[00:09] <jbicha> infinity: well I thought I would try desktop-file-utils at least, thanks
[00:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: netcfg (zesty-proposed/main) [1.138ubuntu5 => 1.138ubuntu5.1] (core)
[00:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: netcfg (yakkety-proposed/main) [1.138ubuntu2 => 1.138ubuntu2.1] (core)
[00:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: netcfg (xenial-proposed/main) [1.135ubuntu4.3 => 1.135ubuntu4.4] (core)
[00:44] <cyphermox> bdmurray: still around? do you have time to review the netcfgs?
[00:48] <bdmurray> cyphermox: I think you should come talk to me in person
[00:49] <cyphermox> but whyyyy?
[00:49] <cyphermox> :)
[04:52] <slangasek> doko: I see some autopkgtest regressions caused by new warnings from gcc: http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/c/ciftilib/artful/armhf , http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/f/fast5/artful/armhf - is that a behavior change that we want to keep?  it's not clear to me that the behavior described by the new warning actually breaks the code under gcc 7.1
[05:37] <estan> tjaalton: good morning, any chance you could do the qtbase-opensource-src 5.5.1+dfsg-16ubuntu7.5 SRU? it has two nice verfied fixes i'm eagerly awaiting :)
[05:40] <estan> (some autopkgtests were previously failing, but they were all false positives, and passed after mitya57 restarted them yesterday)
[05:50] <tjaalton> estan: you mean releasing it? there's a rule to not release on friday..
[05:52]  * apw concurs
[06:04] <estan> tjaalton: aha, that makes sense.
[08:19] <ginggs> slangasek: still around?
[08:26] <ginggs> slangasek: i guess not, it was discussed in #ubuntu-devel less than two days ago. affected packages glbinding, ciftilib, fast5
[09:06] <jamespage> o/
[09:07] <jamespage> any archive admins around to poke python-script binary NEW packages into artful-proposed?
[09:16] <apw> jamespage, i can ...
[09:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-scrypt [arm64] (artful-proposed) [0.8.0-0ubuntu1]
[09:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-scrypt [ppc64el] (artful-proposed) [0.8.0-0ubuntu1]
[09:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-scrypt [i386] (artful-proposed) [0.8.0-0ubuntu1]
[09:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-scrypt [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.8.0-0ubuntu1]
[09:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-scrypt [s390x] (artful-proposed) [0.8.0-0ubuntu1]
[09:22] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-scrypt [armhf] (artful-proposed) [0.8.0-0ubuntu1]
[09:22] <jamespage> apw: thanks
[09:25] <jamespage> apw: would you have a bit of time todo some NEW package reviews for artful? I have 5 or so new python deps for OpenStack in the queue
[09:26] <apw> jamespage, that thing is exploding, i will see if i can get to it
[09:28] <jamespage> apw: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/artful/+queue?queue_state=0&queue_text=python (apart from flask-htmlmin) is blocking OpenStack Pike b2 updates atm
[09:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted flask-htmlmin [amd64] (artful-proposed) [1.2-1]
[09:41] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted node-gulp-concat [amd64] (artful-proposed) [2.6.1-1]
[12:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-fan (yakkety-proposed/main) [0.12.0.1 => 0.12.0.2] (no packageset)
[14:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-fan [source] (yakkety-proposed) [0.12.0.2]
[15:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (xenial-proposed/universe) [2.29 => 2.31] (no packageset)
[15:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (yakkety-proposed/universe) [2.29+16.10 => 2.31+16.10] (no packageset)
[15:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: snapcraft (zesty-proposed/universe) [2.29+17.04 => 2.31+17.04] (no packageset)
[16:27] <jbicha> sil2100: have you decided you don't like verification-done any more and prefer verification-done-{series} ?
[16:28] <sil2100> jbicha: yeah, we're in the middle of changing the process so I'm switching all verification-done bugs to the series notation
[16:28] <sil2100> Don't worry about it, I go through a list and all is good
[16:41] <sil2100> jbicha: anyway, yes, from now on please use the verification-done-RELEASE tags for everything, even when there's only one series affected
[16:56] <bdmurray> slangasek: There are some snapcraft uploads in the SRU queue what were you saying yesterday about python3-click?
[17:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: debuerreotype [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.1-1] (no packageset)
[17:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libimage-sane-perl [i386] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.09-1] (no packageset)
[17:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: el-mock-el [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [1.25.1-1] (no packageset)
[17:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libimage-sane-perl [ppc64el] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.09-1] (no packageset)
[17:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: qml-mode [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.4-1] (no packageset)
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: ert-expectations-el [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.2-1] (no packageset)
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libimage-sane-perl [arm64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.09-1] (no packageset)
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: jugglinglab [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.6.2-1] (no packageset)
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: r-bioc-delayedarray [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.2.4-1] (no packageset)
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libimage-sane-perl [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.09-1] (no packageset)
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libimage-sane-perl [s390x] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.09-1] (no packageset)
[17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: libimage-sane-perl [armhf] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.09-1] (no packageset)
[17:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: jinja2-mode [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [0.2-1] (no packageset)
[17:20] <slangasek> bdmurray: sergiusens had pointed me at ttps://launchpad.net/~sergiusens/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+packages?field.name_filter=click&field.status_filter=published&field.series_filter= which need uploads sponsored and accepted as SRU
[17:20] <bdmurray> slangasek: where'd your h go?
[17:23] <slangasek> bdmurray: the cut'n'paste imp
[17:46] <apw> takes his cut ...
