| vorlon | rbasak: it appears an MP that's in progress but not in condition to be sponsored can't ever be dropped from the sponsorship report. e.g. https://code.launchpad.net/~xnox/ubuntu/+source/casper/+git/casper/+merge/373690 now has an 'abstain' review on behalf of ubuntu-sponsors but still shows up in the report. I'm not sure if MP reviews in certain states should drop it from the report? | 00:22 |
|---|---|---|
| vorlon | rbasak: or I could just add xnox to the BLACKLISTED_REQUESTER tuple ;D | 00:22 |
| === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie | ||
| === sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie | ||
| xnox | flips tables | 08:47 |
| xnox | vorlon: i changed it to work in progress, maybe that will drop it off the report? | 08:48 |
| rbasak | vorlon: looks like the bzr MP handling filtered for "Needs review" only. I guess we could do that? | 10:33 |
| === JanC is now known as Guest5232 | ||
| === JanC_ is now known as JanC | ||
| enr0n | Can a core dev please retry the following? `retry-autopkgtest-regressions --blocks systemd -s focal | grep -v fwupd`. TIA! | 12:59 |
| rbasak | ahasenack: there's an autopkgtest regression in pending-sru for iptables. Did it reappear after you cleared them? | 13:03 |
| ahasenack | rbasak: it must have, I definitely cleared them | 13:03 |
| rbasak | https://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/a/autopkgtest/jammy/armhf suggests not | 13:03 |
| rbasak | I'll just retry | 13:03 |
| rbasak | Did it reappear> I realised that I could just look | 13:05 |
| ahasenack | subprocess.CalledProcessError: Command '['cp', '-a', '/usr/lib/locale/C.UTF-8', '/tmp/autopkgtest.test.32tiwsgn/chroot//usr/lib/locale']' returned non-zero exit status 1. | 13:06 |
| ahasenack | ?? | 13:06 |
| rbasak | enr0n: done | 13:07 |
| ahasenack | rbasak: it's green now | 13:09 |
| rbasak | That was quick! | 13:10 |
| ahasenack | rbasak: oh, autopkgtest was a new upload, not iptables | 13:10 |
| ahasenack | the regression was autopkgtest, not iptables | 13:10 |
| * rbasak hates searching for autopkgtest in the pending-sru report | 13:10 | |
| rbasak | I'd prefer to see the pending-sru report clear before releasing as a less error-prone check than my examining things manually. But +1 to release as soon as the current status ends up in the report. | 13:12 |
| rbasak | Assuming that the current status is "all good" of course</pedantic> | 13:13 |
| ahasenack | you realize you could be racing it the other way around | 13:14 |
| ahasenack | the report could be green, but there is a dep8 failure that just wasn't picked up yet | 13:14 |
| rbasak | That's true. | 13:14 |
| rbasak | But if we're moving towards taking britney out of dry run mode, then that's something I guess we'll have to live with. | 13:15 |
| rbasak | Here's a perfect and minimal SRU verification report from GunnarHj. He's not here, but thanks! https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ibus-pinyin/+bug/2019921/comments/5 | 13:18 |
| -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 2019921 in ibus-pinyin (Ubuntu Jammy) "ibus-pinyin: Crashes when opening Preferences" [High, Fix Committed] | 13:18 | |
| === twovi_ is now known as twovi | ||
| enr0n | rbasak: thanks! | 13:47 |
| === JanC_ is now known as JanC | ||
| UnivrslSuprBox | rbasak: what does "britney out of dry run mode" mean here? How are migrations done now if not by Britney? | 14:08 |
| rbasak | UnivrslSuprBox: I'm only talkig about stable releases. There, the SRU team do "migrations" manually (we call this "releasing" for SRUs), informed by britney at https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/pending-sru.html but not actually performed by britney. We use sru-release from ubuntu-archive-tools instead. | 14:37 |
| vorlon | xnox: moving it to WIP is wrong tho; there should be a way to remove an MP from the report without changing the top-level status | 14:53 |
| vorlon | rbasak: I suppose having it only include 'Needs Review' for git reviews could be reasonable yes | 14:54 |
| sergiodj | vorlon: hey, if you're OK with my reply on https://code.launchpad.net/~sergiodj/ubuntu/+source/clamav/+git/clamav/+merge/442791 I intend to go ahead and merge it later this week | 15:00 |
| vorlon | sergiodj: that's fine - and sorry, since I didn't claim a review on that (it was just a drive-by comment) I didn't get notified of your response | 15:04 |
| sergiodj | vorlon: that's fine, no worries. thanks for chiming in | 15:05 |
| dviererbe | Hello, can someone review my Merge Proposal to Merge unzip from Debian unstable? It should was just a simple merge conflict in the debian/control file, so it should not take too much time to review it. | 15:25 |
| dviererbe | https://code.launchpad.net/~dviererbe/ubuntu/+source/unzip/+git/unzip/+merge/443804 | 15:25 |
| cjwatson | We're attempting to cut over Launchpad's Debian importer to a new Juju-deployed environment based on focal (it was previously manually-constructed and based on xenial); things look OK on staging, but at minimum the first run will take a few more hours than usual to populate its mirror, and if there's anything unforeseen then it may be broken until tomorrow. | 16:13 |
| cjwatson | Debian imports are usually not _super_ time-sensitive though. | 16:14 |
| === JanC_ is now known as JanC | ||
| ahasenack | rbasak: iptables is clear now in the pending sru report | 17:00 |
| rbasak | ahasenack: OK released | 18:42 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!