[09:42] <Trevinho> ilasc: hey, I'm not sure what's happening but I did two uploads for ubuntu (mutter and gnome-shell) but none of them was queued to groovy or I got any email about, can you inspect what's happening?
[09:49] <ilasc> Trevinho: I will take a look now, so you have any specifics for me, package name, user name ?
[09:50] <ilasc> for your uploads ?
[09:50] <Trevinho> ilasc: packages names are written in previous message (mutter and gnome-shell), while lp user name is 3v1n0
[09:50] <ilasc> excellent, I'll have a look now
[09:50] <Trevinho> ilasc: thanks
[10:12] <Trevinho> ilasc: mh maybe I got why it failed... was missing orig. buit still wondering why no email
[10:13] <ilasc> Trevinho: that would explain it, I couldn't find anything in the logs
[10:13] <cjwatson> ilasc: Where did you look?
[10:14] <ilasc> cjwatson: probably the wrong place: process-build-uploads :-)
[10:14] <cjwatson> ilasc: That's not at all where uploads from humans go :)
[10:14] <ilasc> :-) right
[10:14] <cjwatson> ilasc: For uploads to Ubuntu, anonster.canonical.com::ppa-logs/lp_queue/process-upload.log
[10:15] <ilasc> oh good, thanks! looking now
[10:15] <cjwatson> ilasc: (PPA uploads go to a separate system, so in that case it would have been haetae.canonical.com::ppa-logs/lp_queue/process-upload.log)
[10:15] <cjwatson> ilasc: process-build-uploads is for uploads from builders, which is a later stage, after the source upload has been accepted and successfully built
[10:18] <ilasc> noted, thanks cjwatson !
[10:25] <ilasc> ok Trevinho looking now at relevant logs it looks like some emails did go out - trying to correlate timestamps for them now
[10:25] <Trevinho> ilasc: I looked in all my spam and filtered stuff and nothing's there, but could be something temporary
[10:25] <Trevinho> due to non-lp things
[10:28] <cjwatson> Yeah, it's fairly clear LP sent email in this case, although email being what it is that doesn't necessarily guarantee that it got to you
[10:29] <cjwatson> And as you say it was missing orig
[14:33] <xnox> https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-foundations/+snap/pc-amd64-20/+build/1146998 requested build against security pocket only
[14:33] <xnox> and yet -updates was enabled =(
[14:33] <xnox> is it not possible to do -security pocket only builds of snaps?
[14:36] <cjwatson> xnox: It's not because it's a snap, it's because the source archive is a PPA, so it acts like a PPA build.  Curiously, PPA builds always use -updates
[14:36] <cjwatson> xnox: I'm not sure how much sense this makes ... a bug would be welcome
[16:40] <xnox> edited ppa dep's to be security only too; re-requesting snap build in security pocket.
[16:51] <cjwatson> xnox: You're welcome to try, but unless I'm misreading the code I don't think that will help
[16:51] <cjwatson> xnox: ... I think maybe I am misreading the code :)  An explicit primary archive dependency wins
[17:12] <xnox> looks good!