Re: jubany. lucid?
I think we're now up and running again; if you see any continuing problems please let me know (and/or fix it ;-). m -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
Re: jubany. lucid?
The core OS has been upgraded (thanks, Elmo!) The jobs are not yet running again; I'm working on it. m -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
Re: jubany. lucid?
The odds are good. Last time I asked for this upgrade on a different machine it was done in about a week. I filed internal rt #46864. m -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
Re: RFC: Minor collisions handling, both manual and automatic
That makes sense to me too. -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
jubany. lucid?
Sooner or later we are going to want to use bzr 2.4 in the package importer. jubany's currently running hardy, which doesn't even have Python 2.6. What are our chances of getting it upgraded to lucid? Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
Re: RFC: Minor collisions handling, both manual and automatic
On Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:57:19 +0100, Max Bowsher <_...@maxb.eu> wrote: > I just dealt with a requeue/zap-revids for bootchart to get that import > going again. > > The importer created various extra and fairly pointless revisions in the > lucid and maverick branches... all to remove a vim backup file which was > included in the human-committed branch but not in the archive. > > I think we should do two things to deal with minor collisions like this: > > 1) Automation > = > > In the collision detection code, we should have heuristics for pathnames > which are safe to disregard and still treat a collision as clean. I'm > thinking of: > > .*.swp (vim backup) > > .pc > .pc/.version > .pc/.quilt_series > .pc/.quilt_patches > > (The creation or removal of an initialized quilt control directory > containing no actual content is pretty harmless) > > I'm sure there are more. That sounds ok to me. Provided the branch remains usable I don't see why these would cause a problem. > 2) Manual override > == > > We should have a new tool that can be used to forcible add/update rows > in the importer's meta.db revids table, by package, suite and > revision-id, so that jubany operators can placate the importer about > one-off oddities determined to be harmless on human inspection. Agreed. I just tended to use the big-but-easy hammer of requeue --full. Thanks, James -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
RFC: Minor collisions handling, both manual and automatic
I just dealt with a requeue/zap-revids for bootchart to get that import going again. The importer created various extra and fairly pointless revisions in the lucid and maverick branches... all to remove a vim backup file which was included in the human-committed branch but not in the archive. I think we should do two things to deal with minor collisions like this: 1) Automation = In the collision detection code, we should have heuristics for pathnames which are safe to disregard and still treat a collision as clean. I'm thinking of: .*.swp (vim backup) .pc .pc/.version .pc/.quilt_series .pc/.quilt_patches (The creation or removal of an initialized quilt control directory containing no actual content is pretty harmless) I'm sure there are more. 2) Manual override == We should have a new tool that can be used to forcible add/update rows in the importer's meta.db revids table, by package, suite and revision-id, so that jubany operators can placate the importer about one-off oddities determined to be harmless on human inspection. Max. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
