[00:51] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: studio-controls (jammy-proposed/universe) [2.3.1-0ubuntu1 => 2.3.1-0ubuntu2] (ubuntustudio)
[02:21]  * tumbleweed got stung by what was presumably a jellyfish today :P
[02:34] <vorlon> seems an excessive way to celebrate
[06:08] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: virtualbox (jammy-proposed/multiverse) [6.1.32-dfsg-1build1 => 6.1.34-dfsg-2] (kernel-dkms, ubuntu-cloud) (sync)
[08:33] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ukui-settings-daemon [source] (jammy-proposed) [3.1.1.1-1ubuntu1]
[08:41] <schopin> I'm fairly sure the answer is going to be "no", but since there's openssl 3.0.3 coming out next week (bugfix release), it's not something that we would SRU wholesale, now, would it? :D
[08:43] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gnome-weather [source] (jammy-proposed) [41.0-3ubuntu2]
[08:54] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted evolution [source] (jammy-proposed) [3.44.0-1ubuntu1]
[09:04] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted studio-controls [source] (jammy-proposed) [2.3.1-0ubuntu2]
[09:13] <ginggs> schopin: i think it's been done before
[09:13] <ginggs> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/1.1.1-1ubuntu2.1~18.04.1
[09:15] <schopin> ginggs: so, there's precedent, nice!
[09:23] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gtk4 [source] (jammy-proposed) [4.6.2+ds-1ubuntu3]
[09:23] <toabctl> FYI: the CPC team is waiting for the archive to be open and distro-info-data SRU'd before we start building LXD images.
[09:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubiquity [source] (jammy-proposed) [22.04.16]
[09:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-docs (jammy-proposed/main) [22.04.4 => 22.04.5] (ubuntu-desktop)
[10:08] <Nafallo> for tumbleweed's sake I hope K won't be Kangaroo with those kind of celebrations. I hear they can be vicious :-P
[10:10]  * RikMills celebrates with a jam sandwich for lunch
[10:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: oss4 (jammy-proposed/universe) [4.2-build2010-5ubuntu9 => 4.2-build2010-5ubuntu9.1] (kernel-dkms)
[10:23] <xnox> ginggs:  that's not a precedent....... because that was upload to drop 1.1.0 which went end of life.
[10:24] <xnox> schopin:  ginggs: we don't take new openssl releases into stable series, as they ship too many regressions in every point release they cut. Instead we only cherry-pick individual patches.
[10:26] <xnox> toabctl:  which in turn is waiting on release team finding out the new name first.......
[10:26] <schopin> xnox: yeah, that's what I figured
[10:26] <xnox> schopin:  but that was smooth enough to try ;-)
[10:27] <xnox> also https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openssl/+bug/1797386 never doing that ever again. it was the right thing to do, but it was a lot of pain
[10:27] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 1797386 in ruby2.5 (Ubuntu Bionic) "[SRU] OpenSSL 1.1.1 to 18.04 LTS" [Undecided, Fix Released]
[10:27] <bdmurray> xnox: have you looked at the new ubuntu-advantage-tools
[10:32] <xnox> vorlon:  bdmurray:  it hooks good to me, and can be approved. (and consistent with yesterday's meeting with $lots-of-people)
[10:36] <bdmurray> xnox: ack, thnaks
[10:40] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-advantage-tools [source] (jammy-proposed) [27.8~22.04.1]
[11:26] <xnox> mclemenceau:  join /j #ubuntu-irc to ask for a cloak
[11:33] <jbicha> bdmurray: good morning, please review gdm3 for jammy-proposed
[12:25] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (impish-proposed/main) [2.3.9 => 2.3.9ubuntu0.1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[13:05] <paride> bdmurray, so in jammy /etc/os-release we have VERSION_ID="22.04" and VERSION="22.04 (Jammy Jellyfish)"
[13:05] <paride> while the past LTS releases also specify LTS in there
[13:06] <paride> bdmurray, that's why ubuntu-advantage-tools doesn't check for "22.04 LTS"
[13:07] <apw> definatly the official name for this release is 22.04 LTS.
