# F37 Blocker Review meeting
# Date: 2023-03-13
# Time: **16:00** UTC
# Location: #fedora-blocker-review on irc.libera.chat
Hi folks! We have 11 proposed Final blockers to review, so let's have a
review meeting.
Note that clocks went forward in North America this weekend, so the
meeting time in UTC is an hour earlier than before. If you do not
observe daylight savings time, or your clocks did not yet go forward,
the meeting will be an hour earlier in your local time. Please double
check!
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: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/ .
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.
https://pagure.io/fedora-qa/blocker-review 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 F38 can be found on the
wiki [0].
For more information about the Blocker and Freeze exception process,
check out these links:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_blocker_bug_process
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_freeze_exception_bug_process
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:
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:SOP_Blocker_Bug_Meeting
Have a good day and see you tomorrow!
[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Release_Criteria
--
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @adamw@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net
_______________________________________________
test-announce mailing list -- test-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to test-announce-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/test-announce@lists.fedorapro…
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
(Resending as it seems this didn't reach the ML the first time...)
Hi Fedorians,
Changes/Mass_Retire_Golang_Leaves [1] has been approved by FESCo. As
part of this Change, all Go library packages that are leaves will be be
mass retired and removed from the Fedora 39 repositories in
approximately one month.
The following maintainers/groups own co-maintain or watch at least one
package that we have identified as a leaf:
@deepinde-sig
@go-sig
@osbuild-sig
agerstmayr
anthr76
athoscr
atim
carlwgeorge
dcavalca
dctrud
eclipseo
fab
fale
fuller
gundersanne
jchaloup
jdoss
jjelen
laiot
logic
mayorga
mgoodwin
nathans
obudai
pwouters
qulogic
rga
rominf
yanqiyu
I will forward this message to those users separately instead of BCCing.
Apparently, some people have broken filters that hide any email sent to
the ML even if it's addressed to them directly.
See [2] for a full list of leaves and [3] for a maintainer by maintainer
breakdown. Maintainers may opt out by cloning
https://pagure.io/GoSIG/go-leaves/ and pushing an `opt-out/{PKGNAME}`
file with a short justification.
Something like:
```
git clone ssh://git@pagure.io/GoSIG/go-leaves.git
cd go-leaves
echo "Dependency for foo (review bug #XXXXX)" > ./opt-out/bar
git add ./opt-out/bar
git commit -m "opt out bar"
git push origin
```
All Go SIG members have write access to this repository. Other users can
submit a pull request. You're also welcome to file an issue and I'll
push the file for you.
After a month has passed, we'll remove Go SIG write access from the
repository and stop accepting additional opt-outs. Then, we'll preform
test builds in Copr to make sure there's no false positives in the list.
Finally, I'll verify the results, opt out any additional false
positives, and preform the mass retirement. As usual, anybody can
unretire packages without a re-review within eight weeks by filing a
releng ticket.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Mass_Retire_Golang_Leaves
[2] https://pagure.io/GoSIG/go-leaves/blob/main/f/leaves
[3] https://pagure.io/GoSIG/go-leaves/blob/main/f/leaves-by-maintainer
Thank you for your cooperation,
--
Maxwell G (@gotmax23)
Pronouns: He/They
Hello all.
Modern Fedora ISOs, including Fedora 38 Beta, have the following error
on legacy hardware (tested on Haswell) when booted in UEFI mode:
Invalid image
Failed to read header: Unsupported
Failed to load image: Unsupported
start_image() returned Unsupported
A lot of users have this problem:
https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f37-invalid-image-error-while-bootin…
It needs to be fixed or documented that Fedora can no longer be
installed in UEFI mode on legacy hardware.
