[00:06] xnox: LP: #1797386 includes no test case information for the python packages; and unlike the ruby, r-cran bits I already accepted, these touch things besides openssl support. (and also, do these changes introduce a runtime dep on 1.1.1? there are no changes to versioned deps. What's the verification plan here? [00:06] Launchpad bug 1797386 in openssl (Ubuntu) "[SRU] OpenSSL 1.1.1 to 18.04 LTS" [Undecided,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1797386 [00:07] vorlon, python3s gain shlibdep on 1.1.1 due to using 1.1.1 only symbols; the 2.7 one does not; and we wanted to include pythons point releases due to openssl support and for doko to piggy back onto openssl rebuild of python. [00:07] vorlon, python updates is intensive, hence it's openssl+python-point-release updates [00:08] xnox: yes, so where are the test plan / results for the python updates? this needs to be transparent in the SRU bugs [00:08] vorlon, the openssl verification of pythons is sufficent in autopkgtests of like ssl module, python-cryptography, and reverse triggers. [00:08] (cause i had to fix a few of those, which already landed as standalone SRUs, hence expect greenish results from python* stuff w.r.t. openssl) [00:09] the big test rebuild covered the python updates as well [00:09] vorlon, the test plan / results for the python updates -> i believe doko had the test rebuild results. [00:09] then that needs to be spelled out in the SRU bug [00:09] ok [00:09] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tMIwlwoHH_1h5sbvUbNac6-HIPKi3e0Xr8ebchIOU1A/edit#gid=147857652 Sheet2 [00:10] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected kdelibs4support [source] (disco-proposed) [5.56.0-0ubuntu3] [00:10] xnox: and there's no runtime breakage from using new python2.7 binary against openssl 1.1.0? nothing will break as a result of trying to use unknown enum values? [00:11] and there's an upstream plan to extend the support: https://bugs.python.org/issue34631 [00:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apache2 [source] (disco-proposed) [2.4.38-2ubuntu2] [00:13] vorlon, there is no breakage if one upgrades all the things..... if one has selective upgrades one can end up in a situation where python is clearly using tls1.3 but doesn't have enums for it; or it smells like it has tls1.3 enums but fails to use them at runtime. I have constructed emperically such a situation, however so far i have not seen this to actually cause any problems as nobody is using tls1.3 enums in python2.7 or expects them to be [00:13] usable, yet. I have a bug filed for this https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python2.7/+bug/1808476 but we didn't action yet. [00:13] Ubuntu bug 1808476 in python2.7 (Ubuntu) "Please bump libssl1.1 dependency to at least >= 1.1.1, as headers leak constants" [Undecided,New] [00:13] vorlon, it's a valid concern, but only theoretical at the moment. [00:14] and doesn't manifest itself if all updates are installed/applied. Note that pythons are built in security pocket, such that security team can copy these into -security pocket if and when openssl 1.1.1 ends up in the security pocket. [00:14] (as the rest of the things built from my ppa) [00:14] ok, I still think we should patch that as part of this SRU [00:15] ok [00:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-software [source] (bionic-proposed) [3.28.1-0ubuntu4.18.04.9] [02:41] infinity: re kdelibs4support. I frankly have no idea how to fix that for s390x. [02:44] I can't see any KDE developers caring one jot about s390x either [03:05] infinity: oh, on reading your reject message, you mean we should perhaps hint it for this release? that would seem reasonable [03:06] at 3:30am when I can't sleep, I didn't quite get the meaning [03:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: bash (disco-proposed/main) [5.0-2ubuntu1 => 5.0-3ubuntu1] (core) [04:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: appstream (disco-proposed/main) [0.12.6-1 => 0.12.6-2] (desktop-core) (sync) [04:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted bash [source] (disco-proposed) [5.0-3ubuntu1] [04:16] bdmurray: have you already seen that apport autopkgtests are newly unhappy with your latest upload? [04:26] acheronuk: It's a Qt regression, AFAICT, not a