=== attente_ is now known as attente | ||
Logan | can someone please reject my musescore upload in Xenial? I did the version numbering incorrectly :( | 02:23 |
---|---|---|
Logan | please reject the first one and approve the second one :3 | 02:26 |
=== jamespag` is now known as jamespage | ||
flexiondotorg | infinity, Morning | 11:36 |
flexiondotorg | infinity, I've got a couple of package deletions for Yakkety. | 11:36 |
flexiondotorg | https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mate-netspeed/+bug/1584769 | 11:36 |
ubot5 | Launchpad bug 1584769 in mate-netspeed (Ubuntu) "Please remove mate-netspeed from the Yakkety archive, it is now included in mate-applets" [Undecided,New] | 11:36 |
flexiondotorg | https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-main-menu/+bug/1584767 | 11:36 |
ubot5 | Launchpad bug 1584767 in gnome-main-menu (Ubuntu) "Please remove gnome-main-menu from the Yakkety archive, it is obsolete" [Undecided,New] | 11:36 |
xnox | hello, please reject "s390-tools (xenial-proposed/main) [1.34.0-0ubuntu8 => 1.34.0-0ubuntu8.1] (no packageset)" | 11:48 |
xnox | will reupload with one more bugfix | 11:48 |
apw | xnox, done | 11:57 |
xnox | thanks | 11:58 |
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
sergiusens | cjwatson hey, sorry to bug you but I uploaded a package on Friday and can't find it, this is all I have "[ubuntu/xenial-proposed] snapcraft 2.10 (Waiting for approval)" | 13:24 |
cjwatson | sergiusens: it's in https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/xenial/+queue?queue_state=1 awaiting SRU team approval | 13:25 |
sergiusens | cjwatson I swear I checked there :-/ Thanks! | 13:26 |
Trevinho | bdmurray: I got emails about possible SRU regresisons (multiple mails actually :-)), but I think they're nothuing new. | 14:28 |
bdmurray | Trevinho: I agree about the regressions not being new issues. I'll look into why you got multiple emails too. | 14:34 |
sergiusens | infinity hi there, can I get snapcraft allowed into xenial-proposed? | 14:49 |
apw | sergiusens, the exception for that has all sorts of QA requirements, where are you documenting they are complete? I don't see anything in the first couple of bugs. | 15:47 |
sergiusens | apw are you talking about https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#Snapcraft ? | 15:50 |
apw | sergiusens, yep that one | 15:55 |
sergiusens | apw everything change lands with a test in code (snapcraft.tests for unit tests, integration_tests and/or demo_tests) | 15:55 |
apw | sergiusens, right but the SRU is supposed to indicate that all of the steps on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SnapcraftUpdates have been completed | 15:56 |
elopio | apw: QA here. Everything for this release is tested in autopkgtests. Once it gets to proposed, I do a manual verification. | 15:57 |
sergiusens | apw but our package hasn't been built yet, it is stuck in the unnapproved queue | 15:57 |
apw | sergiusens, i was unable to find that easily, so i was asking where as i was sure infinity will ask | 15:57 |
sergiusens | apw https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/xenial/+queue?queue_state=1&queue_text=snapcraft | 15:57 |
apw | sergiusens, ahh ok the write up there is not well worded as i took it to mean before queueig, and yet in there is says -proposed, so ... ignore me | 15:58 |
sergiusens | elopio mind rewording a bit ^ ? | 15:59 |
elopio | apw: we do parts before it gets to proposed, and parts after it gets to proposed. I thought that by proposing it, we were saying that we followed the process. | 15:59 |
elopio | apw: I'm happy to make this clearer, just not sure how. Should I comment on every bug the tests we did before proposing it? | 16:01 |
xnox | elopio, apw, sergiusens - autopkgtests do run from silos. you should get a silo assigned, upload for xenial sru, which will build and run packages. | 16:19 |
xnox | then sru team can copy that into -proposed. | 16:19 |
xnox | autopkgtests will run again, and things will publish in -proposed | 16:20 |
xnox | and then migrate to -updates if all is good. | 16:20 |
xnox | please use silos in the future, and then you can satisfy everything upfront. | 16:20 |
elopio | xnox: we run the autopkgtests in jenkins. That works the same as putting the package in the silo, afaik. I'm not sure what we will win by that extra step. | 16:21 |
xnox | elopio, not needing jenkins =) and the fact that SRU team has no visibility into jenkins, but do have visibility into http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/ | 16:22 |
xnox | and that you don't need to block on stable release updates team accepting your package, to see if it will be accepted. as silo assgniment is self-service. | 16:22 |
xnox | and it's the same binary that will be used into the -updates pocket, as the one build in silo. | 16:23 |
xnox | things built in jenkins, are obviously thrown away =) | 16:23 |
elopio | xnox: so if we put the package in a silo, and it passes the autopkgtests there, it will get to proposed without any manual step? | 16:23 |
