[08:04] <mlankhorst> ok back :p
[18:53] <bdmurray> infinity: could you review libtar for me?
[18:58] <shadeslayer> could someone reject kde-workspace from trusty unapproved?
[19:12] <bdmurray> shadeslayer: doing so
[19:27] <shadeslayer> bdmurray: thx
[19:27] <shadeslayer> uploaded the fixed package
[22:04] <shadeslayer> oh
[22:12] <shadeslayer> ScottK: ^^ kde-workspace uploaded
[22:13] <cjwatson> shadeslayer: since you've been asking - the livefs stuff is landed on Launchpad trunk now and is looking pretty good, so I'm optimistic that we'll have an initial production rollout next week
[22:13] <cjwatson> doing it on Friday would probably be a bit cavalier
[22:13] <shadeslayer> I noticed :)
[22:14] <shadeslayer> hehe
[22:14] <shadeslayer> cjwatson: btw from what I've understood, using the LP derivative distro will make a entire archive fork ?
[22:14] <cjwatson> I ended up using the PPA code for testing (because I needed a hacked live-build), so maybe I can get some ops time to debug that
[22:14] <cjwatson> shadeslayer: partial
[22:14] <cjwatson> s/debug/deploy/
[22:15] <cjwatson> buildd deployments are rather more fragile and time-consuming for ops at the moment sadly
[22:15] <shadeslayer> cjwatson: so, we specify which packages to fork then?
[22:15] <cjwatson> but we'll see
[22:16] <shadeslayer> *nod*
[22:16] <cjwatson> shadeslayer: something like that.  I don't think it will be ready for casual use for quite a while ...
[22:16] <shadeslayer> cjwatson: I mostly need it for Kubuntu Next ISO's
[22:16] <cjwatson> yeah, don't hold your breath
[22:16] <cjwatson> I would expect a PPA to be better for your use case anyway?
[22:16] <shadeslayer> I see, then we'll have to figure out how to do those with PPA's
[22:17] <shadeslayer> yep, however, I was more interested in the ISO side of those
[22:17] <cjwatson> I dunno, maybe it will be possible with derived distros, but the target is to get them working for a single target for August and that target doesn't require anything complicated on the cdimage side
[22:17] <cjwatson> whereas Kubuntu likely would
[22:17] <cjwatson> so would need to discuss the exact requirements in a bit more detail I think
[22:18] <shadeslayer> mhm, should I email Ubuntu devel with our requirements next week then? because plasma 5 is going to be out in a few weeks, and it would be awesome to have a ISO to go along with it
[22:19] <cjwatson> I'm also kind of wary of derived distros being used for more than stabilisation branches, as it would be very easy to end up with fragmentation
[22:19] <shadeslayer> I could hack around things and use ubuntu-defaults-builder and what not, but I don't know how to setup the UEFI side of things
[22:19] <cjwatson> right, you absolutely will not have derived distros in a few weeks
[22:19] <cjwatson> so sure, details please :)
[22:19] <shadeslayer> ok, will send details to ubuntu-devel next week :)
[22:19] <shadeslayer> if that's the right place to discuss this
[22:19] <cjwatson> will probably need some work on the cdimage side to mirror additional PPAs
[22:20] <cjwatson> maybe ubuntu-release, but whichever
[22:20] <shadeslayer> well, it'll be just the one
[22:20] <cjwatson> yeah but I'm not writing special-case code for this, if I write it it'll be generic so I don't have to rewrite it later :)
[22:20] <shadeslayer> fair enough :)
[22:21] <cjwatson> trying to make sure that new classes of configuration I add to cdimage are table-driven
[22:21] <cjwatson> one thing that's important to know is the scope of the PPA
[22:21] <cjwatson> in particular it would be helpful to have a guarantee that it will not touch things in the debootstrap set
[22:22] <cjwatson> ('cos debootstrap isn't much good at multi-archive bootstrapping)
[22:23] <cjwatson> if it's just the UI layer, and you're happy to deal with the utopic archive moving along under you, then a PPA should work
[22:24] <shadeslayer> I highly doubt it'll touch things in the debootstrap layer
[22:24] <shadeslayer> **maybe** some library like poppler, or stuff, but I highly doubt we'll touch things in debootstrap
[22:27] <stgraber> cjwatson: the only problem is if the PPA contains extra packages (not in archive) which they need in the debootstrap set, correct? anything else, we debootstrap from the release pocket + dist-upgrade the chroot with all the right sources afterwards which should take care of any version bump for packages in the debootstrap set.
[22:28] <stgraber> or am I missing something?
[22:28] <cjwatson> or removals.  but possibly, yeah
[22:28] <cjwatson> still, I'd be more comfortable if that were excluded
[22:28] <cjwatson> it's complex enough as it is :)
[22:30] <stgraber> yeah, I just assumed we already had that kind of logic since it's not uncommon for us to push debootstrap-set packages into -updates post-release and then build point release isos including that (where we debootstrap from release pocket, setup sources.list and dist-upgrade afterwards).
[22:31] <cjwatson> we might do, I'd just like for it not to be a requirement because it seems like a plausible source of difficulty
[22:32] <cjwatson> and this is several thousand lines of brand new infrastructure code as it is
[22:36] <cjwatson> https://dogfood.paddev.net/builders/  heh, LP is nice sometimes, I didn't explicitly put the [<archive>] bit there but it's absolutely right
[22:39] <cjwatson> ah yes, of course PackageBuildFormatterAPI does that
[22:51] <DalekSec> Howdy!  With the latest upload of darkice, we have eliminated the rest of the Ubuntu delta, can you sync it (or do I need to make a formal sync request?)
[22:56] <cjwatson> that's self-service by uploaders, we don't do that centrally any more
[22:56] <cjwatson> if you have upload access, use syncpackage, otherwise, use requestsync
[22:56] <cjwatson> assuming you have an Ubuntu system to run it from?
[22:58] <cjwatson> actually, never mind, it's pretty clear, I'll switch to my uploader hat and do it
[22:58] <cjwatson> done
[23:00] <DalekSec> Sweet, thanks.  And no, I have no upload rights.
[23:00] <DalekSec> (It was a simple one, yeah.)
[23:10] <bdmurray> cjwatson: could you review libtar in trusty-proposed?
[23:11] <cjwatson> looking
[23:17] <cjwatson> bdmurray: do you want to fix the grievous misspelling of the patch author's name in the changelog? :)
[23:18] <cjwatson> Magnus != Marcus, Holmgren != Holmgen
[23:18] <cjwatson> rest of it looks ok ...
[23:18] <bdmurray> cjwatson: wow, that'd be great or I can do it
[23:19] <cjwatson> can I reject and have you fix the changelog?  I like to have people's names spelled right
[23:19] <cjwatson> but I'll be around for a little bit longer to accept the second try
[23:21] <bdmurray> cjwatson: sure, sounds good
[23:26] <bdmurray> cjwatson: reuploaded
[23:34] <cjwatson> bdmurray: thanks
[23:37] <bdmurray> cjwatson: thank you for pointing it out