[06:00]  * tsimonq2 is gone: 
[08:00] <sil2100> jibel: hey! Looking at the silos that landed on Friday and which we would still need to land, it seems we'd need silo 41 and silo 36 still, right?
[08:01] <sil2100> jibel: 36 seems like a big change that would touch a lot of components... did you guys start testing the latest rc-proposed image already, or are we waiting for the mir silo?
[08:01] <sil2100> (by big change I mean 'mir')
[08:06] <jibel> sil2100, morning
[08:06] <jibel> sil2100, yes we still need 41 and 36
[08:07] <jibel> sil2100, 41 didn't land due to a server side issue
[08:07] <sil2100> 36 seems to be ready for QA at least now I suppose
[08:07] <jibel> sil2100, 36 didn't land because some webbrowser AP test failed and we wanted a confirmation that it was not due to the silo
[08:07] <jibel> sil2100, it's ready now yes
[08:08] <jibel> sil2100, we'll also land 13 for pd today
[08:08] <sil2100> jibel: yeah, saw Kevin's e-mail about it - ok, let's at least wait for the sign-off of mir
[08:08] <jibel> sil2100, do you do a snapshot for pd too?
[08:08] <sil2100> jibel: do you think it's worth it to kick a new image after mir is released?
[08:08] <jibel> sil2100, probably
[08:08] <sil2100> jibel: not really, but I can do one anytime when needed
[08:09] <sil2100> I'll prepare the snapshot for touch when we land mir
[08:11] <jibel> sil2100, about devel-proposed, I think you can promote it. scopes don't work, ringtones, notifications sound and brightness panels don't work in system-settings, the rest is okay-ish
[08:11] <jibel> I'll file bugs for system-settings
[08:12] <jibel> sil2100, you'll build the RC when mir lands?
[08:13] <jibel> sil2100, also we'll need new translations at some point this week
[08:13] <jibel> maybe tomorrow
[08:15] <sil2100> jibel: ok, thanks!
[08:15] <sil2100> jibel: yeah, I suppose we'll do the RC with the mir landing and then unblock rc-proposed normally
[08:15] <sil2100> We'll cherry pick the in-app payments bits then
[08:38] <sil2100> jibel: I saw an e-mail that the China team already started testing the weekend image - the mir landing will probably invalidate most of those tests, right?
[08:43] <sil2100> jibel: since I could copy the current rc-proposed image to RC as well, but we'll need mir anyway so not sure if it makes sense
[08:48] <jibel> sil2100, we have 3 images to test + pd. We cannot afford 1 day of delay
[08:49] <jibel> sil2100, if mir lands today, we'll find any problem with the remaining tests. There is still one week of testing
[08:58] <sil2100> jibel: ok
[09:32] <jibel> sil2100, sorry google logged me out
[09:33] <jibel> trying to rejoin
[12:34] <jibel> bfiller, did you export the translations of the camera to LP? I cannot find the text of the new dialog
[12:34] <jibel> bfiller, if it is not done, I think you should publish the new camera app anyway so it's on the RC build
[14:09] <sil2100> jibel, davmor2, rvr: mir published, thanks for the testing! I'll kick a new image once it published in the PPA
[14:09] <sil2100> *it's
[14:09] <jibel> thanks
[14:10] <jibel> bfiller, can you publish the camera app before sil2100 builds a new image?
[14:11] <jibel> ah, is it a public holiday in the US?
[14:13] <sil2100> Hope not!
[14:13] <jibel> sil2100, http://www.timeanddate.com/holidays/us/martin-luther-king-day
[14:39] <Mirv> robru: sil2100: I think the britney results should use the "forced by" things from normal autopkgtests, otherwise I don't ever get to land any Qt stuff because of various broken reverse dependency tests like KDE's: https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/static/britney/xenial/landing-060/excuses.html
[14:40] <Mirv> I don't know where to get them from, but at least kactivities-kf5, marble and rocs have been on those lists, making it possible for things to migrate in xenial
[14:44] <sil2100> jibel: I guess bfiller is gone, so I kick an image without the camera-app...
[14:44] <sil2100> Or do we have someone else that could do that?
[14:44] <sil2100> Elleo: ping
[14:46] <jibel> Kaleo, ^
[14:47] <jibel> Kaleo, do you have the power to publish the camera app?
[14:47] <sil2100> Kaleo, Elleo: hey, does anyone of you guys have the knowledge and permissions to upload camera-app to the store?
[14:47] <Kaleo> what?
[14:47] <Kaleo> ah
[14:48] <Kaleo> bfiller should be around extremely soon
[14:48] <Kaleo> we have a meeting in 10 minutes
[14:48] <jibel> okay, lets wait 10 min
[14:48] <Kaleo> and I don't think I can upload to the store, let me check
[14:49] <Mirv> sil2100: I might still have unless it's changed
[14:49] <Kaleo> I don't have the ability to upload
[14:49] <Mirv> but it seems people will be around anyway?
