[10:19] <cpaelzer> rbasak: would you (or any other SRU member) have opinion/guidance how should michal-maloszews continue on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nginx/+bug/1957320/comments/11
[10:19] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Launchpad bug 1957320 in nginx (Ubuntu Jammy) "Cannot restart nginx when listening on UNIX domain sockets" [Low, In Progress]
[11:13] <rbasak> Looking
[15:00] <dbungert> @pilot in
[15:01] <ogra> will there be drinks and food served ?
[15:54] <UnivrslSuprBox> `src:kpimtextedit (23.04.2-0ubuntu1)` was published to mantic's release pocket yesterday. However, `libkf5pimtextedit-data` is still version `22.12.3-0ubuntu1` and its source package no longer exists in the mantic archive. Has something unexpected happened or are there just long-running processes that still haven't finished?
[16:04] <enr0n> UnivrslSuprBox: according to the changelog, that binary package was renamed to libkpim5textedit-data (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kpimtextedit/23.04.2-0ubuntu1)
[16:07] <enr0n> so libkf5pimtextedit-data is NBS (https://ubuntu-archive-team.ubuntu.com/nbs.html), so an AA has to resolve that I think
[16:07] <UnivrslSuprBox> enr0n: thanks. Hmm. I'll have to dig back on how I hit this dependency. Something I requested wanted `libkf5pimtextedit-data` and got version `22.12.3-0ubuntu1`, then tried to trace back to its source package. It sounds like that package needs to be updated.
[16:46] <vorlon> enr0n, UnivrslSuprBox: transition still in progress, a lot of rebuilds + migrations to happen before we remove all the NBS
[16:53] <mateus-morais> Hi team, I am looking for a review and sponsorship for a merge on the adduser package (bug 2021498). Thank you!
[16:53] -ubottu:#ubuntu-devel- Bug 2021498 in adduser (Ubuntu) "Please merge 3.134 into mantic" [Undecided, In Progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/2021498
[16:57] <kanashiro[m]> mateus-morais: did you try to use the git-ubuntu workflow to do the merge?
[16:57] <kanashiro[m]> Here is some doc: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Merging/GitWorkflow
[16:58] <kanashiro[m]> And even if you do not use git-ubuntu, usually people attach a debdiff to the bug
[17:08] <mateus-morais> kanashiro[m]: I did, but I decided to go that route because 1. there's a ubuntu/devel branch on salsa that has the ubuntu delta commits by feature, which made rebasing easier 2. the delta isn't currently in the form of patches, but applied directly to source (see: https://salsa.debian.org/mateus-morais/adduser/-/commits/ubuntu/devel/). Any
[17:08] <mateus-morais> suggestions?
[17:14] <kanashiro[m]> right, adduser is a native package. It seems that bdrung pushed this ubuntu/devel branch on salsa git repo. You could try to coordinate with him to get your changes merged there as well. In the bug, you could at least attach a debdiff to ease the review.
[17:20] <mateus-morais> Ok, will do!
[17:23] <UnivrslSuprBox> vorlon: regardless of when NBS has to occur, the source package was removed from the repository before all of its binary packages were. Is that expected/desirable?
[17:26] <vorlon> UnivrslSuprBox: yes
[19:00] <dbungert> @pilot out
[20:46] <sergiodj> I just found out that packages whose d/copyright are symlinks are rejected when uploaded.  git-annex is one of those packages
[20:46] <sergiodj> ugh
[20:47] <ahasenack> symlink to what? Some "main" copy in one specific binary package?
[20:47] <ahasenack> or to the common licenses somewhere in /usr/share?
[20:47] <sergiodj> git-annex is a package from a former (prolific) DD, and he maintains the copyright upstream (in d/copyright format)
[20:48] <sergiodj> so it's a link to ../COPYRIGHT
[20:48] <ahasenack> was the rejection automated?
[20:48] <sergiodj> yes
[20:48] <ahasenack> so something lintian-like
[20:48] <sergiodj> probably
[20:49] <sergiodj> I hacked the source package and uploaded it again, let's see if it
[20:49] <sergiodj> it's accepted*
[20:49] <sergiodj> hopefully this is just a temporary delta until Debian adopts the changes I'm proposing
[20:51] <sergiodj> but it's interesting to see that the autosync process apparently bypasses these checks
[21:29] <cjwatson> sergiodj: Please file a bug against Launchpad if our checks are out of sync in that way with Debian (i.e. we reject something that Debian would have accepted) - that's generally undesirable and I'd consider it a bug
[21:29] <cjwatson> (all other things being equal, at least)
[21:29] <sergiodj> cjwatson: will do
[21:30] <cjwatson> That test dates back to 2010
[21:30] <cjwatson> I'm not sure whether it was in imitation of a Debian check, or whether it's there as a crude way to prevent symlinks escaping the source tree
[21:46] <rbasak> git-annex has had a delta for git-annex for this reason in the past.