What are next steps here? Is the Zesty SRU ready to go? Does Robie (or
someone else) need to make a python-certbot package for Xenial?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
[S
@racb the exception document looks good to me.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
[SRU] Backport letsencrypt 0.14.1
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://b
Also, a more generic template for any future SRUs:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1oQOV_kw-gs0ZeNFLyd-
nIzpsaoMW5zMLlooaQkoKnF0/edit
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
The updated SRU request documentation is here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mhmBt6umfdWEqvvnc17ILl5xbW4xSLlFhEG85ZAUYhg/edit
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
[SRU]
The Certbot team has had a couple of calls with rbasak to sort out
progress on this.
Lask week we met and concluded that we should SRU 0.14.1 because it's
well-tested and has additional bugfixes, as well as creating a
streamlined process for the Certbot team to get well-tested releases
SRU'd quick
** Summary changed:
- [SRU] Backport letsencrypt 0.9.3
+ [SRU] Backport letsencrypt 0.14.1
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
[SRU] Backport letsencrypt 0.14.1
To manage
Apologies for the delay here :(
The Certbot locking patch turned out to be more subtle to implement
correctly than we had expected, but we finalised and version and shipped
it in Certbot 0.14.0 last week. The patch is here:
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/pull/4449#issuecomment-299802507
Since
Here's a slightly better link:
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/pull/4369
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
[SRU] Backport letsencrypt 0.9.3
To manage notifications abo
We have the mitigation in our git master tree
(https://github.com/certbot/certbot/pull/4394/files) and are shipping it
in an 0.12.1 release today to get field testing. Once that patch has
been used to issue ~100K certs I'd be okay with it going into an SRU.
--
You received this bug notification b
Hi Chris!
I think your todo list looks accurate.
On the question of cron jobs, here are the answers as we understand them
upstream:
What happens if the user runs two multiple cron jobs?
Answer 0: probably nothing. "certbot renew" is designed to be run as
often as you like, and is normally a no-
This has been stuck for a while, I suspect because it hasn't been
clearly on anyone's plate :(.
Let's fix that:
* Brad Warren on the Certbot team is going to construct a retrospective
changelog.txt, and post a link here.
* RAOF should probably revise the packages to include that and the news fil
Harlan and the other Debian developers have git trees here:
https://alioth.debian.org/plugins/scmgit/cgi-
bin/gitweb.cgi?a=project_list;pf=letsencrypt
Maybe Chris should also get access to those repos?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subsc
That's great Chris!
We had some discussions yesterday about whether this has taken long
enough that 0.10.x should be considered for the SRU instead. 0.10.1 has
been in the field for 13 days; people found a couple of bugs in it, but
they only affected new 0.10.x functionality rather than being
regr
I think it's my job to gently nudge whoever it is that's making the
slightly tweaked packages here, but I'm not sure whether it should be
Chris or Harlan... if all else is equal perhaps it should be Chris,
since we also have a new 0.10.1 release that needs to be packaged for
sid and that would be i
* nod. We haven't changed any of the preexisting API calls or semantics,
so even unpackaged clients should be fine.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
letsencrypt 0.4.1 con
The changes in python-acme were comparatively minor. A few bugs were
fixed; one new feature was added to the API (support for DNS-01
challenges); some protocol messages were removed (because they were
believed to have security problems, were never used by Let's Encrypt,
and were removed from the IE
I don't think so. We would want 0.10.0 to have at least several weeks of
field testing before stable distributions include it as an update, and
any regressions in that release would mean we do 0.10.x bugfix releases
that would stretch the timeline further.
--
You received this bug notification be
.format(*x), sorry :)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
letsencrypt 0.4.1 contains numerous bugs fixed upstream
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs
>>> import random
>>> x = ["RAOF", "rbasak"]
>>> random.shuffle(x)
>>> print "{0} should upload and {1} should review".format(x)
RAOF should upload and rbasak should review
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.l
> Does this mean that users who currently won't get auto-renewed will
> start getting auto-renewed after this proposed update? If so, will that
> also include users who currently have expired (languishing) old
> certificates?
Yes. Each certificate (or more precisely, each lineage of certificates,
@hlieberman My understanding is that the package name change shouldn't
affect any workflows, because "sudo apt-get install letsencrypt" will
still work and the "letsencrypt" command will still work. Anything I
might have missed?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ub
* "a compatible but less buggy"
I should also note that most of our users have been running the certbot-
auto script which automatically upgrades them to the latest release of
Certbot as soon as it's public, so the odds of us getting bug reports
about workflow changes is fairly high.
--
You rece
On IRC, rbasak asked:
From an SRU review perspective, what I most want spelled out the exact
list of any behaviour changes you expect Xenial users to receive, and your
confirmation that you don't believe that there are any other changes.
Your word as upstream carries a great deal of weight on
Sorry Launchpad #1640978
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1610030
Title:
certbot improperly encodes CSRs
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu
(Third time lucky) This CSR bug was actually fixed in letsencrypt 0.4.1,
so it isn't live in Xenial. However there are numerous other bugs that
would warrant an SRU, as documented here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-
letsencrypt/+bug/1640978
--
You received this bug notificatio
This CSR bug was actually fixed in letsencrypt 0.4.1, so it isn't live
in Xenial. However there are numerous other bugs that would warrant an
SRU, as documented here: #1640978
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bug
You have a buggy version of urllib3 installed in /usr/local/lib. See
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/issues/3346
** Bug watch added: github.com/certbot/certbot/issues #3346
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/issues/3346
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubu
Also fixes: Launchpad bug #1608214
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1640978
Title:
letsencrypt 0.4.1 contains numerous bugs fixed upstream
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
Public bug reported:
This bug contains a list of known major and other issues fixed between
upstream letsencrypt 0.4.1 and the latest version, certbot 0.9.3 (the
project has also been renamed to avoid confusion between the python
client software and the Let's Encrypt CA service).
[Impact]
MAJOR
Hi! Could you please file a bug with us upstream
(https://github.com/certbot/certbot/issues) and include a copy of the
configuration file within which you're getting the error?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bu
The underlying upstream issue was:
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/pull/2529
However we would strongly, strongly recommend updating Certbot users to
0.8.1-2 rather than leaving them with a letsencrypt 0.4.1. There are
plenty of serious issues that have been fixed in between.
The full list of i
Hi Thomas,
I'm the upstream lead dev on the python client. We have been working
closely with the Debian developers who are packaging our releases. Our
current view is that it would be appropriate to package version 0.4.0 or
higher of the let's encrypt python client for a LTS release, and a
mista
Public bug reported:
Install an addon that has its own windows with their own XUL menus. I
encountered this problem with the "Javascript Debugger" extension (AKA
"venkman").
Once you install the Javascript debugger, its window can be opened with
Tools->JavaScript Debuuger. But that window itse
33 matches
Mail list logo
