[10:11] pitti, slangasek: i've expanded the info in LP: #1556685 and uploaded the oce SRU again [10:11] Launchpad bug 1556685 in oce (Ubuntu Xenial) "[SRU] Wrong installation path (0.16 instead of 0.17)" [Undecided,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1556685 === pietroalbini_ is now known as pietroalbini [15:51] bdmurray or slangasek care to approve snapcraft into xenial-proposed? [15:52] sergiusens: I'll take a look [15:53] ty [15:54] hi all, can please someone help me with this: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/yakkety/update_excuses.html#account-plugins [15:54] the ubuntu-system-settings-online-accounts is already in yakkety [15:54] so I don't understand what the account-plugins package is waiting for [15:55] mardy: component mismatch [15:55] mardy: account-plugins is in main [15:55] mardy: ubuntu-system-settings-online-accounts is in universe [15:56] (and account-plugin-owncloud is in main too) [15:57] nacc: OK... so, if I wanted to move account-plugin-owncloud to universe, how should I do that? is it a matter of changing debian/control? [15:57] mardy: i think that's indicated here: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed for account-plugin-owncloud [15:57] mardy: no, someone (an AA? not sure where this permission starts to be granted) has to demote it [15:57] it's on the list already, afaict [15:59] nacc: OK. Would you suggest someone to ping, just to be sure? [15:59] AA, yes. I'll do it [15:59] cjwatson: thanks! (and noted who has those rights) [15:59] cjwatson: thanks! [16:00] sergiusens: Why is 2.11+16.10 still in proposed? [16:01] (done) [16:03] sergiusens: it looks like an amd64 test regression - http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/s/snapcraft/yakkety/amd64 [16:23] bdmurray oh, snapd in -proposed might be hitting us there (which also fails) [16:24] elopio care to look at that? ^ [16:25] sergiusens: I don't think its snapd related Get:24 http://ftpmaster.internal/ubuntu yakkety/main amd64 snapd amd64 2.0.2 [4,011 kB] [16:25] sergiusens: from https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-yakkety/yakkety/amd64/s/snapcraft/20160610_090430@/log.gz [16:27] bdmurray heh snapd on xenial-updates is already 2.0.5... [16:27] sergiusens: my concern is that if the yakkety autopkgtests are failing, they'll likely fail for xenial too [16:28] bdmurray the error is from snapd, not much we can do but disable the tests [16:28] bdmurray they won't [16:28] okay [16:29] bdmurray all our code changes run adt for xenial https://github.com/ubuntu-core/snapcraft/pull/559 [16:30] bdmurray you will need vpn to see the results, but we do run [16:31] sergiusens: okay, I'll approve it [16:35] sergiusens: oh and fwiw snapcraft.io/create never loads for me [16:35] bdmurray: normal, it will be on on tuesday [16:36] the goal is to have the tour available by then [16:39] bdmurray: thanks. [16:40] and yes, we won't release this until next week. We just want to be ready for when the site is ready. [16:40] I'm trying to reproduce the snapd error in yakkety, to report a bug. [16:41] also we are waiting on yakkety images for our CI lab. Soon we will catch these type of errors earlier. [16:49] bdmurray: do the autopkgtests get executed when the package is moved to proposed? Or they are only run when trying to migrate from proposed to updates? [16:50] they are run when the package is fully in -proposed, the results then contribute to the decision to release to -updates [16:50] http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html helps :) [16:52] nacc: that page doesn't show the results in xenial-proposed. Just yakkety. [16:53] that's http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/xenial/update_excuses.html [16:53] elopio: ah sorry, you're right [16:54] Laney: great. It's not there, but I supposed that's because it needs some time. [16:58] could an AA take a look at bug 1585058? [16:58] bug 1585058 in pixfrogger (Ubuntu) "Sync pixfrogger 1.0-4 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1585058 [17:01] I think that just needs a member of the release team to force it despite the arch: all uninstallability [17:01] XS-Build-Indep-Architecture is working, but it doesn't affect proposed-migration's behaviour of checking arch: all installability on amd64 [18:17] cjwatson: Hrm. Since uninst counts are counted against only amd64 for arch:all (I think?), I wonder if teaching britney to check B-I-A and jigger the check for that source's binaries might be smart, to keep the count 0. [19:54] infinity: Wouldn't be a bad idea if it's reasonably easy. [21:20] bdmurray just in case http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/s/snapcraft/xenial/amd64/ :-) [21:21] sergiusens: I saw, thanks! [21:34] infinity: get my email about getting the 'conjure 0.0.8' purged from the archive? [21:54] do i need to wait for php7.0-dev to make into release (to remove the last dep), or can I request an AA demote dh-php now, if it's showing up in (source & binary movements to universe) on http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/component-mismatches-proposed ? [21:58] stokachu: Not that I saw the email, but we don't remove packages from the release pocket of stable suites (except that time when we had to due to a legal threat, but we don't talk about that). [21:59] cjwatson: ok this was a request because of the name change that happened between conjure and conjure-up [21:59] cjwatson: afraid users will be confused [21:59] stokachu: The most effective way to stop xenial users seeing it would be to change conjure-up in xenial-updates to ship a transitional package. [21:59] stokachu: That will be like 100x less effort. [22:00] ah ok [22:00] ill do that [23:36] well, now that php7.0-dev has moved to release, can an AA demote dh-php to universe?