| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted network-manager [amd64] (artful-proposed) [1.8.2-1ubuntu4] | 06:56 | |
| === maclin1 is now known as maclin | ||
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | ||
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fonts-noto-cjk [amd64] (artful-proposed/main) [1:1.004+repack3-2] (kubuntu, personal-gunnarhj, ubuntu-desktop) | 12:45 | |
| flexiondotorg | slangasek Who will be assisting the 17.10 Beta 1 iso spinning/release etc? | 12:46 |
|---|---|---|
| flexiondotorg | Beta 1 scheduled for August 31st. | 12:46 |
| flexiondotorg | I've started gathering the participating flavours. | 12:47 |
| tsimonq2 | fwiw, Laney did Nusakan for last cycle's Beta 1, but looks like he's not in the chan | 16:03 |
| micahg | doesn't appear to be online | 16:06 |
| slangasek | flexiondotorg: looks like sil2100 might take point, and I'm working on getting things set up on the tracker. Is http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/series/62/manifest accurate to your understanding? | 16:27 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828) has been added | 17:03 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828) has been added | 17:03 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828) has been added | 17:34 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828) has been added | 17:34 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron-lbaas-dashboard (zesty-proposed/universe) [2.0.0-0ubuntu1 => 2.0.0-0ubuntu1.1] (no packageset) | 19:05 | |
| flexiondotorg | slangasek sil2100 From the feedback I've had so far, the tracker looks correct. | 19:49 |
| valorie | any guesses on when Kubuntu beta 1 will roll out for prelim testing? | 20:30 |
| slangasek | valorie: just now triggered the builds, now that flexiondotorg has confirmed whose should be built. so, soon | 20:37 |
| slangasek | sil2100: ^^ | 20:37 |
| valorie | ping sil2100 slangasek flexiondotorg - Kubuntu is participating in beta 1 | 20:38 |
| valorie | cool | 20:38 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828) has been added | 21:17 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Kylin Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828) has been added | 21:17 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] has been updated (20170828.1) | 21:27 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] has been updated (20170828.1) | 21:27 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu MATE Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828.2) has been added | 21:29 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu MATE Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828.2) has been added | 21:29 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] has been updated (20170828.1) | 21:33 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Lubuntu Next Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] has been updated (20170828.1) | 21:33 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New sync: hunspell-dz (artful-proposed/primary) [0.1.0-1] | 21:33 | |
| tsimonq2 | What's up with the respin? ^^^^ | 21:33 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Budgie Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828.1) has been added | 21:35 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Ubuntu Budgie Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828.1) has been added | 21:35 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop amd64 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828.1) has been added | 21:40 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop i386 [Artful Beta 1] (20170828.1) has been added | 21:40 | |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: is it a respin? sorry, I overlooked that there were already builds posted for lubuntu which I didn't trigger; that was the batch trigger of all flavors for beta1 | 21:41 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: I'm just assuming respin because of timestamps with "20170828.1" and there's two sets of Lubuntu notifications | 21:43 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: And ok, cool. | 21:43 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: yes, it is a "respin" based on the scrollback that I overlooked :-) | 21:43 |
| tsimonq2 | Alright :) | 21:44 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: Being on the safe side here -- do metapackage updates (i.e. meta-kde or something) violate Feature Freeze? | 21:48 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: they might; but I'm also not going to yell at flavors for changes they make to their own images | 21:51 |
| slangasek | although actually, now that I think of it | 21:51 |
| slangasek | sorry, that came out wrong ;) | 21:51 |
| slangasek | what I was going to say is, I think we might want a respin of all images again for beta-1 immediately, since I just now dropped resolvconf from the bootstrap set | 21:52 |
| slangasek | (it was in progress last week but had to be reverted until new systemd landed) | 21:52 |
| tsimonq2 | ack | 21:52 |
| tsimonq2 | Hmm, I'm new to having archive upload access (:P), if a package is blocked from migrating because an rdep fails autopkgtests, and I upload a new version that fixes them, does the rdep automatically get a retry against the blocked package, or do I have to do sometime to it? | 21:55 |
| tsimonq2 | s/sometime/something/ | 21:56 |
| tsimonq2 | (that question should have probably went to #ubuntu-devel but whatever :) ) | 21:56 |
| tsimonq2 | Oh, nvm, I RTFM'ed | 21:57 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: meta-kde [amd64] (artful-proposed/universe) [5:92] (kubuntu) | 21:58 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: meta-kde [ppc64el] (artful-proposed/universe) [5:92] (kubuntu) | 21:58 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: meta-kde [i386] (artful-proposed/universe) [5:92] (kubuntu) | 21:58 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: meta-kde [arm64] (artful-proposed/universe) [5:92] (kubuntu) | 21:59 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: meta-kde [s390x] (artful-proposed/universe) [5:92] (kubuntu) | 21:59 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: meta-kde [armhf] (artful-proposed/universe) [5:92] (kubuntu) | 21:59 | |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: OOI which M did you R? | 21:59 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: hm? | 22:01 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: which manual did you read | 22:01 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ProposedMigration#How_to_re-run_autopkgtests_with_dependencies_on_other_packages_in_the_proposed_pocket | 22:02 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: ok. which package are you uploading in order to fix - the failing package or the package that caused it to fail? | 22:02 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: I'm looking to get nodejs to migrate | 22:03 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: I uploaded fixes to node-tap and node-evp-bytestokey. | 22:03 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: I *think* I figured it out (I can retry things now that I'm a member of ~motu, thankfully) | 22:04 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: ok. since node-evp-bytestokey has already migrated to artful, you don't need any special triggers, you just have to hit the retry button | 22:05 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: Yep, and I did exactly that :) | 22:05 |