[14:52] <Mirv> so I have 3.0.0.614 .click here, I can try uploading it if wanted
[14:54] <davmor2> sil2100: no bregma so I'll let you know https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/875 passes
[14:54] <Elleo> sil2100: not something I really know about I'm afraid, I've not been involved in publishing any of the click apps we manage
[14:57] <sil2100> Mirv: oh
[14:57] <sil2100> jibel: you remember the version number you guys tested?
[14:57] <sil2100> Mirv: since bfiller and the US seem to have a national holiday today
[14:59] <jibel> sil2100, we tested what is attached to the silo
[15:00] <jibel> sil2100, http://people.canonical.com/~kaleo/camera/com.ubuntu.camera_3.0.0.ci805_armhf.click
[15:01] <sil2100> I wonder if that's the same as 3.0.0.614
[15:01] <Mirv> sil2100: the process known to me is that MP:s are merged to trunk at https://code.launchpad.net/~phablet-team/camera-app/trunk and a click package is automatically built on s-jenkins. I'd be somewhat wary of other methods of obtaining click packages.
[15:02] <sil2100> Mirv: I think I see the right change merged in
[15:02] <sil2100> So I suppose this is the right click that we would need
[15:02] <sil2100> (if it's auto-generated)
[15:02] <sil2100> jibel: what do you think? ^
[15:03] <jibel> sil2100, I've no idea, I don't know what Bill does to release a click
[15:03] <jibel> nor where he gets it from after we approved it
[15:03] <Kaleo> sil2100, no it's not the right click
[15:03] <Kaleo> he normally rebuilds it
[15:04] <jibel> sil2100, okay, lets wait tomorrow then. It'll go straight to stable and if anything breaks it'll be worse than losing a day of testing
[15:04] <Kaleo> it's a bank holiday in the US
[15:05] <jibel> sil2100, you can rebuild with mir, then another build tomorrow with the new camera app
[15:06] <sil2100> Ok then
[15:06] <jibel> Kaleo, do you know at least how to update the translation templates in LP. The new dialog is not in lp and cannot be translated.
[15:06] <jibel> ?
[15:07] <sil2100> Building
[15:10] <Mirv> the auto build from trunk is at http://s-jenkins.ubuntu-ci:8080/job/camera-app-click/
[15:10] <jibel> ChrisTownsend, davmor2 approved silo 13
[15:10] <ChrisTownsend> jibel: davmor2: Thanks!
[15:10] <davmor2> jibel: Ah I didn't ChrisTownsend on here and couldn't see bregma either so just let sil2100 know :)
[15:11] <davmor2> didn't see even
[15:11] <sil2100> \o/
[15:11] <ChrisTownsend> davmor2: Yeah, I just popped up online a little bit ago:)
[15:11] <sil2100> Will publish in a moment and then kick a new pd image
[15:11] <davmor2> and that'll be why then \o/
[15:12] <ChrisTownsend> sil2100: We have some packaging changes that *someone* will need to ack.
[15:12] <davmor2> ChrisTownsend: there are a rook load of issues with pd but none of them specifically related to the landing at hand :)
[15:13] <ChrisTownsend> davmor2: Ok, care to give any specifics?
[15:14] <Kaleo> jibel, I can check that
[15:26] <Kaleo> jibel, I update the pot file in trunk
[15:26] <Kaleo> jibel, hmmmm, I think it should update the launchpad translations apge
[15:26] <Kaleo> page*
[15:39] <Saviq> sil2100, what's ota9 status? can we land stuff yet?
[15:40] <sil2100> Saviq: one minute more, want the current image to finish pullin the packages, not sure if QA has enough resources for sign-off tho
[15:40] <sil2100> s/image/images
[15:42] <Saviq> sil2100, ack
[16:55] <sil2100> ChrisTownsend: ping
[16:55] <ChrisTownsend> sil2100: Hey, what's up?
[16:55] <sil2100> ChrisTownsend: hey! It's not a real problem, but I noticed you added a linux-image-generic dependency in libertine - I would like to know the reason for that :)
[16:55] <sil2100> (I'm reviewing the packaging diff)
[16:56] <ChrisTownsend> sil2100: So, for the lxc backend we only support unprivileged lxc's which only kernels >= 3.13 support.
[16:57] <sil2100> Ok, makes sense
[16:57] <ChrisTownsend> sil2100: Cool, thanks!
[17:06] <jibel> sil2100, 222 contains the mir landing nothing else?
