| [[#t16:03:00|16:03]]
|- id="t16:03:05"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I can't do both at the same time
|| [[#t16:03:05|16:03]]
|- id="t16:03:13"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | is the RAID code supposed to be in place and working in Anaconda ?
|| [[#t16:03:13|16:03]]
|- id="t16:03:19"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | tflink: not asking you to do both :) you're already the hero!
|| [[#t16:03:19|16:03]]
|- id="t16:03:26"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Viking-Ice: I have no idea, that's what I wanted to find out
|| [[#t16:03:26|16:03]]
|- id="t16:03:32"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | Viking-Ice: asking on #anaconda right now
|| [[#t16:03:32|16:03]]
|- id="t16:03:34"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | i/we/other pronoun
|| [[#t16:03:34|16:03]]
|- id="t16:03:58"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | "raid support has been in since the first post-alpha tree"
|| [[#t16:03:58|16:03]]
|- id="t16:04:31"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | ah so it's just broken ;)
|| [[#t16:04:31|16:04]]
|- id="t16:04:54"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | jreznik: what about LUKS?
|| [[#t16:04:54|16:04]]
|- id="t16:04:57"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | maybe, I just don't think anyone's tested it yet
|| [[#t16:04:57|16:04]]
|- id="t16:04:59"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | what's the time frame for TC3?
|| [[#t16:04:59|16:04]]
|- id="t16:05:08"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Martix: patches were posted on thursday
|| [[#t16:05:08|16:05]]
|- id="t16:05:18"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: when we get another anaconda build, I think
|| [[#t16:05:18|16:05]]
|- id="t16:05:36"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | well, ok - let's give qa time to test if raid is there, I'll go through the anaconda list bugs to get an overview for mtg
|| [[#t16:05:36|16:05]]
|- id="t16:05:50"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | Martix: patches posted for luks
|| [[#t16:05:50|16:05]]
|- id="t16:06:02"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | great
|| [[#t16:06:02|16:06]]
|- id="t16:06:40"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | RAID is in beta TC2
|| [[#t16:06:40|16:06]]
|- id="t16:07:33"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | It's md raid for all file systems except btrfs which does its own raid0/1/10 but not 5 (yet) and there isn't an option to use md raid 5 for btrfs.
|| [[#t16:07:33|16:07]]
|- id="t16:07:40"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: it works, I assume?
|| [[#t16:07:40|16:07]]
|- id="t16:07:52"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | testing
|| [[#t16:07:52|16:07]]
|- id="t16:08:02"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: I don't believe that there is GUI support for btrfs yet
|| [[#t16:08:02|16:08]]
|- id="t16:08:07"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | but I could be wrong
|| [[#t16:08:07|16:08]]
|- id="t16:08:11"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | there is support for btrfs
|| [[#t16:08:11|16:08]]
|- id="t16:08:30"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | it even uses subvols for root and home
|| [[#t16:08:30|16:08]]
|- id="t16:09:35"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | if i use a single disk only, anaconda crashes when changing Device Type to RAID. So I think someting is hooked up to cause that.
|| [[#t16:09:35|16:09]]
|- id="t16:09:50"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: are you testing w/ multiple disks?
|| [[#t16:09:50|16:09]]
|- id="t16:10:15"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | about to but figured i'd see what happens with one first
|| [[#t16:10:15|16:10]]
|- id="t16:11:13"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | do we still have enough people to do blocker review, then?
|| [[#t16:11:13|16:11]]
|- id="t16:11:24"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | ok so the parameters are two disks, and RAID 1 for everything
|| [[#t16:11:24|16:11]]
|- id="t16:12:04"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I take that as a no, we don't have enough people
|| [[#t16:12:04|16:12]]
|- id="t16:12:15"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | we have
|| [[#t16:12:15|16:12]]
|- id="t16:12:16"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | UI is present
|| [[#t16:12:16|16:12]]
|- id="t16:12:25"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | but i get anaconda crashes
