If we can test and confirm this affects a default F35 Server or KDE install I'd probably be +1.

BetaBlocker +1

I don't see how edition matters? I can reproduce on a clean F35 workstation install, so the cited upgrade criterion applies.

Oh, I figured it wouldn't happen to Workstation because it doesn't include @standard, so Server and KDE are the other release-blocking editions. But if it does happen on Workstation, that's enough.

Now I check, openQA is hitting this too, but we make it a soft failure (in openQA if upgrade fails without --allowerasing we mark it as a soft failure and retry with --allowerasing).

I think there's actually a precedent that we don't block if --allowerasing works; it's still best to resolve the issue so that --allowerasing isn't necessary as it can be dangerous, but it doesn't make the bug a blocker. We should check that before voting I think. If I'm right about the precedent, I'd be -1 on this. Otherwise, +1.

That makes sense, I'll change my vote if pointed at the correct rule.

I think there's actually a precedent that we don't block if --allowerasing works; it's still best to resolve the issue so that --allowerasing isn't necessary as it can be dangerous, but it doesn't make the bug a blocker. We should check that before voting I think. If I'm right about the precedent, I'd be -1 on this. Otherwise, +1.

--allowerasing works and the upgraded system ends up with plocate installed and working so everything seems to be ok.
I do not know anything about the precedent ... without it, I would be

BetaBlocker +1

BetaBlocker +1

AGREED AcceptedBetaBlocker For each one of the release-blocking package sets, it must be possible to successfully complete a direct upgrade from a fully updated, clean default installation of each of the last two stable Fedora releases with that package set installed.

The following votes have been closed:

• Accepted BetaBlocker (+3, 0, -0)
  • +1 by nielsenb, lruzicka, frantisekz

Release F36 is no longer tracked by BlockerBugs, closing this ticket.