Hey Erich.
I will of course handle the SRU, that is one of my priotity items for
today. And I also noticed the inability of rebuilding studio, I saw
the build being stuck on Rebuild. I will look into the tracker today
as well.
Sadly I am and will be working with limited capacity for a while with
t
Hey David!
I can make sure that happens. However, I see that Mauro isn't part of
the ubuntubudgie-dev. I would prefer if he was when picking up such
responsibility.
Cheers,
On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 at 14:13, David Mohammed wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> this is a quicknote to say that fellow team members
Hey Simon!
Your LTS requalification application checks out so I'm fine with
starting a Technical Board vote on this.
My vote is of course +1. Other TB members please vote as well!
Regarding your comments and concerns: I'm sorry you had to go through
these various frustrating situations before en
Hey Michael!
I basically +1 what Steve said. To add a bit more to this, the current
source-iso machinery doesn't take snaps into consideration, so the
resulting isos weren't fully compliant anyway - especially after we
adopted so many snaps on our images.
The source iso codebase was in general unm
at 1:04 PM Lukasz Zemczak
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Jeremy!
> >
> > We already have something like that. There are automatic redirects set
> > up to
> > https://releases.ubuntu.com//ubuntu--latest-desktop-amd64.iso
> > on cdimage, for instance:
> >
>
Hey Jeremy!
We already have something like that. There are automatic redirects set
up to
https://releases.ubuntu.com//ubuntu--latest-desktop-amd64.iso
on cdimage, for instance:
https://releases.ubuntu.com/jammy/ubuntu-22.04-latest-desktop-amd64.iso
And every release sets up the -latest- redirec
I have checked the newly added section regarding the Feature Freeze
exception not applying (but other freezes, such as Beta Freeze, still
do) and it all seems to make sense to me now. I think the wording is
clear enough regarding the intentions.
As I think Steve's concerns have been addressed, I'm
Hey Seb!
I agree we should probably find a better way to make this process a
bit more visible, maybe making sure that the engineer responsible for
driving the opening gives regular updates somewhere. Maybe something
like a tracking post on discourse, like what we have for releases.
For now I reco
As of now, mantic has entered the Beta Freeze, with a goal of
releasing Beta images sometime late Thursday. *From now until the Beta is
released, please only upload updates for packages on any release images if you
/need/ to get them into the Beta itself.* Please hold off with everything else
until
I must say that I was certainly inconsistent in my approach here,
requesting one of 2) or 3) depending on the particular package in
mention.
I'd say that my personal preference would be 2), and this is what I in
general tried to push for in some cases. If someone decides to
backport a new upstream
ible, links to changelogs for the vendored packages are also present
> in the SRU bug
>
> Would this be sufficient?
>
> Phil
>
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2023 at 16:07, Lukasz Zemczak
> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Phil, Utkarsh,
>>
>> This feels sensible to me. Do you
Hey Phil, Utkarsh,
This feels sensible to me. Do you have any proposal for the amendments
to the MREs for the Google cloud packages?
I think it would be good if we required outlining the vendored package
version changes in the SRU template, at least for documentation
purposes. At least listing the
r 16, 2023 at 04:29:29PM +0100, Lukasz Zemczak wrote:
> > Would it be possible for us to perform the vote online, via the ML?
> > I'd appreciate TB members to participate here with questions or votes.
> > From my side, as I already worked on the flavor bits from the
> >
Hello Technical Board!
Would it be possible for us to perform the vote online, via the ML?
I'd appreciate TB members to participate here with questions or votes.
From my side, as I already worked on the flavor bits from the
release-team POV, I am +1 on Ubuntu Cinnamon joining the official
flavors.
Hey!
This was reported to me on IRC a few hours ago and I have then
disabled the job temporarily. The reason is related to the migration
of snakefruit to another host (this is happening on the new host that
we're migrating into).
Cheers,
On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 at 16:49, Robie Basak wrote:
>
> Doc
On Thu, 2023-03-02 at 09:46 +0100, Lukasz Zemczak wrote:
> > Hello Lena!
> >
> > Thank you for filling in the SRU MRE. I think your proposition makes
> > sense, in general I do not object to having an MRE for this project.
> > I
> > do have some minor things I
Hello Lena!
Thank you for filling in the SRU MRE. I think your proposition makes
sense, in general I do not object to having an MRE for this project. I
do have some minor things I'd like us to touch first before
proceeding:
1) Does upstream have a schedule for point-releases for stable
versions? W
Hello Joshua!
Apologies for the longer wait. I was able to discuss it with some of
the release team members and we seem to have an agreement. Welcome to
the Ubuntu flavors!