[17:09] <sil2100> jibel: yes (just triple confirmed in the manifests)
[17:09] <sil2100> jibel: only mir packages have changed
[17:27] <sil2100> davmor2, jibel: who should I poke to get the latest music-app click for OTA-9?
[17:27] <sil2100> ahayzen I suppose?
[17:27]  * ahayzen hides
[17:27] <sil2100> ahayzen: piiing ;)
[17:28] <sil2100> ahayzen: could you share teh click with me?
[17:28] <jibel> sil2100, http://people.canonical.com/~alan/music/20160114/com.ubuntu.music_2.3.931_all.click
[17:28] <sil2100> Thanks :)
[17:28] <ahayzen> ^^ has issues btw :-)
[17:28] <sil2100> Ouch
[17:29] <ahayzen> we've fixed all the issues that were found, just trying to make jenkins happy now
[17:29] <ahayzen> seems it can't find the keyboard sometimes
[17:29] <jibel> ahayzen, we want to make sure that if it's ever published to the store before OTA9, users of the stable release won't see the update
[17:30] <ahayzen> jibel, ah yes, we bumped the framework, so in theory they shouldn't
[17:30] <ahayzen> but good to test :-)
[17:30] <jibel> ahayzen, yeah but better safe than sorry :)
[17:36] <sil2100> Cannot install com.ubuntu.music_2.3.931_all.click: Framework "ubuntu-sdk-15.04.3-qml" not present on system (use --force-missing-framework option to override)
[17:36] <sil2100> I guess we're safe ;)
[17:36] <ahayzen> \o/
[17:37] <sil2100> jibel: ok, anyway, let me copy the current rc-proposed image to rc, for now please use the rc-proposed version
[17:37] <sil2100> Since it will take a while
[17:43] <jibel> sil2100, when you copy to rc you tag it ota9?
[17:44] <sil2100> jibel: hm, I guess I could, although in theory it won't be our final candidate for sure - you want to test the tagging right now as well?
[17:44] <sil2100> Well, there's no problem in having 3 OTA-9 images in rc since that's what RC is about
[17:45] <sil2100> Oh, maybe I'll tag it OTA-9-rc?
[17:48] <jibel> sil2100, no, i was just curious
[17:49] <sil2100> I suppose a convention of tagging it as OTA-x-rc is a good idea anyway, tags are not carried over with image copies
[17:50] <sil2100> I'm importing the new chinese tarball to the -proposed-proposed channel now
[18:42] <Saviq> sil2100, are we there yet? (pop!)
[19:13] <sil2100> Saviq: yep!
[19:15] <Saviq> \o/
[19:23] <sil2100> jibel, davmor2: I copied all rc-proposed candidate images to rc (phased percentage 0% for now) - all besides meizu.zh
[19:23] <sil2100> Since meizu.zh is still not ready because of the custom I suppose
[19:23] <sil2100> I can copy it over anytime
[19:25] <davmor2> sil2100: \o/
[19:25] <sil2100> Let me set the phasing for all to 100%
[22:11] <robru> michi: ping
[22:12] <dobey> "burned version number" ?
[22:12] <dobey> that's a new one
[22:12] <robru> dobey: it means the destination archive has a package with the same version number but different source contents.
[22:13] <robru> dobey: happens when two conflicting silos build on the same day (thus having same version numbers built), one gets published, the other one is "burned"
[22:17] <robru> dobey: strictly speaking this was always a potential problem with conflicting train silos, it's just that only recently the train started detecting & reporting the situation.
[22:19] <dobey> right. think it would be better to just use the same error message one would get from a package upload
[22:20] <robru> dobey: what, "version NNN not found in changelog"? that can't fire because the version *is* found in the changelog, it's just the wrong one.
[22:21] <dobey> robru: no. i mean, when you try to dput a package to a PPA for example, that has the same version and different contents, you get an error message saying it has different contents
[22:22] <robru> dobey: can you file a bug with the exact error text you want?
[22:22] <dobey> or maybe for ci train, it could be more explicit somehow, stating which request was landed
[22:23] <robru> dobey: it doesn't really have a way of knowing what silo the upload at dest came from.
[22:24] <dobey> well, i'll file a bug describing what i think the problem is, i guess
[22:24] <dobey> ah
[22:24] <robru> dobey: it's just checking the version number at dest, it could come from anywhere really, not even necessarily a train upload. just "oops, source contents don't match even though version is the same"
[22:25] <robru> so it indicates it 'needs rebuild' because there's no way to publish this silo with this version as-is
[22:26] <dobey> sure. i understand the reasoning for having an error there.
[22:26] <dobey> just trying to think of a nicer way to describe it more explicitly :)
[22:27] <robru> cool
[22:38] <robru> bbl, lunch