[02:05] === trainguard: IMAGE 207 building (started: 20140825 02:05) === [03:35] === trainguard: IMAGE 207 DONE (finished: 20140825 03:35) === [03:35] === changelog: http://people.canonical.com/~ogra/touch-image-stats/207.changes === [04:45] veebers: https://code.launchpad.net/~veebers/autopilot/legacy-lp1352889/+merge/230241 not approved [04:46] Mirv: ah rats, not the first time I've done that either :-P Thanks for the heads up, sorting it now [04:46] ;) [04:47] Mirv: Have approved now, is there a button that I need to (re)push? [04:48] veebers: no buttons needed, thanks! [04:48] Mirv: nw, thanks for sorting that out [04:48] now we just need a core-dev to approve the pkg changes :S but I'll have it done today. [04:49] Mirv: awesome, thanks again :-) [07:00] sil2100: hi! Do you know why silo 15 hasn't yet landed? [07:03] mardy: there seems to have been some sort of build error according to the spreadsheet [07:03] mardy: or maybe that thing is an erronous report in itself, but that's why it's red in the spreadsheet so no-one has noticed it has actually been tested.. [07:04] mardy: I think that's a false alarm that's totally Wellark's fault :) https://ci-train.ubuntu.com/job/ubuntu-landing-015-1-build/9/console - he probably erronously tried to build a wrong silo [07:04] Mirv: yes, I've seen the error message, but I honestly didn't understand what it means :-) The silo was built and tested [07:04] mardy: I'm running 'watch only' build on it now so that the status gets refreshed correctly [07:12] Mirv: cool, that seems to have worked, thanks a lot! :-) [07:17] mardy: no problem :) but the MP:s are not approved [07:17] https://ci-train.ubuntu.com/job/ubuntu-landing-015-2-publish/5/console [07:17] or at least not top approved [07:18] dbarth: could you top-approve also those in that console log ^ ? you've already approved them in comments. [07:19] Mirv: I just top-approved them myself :-) [07:19] dbarth: unping :) [07:20] so, now only packaging acks [07:24] mardy: hey. unfortunately the libaccounts-glib needs changes. the diff https://ci-train.ubuntu.com/job/ubuntu-landing-015-2-publish/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/packaging_changes_libaccounts-glib_1.17+14.10.20140819.1-0ubuntu1.diff reveals that manual uploads from spring enabling multi-arch did not get merged to trunk, and they'd need to be added back (including changelog entries) :( [07:24] https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libaccounts-glib/+changelog [07:25] ubuntu2 was just a rebuild, but ubuntu3 added the two multi-arch lines. so it should be just syncing changelog and adding back those two multi-arch lines [07:25] Mirv: ah, OK, I'll try to fix that; the multi arch lines should be already in trunk, only the changelog is missing [07:26] mardy: the diff claims for some reason that the multi-arch lines are being removed in the current build [07:26] Mirv: what diff? [07:27] * mardy checks [07:27] Mirv: yes, I guess you are right; I'll add those lines [07:28] Mirv: is it important that I add the changelog entries as well? [07:28] mardy: thanks. it's a bit unfortunate this happens every now and then. [07:28] mardy: yes it is, since we don't want to erase history :) possibly easiest to copy paste from https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/libaccounts-glib_1.15%2B14.04.20131126.2-0ubuntu3.debian.tar.gz (open in file-roller, open debian/changelog in gedit) [07:36] Mirv: I pushed a couple of commits fixing that, can you please check? [07:37] Mirv: hi; while you're on webapps stuff, silo 2 can be freed; it's not ready for re-testing [07:38] Mirv: and line 12 is obsolete; can i just remove it from the spreadsheet? [07:48] mardy: looks perfect, thanks! [07:48] Mirv: cool! So, what is the next step? [07:49] mardy: rebuilding the libaccounts-glib only [07:49] dbarth: ok, freed. should it be marked as "Ready?" "No" also? [07:49] dbarth: you can simply remove the line 12, go ahead [07:52] mardy: I just kicked a libaccounts-glib build, then [07:54] Mirv: thanks [08:17] trainguards, can I have silos for line 39 and line 40? [08:18] tvoss: sure o/ [08:18] sil2100, thanks [08:18] tvoss: those are for utopic for now, yes? [08:21] Mirv: I see you're ssigning a silo for oSoMoN ? ;) [08:22] sil2100: yes :) [08:23] thanks guys :) [08:23] mardy: landing-015 is now built again, you maybe want to have a quick smoke test? the diff was of course only packaging and doesn't affect functionality at all. [08:29] dbarth_: What