[00:36] <stgraber> hmm, so what happened to snapcraft in Xenial? looks like it just went back to 2.8.4 and that's making all the lxd builds fail
[00:37] <stgraber> LP says there should be 2.20 in xenial-proposed, 2.8.4 in xenial and 2.19 in xenial-updates
[00:37] <stgraber> rmadison only shows 2.8.4 in xenial, not the other too
[00:38] <stgraber> and publishing history confirms that 2.19 was never removed or superseded, so something weird's going on
[00:38] <stgraber> infinity: ^
[00:39] <stgraber> the timeline I've got is that it was fine 5 hours ago and bad an hour ago, so something happened at some point in between
[00:40] <stgraber> slangasek: ^ if you're around.
[00:42] <mwhudson> stgraber: huh
[00:43] <mwhudson> stgraber: the publisher has gone a bit weird, that may be related
[00:43] <stgraber> mwhudson: ah, what's going on with the publisher?
[00:43] <mwhudson> stgraber: are you getting different answers from ftpmaster.internal vs archive.ubuntu.com ?
[00:43] <stgraber> nevermind, reading scrollback of the internal channel now
[00:43] <mwhudson> stgraber: dunno, see #webobs internal
[00:44] <stgraber> mwhudson: yeah, they may be different answers, rmadison queries ftpmaster and that's also what LP uses
[00:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.10+16.04ubuntu1 => 0.10+16.04ubuntu2] (no packageset)
[01:04] <stgraber> so the reason is ftpmaster running out of memory and the publisher ending up doing a partial publish (not so great error handling...)
[01:04] <stgraber> IS is now trying to get a succesful publisher run again to get things back to normal
[03:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gspell (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.0.3-1ubuntu3 => 1.0.3-1ubuntu4] (no packageset)
[03:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: subiquity (xenial-proposed/primary) [0.0.23~16.04.1]
[04:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gspell [armhf] (zesty-proposed/main) [1.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[04:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gspell [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed/main) [1.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[04:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gspell [amd64] (zesty-proposed/main) [1.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[04:06] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gspell [arm64] (zesty-proposed/main) [1.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[04:07] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gspell [i386] (zesty-proposed/main) [1.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[04:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gspell [s390x] (zesty-proposed/main) [1.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[04:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: gspell [powerpc] (zesty-proposed/main) [1.2.0-2] (no packageset)
[04:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pulseaudio [i386] (zesty-proposed/main) [1:9.0-4ubuntu1] (core)
[04:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pulseaudio [amd64] (zesty-proposed/main) [1:9.0-4ubuntu1] (core)
[04:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pulseaudio [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed/main) [1:9.0-4ubuntu1] (core)
[04:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pulseaudio [s390x] (zesty-proposed/main) [1:9.0-4ubuntu1] (core)
[04:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pulseaudio [powerpc] (zesty-proposed/main) [1:9.0-4ubuntu1] (core)
[04:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pulseaudio [armhf] (zesty-proposed/main) [1:9.0-4ubuntu1] (core)
[04:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: pulseaudio [arm64] (zesty-proposed/main) [1:9.0-4ubuntu1] (core)
[06:00] <LocutusOfBorg> *please* blacklist ghc and haskell-*
[06:00] <LocutusOfBorg> somebody started the ghc-8 transition in Debian
[06:31] <LocutusOfBorg> pitti, slangasek ^^ I don't want a ghc 8 transition right now
[07:06] <pitti> hm, autosync isn't on yet, is it? ^ for the ghc thing
[07:33] <apw> it is not as far as i know, waiting on perl was the last i heard
[08:58] <oSoMoN> hi everyone. Could someone help me understand why https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/xenial/+queue?queue_state=4&queue_text=webbrowser-app ended up in the rejected queue?
[09:03] <pitti> oSoMoN: you should have gotten a REJECTed email, but I guess it's because https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/ubuntu/landing-051-deletedppa has been deleted
[09:03] <pitti> oSoMoN: although I think this is not the same webbrowser-app upload that you were doing recently
[09:03] <pitti> (this was from August already)
[09:04] <oSoMoN> pitti, indeed that was a different SRU (the upload I did recently was targetting yakkety, this is for xenial)
[09:05] <oSoMoN> pitti, I don’t think I got that rejected e-mail, I’ll check again. according to bileto’s logs (https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/1650#audit_log) the silo was abandoned because the upload had been rejected, not the other way around
[09:07] <oSoMoN> pitti, should I request a new silo?
[09:07] <pitti> oSoMoN: I don't know why it was rejected, or what happened to the silo, I'm afraid
[09:08] <oSoMoN> no worries, I’ll request a new one then, I shouldn’t have let it drag on for so long
[09:25] <rbasak> Does bileto not pass rejected emails along?