--
Sincerely,
Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly(a)easycoding.org)
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FontAwesome6
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
== Summary ==
Update the FontAwesome package in Fedora to version 6.x, with a
compatibility package for packages still needing 4.x.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:jjames| Jerry James]]
* Email: loganjerry(a)gmail.com
=== Affected maintainers ===
* [[User:xavierb|Xavier Bachelot]]
* [[User:lbalhar|Lumír Balhar]]
* [[User:nb|Nick Bebout]]
* [[User:abbra|Alexander Bokovoy]]
* [[User:spot|Tom Callaway]]
* [[User:rcritten|Rob Crittenden]]
* [[User:edewata|Endi Sukma Dewata]]
* [[User:rdieter|Rex Dieter]]
* [[User:rdopiera|Radomir Dopieralski]]
* [[User:cdorney|Claran Dorney]]
* [[User:melmorabity|Mohamed ElMorabity]]
* [[User:mfargett|Marco Fargetta]]
* [[User:kevin|Kevin Fenzi]]
* [[User:cfu|Christina Fu]]
* [[User:mharmsen|Matthew Harmsen]]
* [[User:jhrozek|Jakub Hrozek]]
* [[User:ipa-maint|ipa-maint]]
* [[User:ckelley|Chris Kelley]]
* [[User:mkosek|Martin Kosek]]
* [[User:plautrba|Petr Lautrbach]]
* [[User:vakwetu|Ade Lee]]
* [[User:fale|Fabio Allesandro Locati]]
* [[User:jmagne|Jack Magne]]
* [[User:cicku|Christopher Meng]]
* [[User:than|Than Ngo]]
* [[User:jnovy|Jindrich Novy]]
* [[User:nonamedotc|Mukundan Ragavan]]
* [[User:mrunge|Matthias Runge]]
* [[User:cipherboy|Alexander Scheel]]
* [[User:simo|Simo Sorce]]
* [[User:chedi|Chedi Toueiti]]
* [[User:puiterwijk|Patrick Uiterwijk]]
* [[User:pvoborni|Petr Vobornik]]
* [[User:twoerner|Thomas Woerner]]
* [[User:jonathanspw|Jonathan Wright]]
== Detailed Description ==
The fontawesome-fonts package in Fedora is currently on version 4.7.0.
Meanwhile, some packages now require version 5.x or 6.x of the fonts.
Since most consumers still want version 4.7.0, the proposal is to
introduce a fontawesome4-fonts compatibility package, and move the
fontawesome-fonts package to the most recent release, currently
version 6.3.0.
== Feedback ==
== Benefit to Fedora ==
Some user-facing applications will be able to display the latest
versions of the FontAwesome icons, which have undergone a number of
updates and cleanups to provide a more pleasing look. In addition,
many new icons have been added in the 5.x and 6.x versions. For
example, version 6.x contains a Fedora icon, while previous versions
do not.
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
** The fontawesome-fonts package will be updated to version 6.3.0.
** The python-pydata-sphinx-theme package will be updated to version
0.13.1, which requires FontAwesome 6.x.
** The python-QtAwesome package will be updated to version 1.2.2,
which includes FontAwesome 6.x support, and changed to unbundle those
fonts that can be unbundled.
** The python-sphinx_ansible_theme package will be updated to version
0.10.1, which permits some spec file simplifications, and updated to
depend on fontawesome4-fonts.
** The python-XStatic-Font-Awesome package will be updated to version
6.2.1.1, which requires FontAwesome 6.x.
** The texlive package will be updated to remove an unnecessary
dependency on fontawesome-fonts.
** Two new packages will be added to the distribution:
*** fontawesome4-fonts, a nearly exact copy of the current
fontawesome-fonts package
*** python-accessible-pygments, to support upgrading the
python-pydata-sphinx-theme package
** One package will be retired from the distribution:
*** fontawesome5-fonts, which will be obsoleted by fontawesome-fonts,
since version 6.x is backwards compatible with 5.x
** The following packages will be updated to depend on
fontawesome4-fonts instead of fontawesome-fonts:
*** freeipa
*** ipsilon
*** python-acme
*** python-f5-sdk
*** python-streamlink
*** sympa
** The following packages will be updated to unbundle the FontAwesome
CSS files and depend on fontawesome4-fonts:
*** python-nbclassic
** The following packages will be updated to unbundle the FontAwesome
4.x fonts and depend on fontawesome4-fonts:
*** dogtag-pki
** The following packages will be updated to unbundle the FontAwesome 6.x fonts:
*** R-fontawesome
** The following packages will be updated to build documentation with
the new version of python-pydata-sphinx-theme:
*** python-networkx
** Finally, the cantata package will be updated to version 2.5.0,
which is the final upstream version. Since upstream has declared
itself dead, a patch to use FontAwesome 6.x will be added to the
cantata package, so that we can someday retire fontawesome4-fonts.
