=== plars-away is now known as plars [07:43] stgraber, "Daily rebuild quota reached for product." ... i got that for touch on the iso tracker ... thought you might want to know about it :) (i started a build directly on nusakan now) [08:56] ogra_, i wonder when the day starts, as it is pretty early relative to UTC [08:58] apw, well, i never know if he is in switzerland or canada TZ :) [08:59] ogra_, well i was more thinking of the day for the quota system :) [08:59] hah === pete-woods is now known as pete-woods-away === doko_ is now known as doko === pete-woods-away is now known as pete-woods [12:37] any MOTUs around? [12:49] Chipaca, there are bound to be, but they will likely be more responsive to a specific question [12:49] apw: asked more specifically in #ubuntu-motu [12:49] not getting any love there though :) [12:55] Chipaca: you need to give it more than a few minutes :) Looking. [12:55] rbasak: I am nothing if not impatient === ara is now known as Guest42533 [14:53] ogra_: Daily quotas are intentional, so no one flavour decides they're so important that they can choke out all the infrastructure's resources. [14:53] infinity, interesting ... its not like we did build more than two images a day [14:54] 3 at times ... but rarely [14:54] ogra_: It's possible it's intentionally but also broken. :) [14:54] hehe [14:54] s/intentionally/intentional/ [14:54] that is why i pinged stgraber about it [15:01] ogra_: "Living in the past will be possible in the near future"... Hah! [15:05] ogra_: Wow, and my brain decided to quote you backwards. I might need to wake up. [15:05] haha [15:54] stgraber, I've corrected the openipmi version that you objected to and have re-uploaded. [17:17] cjwatson, ping about platform-api again. I hit publish on the silo but it doesn't seem to have made it into proposed, likely because of that version issue. any way to fix it? [17:48] "That version issue"? [17:54] infinity, yeah sorry, was talking with cjwatson about this yesterday [17:55] infinity, what happened is, platform-api was supposed to build v1.2.0 in a ppa, but because the ppa had an old, deleted v2.0.0 in it, citrain screwed up and built 2.0.0 anyway. then *I* screwed up and published that, but it got stuck in -proposed. cjwatson deleted it from -proposed already, so I then rebuilt 1.2.0 correctly and published that, but the upload to -proposed was rejected [17:55] or at least i assume it was rejected, because it's not in proposed. i don't get rejection mails... [17:56] infinity, https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuDk72Lpx8U5dFVHQ3FuMDJGLUZCamJfSjYzbWh3Wnc&rm=full&pli=1#gid=37 here's the status showing platform-api not in proposed along with the rest of the silo [17:58] robru: How do I determine what PPA that's in, so I can try a manual copy? [17:58] Oh, it's at the top. [17:59] infinity, that link I gave has a link to the PPA, but also here: https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/landing-019 yeah ;-) [17:59] infinity, silos are always https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/landing-0##, I have a saved search for that ;-) [18:01] robru: Was accepted just fine on a manual copy. So either your original attempt was before it was deleted, or something else went wrong. Without the emails, it's hard to tell. :/ [18:01] robru: Copied now, though. [18:01] infinity, great, thanks. [18:02] infinity, yeah, I tried to subscribe to the team that gets the jenkins rejection emails but nobody approved me for that, not sure who to ping [18:02] infinity, i believe cjwatson did the deletion yesterday, so i doubt there was a race between his deletion and my upload (an hour ago). something else is wrong i guess, but at least this is an isolated case [18:55] robru: There's no sign of a copy attempt in the Launchpad logs before infinity did a manual copy [18:56] robru: So something must have been confused on the CI side, but I can't say I know what [18:57] cjwatson, thanks for checking. here's the log, I guess it didn't copy: https://ci-train.ubuntu.com/job/landing-019-2-publish/32/console [18:57] robru: Right, that's a citrain refusal [18:58] robru: It points to the "ignore version destination" option which sounds like it would have been plausible [18:58] robru: But if you were using that and it still didn't work then I guess it's a citrain bug [18:58] it's funny how many individual things had to go wrong for us to get to this state. one landing was in one silo, but then got moved to a different one. the next landing in the first silo contained one of the same projects as the previous landing. also this would not have been a problem if upstream hadn't bumped the upstream version number [18:58] robru: FWIW if it *had* been a Launchpad copy error then you would have got mail about it as the publisher [18:59] cjwatson, yeah, i had that option checked [18:59] ah [18:59] (regardless of any team that gets jenkins rejection mails) === ken_ is now known as kenvandine