| === Feren^IRCCloud_ is now known as Feren^IRCCloud | ||
| === hikiko is now known as hikiko|ln | ||
| === Ken is now known as Guest14755 | ||
| === scottt is now known as Guest41818 | ||
| === hikiko|ln is now known as hikiko | ||
| attente | hi, i'm trying to sru bubblewrap to xenial: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bubblewrap/+bug/1649330 | 15:57 |
|---|---|---|
| ubot5` | Ubuntu bug 1649330 in bubblewrap (Ubuntu) "[SRU] bubblewrap unavailable on xenial" [Undecided,New] | 15:57 |
| attente | i'm not sure what the process is for sru'ing a new package there, is there something i need to do? i don't have upload rights | 15:58 |
| rbasak | attente: there's not much of a defined process as it's a pretty rare thing. You'll need sponsorship, an archive admin's approval, and an SRU team member's approval. | 16:02 |
| rbasak | attente: and you'll need to prepare the upload. | 16:02 |
| rbasak | I won't know what ordering to recommend. | 16:03 |
| rbasak | don't know | 16:03 |
| rbasak | If it were me, I'd seek approval from everyone involved before getting a sponsor to upload, since that avoids tangling stuff up with Launchpad technicalities. | 16:03 |
| rbasak | The archive admin and SRU team member may be the same person, I don't know. | 16:04 |
| rbasak | Hope that helps. | 16:04 |
| rbasak | And I'd prepare the proposed upload in a git or bzr tree, so that every reviewer can review in one place instead of the scattergun-and-reject-from-the-queue approach. | 16:04 |
| attente | rbasak: ok, thanks | 16:05 |
| rbasak | attente: OTOH, consider using the backports pocket, but I presume you've already ruled that out for some reason? | 16:07 |
| attente | rbasak: i believe the integration tests don't run in an environment with backports enabled | 16:08 |
| attente | rbasak: (this is for a snapcraft branch) | 16:08 |
| rbasak | If that's the only reason, it sounds like the integration tests need fixing to work with backports, rather than putting the package in updates just because of that. | 16:10 |
| attente | is it ok to generally assume that backports will be enabled on a user's machine? | 16:11 |
| attente | if this branch gets merged, then snapcraft on xenial will require that once that's sru'd | 16:12 |
| rbasak | I believe backports is generally available by default but pinned from packages from it being used except when specifically requested. | 16:12 |
| rbasak | If snapcraft is in updates, it shouldn't have a dependency on backports. | 16:12 |
| rbasak | So that's a more solid reason that this needs to go into updates. | 16:12 |
| rbasak | (or it's a reason that snapcraft should have been in backports, depending on your perspective) | 16:12 |
| attente | snapcraft is generally sru'd back to xenial, right? | 16:13 |
| rbasak | I don't know. | 16:13 |
| attente | i see for example: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapcraft/+bug/1614322 | 16:14 |
| ubot5` | Ubuntu bug 1614322 in snapcraft (Ubuntu Yakkety) "[SRU] New stable micro release 2.15" [Undecided,Fix released] | 16:14 |
| attente | so my impression is that backports might not be enough for this case | 16:15 |
| rbasak | It does sound that way. | 16:17 |
| attente | rbasak: would it be frowned upon if i copied the packaging from yakkety's or zesty's archive? | 16:22 |
| rbasak | attente: no, that's absolutely fine. | 16:23 |
| rbasak | attente: just add a new changelog entry to the top, and get the package versioning right. Assuming it works :-) | 16:23 |
| attente | rbasak: sounds good, thanks! :) | 16:23 |
| === scottt is now known as Guest87990 | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!