|| [[#t16:12:25|16:12]]
|- id="t16:12:45"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | me too
|| [[#t16:12:45|16:12]]
|- id="t16:13:39"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | so i think those need to be isolated, see if there are bugs already filed, if not file bugs because these would appear to be beta blocker bugs
|| [[#t16:13:39|16:13]]
|- id="t16:14:07"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | but not freeze inhibiting bugs
|| [[#t16:14:07|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:13"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | either way, it looks like we have no real grounds to block freeze for RAID
|| [[#t16:14:13|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:19"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | agreed
|| [[#t16:14:19|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:21"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | and not much for LUKS
|| [[#t16:14:21|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:26"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | agreed
|| [[#t16:14:26|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:28"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | ui is present
|| [[#t16:14:28|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:30"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | cmurf: you didn't heard about cat-o-9 rule proposed by tflink?
|| [[#t16:14:30|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:38"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | ?
|| [[#t16:14:38|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:43"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Martix: that was for during blocker review meetings
|| [[#t16:14:43|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:53"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | and specifically aimed at you :-P
|| [[#t16:14:53|16:14]]
|- id="t16:14:57"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | which is right now ;-)
|| [[#t16:14:57|16:14]]
|- id="t16:15:02"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | it is?
|| [[#t16:15:02|16:15]]
|- id="t16:15:15"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | what is the cat-o-9 rule
|| [[#t16:15:15|16:15]]
|- id="t16:15:56"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: anyone who makes huge changes to the blocker list in the middle of a review meeting gets flogged :)
|| [[#t16:15:56|16:15]]
|- id="t16:16:11"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | Martix: good that you remember
|| [[#t16:16:11|16:16]]
|- id="t16:16:24"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | tflink: that required a rule?
|| [[#t16:16:24|16:16]]
|- id="t16:16:36"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: apparently, yes
|| [[#t16:16:36|16:16]]
|- id="t16:16:44"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | sad
|| [[#t16:16:44|16:16]]
|- id="t16:17:16"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | anyhow, since it looks like enough testing has been done for RAID and LUKS for pre-freeze, shall we go through the blocker bugs quickly?
|| [[#t16:17:16|16:17]]
|- id="t16:18:06"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | tflink: ok, this means - luks/raid support is on-going, no need to block freeze but upgrades... do I understand it correctly?
|| [[#t16:18:06|16:18]]
|- id="t16:18:36"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | jreznik: yeah, that's what it looks like right now
|| [[#t16:18:36|16:18]]
|- id="t16:18:45"
! style="background-color: #539e9e" | jreznik
| style="color: #539e9e" | tflink: thanks guys!
|| [[#t16:18:45|16:18]]
|- id="t16:19:00"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | but I think we're pretty firm on not entering freeze w/o a testable upgrade tool
|| [[#t16:19:00|16:19]]
|- id="t16:19:01"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | tflink, we probably should move the blocker bug process into QA
|| [[#t16:19:01|16:19]]
|- id="t16:19:06"
| colspan="2" | * jreznik is ok with quick blocker bugs review now
|| [[#t16:19:06|16:19]]
|- id="t16:19:23"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | tflink: so if you're talking beta blocker, the RAID bugs will eventually be blockers. I'm not seeing bugs file for the bugs I'm encountering.
|| [[#t16:19:23|16:19]]
|- id="t16:19:24"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | jreznik: make sure that fedup release in the end of week will support existing LVM/LUKS/RAID setups
|| [[#t16:19:24|16:19]]
|- id="t16:19:25"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Viking-Ice: not sure I understand what you mean
