[06:07]  * Mirv manages to work on Qt still as jenkins doesn't respond
[07:18] <Mirv> didrocks: FYI I'm continuing with Qt related work for now, good progress over there at least while no news about CI yet
[07:21] <didrocks> Mirv: yeah, I was trying to fetch news :)
[07:21] <didrocks> Mirv: what are you doing on Qt btw?
[07:21] <didrocks> (just curious ;))
[07:22] <Mirv> didrocks: the 5.2beta1 packages I made earlier had some problems with docs&co, but I spotted the problem now and trying to get more proper packages built. lots of modules not updated yet, too, and then getting QtC + plugin sponsored to trusty now.
[07:23] <didrocks> excellent!
[07:23] <didrocks> plugin as upstream Qt plugins?
[07:23] <Mirv> I'm also happy that I've somewhat updated build machine (haswell CPU), eases up
[07:23] <didrocks> upstream QtC plugin?
[07:23] <Mirv> didrocks: Qt Creator Ubuntu plugin
[07:23] <Mirv> didrocks: not upstreamed, unfortunately :(
[07:23] <didrocks> Mirv: well, this one will work through dailies, right?
[07:24] <Mirv> didrocks: it'd work, yes, but I find that some tests would be needed. although now we're in manual mode anyhow so in that sense the daily build could be enabled too.
[07:24] <Mirv> there's currently no tests at all for QtC + plugin functionality
[07:25] <didrocks> Mirv: yeah, please enable daily build
[07:25] <didrocks> as we are in manual mode
[07:27] <Mirv> didrocks: ok.
[07:29] <Mirv> it'll need this QtC update as well since it only builds against newer QtC, but now it's therefore a correct time to remove the disabling of daily build from config
[07:31] <didrocks> yeah
[08:14] <vila> hi guys, still a bit sick but back nonetheless
[08:14] <sil2100> o
[08:14] <sil2100> o/
[08:15] <vila> I managed to brick my phone yesterday
[08:15] <didrocks> vila: hey!
[08:15] <vila> didrocks: o/
[08:15] <didrocks> morning sil2100
[08:15] <vila> sil2100: o/
[08:15] <vila> it first failed to download image #20 several times
[08:15] <sil2100> Morning!
[08:15] <vila> then succeeded in downloading image #17 (wow, how come ?)
[08:16] <vila> and installing that led to the 'ggogle' logo at boot and stayed there
[08:16] <vila> before I attempt phablet-flash again, is there something I need to know ?
[08:17] <didrocks> vila: system update?
[08:18] <vila> didrocks: yeah, bricked while using OTA
[08:18] <vila> system update
[08:18] <didrocks> vila: ok, ogra knows more what happened, system update was broken yesterday: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/system-image/+bug/1250181
[08:18] <didrocks> then, I saw that stgraber discussed about it
[08:18] <didrocks> and remove some files, regenerate some signatures
[08:18] <didrocks> I guess that's why you downgraded to image 17 ;)
[08:19] <didrocks> can you keep it broken for the meeting?
[08:19] <didrocks> so that we can discuss it
[08:19] <vila> sure
[08:19] <vila> it's not as if it was my main phone... err wait
[08:19] <didrocks> :p
[08:20] <vila> ha yeah, looking at the bug, I saw many ... interesting numbers in the progress bar ;) The "oops, far more than 100, let's go back so more reasonable number" was entertaining
[08:20] <vila> *to more
[08:21] <didrocks> vila: I can just testify it's not the UI :)
[08:25]  * sil2100 is saddened by cu2d not being accessible still
[08:25] <sil2100> At least appmenu-qt5 will be happy ;)
[08:30] <didrocks> sil2100: how is it going? something we can test for you?
[08:38] <vila> didrocks: also, images are still created despite ci being down ?
