[00:24] <tsimonq2> slangasek: does https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess#FeatureFreeze_for_new_packages apply to source packages only?
[02:25] <slangasek> tsimonq2: generally yes
[02:26] <slangasek> tsimonq2: though I don't think that actually documents current practice, which is actually more along the lines of "if it's a completely new package that doesn't touch anything, we require no paperwork, you just have to get an AA to review it"
[02:43] <jbicha> slangasek: oh, so I can just sync bug 1614894 after a test build?
[03:09] <tsimonq2> slangasek: let's say foo is a big package. I want to split foo into foo and foo-bar to separate it and add a few more things to foo-bar (for some complicated reasons)
[03:11] <tsimonq2> slangasek: it fixes foo when installed under certain conditions, but since it adds new files as well, it might be considered a feature
[03:12] <tsimonq2> slangasek: (I'm talking about lubuntu-default-settings being split into lubuntu-qt-default-settings and updating the seed to fix the Lubuntu next image)
[03:15] <tsimonq2> slangasek: do I need to file an FFE when Julien merges my MP into the lubuntu-default-settings repo?
[03:20] <slangasek> jbicha: cassbeam> yes
[03:20] <slangasek> tsimonq2: I would call that ba bugfix and not press you for an FFe
[03:29] <tsimonq2> ok thanks slangasek
[06:28] <flocculant> pitti: that'll be a no from here re networking :(
[06:30] <flocculant> also daily gets to the try/install dialogue and then no further to get to desktop without using startx
[06:31] <flocculant> s/the try option of the dialogue
[06:34] <jbicha> flocculant: wait a few hours and try a rebuild: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/livecd-rootfs/2.429
[06:34] <flocculant> jbicha: ack - ty :)
[06:34] <jbicha> for networking, I don't know about the other issue
[06:35] <flocculant> well at least if I get networking I can try and report it with apport :D
[06:35] <flocculant> not really sure what to report against mind you - tracker suggests syslinux
[06:36] <jbicha> yeah I had to use a USB stick to get the data out of VirtualBox for bug 1614848
[06:37] <jbicha> I guess I was one of the first to be affected by the no-networking bug but since ubiquity was badly broken I didn't realize it wasn't ubiqutiy's fault
[06:37] <flocculant> ha ha
[06:38] <flocculant> jbicha: I'm just glad xubuntu is only doing final beta or I'd be :( at the moment
[10:14] <sakrecoer> flocculant: i ma in here :)
[10:14] <sakrecoer> where do you announce these discussions as the one held yesterday?
[10:30] <flocculant> sakrecoer: if you mean what I said in the mail - it wasn't - I just read it in channel
[10:33] <sakrecoer> flocculant: yes, and like i wrote on the list, i'm not sure i will have that time unfortunately
[10:33] <sakrecoer> and ross said he hasn't
[10:35] <flocculant> yea I gathered - not actually anything to do with me, I just thought I'd ask on the list as no-one else had yet :)
[10:37] <sakrecoer> ok :) thanks.. i will probably be able to, but since i can't garantee it, i feel ackward to commit to it...
[10:38] <sakrecoer> monday i'm supposed to get confirmation for a job that would start on tuesday..
[10:38] <sakrecoer> flocculant ^
[10:42] <flocculant> nice :)
[13:36] <sergiusens> slangasek or pitti just in case you monitor during the weekend, I don't quite follow the queue status; snapcraft here http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/xenial/update_excuses.html says "Tests in progress" but it doesn't seem to be true
[16:08] <roasted> hi friends. I see NM 1.2.2 is listed in the upload queue. Is there any idea when that may land?
[16:24] <jbicha> Mirv: the only thing left for the evolution 3.22 transition is qtorganizer5-eds's inability to build on s390x (becasue of url-dispatcher)
[16:42] <jbicha> Laney: hi, evo transition is done but for ^
[16:43] <Laney> jbicha: nice one, try to get someone to remove the old binaries I guess
[16:43] <jbicha> oh I see you're not in ~ubuntu-archive yet
[16:45]  * Laney weeps in the corner
[17:31] <apw> sergiusens, your tests appear to have run and imploded: "badpkg: rules extract failed with exit code 1
[17:32] <Mirv> jbicha: right, I guess we'll reach someone latest on Monday morning (as pit_ti is back)
[17:35] <jbicha> Mirv: do you know exactly what packages need to be removed? because there are AAs that do some things on weekends
[17:40] <Mirv> jbicha: it's always complicated. the basic problem is upstart not available on s390x, and the problems spread from there on out. the easy answer is just the qtorganizer5-eds's binaries need to be removed, so that it's not stuck on proposed on the principle "it used to have s390x binaries": https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/landing-055/+build/10498649
[17:41] <Mirv> jbicha: the problem is sometimes the problems can back, since obviously it'd be best if one could continue building the binaries, upstart would build etc instead of this hunting
[17:41] <Mirv> but the immediate problem should be fixed by removing the organizer's s390x binaries
[17:46] <jbicha> or alternatively, just kick upstart out! ;) (which I think is happening too)
[19:18] <slangasek> sergiusens: http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/s/snapcraft/xenial/amd64/ actually shows the test failed, but because it was captured with the wrong version, it wasn't recorded :/  running manually now
[19:19] <slangasek> jbicha: kicking upstart out of the archive doesn't help those pieces of the phone stack that depend on it
[19:23] <Ukikie> People care about the phone? :o
[19:29] <sergiusens> slangasek thanks, the log there doesn't make sense to me, we have no packaging changes for it to fail at that level (https://objectstorage.prodstack4-5.canonical.com/v1/AUTH_77e2ada1e7a84929a74ba3b87153c0ac/autopkgtest-xenial/xenial/amd64/s/snapcraft/20160820_000616@/log.gz)
[21:01] <slangasek> sergiusens: the re-run succeeded, so the earlier failure is ignorable
[21:48] <roasted> When is the next sru landing? Crossing fingers for a nm bump...