| === maclin1 is now known as maclin | ||
| === ahoneybun is now known as Guest36814 | ||
| === maclin1 is now known as maclin | ||
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: qemu (xenial-proposed/main) [1:2.5+dfsg-5ubuntu10.10 => 1:2.5+dfsg-5ubuntu10.11] (ubuntu-server, virt) (sync) | 06:40 | |
| === klebers_ is now known as klebers | ||
| xnox | tsimonq2, horum, that is bad. | 09:36 |
|---|---|---|
| xnox | slangasek, could you please activate run-once no-network test case for lubuntu products? | 09:36 |
| xnox | balloons, please add me to the https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-testcase team =) i am lead for s390x product releases in the iso tracker. | 09:38 |
| === santa is now known as Guest66899 | ||
| jamespage | please could someone reject neutron 2:8.4.0-0ubuntu2 from the xenial unapproved queue | 10:38 |
| apw | jamespage, looking | 10:39 |
| jamespage | apw: it needs pairing up with another neutron sru | 10:39 |
| apw | jamespage, what about neutron-lbaas | 10:40 |
| jamespage | apw: that ones ok as it | 10:40 |
| jamespage | as is rather | 10:40 |
| apw | jamespage, ack and done | 10:41 |
| jamespage | apw: ta | 10:41 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected neutron [source] (xenial-proposed) [2:8.4.0-0ubuntu2] | 10:41 | |
| === Guest66899 is now known as santa_ | ||
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (zesty-proposed/main) [2.24+17.04 => 2.24.1+17.04] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 10:43 | |
| * apw looks at the snapd uploads ^ | 10:43 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted snapd [source] (zesty-proposed) [2.24.1+17.04] | 10:47 | |
| flocculant | xnox: all the current 'no network' testcases are based on doing other things - me and balloons were discussing it yesterday, https://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2017/04/18/%23ubuntu-quality.html | 11:29 |
| flocculant | probably best to wait for tsimonq2 to write the testcase - I'm an admin on the manual stuff and watch for merges for that - so atm waiting for tsimonq2 :) | 11:30 |
| flocculant | once that's done he'll be able to add it to his test list - at least once the tracker is set up for the AA release | 11:31 |
| tsimonq2 | flocculant: Tonight, I can't do it right now. | 11:41 |
| flocculant | tsimonq2: even if you could - I can't I'm off again shortly :) if it's there 0700 uk time I'll look first thing | 11:42 |
| tsimonq2 | And flocculant has a point, I really don't think it's something we can just enable... so please wait, xnox | 11:43 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: ^ | 11:44 |
| tsimonq2 | flocculant: Ack, I'll make it happen. :) | 11:49 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapd [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.24] | 11:55 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapd [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.24+16.10] | 11:55 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapd [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.24~14.04] | 11:55 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.23.6+16.10 => 2.24.1+16.10] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 12:05 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (xenial-proposed/main) [2.23.6 => 2.24.1] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 12:06 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (xenial-proposed/main) [2.23.6 => 2.24.1] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 12:06 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron (xenial-proposed/main) [2:8.4.0-0ubuntu1 => 2:8.4.0-0ubuntu2] (openstack, ubuntu-server) | 12:07 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (yakkety-proposed/main) [2.23.6+16.10 => 2.24.1+16.10] (desktop-core, ubuntu-server) | 12:07 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapd (trusty-proposed/universe) [2.23.1~14.04 => 2.24.1~14.04] (no packageset) | 12:13 | |
| * apw deals with snapd ^ | 12:49 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapd [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.24.1+16.10] | 12:51 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected snapd [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.24.1] | 12:51 | |
| === bregma__ is now known as bregma | ||
| === slashd- is now known as slashd | ||
| rbasak | "deals with" :-P | 12:56 |
| mitya57 | apw, right, I want the last qtbase which includes the first. (I uploaded the first, it was not accepted for some time, then I needed one more fix and uploaded it too) | 12:57 |
| apw | rbasak, they were duplicates ... | 12:57 |
| apw | rbasak, i am reviewing the rest, as i am familiar with the changes we asked for | 12:58 |
