[15:46] <barry> slangasek: LP: #1223483 is back in New (and any thoughts on LP: #1223001)?
[15:46] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1223483 in python-virtualenv (Ubuntu) "[FFe] sync 1.10.1 from Debian" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1223483
[15:46] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1223001 in python-pip (Ubuntu) "[FFe] sync python-pip 1.4.1 from debian" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1223001
[15:47] <rbasak> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess says that "we expect requesters to have an updated package already prepared and tested!", but AIUI recently we have been asked to request FFes as early as possible, and it's useful to get an ack before doing the work. Is the documentation still accurate?
[15:47] <slangasek> barry: sorry, hadn't gotten to 1223001 yet, spent all last night arguing with the Debian upstart update :)
[15:48] <barry> slangasek: i hope you won! :)
[15:48] <slangasek> rbasak: I think that's always been fuzzy
[15:48] <slangasek> barry: except for the part where I'm now blocked by a libnih upstream change :)
[15:48] <barry> ouch ;)
[15:54] <utlemming> slangasek: we have a critical SRU for Cloud-init for Windows Azure. See https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cloud-init/+bug/1224684
[15:54] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1224684 in cloud-init (Ubuntu Precise) "[SRU] cannot sudo, prompted for password on 12.04 Windows Azure" [Critical,Confirmed]
[15:55] <utlemming> slagasek: any chance we could fast track this?
[15:58] <slangasek> utlemming: I imagine so.  is it uploaded?
[15:59] <slangasek> I see that it is
[16:01] <utlemming> slangasek: just going to say it was :)
[16:02] <rbasak> slangasek: thanks. I'll prepare one.
[16:43] <slangasek> utlemming: so what makes this an Azure-specific issue?
[16:43] <utlemming> slangasek: if you look at the code, it is in the data-source.
[16:44] <utlemming> slangasek: I validated that the impact is only on Azure
[16:44] <slangasek> utlemming: ok.  put differently, why is this not handled in a common codepath?
[16:45] <utlemming> slangasek: ah, simply because user creation is only done for Azure on 12.04. The default user on 12.04 is built by the build system, but for Windows Azure the default cloud user is not applicable.
[16:45] <slangasek> ah, interesting
[16:45] <slangasek> ok, accepted into -proposed
[16:46] <utlemming> slangasek: most appreciated
[17:02] <thomi> Hello release team, could I ask someone to ack this FFE please? https://bugs.launchpad.net/autopilot/+bug/1212833
[17:02] <ubot2`> Launchpad bug 1212833 in Autopilot "[FFE] Add support for launching click packages" [Critical,In progress]
[17:05] <thomi> cjwatson: I wonder if you could take a look at that? It's kind of important for the touch guys... or maybe tell me who I can poke?
[17:11] <infinity> thomi: Approved, close the bug(s) when you upload, please.
[17:13] <thomi> infinity: will do, thanks
[18:15] <roaksoax> could someone please reject djorm-ext-pgarray from precise-proposed. I mistakenly uploaded it :(
[18:16] <roaksoax> ery much appreciated
[18:25] <infinity> roaksoax: Done.
[18:26] <roaksoax> infinity: awesome thank you
[18:27] <bdmurray> On a saucy cd .disk/info still says Alpha
[18:28] <infinity> bdmurray: Well, some of us haven't had a beta release yet. :)
[18:28] <bdmurray> infinity: oh yeah, that's a good point I guess
[19:04] <stgraber> balloons: was the milestone still marked as testing?
[19:07] <adam_g> does a new debian merge require a FFe if the upstream version doesn't change?
[19:12] <slangasek> adam_g: if you're merging new features, yes.  If you're merging bugfixes, no.
[19:31] <infinity> adam_g: It's the same basic rules as an SRU or security update, or any similar conservative policy.
[19:32] <infinity> adam_g: If it's just bugfixes, go to town.  If it changes/removes/adds behaviour, you need an FFe.
[19:35] <adam_g> infinity,  http://paste.ubuntu.com/6103024/  is the log of upload in question. looks like it should have one filed
[19:36] <infinity> adam_g: That looks potentially scary, yes.  Also, did you mean to rename the source package? :P
[19:37] <infinity> adam_g: An FFe bug with a debdiff from 2.02.98-1ubuntu5 to 2.02.98-6ubuntu1 for easy reviewing would be nice.  I'd like to unwind some of those changelog entries and see what they actually do.
[19:40] <adam_g> infinity, oh dont worry there are very descriptive bugs corresponding to them, ie http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=712049
[19:40] <ubot2`> Debian bug 712049 in lvm2 "lvm2 - udev monitor sync stuff is still racey" [Serious,Fixed]
[19:40] <adam_g> infinity, not sure what you mean wrt source package renaming?
[19:41] <infinity> adam_g: Your changelog entry has s/lvm2/lvm1/ :P
[19:42] <adam_g> uhm
[19:42] <adam_g> im blaming pastebin
[22:13] <stgraber> I'm going to force LXC through as https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/saucy-adt-lxc/45/ARCH=i386,label=adt/ failed because of some kind of archive race
[22:13] <stgraber> (same on amd64 succeeded)
[22:14] <Laney> I retriggered it
[22:14] <Laney> don't think p-m will notice that though
[22:15] <jbicha> Laney: if you're here, can you mark Beta 1 as released on the iso tracker?
[22:15] <Laney> oh yeah
[22:15] <Laney> I didn't do that because of something to do with cloud images
[22:15] <Laney> but I think they did that
[22:16] <utlemming> Laney: ?
[22:16] <utlemming> Laney: there supposed to be marked as ready, and they were released
[22:16] <Laney> it's fine
[22:16] <infinity> rsalveti: Yay for multiarching libeeze out of the box, boo for missing the multi-arch headers in debian/control.
[22:17] <infinity> rsalveti: Please fix on the next upload.
[22:18] <Laney> Oh what, someone else did it
[22:18] <Laney> I hauled myself up and got a 2fa device and everything