xnox | elopio, there is manual step still. but there are less questions about those =) | 16:23 |
xnox | as in, it's more trivial to process then opaque thing. as above. | 16:24 |
xnox | *than | 16:24 |
elopio | xnox: if it simplifies things, I'm not against doing that. But I still don't understand some things, like, I don't see any results from silos in autopkgtest.ubuntu.com. | 16:25 |
elopio | what we are trying to explain in the SRU exception page is that no PR lands into master if the autopkgtests don't pass. | 16:26 |
sergiusens | xnox I cannot dput to silos | 17:26 |
xnox | sergiusens, i know i can. | 17:29 |
sergiusens | xnox we are trying to move people away from the equation, not add them | 17:30 |
xnox | sergiusens, do you release from git/bzr branches? silos can just take that, merge branches for you and throw things into a silo... | 17:30 |
sergiusens | xnox I can dput to the archives but not that train ting | 17:30 |
xnox | sergiusens, and e.g. i think it's easy to get right sto dput thing sinto silos. | 17:30 |
sergiusens | xnox yes, git branches on gitub | 17:30 |
xnox | sergiusens, e.g. i can dput to silos. | 17:30 |
sergiusens | github | 17:30 |
xnox | silos can take things from github direct, without $someone in the middle generating things and dput things | 17:31 |
sergiusens | xnox I don't want to depend on people being around, I already have to chase people down to get the darn package accepted. | 17:31 |
xnox | sergiusens, talk to sil2100 to get dput permissions into silos. | 17:31 |
sergiusens | xnox does it still mangle changelogs and versions? | 17:31 |
xnox | sergiusens, yes, that's what i'm trying to reduce too! | 17:31 |
sergiusens | xnox last I talked to him he said it wasn't possible | 17:31 |
xnox | silos are entirely self-service. | 17:31 |
xnox | i'm sure it is, cause i can dput stuff =/ | 17:32 |
xnox | into silos | 17:32 |
sergiusens | xnox yeah, they let core devs dput to silos, no one else | 17:32 |
xnox | sergiusens, oh y, r u not core dev? =) | 17:32 |
sergiusens | xnox no, just ppu | 17:33 |
sil2100 | sergiusens: hey! Policies changed a bit, if you have PPU access for some packages then we can give you direct-silo upload permissions | 17:41 |
sil2100 | sergiusens: we generally do not want to give those powers right now to people that we don't know | 17:41 |
sil2100 | sergiusens: let me add you in a minute | 17:41 |
sergiusens | sil2100 xnox ok, I'll do that for the next upload then | 17:49 |
sergiusens | I consider this one running under the agreed upon course | 17:49 |
sergiusens | it would be good to see the StableReleaseUpdates wiki page mention the fact that silos are now required | 17:49 |
sergiusens | slangasek ^ | 17:49 |
xnox | sergiusens, they are not required. | 17:49 |
xnox | but they help you, satisfy your requirements. | 17:50 |
sergiusens | xnox ah, then I'll probably pass. We already satisfy our requirements | 17:50 |
* apw regrets muddying the water | 17:50 | |
xnox | general srus are one-off, for unique bugs, and hence upload to unapproved queue, wait forever, test whenever, release whenever is good enough. | 17:50 |
xnox | sergiusens, well, not quite. | 17:50 |
sergiusens | xnox we have an exception | 17:50 |
xnox | sergiusens, silo is self-service, and will allow you to do all the testing sans las publications, and you will find your reviewes from a silo copy of binaries to be done reqlly quickly. | 17:51 |
xnox | instead of always being stuck for 1-5 weeks in the SRU unapproved queue. | 17:51 |
xnox | even though you do satisfy requirements. | 17:51 |
sergiusens | xnox so far we've gone from initial upload to publication in 3 days | 17:51 |
xnox | #toolong =) | 17:52 |
infinity | xnox: Err, since when do silo SRUs get reviewed "really quickly"? | 17:52 |
xnox | silos get same day publication, and you essentially can do manual testing straight away, and autopkgtest testing is done straight away. | 17:52 |
xnox | infinity, you are back =) | 17:52 |
infinity | xnox: The SRU team tends to hate reviewing copies. :P | 17:52 |
xnox | infinity, how alive are you? =) | 17:52 |
xnox | or just really good meds? | 17:52 |
* apw hits the rewind time button, and keeps quiet | 17:53 | |
infinity | I'm about 60% alive. | 17:53 |
* xnox passes infinity +5 hp healing potion | 17:53 | |
xnox | infinity, i guess it's up to you if you want to see bi-weekly snappy SRU as a source dput, or a copy. | 17:54 |
xnox | one might not build, might fail tests, might fail autopkgtest - the other one managed to pass all that, just before a copy. | 17:54 |
cjwatson | xnox: it might be a good idea to check what the SRU team wants before spending ages advising people what to do :-) | 18:00 |
cjwatson | the problem with copies is mainly the age-old one that it's a pain to get diffs for them | 18:00 |
cjwatson | (which is an LP bug, and so my problem, sure, but it's Hard) | 18:01 |
infinity | cjwatson: Soyuz Redesign! | 18:09 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!