<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:00:34
!startmeeting F44 Final Go/No-Go meeting #2
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:35
Meeting started at 2026-04-23 18:00:34 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
18:00:36
The Meeting name is 'F44 Final Go/No-Go meeting #2'
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:00:41
!topic Roll Call
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:00:48
!hi
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:00:49
hi hi folks, who's around for go/no-go?
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:00:51
Jeremy Linton: Jeremy Linton (jlinton)
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:00:53
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:00:54
Brandon Nielsen: Brandon Nielsen (nielsenb)
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:01:01
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:01:02
Derek Enz: Derek Enz (derekenz)
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:01:23
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:01:25
Lukáš Růžička: Lukáš Růžička (lruzicka)
<@smoliicek:fedora.im>
18:01:32
hi, joining in as a lurker :)
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
18:01:33
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:01:35
pwhalen: Paul Whalen (pwhalen)
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:01:36
hiace
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:02:12
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:12
Michel Lind ☘ UTC+1: Michel Lind (salimma) - he / him / his
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:02:18
Some folks are around for Go, do you want black or white stones?
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:02:19
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:20
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-5): Jocelyn Gould (korora) - she / her / hers
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:02:44
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:02:50
Conan Kudo 🥴: Neal Gompa (ngompa) - he / him / his
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:03:10
i always play red stones
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:03:30
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:03:38
geraldosimiao: Geraldo S. Simião Kutz (geraldosimiao) - he / him / his
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
18:03:46
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:03:47
Jef Spaleta: Jef Spaleta (jspaleta) - he / him / his
<@pboy:fedora.im>
18:03:57
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:03:58
Peter Boy (ServerWG, Docs): Peter Boy (pboy)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:06:30
hi hi everyone
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:06:36
ok, let's get going with some exciting boilerplate
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:06:56
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:06:59
Fabio Rodrigues Ribeiro UTC -3: Fábio Ribeiro (farribeiro) - he / him / his
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
18:07:01
can we no-go the boilerplate
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:08
the boilerplate is always go
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:15
fedora never knowingly refuses boilerplate
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:17
4. Fedora CoreOS and IoT are ready
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:17
2. No remaining blocker bugs
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:17
!info This is determined in a few ways:
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:17
!info Purpose of this meeting is to check whether or not F44 Final is ready for shipment, according to the release criteria.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:17
!topic Purpose of this meeting
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:17
1. Release candidate compose is available
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:17
3. Test matrices are fully completed
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:30
oh, right, i was going to fix that 'few ways' thing, wasn't i? never mind
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:40
!topic Current status - RC
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:07:55
we have one! in fact, we sort of have three
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:08:02
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:08:09
Simon de Vlieger: Simon de Vlieger (supakeen) - he / him / his
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:13
!info we have three theoretically viable RCs
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:08:54
!info RC-1.5 from Friday; has fixes for all accepted blockers except 2448283
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:09:55
!info RC-1.6 from yesterday; adds Firefox 150 for proposed blocker 2460531 and openssl 3.5.5-2 for sorta-proposed blocker 2447397
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:10:36
!info RC-1.7 from yesterday; includes Firefox 150, drops openssl, adds PackageKit 1.3.4-3.fc44 for proposed blocker 2460579
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:11:25
i suspect we're gonna wind up with 1.7 if anything, but I suggest we keep 'em all theoretically in play till after the blocker review phase. once we've reviewed blockers it should be clear which RC we should go with. sound sensible?