[09:27] <apw> i have taken to dropping a note next to the reject notification from queuebot in here, but i don't think i did that one
[09:27] <rbasak> Sounds like someone should file a bug against bileto
[09:33] <apw> i assume the bugs go to the owner of the copying key
[09:33] <apw> s/bugs/emails
[09:47] <xnox> Laney, is it wise to start boost transition, when there are 5,500 hits for "perl" on the excuses page?
[09:48] <xnox> pitti, oSoMoN, unfortunately the reject emails go to the bileto bot email address; effectively /dev/null
[09:49] <oSoMoN> xnox, is robru aware of it? it would be useful to have that information stored and accessible somewhere
[09:50] <robru> oSoMoN: there was some talk of getting those mails sent to landers, but it requires changes in launchpad, ask cjwatson if that is in production yet
[09:55] <robru> oSoMoN: pitti: i think you guys are confused. The upload to the ppa wasn't rejected, the package was in the ppa and then published, but sru team rejected the upload to xenial archive
[09:56] <oSoMoN> robru, yes, that’s what I said, and some time later the silo was abandonned because of the rejection
[09:56] <rbasak> bdmurray: ^
[09:58] <robru> oSoMoN: yeah, I'm not aware of emails being sent for sru rejections, emails get sent if the ppa rejects an upload, so the plan to get emails sent in case of uploads rejection doesn't apply here as far as i know
[10:01] <robru> robru: anyway sorry for deleting your ppa, i was being aggressive in removing landing-nnn PPAs, it looked really neglected
[10:03] <robru> oSoMoN: the rejection reason should be on your bug, really: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/webbrowser-app/+bug/1600176 shame it's not
[10:03] <ubot5`> Ubuntu bug 1600176 in webbrowser-app (Ubuntu) "[SRU] webbrowser-app bug fixes" [High,New]
[10:03] <robru> oSoMoN: not sure if you started a new ticket yet, no harm in reusing the same ticket, just click build and it'll bring the ticket back to life
[10:04] <oSoMoN> robru, I started another one, and don’t feel bad about deleting the other one, it was being neglected indeed, I didn’t do a good job of following up on it
[10:05] <rbasak> robru: what if an SRU upload refers to two bugs, and the rejection reason is that a patch appears to be a third bug that doesn't appear to apply to either of them? I don't think there's a clear place for a rejection reason to go.
[10:05] <rbasak> robru: or (not sure if this applies to bileto) sometimes there's an upload that needs to be rejected because it has no bug reference.
[10:06] <robru> rbasak: oh jeez i dunno. The mp has a few bugs listed but that one is the only one that isn't "fix released"
[10:06] <rbasak> I think there was some confusion on this upload, but it started off with me saying "why is there a patch not connected to either of the bugs listed?"
[10:06] <rbasak> oSoMoN cleared that up yesterday, but it was confusing.
[10:10] <robru> rbasak: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ci-train-bot/webbrowser-app/webbrowser-app-ubuntu-xenial-landing-051/revision/1419#debian/changelog it seems like this upload was drowning in bug references
[10:11] <rbasak> Hmm. That's not the changelog I reviewed yesterday.
[10:11] <robru> rbasak: no, this upload was rejected over a month ago
[10:11] <rbasak> Then I'm missing your point.
[10:12] <robru> rbasak: nobody seems to know why this sru was rejected, you said maybe it lacked a bug reference, i dug up the changelog to confirm it had bug references
[10:13] <rbasak> No, that's not what I mean. What I'm saying is that rejection reasons aren't necessarily tied to bugs, so in the general case the right place for a rejection reason is against the upload, not against a particular bug.
[10:13] <robru> Ah
[10:14] <robru> Ok anyways, 3am here, goodnight, and good luck oSoMoN !
[10:18] <LocutusOfBorg> infinity, my eternal gratitude for a powerpc fpc bootstrap <3
[10:22] <oSoMoN> rbasak, yeah that was confusing, there were two SRUs, one targetting yakkety (that you reviewed yesterday) and one targetting xenial (that had been bitrotting for a while, and I was trying to understand why it had been rejected in the first place)
[10:22] <rbasak> Ah. I had thought that the one I reviewed yesterday was the one rejected. Sorry.
[10:23] <oSoMoN> no worries :)
[12:46] <LocutusOfBorg> pitti, your opinion about ghc8?
