[03:06] <wxl> hopefully this is not too late but i just marked lubuntu alternate amd64/i386 as ready for alpha2
[06:21] <pitti> infinity: I just uploaded an SRU for bitcoin in precise; any idea why it landed in NEW?
[06:21] <pitti> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/+queue?queue_state=0
[06:21] <pitti> wgrant: ^
[06:21] <pitti>  bitcoin  | 0.3.24~dfsg-1 | precise/universe | source
[06:21] <pitti>  bitcoind | 0.3.24~dfsg-1 | precise/universe | amd64, armel, armhf, i386, powerpc
[06:21] <pitti> is that because it doesn't exist in any other release?
[06:22] <pitti> but I suppose accepting it in NEW won't put it into UNAPPROVED, like that it's just not visible to the SRU team
[06:23] <wgrant> pitti: Totally new override code was deployed a few hours ago, so probably a regression there. Investigating now -- please don't touch it just yet.
[06:23] <pitti> wgrant: thanks; no, I won't -- if I would accept it it would already go into -proposed, and I'm not in ~ubuntu-sru any more
[06:25] <infinity> Definitely a regression.
[06:25] <infinity> wgrant: HEY, YOUR CODE HAS A REGRESSION.
[06:25] <infinity> wgrant: YOU WANTED ME TO TELL YOU.
[06:25] <infinity> wgrant: THIS IS ME NOTICING.
[06:26] <wgrant> Ahh
[06:26] <wgrant> It's the resurrections-must-hit-NEW case going wrong.
[06:27] <wgrant> The most recent precise pub is a rejected SRU that is now Deleted.
[06:27] <wgrant> So it sees the most recent pub is Deleted and decides it needs NEWing again.
[06:27] <wgrant> I guess in this case I should look for non-Deleted ones first.
[06:32] <wgrant> infinity: Opinions on precedence for binaries? We need to fall back to other archs and also to deleted pubs, but in which order should the combinations be tried?
[06:33] <wgrant> Like, should an amd64 binary fall back to i386's overrides before a deleted amd64 pub?
[06:34] <pitti> I think "yes", from my POV
[06:34] <pitti> in general it's really awkward to have builds for different arches be in different components
[06:34] <pitti> and I'm inclined to say that every such case is queue pilot error instead of deliberate
[06:35] <infinity> wgrant: arch-before-deleted, I'd say.  Since arches should match in the Ubuntu case anyway.
[06:35] <infinity> wgrant: We don't tend to mismatch.
[06:35] <infinity> wgrant: We *can*, but we don't, cause it breaks our tiny little AA minds (and some of our tools).
[06:36] <infinity> We should probably revisit that some day, so we can do different arch priorities, but yeah, we don't today.  Today, we override the tools instead of the pubs.
[06:36] <wgrant> infinity: That's where I was leaning to as well, yeah.
[06:37] <wgrant> The only thing that can sanely differ is priority, I guess.
[06:37] <wgrant> And who cares if that goes slightly wrong.
[07:17] <Riddell> Laney: did alpha 2 get released? I see nothing on ubuntu-devel-announce?
[08:15] <Laney> Riddell: no, kylin hadn't readied before I had to leave
[08:15] <Laney> let me check on it now
[08:16] <Laney> yes, looks good, doing it
[08:20] <Riddell> gotcha
[08:32] <Laney> jamespage: do you know if anyone other than utlemming can publish cloud images?
[08:32] <jamespage> Laney, rcj can as well but they are both not around until later
[08:33] <jamespage> Laney, prob smoser as well
[08:33] <Laney> ha
[08:33] <jamespage> again +3 hrs or so
[08:33] <Laney> sure, don't really want to wait for that
[08:33] <Laney> I'll just say "will shortly be available"
[08:37] <Laney> syncing out now
[08:41] <jamespage> Laney, ack
[09:02] <Laney> jamespage: ah, maybe they're already done: http://cloud-images.ubuntu.com/releases/utopic/alpha-2/
[09:08] <jamespage> Laney, awesome
[09:09] <jamespage> that does look to be the case
[09:09] <Laney> so all good
[09:09] <Laney> move along people, nothing to see here
[09:22] <pitti> the new debhelper is being held back in -proposed by the new broken gem2deb version in -proposed, but it's not the new debhelper's fault; can you please hint this?
[12:48] <smoser> Laney, i can.
[12:49] <smoser> and, yeah, rcj.
[13:32] <Laney> smoser: It'd be good to have someone in the eu who can do it too
[13:33] <smoser> Laney, talk to utlemming to get someone on that team.
[13:34] <Laney> utlemming: consider yourself talked to :-)
[14:31] <Chipaca> seb128: please re-review https://code.launchpad.net/~chipaca/gsettings-ubuntu-touch-schemas/just-the-touch-settings/+merge/228317
[14:45] <seb128> Chipaca, k
[15:12] <Nivex> Curiosity is getting the better of me. What's the blocker for do-release-upgrade from 12.04.4 to 14.04.1 ?
[15:58] <wgrant> pitti, infinity: That NEW bug is fixed on prod now.
[17:14] <utlemming> Laney: working on that question today, incidently.