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:11:56
Sounds good to me
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:12:43
yeah, ok
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:13:37
fine with me I guess
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:03
!agreed RC-1.5, RC-1.6 and C-1.7 are available and will be discussed for release readiness. We will nail down one specific RC after blocker review
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:14:06
Yep sounds good.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:13
grr. so close. oh well
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:14:30
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:14:32
Paul Maconi (Aggraxis): Paul Maconi (aggraxis) - he / him / his
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:34
!topic Current status - blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:34
!link https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/milestone/44/Final/buglist
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:34
!info This sections will be led by a member of Fedora Quality, i.e. me
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:51
so, let's look at proposed blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:59
!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+3,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao, +kparal, +derekenz)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:59
!topic (2461077) Anaconda fails to enforce min partition sizes for /boot, /boot/efi
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:59
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2461077
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:59
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2125
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:14:59
!info Proposed Blocker, anaconda-webui, NEW
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:15:33
this is a very newly-proposed one (today). basically, webui does not warn you if you make a partition smaller than the usual minimum size. gtkui does warn you in this case.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:15:40
it's not a new bug, f42 and f43 behave the same.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:15:44
this makes sense to be broken, since the partitioner isn't from anaconda
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:15:53
the restriction is in blivet, not udisks
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:16:09
we do have mechanisms for passing requirement-y things in and out
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:16:29
not for something that's just crazy-glued into the UI :P
<@marmijo:fedora.im>
18:16:43
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
18:16:45
marmijo: Michael Armijo (marmijo)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:17:08
no, we really do. there's the list of expected partitions down the right hand side for e.g.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:17:09
as much as it irritates me, this probably falls under the "hard-to-fix" and "very-late" blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:17:23
i *think* we do have some hard limitations passed through too, though i have to look it up / check
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:17:37
I would say, blocker +1, waive for F45
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:17:38
anyway, yeah, I kinda have to be +1 to this I think, but i'll also support waiving it if/when we get to that
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:17:57
it's a blocker to me +1, but I don't think we can fix it
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:18:10
and open CommonBugs to explain that it really cannot be 43MB
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:18:16
Yea, this can be waived even if it becomes a blocker.
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:18:23
Agree
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:18:25
does anyone want to argue for rejecting it as a blocker?
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:18:36
same
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:18:53
Sure, there's probably an infinite number of ways to create broken partition tables that we haven't found yet but that isn't the criteria :)
<@m4rtink:fedora.im>
18:19:56
We are aware of this issues, but don't think it is fixable in a reasonable timeframe for F44 release. Feel free to propose as a F45 Beta blocker, so we don't loose track.
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:21:15
I take it this is one of those "intentional footgun" kinds of problems. You decrease the partition size, and it fails the install later.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:21:23
Conan Kudo 🥴 when you click "Return to installation" there's a "Checking storage configuration" step, though admittedly I can't make it exactly *fail* yet. somehow when I throw really silly configs at it, it decides on "Use free space", which is odd, there isn't any free space. this might be another bug, sigh. let's pretend it's not there
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:21:28
yup
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:21:43
I don't think so, it's just a path nobody considered so far, I think
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:22:02
`/boot` isn't supposed to be allowed to be smaller than 512M afaik
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:22:12
even gtkui will let you do it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:22:15
it just warns you first
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:22:54
I mean, if the right-side navigation help was a little too helpier, that would definitely help
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:23:10
Yah, the warning is whats missing, but if your messing with the storage config, make it to small it fails, you learn your lesson and do it again.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:23:24
proposed !agreed 2461077 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of "When using...the Cockpit-based "storage editor" flow on the webui-based installer, the installer must be able to...Reject or disallow invalid disk and volume configurations without crashing." We note it was proposed very late and will likely consider waiving it later
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:23:27
Yah, the warning is whats missing, but if your messing with the storage config, make it too small it fails, you learn your lesson and do it again.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:23:33
ack
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:23:36
ack
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:23:39
ack
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:23:42
Ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:23:48
yeah, sure, if you click through the warning then that's the expectation I guess.
