=== Termana is now known as Guest33362 [03:42] slangasek: Thanks. === Guest33362 is now known as Termana [05:10] hey guys, I'd like to know, is Adam the release manager now? just so I can cite it that way on the UWN [05:13] JoseeAntonioR: there is no release manager; Adam is a member of the release team [05:13] slangasek: great, thanks! [06:20] * vibhav patiently waits for the archive to open === TheLordOfTime is now known as LordOfTime === LordOfTime is now known as TheLordOfTime === infinity changed the topic of #ubuntu-release to: Ubuntu 13.04 and 12.04.2 released | Archive: open | Saucy Salamander Release Coordination. Please don't upload things during freezes where you shouldn't, or be prepared to apologise to the release team | we accept payment in cash, check or beer | melior malum quod cognoscis [08:40] \o/ Thanks infinity:) [09:41] Archive open \o/ === smartboyhw_ is now known as smartboyhw === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha [13:22] * cjwatson enables the auto-sync cron job === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk [14:55] So it seems there's a bit of a ping pong possible on c-m. I get the impression it's looking in -proposed and noticing something can be demoted without making sure it can be demoted in -release too. [14:55] So you demote stuff and then it wants to be promoted right away because of stuff in -release. [14:57] c-m doesn't look in -proposed at all in its default configuration. [14:57] Though http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed.txt exists. [14:59] BTW, I've removed the alpha warning code from ubiquity as we discussed pre-release. [15:09] OK. Then I don't know why boost1.49 keeps showing up as downgradeable and then after moving to universe it immediately wants back in main. [15:09] Thanks [15:12] I'll have a look at debugging that when I'm a bit less jetlagged, I guess ... [15:13] Great. [15:13] Maybe breakfast and heroic amounts of coffee will help. [15:14] * ScottK has to remember "heroic amounts of coffee". [15:15] I've read about studies that purport to show you burn more calories when exhausted, so breakfast is probably good. [16:36] stgraber: ^^^ the opendkim version comparison is wrong there. It's looking at backports for the "from" version number and it shouldn't. [16:46] debfx: ^^^ you're official. [16:50] thanks ScottK :) [16:50] debfx: Thanks for volunteering to help. [16:50] Also thanks for cjwatson's queue management changes in LP that allow you to get +queue access just for backports. [16:51] yw :) [16:51] you may or may not wish to use the 'queue' tool in lp:ubuntu-archive-tools instead [16:51] (or as well) [16:51] debfx: ^^^ [16:52] * micahg should probably try that at least once [16:54] now we only need to convince infinity to fix that backports can't build-depend on backports bug [16:55] debfx: I'm not sure it's still actually a problem. [16:55] oh, it isn't? [16:56] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/opendmarc/1.1.3-1~ubuntu12.04.1 [16:56] Although that one may have worked only because opendkim-tools doesn't exist in the release pocket [16:57] ScottK: right, you can build-depend on something newer in backport [16:57] *backports [16:57] Then what doesn't work? [16:57] sorry, can't [16:58] *can't build-depend [16:58] opendmarc does build-dep on opendkim-tools which is only in precise-backports. [16:59] I'll retry the package that led me to file that bug [16:59] something newer [16:59] OK, so it's an exists in insufficient version problem? [16:59] the issue is pinning, backports is pinned and the LP sbuild doesn't do version checking [16:59] OK, so my case doesn't answer the question. [17:04] yes, still doesn't work [17:05] OK. [17:09] * cjwatson waits for auto-sync to finish ... [17:18] Up to libpano13 ... come on, bored now [19:48] cjwatson: I just got an accepter mail for authres migration to the release pocket. It was auto synched so I found that surprising. Is that expected? [19:48] r/d [21:45] ScottK: yeah, it's a known problem of queuebot but I've never taken the time to add the necessary logic to deal with backports [21:46] currently it's just looking for the highest version in the archive. Which tends to be correct unless that source is in -backports and the source that was uploaded isn't [23:46] ScottK: Not sure [23:46] ScottK: I doubt auto-syncing is specifically relevant