do you think? I don't see the need to re-test it ^ [08:30] Mirv: i can do a quick smoke test no worries [08:30] dbarth_: thanks! [08:31] omg, meeting [08:31] It will be a very sad meeting [08:35] hi trainguards; can i have a silo for line 29; thanks [08:53] dbarth_: utopic, yes? not rtm/14.09 [08:54] (assuming) === tvoss is now known as tvoss|test === tvoss|test is now known as tvoss [09:06] Mirv: sil2100: I do not know if anybody is actively working on this issue -> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/phablet-tools/+bug/1360582 I have not seen mvo online yet. But this bug killed the SDK, like totally. Not little, not just a bit, but ultimately. [09:06] Ubuntu bug 1360582 in phablet-tools (Ubuntu) "Can't manually install clicks "Signature verification error" since #205" [Undecided,Confirmed] [09:08] bzoltan: we discussed that on the meeting, we're waiting for mvo and or jdstrand, although it seems to be caused by mvo's landing [09:11] sil2100: OK, I will make a simple AP tests for the SDK tools what people could run before landing something what effects the SDK [09:14] dbarth_: we'll need to finish the 015 and 010 landings first before line 29. [09:19] thostr_: pstolowski: please coordinate with Saviq on whether you can build, test and publish your line 34 before his landing-017 or not [09:19] Mirv: will do [09:20] Mirv: 15 smoke tested; you can land [09:20] Mirv: for 10, that's fine; i can do a rebuild if oSoMoN lands first [09:20] dbarth_: thanks, we'll just need packaging acks still [09:25] Anyone have an idea what is causing this failure: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/thumbnailer-utopic-amd64-ci/18/console [09:27] Mirv, it's fine, Saviq will remove it from his entry [09:29] satoris: looks like a jenkins problem and something for cihelp, but I'm not sure what's their availability today [09:29] pstolowski: ok then [09:30] Thanks. [09:42] Mirv, mardy: whoops, sorry! [09:43] 15 and 12 are not that far of each other :) [09:44] :) [09:50] Mirv: cool, silo 15 is migrating, can we have a new silo then? ^^ ;) [09:50] remember i freed silo 2 as well, as a special bonus [10:21] dbarth_: done now [10:23] 015 not yet merge&cleaned though since it's still in proposed [10:24] Mirv: ty! === tvoss is now known as tvoss|lunch [10:58] 12:40 < ogra> heh, so nothing landed in RTM since my last upload on friday ... [10:58] sil2100: ^ [10:59] asac, it is painful ans awful for people using bzr atm [10:59] i know, doesnt change a thing though [10:59] we need that fixed before we force *everyone* into having to maintain two out of sync branches [11:00] which is something we wont be able to easily revert later [11:00] well, whatever isnt landing in stable now, isnt in stable [11:00] (and which contradicts the whole plan we initially had) [11:01] doesnt help [11:01] asac, right, because you only can land something in stable if you create a diverged branch atm [11:01] then do that [11:01] Well, *theoretically* you can already do this: [11:01] i wont, i will rather use debs now ... like most of us [11:01] (sneakily) [11:02] Fill in a landing with MR's for a ubuntu [11:02] And then below fill in the same landing for ubuntu-rtm but without any MPs, just source package names listed [11:02] then pull the source package out of the silo and re-land that in rtm [11:02] right [11:02] yeah, then do that [11:02] thats what we need [11:02] if you dont land you will not land [11:02] Yeah, troublesome (I'll try to make that much easier today) but still [11:02] and thats where we need to work towards in automation [11:03] dont hold your breath for automation. people that land in ubuntu only now are risking that their changes won't make it [11:04] -> diverging the baseline further, making live even harder for everyone who wants to land in both directions [11:04] lfie [11:05] asac, well, i think we need some wiggle room anyway ... we dont have rtm tests for krillin (well, we dont even have automated tests yet, its all manual) [11:05] so if we want to target that, there is still a good bunch of things missing [11:06] thats going to happen today [11:06] i would expect a few days til everything is fallen in place on all sides ... and while thats goinng on sil2100 can work on that extra PPA love [11:06] now that the channel is avail [11:06] ogra_: we wont get the stuff over then [11:06] thats the point. land your stuff in stable with N4 targetted then [11:06] I'll be loving it much more after lunch [11:06] we shouldnt