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:23:53
Ack
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:23:57
mkolman: maybe there should be a quiz about partitioning before you open the paritioning tool
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:24:09
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:15
partition penguin license test
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:24
!agreed 2461077 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of "When using...the Cockpit-based "storage editor" flow on the webui-based installer, the installer must be able to...Reject or disallow invalid disk and volume configurations without crashing." We note it was proposed very late and will likely consider waiving it later
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:47
!info Ticket vote: 0Day (+1,0,-0) (+geraldosimiao)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:47
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2122
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:47
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2460531
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:47
!topic (2460531) Firefox 150 fixes 271 unspecified security issues (F44 blocker consideration)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:47
!info Proposed Blocker, firefox, ON_QA
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:47
!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+4,0,-0) (+pbrobinson, +augenauf, +adamwill, +derekenz)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:24:47
!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+3,0,-0) (+kparal, +augenauf, +geraldosimiao)
<@m4rtink:fedora.im>
18:25:25
Lukáš Růžička: a quiz that tests users luck by asking them to guess random numbers would be the most useful before configuring storage :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:25:46
this one you might've seen in the news
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:25:53
Well some of this would be fixed by simply removing the need for a /boot
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:26:00
Firefox 150 (allegedly) fixes 271 Security Things that were found by AI magic
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:26:04
its all leftover legacy from BIOS's that couldn't read the entire disk
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:26:25
please direct all further partitioning discussion to /dev/null, thanks
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:27:06
so, it's worth noting the security criterion is *really* more about pr/image/ass covering than it is genuine security
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:27:25
realistically speaking, any image we publish is probably known-insecure within weeks
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:27:27
AI magic
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:27:50
what we're really concerned with is "will the press dump on us for shipping without a fix for this big security bug they're currently all in a flap about"
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:28:05
i'd say this case definitely meets that bar, so i'm +1
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:28:43
yeah, +1, but I am not happy about that as there will be issues comming every single day.
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:29:01
and we never release
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:29:02
Well going all ubuntu and dropping firefox as a native package and expecting the user to pull the flatpak solves the problem too.
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:29:06
FinalFE +1
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:29:36
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:29:36
I'm iffy on this one, as if we had a go last week, we would have shipped 149.
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:29:36
+1 FE, go to 150 after release (probably pretty quickly)
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:29:46
that's still better than what Ubuntu does which is snap :P
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:29:49
we only really care about ones that get a bunch of mainstream traction, and once we make a decision at this meeting it's basically nailed on, so we're probably fine from that pov
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:29:59
I think this is academic because we have an RC that includes it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:30:06
it's not academic
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:30:06
so +1 and meh let's stop worrying about it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:30:24
if we reject this and the packagekit one, we could - and theoretically should - ship RC-1.5 not RC-1.7
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:30:30
(assuming we waive the others)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:30:41
if we accept this and/or the packagekit one, we have to ship RC-1.7 if anything
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:30:44
I was going to ask, isn't the FF update in 1.7?
