[01:50] <wgrant> rockstar: Hi. Was there a corresponding launchpad-buildd change for your sourcepackagename-dropping branch?
[01:50] <wgrant> It still looks for package_name in the dict passed through from the master, so it's broken at the moment.
[02:01] <wgrant> Also, argh, our tests really suck.
[02:30] <wgrant> So, recipe builds are currently broken in several ways in several places.
[02:31] <wgrant> Some of them are crashes, some of them just do something that I cannot understand.
[02:31] <james_w> hi wgrant
[02:31] <wgrant> Morning james_w.
[02:34] <wgrant> Does anyone know if QA has caught the breakage?
[02:35] <james_w> I know that it is not being rolled out to production
[02:35] <james_w> in some manner or other
[02:35] <wgrant> But it's in db-devel...
[02:36] <james_w> https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~abentley/launchpad/disable-recipe-builds/+merge/26322
[02:36] <wgrant> Hm, well, that doesn't really indicate that it's known. But I guess it works around it.
[02:37] <james_w> yeah, I'd file the bugs anyway
[02:38] <james_w> though I think you of all people doesn't need telling to file bugs :-)
[02:57] <wgrant> james_w: Also, when did "ARM Archive Branching" become "rewrite Launchpad"?
[02:57] <james_w> yeah, it's a bit unfortunate
[02:58] <james_w> we aim to reuse what we can
[02:58] <wgrant> It seems like you're trying to work around Launchpad rather than fixing it.
[02:58] <wgrant> Which may mean rewriting it, I don't know.
[02:58] <wgrant> But writing another completely independent but also completely duplicated thing seems... odd.
[03:16] <wgrant> Ah, it is so OEMs can run their own archives locally. I see.
[03:18] <wgrant> It still seems pretty silly to not fix Launchpad instead.
[03:20] <cody-somerville> People have been trying to fix Launchpad for years :P
[03:21] <wgrant> Have they?
[03:21] <wgrant> It doesn't seem like anybody has tried anything revolutionary.
[03:21] <cody-somerville> Too difficult to do in Launchpad.
[03:22] <wgrant> Well, inventing a new archive system to run along Soyuz forever is not the solution!
[03:22] <wgrant> Rip Soyuz out, sure...
[03:22] <wgrant> s/along/alongside/
[03:23] <cody-somerville> Maybe this new thing will replace Soyuz at some point.
[03:56] <rockstar> wgrant, no, if there wasn't a test for it, I didn't fix it.
[03:56] <rockstar> wgrant, there are configs that block recipe availability in production.
[03:58] <rockstar> So it is not being rolled out to production.
[03:58] <rockstar> We still have yet to actually run a build through the production system, because there are infrastructure changes that couldn't be made in time.
[04:00] <wgrant> rockstar: So we're waiting for 10.06, or doing lots of cherrypicks?
[04:01] <rockstar> wgrant, well, probably a little of both.
[04:23] <wgrant> Bug #587109, bug #587110, and bug #587113
[04:23] <mup> Bug #587109: Needs to cope with not receiving package_name from the master <Launchpad Auto Build System:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/587109>
[04:23] <mup> Bug #587110: Need fmt:link for SourcePackageRecipeBuild <Launchpad Bazaar Integration:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/587110>
[04:23] <mup> Bug #587113: BuildBase result handling broken <Soyuz:New> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/587113>
[04:24] <wgrant> 587110 is the only one that is likely to affect anyone apart from cesium and the slaves.
[04:24] <wgrant> And there's also something going horribly wrong with updating the status of SPRBs.
[15:59] <nigelb> bryceh: I ran a script to subscribe ubuntu-reviewers to bug with patches that are not kernel or doc team bugs, but some bugs were never counted.  If you've got the time can you help figure out why?
[22:54] <thumper> jelmer: I was bitten again by two import related bugs:
[22:54] <thumper> jelmer: the corrupted config file
[22:54] <thumper> jelmer: and the locked db with two imports from the same host
[22:55]  * thumper goes to make breakfast
[22:55] <jelmer_> thumper: both are waiting for changes in bzrlib
[22:56] <jelmer_> thumper: the locked db one can be worked around by installing python-tdb
[23:28] <thumper> jelmer: waiting for a change to land in bzrlib? or a change in bzrlib to land in LP?
[23:29] <lifeless> thumper: the config one is a bzrlib issue, but noone is working on it AFAIK
[23:29] <lifeless> as it has, till now, only affected bzr-svn
[23:30] <lifeless> the bug explains what is needed
[23:34] <jelmer> thumper: waiting for a change to land in bzrlib