FinalBlocker -1

I don't think we should block on single 3rd party proprietary software being un-installable.

FinalBlocker +1

FinalBlocker +1

I don't think we should block on single 3rd party proprietary software being un-installable.

Just a clarification, this is not proposed because "Chrome can't be installed", but because "we ship a repo that is broken". At the same time, the repo is not enabled by default, and we don't have a direct release criterion for this (we only have a criterion for gnome-initial-setup that it must do its job, and for gnome-software that it must do its job, which are relevant, but don't cover it directly). I'm not sure myself, honestly. But I raised this so that Workstation WG can consider it.

FinalBlocker +1

Although the software is third party, it is widely used and I myself use it on Fedora. The fact that we have a repo that is not usable is enough for me to suggest it being a Final Blocker

I hate it, but I don't really see a criteria being violated. That being said it's really commonly installed software so I can see not wanting to ship something that might "look bad" to many users. Currently on the fence, waiting to be swayed.

FinalBlocker +0

we ship a repo that is broken

We also ship tools that are broken.

If rpm considers some checksums insecure, it should do its best to get rid of them by letting users uninstall packages using them.

I'm not sure if everyone understood the difference which I tried to make between this ticket and #1039. This ticket is about one of workstation repos not being usable. #1039 is about the underlying root cause and its effects (blocked updates, unable to remove packages, etc). Fixing #1039 would of course fix this ticket as well. But it's good to have it separately, in case people decide to not fix #1039.

FinalBlocker +1

If we know the repo can't be used, we shouldn't offer to enable it.

FinalBlocker +1

For the same reason @bcotton cited.

As things stand, I have to be:
FinalBlocker -1
because there is not a criterion for this. Note that we also do not require, for instance, that all packages in the official repos must be installable (I expect we have never actually achieved this). We really need to stick to the release criteria and not just vote on feeling; voting on feelings was a mess and was why we wrote the release criteria in the first place. To me this clearly does not violate the relevant Basic, Beta or Final criteria, so it cannot be a blocker as the criteria stand.

If we want to block on this, we need to be able to codify exactly what our requirement is, and add that to the criteria. So folks who want to vote +1 on this: can one of you please do that?

FinalBlocker +1

The criterion might be:

If Fedora provides a third-party repository that can be easily enabled with a general switch (Enable Third Party Repos), applications from such repository must be able to install.

FinalBlocker +1

I think Adam convinced me here. Our own repos, enabled by default, quite likely contain non-installable apps, and it's not blocking. This is a repo disabled by default, containing an app not under our control, so it feels weird to have higher standards for it. On the other hand, the app is very high-profile, and so it's going to be bad PR if it can't be installed, when we "promote" it ourselves. But, Workstation WG is aware of it and they can remove the repo from the set, if they wish. It still doesn't justify having higher standards for a disabled-by-default third-party repo, than for our enabled-by-default provided-by-us repo. We can discuss a new criterion, if somebody wants to propose it (let's do it on the test list, please?), but currently:

FinalBlocker -1

Our own repos, enabled by default, quite likely contain non-installable apps, and it's not blocking.

I believe it should be blocking.

I'm also convinced, looks bad, but in absence of a criteria...

FinalBlocker -1

I've decided to mess up the blocker discussion by outright closing the bug. ;) FESCo has already determined this needs solved in rpm or in crypto-policies, so no changes in fedora-workstation-repositories are required. But anyway:

FinalBlocker -1

Release F38 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.