allow folks to shoot themselves even more [11:06] asac, right, it is tricky to get anything over if you dont even have a reference image test [11:07] we have N4 and later today krillin too [11:07] right [11:08] anyway, deb landing is trivisal in both ... the bzr/MP landing needs some love first else we paint ourselves in an RTM corner with forcing two branches for each landing [11:08] we have the trick sil said [11:08] (in both -> ubuntu and rtm) [11:08] no need to be stuck [11:08] right [11:08] we need to stop now and replay whoevfer landed without landing in ubuntu-rtm [11:08] i am not stuck [11:08] but i think many people hold their feet still hoping for improvement first [11:09] thats not coming [11:09] if it comes it comes, but dont wait [11:09] i guess someone should outlin the source package step on the ML ;) [11:09] since up to now people onlykone the MP way [11:09] *only know [11:09] right, and so their changes are not landing in stable [11:10] yes ... since they dont know that process is also allowed [11:10] (see the ML discussion from the weekend) [11:10] for me those changes landed today are not meant for stable then. we certainly won't do the replaying [11:10] for them === mandel is now known as mandel|lunch === renato is now known as Guest9436 [12:14] * jdstrand notes that bug #1360582 is not his bug (I got pinged earlier) [12:14] bug 1360582 in phablet-tools (Ubuntu) "Can't manually install clicks "Signature verification error" since #205" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1360582 [12:16] jdstrand, yes, thats mvo's [12:16] but it was fixed afaik [12:16] ok cool [12:16] * jdstrand is curious how [12:16] dunno, he had me test it and later provided a new landing [12:17] (which makes me assume he attempted to fix it with tht) [12:17] ok, thanks [12:18] oh, thats the --allow-unauthenticate bit [12:18] the issue i tested for was "no clicks can be installed at all because click tries to create some dirs in /root/" [12:19] i know he fixed that one ... the one above was likely fallout of this [12:22] ogra_: that one's not really fixed; the workarount is to use click install directly which I was told we shouldn't do [12:22] how else would you sideload a click package ? [12:22] jedi waves over your screen ? [12:24] ogra_: pkcon install-local ... [12:24] oh [12:24] that, yeah [12:25] (in fact thats what i use locally in my scripts ... thats what you get using scripts and never looking what you programmed initially :P ) [12:25] that's the dream; fire and forget and work always :-) [12:26] yeah [12:26] thats what makes my dev mode changes so hard :( [12:41] can anybody reconfigure silo 12, please? [12:43] Mirv, hey is there an image to test ? [12:43] Mirv, on mako I mean [12:57] Saviq: hey! [12:58] sil2100, elo [12:59] Saviq: so, I see you have a silo ready for releasing [12:59] sil2100, actually... [12:59] sil2100, I need to take it back and push one small change and rebuild :/ [13:00] sil2100, sorry for the noise, will have it ready in ~30mins [13:00] Saviq: I was thinking... I know that you have already published something to RTM for unity8 (and did a separate unity8 branch probably), but I was thinking if maybe we could allocate you an RTM silo to which we'll do a srccopy from the ubuntu one? [13:01] Saviq: no worries :) [13:01] sil2100, yeah, let's do that [13:01] sil2100, I need to look back for dependencies, though [13:01] sil2100, I'll let you know when we're ready [13:01] Saviq: for now all manual, so I'll help you out with the copies and such, just tell me when you [13:01] are ready [13:01] sil2100, will do [13:01] (premature newline) [13:01] We'll get a silo for you then [13:02] I just need to consume my lunch and I'll be back === tvoss|lunch is now known as tvoss [13:20] om26er: which kind of mako image you'd want? :) [13:20] om26er: I think we're not considering mako promotions today at least [13:21] om26er: and there are enough unsolved blockers in the image now (apparently some new over the weekend even) [13:25] sil2100: good morning, can I get a reconfigure in silo 1, please? [13:27] Mirv, alright, I just wanted to inquire. [13:32] ralsina: I can reconfigure it [13:32] Mirv: awesome, thanks! [13:36] Saviq: i would recommend to not publish your ubuntu silo if you plan to get that into stable (using sil2100's new trick) as is as we will have QA double check for stable silo, so you might have to iterate there one more time before publishing [13:36] ... which probably means you want