[06:56] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted network-manager [amd64] (artful-proposed) [1.8.2-1ubuntu4]
=== maclin1 is now known as maclin
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
[12:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: fonts-noto-cjk [amd64] (artful-proposed/main) [1:1.004+repack3-2] (kubuntu, personal-gunnarhj, ubuntu-desktop)
[12:46] <flexiondotorg> slangasek Who will be assisting the 17.10 Beta 1 iso spinning/release etc?
[12:46] <flexiondotorg> Beta 1 scheduled for August 31st.
[12:47] <flexiondotorg> I've started gathering the participating flavours.
[16:03] <tsimonq2> fwiw, Laney did Nusakan for last cycle's Beta 1, but looks like he's not in the chan
[16:06] <micahg> doesn't appear to be online
[16:27] <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?
[17:03] -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
[17:34] -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
[19:05] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: neutron-lbaas-dashboard (zesty-proposed/universe) [2.0.0-0ubuntu1 => 2.0.0-0ubuntu1.1] (no packageset)
[19:49] <flexiondotorg> slangasek sil2100 From the feedback I've had so far, the tracker looks correct.
[20:30] <valorie> any guesses on when Kubuntu beta 1 will roll out for prelim testing?
[20:37] <slangasek> valorie: just now triggered the builds, now that flexiondotorg has confirmed whose should be built.  so, soon
[20:37] <slangasek> sil2100: ^^
[20:38] <valorie> ping sil2100 slangasek flexiondotorg - Kubuntu is participating in beta 1
[20:38] <valorie> cool
[21:17] -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
[21:27] -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)
[21:29] -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
[21:33] -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? ^^^^
[21:35] -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
[21:40] -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
[21:41] <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
[21:43] <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 :-)
[21:44] <tsimonq2> Alright :)
[21:48] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Being on the safe side here -- do metapackage updates (i.e. meta-kde or something) violate Feature Freeze?
[21:51] <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 ;)
[21:52] <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
[21:55] <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?
[21:56] <tsimonq2> s/sometime/something/
[21:56] <tsimonq2> (that question should have probably went to #ubuntu-devel but whatever :) )
[21:57] <tsimonq2> Oh, nvm, I RTFM'ed
[21:58] -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)
[21:59] -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?
[22:01] <tsimonq2> slangasek: hm?
[22:01] <slangasek> tsimonq2: which manual did you read
[22:02] <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?
[22:03] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I'm looking to get nodejs to migrate
[22:03] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I uploaded fixes to node-tap and node-evp-bytestokey.
[22:04] <tsimonq2> slangasek: I *think* I figured it out (I can retry things now that I'm a member of ~motu, thankfully)
[22:05] <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?
[22:07] <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!
[22:08] <tsimonq2> slangasek: Also, mind giving the aforementioned meta-kde a review? ;)
[22:17] <slangasek> tsimonq2: heh, I said you could update metapackages; you neglected to mention you needed NEW review... ;)
[22:18] <tsimonq2> slangasek: That makes a difference? :P
[22:19] <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?
[22:20] <tsimonq2> The Ubuntu delta does a lot of what's in Debian already
[22:20] <tsimonq2> i.e. package renames, etc.
[22:21] <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
[22:23] <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
[22:25] <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)
[22:27] <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)
[22:45] <valorie> not netbook, for god's sake
[22:46] <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?
[22:47]  * 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
[22:48] <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 ;)
[22:49] <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
[22:51] <slangasek> tsimonq2: that just shows that no one has blacklisted it *yet* :)
[22:52] <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?
[22:53] <slangasek> I don't know?  I didn't make those changes
[22:54] <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: ^^
[22:56] <valorie> well, acheronuk, not me
[23:20] -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)
[23:22] -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]
[23:36] <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
[23:37] -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]
[23:58] <flexiondotorg> slangasek I've just heard that Xubuntu would like to participate in 17.10 Beta 1 as well.
[23:58] <valorie> yay!