[13:08] <paride> then we need to fix base-files
[13:10] <tjaalton> seems jammy isn't open for sru handling yet
[13:10] <tjaalton> via mere sru-team mortals
[13:10] <apw> tjaalton, correct; "opening" involves steps to open access to -updates and -security
[14:04] <Odd_Bloke> Congrats on the release, folks!
[14:09] <ahasenack> quick poll, when the title of a documentation section says "network users authentication", what do you think it means?
[14:09] <ahasenack> I'm trying to come up with a good name
[14:09] <ahasenack> ops, wrong channel, sorry
[14:22] <paride> Odd_Bloke \o/
[14:55] <xnox> Odd_Bloke:  thank you, that is my 20th one =) surreal it's been 10 years at canonical for me.
[14:56] <xnox> tjaalton:  yeah, cause overlords need to move out packages from -proposed to $k-proposed that never got released / never get released. before allowing sru-team to handle jammy-proposed
[14:56] <xnox> i wonder if ubuntu-archive could have created "k-release-staging ppa" and move all packages from the jammy-proposed to that ppa; to make jammy-proposed clean. and let sru-team do things.
[15:02] <Odd_Bloke> xnox: Wow!
[15:41] <paride> I'd like to fix jammy's /etc/os-release, but I'm unsure on where to target the upload, given that Jammy is released but KK is not open yet
[15:50] <vorlon> paride: target to jammy, and when kk opens we will forward-copy any SRUs as necessary
[15:50] <vorlon> xnox: SRU team is not blocked from doing things just because there's other cruft currently in jammy-proposed
[15:52] <paride> vorlon, thanks
[16:09] <jbicha> vorlon: could you review gdm3 for jammy-proposed?
[16:10] <vorlon> jbicha: sure, looking
[16:13] <xnox> vorlon:  but they don't seem to have queue permissions either?!
[16:14] <vorlon> xnox: that's a matter of the series state in launchpad, has that not been toggled as per the release checklist?
[16:18] <vorlon> jbicha: replacing a quilt patch with a different quilt patch is possibly the worst input to an SRU queue review FYI
[16:19] <vorlon> jbicha: please update the test case to cover testing that the behavior is not changed on systems that are not targeted by this change
[16:21] <jbicha> so next time it would be better to remove the patch and add a new one with a new file name?
[16:21] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: base-files (jammy-proposed/main) [12ubuntu4 => 12ubuntu4.1] (core, i386-whitelist)
[16:24] <jbicha> I've added an additional test case for non-Nvidia systems
[16:24] <vorlon> thanks
[16:25] <vorlon> jbicha: and yeah, using a different patch filename would help for readability of the debdiff
[16:26] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gdm3 [source] (jammy-proposed) [42.0-1ubuntu7]
[16:34] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- New source: build-hat (jammy-proposed/primary) [0.5.8-0ubuntu1]
[17:12] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: net-snmp (jammy-proposed/main) [5.9.1+dfsg-1ubuntu2 => 5.9.1+dfsg-1ubuntu2.1] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist, ubuntu-server)
[17:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: apt (focal-proposed/main) [2.0.6 => 2.0.7] (core, i386-whitelist)
[18:44] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: ubuntu-image (jammy-proposed/main) [2.2+22.04ubuntu2 => 2.2+22.04ubuntu3] (desktop-core)
[18:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox [sync] (jammy-proposed) [6.1.34-dfsg-1]
[18:48] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: rejected virtualbox [sync] (jammy-proposed) [6.1.34-dfsg-2]
[19:13] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted gtksourceview5 [source] (jammy-proposed) [5.4.1-0ubuntu1]
[19:16] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-docs [source] (jammy-proposed) [22.04.5]
[20:58] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted base-files [source] (jammy-proposed) [12ubuntu4.1]
[21:00] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted net-snmp [source] (jammy-proposed) [5.9.1+dfsg-1ubuntu2.1]
[21:46] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: accepted ubuntu-image [source] (jammy-proposed) [2.2+22.04ubuntu3]
[22:39] -queuebot:#ubuntu-release- Unapproved: net-snmp (impish-proposed/main) [5.9+dfsg-3ubuntu2 => 5.9+dfsg-3ubuntu3.1] (desktop-core, i386-whitelist, ubuntu-server)