|| [[#t16:19:25|16:19]]
|- id="t16:20:05"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: if the code is present and testable, that should be enough for freeze entrance - we aren't looking to have a beta-ready release before we enter freeze
|| [[#t16:20:05|16:20]]
|- id="t16:20:39"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | "shall we go through the blocker bugs quickly" are you referring to beta blocking, or freeze?
|| [[#t16:20:39|16:20]]
|- id="t16:21:02"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: just the currently proposed blockers
|| [[#t16:21:02|16:21]]
|- id="t16:21:09"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | goti t
|| [[#t16:21:09|16:21]]
|- id="t16:21:23"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | it'll take me a while to write these up, need to reproduce them consistently
|| [[#t16:21:23|16:21]]
|- id="t16:21:54"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I really don't think we're going to get through the proposed blockers in 40 minutes
|| [[#t16:21:54|16:21]]
|- id="t16:22:19"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | just anaconda
|| [[#t16:22:19|16:22]]
|- id="t16:22:41"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | and I fail to see much of a point in doing this just for the freeze-entrance meeting
|| [[#t16:22:41|16:22]]
|- id="t16:22:46"
! style="background-color: #488888" | Martix
| style="color: #488888" | only 15-16 bugs :-)
|| [[#t16:22:46|16:22]]
|- id="t16:22:48"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | true
|| [[#t16:22:48|16:22]]
|- id="t16:23:14"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | tflink, I was proposing moving the blocker review process to the QA channel ( as opposed to be doing it here )
|| [[#t16:23:14|16:23]]
|- id="t16:23:32"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | would anyone mind telling me where anaconda logs are now kept? they're not in ~ or /var/log when booted off netinstall
|| [[#t16:23:32|16:23]]
|- id="t16:23:40"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | and if we start with the Anaconda bugs we might be done with them before the topic comes up at the fesco meeting
|| [[#t16:23:40|16:23]]
|- id="t16:23:49"
! style="background-color: #818144" | kparal
| style="color: #818144" | cmurf: /tmp
|| [[#t16:23:49|16:23]]
|- id="t16:23:51"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | cmurf, /tmp
|| [[#t16:23:51|16:23]]
|- id="t16:24:12"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | cmurf: the logs are persisted on shutdown of the installer - if you get a crash, they won't be written to disk
|| [[#t16:24:12|16:24]]
|- id="t16:24:14"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | oops that's not new.
|| [[#t16:24:14|16:24]]
|- id="t16:24:20"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | I assume that's what you were asking
|| [[#t16:24:20|16:24]]
|- id="t16:24:27"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | at least I don't think they will
|| [[#t16:24:27|16:24]]
|- id="t16:24:33"
! style="background-color: #97974f" | cmurf
| style="color: #97974f" | recurring temporary confusion
|| [[#t16:24:33|16:24]]
|- id="t16:24:50"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | the journal should pick it up
|| [[#t16:24:50|16:24]]
|- id="t16:24:55"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | OK, lets adjurn and regroup in #fedora-qa for blocker review awesome fun happy time
|| [[#t16:24:55|16:24]]
|- id="t16:25:26"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #info Blocker Review will start immediately after this meeting in #fedora-qa
|| [[#t16:25:26|16:25]]
|- id="t16:25:37"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #topic Open Floor
|| [[#t16:25:37|16:25]]
|- id="t16:25:48"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Is there anything else that absolutely needs to be brought up now?
|| [[#t16:25:48|16:25]]
|- id="t16:25:56"
! style="background-color: #8c4a4a" | Viking-Ice
| style="color: #8c4a4a" | not from me
|| [[#t16:25:56|16:25]]
|- id="t16:26:21"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Then I think that we're done here for now
|| [[#t16:26:21|16:26]]
|- id="t16:26:32"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | Thanks for coming, everyone!
|| [[#t16:26:32|16:26]]
|- id="t16:26:35"
! style="background-color: #407a40" | tflink
| style="color: #407a40" | #endmeeting
|| [[#t16:26:35|16:26]]
|}
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.10.0 by [mailto:marius@pov.lt Marius Gedminas] - find it at [http://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html mg.pov.lt]!