KDE regression. Turning off KDE tests to paper over a Qt regression seems odd. [04:29] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-octavia-lib [source] (disco-proposed) [1.1.1-0ubuntu1] [04:31] acheronuk: But yeah, even if we decide we don't care, I'd rather see a failing test than one that claims to be passing because it's disabled. [04:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: python-octavia-lib [amd64] (disco-proposed/none) [1.1.1-0ubuntu1] (no packageset) [04:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted python-octavia-lib [amd64] (disco-proposed) [1.1.1-0ubuntu1] [04:43] infinity: what is the new dpkg doing to lsb-base (and therefore sudo) in autopkgtests? [04:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-defaults-ports (disco-proposed/universe) [1.181ubuntu1 => 1.181ubuntu2] (no packageset) [04:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-defaults (disco-proposed/main) [1.181ubuntu2 => 1.181ubuntu3] (core) [04:43] versioned breaks or such? [04:44] ah, looks quite likely [04:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-defaults-ports [source] (disco-proposed) [1.181ubuntu2] [04:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-defaults [source] (disco-proposed) [1.181ubuntu3] [04:55] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: intel-media-driver (disco-proposed/universe) [18.4.0+dfsg1-1 => 18.4.0+dfsg1-1ubuntu1] (kubuntu) [05:46] vorlon: Versioned breaks, yeah. [05:47] vorlon: I forgot that pinning wreaks havoc with that, probably should have migrated lsb before uploading dpkg. [05:56] infinity: bit of manual triggering required to get it going, but things are generally passing now [05:57] and lsb should get in with the next run besides [06:24] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: veusz (disco-proposed/universe) [3.0.1-1 => 3.0.1-1ubuntu1] (no packageset) [06:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted veusz [source] (disco-proposed) [3.0.1-1ubuntu1] [06:40] infinity: on refection I don't disagree [07:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-defaults-ports (disco-proposed/universe) [1.181ubuntu2 => 1.181ubuntu3] (no packageset) [07:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-defaults-ports [source] (disco-proposed) [1.181ubuntu3] [08:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: update-notifier (trusty-proposed/main) [0.154.1ubuntu3 => 0.154.1ubuntu4] (kubuntu, ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server) [08:03] sil2100: ^ the update-notifier ESM change for trusty, would be great if you could approve it! [08:11] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zenity (disco-proposed/main) [3.30.0-2 => 3.32.0-1] (desktop-core) (sync) [08:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mpich (disco-proposed/universe) [3.3-1 => 3.3-3] (kubuntu) (sync) [08:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: wxpython4.0 (disco-proposed/universe) [4.0.4+dfsg-1 => 4.0.4+dfsg-2] (no packageset) (sync) [08:15] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted wxpython4.0 [sync] (disco-proposed) [4.0.4+dfsg-2] [08:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected zenity [sync] (disco-proposed) [3.32.0-1] [08:20] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gedit (disco-proposed/main) [3.32.0-1 => 3.32.0-2] (ubuntu-desktop) (sync) [08:25] juliank: on it! [08:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: kmod (disco-proposed/main) [25-1ubuntu2 => 25-1ubuntu3] (core) [08:34] infinity: ^ this includes only dropping i2c_i801 from the blacklist, doesn't touch bochs [08:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted update-notifier [source] (trusty-proposed) [0.154.1ubuntu4] [08:44] acheronuk: any chance plasma-framework etc could have more verbose autopkgtests in the future? [08:48] tjaalton: more verbose than the testsuite-stdout in the artifacts.tar.gz? [08:49] testsuite FAIL non-zero exit status 2 [08:49] that's all it says now [08:50] tjaalton: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/RySzKmT3SS/ [08:51] from the artifacts @ http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/p/plasma-framework/disco/arm64 [08:51] ah ok [08:57] the user experience for going through these is not that great though [08:58] the first one opens up