I think on the whole I'm:

BetaBlocker -1
FinalBlocker -1

for this. It's been this way for a while, it was made this way intentionally, and the criteria don't really require it to work this way. Open to convincing arguments to change my vote, though.

BetaBlocker -1

I think there's still an argument to be made that this isn't following the intent of the criterion. It's possible to install a system that you can't log into remotely without being at least warned of that in the installer. (For comparison, we have a specific checkbox to allow root logins via SSH. This at least informs the user by strong implication)

BetaBlocker -1

Please note that this isn't currently proposed against Beta, just Final.

I've been bit by stuff like this before, and I understand the reasoning given for a conditional criteria violation. Still, I wouldn't block on it.

FinalBlocker -1

AGREED RejectedFinalBlocker

Discussed during the 2024-03-18 blocker review meeting [1]:

We all agree it can be argued as a conditional violation of the criteria, but our subjective opinion (as is required for conditional violations) is that it's not a serious enough case to count as a blocker. it has been the case for several releases without major complaints.

[1] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/blocker-review_matrix_fedoraproject-org/2024-03-18/f40-blocker-review.2024-03-18-16.01.log.html

The following votes have been closed:

• Rejected FinalBlocker (+0, 0, -2)
  • -1 by adamwill, nielsenb

Release F40 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.