Latest revision as of 03:12, 24 October 2012

Attendees

Agenda

  • Previous meeting follow-up
  • Release criteria proposals
  • Fedora 18 Beta status / mini blocker review
  • Open floor

Previous meeting follow-up

  • adamw to propose a criterion covering basic (not advanced) re-use of /home for Beta - not done yet, sorry
  • adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion - not done yet
  • tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down - not done yet

Release criteria proposals

  • Proposed changes to the upgrade criteria for Beta and Final were accepted (see log for exact text)

Fedora 18 Beta status / mini blocker review

  • Agreed that we recommended slipping of freeze due to no currently testable upgrade tool for F18
  • Outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS was another potential issue that needs re-testing

Open floor

N/A

Action items

  • adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion
  • tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down

IRC Log

tflink #startmeeting fedora-qa 15:02
zodbot Meeting started Mon Oct 8 15:02:00 2012 UTC. The chair is tflink. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:02
zodbot Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 15:02
tflink #meetingname fedora-qa 15:02
zodbot The meeting name has been set to 'fedora-qa' 15:02
tflink #topic Roll Call 15:02
tflink #chair kparal 15:02
zodbot Current chairs: kparal tflink 15:02
* Martix is here 15:02
* pschindl is here 15:02
* satellit listening 15:02
kparal oh, so it's here again 15:02
tflink kparal: the meeting? Did I start in the wrong channel? 15:03
* mkrizek is here 15:03
joat here 15:03
* kparal is confused by channel changes 15:03
* spoore is listening...or trying to..may have to read log later 15:03
kparal tflink: I don't really know, sometimes it's here and sometimes it's in fedora-qa 15:03
kparal maybe blocker bug meetings are in #fedora-qa? I don't know 15:03
* Viking-Ice runs for a cup of coffee 15:04
* kparal thinks #fedora-meeting is better anyway 15:04
Martix kparal: only blocker one 15:04
tflink kparal: I think it's mostly in here. the blocker review meeting is in fedora-qa, though 15:04
* jskladan hides in the shadows 15:04
* kparal kicks jskladan 15:04
* jreznik is here 15:05
tflink well, it sounds like most everyone is here, let's get started 15:05
tflink #topic Agenda 15:06
tflink #info Previous Meeting Follow-up 15:06
tflink #info Release Criteria Proposals 15:06
tflink #info F18 Beta Status 15:06
tflink #info F18 Beta Mini Blocker Review 15:07
tflink #info Open Floor 15:07
tflink #topic Previous Meeting Follow-Up 15:07
tflink "adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion" - not yet done 15:08
tflink at least I don't think it was done - did I miss a thread somewhere? 15:08
kparal I haven't seen it either 15:09
Viking-Ice neither has I 15:09
Martix adamw: we are looking at you 15:09
tflink ok, we can just put it down again for next week unless someone else wants to take it 15:09
tflink Martix: he's on vacation today 15:10
tflink adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion 15:10
tflink #action adamw to consider revisions to 'kickstart delivery method' criterion 15:10
Martix tflink: I know, but adamw is also responding on #fedora-qa ;-) 15:10
tflink tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down 15:10
tflink aand fail on my part 15:10
tflink I wrote the email as a draft and forgot to actually send it out 15:11
tflink I'll make sure it's updated with the most recent threads on test@ and send it out today 15:11
tflink #action tflink to ask other interested parties (anaconda team,fesco...) to look over the beta criteria and see if there's anything they feel should be dialled down 15:11
tflink I do believe that's all the things to follow up on 15:12
tflink did I miss anything? 15:12
* tflink takes that as a no 15:12
Viking-Ice well arguably anything of that stuff to be dialed down should not take effect until next release cycle 15:13
tflink Viking-Ice: I see your point but that seems a bit harsh since we've been changing a bunch of stuff 15:13
adamw Martix: i'm not here! 15:14
kparal zombies talking 15:14
Martix adamw: alright 15:14
Viking-Ice tflink, it's one thing adjusting the criteria for dropped functionality and completely another thing to tone it down to cater to bugs that wont be fixed in time 15:15
tflink Viking-Ice: if we write and attempt to enforce unreasonable release requirements, we're going to be on the path towards irrelevency, I think 15:16
Viking-Ice as things stand now we have ca 25 bugs that are filed against anaconda that are either proposed blocker bugs or blocker bugs and adjusting the criteria does not fix the sorry state the installer is in 15:16
* tflink is of the opinion that it's a game of compromise 15:16
