[09:08] <dkessel> ballooons: just fyi - if there is any test automation meeting today, i wont be able to participate
[11:52] <balloons> dkessel, ack
[16:24] <balloons> ping svij
[16:25] <svij> balloons: pong
[16:25] <balloons> svij, so nuclearbob is going to be hosting things :-) I'm working through the next steps, and I'm curious if you have any code from how you setup the jobs
[16:26] <balloons> I was thinking the jobs could all simply pull from an lp branch. I'll setup a new project on lp under the testcase admins as drivers
[16:26] <svij> uh, no. I only tried running the tests the "manual" way.
[16:26] <balloons> ahh ;-0
[16:27] <balloons> ok, so it'll be blank at first, heh
[16:27] <svij> in the READmE of ubiquity there is a tutorial how to setup the jenkins slave afair
[16:29] <balloons> right, indeed there is
[16:29] <svij> I didn't check if that still works
[16:30] <balloons> nuclearbob found this trying to run it: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubiquity/+bug/1487098
[16:31] <svij> my tests with the cloud instances didn't get that far ;)
[16:33] <svij> brb (dinner)
[17:05] <svij> er
[17:16] <DanChapman> balloons: svij, hey o/ so I have the tests nearly up and running again \o/ Just the manual partition step to fix and they should be all back to normal
[17:16] <svij> cool!
[17:17] <balloons> DanChapman, oO!!!
[17:17] <balloons> high-five!
[17:17] <DanChapman> balloons: hmmm bug 1487098 looks like it is for kubuntu??
[17:17] <balloons> lol DanChapman
[17:17] <balloons> I guess we'll have to confirm with nuclearbob if indeed he was launching kubuntu
[17:19] <DanChapman> the line before the traceback shows "Aug 20 11:22:06 hostname ubiquity[4050]: Exception in KDE frontend (invoking crash handler):" I havn't hit that issue with the iso's i've been using
[17:23] <balloons> right, I saw the same after you mentioned it. I'm guessing that's it
[18:27] <nuclearbob> balloons: I was just running the run_ubiquity script
[19:54] <balloons> nuclearbob, was it starting the qt version then? seems odd
[19:55] <nuclearbob> balloons: indeed. Not sure how to get it to use the gtk version
[19:55] <balloons> DanChapman, thoughts ^^?
[20:07] <DanChapman> balloons: nuclearbob IIRC ubiquity just queries /cdrom/.disk/info to determine the flavor in use for the install and will switch gtk/qt based on that. What flavor iso were you using nuclearbob?
[20:07] <nuclearbob> DanChapman: I installed using a normal unity-based image, but that was some time and several upgrades ago
[20:14] <DanChapman> nuclearbob: oh right, you ran run_ubiquity locally? and not in a vm? If so I would advise against doing that as run_ubiquity will launch ubiquity as root and bad things could happen
[20:14] <nuclearbob> DanChapman: okay, good to know. I'll try it in a vm next, thanks
[20:29] <balloons> so DanChapman, I assume you have an MP that will need reviewed for ubuquity right?
[20:30] <DanChapman> balloons: yeah I will need to get someone to review it. Who would be best to ping to get it reviewed?
[20:32] <balloons> DanChapman, my guess is cjwatson and/or cyphermox
[20:33] <DanChapman> cool beans, well I'll just request "Ubuntu Installer team" to review and ping one of them to get it on their radar.
[20:36] <balloons> rigjt
[20:36] <balloons> awesome!
[20:37] <cyphermox> good evening
[20:37] <DanChapman> balloons: thinking about it, it might be wise to initially start running the tests from my (future) branch then it will be easier to get quicker fixes in to test rather than bothering cjwatson/cyphermox with loads of little fixes. Once there deemed stable enough then propose a merge? What's your thoughts?
[20:38] <cyphermox> what is it that you are trying to do?
[20:38] <balloons> DanChapman, mmm.. that could also be a thing. I suspect your they'll want confirmation your fixes work, which you have. But there might be more work invovled with making them work in jenkins
[20:39] <balloons> hey cyphermox. DanChapman has updated the failing AP tests for ubiquity
[20:39] <cyphermox> the failing AP tests?
[20:39] <cyphermox> http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/u/ubiquity/
[20:39] <cyphermox> do you mean the image promotion tests?
[20:42]  * cyphermox 's brain defaults to acronym["AP"] =  "access point", needs a bit more context :)
[20:44] <DanChapman> cyphermox: "autopilot tests" :-) https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/view/Ubiquity/view/All/
[20:45] <DanChapman> balloons: I think last time we intitially got the jenkins runs going off a seperate branch before switching them to trunk once they were running correctly
[20:45] <cyphermox> guess once or twice every 9 months it's good to run these tests ;)
[20:46] <cyphermox> DanChapman: let me know when you're done, but do you need to change things in ubiquity to fix this?
[20:47] <balloons> DanChapman, I believe you are correct. I'm ok with that idea, but I don't think it's a bad idea to get other folks invovled so they know abou tit
[20:47] <balloons> Little changes are easier to digest
[20:48] <DanChapman> cyphermox: ok great.... no I havn't needed to change anything in ubiquity just in the tests themselves and the testrunner
[20:49] <cyphermox> ok
[20:50] <cyphermox> knock yourself out. anything we can find automatically before release makes me want to give you beer, if you're into that :)
[20:52] <cyphermox> DanChapman: there's the image promotion tests that could also use some careful reviewing / fixes, looks like they sometimes pass when the image doesn't boot (and don't test much anyway), and sometimes fail for no reason.
[20:53] <DanChapman> balloons: well i'm not fussed either way, Getting other folks involved would be awesome so we should probably make it as open to that as possible. (i.e just do trunk :-) )
[20:53] <cyphermox> I started looking, and the few tests that are already created look pretty good, it would just be a matter of making sure they are consistent and truthful, and enabled
[20:53] <balloons> DanChapman, ahh right.. collaboration means put it in trunk!
[20:54] <cyphermox> and then there were other priorities, but I'll be back home this weekend and should have time to hack at it