to iterate with devel in sync too (and stay in sync) [13:36] ralsina: uh oh, the csv output is again broken at Google, which means many functionalities including reconfigure is broken at the moment :( a manual reconfiguration worked however but hopefully google will fix itself soon [13:36] sil2100: ^ csv again broken, prepare-silo-manual still works [13:36] Mirv: oops, thanks! [13:36] asac, stable = rtm ? [13:37] yeah [13:37] asac, I don't have a devel, not sure what you mean there [13:37] * ogra_ thinks our terms get heavily overused :( [13:37] Saviq: you have a silo targetted normal utopic, no? [13:37] ogra_, do you know how to get add-apt-repository to recognize 14.09 as a distro? [13:37] sil2100: dholbach: we have not seen mvo so far today. He might be on vacation. [13:37] sil2100: unping, a couple of minutes later csv works again, thanks google [13:37] brendand, should just work on rtm installs [13:37] * asac will try to stick to long form: "ubuntu" "ubuntu-rtm" in near future [13:38] brendand, if not, file a bug :) [13:38] ogra_, well /etc/lsb-release is not correct in 14.09 so it's not [13:38] Saviq: devel i used as synonym for -> ubuntu ... stable for -> ubuntu-rtm [13:38] brendand, oh, that, yeah [13:38] ogra_, where's the best place for that to go? [13:39] asac, if you want to say that I should file separate MPs into ubuntu and ubuntu-rtm, that's not gonna happen, I don't have the time to retarget a dozen or more MPs [13:39] brendand, in lsb i guess [13:39] Saviq: sil has a trick he wanted to try with your silo that uses source copy [13:39] asac, please don't use synonyms like that unless we rename the channels as well, we have devel-proposed, devel, stable, rtm, ubuntu etc. [13:39] Saviq: but you can only use that if you havent gotten out of sync yet [13:40] asac, I don't think that's a problem [13:40] Saviq: yeah, i will use devel-propose and rtm [13:40] the rest doesnt matter now [13:40] right [13:40] rtm-proposd actually [13:40] asac, with the first srccopy landing it will get back in sync [13:41] asac, rtm-proposed doesnt exist for devs ... thats happening automatically (like uploading to ubuntu ending up in ubuntu-proposed) [13:41] ogra_, or maybe against 14.09, if possible [13:41] Saviq, the plan was some kind of auto-copy of the source packages to the rtm silo ... so you dont need two branches unless you do dircet rtm uploads [13:42] Saviq: cant say for sure - you are most likely right. the further things diverge the more stepping stones you might encounter. anyway, sil think he has a trick to do these with source copy's... would be good to try so we can announce that more widely as an option. [13:42] ogra_, yes, that's exactly what I want indeed [13:42] right [13:42] everyone does :) [13:42] "auto" is not avail, but semi-auto [13:42] ogra_: have you guys heard about that the SDK tools are broken since the #205? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/phablet-tools/+bug/1360582 The developers can not run their apps on the device. [13:42] is what we want to try NOW [13:42] Ubuntu bug 1360582 in phablet-tools (Ubuntu) "Can't manually install clicks "Signature verification error" since #205" [Undecided,Confirmed] [13:42] sil2100 is fixing :) [13:42] auto will come later if that really turns out feasible [13:42] bzoltan, yes, we need mvo to fix that [13:43] bzoltan, and like most debianners he is at debconf this week [13:43] ogra_, asac was just saying I shouldn't do that because I already have an rtm branch, which I don't see as a problem (I will just drop the rtm serie for now or just keep it manually updated) [13:43] ogra_: mvo is no around [13:43] bzoltan, right [13:43] ogra_: would this situation qualify as a reason for reverting? [13:43] bzoltan, he might be later today ... as he is (like many from UE, is in portland) [13:43] bzoltan, but it didnt land in rtm yet [13:43] Saviq: ah so you have branched and will use branches, then yes, you are not a good target to try; remember to deliver early and often though so you dont risk big issues with this [13:43] so no worries [13:44] bzoltan, shouldnt even affect you atm [13:44] ogra_: and should not [13:44] asac, no I won't [13:44] asac, use branches [13:44] well, it wont until mvo lands it there [13:44] ogra_: it does [13:44] bzoltan, how, it didnt land yet [13:44] ogra_, Saviq: the auto-mechanism will give the ability to request dual-silos (if there are silos free) that would basically build stuff for ubuntu and just with every build