adamw the not-here zombie notes that this is a complete side alley since we actually have no proposals to weaken any criteria. 15:17
Viking-Ice and to me delaying the release to have these fixed ( without altering our criteria ) is better then adjust the criteria to meet some release date which we have never been able to meet anyway 15:17
Martix when do you realise that we should drop newUI? and revert to last commit before newUI merge into Anaconda master :-P 15:17
Viking-Ice it's too late in the game to drop it 15:18
tflink I think we're getting really far off into the weeds here 15:18
Viking-Ice which means we only slip from here on 15:18
Viking-Ice and to me it's perfectly fine to slip 15:18
* tflink apologizes for the delay, didn't realize he would be leading until ~ 15 minutes before the meeting 15:18
Martix 12/25 release date workforme 15:18
tflink #topic Release Criteria Proposals 15:18
Viking-Ice worst case scenario santa deliver Fedora this Christmas ;) 15:19
tflink #undo 15:19
zodbot Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x11064c50> 15:19
tflink #topic Upgrade Release Criterion Proposal 15:19
tflink The last proposal I'm seeing is: 15:19
tflink For each one of the release-blocking package sets ('minimal', and the package sets for each one of the release-blocking desktops), it must be possible to successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the previous stable Fedora release with that package set installed, using any officially recommended upgrade mechanism. The upgraded system must meet all release criteria 15:19
tflink that one would be for final 15:19
tflink nvm, that's beta 15:19
tflink the only difference is swapping any/all 15:20
* kparal acks 15:20
Viking-Ice ack 15:20
Martix "setenforce 0 && yum distro-sync" would be officially recommended ;-) 15:20
tflink proposed #agreed QA accepts the criteria revision posted at xx:19 for beta 15:21
Martix ack 15:21
tflink Martix: you're not helping, we don't decide the recommended upgrade methods 15:21
Martix tflink: just sidenote 15:22
tflink sounds like we're pretty much agreed 15:22
tflink #agreed QA accepts the criteria revision posted at xx:19 for beta 15:22
tflink and for formality/boilerplate ... 15:22
tflink Proposed final criterion: 15:22
tflink For each one of the release-blocking package sets ('minimal', and the package sets for each one of the release-blocking desktops), it must be possible to successfully complete an upgrade from a fully updated installation of the previous stable Fedora release with that package set installed, using all officially recommended upgrade mechanisms. The upgraded system must meet all release criteria. 15:23
tflink proposed #agreed QA accepts the proposed upgrade criterion listed at XX:23 for F18 Final 15:23
kparal ack 15:24
Martix ack 15:24
jskladan ack 15:24
tflink #agreed QA accepts the proposed upgrade criterion listed at XX:23 for F18 Final 15:25
tflink I think that was all of the changes since last week 15:25
tflink unless I'm missing one in the partitioning thread 15:25
tflink #topic F18 Beta Status 15:26
tflink #info F18 Beta Freeze Entrance Readiness Meeting today @ 17:00 UTC 15:27
kparal so the upgrade tool is still nowhere to be seen 15:28
Viking-Ice yup so not freeze ready 15:28
* kparal wasn't exactly implying that 15:29
tflink what are our reasons for saying that we don't think beta is ready for freeze (assuming that's pretty much the consensus here)? 15:29
tflink the two that I can think of is the number of anaconda bugs around partitioning and the lack of a release for the upgrade tool 15:29
Viking-Ice yu&#240; 15:29
Viking-Ice mean yup 15:29
cmurf Is LVM, LUKS and RAID required for Beta? If not, purportedly in Beta TC2 those aren't available. 15:29
tflink cmurf: I think that was put off to final 15:30
Viking-Ice if they aren't they should be 15:30
tflink but I'm not 100% sure 15:30
adamw not-here zombie pop-up: we did not entirely decide it 15:30
kparal Creating encrypted partitions is in Beta 15:30
adamw we agreed that the criteria put into place last week were the *minimum* we needed 15:30
kparal raid is also mentioned in Beta criteria (still) 15:31
adamw oh yeah, we have an explicit criterion for raid 15:31
adamw so that's clear 15:31
tflink did I miss a discussion around the partitioning criteria? 15:31
adamw lvm is the grey area. 15:31
Viking-Ice this things must be working if upgrade is required to work 15:31
Viking-Ice this/these 15:31
kparal we know that there are bugs. I'm not sure that means we can't enter Beta freeze 15:32
tflink oh, that's a wrinkle that I hadn't thought about 15:32
tflink F17 default install used LVM 15:32
cmurf In beta release, LVM is only mentioned for the installer rescue mode so creating them doesn't appear required. For beta. 15:32
kparal but we definitely still haven't seen the upgrade tool 15:32