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:30:49
RC 1.7 for the win
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:31:03
sorry, i should've explained that earlier
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:31:14
that winnows down the release candidates, so sounds good
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:31:21
esp since Neal wants the PK fix ;)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:31:41
if we accept this but not the PackageKit one, or we consider and accept the SSL one *and* the PackageKit one, things are a bit awkward, so let's not do those things :D
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:31:46
Yes
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:31:48
by policy, we need to ship this, it made it in time to be included in an eligible candidate compose, so I don't really see the point of arguing it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:32:25
we don't? we have precedent for deciding to ship an older candidate, we've done that before. that's why this decision matters
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:32:35
anyhow, we have quite a few +1s and nobody seems to be -1, so:
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:32:40
+1
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:32:49
I'm +1
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:32:56
For CYA / bad press reasons
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:33:33
+1 in general; we have a compose that fixes some stuff so we should use that compose :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:33:47
proposed !agreed 2460531 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of "The release must contain no known security bugs of 'important' or higher impact according to the Red Hat severity classification scale which cannot be satisfactorily resolved by a package update (e.g. issues during installation)". We don't actually know for *sure* that any of the alleged 271 issues is 'important' or higher, but we decided that assuming at least one of them is constitutes a more sensible choice than assuming all of them are not
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:33:52
ack
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:33:56
ack
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:33:57
ack
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:34:00
ack
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:34:03
ack
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:34:15
ack
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:34:19
acl
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:21
!agreed 2460531 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of "The release must contain no known security bugs of 'important' or higher impact according to the Red Hat severity classification scale which cannot be satisfactorily resolved by a package update (e.g. issues during installation)". We don't actually know for sure that any of the alleged 271 issues is 'important' or higher, but we decided that assuming at least one of them is constitutes a more sensible choice than assuming all of them are not
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:34:24
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:41
!info Ticket vote: FinalBlocker (+4,0,-0) (+augenauf, +geraldosimiao, +adamwill, +derekenz)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:41
!topic (2460579) Local Privilege escalation: Run code as root due to race condition in PackageKit
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:41
!link https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2460579
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:41
!link https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review/issue/2124
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:41
!info Proposed Blocker, PackageKit, ON_QA
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:41
!info Ticket vote: FinalFreezeException (+3,0,-0) (+augenauf, +kparal, +geraldosimiao)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:34:49
ok, and yes, this is the other thing that was fixed in RC-1.7
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:35:08
this *is* a really pretty bad security issue, to be fair. definitely meets the criteria, so...+1.
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:35:14
+1 for the same reason as above :)
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:35:50
+1
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:35:54
kill it with fire
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:36:21
Yup, +1
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:36:32
+1
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:36:50
+1
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:37:00
proposed !agreed 2460579 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of "The release must contain no known security bugs of 'important' or higher impact according to the Red Hat severity classification scale which cannot be satisfactorily resolved by a package update (e.g. issues during installation)"
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:37:09
ack
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:37:10
ack
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:37:13
ack
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:37:14
ack
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:37:16
ack
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:37:22
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:37:25
!agreed 2460579 - AcceptedBlocker (Final) - this is accepted as a violation of "The release must contain no known security bugs of 'important' or higher impact according to the Red Hat severity classification scale which cannot be satisfactorily resolved by a package update (e.g. issues during installation)"
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:38:02
ok, and for completeness: does anyone want to argue for accepting https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2447397 , the openssl proposal by Peter Robinson ?
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:38:39
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:38:44
it does not appear on the list because it was closed, but it's still theoretically considerable. it was closed on the basis the specific CVE that bug is for does not apply to Fedora, but peter really meant to propose the whole set of CVEs fixed by the update, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2447397#c4
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:38:56
however, those are all low or moderate, so it looks like a clear -1
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:39:02
but if anyone wants to argue the case, say so and i'll topic it
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:39:08
I think the last comment makes it clear.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:39:10
seems like -1 and can ship as a zero day
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:39:13
-1
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:39:19
patch yo junk after install
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:39:23
-1
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:39:25
-1
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:39:33
-1
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:39:36
-1
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:39:37
seems clear enough
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:39:39
-1
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:39:40
0day +1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:39:41
if it ships as a zero day, upgraded systems won't have it anyway
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:40:03
0
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:40:13
Don't netinst grab the latest package data anyways?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:40:30
yeah if RH's assessment is this is low/med ... if we start blocking on those all the time we'll never release
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:40:31
It does
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:40:33
Just grab the everything bagel and go to town :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:40:56
Paul Maconi (Aggraxis) netinst yes. we mainly are concerned with non-network deployments, for this kinda bug - live installs etc.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:41:08
anyhow, that's a pretty clear -1
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:41:25
absolutely, but with them being low/moderate there is no gigantic risk here. and I say that working for a risk adverse organization.
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
18:42:05
im actually concerned that the rate of CVEs will increase to the point where serious issues will be coming out at a rate high enough by next release that this will be a legit concern...