| * slangasek nods | 22:05 | |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: What about node-tap? | 22:05 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: that one shows autopkgtest regressions in its own revdeps that will need sorting... and you'll want to trigger a node-tap retest against node-tap+nodejs from -proposed in parallel to that | 22:07 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: ack, thanks! | 22:07 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: Also, mind giving the aforementioned meta-kde a review? ;) | 22:08 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: heh, I said you could update metapackages; you neglected to mention you needed NEW review... ;) | 22:17 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: That makes a difference? :P | 22:18 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: one is asking the archive admins to do something, the other is not | 22:19 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: True | 22:19 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: My point is, does it make a difference irt Feature Freeze? | 22:19 |
| slangasek | this looks like a pretty major change from what was there in zesty; why the change? | 22:19 |
| tsimonq2 | The Ubuntu delta does a lot of what's in Debian already | 22:20 |
| tsimonq2 | i.e. package renames, etc. | 22:20 |
| slangasek | ok, but why *change*? according to the last changelog these binary packages were all deliberately dropped because they are orthogonal to the kubuntu-meta package | 22:21 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: These packages aren't provided by kubuntu-meta itself, but it's getting to a point where kubuntu-desktop might not have all of KDE (we've been having second thoughts about PIM) -- having a KDE-specific metapackage with non-Kubuntu packaging would be beneficial for people who want KDE Plasma without Kubuntu | 22:23 |
| tsimonq2 | Why change? Well, it's getting closer to Debian and it provides metapackages that are beneficial for end users. | 22:25 |
| tsimonq2 | (i.e. the same reason why lubuntu-meta and the lxde metapackages still exist independently) | 22:25 |
| tsimonq2 | Specific entry: | 22:27 |
| tsimonq2 | + * Remove kde-standard, kde-full, kde-plasma-desktop and | 22:27 |
| tsimonq2 | + kde-plasma-netbook metapackages, kubuntu has its own meta packages | 22:27 |
| tsimonq2 | (I think my point reflects why we should bring those back) | 22:27 |
| valorie | not netbook, for god's sake | 22:45 |
| tsimonq2 | valorie: My point is, that should be dealt with in Debian | 22:46 |
| valorie | zombie, it is | 22:46 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: I find this argument dubious; the role of flavor teams is precisely to curate the installed set of packages on behalf of Ubuntu users. Who wants to install the not-Kubuntu KDE meta packages? | 22:46 |
| * valorie hands tsimonq2 the magick sword | 22:47 | |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: btw, do you want to comment on Debian bug #872580 with whatever info is relevant? | 22:47 |
| ubot5 | Debian bug 872580 in node-evp-bytestokey "[node-evp-bytestokey] FTBFS with node v6" [Serious,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/872580 | 22:47 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: meta-kde> "Who wants to install the not-Kubuntu KDE meta packages?" - you would be surprised, actually | 22:48 |
| tsimonq2 | Regardless, on the flipside, I don't see a reason why the delta *should* exist | 22:48 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: node-evp-bytestokey> sure | 22:48 |
| slangasek | sure; usually we don't have a delta because we blacklist such packages entirely ;) | 22:48 |
| tsimonq2 | !info lxde | 22:49 |
| ubot5 | lxde (source: lxde-metapackages): Metapackage for LXDE. In component universe, is optional. Version 9 (zesty), package size 1 kB, installed size 10 kB | 22:49 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: :P | 22:49 |
| slangasek | tsimonq2: that just shows that no one has blacklisted it *yet* :) | 22:51 |
| tsimonq2 | slangasek: But I think blacklisting is besides the point, fwiw | 22:52 |
| tsimonq2 | If we're going to blacklist it, why have any Ubuntu changes? | 22:52 |
| slangasek | I don't know? I didn't make those changes | 22:53 |
| slangasek | I do think it's better to drop this package instead, but I won't block it. However, I think the Kubuntu team should get a say in what's done with this package | 22:54 |
| tsimonq2 | valorie, clivejo: ^^ | 22:54 |
| valorie | well, acheronuk, not me | 22:56 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lxd (xenial-backports/main) [2.16-0ubuntu2~ubuntu16.04.1 => 2.17-0ubuntu2~ubuntu16.04.1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-server) | 23:20 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: lxd (zesty-backports/main) [2.16-0ubuntu2~ubuntu17.04.1 => 2.17-0ubuntu2~ubuntu17.04.1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-server) | 23:20 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted lxd [source] (xenial-backports) [2.17-0ubuntu2~ubuntu16.04.1] | 23:22 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted lxd [source] (zesty-backports) [2.17-0ubuntu2~ubuntu17.04.1] | 23:22 | |
| slangasek | heh; resolvconf demotion hasn't taken effect yet because there have been no new publications to artful. Guess I need to fix something. Oh look, there's a source package that will migrate if I accept the new binaries synced from Debian :P | 23:36 |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted fonts-noto-cjk [amd64] (artful-proposed) [1:1.004+repack3-2] | 23:37 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted meta-kde [arm64] (artful-proposed) [5:92] | 23:37 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted meta-kde [i386] (artful-proposed) [5:92] | 23:37 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted meta-kde [s390x] (artful-proposed) [5:92] | 23:37 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted meta-kde [amd64] (artful-proposed) [5:92] | 23:37 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted meta-kde [ppc64el] (artful-proposed) [5:92] | 23:37 | |
| -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted meta-kde [armhf] (artful-proposed) [5:92] | 23:37 | |
| flexiondotorg | slangasek I've just heard that Xubuntu would like to participate in 17.10 Beta 1 as well. | 23:58 |
| valorie | yay! | 23:58 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!