=== 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 [15:57] hi, i'm trying to sru bubblewrap to xenial: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bubblewrap/+bug/1649330 [15:57] Ubuntu bug 1649330 in bubblewrap (Ubuntu) "[SRU] bubblewrap unavailable on xenial" [Undecided,New] [15:58] 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 [16:02] 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] attente: and you'll need to prepare the upload. [16:03] I won't know what ordering to recommend. [16:03] don't know [16:03] 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. [16:04] The archive admin and SRU team member may be the same person, I don't know. [16:04] Hope that helps. [16:04] 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. [16:05] rbasak: ok, thanks [16:07] attente: OTOH, consider using the backports pocket, but I presume you've already ruled that out for some reason? [16:08] rbasak: i believe the integration tests don't run in an environment with backports enabled [16:08] rbasak: (this is for a snapcraft branch) [16:10] 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. [16:11] is it ok to generally assume that backports will be enabled on a user's machine? [16:12] if this branch gets merged, then snapcraft on xenial will require that once that's sru'd [16:12] I believe backports is generally available by default but pinned from packages from it being used except when specifically requested. [16:12] If snapcraft is in updates, it shouldn't have a dependency on backports. [16:12] So that's a more solid reason that this needs to go into updates. [16:12] (or it's a reason that snapcraft should have been in backports, depending on your perspective) [16:13] snapcraft is generally sru'd back to xenial, right? [16:13] I don't know. [16:14] i see for example: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/snapcraft/+bug/1614322 [16:14] Ubuntu bug 1614322 in snapcraft (Ubuntu Yakkety) "[SRU] New stable micro release 2.15" [Undecided,Fix released] [16:15] so my impression is that backports might not be enough for this case [16:17] It does sound that way. [16:22] rbasak: would it be frowned upon if i copied the packaging from yakkety's or zesty's archive? [16:23] attente: no, that's absolutely fine. [16:23] attente: just add a new changelog entry to the top, and get the package versioning right. Assuming it works :-) [16:23] rbasak: sounds good, thanks! :) === scottt is now known as Guest87990