| mitya57 | If two uploads is a problem, I can squash them into a single one. | 12:58 |
| === caribou_ is now known as caribou | ||
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: open-vm-tools (zesty-proposed/main) [2:10.1.5-5055683-1ubuntu1 => 2:10.1.5-5055683-1ubuntu1.1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-cloud, ubuntu-server) | 14:14 | |
| slangasek | bdmurray: should the pending-sru report maybe show a bug as green instead of purple when it's verified for *this* series that we're currently looking at? | 14:56 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: because now if its purple you won't look at the bug, but if it's green you would? | 14:58 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: if I have a mix of green and purple I have to look at the bug to see if it's fixed for this release; if it's all green I know it should be ready to release and can just load up all the bugs for one final check | 15:00 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: ack, so it'd help with multi-bug SRUs. | 15:02 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: imho yes | 15:04 |
| howefield | x/exit | 15:06 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted snapd [source] (yakkety-proposed) [2.24.1+16.10] | 15:17 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected graphviz [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.36.0-0ubuntu3.2] | 15:18 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: graphviz (trusty-proposed/main) [2.36.0-0ubuntu3.1 => 2.36.0-0ubuntu3.2] (core) | 15:19 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted snapd [source] (xenial-proposed) [2.24.1] | 15:19 | |
| apw | slangasek, bdmurray could we just get rid of verification-needed et al and _only_ have per series ones ... | 15:20 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted snapd [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.24.1~14.04] | 15:21 | |
| rbasak | apw: +1 | 15:22 |
| rbasak | I've considered asking for that too. | 15:22 |
| apw | we are afterall the only ones who put those in the request inside the bug via sru-foo | 15:22 |
| apw | we can detect people who don't read and use the old ones and auto respond on those | 15:23 |
| bdmurray | apw: I already made slangasek's change though! So you want to switch to tagging v-n-$series and v-d-$series? | 15:24 |
| apw | bdmurray, personally i find it confusing we have a tag for all series and one per series | 15:26 |
| apw | bdmurray, i assume so do people setting them | 15:26 |
| apw | bdmurray, or you may yet tell me that is not what the v-n means of course and i demonstrate how confused i am | 15:27 |
| bdmurray | apw: v-n captures that there is some kind of verification of the SRU needed so people could search LP for bugs needing verification with one tag. | 15:29 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted graphviz [source] (trusty-proposed) [2.36.0-0ubuntu3.2] | 15:29 | |
| apw | bdmurray, ok so the sru-report will now essentially only show the state of the -series tags ? | 15:29 |
| bdmurray | apw: For verification-done that's my intent. | 15:29 |
| apw | bdmurray, i can see that that is useful as long as we are only using the -series ones | 15:30 |
| rbasak | Also sru-review needs to change to munge the existing tags correctly (and create the correct new ones) | 15:30 |
| apw | and that is just a convineince for "finding verification work" | 15:30 |
| apw | bdmurray, though in some sense if verification-needed is meant to set if any v-n-* exists then we ought to be doing that via a robot | 15:31 |
| bdmurray | Maybe we should open a bug so we can discuss this in a better medium than irc. | 15:32 |
| bdmurray | https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-archive-tools | 15:32 |
| bdmurray | I think I understand what y'all want but don't want to put effort into the wrong thing, nor lose track of the idea since its not a one line / one tool fix. | 15:38 |
| rbasak | While we're on the subject... | 15:40 |
| rbasak | The git workflow stuff is able to do SRU reviews from the queue now. | 15:40 |
| rbasak | It's easier to review this way (IMHO anyway) because I can diff something in unapproved against anything in the archive currently (and indeed any tree in any upstream git repo) | 15:41 |
| rbasak | I'm still using sru-review to accept currently, as it does some other checks as well potentially. | 15:41 |
| rbasak | But I'd like to add queue accept and reject functions to the git workflow tool instead. | 15:42 |
| rbasak | To do that, maybe I could factor out the actual checking bits of sru-review/accept/release into some kind of API and access that instead? | 15:42 |
| rbasak | As I don't want to duplicate code. | 15:42 |
| rbasak | Anyway, opinions welcome. | 15:43 |