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:42:22
agreed
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:42:38
don't be silly, by that point the agents will have made all software perfectly secure and functional and we can sign the release off from the beach without looking at it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:42:45
i have my towel on a deck chair already
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:42:51
some of the CVEs that got through to NIST and thus we get bugs filed are totally bogus too, and that problem will get worse
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:43:07
Yep. AI will code it, find the bugs, fix them, and of course make no mistakes. Why worry?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:43:10
adamwmaybe we should merge with Firefox and call ourselves Firefox OS! since Mozilla seems to have a handle on it
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:43:15
and we can secure Fedora with Mythos ;)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:43:41
but srsly - if things get to that point we can look at rewording the criterion somehow, it *is* a bit tricky though as we really *do* want to be able to wedge in genuinely super-critical fixes and fixes for giant media panics
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:44:12
I'm taking a "wait and see" approach about this
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:44:25
https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/cve-2026-28390
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:44:32
and I'm saying this as someone who got a legitimate, severe CVE report from a researcher using AI
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:44:38
it's just not worth it to freak out about it
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:44:46
has a very long list of affected components, many of which are probably more important to fedora than RHEL
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:44:47
i've been panicking and will continue to do so :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:45:04
oh, i'm being flippant but they absolutely do find genuine issues, yeah. it's going to be interesting
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:45:09
I was supposed to be panicking?
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
18:45:13
we can talk after the release is done about cotigency plans if this becomes a problem.
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:45:18
"may you live in interesting times"
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:45:26
mesa for example (although I have no idea how that works in this case)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:45:27
Jocelyn Gould (UTC-5) this is fedora, you are expected to panic all the time unless given express notice to the contrary
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:45:37
you werne't already?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:45:39
anyhow, let's try and stay vaguely focused!
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:45:42
you weren't already?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:45:48
we now have the full set of accepted blockers
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:45:49
not since F42 surely
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:45:54
we gave everyone towels!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:46:18
!info we now know the full set of accepted blockers. Since Firefox and PackageKit were accepted, RC-1.5 and RC-1.6 are no longer viable; RC-1.7 is the only candidate now under consideration
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:47:00
!info treating ON_QA and VERIFIED blockers as 'addressed', there are two outstanding unaddressed blockers
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:47:29
!topic Waiver discussion
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:47:45
!topic Waiver discussion - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2461077 "Anaconda fails to enforce min partition sizes for /boot, /boot/efi"
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:47:57
+1 to waive and punt to F45
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:48:05
I feel this can be waived; it's been there.
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:48:11
+1
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:48:16
I'm going to propose we waive this under *both* "Last minute blocker bugs" and "Difficult to fix blocker bugs"
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:48:17
waive +1
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:48:22
+1 and wave
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:48:22
+1 👋
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:48:23
it's too late to get it fixed, and it existed for two releases, and it's a pain to access to partitioner anyway
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:48:34
it was filed last minute, fixing it is not trivial (per anaconda team), it was in f42 and f43 so we're not making anything worse by shipping with it
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:48:35
+1
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:48:46
+1 and waive
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:48:51
+1 and waive
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:49:40
proposed !agreed 2461077 - waived to Fedora 45 Beta per both "Last minute blocker bugs" and "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" provisions at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process#Exceptional_cases
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:49:47
ack
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:49:48
ack
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:49:50
ack
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:49:53
ack
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:49:54
ack
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:49:54
qck
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:49:59
ack
<@salimma:fedora.im>
18:50:10
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:50:12
!agreed 2461077 - waived to Fedora 45 Beta per both "Last minute blocker bugs" and "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" provisions at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process#Exceptional_cases
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:50:40
!topic Waiver discussion - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2448283 "Selecting a non-ASCII capable keyboard layout should automatically also select US English as a second layout"
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:51:17
I propose waiving this under the "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" provision. it is not straightforward to fix and we are reliant on upstream for the work
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:51:32
+1 I concur
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
18:51:36
ack
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:51:38
Yeah.
