[02:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: python-os-xenapi (zesty-proposed/primary) [0.1.1-0ubuntu1]
[03:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lxd (xenial-proposed/main) [2.8-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.04.1 => 2.0.9-0ubuntu1~16.04.1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-server)
[07:19] <cpaelzer> rbasak: Hi, I wanted to kick off a discussion if uploaders on multipath-tools should be changed
[07:20] <cpaelzer> rbasak: I start here  as I'd expect -release to be the right channel, but please feel free to redirect wherever is more appropriate
[07:21] <cpaelzer> rbasak: current uploaders are hallyn + ubuntu-core-dev; given that our Team was tasked to do the merge this cycle I wanted to ask if it would be correct to add ubuntu-server-dev to that list?
[07:56] <LocutusOfBorg> hello release and archive admins, the haskell migration needs a kick of haskell-secret-sharing out of release please
[07:56] <LocutusOfBorg> reason is: the new ghc-8.0.2 can't build haskell-secret-sharing's documentation with haddock
[07:57] <LocutusOfBorg> we can A: remove the doc package, B: kick it out until the upstream bug is fixed
[07:57] <LocutusOfBorg> (leaf package)
[07:57] <LocutusOfBorg> apw, ^^ :=
[08:02] <rbasak> cpaelzer: I think it may be appropriate to add multipath-tools to the server packageset. Are there any non-server uses of multipath-tools?
[08:02] <rbasak> Only servers have multipath, right? :-)
[08:03] <cpaelzer> Only servers have real multipath
[08:03] <apw> rbasak, things can be in more than one packageset can't they ?
[08:03] <cpaelzer> rbasak: and crazy-geek-machines
[08:04] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, do we have a near-term expectation of that fix arriving soon ?
[08:04] <LocutusOfBorg> in my opinion for a new leaf package, B is preferred (and both me and the Debian Maintainer, are monitoring upstream issue: https://github.com/haskell/haddock/issues/574 )
[08:04] <rbasak> apw: they can. But AIUI a "relevant to this flavor but not relevant to any other flavor" is pretty much a slam dunk reason to add to a flavor-based packageset.
[08:05] <apw> rbasak, and yes i would say it is a server-class machine feature in general
[08:09] <LocutusOfBorg> apw, sorry, don't know
[08:10] <LocutusOfBorg> I can always remove the doc package if we want it to go in again
[08:11] <LocutusOfBorg> but for haskell going out of sync from Debian is risky
[08:11] <acheronuk> apw: sorry to bother you, but any news on getting the old and obsolete kdeconnect-plasma-dbg removed?
[08:17]  * locutus_ leaves
[08:33] <apw> acheronuk, i think that is fine, am trying to get a second oppinion
[08:34] <acheronuk> apw: ok. np. I'm aware the release team is a bit short handed ATM
[08:35] <apw> acheronuk, will try and get that sorted asap
[08:38] <apw> LocutusOfBorg, done
[08:44] <acheronuk> apw: we have KDE applications 16.12.1 sources and gpgme in the 'new' queue as well
[08:45] <acheronuk> gpgme is needed for some new applications
[08:45] <acheronuk> apw: but I know you are busy. so whatever can be done is great
[09:17] <apw> acheronuk, the gpgme1.0 has ftbfs on three arches it used to build on
[09:18] <acheronuk> apw: yes, I know. which is better than the complete fail it has been having for the last month and 1/2
[09:19] <apw> acheronuk, so it will not be migrating either way right ?
[09:22] <acheronuk> apw: That I don't know. The launchpad builders have had issues running the buildtime tests, and it had been difficult to get even this far with it.
[09:23] <acheronuk> it is something we can't do without if we want to do the KDE PIM suite for zesty, and not leave people with buggy out of date email/addressbook/ etc applications
[09:24] <acheronuk> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gpgme1.0/+bug/1647204
[09:48] <acheronuk> apw: I'm not sure what happens there if we unable to get gpgme building on arm architectures, but for KDE and things like claw-mail it is needed. at least on the architectures it builds on
[10:46] <apw> acheronuk, indeed ... hmmm
[10:58] <acheronuk> apw: yep. I have 50+ packages in the KDE PIM suite that can't be uploaded as they are waiting on a working gpgme build, for at least amd64 and i386
[11:14] <acheronuk> apw: thank you. that seems to have unstuck migrated kdeconnect :)
[11:14] <acheronuk> & migrated
[11:14] <apw> acheronuk, so i think we need some commitment to getting that building on those arches if we let it in as it is in the meantime
[11:15] <apw> acheronuk, good stuff
[11:20] <acheronuk> apw: well, I certainly would not like it to stay ftbfs on those other architectures if it can be helped, even if on the kubuntu side it not actually required as because of other dependences our PIM packages that need it are not buildable on arm and powerpc anyway
[11:21] <acheronuk> I think barry is preety keen to see it build on all, and so presumably is the gpg dev who was assisting in that bug report
[11:28] <apw> acheronuk, ok i'll look at it
[11:28] <apw> on that basis
[11:30] <acheronuk> apw: thanks. I am very aware it's not ideal, but at one point I was seriously looking at back up plans for it not building on anything!
