[00:05]  * robbiew closes his eyes and holds on
[00:08] <slangasek> hmm, something changed post-release to cause lilo-installer to fall out of the alternate ISO
[00:09] <slangasek> er, no - cause it to be /added/ to
[00:09] <slangasek> ... nope, I was right the first time
[00:18] <slangasek> ah, cjwatson made that change, alrighty then :)
[00:42] <slangasek> dropping langpacks from the daily-live ISO for .1; the package growth since 10.04 has all been in either the kernel or in firefox/xulrunner, both of which are infeasible to recover size from in the time remaining :(
[09:11] <Laney> are we having freeze exception delegates as per previous cycles?
[09:56] <ara> do you guys know when are we going to see the first 10.04.1 candidate images in the ISO tracker?
[12:13] <Riddell> ara: so far our release manager hasn't appeared so I wouldn't hold your breath
[17:59] <mathiaz> slangasek: hey - in which order are you planning to spin the 10.04.1 isos?
[18:01] <doko> barry: as I understand it, py27 was delayed by the release team (but ScottK might know more)
[18:02]  * ScottK looks at robbiew.
[18:02]  * ScottK just mentioned it needed deciding since it wasn't done before FF.
[18:02]  * robbiew thinks we need to postpone it
[18:03] <robbiew> as it's not done
[18:03] <robbiew> and FF is here
[18:03]  * barry is sad
[18:04] <barry> right, we talked about it before i went on vacation that the remaining handful of ftbfs could be fixed before beta
[18:04] <barry> (in main)
[18:05] <barry> and that i was committed to working on those and the universe failures
[18:05] <doko> sorry, I didn't track this too close this week
[18:06] <robbiew> barry: there was some concern from seb128 about the work it would take
[18:07] <robbiew> also on the rebuilds it would cause
[18:08] <barry> it would probably be ~500 packages in main+uni
[18:08] <barry> iirc
[18:08] <doko> robbiew: we'll have an arm rebuild of some packages anyway at some point
[18:09] <robbiew> so what do we lose by doing it early in 11.04
[18:10] <barry> robbiew: probably not much practically speaking.  i wonder though if it's possible/feasible to make the python2.7 package available even if not supported (i.e. no changes to python-support, python-central, python-defaults).  does that give us much?
[18:10] <robbiew> doko? ScottK? ^
[18:10] <barry> i do know that folks would like py27 in maverick, but i suppose waiting 6months won't kill them ;)
[18:11] <doko> robbiew, barry: that I did last Sunday. it's in main (at least I pushed it there)
[18:11] <ScottK> python2.7 is in Maverick.  It's just not supported for modules and extensions.
[18:11] <barry> doko: cool
[18:11] <ScottK> No issue with that.
[18:11] <ScottK> Although it can drop to Universe if it won't be supported.
[18:12] <doko> what we should do is to explicitely add support in distribute, python-profiler and python-std-lib-extension
[18:12] <slangasek> mathiaz: in a very fast order, why? :)
[18:12] <ScottK> Then it would need to be in Main, but that shouldn't be a problem.
[18:12] <barry> doko: what do we need to add there?
[18:12] <doko> support for 2.7
[18:13] <doko> basically update the mav packages from my ppa
[18:14] <barry> doko: is that just merging in your changes, or more work?  if the latter, how can i help given that i can't upload them?
[18:15] <doko> barry: let me look at it tomorrow, before I say something wrong
[18:17] <barry> doko: okay :).  i'm happy to do any and all grunt work to make this happen.  if we can get those changes in then at least people can more easily start w/2.7 and i can adjust my ppas to work out the remaining build failures.  i'll contact the appropriate mailing lists and give a status + solicit help and will work with upstreams to get fixes in, and updates in debian.  then early in 11.04 we can flip the switch.  that'll give us the rest
[18:17] <barry> of this cycle and all next cycle to make this a very solid offering
[18:17] <robbiew> thanks barry :)
[18:18] <robbiew> I'm sure ScottK is just a little bit happier inside now, too
[18:18] <robbiew> lol
[18:18] <ScottK> Now barry will have lots of free time to fix other stuff.
[18:19] <barry> robbiew: np!
[18:19] <barry> ScottK: this is how you repay me for making you happy? :)
[18:20] <ScottK> barry: Sure.  Plenty to do and you claim you're looking for more experience.
[18:21] <barry> ScottK: thank you sir, can i have another? :)
[18:21] <robbiew> lol
[18:22]  * barry is glad someone gets the reference
[18:24] <mathiaz> slangasek: I'm working on the test plan for the -server isos
[18:24] <mathiaz> slangasek: Having an idea about when the -server isos would be available would help
[18:25] <barry> doko, ScottK, robbiew thanks
[18:26] <robbiew> barry: no...thank you ;)
[18:35] <slangasek> mathiaz: ETA 20 minutes
[18:36] <mathiaz> slangasek: \o/
[18:36] <mathiaz> slangasek: this is awesome!
[20:04] <bdrung> which archive admin rejected python-box2d and why?
[20:15] <Daviey> bdrung, Looks like it's still in the new queue to me.
[20:16] <bdrung> Daviey: i got two mail: "python-box2d_2.0.2+svn20100109.244-1_source.changes rejected" and "sugar-physics-activity_5+dfsg-1_source.changes rejected"
[20:19] <Daviey> bdrung, Interesting.. The source package was rejected, but binary i386 and sparc are still in NEW.
[20:20] <bdrung> Daviey: why can a binary be build if the source isn't accepted?
[20:20] <Daviey> That is a very good point.. I an intrigued as you are!
[21:56] <ScottK> bdrung: If it got uploaded more than once, it would likely get accepted once and rejected once.
[21:56] <bdrung> ScottK: ok, then the question is: how does it get uploaded twice?
[21:57] <ScottK> It's not rare for someone to upload a new package, realize it has a mistake, and then upload it again.
[21:57] <ScottK> Or two sponsors collide and they both upload it.
[21:57] <ScottK> I've seen both happen.
[21:57] <bdrung> ScottK: but i uploaded them days ago
[21:59] <bdrung> ok, it was only a half day ago.
[21:59] <bdrung> ScottK: shouldn't it get rejected immediately?
[21:59] <ScottK> Not if it's still in New.
[22:00] <bdrung> instead of getting a New message.
[22:01] <bdrung> so they are in New, chapter closed
[22:01] <ScottK> It might not make sense, but that's how it works at the moment.
[22:03] <bdrung> the reject message should be more verbose
[22:04]  * bdrung has to do some network analysis. bbl
[23:43] <wgrant> ScottK, bdrung: bug #62976
[23:43] <ubot4`> Launchpad bug 62976 in soyuz "Soyuz should not allow duplicated packages in NEW/UNAPPROVED queue" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/62976
[23:45] <bdrung> wow, that's a low bug number
[23:45] <bdrung> wgrant: thanks for this link
[23:46] <wgrant> We only have one two-digit bug left in LP :(
[23:46] <bdrung> wgrant: which one?
[23:48] <wgrant> bug #25
[23:48] <ubot4`> Launchpad bug 25 in rosetta "Allow discussion/commenting on translations (affects: 12) (dups: 3) (heat: 82)" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/25
[23:51] <slangasek> ubuntu desktop, alternate posted for 10.04.1