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:51:42
+1
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:51:43
I'll also note that the fix we *did* get, for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2453216 , substantially lessens the practical impact of this one
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:51:44
Agree +1
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:51:51
+1
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
18:51:53
It's something that's going to be looked at for Plasma 6.7.
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:51:56
ack
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:52:01
In this case it's possible to go back and select a different keyboard layout?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:52:08
because now you should not arrive at the Keyboard Layout screen and see nothing selected and so be tempted to click on something
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:52:18
i believe so, yeah, i haven't actually *checked* though
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:52:37
Ok; it's already being waived at this point so no need to verify :)
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:52:41
(lots of +1's)
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:52:46
and for now plasma-setup Keyboard Layout page pre-selection is fixed (bug # 2453216)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:53:44
yeah, that's what I mentioned - that makes people less likely to hit this one on the whole
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:53:55
seems like nobody opposed to waiving this?
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:54:07
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:55:49
proposed !agreed 2453216 - waived to Fedora 45 Final per the "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" provision at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process#Exceptional_cases - we are reliant on upstream to fix this, and upstream have advised us it is not trivial to fix and they cannot commit to fixing it correctly in a timeframe broadly compatible with the Fedora 44 release schedule. We note the fix for 2448283 lessens the practical impact of this bug by making folks less likely to decide to click stuff on the affected page
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:55:53
ack
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:55:58
ack
<@korora:fedora.im>
18:55:58
ack
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
18:56:00
ack
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:56:02
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:56:03
oh, it's waived to Final not Beta because the criterion is Final
<@nielsenb:fedora.im>
18:56:08
ack
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
18:56:16
ack
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:56:19
proposed !agreed 2453216 - waived to Fedora 45 Final per the "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" provision at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process#Exceptional_cases - we are reliant on upstream to fix this, and upstream have advised us it is not trivial to fix and they cannot commit to fixing it correctly in a timeframe broadly compatible with the Fedora 44 release schedule. We note the fix for 2448283 lessens the practical impact of this bug by making folks less likely to decide to click stuff on the affected page. Waived to Final rather than Beta because the relevant criterion is Final.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:56:56
!agreed 2453216 - waived to Fedora 45 Final per the "Difficult to fix blocker bugs" provision at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process#Exceptional_cases - we are reliant on upstream to fix this, and upstream have advised us it is not trivial to fix and they cannot commit to fixing it correctly in a timeframe broadly compatible with the Fedora 44 release schedule. We note the fix for 2448283 lessens the practical impact of this bug by making folks less likely to decide to click stuff on the affected page. Waived to Final rather than Beta because the relevant criterion is Final.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:57:12
OK, with that decision:
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
18:57:28
🥁
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:57:31
!info all outstanding blocker bugs are considered to be addressed in RC-1.7 or waived
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:57:46
!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Fedora_44_Test_Results
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:57:46
!topic Current status - test matrices
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:58:17
hmm, i'm not seeing any USB UEFI results in aarch64 default boot and install
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:58:38
has anyone actually booted RC-1.7 on a real aarch64 system from a USB stick? if so can you slap a check in one of those boxes?
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
18:59:18
I have not, sorry.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:59:32
Jeremy Linton did you?
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
18:59:35
i booted a disk image from USB UEFI after the u-boot USB regression got fixed but not an installer
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:59:47
disk image is the thing we want for that box
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
18:59:55
but it should be an RC-1.7 disk image, as this is a smoke test
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
18:59:58
I did on the 1.2 version
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
19:00:27
huh that matrix says netinst/dvd/dvd-ostree
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:00:29
ideally we want testing with 1.7, that's why we didn't bring a result forward here (for these really basic 'does it boot?' tests we really want to check with exactly what we're shipping, just in case of cosmic bitflips or whatever)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:00:40
oh wait you might be right
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:00:41
there's two tables
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:00:44
I burned the image no usb sorry
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
19:00:47
looking here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_44_RC_1.7_Installation#Default_boot_and_install_(aarch64)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:00:55
yeah you're right, my bad
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
19:00:56
I've tested USB AArch64 installs for IoT
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:01:10
if anyone could grab the netinst and give it a go quickly it'd be great
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:02:32
aside from that, we're missing complex storage stuff and windows 11 dual boot...and a couple of aarch64 desktop tests we can probably bring forward from 1.2 or 1.5
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:02:55
the one time I don't bring my MBP with me...
