[07:37] <dholbach> good morning
[15:40] <roman___> Hello,
[15:41] <roman___> I'm trying to get though procedur https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages
[15:41] <roman___> to include new package.
[15:41] <roman___> Quoted: "Join the #ubuntu-motu channel on irc.freenode.net and talk with the MOTU. It's good to do this early on, to get advice on how to package (avoid common mistakes), to find out if your package is likely to be accepted (before you invest a lot of work in packaging it), and to find mentors willing to sponsor your package or to point you in the right direction. "
[15:42] <roman___> I have created preliminary package, needs-packaging bug is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1542258
[15:42] <roman___> Open questions:
[15:43] <roman___> * software is python port of existing private software, not yet hosted on opensource platform. Is adding to launchpad as bazaar project sensible?
[15:45] <roman___> * How to get the review process going (Note: I have passed the review procedure once by myself on the partial package. Has to be redone now)
[15:46] <roman___> * It would be great, to make it to Xenial, because this is also the release we are goning to use on our machines. Hence if in Xenial, our support of open-source package (bug fixing) via Ubuntu will be better, as we also use the package in house.
[15:48] <rbasak> roman___: Xenial's feature freeze is on Thursday. If you're not familiar with the process and are only starting now, I don't think it's likely you'll get it into Xenial.
[15:48] <teward> i was about to say that heh
[15:48] <teward> rbasak: ninja'd ;)
[15:49] <rbasak> New packages are given some leeway by the release team though as they're unlikely to regress anything. However, you're still giving less time for testing before release, and we want the release to be good.
[15:49] <rbasak> Usually the path to get software into Ubuntu is via Debian.
[15:50] <rbasak> Adding a public VCS is always sensible. It doesn't have to be Launchpad, though that's useful for tighter bug tracking integration.
[15:50] <rbasak> Launchpad supports git hosting now too.
[15:50] <roman___> The package is already completed, builds in PPA, is uploaded.
[15:50] <roman___> My 2nd review is missing
[15:50] <roman___> and of course the Ubuntu review.#
[15:51] <rbasak> I haven't seen the packaging, but third party packaging with people unfamiliar with Debian and Ubuntu rarely meets policy requirements.
[15:51] <rbasak> Sorry I don't have time to look right now. Busy working on stuff with a deadline of two days to feature freeze.
[15:51] <roman___> @via Debian: I started mentoring procedure there already, but as I do not have so strong links to Debian community, everything is taking quite a while.
[15:52] <rbasak> Sure, and I appreciate that it's harder than it should be, both for Debian and for Ubuntu.
[15:52] <rbasak> But asking two days before feature freeze with a goal to get it into Xenial is unrealistic.
[15:52] <rbasak> Go for Xenial+1 and more people will be able to help at the start of the next cycle. You're asking less of them that way.
[15:53] <rbasak> (or do Xenial+1 and backports after Xenial's release or something).
[15:53] <roman___> @rbasak VCS: OK, so I'll push the sources there, Git is better as I'm already familiar with it.
[15:53] <rbasak> I'm not saying you can't get it into Xenial, just that it's a big ask right now.
[15:55] <roman___> @make it to xenial/big ask: I'm not so familiar with the procedures. So my first goal is to meet all the requirements for inclusion, no matter if xenial or later.
[15:55] <rbasak> Inclusion in Debian means automatically meeting the requirements for Ubuntu inclusion. So I'd focus on that side. (I appreciate it's not easy)
[15:56] <roman___> As package is really small and security was major design goal (e.g. I did the same auditing methods used for detection of last year Ubuntu LXC guest escape reeported by us (have to look up the 3 CVEs).
[15:56] <rbasak> I see you have filed an ITP. Get the packaging uploaded to mentors and ask for review.
[15:57] <roman___> It is already uploaded to mentors, but no responses yet.
[15:57] <rbasak> If it's already on Debian mentors and not making progress, Ubuntu will be more amenable to uploading ahead of Debian.
[15:58] <roman___> Making it to LTS would be great, but also I do not want to unnecessarily bind MOTU resources. So perhaps we could somehow sort out, what would be the top priorities by me to support MOTU procedure.
[15:59] <roman___> Is this correct? P0: get source to launchpad hosting; P1 run the 2nd review round; P2: fix issues found, update launchpad PPA and Debian mentoring platform package
[15:59] <roman___> And then?
[16:00] <rbasak> I would just focus on the review at mentors.
[16:01] <roman___> To avoid involving too many MOTUs in parallel, does it make sense to go into P2P comm instead (mail) of broadcast from now on.
[16:01] <roman___> @mentors: thanks for that, I'll try to wake them up.
[16:02] <roman___> After mentors completed, how long will procedure on Ubuntu side take to import?
[16:03] <teward> roman___: if it gets into Debian it will probably autosync into Ubuntu during the next development cycle
[16:03] <roman___> Ah, OK.
[16:04] <teward> provided it passes all Debian mentors' concerns, and is actually added *to* Debian
[16:06] <Rhonda> Anyone got an idea when the update for glibc is expected?
[16:06] <roman___> @ubottu: Assigned to me. I'll commit the source to launchpad git, add the links to changelog/control files, add the bug number to changelog (to fix the bug) and upload
[16:22] <rbasak> Rhonda: "no eta yet" from #ubuntu-hardened. I suggest following in there.
[16:23] <rbasak> roman___: please keep this public, here on IRC or on a public ML. Those not interested can ignore or filter. Otherwise overhead for others to catch up wastes time.
[16:24] <rbasak> roman___: if in Debian after FF, and the release team grant you an exception, a manual sync for a packager is trivial.
[16:24] <rbasak> for a package