2024-03-04 @ 17:00 UTC - Fedora 40 Blocker Review Meeting

Hi folks! It’s time for another blocker review meeting. We have 2 proposed freeze exception for Beta, and 5 proposed blockers for Final.

The meeting will be on Matrix. Click the link above to join in a web client - you can authenticate with your FAS account - or use a dedicated client of your choosing.

If you have time this weekend, you can take a look at the proposed or accepted blockers before the meeting - the full lists can be found here.

Remember, you can also now vote on bugs outside of review meetings! If you look at the bug list in the blockerbugs app, you’ll see links labeled “Vote!” next to all proposed blockers and freeze exceptions. Those links take you to tickets where you can vote. This page has instructions on how exactly you do it. We usually go through the tickets shortly before the meeting and apply any clear votes, so the meeting will just cover bugs where there wasn’t a clear outcome in the ticket voting yet. THIS MEANS IF YOU VOTE NOW, THE MEETING WILL BE SHORTER!

We’ll be evaluating these bugs to see if they violate any of the Release Criteria and warrant the blocking of a release if they’re not fixed. Information on the release criteria for F40 can be found on the wiki.

For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process, check out these links:

And for those of you who are curious how a Blocker Review Meeting works - or how it’s supposed to go and you want to run one - check out the SOP on the wiki.

Have a good weekend and see you on Monday!

