[02:09] <persia> Maybe write a test case script?
[02:15] <karstensrage> for a PAM module?
[02:50] <karstensrage> i mean what do backporters do for things like python?
[02:50] <karstensrage> or just anything ?
[04:13] <persia> Typically more tighlyintegrated or deeper stack components are not backported: I do not mean this as discouragement, only apology foor the process.
[04:17] <karstensrage> its a really tough problem i totally acknowledge htat
[04:17] <karstensrage> if i could think of a test case i would
[04:18] <karstensrage> but pam modules are tricky business
[04:18] <karstensrage> they take over login type things, ssh, sudo. the source has a little app that you can use but you have to set it up
[05:29] <Arshid> hi
[14:36] <karstensrage> fantastic
[14:37] <karstensrage> the admin for backporters no longer works with ubuntu
[14:39] <karstensrage> it strikes me here that this process is perhaps a bit broken and maybe it needs to be discussed at a higher level, the concern here is that no one is really doing it, there is no defined process for how someone trying to get a backport done is supposed to do it, there is no defined process for what a backporter is supposed to do and everyone is too busy anyways
[14:45] <karstensrage> is there a way to up-level this discussion, there is severe dissonance in xenial pulling from unstable and whatever backports is
[14:48] <rbasak> karstensrage: there are four admins apparently: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-backporters/+members
[14:48] <rbasak> I believe at least one of them is still active.
[14:49] <karstensrage> rbasak, although i will if i have to, throwing darts at that list has not really been fruitful
[14:49] <rbasak> If there are delays, bring it up on the ubuntu-devel ML maybe? Perhaps more people on the backporters team are needed.
[14:50] <karstensrage> to be honest from the outside backporters seems dead
[14:50] <rbasak> So...help reawaken it? :)
[14:53] <karstensrage> ok seems like a very thin mailing list and im a bit frustrated at this point
[14:53] <karstensrage> not sure ranting will come off well
[14:53] <karstensrage> i honestly dont know how to frame this correctly for the ubuntu process itself
[14:54] <karstensrage> "hi ubuntu-devel, backports sucks, please fix, k thanks bye"
[15:00] <karstensrage> so i guess there is a fundamental problem that i cant figure out how to fix, and thats that you cant expect a  backporter (or really anyone; same with debian maintainers) to switch in some random context of whatever is being backported and "evaluate" things
[15:02] <karstensrage> so either you come up with some "process" which is either severely anemic to handle every case or just arbitrary superficial stuff
[15:03] <karstensrage> or you "fiddle dee dee, ill think about that tomorrow" the problem and get what you have today
[15:05] <karstensrage> if the "process" for upcoming LTS is just "whatever unstable did" i see that as valid for backports as well, its justifiable
[15:06] <karstensrage> this is like the reverse bike shed problem
[15:06] <karstensrage> youre trying to come up with a process to evaluate nuclear power plants
[15:06] <rbasak> That's a reasonable point.
[15:07] <karstensrage> thank you, rbasak the problem is if you dont address this, no one will volunteer to evaluate nuclear power plants... if you dont define some doable process, you cant expect backporters to do anything
[15:07] <karstensrage> which is exactly what you have
[15:11] <persia> karstensrage: So, the backports process has been created by the backporters: most things are self-organising, and waiting on some other thing tends not to work.
[15:12] <persia> reawakening sleeping teams is more likely to be successful than suggesting someone else do that.
[15:13] <rbasak> karstensrage: the process is well documented, no? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports
[15:13] <rbasak> Specifically https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBackports#Approving_a_Backport
[15:18] <karstensrage> rbasak, but those are all just "statements"?
[15:27] <rbasak> I don't follow.
[15:37] <karstensrage> rbasak, just say "the package installs correctly."
[15:41] <karstensrage> no one is going to check that, or even knows what it means
[15:41] <karstensrage> right?
[17:53] <karstensrage> is that right rbasak ?
[18:23] <rbasak> karstensrage: I would take "correctly" to mean "without errors". For each binary package, not just one.
[18:25] <karstensrage> yes of course
[18:25] <karstensrage> ive already tested all that stuff including that it works but i know a lot about PAM
[18:25] <karstensrage> on all environments
[18:28] <karstensrage> the ppa's have been in launchpad forever... i just recently updated the ppa's with the latest that actually got into debian and xenial, and tested them AGAIN
[18:28] <karstensrage> but its all irrelevant to a backporter
[18:28] <karstensrage> if they existed
[18:29] <karstensrage> persia, suggested a test script.. im wracking my brain trying to figure out if thats even possible
[18:29] <karstensrage> but it would be a huge effort and with no commitment from someone that could actually backport stuff, its hard to justify that
[18:30] <persia> My idea was that it would be easier to get testers that way, but yes, it ultimately needs a backporter.
[18:32] <karstensrage> persia, the issue with a "test" if it could even be done (still thinking about it) is that who is it for. if its for me, ive already actually installed the ppa's and the xenial stuff
[18:32] <karstensrage> and configured it and it works
[18:32] <karstensrage> if its for some random backporter with no context of PAM or what it entails, the test just says "YES"
[18:32] <karstensrage> so its the same as me saying "YES"
[18:33] <karstensrage> of course the devil is in the details but the problem is working out those details is what the backporter actually wants to do, but it cant scale
[18:34]  * karstensrage sighs
[19:06] <persia> Yep :/
[21:16] <karstensrage> so i unassigned micahg and ill try the mailing list to ask for someone to help
[21:16] <karstensrage> im willing to provide any technical assistance to a backporter to understand PAM, configure it
[21:17] <karstensrage> but given the ease with which xenial was just "done" im hesitant without some commitment on the other side