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:02:58
storage stuff we may have to just live without, because it was tested by an RHer who is no longer on our team :(
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:03:19
windows 11 dual boot we can probably live without too, windows 10 was tested
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:03:57
Thought I covered all the KDE desktop tests
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:04:05
you did, it's workstation. actually on the base matrix
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:04:19
Ok
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:04:21
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Fedora_44_RC_1.7_Base#Release-blocking_environments_(aarch64)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:04:27
we have them for 1.5, though, so i can just bring those forward
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:04:31
i think they don't need re-testing
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:05:30
Yesterday I remember covering WS openvpn test.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:05:50
maybe you just didn't fill it in?
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:05:54
May have forgot to fill the blank :-/
<@jlinton:fedora.im>
19:06:02
I did a number of the normal install paths (with the kde+server DVDs) them, but largely in VM's for 1.7.. I was looking for regression not entire test suite.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:06:04
well, go ahead now if you remember doing it :)
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:06:17
adamwill gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 8 cookies, 5 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:06:55
farribeiro gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 9 cookies, 6 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
19:06:58
ok, it boots
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:07:01
aggraxis gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 10 cookies, 7 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:07:06
yay
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:07:17
done
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:07:20
korora gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 11 cookies, 8 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:07:33
farribeiro gave a cookie to adamwill. They now have 309 cookies, 16 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:08:08
ngompa gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 12 cookies, 9 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:08:15
derekenz has already given cookies to supakeen during the F43 timeframe
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:08:17
geraldosimiao gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 13 cookies, 10 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:08:40
lruzicka gave a cookie to supakeen. They now have 14 cookies, 11 of which were obtained in the Fedora 43 release cycle
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
19:09:00
updated the matrix
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:09:14
thanks
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
19:09:21
aggraxis has already given cookies to adamwill during the F43 timeframe
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
19:09:44
Give him another one, you stingy bot. I give Luna like 37 treats a day.
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:10:26
!info coverage is close to 100% with only missing advanced storage tests due to Red Hat losing an employee, and missing Windows 11 dual boot test (Windows 10 is covered). this coverage is considered acceptable
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:10:50
!agreed Sufficient test coverage is in place for RC-1.7 to continue with the release readiness checks
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:10:57
!topic Fedora CoreOS / IoT check-in
<@pwhalen:fedora.im>
19:11:09
IoT is good
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:11:14
anyone around to speak for CoreOS / IoT? dustymabe ? Peter Robinson ? pwhalen ?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:11:16
thanks pwhalen
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:11:24
!info IoT is good per pwhalen
<@dustymabe:matrix.org>
19:12:04
cc marmijo
<@marmijo:fedora.im>
19:12:43
CoreOS is ready!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:12:58
!info CoreOS is ready per marmijo
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:13:12
ok then, we're ready for the main event
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:13:14
!topic Go/No-Go decision
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:13:16
I will poll each team. Please reply “go” or “no-go”
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:13:20
FESCo?
