[06:52] <ara> good morning all :-)
[10:01] <doomik> Hello
[10:15] <ara> hey doomik
[10:16] <doomik> the testing distro will be available at 9 March ?
[11:10] <ara> doomik: what do you mean by testing distro?
[11:13] <davmor2> doomik: We will be smoke testing the various desktops on the 9th of march
=== cjwatson_ is now known as cjwatson
[14:40] <sbeattie> davmor2: are you not smoketesting on a daily basis anymore?
=== beaver is now known as CleanRat
[16:52] <stgraber> sbeattie: ping, small question about the SRU process :) around ?
[16:52] <sbeattie> stgraber: ask away.
[16:54] <stgraber> sbeattie: I'm looking at bug 290399 and it seems that they're waiting for an approval before getting the package uploaded to -proposed
[16:54] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 290399 in redhat-cluster "After ran the command fence_tool dump, the fenced process will take 100% CPU usage" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/290399
[16:54] <stgraber> though looking at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates the process seems to be to uploaded to -proposed then get the archive admins validate it
[16:54] <stgraber> and then do the usual QA to get it uploaded to -updates after validation
[16:56] <sbeattie> stgraber: hrm, according to zul's comment, he uploaded it. Is that not the case?
[16:56] <stgraber> nope
[16:56] <stgraber> not in the queue and not in -proposed
[16:58] <sbeattie> hrm, well, the SRU team can't accept it until there's an upload. Wonder what happened there.
[16:58]  * sbeattie goes to read the scrollback in #ubuntu-server as well.
[16:59] <apw> cr3 who normally does checkbox releases?
[16:59] <cr3> apw: I've mostly done them but schwuk could handle them as well, what's up?
[17:00] <apw> was trying to get a feel for how often they get pushed, if there is a schedule etc
[17:00] <apw> as i am carrying stuff in there now :)  want to get a feel for when it goes out
[17:00] <apw> also ... is checkbox in the desktop seed now, will it be on by defualt?
[17:00] <cr3> apw: no schedule, we just try to pack as much in there as possible before the release :)
[17:01] <cr3> apw: should be on by default on desktop indeed
[17:01] <apw> will there be another releaase before beta ships?
[17:01] <cr3> apw: yes
[17:02] <apw> cool, check with me that i've shoved all the suspend_test stuff in would you ... if we do a public call for testing it would make sense to use the version installed on the machine if its there
[17:02] <cr3> apw: will do
[17:02] <apw> cr3, on another note, did you have any thoughts on the test with output issue?
[17:02] <sbeattie> cr3: given the changes since 0.5, should probably do an upload before a6.
[17:03] <apw> alpha6 is next thursday right?
[17:03] <cr3> sbeattie: that would be the responsible thing to do :)
[17:03] <cr3> apw: yeah, I'd really like to be able to see test output in the interface. I'll try to get it done before beta
[17:03] <apw> so cool.  i'll make sure my stuff is pushed up by the end of monday.  its probabally done already
[17:03] <sbeattie> cr3: ah, I stand corrected, I'll not expect an upload until the beta then. :-)
[17:04]  * sbeattie ducks
[17:04] <cr3> sbeattie: you know me too well :)
[17:04] <apw> cr3 cool.  its a bit of a blocker for shipping any of the suspend tests run from checkbox imo
[17:04] <apw> not that it is stopping any testing as we have the direct interface right now
[17:05] <apw> so a blocker, but not an issue if that makes any sense
[17:05] <cr3> apw: noted, I'll give it top after hours priority :)
[17:05] <apw> heheh ... also have you thought about continuing after a crash?
[17:06] <sbeattie> cr3: BTW, re bug 324215, it's only an issue due to the package transition correct? My attempts to trigger the purge failure on hardy and intrepid were unsuccessful.
[17:06] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 324215 in checkbox "hwtest-gtk fails to uninstall if hwtest is no longer installed" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/324215
[17:06] <sbeattie> ... because hwtest-gtk and hwtest-cli would get uninstalled before hwtest, at least via apt.
[17:07] <cr3> sbeattie: right, and I was making crappy assumptions in my debian *rm scripts
[17:08] <cr3> apw: I've thought about it, but I'm still not sure about the user experience in those circumstances
[17:08] <sbeattie> cr3: if not, we could push an SRU; I went ahead and cherry-picked the relevant bits here: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~sbeattie/checkbox/lp324215/revision/295
[17:08] <apw> cr3, pretty much any test which does suspend or hibernate and doesn't come back could do with some way for the user to say "continue"
[17:08] <cr3> apw: should checkbox just start from where it left off? should the user be prompted for all the tests again, but having them prefilled with previous values?
[17:08] <apw> and get the same box up with 'FAILED' delected
[17:09] <apw> i would continue from the same place if possible
[17:09] <apw> in autotest we do that by freezeing the state machine and reloading it between tests
[17:10] <cr3> apw: anything is possible, I'm just wondering what would be correct. are there other applications like this which behave in a similar fashion?
[17:10] <cr3> apw: for example, firefox prompts the user to recover tabs or somesuch, so should checkbox also provide the same dialog
[17:10] <apw> yeah 'continnue you existing test run?'
[17:10] <apw> would be reasonable, i would then like it to jump to the right test again
[17:11] <cr3> sbeattie: if you could sru that cherry pick, that'd be really awesome!
[17:11] <cr3> sbeattie: by the way, as long as you're sru'ing checkbox, I think there's another bug I'd like to verify... one moment
[17:12] <cr3> apw: right, it's details like that which are mostly stopping me
[17:12] <cr3> apw: I could also have a check box saying "don't remind me again" or somesuch, still like in firefox
[17:13] <cr3> apw: when I implement new features, I try not to invent too much and rely on precedent from other applications which might be already familiar to users
[17:13] <apw> sensible enough
[17:13] <cr3> apw: just to be sure, your priority would be viewing output before recovery, right?
[17:14] <apw> i would thing a dialog that says " you were mid-test" with "continue test", "scrap test", "ignore test" sort fo thing
[17:14] <cr3> sbeattie: I'd also like to sru bug #323284, especially since dapper is nearing eol
[17:14] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 323284 in hwtest "hwtest installation fails with dapper version of debconf" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/323284
[17:14] <apw> yeah output is mroe important as apport will report failurs for us right now
[17:15] <cr3> sbeattie: I haven't had time to reproduce the problem though, so I don't have a fix
[17:15] <sbeattie> cr3: okay, I'll peek.
[17:41] <davmor2> sbeattie: sorry I was off this afternoon so no testing today.  Monday was testing day.  Iwas busy most days so I have tested just not logged.  I'll do that for you after :) Kubuntu and server yesterday ubuntu for bluetooth and installer plus wubi the others
[17:42] <sbeattie> davmor2: okay, I was more curious than anything.
[18:07] <davmor2> sbeattie: that should look better :)
=== fader is now known as fader|lunch
=== fader|lunch is now known as fader
=== fddfoo is now known as fdd
=== hggdh_ is now known as hggdh
=== fdd is now known as pricolici
=== charlie-tca is now known as charlie-tca_
=== charlie-tca_ is now known as charlie-tca