fine, the next ones are appended -N and file-roller gets confused [08:58] looks like plasma-iconitemtest is buggy/racy [08:59] ark from kde doesn't get confused ;) [09:00] it can unpack artifacts.tar-1? [09:00] sil2100, please also take a look at ubuntu-meta sru-s if you have some time [09:03] rbalint: will do! Might take some moments as we have guests right now [09:03] But I'm slowly doing my SRU shift [09:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-8-cross-ports (bionic-proposed/universe) [9ubuntu0.1 => 9ubuntu0.2] (no packageset) [09:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gcc-8-cross (bionic-proposed/main) [18ubuntu0.1 => 18ubuntu0.2] (ubuntu-desktop) [09:19] tjaalton: yes [09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted appstream [sync] (disco-proposed) [0.12.6-2] [09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gedit [sync] (disco-proposed) [3.32.0-2] [09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mpich [sync] (disco-proposed) [3.3-3] [09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted curtin [source] (disco-proposed) [18.2-19-g36351dea-0ubuntu1] [09:35] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted kmod [source] (disco-proposed) [25-1ubuntu3] [09:38] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libreoffice (disco-proposed/main) [1:6.2.2-0ubuntu1 => 1:6.2.2-0ubuntu2] (ubuntu-desktop) [09:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libreoffice-l10n (disco-proposed/main) [1:6.2.2-0ubuntu1 => 1:6.2.2-0ubuntu2] (ubuntu-desktop) [09:41] tjaalton: my retry just passed [09:47] dear release team, please consider accepting libreoffice{,-l10n} into disco-proposed, this upload fixes bug #1822839 [09:47] bug 1822839 in LibreOffice "LibreOffice doesn't detect JVM because of unexpected java.vendor property value" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1822839 [09:47] doko, FYI ^ [09:47] ^^ will also help with Qt [09:57] oSoMoN: don't see the diff yet. does this add the "Private Build" vendor as well? [09:57] acheronuk: cool, thanks [09:58] doko, no, only "Debian" (from the debian patch) and "Ubuntu" [10:01] oSoMoN: hmm, ok. Could you include that one for stable release updates as well? not now, but when you do the next uploads anyway [10:03] doko, sure, can do [10:03] doko, the "Private Build" vendor is for PPA builds only, right? [10:03] so it will never hit the archive [10:05] oSoMoN: right, but might be an unexpected result, if somebody builds it's own OpenJDK [10:06] I'll backout the vendor change for backports until we have that fixed in lo [10:07] doko, ok, and I'll update the patch in the VCS to add "Private Build", but won't do another upload for now, I presume this can wait for the next upload (at the latest the 6.2.3 SRU just after release) [10:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libreoffice-l10n [source] (disco-proposed) [1:6.2.2-0ubuntu2] [10:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libreoffice [source] (disco-proposed) [1:6.2.2-0ubuntu2] [10:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libpolyclipping (disco-proposed/universe) [6.4.2-6 => 6.4.2-6ubuntu1] (no packageset) [10:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libpolyclipping [source] (disco-proposed) [6.4.2-6ubuntu1] [10:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-8-cross [source] (bionic-proposed) [18ubuntu0.2] [10:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gcc-8-cross-ports [source] (bionic-proposed) [9ubuntu0.2] [11:24] ddstreet, i see you are working on a systemd update in git, please base it on lp:~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu/+source/systemd to preserve per commit history [11:24] sure [11:24] ddstreet, also mp-s are welcome [11:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: gnome-software (disco-proposed/main) [3.30.6-2ubuntu2 => 3.30.6-2ubuntu3] (ubuntu-desktop) [11:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ciftilib (disco-proposed/universe) [1.5.1-3ubuntu2 => 1.5.3-2] (no packageset) (sync) [11:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ciftilib [sync] (disco-proposed) [1.5.3-2] [11:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: busybox (disco-proposed/main) [1:1.27.2-2ubuntu6 => 1:1.27.2-2ubuntu7] (core) [11:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-software [source] (disco-proposed) [3.30.6-2ubuntu3] [12:01] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted busybox [source] (disco-proposed) [1:1.27.2-2ubuntu7] [12:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: tomcat9 (bionic-proposed/universe) [9.0.16-3~18.04 => 9.0.16-3~18.04.1] (no packageset) [12:07] sil2100, doko, tdaitx ^ fix for LP: #1823125 [12:07] Launchpad bug 1823125 in tomcat9 (Ubuntu Bionic) "tomcat9 fails to install in 18.04" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1823125 [12:08] sil2100, does that need an sru-template? [12:38] rbalint, it is being sru'd, though i assume regression potential is basically 0 [12:41] apw ? [12:41] rbalint, i am saying it likely sould have one, but filling it in should be easy [12:42] apw, ok, i thought you say that the bug itself is not likely to hit [13:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: r-cran-plm (disco-proposed/universe) [1.7-0-1 => 1.7-0-1ubuntu1] (no packageset) [13:17] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted r-cran-plm [source] (disco-proposed) [1.7-0-1ubuntu1] [13:30] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: debian-keyring (disco-proposed/universe) [2019.02.25 => 2019.03.24] (no packageset) (sync) [13:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted debian-keyring [sync] (disco-proposed) [2019.03.24] [13:32] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: r-cran-lmertest (disco-proposed/universe) [3.1-0-1 => 3.1-0-1ubuntu1] (no packageset) [13:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted r-cran-lmertest [source] (disco-proposed) [3.1-0-1ubuntu1] [13:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ciftilib (disco-proposed/universe) [1.5.3-2 => 1.5.3-2ubuntu1] (no packageset) [13:36] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ciftilib [source] (disco-proposed) [1.5.3-2ubuntu1] === cpaelzer_ is now known as cpaelzer [14:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: linux-signed [amd64] (xenial-proposed/main) [4.4.0-146.172] (core, kernel) === Guest7369 is now known as pfsmorigo [14:31] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted resource-agents [source] (xenial-proposed) [1:3.9.7-1ubuntu1] [14:34] vorlon: I happened to notice that this morning independent of your ping. I'll get on that today. [14:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: libhugetlbfs (disco-proposed/universe) [2.19-0ubuntu1 => 2.19-0ubuntu2] (no packageset) [14:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted libhugetlbfs [source] (disco-proposed) [2.19-0ubuntu2] === chrisccoulson_ is now known as chrisccoulson [14:51] sil2100: Hi, could we get some britney hints to help the Qt transition migrate? [14:52] 1. the kdelibs4support failure on s390x. There is a code review in upstreamn qtbase to fix that which would have a follow up upload once that is done and the transition is migrated [14:53] 2. skiptest for qtbase, as the libreoffice failures are not qtbase's fault [14:53] ^^ or other release team? vorlon, infinity maybe? [14:55] update_output_notest.txt says Qt would migrate [15:00] acheronuk: Pointer to the upstream review? [15:02] infinity: https://codereview.qt-project.org/258164 [15:02] by mitya57 [15:03] Shiny. [15:03] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected tomcat9 [source] (bionic-proposed) [9.0.16-3~18.04.1] [15:10] acheronuk: Is anyone committing to getting that in before release (even if upstream doesn't respond in time)? [15:10] mitya57: ^? [15:10] acheronuk: I can live with short-term jamming things in, but I don't want to, eg, ignore kde4libs tests post-release. [15:12] from #ubuntu-qt [15:12] [15:47] I would say, hint and I will do a new upload a bit later. [15:12] [15:48] I want to get some review on my patch from upstream first. [15:13] hopefully he can confirm here [15:14] that will go in anyway if there is a delay on review [15:17] cyphermox bdmurray sil2100 i'm about to upload plymouth to bionic, do you want me to include a patch for lp #1794292 as well in my upload? [15:17] Launchpad bug 1794292 in plymouth (Ubuntu Bionic) "plymouthd crashed with SIGSEGV in /sbin/plymouthd:11 in ply_renderer_set_handler_for_input_source -> ply_keyboard_stop_watching_for_renderer_input -> ply_keyboard_stop_watching_for_input -> ply_device_manager_deactivate_keyboards -> on_deactivate" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1794292 [15:18] ddstreet: I forget but does the errors bucket show a bunch of bionic crashes? [15:18] * bdmurray is also in a meeting at the moment [15:18] thanks sil2100 [15:19] ddstreet: it would be nice; if you can [15:19] sil2100: I'll test your comment for that bug ^; testing that it still work with disk encryption enabled [15:19] (I have no doubt it does, but better be certain) [15:19] cyphermox: thanks! [15:20] ddstreet: yeah, would be nice to have it I guess [15:20] bdmurray it does show some in bionic, but only around 1/10 of the number for cosmic [15:20] ack, i'll throw it into the upload then, thnx [15:20] ddstreet: are you sure about that? [15:20] bdmurray maybe i'm not reading the chart right [15:21] if people haven't triggered it, it deosn't mean it's not there [15:21] ddstreet: oh no, that's me who can't figure out which column is which release [15:22] the versions of plymouth between the two release are quite close [15:22] infinity, acheronuk: Yes. I will do a new upload before end of week. [15:23] yep same debian base, just a few extra ubuntu patches on top of cosmic [15:28] mitya57: Excellent. [15:50] cyphermox Laney just curious, why in the plymouth pkg are patches added/removed in the middle of the d/p/series instead of just adding to the end like normal pkgs? [15:57] because things were already more or less sorted by type of change; whether it was an ubuntu or debian patch, etc. [15:58] hmm, i've always viewed series as chronological, since inserting in the middle can cause unexpected problems with later patches [15:58] k just wondering. thnx [15:59] so; ie. cherry-picks I try to apply towards the top, because they might invalidate later patches, and then you're already ready when you upload a new release and the patch is upstream (your patch lower down is already refreshed, kinda) [15:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed-azure [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [4.18.0-1015.15] [15:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (cosmic-proposed) [4.18.0-18.19] [15:59] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (cosmic-proposed) [4.18.0-18.19] [16:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [ppc64el] (bionic-proposed) [4.15.0-48.51] [16:00] i see, ok [16:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted linux-signed [amd64] (xenial-proposed) [4.4.0-146.172] [16:01] ddstreet: Didn't look at this case, but my usual practice is go to from upstream to downstream, so that things further away from upstream are the ones that need to be rebased [16:01] ^ yeah, that [16:01] basically what cyphermox says [16:02] ddstreet: also; you'll notice I try to use git_*_.patch for naming; it makes it easier to see whether a patch is upstream already for some large projects [16:02] cyphermox do you typically use dep3 headers? [16:03] ie. then you can look at series, check the hashes using something like git tag --containts , etc [16:03] yes, you have the headers, but that means you also need to open the file ;) [16:03] sure, i just don't always see dep3 headers in patches [16:04] people should try to have them, some in plymouth are missing [16:04] all git cherry-picks definitely should have headers [16:04] and we should probably move this discussion to -devel [16:05] sorry didn't mean to get into it, just was wondering :) [16:06] no worries [16:14] infinity: so is that a yes to the hints? :) [16:15] * acheronuk wants to get Qt done, as ahs other things queued [16:15] *has [16:15] acheronuk: I'll look in a bit. [16:15] thank you [16:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: sphinx (disco-proposed/main) [1.8.5-1 => 1.8.5-1ubuntu1] (edubuntu, ubuntu-desktop, ubuntu-server) [16:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: plymouth (bionic-proposed/main) [0.9.3-1ubuntu7.18.04.1 => 0.9.3-1ubuntu7.18.04.2] (core) [16:45] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: zenity (disco-proposed/main) [3.30.0-2 => 3.32.0-3] (desktop-core) (sync) [16:55] sil2100, sorry, but I see libunistring in both proposed and updates pocket... [16:55] libunistring | 0.9.10-1ubuntu1.18.10.1 | cosmic-proposed | source [16:55] libunistring | 0.9.10-1ubuntu1.18.10.1 | cosmic-updates | source [16:55] same for bionic [16:58] LocutusOfBorg: That's nothing unusual. [16:58] how long does it take to go away from -proposed? [16:58] It's cleaned manually. [16:58] I'll scrub it now. [16:58] (But it also doesn't matter if it's there...) [16:59] I was wondering about some automatic copy&clean too that worked only half [16:59] http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html [16:59] List at the end of that report, we just manually process it from time to time. [16:59] yep, it doesn't hurt, but I like clean proposed pocket whenever possible :) [16:59] It would be automatic if and when we get around to having britney do stable migrations. [17:00] probably you are just too fast for me to notice, this is why I never saw it [17:00] :) thanks! [17:00] yep, britney not doing stable is probably the reason, makes sense now, its sad having to do all of this manually with britney in place [17:01] but this said, a cronjob can cleanup that proposed automatically, without having to ask britney... [17:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: stress-ng (disco-proposed/universe) [0.09.57-0ubuntu1 => 0.09.57-0ubuntu2] (no packageset) [17:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted stress-ng [source] (disco-proposed) [0.09.57-0ubuntu2] [17:09] LocutusOfBorg: yeah, as infinity said, usually someone at some point in their morning routine just does that ;) [17:13] :) [17:14] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: nautilus (disco-proposed/main) [1:3.32.0-0ubuntu1 => 1:3.32.0-0ubuntu2] (ubuntu-desktop) [17:15] LocutusOfBorg: And yes, it could probably be cronned by now. We have a history with reports that tell us to do destructive things, where we write the report, we spend the first 6-12 months questioning everything it tells us, to make sure we didn't write a buggy report, then we just start blindly copy-pasting it, cause it hasn't failed us. [17:15] That last point is when we could automate it, but we never seem to take the last step. :P [17:15] (See also safe NBS removal) [17:17] s/months/years/ ;) [17:17] well, oh, I guess we do still do the blind copy-paste part [17:37] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: stress-ng (cosmic-proposed/universe) [0.09.42-1ubuntu1 => 0.09.42-1ubuntu2] (no packageset) [17:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apport (disco-proposed/main) [2.20.10-0ubuntu24 => 2.20.10-0ubuntu25] (core) [17:40] vorlon: that apport upload has the test fix [17:42] bdmurray: accepted, thanks [17:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted apport [source] (disco-proposed) [2.20.10-0ubuntu25] [18:42] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: stress-ng (bionic-proposed/universe) [0.09.25-1ubuntu1 => 0.09.25-1ubuntu2] (no packageset) [18:46] vorlon: I don't suppose you are free to quickly do the hints I discussed earlier? I have a plasma bugfix release to land once Qt is out of the way... [18:51] acheronuk: I was treating this question as one that infinity has the lock on since he has context and an opinion [18:51] no problem [20:18] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: clamav (disco-proposed/main) [0.100.2+dfsg-2ubuntu1 => 0.100.3+dfsg-0ubuntu1] (ubuntu-server) [20:34] bdmurray, vorlon, could you please accept ubuntu-meta srus? if it is not accepted today it can't get into release next week [20:35] I didn't feel comfortable reviewing it. [21:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: mat2 (disco-proposed/universe) [0.7.0-1 => 0.8.0-3] (no packageset) (sync) [21:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted mat2 [sync] (disco-proposed) [0.8.0-3] [21:19] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New binary: mat2 [amd64] (disco-proposed/universe) [0.8.0-3] (no packageset) [22:40] rbalint: How do the SRUs relate to the release? [22:40] (hint: they don't) [22:41] acheronuk: Sorry, was out all afternoon at the doctor's, I'll see about getting Qt migrated after some personal evening faff is out of the way. [23:09] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New: accepted mat2 [amd64] (disco-proposed) [0.8.0-3] [23:52] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: parole (disco-proposed/universe) [1.0.1-1build1 => 1.0.2-0ubuntu1] (ubuntustudio, xubuntu)