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:14:09
Is that just Neal here? Conan Kudo 🥴
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:14:09
Go
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:14:18
if you need a second, Go
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:14:25
one is fine
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:14:30
Releng?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:14:39
jnsamyak around?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:14:52
do we have a releng person? Kevin is the only one usually awake right now and he's on vacation
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:15:12
uh oh
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:15:16
yeah it's super late in India
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:15:40
not having NA coverage for Fedora Infra really sucks right now :(
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:15:44
sounds like we need at least 2 releng people in Americas, Europe and Asia :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:15:59
there's a few of us who can cosplay as NA releng
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:16:13
Neal has a beard, he can be Kevin
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:16:26
I have the commits to prove it
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:16:30
ENHANCE! ENHANCE! ENHANCE that image!
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:16:41
infinite zoom
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:16:41
I have the pungi-fedora commits to prove it
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:16:44
must be Mythos powerd
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:16:59
you can see the one gray hair
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:17:06
!info nobody officially from releng is around due to PTO / timezone issues, but myself and Conan Kudo 🥴 play releng on TV and we say it's fine
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:17:25
QA?
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
19:17:37
Go
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:17:38
Go
<@geraldosimiao:matrix.org>
19:17:40
go
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:17:49
see, qa is always prepared ;)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:17:55
QA is very enthusiastic about the quality of Fedora :)
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:17:57
!agreed Fedora Linux 44 Final is GO
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:18:06
🎉
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:18:14
!info Fedora Linux 44 Final will release on the current target date (2026-04-28) with RC-1.7
<@dustymabe:matrix.org>
19:18:16
whoo hoo!
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
19:18:22
Congratulations, everyone!
<@farribeiro:matrix.org>
19:18:25
🎆
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
19:18:32
Canadian hockey playes say: Greaty, hooray
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:18:35
!action jspaleta to announce decision
<@korora:fedora.im>
19:18:36
🎆🎆
<@theprogram:fedora.im>
19:18:38
For what date?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:18:46
thanks everyone!
<@lruzicka:fedora.im>
19:18:47
Tuesday
<@theprogram:fedora.im>
19:18:49
28
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:18:53
MatH see later info
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:19:00
great job all
<@smoliicek:fedora.im>
19:19:03
🎉
<@korora:fedora.im>
19:19:05
Thank you!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:19:08
Anything else we need to discuss before closing?
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:19:08
!topic Open floor
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
19:19:23
Thanks everyone and Adam especially for running the show today 🙂
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:19:25
at least we released before the release party
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:19:28
Lukáš Růžička i'll do the secretary stuff, you can get to the pub :D
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:19:31
even if nobody gets the bits before it
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
19:19:31
Okay April 28th release... is a go.. Wait I can't veto this? I still need to write a release article or something.. i need another week
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:19:47
per the meeting script you don't even get a vote. sorry :P
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:19:48
ugh I need to write muh articles
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:20:07
this is going to be a super-fun weekend, for sure
<@supakeen:fedora.im>
19:20:11
We’ve been joking about ordering donuts with little Fedora logos on them wonder if there’s enough time left
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
19:20:21
i get the announcement to test and devel list today
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:20:30
I'd break my diet for one of those
<@salimma:fedora.im>
19:21:05
woohoo I attended the exciting meeting
<@jspaleta:fedora.im>
19:21:16
Hey everyone dont forget... release party tomorrow. To use a football analogy... sort of feels like we're celebrating before crossing the goal line... and that always always goes so well
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:21:47
you were in another meeting as well as this one?
<@astranovus:matrix.org>
19:22:00
big congrats to everyone, am i now safe to install rc 1.7 or do i have to wait for the final release day
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:22:09
yes you can do it now
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
19:22:12
go nuts.
<@aggraxis:fedora.im>
19:22:21
The rest of us did. lol
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:22:24
1.7 is the same bits as final
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:22:24
now is the ideal time to install rawhide
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:22:32
you are mean
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:22:34
alright, thanks for coming everyone
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
19:22:42
rawhide is usually a broken mess right now :P
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:22:42
and great job on the release
<@derekenz:fedora.im>
19:22:49
Thank you Adam!
<@adamwill:fedora.im>
19:23:36
!endmeeting