[08:45] <didrocks> vila: we did some, but without test results, there is little use
[08:45] <popey> vila: it's easily fixed, by downloading the boot file and manually pushing it to the phone when in recovery mode via fastboot
[08:49] <vila> popey: what boot file are you talking about ?
[08:50] <popey> trusty-preinstalled-boot-armhf+mako.img
[08:50] <vila> popey: will that wipe the data ?
[08:50] <popey> no
[08:52] <vila> popey: and where is that ? It seems I can't find it on system-image.ubuntu.com
[08:53] <popey> http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntu-touch/daily-preinstalled/20131107.1/trusty-preinstalled-boot-armhf+mako.img
[08:53] <vila> popey: thanks
[08:54] <popey> np
[08:58] <vila> popey: can't 'adb reboot fastboot', 'ad reboot recovery' is ok but fastboot seem to be stucked at the google logo
[08:59] <vila> popey: i.e. fastboot boot <file> stays at '< waiting for device >'
[09:04] <popey> hmm
[09:05] <vila> popey: hmm, may be I'm not using the right commands >-/
[09:05] <popey> hmm, does adb push work?
[09:05] <popey> i thought i used fastboot but it's gone from my history
[09:05] <popey> ah no, i still have the historty
[09:05] <popey> fastboot flash boot trusty-preinstalled-boot-armhf+mako.img
[09:06] <popey> vila: ^
[09:06] <vila> popey: right, I was missing 'flash', trying
[09:06] <vila> same, waiting for device
[09:07] <vila> popey: may be I need the device to be in the "right" state ? Which state is that and how do I get there :)
[09:08] <popey> adb reboot-bootloader
[09:08] <popey> fastboot flash boot trusty-preinstalled-boot-armhf+mako.img
[09:08] <popey> is what I did I think
[09:09] <vila> popey: works far better, and now 'Start'
[09:10] <vila> hmm, no better, still stucked at the google logo
[09:12] <popey> hm
[09:13] <ogra_> vila, when was that, that you got r17  ?
[09:13] <vila> hold on !
[09:13] <ogra_> this should be fixed since tonight
[09:13] <vila> ogra_: yesterday
[09:13] <popey> ogra_: so I should be able to OTA update mine?
[09:13] <vila> popey: just needed to be a bit patient, it finally booted
[09:13] <ogra_> popey, yes, it should give you r20
[09:14] <popey> 307MB!
[09:14] <ogra_> vila, ah, then i'm fine ...
[09:14] <ogra_> popey, yes, the screwup on the server actually enforces a full image upgrade
[09:14] <popey> ah okay, thats cool
[09:14] <popey> i love this whole OTA thing
[09:15] <vila> popey, ogra_ : So, now that it booted, I'm at image #17
[09:15] <popey> adb shell system-image-cli -i
[09:15] <popey> will tell you
[09:15] <vila> ogra_: any explanation for the bricked behaviour after the upgrade to #17 ?
[09:15] <popey> vila: known bug
[09:15] <vila> popey: good (well sort of ;)
[09:15] <popey> vila: bug 1250181
[09:16] <ogra_> vila, the same as for 16,18 and 19 ... broken udev upload
[09:16] <popey> oh, well, thats related but not the cause
[09:16] <vila> ogra_: so upgrading to #20 is fine ?