tflink how well is upgrade going to work w/ LVM? 15:32
cmurf tflink: my understanding is that there won't be LVM by default. Either it's ext4 on separate partitions, or btrfs plus subvols. 15:32
cmurf tflink: I don't know, but I'd like to think that's expected to work or it's a problem. 15:33
tflink cmurf: for F18+, sure. I'm concerned about upgrades from F17 15:33
tflink so, the things that we're concerned about are: 15:33
Viking-Ice yes but the upgrade path must support LVM since LVM was the default before F18 15:33
tflink 1. We aren't aware of a release for the upgrade tool 15:33
tflink the other one was mostly RAID, no? 15:34
kparal I never tested that 15:35
cmurf beta release criteria 11: installer must be able to create and install to software, hardware or BIOS RAID-0, RAID-1 or RAID-5, except for /boot 15:35
cmurf I'm not seeing it in the ui 15:35
tflink kparal: yeah, neither have I. looks like I know what I'm doing in the next hour or so :) 15:36
* satellit note "disks" on live desktop CD cannot reformat a previous f18 install to HD - anaconda cannot do this from Beta TC2 netinstall either (just tested it) 15:36
cmurf but i could be confused 15:36
adamw iirc it's not expressed as RAID exactly, but there are checkboxes for 'redundancy' or something like that. it's in custom part. 15:36
tflink satellit: yeah, I think that one's known. there was a new anaconda build on friday but it had more issues and a new TC wasn't built 15:36
satellit ok 15:36
tflink is there any reason to be concerned about the functionality of the partitioning UI (outside of RAID) to the point that freeze might not be wise? 15:37
cmurf is the intention of beta release criteria 11 to mean that the creation of software RAID 5 is required for / or /home? 15:38
tflink cmurf: I believe so, yes 15:38
cmurf interesting. 15:39
cmurf ok about freeze, i felt that alpha freeze came too soon expecially for anaconda. 15:40
jreznik ok, wwoods seems to be still working on fedupg - that means no release 15:40
cmurf is there an opinion from the anaconda team on freeze status for beta? 15:40
jreznik cmurf: yep and that's the reason for this special meeting 15:40
tflink is there an interest in coming up with a recommendation from QA for freeze readiness? 15:40
jreznik tflink: it would be great if qa could do it 15:40
Viking-Ice jreznik, that and the the share number of bugs against Anaconda that either are blocking or proposed as blocking should be sufficiant to raise the alarms and slip ;) 15:40
kparal I believe QA should get a chance to play with the upgrade tool before entering the freeze 15:41
kparal that would be my proposal 15:41
cmurf jreznik: yes i know that, my question is if the anaconda team has an opinion on freeze causing them more work that's unnecessary/not helpful 15:41
adamw not-here zombie is also for slipping the freeze, on fedup grounds. 15:42
jreznik kparal: not "play" but it should be released as a real release - packaged etc. 15:42
tflink ok, sounds like we're pretty much pro-freeze slip 15:42
* tflink got a phone call 15:42
Martix we are still waiting for fedup, we should slip freeze and poke Anaconda and fedup developers 15:42
tflink proposed #agreed QA Recommends slipping of freeze at this time due to no currently testable upgrade tool for F18 15:43
jreznik Martix: already doing - the poking stuff 15:43
Viking-Ice We must be able to evaluate the readiness of the upgrade tool before we freeze and to do so it must be present :) 15:43
kparal ack 15:43
Viking-Ice ack 15:43
* tflink wants more than 2 acks before doing the #agreed 15:44
mkrizek ack 15:44
Martix ack 15:44
Southern_Gentlem ack 15:44
tflink #agreed QA Recommends slipping of freeze at this time due to no currently testable upgrade tool for F18 15:45
Martix jreznik: we should start kicking in their arses! :-) 15:45
jreznik is qa going to talk also about part. requirements or thinks missing upgrade tool is enough? 15:46
jwb Martix, please refrain from using language like that. 15:46
Martix jwb: ok, my appologize 15:46
pjones Martix: I don't think that will make things more likely to go a way you're happy with. 15:46
jreznik Martix: no, please - what we need is to explain what we need/require 15:46
tflink any thoughts on the partitioning requirements? 15:47
Martix jreznik: ok: testable fedup, abbility to remove partitions in Anaconda, abbility to upgrade on LVM/LUKS/RAID 15:47
tflink ability to install w/ RAID 15:48
Martix abbility to create LUKS partitions 15:48
tflink but I can't remember off the top of my head whether that funtionality already exists 15:48
tflink and I'm not convinced that the current issue of anaconda not doing well at removing existing partitions is enought to justify slipping freeze 15:49
tflink so other than the missing upgrade tool (which I do think is enough to justify slipping freeze, personally) 15:49