[11:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gpgme1.0 [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [1.8.0-3ubuntu1]
[11:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gpgme1.0 [ppc64el] (zesty-proposed) [1.8.0-3ubuntu1]
[11:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gpgme1.0 [i386] (zesty-proposed) [1.8.0-3ubuntu1]
[11:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted gpgme1.0 [s390x] (zesty-proposed) [1.8.0-3ubuntu1]
[11:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: console-setup (xenial-proposed/main) [1.108ubuntu15.2 => 1.108ubuntu15.3] (core)
[11:53] <xnox> i do not see a 16.04.2 testing milestone on the iso tracker.
[11:53] <xnox> the console-setup fix is not essential for a respin.
[11:54] <xnox> are we releasing 16.04.2 this week?
[12:00] <jbicha> the HWE stuff is still in xenial-proposed
[13:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (xenial-proposed/universe) [2.25 => 2.26+17.04.1] (no packageset)
[14:09] <ogra_> infinity, hmm, is there any particular reason why we do not publish manifest files for server images on releases.u.c ? i see them in the daily builds on cdimage
[14:10] <ogra_> or slangasek ^^^
[14:33] <barry> acheronuk: i can't say i have any more bright ideas about the arm failures tho :/
[14:36] <acheronuk> barry: One is a Qt issue, so I can have ask around the KDE/Qt people on that. Andre Heinecke thought the the others might be helped by some commits in gpgme master branch which don't apply cleanly to 1.8-3
[14:37] <acheronuk> I may try a git snapshot in a ppa to test the 2nd of those ^^^
[14:38] <barry> acheronuk: please do let me know how it goes.  it's kind of background for me right now, but i'm interested because it's holding up the claws-mail promotion
[14:46] <jgrimm> RAOF, SRU duty today?   if so, Xenial Unapproved queue: cloud-init, docker.io, runc, containerd could use some help
[15:30] <jgrimm> mdeslaur, your zesty memcached upload stuck in update_excuses, just mentioning in case you'd not seen (60 days old)
[15:36] <mdeslaur> jgrimm: thanks, I'll take a look
[15:36] <jgrimm> thanks sir
[15:53] <flexiondotorg> infinity There is a verification done SRU we'd really like to see landed in Xenial in time for 16.04.2
[15:55] <flexiondotorg> It is humanity-icon-theme (0.6.10.1) xenial;
[15:55] <flexiondotorg> System 76 were encouraged to do some work to resolve some issues.
[15:55] <flexiondotorg> They've stepped up and we'd really like to see this included in the 16.04.2 image.
[15:56] <flexiondotorg> These are the relevant bugs LP: #1657863 and LP: #1622686
[15:59] <flexiondotorg> slangasek Please also see the above regarding landing humanity-icon-theme (0.6.10.1) xenial; for 16.04.2
[16:06] <infinity> flexiondotorg: Looking.
[16:06] <flexiondotorg> Cheers. I'll start chalking up beers.
[16:08] <infinity> flexiondotorg: There's a ubiquity task there, too.  Is that invalid?  Does the icon theme fix alone fix it?
[16:08] <flexiondotorg> It does.
[16:08] <infinity> So we can close the installer tasks?
[16:08] <flexiondotorg> There is a separate patch for Ubiquity as well.
[16:09] <flexiondotorg> Which isn't absolutely required to fixed the double header.
[16:09] <flexiondotorg> So that has landed in z already.
[16:09] <infinity> But the ubiquity fix is still desirable?  I should keep those tasks open? :P
[16:10] <infinity> flexiondotorg: Anyhow, icon theme released.
[16:10] <flexiondotorg> But the icon scaling fixes alone ensure the a11y indicator in ubiquity-dm doesn't oversize the header.
[16:10] <flexiondotorg> Cheers.
[16:10] <flexiondotorg> Much appreciated.
[16:10] <flexiondotorg> infinity When will the 16.04 archive freeze for building?
[16:13] <infinity> flexiondotorg: Later.  There's another 1wk delay for $reasons being announced this morning, if my meetings last night are any indication.
[16:13] <flexiondotorg> OK, thanks.
[16:13] <flexiondotorg> That is actually a relief.
[16:29] <sergiusens> infinity or slangasek can you please reject 'snapcraft (2.26+17.04.1) xenial' ?
