[00:22] <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
=== sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie
=== sem2peie- is now known as sem2peie
[08:47] <xnox> flips tables
[08:48] <xnox> vorlon:  i changed it to work in progress, maybe that will drop it off the report?
[10:33] <rbasak> vorlon: looks like the bzr MP handling filtered for "Needs review" only. I guess we could do that?
=== JanC is now known as Guest5232
=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
[12:59] <enr0n> Can a core dev please retry the following? `retry-autopkgtest-regressions --blocks systemd -s focal | grep -v fwupd`. TIA!
[13:03] <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
[13:05] <rbasak> Did it reappear> I realised that I could just look
[13:06] <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> ??
[13:07] <rbasak> enr0n: done
[13:09] <ahasenack> rbasak: it's green now
[13:10] <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
[13:12] <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.
[13:13] <rbasak> Assuming that the current status is "all good" of course</pedantic>
[13:14] <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.
[13:15] <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.
[13:18] <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]
=== twovi_ is now known as twovi
[13:47] <enr0n> rbasak: thanks!
=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
[14:08] <UnivrslSuprBox> rbasak: what does "britney out of dry run mode" mean here? How are migrations done now if not by Britney?
[14:37] <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.
[14:53] <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
[14:54] <vorlon> rbasak: I suppose having it only include 'Needs Review' for git reviews could be reasonable yes
[15:00] <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
[15:04] <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
[15:05] <sergiodj> vorlon: that's fine, no worries.  thanks for chiming in
[15:25] <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
[16:13] <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.
[16:14] <cjwatson> Debian imports are usually not _super_ time-sensitive though.
=== JanC_ is now known as JanC
[17:00] <ahasenack> rbasak: iptables is clear now in the pending sru report
[18:42] <rbasak> ahasenack: OK released