jreznik tflink: so could you guys please retest? if functionality exists before mtg? or maybe better to ask anaconda guys directly :) 15:49
tflink jreznik: I'm planning to do so 15:49
tflink the potentially problematic areas (pending re-test) as I see them are: 15:50
tflink LUKS and RAID 15:50
jreznik fedup should be testable by the enf of the week 15:51
cmurf It's a bit awkward having RAID in custom partitioning, but perhaps that's a squawk for F19. RAID != partitioning. 15:51
Viking-Ice it belongs in the advanced storage spoke 15:52
tflink proposed #agreed outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS is another potential issue that needs re-testing 15:52
kparal ack 15:52
* kparal is testing LUKS now 15:52
* tflink will test RAID right after the meeting 15:53
Martix jreznik: deja vu 15:53
* tflink demands more ack/nak/patch !!! 15:53
Viking-Ice ack 15:53
* satellit yum installed gparted to desktop live added msdos partition table will retry TC2 Netinstall on the HD 15:53
cmurf i'm testing it now and my biggest issue is UI confusion honestly 15:53
kparal luks fails, it doesn't ask for password and creates a standard unencrypted partition 15:54
cmurf it = RAID 15:54
kparal at least it seems so 15:54
tflink keep in mind that we aren't asking everything to _work_ 100% for freeze entrance 15:54
kparal yep 15:54
tflink just that the functionality is testable and somewhat present 15:54
cmurf sure. is the testing to be based on TC2? 15:54
tflink so if LUKS isn't quite working but at least somewhat works - it's OK for freeze entrance 15:55
tflink same with RAID 15:55
* satellit looks like it worked (gparted on live desktop) 15:56
tflink so ... any more votes on the proposal? 15:56
Martix tflink: ack 15:56
cmurf ack 15:56
tflink proposed #agreed outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS is another potential issue that needs re-testing. We will retest these things before the freeze entrance readiness meeting. 15:57
tflink since the change isn't big, I assume that all the acks hold 15:57
tflink #agreed outside of the upgrade tool, install w/ RAID and/or LUKS is another potential issue that needs re-testing. We will retest these things before the freeze entrance readiness meeting. 15:57
jreznik well, does "it doesn't ask for password and creates a standard unencrypted partition" - means it somehow works or not at all? ;-) 15:57
tflink jreznik: do we know if the code exists? 15:57
* kparal just reported https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864120, logs will follow shortly 15:58
kparal jreznik: not at all, currently, it seems 15:58
jreznik kparal: thx 15:58
tflink anything else about beta? 15:59
tflink if not, I propose that we skip the blocker review for today so that we can get a bit more testing done before the meeting (in ~ 1 hour) 16:00
kparal ack 16:00
tflink it's interesting to see people trail off as meetings go on :) 16:01
tflink anyhow, I assume that there are no objections 16:01
Viking-Ice I actually would like us to go through the proposed blocker bugs against anaconda 16:01
tflink Viking-Ice: I don't disagree but it's difficult to do blocker review and RAID test @ the same time 16:02
jreznik Viking-Ice: good idea, to have a better overview before the meeting 16:02
jreznik but yeah, manpower 16:02
Martix Viking-Ice: ack 16:02
tflink jreznik: you don't get it both ways - either testing of blocker review 16:02
tflink s/of/or 16:02
tflink unless someone else is going to do lead the blocker review or do the RAID testing 16:02
jreznik maybe if someone will be willing to go through the testing and the rest could do blocker review 16:03
tflink I can't do both at the same time 16:03
Viking-Ice is the RAID code supposed to be in place and working in Anaconda ? 16:03
jreznik tflink: not asking you to do both :) you're already the hero! 16:03
tflink Viking-Ice: I have no idea, that's what I wanted to find out 16:03
jreznik Viking-Ice: asking on #anaconda right now 16:03
tflink i/we/other pronoun 16:03
jreznik "raid support has been in since the first post-alpha tree" 16:03
Viking-Ice ah so it's just broken ;) 16:04
Martix jreznik: what about LUKS? 16:04
tflink maybe, I just don't think anyone's tested it yet 16:04
cmurf what's the time frame for TC3? 16:04
tflink Martix: patches were posted on thursday 16:05
tflink cmurf: when we get another anaconda build, I think 16:05
jreznik well, ok - let's give qa time to test if raid is there, I'll go through the anaconda list bugs to get an overview for mtg 16:05
jreznik Martix: patches posted for luks 16:05
Martix great 16:06
cmurf RAID is in beta TC2 16:06
cmurf It's md raid for all file systems except btrfs which does its own raid0/1/10 but not 5 (yet) and there isn't an option to use md raid 5 for btrfs. 16:07
tflink cmurf: it works, I assume? 16:07
cmurf testing 16:07
