[05:55] <kees> is anyone around to hit this one?
[05:55] <kees> 21:09 -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: duo-unix (precise-proposed/universe) [1.7-3 => 1.9.11-1~ubuntu0.12.04.1] (no packageset)
[06:17] <infinity> kees: Hit it in what sense?
[06:19] <infinity> kees: The bug doesn't seem to justify the backport?
[06:19] <infinity> kees: How does "changing certificates" lead to "need to backport all the new code"?
[06:45] <kees> infinity: because their server is dropping connections based on versions. since the code changes are well tested and relatively small, it seems best to just catch up precise instead of doing a hacky cert-and-fake-version bump on the protocol.
[06:45] <kees> infinity: and "hit" in the sense of no one appears to have looked at it from approve or reject
[23:20] <infinity> stgraber, slangasek, cjwatson, RAOF, ScottK, any of you around?
[23:21] <slangasek> infinity: yabbado
[23:22] <cjwatson> Slightly but mostly trying to do QA on the PPA publisher before going back to bed
[23:22] <infinity> slangasek: So.  docker versus docker.io... There's an ongoing thread about docker.io taking over docker(1) and docker moving to wmdocker(1)
[23:22] <slangasek> oh, is this still ongoing?
[23:23] <infinity> slangasek: paultag just uploaded a docker 1.5-1 that does the wmdocker(1) move, and I'm considering just syncing that to trusty.
[23:23] <infinity> slangasek: Any objections?
[23:23] <cjwatson> I would object in some such cases, but in this one it seems relatively unlikely that people will be invoking it by name?
[23:23] <infinity> slangasek: (The second half being a longer discussion about docker 1.0 in trusty, but I think that'll turn out to look like a Good Idea from a supportability standpoint)
[23:23] <slangasek> syncing it to /trusty/?
[23:23] <infinity> slangasek: To trusty, yes.
[23:24] <cjwatson> I'd prefer a cherry-pick to a sync though
[23:24] <cjwatson> If possible
[23:24] <infinity> slangasek: Argument being that 1.5-1 has nearly zero changes relative to 1.4-5, except for the inclusion of the Ubuntu patch, the inclusion upstream of a Debian patch, and the binary move.
[23:24] <slangasek> nearly zero is like nearly infinite
[23:24] <infinity> cjwatson: And the reason for the sync instead of the cherrypick would be to keep the Breaks/Replaces in sync with Debian as well.
[23:24] <cjwatson> Oh
[23:24] <cjwatson> I can see the argument there
[23:25] <cjwatson> We might want to build1 it in utopic in that case, dunno
[23:25] <infinity> cjwatson: We might.  I'm not sure it matters much.  The current version hasn't rebuilt since natty, it's not like this one gets a lot of attention.
[23:25] <kees> bdmurray: precise and saucy micro updates for duo-unix have landed now. Waaaay easier delta to review. :) (debdiffs added to the LP bug)
[23:31] <infinity> cjwatson / slangasek: I can cherry-pick just the binary/manpage move, if you prefer, but I think in this weird case of a leaf package that likely almost no one uses with Ubuntu anyway (and in light of keeping b/r in sync), we're better off just taking the Debian package wholesale.  YOMV.
[23:32] <slangasek> infinity: I'm more intersted in knowing what else was is in the delta that we might consider risky
[23:32] <infinity> slangasek: http://paste.ubuntu.com/7631006/ <-- The entire diff between trusty and sid.
[23:33] <slangasek> what the heck is debian/Dockerfile ?
[23:33] <infinity> slangasek: A joke, AFAICT.  Allows one to build docker in docker.
[23:34] <infinity> slangasek: Harmless cruft, from the POV of the Debian packaging, mind. :P
[23:35] <slangasek> very funny
[23:39] <slangasek> infinity: no upstream changelog, bah; but the changes do seem fairly innocuous, either the thing works with these changes or it doesn't
[23:39] <slangasek> I assume someone will test that it does actually work, before we publish to -updates :)
[23:39] <infinity> Yeah.
[23:39] <infinity> I'll make sure Paul's tested it before I sync, and then test on Ubuntu before releasing.
[23:39] <infinity> I miss WindowMaker.  It'll be fun revisiting the past.