[18:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: click (zesty-proposed/main) [0.4.45.1+16.10.20160916-0ubuntu1 => 0.4.46+17.04.20170607.3-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[19:15] <slashd> bdmurray, what means "rls-aa-notfixing" -> release-artful-notfixing ? and what does it means for us ?
[19:15] <slashd> ddstreet^
[19:22] <slashd> bdmurray, I think I found the answer here : https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/other-q-release-bug-list-workflows
[19:22] <cyphermox> we're just reviewing bugs in rls-aa-tracking and rls-aa-incoming since we're all face to face
[19:24] <slashd> cyphermox, thnaks
[19:24] <slashd> thanks
[19:24] <cyphermox> specifically, I think this one bug is that you already seem to have it handled, and sponsors are subscribed, so we don't need to be tracking it to schedule engineering time on it (since someone else did)
[19:26] <slashd> cyphermox, cool was just making sure if something in particular was blocking aa upload or something
[19:28] <cyphermox> I don't think so. remind me what bug and I can sponsor it if it checks out
[19:28] <slashd> ddstreet, have the LP # handy for cyphermox ^ if the patch is ready for sponsor
[19:29] <ddstreet> lp 1693819
[19:29] <ddstreet> cyphermox note that this isn't fixed upstream with isc-dhcp, but i did open a bug with them - their bug tracking is private though
[19:30] <cyphermox> yeah
[19:30] <cyphermox> I've opened a tab for it, I will look when we're done with the list of bugs
[19:31] <ddstreet> thanks, it's not urgent, and feel free to suggest a different way to patch it
[19:41] <slangasek> slashd: yeah we are just making it clear that foundations is not committing to fix for artful; we are still happy to take your fix
[19:44] <mdeslaur> FYI, there seems to be a heck of a lot of openssl upgrade failure bugs coming in
[19:50] <slashd> slangasek, sound good to me thanks for the clarification
[20:53] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: click (yakkety-proposed/main) [0.4.45.1+16.10.20160916-0ubuntu1 => 0.4.46+16.10.20170607.3-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-desktop)
[23:01] <valorie> dear release team, I've not gotten a response about KDE PIM on the ML; I would appreciate suggestions
[23:01] <valorie> we're preparing more packages that will need approval and don't want to clog any pipelines
[23:01] <valorie> alpha 1 approaches
[23:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted kmail [source] (artful-proposed) [4:16.12.3-0ubuntu1]
[23:21] <slangasek> valorie: I have been looking at the queue following the email prompting (which, btw, your mail seems not to have cleared ubuntu-release or ubuntu-devel but acheronuk's has as of yesterday).  FWIW the sourceful NEW queue in Ubuntu doesn't get much attention because we generally don't expect NEW packages to come into Ubuntu that way in the general case, rather than through Debian
[23:21] <valorie> thanks for your attention, slangasek
[23:21] <slangasek> valorie: and you'll usually get better results on the queue talking to AAs in realtime on IRC, so that we can ask questions and give feedback about packages there... such as the kmail-account-wizard source package, which I'm wondering why it has a different source package name than the binary package
[23:22] <valorie> well, the devels tried
[23:22] <valorie> clivejo: any input on the above to slangasek?
[23:23] <slangasek> "the devels tried" - to talk to AAs?
[23:23] <valorie> I know Rik did
[23:23] <valorie> slangasek: my post is in the list archives.....
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted debuerreotype [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.1-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted ert-expectations-el [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.2-1]
[23:24] <slangasek> that's interesting, I wonder what ate it here
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted jugglinglab [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.6.2-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libimage-sane-perl [arm64] (artful-proposed) [0.09-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libimage-sane-perl [i386] (artful-proposed) [0.09-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libimage-sane-perl [s390x] (artful-proposed) [0.09-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted r-bioc-delayedarray [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.2.4-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted el-mock-el [amd64] (artful-proposed) [1.25.1-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libimage-sane-perl [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.09-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libimage-sane-perl [ppc64el] (artful-proposed) [0.09-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted jinja2-mode [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.2-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted qml-mode [amd64] (artful-proposed) [0.4-1]
[23:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted libimage-sane-perl [armhf] (artful-proposed) [0.09-1]
[23:24] <valorie> I'm not subbed, I guess I should do that
[23:24] <clivejo> I believe Rik and Jose both tried
[23:25] <valorie> "such as the kmail-account-wizard source package, which I'm wondering why it has a different source package name than the binary package" was the question
[23:26] <valorie> I know Rik talked to apw, whom I understand is probably swamped
[23:26] <valorie> but that doesn't help US
[23:27] <slangasek> well, if a particular AA is busy, you certainly need to be prepared to shop around
[23:28] <clivejo> most of these have been split or renamed upstream in KDE
[23:29] <clivejo> KDE renamed the source and the git repo is here - https://cgit.kde.org/kmail-account-wizard.git/
[23:29] <valorie> unfortunately the Debian freeze has hit us this time around
[23:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted knotes [source] (artful-proposed) [4:16.12.3-0ubuntu1]
[23:31] <valorie> ooooo
[23:34] <slangasek> clivejo: there is no requirement that the source package match the upstream source name; there is a soft requirement that a source package producing a single binary package should have the same name as the binary package.  Do you know if Debian will also use the same source name?
[23:37] <clivejo> slangasek: I can't be sure about it, but there has been a git repo created for it https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-kde/applications/kmail-account-wizard.git/
[23:38] <clivejo> which is a copy of the previous source package kdepim
[23:39] <clivejo> which they will remove and split it into the new package