tflink cmurf: I don't believe that there is GUI support for btrfs yet 16:08
tflink but I could be wrong 16:08
cmurf there is support for btrfs 16:08
cmurf it even uses subvols for root and home 16:08
cmurf if i use a single disk only, anaconda crashes when changing Device Type to RAID. So I think someting is hooked up to cause that. 16:09
tflink cmurf: are you testing w/ multiple disks? 16:09
cmurf about to but figured i'd see what happens with one first 16:10
tflink do we still have enough people to do blocker review, then? 16:11
cmurf ok so the parameters are two disks, and RAID 1 for everything 16:11
tflink I take that as a no, we don't have enough people 16:12
Martix we have 16:12
cmurf UI is present 16:12
cmurf but i get anaconda crashes 16:12
Martix me too 16:12
cmurf so i think those need to be isolated, see if there are bugs already filed, if not file bugs because these would appear to be beta blocker bugs 16:13
cmurf but not freeze inhibiting bugs 16:14
tflink either way, it looks like we have no real grounds to block freeze for RAID 16:14
cmurf agreed 16:14
tflink and not much for LUKS 16:14
cmurf agreed 16:14
cmurf ui is present 16:14
Martix cmurf: you didn't heard about cat-o-9 rule proposed by tflink? 16:14
cmurf ? 16:14
tflink Martix: that was for during blocker review meetings 16:14
tflink and specifically aimed at you :-P 16:14
Martix which is right now ;-) 16:14
tflink it is? 16:15
cmurf what is the cat-o-9 rule 16:15
tflink cmurf: anyone who makes huge changes to the blocker list in the middle of a review meeting gets flogged :) 16:15
kparal Martix: good that you remember 16:16
cmurf tflink: that required a rule? 16:16
tflink cmurf: apparently, yes 16:16
cmurf sad 16:16
tflink anyhow, since it looks like enough testing has been done for RAID and LUKS for pre-freeze, shall we go through the blocker bugs quickly? 16:17
jreznik tflink: ok, this means - luks/raid support is on-going, no need to block freeze but upgrades... do I understand it correctly? 16:18
tflink jreznik: yeah, that's what it looks like right now 16:18
jreznik tflink: thanks guys! 16:18
tflink but I think we're pretty firm on not entering freeze w/o a testable upgrade tool 16:19
Viking-Ice tflink, we probably should move the blocker bug process into QA 16:19
* jreznik is ok with quick blocker bugs review now 16:19
cmurf tflink: so if you're talking beta blocker, the RAID bugs will eventually be blockers. I'm not seeing bugs file for the bugs I'm encountering. 16:19
Martix jreznik: make sure that fedup release in the end of week will support existing LVM/LUKS/RAID setups 16:19
tflink Viking-Ice: not sure I understand what you mean 16:19
tflink cmurf: if the code is present and testable, that should be enough for freeze entrance - we aren't looking to have a beta-ready release before we enter freeze 16:20
cmurf "shall we go through the blocker bugs quickly" are you referring to beta blocking, or freeze? 16:20
tflink cmurf: just the currently proposed blockers 16:21
cmurf goti t 16:21
cmurf it'll take me a while to write these up, need to reproduce them consistently 16:21
tflink I really don't think we're going to get through the proposed blockers in 40 minutes 16:21
Martix just anaconda 16:22
tflink and I fail to see much of a point in doing this just for the freeze-entrance meeting 16:22
Martix only 15-16 bugs :-) 16:22
Viking-Ice true 16:22
Viking-Ice tflink, I was proposing moving the blocker review process to the QA channel ( as opposed to be doing it here ) 16:23
cmurf would anyone mind telling me where anaconda logs are now kept? they're not in ~ or /var/log when booted off netinstall 16:23
Viking-Ice and if we start with the Anaconda bugs we might be done with them before the topic comes up at the fesco meeting 16:23
kparal cmurf: /tmp 16:23
Viking-Ice cmurf, /tmp 16:23
tflink cmurf: the logs are persisted on shutdown of the installer - if you get a crash, they won't be written to disk 16:24
cmurf oops that's not new. 16:24
tflink I assume that's what you were asking 16:24
tflink at least I don't think they will 16:24
cmurf recurring temporary confusion 16:24
Viking-Ice the journal should pick it up 16:24
tflink OK, lets adjurn and regroup in #fedora-qa for blocker review awesome fun happy time 16:24
tflink #info Blocker Review will start immediately after this meeting in #fedora-qa 16:25
tflink #topic Open Floor 16:25
tflink Is there anything else that absolutely needs to be brought up now? 16:25
Viking-Ice not from me 16:25
tflink Then I think that we're done here for now 16:26
tflink Thanks for coming, everyone! 16:26
tflink #endmeeting 16:26

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.10.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!

Retrieved from "https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=QA/Meetings/20121008&oldid=308412"