#blocker-review:fedoraproject.org: F40-blocker-review

Meeting started by @adamwill:fedora.im at 17:00:40 UTC

Meeting summary

  1. TOPIC:Roll Call (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:00:44)
  2. TOPIC:Introduction (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:32)
    1. INFO: Our purpose in this meeting is to review proposed blocker and nice-to-have bugs and decide whether to accept them, and to monitor the progress of fixing existing accepted blocker and nice-to-have bugs. (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:38)
    2. INFO: We'll be following the process outlined at: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:41)
    3. LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:44)
    4. INFO: The bugs up for review today are available at: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:47)
    5. LINK: http://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/current (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:49)
    6. INFO: The criteria for release blocking bugs can be found at: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:52)
    7. LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Basic_Release_Criteria (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:55)
    8. LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Beta_Release_Criteria (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:57)
    9. LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:05:59)
    10. INFO: for Beta, we have: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:07)
    11. INFO: 6 Accepted Blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:11)
    12. INFO: 1 Accepted Previous Release Blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:14)
    13. INFO: 4 Proposed Freeze Exceptions (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:17)
    14. INFO: 6 Accepted Freeze Exceptions (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:20)
    15. INFO: for Final, we have: (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:25)
    16. INFO: 3 Proposed Blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:34)
  3. TOPIC:Proposed Beta freeze exceptions (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:48)
  4. TOPIC:(2267486) Include Java 21 as system Java Change in Fedora 40 Beta (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:06:59)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267486 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:07:03)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1488 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:07:05)
    3. INFO: Proposed Freeze Exceptions, distribution, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:07:07)
    4. INFO: Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+2,0,-0) (+nielsenb, +frantisekz) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:07:10)
    5. AGREED: 2267486 AcceptedFreezeException (Beta), conditional on FESCo approval - this is reluctantly accepted on the grounds that we don't really prefer the alternatives of landing it after Beta or unpicking the SCM changes, and on the Java team's assurance that they have tested the changes. As this is a late Change, it also requires FESCo approval at the meeting later todayy (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:24:03)
    6. AGREED: 2267486 AcceptedFreezeException (Beta), conditional on FESCo approval - this is reluctantly accepted on the grounds that we don't really prefer the alternatives of landing it after Beta or unpicking the SCM changes, and on the Java team's assurance that they have tested the changes. As this is a late Change, it also requires FESCo approval at the meeting later today (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:24:41)
  5. TOPIC:(2267713) intel-media-driver-free inclusion in F40+ breaks system upgrades for users with media-driver in F<=39 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:25:31)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267713 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:25:35)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1492 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:25:38)
    3. INFO: Proposed Freeze Exceptions, intel-media-driver-free, MODIFIED (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:25:42)
    4. AGREED: #2267713 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted on the grounds that upgrades usually run without updates-testing enabled, and this is a significant issue for the fairly large number of folks with this driver installed from a third-party source (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:07)
  6. TOPIC:(2259571) F40FailsToInstall: libzypp (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:16)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2259571 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:20)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1491 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:22)
    3. INFO: Proposed Freeze Exceptions, libzypp, MODIFIED (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:25)
    4. INFO: Ticket vote: BetaFreezeException (+1,0,-0) (+nielsenb) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:33:27)
    5. AGREED: 2259571 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) - this is accepted on the usual grounds that FTI issues can interfere with upgrades, so straightforward FTI fixes are typically accepted (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:37:42)
  7. TOPIC:(2266081) Consider LLVM 18 pull in during Beta Freeze (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:37:58)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266081 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:38:01)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1478 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:38:05)
    3. INFO: Proposed Freeze Exceptions, llvm, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 17:38:08)
    4. AGREED: 2266081 - AcceptedFreezeException (Beta) (conditional on FESCo approval) - this is reluctantly approved, along the same lines as the Java 21 approval, if FESCo also approves it (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:03:17)
  8. TOPIC:(2267754) Include GNOME Shell (etc.) 46 rc1 in Fedora 40 Beta (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:03:26)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2267754 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:03:28)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1493 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:03:31)
    3. INFO: Proposed Freeze Exceptions, distribution, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:03:33)
    4. AGREED: #2267754 - punt (delay decision) - we do not want to accept this for a candidate to be built in the next day or two for release next week. that timeframe is too tight without any significant justification to pull in this update (and initial results from openQA suggesting it may cause at least one problem). we will reconsider this if the Beta release slips and we have more definite testing results by then (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:17:28)
  9. TOPIC:proposed Final blockers (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:17:46)
  10. TOPIC:(2247872) Don't write /etc/lvm/devices/system.devices when not doing an end-user install (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:17:56)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2247872 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:17:59)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1438 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:18:02)
    3. INFO: Proposed Blocker, anaconda, POST (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:18:05)
    4. INFO: Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-1) (-nielsenb) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:18:08)
    5. AGREED: 2247872 RejectedBlocker (Final) AcceptedFreezeException (Final) - this cannot block the release as it affects the qcow2 image only, which is not in the release-blocking list for Fedora 40. As it's a significant issue in a non-blocking image, we grant it a freeze exception (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:35:59)
  11. TOPIC:(2266050) [abrt] plasma-workspace-libs: _execute_child(): subprocess.py:1953:_execute_child:FileNotFoundError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory: 'qtpaths' (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:36:06)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2266050 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:36:16)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1481 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:36:19)
    3. INFO: Proposed Blocker, plasma-workspace, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:36:21)
    4. INFO: Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+1,0,-0) (+nielsenb) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:36:24)
    5. AGREED: 266050 - punt (delay decision) - it's not clear if a system service is actually failing here (as defined in the criterion and test case), or if this may alternatively be a violation of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_40_Final_Release_Criteria#SELinux_and_crash_notifications . We'll delay the decision to ask lruzicka for more information (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:45:03)
  12. TOPIC:(2248071) systemd-oomd doesn't kick in on high memory pressure, leading to system lockup (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:45:10)
    1. LINK: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2248071 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:45:13)
    2. LINK: https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/1454 (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:45:15)
    3. INFO: Proposed Blocker, systemd, NEW (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:45:18)
    4. INFO: Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+0,0,-2) (-nielsenb, -catanzaro) (@adamwill:fedora.im, 18:45:20)
    5. AGREED: #2248071 - RejectedBlocker (Final) - we can't find a justification for calling this a release blocker. Even if systemd-oomd never kicks in at all, we have no release criteria covering what should happen if you run your system out of memory, and it will always be something bad. There's no requirement in Fedora that the bad thing be "systemd kills an app" rather than "the kernel kills an app" or "everything seizes up". (@adamwill:fedora.im, 19:00:00)
    6. INFO: accepted Beta blocker status - I'm poking the artwork team, I'm poking pjones for shim, and I'm poking pbrobinson for ARM. lots of poking is occurring (@adamwill:fedora.im, 19:00:27)


Meeting ended at 19:08:25 UTC

Action items

  1. (none)


People present (lines said)

  1. @adamwill:fedora.im (229)
  2. @frantisekz:fedora.im (59)
  3. @nielsenb:fedora.im (56)
  4. @conan_kudo:matrix.org (55)
  5. @pboy:fedora.im (17)
  6. @geraldosimiao:matrix.org (12)
  7. @humaton:fedora.im (6)
  8. @amoloney:fedora.im (6)
  9. @zodbot:fedora.im (5)
  10. @coremodule:fedora.im (5)
  11. @nirik:matrix.scrye.com (5)
  12. @farchord:matrix.org (3)
  13. @meetbot:fedora.im (2)
  14. @nhanlon:beeper.com (2)
  15. @salimma:fedora.im (1)