** All of these changes are available for inspection at
[https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jjames/FontAwesome6 this
COPR]. Changes for an individual package can be seen in jjames's fork
of that package.
** Several packages do not need any changes, because they already
depend on `font(fontawesome)`, rather than on fontawesome-fonts, as
suggested by [https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/FontsPolicy/#_dep…
the font guidelines].
*** coq
*** libgpuarray
*** libsemigroups
*** python-BTrees
*** python-primecountpy
*** python-sphinx_rtd_theme
* Other developers: Maintainers of the packages listed above will need
to review the proposed changes and merge them if they are acceptable.
Afterwards, I will build all packages in a side tag and merge to
Rawhide once all builds are complete.
* Release engineering: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change)
* Alignment with Initiatives:
== Upgrade/compatibility impact ==
Users should not notice this change, except for having fewer bundled
copies of the FontAwesome icons on disk.
== How To Test ==
Install packages from the
[https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jjames/FontAwesome6 the
FontAwesome6 COPR]. Launch each one and verify that it displays the
expected icons.
== User Experience ==
Users should not see any changes, except for a disk space savings if
they have more than one affected package installed.
== Dependencies ==
All dependencies are listed above and will be updated together. If
maintainers do not respond to pull requests in a timely manner, then
provenpackager privileges can be used to merge the pull requests and
do the builds together. The definition of "timely manner" is up for
debate.
== Contingency Plan ==
* Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) N/A (not a
System Wide Change)
* Contingency deadline: N/A (not a System Wide Change)
* Blocks release? N/A (not a System Wide Change),
== Documentation ==
N/A (not a System Wide Change)
== Release Notes ==
The fontawesome-fonts package has been upgraded to version 6.3.0, and
a compatibility fontawesome4-fonts package has been introduced for
applications that still require FontAwesome 4.7.0. For packages that
can use the FontAwesome 6.x icons, the changes described in
[https://fontawesome.com/docs/changelog/ the FontAwesome changelog]
are now available. Packages that use the FontAwesome 4.x icons do not
have any user-visible changes.
--
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
tl;dr - you converted 892 tags in 14 days, statistics script now does not mention recently introduced packages and you
can put your package on ignore list
Two weeks ago we had:
> * 23060 spec files in Fedora
>
> * 29449license tags in all spec files
>
> * 21194 tags have not been converted to SPDX yet
>
> * 8439 tags can be trivially converted using `license-fedora2spdx`
>
Today we have:
* 23107 spec files in Fedora
* 29503license tags in all spec files
* 20302 tags have not been converted to SPDX yet
* 8096 tags can be trivially converted using `license-fedora2spdx`
The list of packages needed to be converted is again here:
https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/packages-without-spdx-f…
List by package maintainers is here
https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/packages-without-spdx-f…
New version of fedora-license-data will be released tomorrow
Legal docs and especially
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/
will be updated too.
I updated the progress in this spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QVMEzXWML-6_Mrlln02axFAaRKCQ8zE807r…
You converted 892 license tags in 14 days. Amazing!
New projection when we will be finished is 2024-04-24. Pure linear approximation.
Now, the script ignores packages that started after 2022-08-01, because by that time SPDX for License tags has been
already mandatory.
If your package does not have neither git-log entry nor spec-changelog entry mentioning SPDX and you know your license
tag matches SPDX formula, you can put your package on ignore list
https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/blob/main/f/ignore-packages.txt
Either pull-request or email to me is fine. I already put there some packages that has been reported in past.
Tip:
SPDX formula allows to list licenses that are not on SPDX list, is uses LicenseRef-* notation. In Fedora we use it on
few places. You can read about it here
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-review-process/#_what_is…
Why Independence of Lithuania? Because today - 11th March 1990 Lithuania declared an independece. It was first republic
from Soviet Union. It was not easy and several people had to pay by their life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_the_Re-Establishment_of_the_State_of_L…
Do you hesitate how to proceed with the migration? Please follow
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/update-existing-packages/
or attend SPDX office hours (see different thread in this mailing list)
Miroslav