[09:16] <ogra_> and that you even got r17 was the bug popey points to
[09:16]  * popey updates to #20
[09:16] <vila> ack
[09:16] <ogra_> we had actually backed it out, but this bug kind of screwed that up
[09:19] <vila> ogra_: reformulating to ensure I understand: #17 was buggy and shouldn't have been proposed as an update but the bug above screwed that and I got it nevertheless and bricked my device
[09:20] <ogra_> vila, right
[09:21] <ogra_> (16, 18 and 19 still had the same bug, you should have gotten #20 from yesterday afternoon on ... )
[09:21] <didrocks> I guess the question is why you got proposed image 17 today
[09:21] <didrocks> and not #20
[09:21] <ogra_> he didnt
[09:21] <popey> yesterday
[09:21] <didrocks> ah, ok
[09:21] <ogra_> thats why i asked when he got it as my first question ;)
[09:22] <vila> yesterday, I got #17 proposed yesterday after having #20 proposed (see my comment on bug #1250181)
[09:22] <ogra_> looks like you upgraded in the middle of stephane fixing the server
[09:23] <vila> being almost offline (in my bed toying with the phone the few times I was awake ;) I hoped something has been fixed server side and that I was fine upgrading to #17
[09:23] <ogra_> (jumping from 20 to 17 kind of indicates that he was actively shuffling images around at that time)
[09:23] <vila> when the phone got stucked at the google logo, I just fall asleep again
[09:24] <popey> interestingly 20 on my phone is running but I just have a google logo
[09:24] <vila> with full confidence the issue will be sorted out when I'll wake up ;)
[09:24] <popey> but adb shell shows unity8 is running
[09:24] <ogra_> runs fine for me
[09:24] <vila> popey: that's the new screen saver maybe ?
[09:24] <popey> hah
[09:24] <popey> oh, it's not rebooted properly
[09:25] <popey>  09:25:01 up 1 day,  7:47,  1 user,  load average: 1.32, 1.32, 1.34
[09:25] <popey> also.. I have two phones and I'm adb shell'ed into the wrong one
[09:25]  * popey starts again.
[09:25] <popey>  /ignore popey
[09:25] <ogra_> oh, i like the new click scope
[09:26]  * popey makes a cup of tea for the call
[09:26]  * ogra_ goes for fresh coffee, brb
[09:48] <vila> ogra_, popey: using adb shell s-i-c seems to find #20, going that route
[09:48] <ogra_> vila, note that on the bug too please
[09:49] <vila> ogra_: on it
[09:49] <ogra_> thx
[09:49] <ogra_> [09:56] <popey> \o/
[09:58] <vila> lol, just got #20 installed, rebooting
[09:58] <vila> ogra_, popey: there shouldn't be any difference in upgrade paths between UI and system-image-cli right ?
[09:58] <ogra_> the UI only attaches to s-i-c afaik
[09:59] <vila> ogra_: ack, hopefully
[10:00] <vila> anyway, I've put the s-i-c output in the bug report, not sure the UI uses exactly that or some d-bus interface but they may find a difference
[10:00] <vila> otherwise, it's not the first time the UI is capricious for me which may be caused by some local network glitch (dunno why the -cli won't run into that though)
[11:16] <vila> upgraded to image #21 via UI, all went well
[11:18] <didrocks> vila: the UI uses the d-bus interface of s-i-c
[11:22] <vila> didrocks: ack.
[11:57] <ogra_> whoops
[11:57] <ogra_> [11:57] <ogra_> (since ages, sorry)
[11:58] <popey> hehe
[12:03] <Mirv> I was wondering too :)
[12:21] <asac> didrocks: you changed the time of landing standup from next tue?
[12:21] <asac> (just saying in case you wanted to change it starting today)
[12:21] <didrocks> asac: I only changed it during UDS
[12:22] <asac> ic
[12:22] <didrocks> removed the afternoon one and started it a little bit before UDS
[12:22] <asac> kk
[12:22] <asac> makes sense
[13:25] <asac> ev: didrocks: this charting tool you use, is that also available for other chart types?
[13:57] <fginther> morning
[14:22] <didrocks> asac: no, this one is only a very light online javascript thing for this kind of diagrams
[14:22] <asac> thx
[16:20] <elopio> cihelp, can the landing bot reject an MP if it doesn't have a given number of approvals by the members of a team?
[16:20] <sergiusens> elopio, I would guess that's a feature request
[16:21] <cjohnston> It seems like it wouldn't reject it, just that it wouldn't accept it
[16:21] <cjohnston> though I don't know what it actually does in practice
[16:22] <sergiusens> cjohnston, it uses lanchpad lib to get the approver list; once you have that, it shouldn't be hard
[16:22] <sergiusens> probably even enforce certain review types
[16:22] <elopio> with reject, I meant: move from approved to needs fixing.
