[08:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: genwqe-user (zesty-proposed/primary) [4.0.18-3]
[09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: s390-tools (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.36.1-0ubuntu2 => 1.36.1-0ubuntu2.1] (no packageset)
[09:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: s390-tools (xenial-proposed/main) [1.34.0-0ubuntu8.2 => 1.34.0-0ubuntu8.3] (no packageset)
[09:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: account-plugins (xenial-proposed/main) [0.12+16.04.20160126-0ubuntu1 => 0.13+16.04.20161212-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[09:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-control-center-signon (xenial-proposed/main) [0.1.8+16.04.20160201-0ubuntu1 => 0.1.9+16.04.20161212-0ubuntu1] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[10:42] <acheronuk> Hi. could someone please take a look at bug #1672672
[10:42] <acheronuk> thanks :)
[10:45] <caribou> apw: we have an issue with makedumpfile 1.5.5 in Trusty : it only supports up to kernel 3.19
[10:45] <caribou> apw: with the xenial_lts kernel, we're up to 4.4 so I'm not convinced that cherry-picking fixes would be viable
[10:46] <caribou> apw: do you think that it would be acceptable to SRU the 1.5.9 version from Xenial into trusty ?
[10:46] <caribou> question opened to any of the SRU team members of course
[10:47] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: qtbase-opensource-src (xenial-proposed/main) [5.5.1+dfsg-16ubuntu7.2 => 5.5.1+dfsg-16ubuntu7.3] (kubuntu, qt5, ubuntu-desktop) (sync)
[10:47] <apw> caribou: it is fixing dumping for a supported kernel, so i think so
[10:48] <caribou> apw: yes indeed
[10:49] <caribou> I'll have a peek at the differences in commit,but it would be safer to bring the whole version in
[11:51] <Mirv> hi. could you perhaps comment whether you could override the camitk i386 tests, http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html#qtbase-opensource-src ? the release has been stuck in proposed for some time.
[11:57] <Laney> Mirv: http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/c/camitk/zesty/i386 doesn't look too good for the new qtbase, does it?
[11:58] <Mirv> Laney: it seems to except no warnings etc, thus parsing a long string wrong. that's why I asked for a comment and whether Trevinho should revisit the landing or if it's deemed that the test is a bit badly written.
[11:58] <Mirv> c/p/
[12:03] <Laney> Mirv: I'd imagine it's not too hard to fix the test if it's a parsing error, and then you can get some more confidence about your upload.
[12:03] <Mirv> ok
[12:03] <Mirv> Trevinho: ^ FYI
[14:32] <oSoMoN> seb128, hey, webbrowser-app is blocked in -proposed because it depends on ubuntu-ui-extras which is in universe but has been approved for main inclusion: bug #1666556
[14:32] <oSoMoN> could you by any chance unblock it by promoting ubuntu-ui-extras to main?
[14:38] <sil2100> mterry: hey! Does an AA have to do the promotion or do ubuntu-mir guys have the power to do so? ^
[14:38] <mterry> sil2100: need an AA
[14:38] <sil2100> oSoMoN: so it didn't happen automatically in the end?
[14:38] <mterry> oSoMoN: sil2100 : but it won't be promoted unless something is pulling it in
[14:38] <mterry> Does anything depend on the extras package?
[14:38] <sil2100> mterry: webbrowser-app now depends on it
[14:39] <mterry> ah I see, that's the issue above  :P
[14:40] <oSoMoN> sil2100, no it wasn’t automatically promoted, I had misremembered what ahayzen said
[17:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ubuntu-mate-artwork [amd64] (zesty-proposed/universe) [17.04.2] (ubuntu-mate)
[18:19] <ahayzen> Hey, I'm looking for a reviewer to do a "preNEW review" of two new packages (qtubuntu-print and ubuntu-printing-app) that I have in silo 2236 (https://bileto.ubuntu.com/#/ticket/2236), would anyone here be able to do this?
[19:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (precise-proposed/partner) [1:20170214.1-0ubuntu0.12.04.1 => 1:20170314.1-0ubuntu0.12.04.1] (no packageset)
[19:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (xenial-proposed/partner) [1:20170214.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1 => 1:20170314.1-0ubuntu0.16.04.1] (no packageset)
[19:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (trusty-proposed/partner) [1:20170214.1-0ubuntu0.14.04.1 => 1:20170314.1-0ubuntu0.14.04.1] (no packageset)
[19:50] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: adobe-flashplugin (yakkety-proposed/partner) [1:20170214.1-0ubuntu0.16.10.1 => 1:20170314.1-0ubuntu0.16.10.1] (no packageset)
[19:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.15+16.10ubuntu1 => 1.0+16.10ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[19:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.15+16.04ubuntu1 => 1.0+16.04ubuntu1] (no packageset)
[20:22] <chrisccoulson> Is there anyone who can approve the adobe-flashplugin uploads in partner please?
[20:22] <chrisccoulson> (for all releases)
[20:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pam-mysql (xenial-proposed/universe) [0.7~RC1-4ubuntu2 => 0.7~RC1-4ubuntu2.1] (no packageset)
[20:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: pam-mysql (yakkety-proposed/universe) [0.7~RC1-4.1ubuntu1 => 0.7~RC1-4.1ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[21:54] <bluesabre> RAOF1, if you are around, would you be interested in releasing thunar into xenial- and yakkety-updates? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/thunar/+bug/1512120
[22:56] <jbicha> RAOF: please reject gnome-shell/xenial and /yakkety
[22:57] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gnome-shell [source] (xenial-proposed) [3.18.5-0ubuntu0.3]
[22:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected gnome-shell [source] (yakkety-proposed) [3.20.4-0ubuntu3]
[22:59] <RAOF> jbicha: Done.
[22:59] <RAOF> bluesabre: And done.
[22:59] <RAOF> Thanks for the ping.
[23:06] <bluesabre> RAOF, thank you very much!
[23:48] <Beret> j #i3
[23:53] <acheronuk> Hi. Could someone please the FFe in bug #1672672 thanks
[23:54] <acheronuk> *please look at