[16:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapcraft [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.26+17.04.1]
[17:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Packageset: Added multipath-tools to ubuntu-server in zesty
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: key-chord-el [amd64] (zesty-proposed/none) [0.6-1] (no packageset)
[17:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: leaflet-geometryutil [amd64] (zesty-proposed/none) [0.4.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libbio-eutilities-perl [amd64] (zesty-proposed/none) [1.75-1] (no packageset)
[17:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: golden-ratio-el [amd64] (zesty-proposed/none) [1.0-1] (no packageset)
[17:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libdist-zilla-plugin-autometaresources-perl [amd64] (zesty-proposed/none) [1.21-1] (no packageset)
[18:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: xserver-xorg-video-amdgpu (xenial-proposed/main) [1.1.0-1 => 1.1.2-0ubuntu0.16.04.1] (desktop-core)
[18:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted golden-ratio-el [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [1.0-1]
[18:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted leaflet-geometryutil [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [0.4.0-1]
[18:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libdist-zilla-plugin-autometaresources-perl [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [1.21-1]
[18:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted key-chord-el [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [0.6-1]
[18:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libbio-eutilities-perl [amd64] (zesty-proposed) [1.75-1]
[19:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: python-tinyrpc (zesty-proposed/primary) [0.5-0ubuntu1]
[21:27] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (xenial-proposed/universe) [2.25 => 2.26] (no packageset)
[21:28] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.25+16.10 => 2.26+16.10] (no packageset)
[21:28] <sergiusens> slangasek: so finally made it and all green ^ (adt tests pre dput can be seen here https://github.com/snapcore/snapcraft/pull/1088)
[21:28] <slangasek> sergiusens: \o/ \o/
[21:39] <slangasek> sergiusens: your changelog reuses the already-closed SRU bug for 2.25
[21:43] <sergiusens> slangasek: :-( Can you reject and I'll fix?
[21:43] <sergiusens> I checked this many times
[21:44] <sergiusens> oh well
[21:45] <slangasek> sergiusens: done
[21:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapcraft [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.26]
[21:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapcraft [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.26+16.10]
[21:52] <sergiusens> slangasek: do I need to do a new push for zesty as well? I guess so
[21:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.25+16.10 => 2.26+16.10] (no packageset)
[21:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (xenial-proposed/universe) [2.25 => 2.26] (no packageset)
[21:55] <slangasek> sergiusens: no
[21:58] <sergiusens> slangasek: thanks, re-uploaded for the yak and xerus
[22:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: neutron-lbaas-dashboard (zesty-proposed/primary) [1.0.0-0ubuntu1]
[22:21] <RAOF> jgrimm: Sure, looking.
[22:22] <jgrimm> RAOF, great!! thanks!
[22:23] <mwhudson> hope they're installable this time...
[22:39] <lamont> who is my favorite sru team member today?  (can I have freeipmi reviewed and accepted for xenial and yakkety?)
[22:42] <lamont> (package finally verified in zesty)
[23:05] <RAOF> lamont: Hello!
[23:05] <RAOF> I got to actually release some fixes today. Yay!
[23:07] <lamont> yay!
[23:07] <lamont> it's a *cough* sizeable addition of some new stuff
[23:10] <RAOF> *sigh*
[23:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: im-config (yakkety-proposed/main) [0.29-1ubuntu16.1 => 0.29-1ubuntu16.2] (input-methods, kubuntu, personal-gunnarhj, ubuntu-desktop)
[23:17] <RAOF> jgrimm: cloud-init is quite a large change, and does not seem to be a bugfix-only change.
[23:17] <RAOF> jgrimm: I notice that the cloud-init in yakkety has been updated by cherry-picking fixes rather than a new upstream version.
[23:18] <RAOF> jgrimm: Also, your upload would make the version of cloud-init xenial-proposed greater than the version in yakkety. Are you additionally planning to upload this to yakkety?
[23:19] <jgrimm> RAOF ^^ smoser
[23:25] <seyeongkim> I'm stuck in verifying 1587039,1640382(same one)  since reproduction steps on description is not working for me. could you please get it out of proposed? I heard there is another commit waiting for my verification. but I think mine seems take long time.
[23:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted docker.io [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.12.6-0ubuntu1~16.04.1]
[23:45] <lamont> RAOF: fwiw, all discussed and in-process with upstream, but figured you didn't want 1.6~aanotevenalpha1 backported... :D
[23:45] <RAOF> :)
[23:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted docker.io [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.12.6-0ubuntu1~16.10.1]
[23:47] <lamont> which reminds me, I need to chunk up the PR that is the patch
[23:49] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted runc [source] (xenial-proposed) [1.0.0~rc2-0ubuntu2~16.04.1]
[23:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lxc (xenial-proposed/main) [2.0.6-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.04.2 => 2.0.7-0ubuntu1~16.04.1] (ubuntu-server)
[23:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lxc (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.0.6-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.10.2 => 2.0.7-0ubuntu1~16.10.1] (ubuntu-server)
[23:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lxcfs (xenial-proposed/main) [2.0.5-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.04.1 => 2.0.6-0ubuntu1~16.04.1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-server)
[23:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lxcfs (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.0.5-0ubuntu1~ubuntu16.10.1 => 2.0.6-0ubuntu1~16.10.1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-server)
[23:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted runc [source] (yakkety-proposed) [1.0.0~rc2-0ubuntu2~16.10.1]