[16:22] <cjohnston> I get that, but why would it be moved to needs fixing?
[16:23] <sergiusens> I am not a fan of that; whoever happroves has a certain responsibility there
[16:23] <cjohnston> this seems like a social problem that is trying to be fixed with code
[16:23] <sergiusens> cjohnston, +1
[16:23] <cjohnston> can it be setup to require 3 reviews, yes its possible (I don't know if it is available currently, but it would be possible to add if it isnt)
[16:23] <sergiusens> if my MR is one line of code that just fixes a README I would certainly not want 10+ reviewers
[16:24] <sergiusens> we'd end up bundling MRs all in one
[16:24] <elopio> I would like that we have a strict policy that all the code be reviewed at least by one member of the team.
[16:24] <cjohnston> I believe it should already be setup that way
[16:24] <elopio> on the tarmac of u1, that's checked when the branch is marked as approved.
[16:25] <elopio> and it's moved to needs fixing so you can tell the bot when the branch is ready again by approving.
[16:25] <cjohnston> I believe that MPs currently require a proper team member to approve it
[16:26] <elopio> sergiusens: I think that even one-liners should need one review. There are typos in a big number of the cases.
[16:26] <elopio> but 10, of course not. I'm talking of enforcing one review.
[16:26] <sergiusens> elopio, sure, but it's variable
[16:26] <cjohnston> again, its a social problem.. if the person who marks the top as approved doesn't ensure that there has been an approved review then there is another problem
[16:26] <sergiusens> elopio, most of the type the person doing the top approve is the one doing the review
[16:27] <elopio> cjohnston: yes, sometimes it's the same person that writes the code the one that top approves. That's mostly when we are in a hurry, but it happens.
[16:27] <sergiusens> elopio, so people just do that
[16:27] <cjohnston> elopio: 1) social problem 2) that person should still ensure that a review has been done
[16:27] <elopio> so, I agree that we can just talk to the teams to avoid that, and we will do it.
[16:27] <sergiusens> elopio, not necessarily; sometimes it's an autoland gone bad (infra issues) and the same author just doing what he's already been green lighted to do
[16:28] <cjohnston> as long as it doesn't merge without a review, isn't that what is needed?
[16:28] <elopio> it would be nice to have jenkins making sure that they follow the policy, so we don't have to keep an eye on every project to check that.
[16:28] <cjohnston> elopio: I believe it does require a review
[16:28] <cjohnston> by a person on the proper team
[16:28] <sergiusens> elopio, cjohnston what is the policy? Nothing prevents you from just merging manually into trunk either
[16:29] <cjohnston> sergiusens: I believe that jenkins requires one approval
[16:29] <sergiusens> cjohnston, not really; if autolanding passes it just changes the vote for ps-jenkins to be of Approved
[16:29] <cjohnston> is ps-jenkins a member of the proper team?
[16:30] <sergiusens> cjohnston, yeah, ps-jenkins is a member of everything under upstream merger
[16:30] <elopio> sergiusens: yes, you are right, you can always merge manually.
[16:30] <cjohnston> we are in a call right now, but possibly fginther could provide a little more insight on the setup
[16:31] <elopio> but if we agree that we need at least one review, and never to merge manually into trunk, then what the jenkins bot would be doing is just a reminder that you are missing one review.
[16:32] <cjohnston> it would make more sense to have a comment rather than mark it as needs review
[16:32] <cjohnston> or needs fixing or whatever it is
[16:32] <elopio> cjohnston: yes, I agree to that. But then how will you tell jenkins to pick the branch again when you got the review?
[16:33] <cjohnston> again though, this is trying to solve a social problem with code
[16:33] <cjohnston> I'd be interested in knowing how often this problem happens?