do the same for the RTM silo [13:44] bzoltan, note that we dont really care for ubuntu anymore [13:44] Just source-only for the RTM ones [13:44] ogra_: it is on the image since #205 [13:44] bzoltan, it isnt in image 6 [13:45] bzoltan, ignore ubuntu ... [13:45] rtm is our target [13:45] file a bug (which already happened i think) and wait for mvo to fix ubuntu and then to land in rtm [13:46] Saviq: right, then what i said was that you could try landing in rtm with source copying now; just talk to sil [13:46] ogra_: so that is the ubuntu-touch/ubuntu-rtm/14.09-proposed [13:46] bzoltan, exactly [13:46] yes [13:46] ogra_: thank you [13:46] :) [13:46] bzoltan, i agree its a bit annoying that we leave ubuntu broken now though [13:47] but there are rtm channels for all devices [13:47] broken? [13:47] asac, yep [13:47] we dont want to ignore ubuntu [13:47] asac: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/phablet-tools/+bug/1360582 [13:47] Ubuntu bug 1360582 in phablet-tools (Ubuntu) "Can't manually install clicks "Signature verification error" since #205" [Undecided,Confirmed] [13:48] bzoltan: how does this block you? [13:48] asac: since the ubuntu image 205 developers can not run their apps on the device [13:48] asac, you need to hack round it by breaking security [13:48] you can install clicks locally ... but not by using the right tools [13:48] right [13:49] so ignoring ubuntu doesnt help as we have the same on rtm i am sure [13:49] ogra_: as root and not as phablet [13:49] asac, only once that landed in rtm [13:49] which didnt happen [13:49] bzoltan, yeah [13:50] ogra_: and we do not do that :) [13:50] bzoltan, well, as a workaround you can use sudo ... surely not a long term solution :) [13:50] but if i would be a dev iÄd rather use sudo than waiting a day for a fix :) [13:51] bzoltan, i think we sadly cant roll back ... so we need mvo to fix it [13:51] ogra_: it is not about what a dev would do... it is about releasing a known to be broken and super ugly hack to LTS [13:51] the server signs the packages now [13:51] so rolling back might mmake them uninstallable [13:52] bzoltan, oh, i didnt mean you should hack your scripts ... just tell devs how to work around it manually [13:52] ogra_: I would roll back without hesitation. I respect and love mvo .. but even he should consider what effects the changes he commits have on the app development. [13:52] a fix has to happen and will eventually [13:52] bzoltan, but rolling back will break even worse [13:52] making the store unusable [13:53] at least thats what i suspect [13:53] so if w dont have this on stable [13:53] it means you cannot install apps on stable? [13:53] err [13:53] rtm :) [13:53] ogra_: it is not about working around .. our customers expect the "green triangle" run the app they edit. Most of them do not even know what adb and click tools are. [13:53] :) [13:53] * asac hits is heads [13:53] asac, can you ? try it [13:53] ogra_: well, if it works, we can back it out [13:53] no? [13:54] asac, right, someone on rtm needs to install a click from the store and verify [13:54] if that works fine we can also roll back === mandel|lunch is now known as mandel [13:54] ogra_: does it matter whether its a webapp or a native? [13:54] ogra_: let's hope that not so many developers update to the 205+ image [13:54] https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/rtm-14.09-changes/2014-August/thread.html shows the new click definitely didnt land yet [13:54] asac, no, just a click package with the new gpg signing from the store [13:54] bzoltan: we've already had our own core apps developers hit by this [13:54] people working on our own apps [13:55] ogra_: which one can i pick? [13:55] asac: ^ [13:55] do you know? [13:55] asac, any ? === Guest9436 is now known as renatu [13:55] i installed delta [13:55] webapp [13:55] popey: yeps.. [13:55] if click doesnt bail you shoudl eb fine [13:55] and that worked on r6 [13:55] cool [13:55] well, then we should be able to roll back [13:55] can someone check that its really signed? [13:55] beuno should be able tto tell you i think [13:55] popey: do you have a better example i could validate on rtm branch to be sure that the backout will not break app install by default? [13:56] asac: a better example of what? [13:56] /me thinks all packages are auto-signed now on the store side [13:56] its just the question if click bails on that or not [13:56] popey: of an app that might not be installable with the old click that