| rbasak | Perhaps if everyone wants to deprecate the current tools in favour of the git workflow, then duplicating the code for now and then ditching the old tooling would be easier. | 15:44 |
| nacc | and i'm 100% on board with making the tooling more flexible to support the most generic cases | 15:45 |
| nacc | don't want the tooling to dictate workflow, just to supprot it | 15:45 |
| bdmurray | wxl: You might want to have a look at bug 1633913. | 16:28 |
| ubot5 | bug 1633913 in lubuntu-meta (Ubuntu) "lubuntu and ubuntustudio are missing pool; can not install without internet connection" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1633913 | 16:29 |
| wxl | bdmurray: thanks. we've been discussing what's up with that. it's a little unclear. | 16:29 |
| bdmurray | wxl: was xnox's comment not clear re the test case being missing? | 16:29 |
| wxl | bdmurray: i guess what i'm saying is we have no idea what change precipitated it. | 16:30 |
| bdmurray | wxl: the test case used to be there? | 16:30 |
| xnox | bdmurray, there is more discussion about it here and testing channels; as in the stock "No Network" tests as used in Ubuntu might not be suitable for Lubuntu. | 16:30 |
| wxl | bdmurray: yeah obviously the tests are something that need to be added, but that doesn't necessarily fix the problem at hand, which i'm a bit more concerned about at this point. | 16:31 |
| bdmurray | Okay, I hadn't seen the previous discussion and only looked at the bug. I justed wanted to make sure it was being discussed. | 16:31 |
| flocculant | xnox: on the other hand almost all of the install testcases say "Available options should represent the state of your system accurately" and the first option relates to network. So if I booted and knew network was available - but didn't see the Download updates option - then I would fail the test | 16:34 |
| xnox | flocculant, the problem is that for a year, nobody did an offline test of lubuntu - e.g. start a VM without a network interface. | 16:35 |
| xnox | everybody seems to configure network / wifi; or use VMs with networking | 16:36 |
| flocculant | xnox: ohh I see - that's not something that we test either | 16:37 |
| xnox | flocculant, well, for ubuntu desktop there is a run-once "No Network" install test cases. and doing that for lubuntu would have caught the bug of not shipping a repository with debs sufficient to complete offline installs. | 16:38 |
| flocculant | xnox: right - I see that now - was perhaps reading things odd here | 16:41 |
| * flocculant wonders what happens for me | 16:42 | |
| flocculant | no surprises | 16:52 |
| flocculant | tsimonq2: so when I see this testcase and deal with that side - you want it added to http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/admin/config/services/qatracker/testsuites/297/edit at the same time? | 16:55 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron (zesty-proposed/main) [2:10.0.0-0ubuntu5 => 2:10.0.0-0ubuntu5.1] (openstack, ubuntu-server) (sync) | 18:51 | |
| tumbleweed | ./win 34 | 19:21 |
| tumbleweed | win 34 | 19:21 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: +1 for dropping purple altogether, then | 19:24 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: fwiw I thought it was useful to know "this bug was verified for some series but not this one" because it seems like that's low-hanging fruit to get the verification done by prodding someone on the bug | 19:25 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: okay | 19:30 |
| tsimonq2 | bdmurray: fwiw I filed a bug about adding the test before xnox said anything, I picked up on that. | 21:00 |
| tsimonq2 | flocculant: Which testcase? | 21:09 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: should I also drop the remaining reference to 'purple' in the text? | 21:11 |
| bdmurray | slangasek: refresh, I caught that in 1094 | 21:16 |
| slangasek | bdmurray: done and merged, thanks! | 21:20 |
| tsimonq2 | What's this do? http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/package-team-mapping.json | 23:03 |
| slangasek | it occupies space on a disk | 23:13 |
| tsimonq2 | XD | 23:14 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: What's the file mean? | 23:14 |
| tsimonq2 | What's it's purpose? | 23:14 |
| slangasek | it provides a cache mapping source packages to teams which are considered owners of those packages, in Ubuntu main | 23:14 |
| infinity | As far as I can tell, its purpose is to point out that Foudnations is the bug subscriber for way too many things. | 23:15 |
| tsimonq2 | lol :P | 23:15 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-mate-welcome (zesty-proposed/universe) [17.04.11 => 17.04.12] (ubuntu-mate) | 23:57 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!