[16:34] <elopio> cjohnston: agree to that too :) We'll try to solve the social problem talking with the team managers to follow the policy. But it would be nice to have an automatic reminder when you don't follow it.
[16:34] <cjohnston> elopio: who is doing the happrove though?
[16:37] <elopio> cjohnston: I can't give you numbers. For what I've seen, it's not common, but it tends to increase when we are in running, which can makes things worse.
[16:37] <elopio> the happrove is done by a member of the team, not necessarily different from the committer.
[16:37] <ogra_> didrocks, i'm wondering, do we actually need a meeting today ? seems CI is still mostly idling
[16:38] <ogra_> (nothing exciting about images either)
[16:38] <cjohnston> ok, so if they are happroving why aren't they reviewing (if it isn't the comitter) or if it is the comitter, why are they happroving without reviews?
[16:40] <didrocks> ogra_: I think we don't
[16:40] <ogra_> yeah
[16:40] <didrocks> sil2100: vila: fginther: ev: cyphermox: kenvandine: as long as CI isn't up, I think we don't need a meeting anymore, we can skip that one ^
[16:40] <fginther> didrocks, +1
[16:40] <didrocks> (would be nice to have a status on the infra though)
[16:40] <kenvandine> +1
[16:41] <ev> +2
[16:41] <sergiusens> elopio, cjohnston fwiw this topic comes back every now and then
[16:41] <fginther> didrocks, I don't have any status yet
[16:41] <cjohnston> there was supposed to be an email coming out soon
[16:41] <cjohnston> re: status
[16:41] <cyphermox> ok
[16:41] <ev> I'll provide a status shortly
[16:41]  * ogra_ goes back to play with his new laptoy
[16:41] <elopio> cjohnston: I haven't seen a happrove from <not-the-committer> without a review, but it can happen.
[16:41] <elopio> cjohnston: I have seen a self happrove with no reviews when the change is considered trivial or too important to wait for a review.
[16:41] <fginther> elopio, I believe there is a bug already for your original request (or something very similar0
[16:42] <ev> I'm just waiting for Larry to provide me a few more details so it's less "we have 80% of the racks cabled" and more "we're having m-o back up at foo PM Boston time"
[16:42] <fginther> elopio, will look it up in a moment
[16:43] <elopio> thanks fginther.
[16:43] <didrocks> ogra_: oh! new laptop :)
[16:44] <ogra_> yeah
[16:45] <kenvandine> x86 even!
[16:46] <sil2100> didrocks: ok, less interuptions for me then :)
[16:46] <sil2100> ev: awesome
[16:47] <elopio> sergiusens: that's why we are trying to define the details we expect from our projects
[16:47] <elopio> it's here, in case somebody is courious: https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/document/d/1D3G62wd1wMAH9zoHiHYXkabnHqelqz8Upffi0d_6iaA/edit#heading=h.nzp18cbqfdgy
[16:47] <elopio> comments are still welcome.
[17:01] <popey> didrocks: landing call?
[17:01] <didrocks> oh sorry, didn't ping popey :)
[17:01] <didrocks> popey: as long as CI isn't up, I think we don't need a meeting anymore, we can skip that one
[17:01] <popey> kk
[17:01] <popey> thanks
[17:01]  * didrocks pitti phew, 2 hours of discussion to push hard for dep8 in the way CI should describe the tests
[17:01] <didrocks> :)
[17:01] <didrocks> we'll have a happy Martin!
[18:27] <fginther> elopio, I finally found the bug report: https://bugs.launchpad.net/jenkins-launchpad-plugin/+bug/1134435
[18:27] <fginther> elopio, it's specifically for rules around top approve, but it's a similar concept.
[18:28] <fginther> elopio, So the short answer is that it is not supported now, but we're planning to build it into the CI Airline system
[18:28] <elopio> thanks fginther, that will do for.