doenst check signatures [13:56] but it seems it doesnt [13:56] yeah [13:56] i could install the "delta webapp" on r6 [13:56] so we should be fine [13:56] ack [13:56] Is it about reverting click? [13:57] asac: no, it's that people developing our apps locally in qtc are having difficulty with their apps [13:57] (and hope that ,mvo shows up soon :P ) [13:57] sil2100, yes [13:57] asac: e.g. clock, calendar, weather, calculator, music etc [13:57] popey, they shouldnt even have noticed [13:57] if you get trunk and develop in qtc, then push to phone to debug [13:57] If yes then I would ne +1 if it doesn't break anything in the store, which I was afraid from the start [13:57] ogra_: why? [13:57] popey, nothing of that is in rtm [13:57] :P [13:57] means they use the wrong image [13:57] uh, hang fire a moment [13:57] right [13:57] :P [13:57] this bug is on #205, the nexus 4 image [13:57] so 1. lets back this out from devel [13:58] popey, right [13:58] 2. lets mvoe devs to rtm [13:58] which _all_ the developer use [13:58] popey, devs should target rtm since last week [13:58] popey: app devs should move to rtm now [13:58] or soonish [13:58] since the announcement that we all switch our focus to rtm [13:58] well, it would be nice if we didn't have an utterly confused messaging in that regard! [13:58] some can stay on devel of course to continue dogfooding that it doesnt break [13:58] popey, did we ? [13:58] ogra_: I can prepare the source packages with the revert - do we have certainty that a revert will not cause any new issues? [13:58] * ogra_ saw several announcements [13:58] where? [13:59] on tubuntu-phone ? [13:59] link? [14:00] [Ubuntu-phone] ANNOUNCEMENT: Landing team - RTM landings now officially open! [14:00] thats the subject [14:00] Nothing in there suggests that core apps developers should reflash their phone. [14:00] unless I missed it [14:01] well, probably asac could send a clearification mail then [14:01] as a higher entity :) [14:02] My e-mail was only from the landing perspective ;) [14:02] given none of the clicks are in the archive or via ci train, the mail only addresses individuals affected by those changes. [14:02] exactly [14:03] robru: sil2100: is there a way to use that citrain tool with rtm silos? [14:03] popey: ogra_: i will wait until the initial dust around rtm/devel fork has settled; then send a call to recommend switching channel for dogfooding and app development target baseline [14:03] ok [14:03] I didn't send out an official annoucement since back then I didn't have clarification of what the procedures are to be [14:04] popey: ogra_: in the end it shouldnt' matter much; popey could tell them that rtm branch might be better from stability point of view etc. as landings get more thorough testing there [14:04] also app devs probably never wanted to run devel-proposed btw [14:04] yeah, they totally do! [14:04] popey: they run devel-proposed? [14:04] e.g. clock depends on new / fixed features in EDS [14:04] asac, they have to [14:04] yeah, all of them. [14:04] devel is like debian stable to them [14:05] ogra_: so, I'll prepare the revert packages in case we want that, and then you can simply pull that in and dput to the archive [14:05] right, thats something we should fix. folks should only temporarily switch to-proposd [14:05] asac, how else would you verify your changes against the latest image ? [14:05] to validate that a fix in there helps [14:05] that would only work if we had way more promotions [14:05] besides that dont be on -proposed as that is wild west with reressions potentially busting you [14:05] sil2100, ok [14:05] and yes, more promotions could help, but then they could also temporarily switch to -proposed if they need sometihng now [14:06] anyhow, later [14:06] * popey gets back to holiday [14:06] asac, if the last promotion is a week old you are way to much behind to make sure your changes work against latest [14:06] and nobody switches temporary :) [14:07] ogra_: thats good feedback; folks said we wanted to allow longer periods of non-promotion s they can self organize to fix their issues [14:07] but thef act that we never had any promotion without TRAINCON-0 [14:08] well, we had a pretty bad cycle wrt promotions and traincon [14:08] that needs to become better next round [14:08] sows taht their i can self organize claim is true on a micro level, but not on a golballevel [14:08] we need someting beteween -2 and -0 [14:08] and promote even more broken with more exceptions ? [14:08]