[09:34] <dbarth> cjwatson: ping? how can i help about silo 26 ? trying to resync since last thursday
[09:35] <cjwatson> dbarth: Don't know, sorry
[09:36] <cjwatson> dbarth: I was just driving by with advice; click is not my responsibility ...
[09:40] <dbarth> cjwatson: hi
[09:40] <dbarth> cjwatson: ah ok nw; i'll sort out build issues with trainguards then maybe
[09:41] <dbarth> i'll also need to update one of the branches to clean all of the trust dbs, not just the location one
[10:12] <Saviq> sil2100, hey, can you please recycle https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/static/britney/ticket-1525/landing-076-vivid/excuses.html thanks
[10:17] <Saviq> seb128, or you, if you're quicker to it ↑ :)
[10:20] <morphis> sil2100: can we published https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/1579 ?
[10:52] <sil2100> Saviq: done
[10:52] <Saviq> tx
[10:53] <sil2100> morphis: it's published, isn't it?
[10:53] <sil2100> morphis: I published it in the morning
[11:44] <rvr> chihchun_afk: Silo 0 approved
[11:49] <sil2100> seb128: hey! Did you do, by any chance, a preNEW review of repowerd in https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/1487 ?
[11:56] <sil2100> seb128: I checked the package briefly and have a few comments, but don't think any of my issues would be blocking - if you find a moment, could you take a look at it too?
[11:57] <sil2100> seb128: it would get to the usual yakkety UNAPPROVED queue but for all the others it goes straight to the overlays
[11:57] <sil2100> s/UNAPPROVED/NEW
[12:14] <morphis> sil2100: ah, it in proposed for yakkety that is why the ticket is still open
[14:41] <dbarth> sil2100, jibel: hey, apparently you guys took part of silo 26 in an image already
[14:42] <dbarth> we're doing a build update; how should we proceed?
[14:43] <jibel> dbarth, what do you mean, which part in particular?
[14:44] <dbarth> jibel: the click module
[16:25] <Saviq> robru, hmm what's going on here https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/1525 - it says britney failed (there was a regression before - was restarted and passed) even though everything's a valid candidate?
[16:26] <Saviq> oh hmm not true
[16:26] <Saviq> it wants qtubuntu >= 0.63, but that's there in the same silo
[16:27] <robru> Saviq: looking
[16:28] <Saviq> robru, ok I can see what's going on, we've lost some architectures :/
[16:28] <robru> ah
[16:29] <robru> Saviq: if there's an arch that regressed though the ticket status should say 'Failed to build' not 'Successfully bult'
[16:29] <Saviq> robru, indeed, we'd have noticed that issue earlier
[16:30] <robru> Saviq: was qtubuntu ever available for arm64, powerpc, and ppc64el?
[16:30] <Saviq> robru, it wasn't, but it's a new dep :/
[16:30] <robru> Saviq: it seems in your ubuntu-keyboard packaging you need to make the >0.63 dep specify not those arches
[16:30] <Saviq> trying to find out whether it's a real dep now
[16:30] <Saviq> robru, or that, yeah
[16:31] <robru> Saviq: right, or depending on how real that dep is, you may want to stop building ubuntu-keyboard on those arches.
[16:31] <robru> brb
[16:31] <Saviq> robru, yup, thanks
[17:11] <dbarth_> hey trainguards
[17:11] <robru> dbarth_: hi
[17:11] <dbarth_> we're re-targetting silo 26 to just have a trust-store branch
[17:11] <dbarth_> hey robru
[17:11] <dbarth_> could you empty the 026 ppa of the click packages please?
[17:11] <dbarth_> this way the silo can land fine on 3 releases at once
[17:11] <robru> dbarth_: sure can
[17:12] <dbarth_> and we're (unfortunately) splitting the click part to land separately on Y, and v+x on the other side
[17:12] <dbarth_> robru: while we're at it, if there is a special combo key to get v+x in one go ? ;)
[17:13] <dbarth_> we mostly need to give sil2100 a vivid build update for midori asap
[17:13] <robru> dbarth_: hmmmm, we had to remove xenial+vivid so that people would stop using it.
[17:14] <robru> dbarth_: can you just do the vivid one first and then xenial after?
[17:14] <robru> dbarth_: actually if you're forking the code anyway, why even bother with xenial? why not just do yakkety and vivid?