[12:46] <LocutusOfBorg> or slangasek
[12:47] <pitti> LocutusOfBorg: no idea about haskell; I'd defer to Laney for that
[12:47] <pitti> LocutusOfBorg: but, so far we don't even have autosyncs on, we first want to finish perl
[12:48] <pitti> LocutusOfBorg: I don't mind blacklisting it for a bit
[12:48] <LocutusOfBorg> no, but a specific blacklist would be awesome
[12:48] <LocutusOfBorg> I can ask to re-enable it when things are more clear, right now we have many reverse-dependencies broken in unstable
[12:49] <LocutusOfBorg> so, blocking it might be nice
[12:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (yakkety-proposed/main) [0.6.5.8-0ubuntu4 => 0.6.5.8-0ubuntu4.1] (no packageset)
[12:49] <LocutusOfBorg> also, two haskell libraries in new queue, and webcomponentsjs-custom-element-v0.js es-module-loader-0.17.js
[12:49] <LocutusOfBorg> still for the golang stuff
[12:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zfs-linux (xenial-proposed/main) [0.6.5.6-0ubuntu14 => 0.6.5.6-0ubuntu15] (no packageset)
[13:02] <pitti> LocutusOfBorg: ghc8 isn't in Ubuntu so it won't even be autosynced; I don't think we need a blacklist for that
[13:03] <pitti> LocutusOfBorg: is there a ghc-defaults or so which needs blacklisting then?
[13:03] <LocutusOfBorg> no, ghc8 is src:ghc
[13:03] <LocutusOfBorg> only one is possible
[13:03] <LocutusOfBorg> https://packages.qa.debian.org/g/ghc.html
[13:05] <pitti> LocutusOfBorg: http://paste.ubuntu.com/23392659/ ?
[13:07] <LocutusOfBorg> are you sure you don't need an additional "haskell-*" hscolour happy djinn drift and so on?
[13:07] <LocutusOfBorg> I remember cjwatson putting such blacklisting a while ago, can't you recover it?
[13:08] <pitti> no, I don't know at all what I'm doing :)
[13:08] <LocutusOfBorg> maybe colin knows better
[13:10] <LocutusOfBorg> you don't track versioning for it
[13:10] <LocutusOfBorg> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/sync-blacklist.txt
[13:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: postgresql-common [amd64] (zesty-proposed/main) [177git1] (kubuntu, ubuntu-server)
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted haskell-relational-schemas [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3.1-1]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted haskell-relational-schemas [armhf] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3.1-1]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted haskell-relational-schemas [powerpc] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3.1-1]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted haskell-relational-schemas [arm64] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3.1-1]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted haskell-relational-schemas [s390x] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3.1-1]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted haskell-relational-schemas [i386] (zesty-proposed) [0.1.3.1-1]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gspell [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [1.2.0-2]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gspell [armhf] (zesty-proposed) [1.2.0-2]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gspell [powerpc] (zesty-proposed) [1.2.0-2]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gspell [s390x] (zesty-proposed) [1.2.0-2]
[13:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gspell [arm64] (zesty-proposed) [1.2.0-2]
[13:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gspell [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed) [1.2.0-2]
[13:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gspell [i386] (zesty-proposed) [1.2.0-2]
[13:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted postgresql-common [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [177git1]
[14:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: procps (xenial-proposed/main) [2:3.3.10-4ubuntu2.1 => 2:3.3.10-4ubuntu2.2] (core)
[14:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-relational-query-hdbc [i386] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.6.0.2-1] (no packageset)
[14:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-relational-query-hdbc [armhf] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.6.0.2-1] (no packageset)
[14:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-relational-query-hdbc [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.6.0.2-1] (no packageset)
[14:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-relational-query-hdbc [arm64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.6.0.2-1] (no packageset)
[14:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-relational-query-hdbc [s390x] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.6.0.2-1] (no packageset)
[14:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: haskell-relational-query-hdbc [powerpc] (zesty-proposed/universe) [0.6.0.2-1] (no packageset)
[14:46] <xnox> pitti, openscad does not support qt gles, since qt switched to gles on arm64 openscad can no longer build on arm64. Could you please remove arm64 openscad binaries from zesty release?
[14:46] <xnox> specifically openscad 2015.03-1+dfsg-3build1 arm64
[14:46] <xnox> from zesty release
[15:05] <pitti> xnox: *zap*, done
[15:05] <xnox> pitti, thank you!
[15:06] <xnox> i'm just a couple of steps away from completing boost1.61 transition and requesting removal of boost1.60. Such that I can start boost1.62 transition without having 3 boosts in the archive.
[15:12] <pitti> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#perl looks much more reasonable now, but still a bit of work to do
[15:12]  * pitti goes to do some less glorious house cleaning, have a nice evening/weekend everyone!
[15:45] <ginggs> yay xnox!
[20:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-image [source] (xenial-proposed) [0.10+16.04ubuntu2]
[21:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted qemu [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.0.0+dfsg-2ubuntu1.29]
[23:35] <bdmurray> slangasek: I think rbasak is good to join the SRU team now.