[03:13] <mfisch> When a sync request is processed, do the Ubuntu builders do a build or is the binary package copied?
[03:15] <mfisch> looks like source from the wikipage, " This will ask Launchpad to copy the source package publication entry from its import of Debian."
[03:16] <mfisch> so we trust that the binaries that were pushed to debian can be properly rebuilt in Ubuntu, or we fix it when it doesn't
[03:57] <ScottK> mfisch: Only the source is copied.
[03:57] <ScottK> It's then rebuilt and then if it doesn't build someone should fix it.
[03:58] <ScottK> Ubuntu makes no claim and has never attempted strict binary compatibility with Debian.
[03:59] <mfisch> ScottK: thanks
[03:59] <ScottK> You're welcome.
[07:09] <dholbach> good morning! :)
[09:09] <Noskcaj10> infinity, Can you merge xscreensaver. It will take you 0.1 seconds to fix the conflict
[09:09] <infinity> Noskcaj10: Sure can.
[09:10] <Noskcaj10> thanks
[10:06] <Noskcaj10> When i use "quilt push" and get a hunk error, why does the patch still take place?
[16:04] <mfisch> Do we have documented when and how a package moves out of -proposed? Is it strictly time based?
[17:23] <ScottK> mfisch: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2012-October/000989.html
[17:23] <ScottK> It's not time based at all.
[18:22] <mfisch> ScottK: Thanks, I'll read through that
[18:53] <mfisch> ScottK: are the test results viewable for the packages?
[18:55] <ScottK> mfisch: The relevant places to start are http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html and http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_output.txt when trying to figure out why something didn't migrate.
[18:56] <mfisch> And once it passes these tests, it lands in saucy, with no delay? No time for people on -proposed to try it?
[18:56] <ScottK> No.  People should not be running proposed.
[18:56] <ScottK> It's for robots only.
[18:56] <mfisch> Ah yes, that other discussion
[18:57] <mfisch> When I started using Ubuntu I had an issue with Unity and was recommended to enable proposed, this was in the Oneiric timeframe
[18:57] <ScottK> This is a recent change.
[18:57] <mfisch> ScottK: but proposed can be used by people testing SRUs, IIRC
[18:58] <ScottK> Yes.  This is only for the development series.
[18:58] <mfisch> Right
[18:58] <mfisch> for the SRU I did they waited for user feedback on the bug
[18:58] <ScottK> Yes.  That's required.
[18:58] <mfisch> Thanks ScottK I'm going to check again to see if this is covered in the wiki and if not, perhaps find a place for it
[18:58] <ScottK> Every SRU is tested in proposed before it's released to updates.
[20:32] <TheLordOfTime> is saucy part of the libgd2 transition that's going on in Debian?
[20:34] <TheLordOfTime> I know there's ongoing Debian testing with the libgd2, and the nginx packages are now using libgd2-dev|libgd2-noxpm-dev as part of the transitioning, but is that transitioning in Saucy as well?
[20:34] <TheLordOfTime> or do i not have to worry about this?
[20:46] <iulian> TheLordOfTime: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/transitions/libgd2.html
[20:47] <TheLordOfTime> that... doesn't answer my question
[20:47] <TheLordOfTime> my question is which release(s) are going to be affected by the transition, saucy and onwards?
[20:47] <TheLordOfTime> iulian:  ^
[20:49] <iulian> The link I've given you lists all the transitions that are happening in Saucy right now.
[20:53] <TheLordOfTime> but that ***wasn't my question***
[20:53] <iulian> I don't understand your question then, sorry.
[20:55] <TheLordOfTime> my question is "Which release is the transition happening in" but i guess saucy since the link's there
[20:55] <iulian> I did say that, didn't I?
[20:56] <TheLordOfTime> iulian:  i'm a little frazzled, i might be misreading
[20:56] <TheLordOfTime> (happens from time to time)
[20:56] <TheLordOfTime> guess i'll have to fix this FTBFS then >.>
[20:56] <TheLordOfTime> before i can fix the PPA for nginx
[20:56] <TheLordOfTime> (since apparently nginx returns as "good")