[17:14] <robru> I guess because we'll eventually switch to xenial
[17:15] <robru> dbarth_: are you sure there's no way to trio land it? there are hooks available to be able to manage control file changes for yakkety/xenial/vivid all in the same source tree
[17:16] <robru> dbarth_: like if it's just a simple delta between yakkety and vivid, it's possible to have bileto apply a patch to the source tree before building the vivid package.
[17:17] <dbarth_> robru: yp no worry, can do 2 landngs in a row
[17:17] <dbarth_> robru: yeah, we'll need xenial/arm64 as well
[17:17] <dbarth_> ah with the hooks maybe
[17:18] <dbarth_> but really we re looking for a fast way for vivid and unblock that part
[17:19] <dbarth_> what i'd rather have is V packages for sil2000 asap
[17:19] <dbarth_> once he has that, i can look into the hooks (there's one already for trust-store) and make the silo proper
[17:21] <dbarth_> robru: like this, right? http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~phablet-team/trust-store/trunk/view/head:/debian/bileto_pre_release_hook
[17:34] <dobey> woah what
[17:42] <robru> dobey: what?
[17:44] <dobey> oh i just saw the backlog and got frightened for a minute about splitting landings up in new branches
[17:45] <robru> dobey: apparently click needs to fork for yakkety? I don't follow click development
[17:45] <dobey> robru: well, doesn't need to fork exactly, but needs a lot of work to get rid of packagekit
[17:46] <dobey> if only we had something to replace it with...
[17:50] <robru> alex-abreu: https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/log/1659/build/2/info/ when targetting just vivid, you need to fork lp:click and replace the version on the first line of the changelog with a vivid version (so s/16.10/15.04/). You can't target trunk with a vivid landing that would cause the version numbers to go backwards.
[17:50] <alex-abreu> robru, yes that's what I doing now
[17:50] <robru> alex-abreu: ok, just saw the failure. carry on
[17:50] <alex-abreu> robru, thx for the heads up
[17:51] <robru> you're welcome!
[17:52] <robru> alex-abreu: also I just pushed some new build code, shouldn't be an issue, but if anything explodes do ping me right away
[17:54] <alex-abreu> ok thx
[17:54] <Saviq> mterry, can you please recycle https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/static/britney/ticket-1378/landing-054-vivid/excuses.html for bfiller, thanks
[17:55] <mterry> Saviq, bfiller: done
[17:56] <bfiller> mterry: thanks, might need for xenial and yakety as well https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/static/britney/ticket-1378/landing-054-xenial/excuses.html https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/static/britney/ticket-1378/landing-054-yakkety/excuses.html
[17:57] <mterry> bfiller, only xenial needed it, and has now been retried
[17:58] <bfiller> mterry: thanks
[17:59] <robru> sil2100: slangasek: meeting?
[17:59] <sil2100> robru: on it
[18:00] <sil2100> hm, ok, browser problems, need a few more moments
[18:21] <dobey> robru: i guess an "overlay" option in bileto that only went to xenial and vivid in the overlay would be a good idea for cases like this
[18:23] <robru> dobey: yeah it might, would take a bit of doing though because by default if I just put x+v back it would be xenial archive and vivid overlay. I'll have to come up with a general solution for this
[18:25] <robru> Like its currently hard coded that the first series is always archive and all subsequent are overlay
[18:31] <dobey> oh and there's no way to manually enter the PPA any more
[18:46] <robru> dobey: even when the manual PPA field was there, it only ever worked for single-series silos. dual/trio were *always* hard-coded as first series archive, subsequent series overlay. the field was ignored
[18:47] <dobey> oh :(
[18:47] <alex-abreu> cjwatson, ping
[20:58] <cjwatson> alex-abreu: contentless pong
[21:07] <boiko> robru: hi, I have a very trivial landing to make in history-service: https://requests.ci-train.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/1662
[21:08] <boiko> robru: but it says no silos available
[21:09] <boiko> robru: is there a express way to land that? It doesn't need QA validation, doesn't even need building to be honest :)
[21:09] <robru> boiko: it doesn't need building? Why not just push the commit to trunk?
[21:10] <boiko> robru: that's actually an option, indeed :)
[21:10] <boiko> robru: I think I'll just do that then, thanks
[21:11] <robru> boiko: you're welcome. I'll still free a couple silos anyway