Initially at least I would like to be your point-of-contact - we'll
see how it goes as we're not entirely compatible timezon
Hey Erich!
Basically my opinion is in line with Robie's - from the SRU POV it
feels like something that would make a valid exception, but we'd
probably want to know more details before giving a full +1. Which
doesn't mean the info cannot be gathered in the SRU bug and the
package uploaded to the j
Hello everyone!
Just a quick heads up: we respun most of the 20.04.5 images to fix the
nvidia-390 driver situation (new kernel lrm). Please do some
re-testing on the new images!
Thank you!
On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 00:02, Lukasz Zemczak
wrote:
>
> Hello everyone!
>
> We just finished
Hello everyone!
We just finished building our first official set of 20.04.5 release
candidate images. As always, those should be available via the ISO
tracker below:
http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/438/builds
Please pick your favorite flavor and start testing! And be sure to
report
/qatracker/milestones/437/builds
The ones with "(re-building)" in the name are still building, but many
have already finished.
Let's give those as much testing as possible and, hopefully, we'll
have a swift release on Thursday.
Thank you,
On Tue, 2 Aug 2022 at 00:57, L
Hello everyone!
We just finished building our first official set of 22.04.1 release
candidate images. From what we're seeing so far things seem to be
looking quite nice, so fingers-crossed for those being our final ones!
http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/437/builds
Please pick your f
Hey Simon!
Interesting. Can you fill a bug under the
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-cdimage/ project? I'll investigate
it now, since I think the rebuild gets queued but then something dies
further in rebuild-requests. But a bug would be a welcome addition
anyway.
Cheers,
On Thu, 30 Jun 2022 a
Hello Lucas!
Thanks for submitting the MRE. It looks decent, I'm willing to approve
it as it is.
Checking the upstream CI tests, I like it that they have so many
different tests running on Ubuntu - that's a plus for sure. But I
guess they're all running on focal, right? Do you know if they're
run
Hello everyone!
We are now finishing building our latest batch of 22.04 release
candidate images to the iso-tracker. From what we're seeing so far
things seem to be looking quite nice, so fingers-crossed for those
being our final ones!
http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/432/builds
Ple
It was approved by Steve I see + accepted by me into jammy-proposed.
On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 11:40, Michał Sawicz wrote:
>
> May I please ask for a look at:
>
> [FFe] Update livecd-rootfs to add arm64 bootable buildd images Edit
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/livecd-rootfs/+bug/1966
It's as dann mentioned. This, of course, is only the case for our main
Ubuntu flavor though.
There is also an automatic redirect for
http://releases.ubuntu.com/20.04.3/ to old-images.
Cheers,
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 at 10:11, Anthony Kirby wrote:
>
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2022 at 19:09, dann frazier wrote:
, 19 Feb 2022 at 00:34, Lukasz Zemczak
wrote:
>
> Hello everyone!
>
> Some moments ago we published our first official release candidate
> images for the 20.04.4 point-release. We seem to have most known
> blocker issues out of the way, but these will not be final images - at
&
Hello everyone!
Some moments ago we published our first official release candidate
images for the 20.04.4 point-release. We seem to have most known
blocker issues out of the way, but these will not be final images - at
least not for the desktop variants (we're waiting for some OEM kernel
work to h
Hello everyone!
Some moments ago we published our first official release candidate
images for the 20.04.3 point-release. We seem to have all critical
blockers resolved, so my hope is that these images will be the final
ones we'll be releasing next week.
http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/mileston
... and the footnotes for the earlier e-mail:
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shim/+bug/1937115
[2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux-riscv/+bug/1934548
On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 10:30, Lukasz Zemczak
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> While working towards the 20.04.3 m
Hello,
While working towards the 20.04.3 milestone, we received reports of
the currently available shim package causing daily builds of our
installation media to fail to boot on some devices[1]. A fix for that
is now in progress, but as we would like to make sure the new version
of the package is
Hello!
I had a quick look at the draft proposal - I have made a few small
corrections here and there. That being said, one other change I did
and that I would like to propose is to simply do the full QA process
for *every* fwupd release. First of all, it's easier to remember which
steps are needed
Hey Robie!
What I think is usually done so early in the cycle is a forward
binary-copy to the devel series when such an SRU is accepted.
As for the NEW packages - since I've been working on these recently,
I'll take care of them. Those are source syncs from a PPA so they will
not be forgotten.
C
As of a short while ago, hirsute has entered the Beta Freeze, with a
goal of releasing Beta images sometime late Thursday. *From now until
the beta is released, please only upload updates for packages on any
release images if you /need/ to get them into the beta itself.*
Please hold off with everyt
Hello everyone,
In an attempt to improve our processes and quality of the LTS
point-release images, starting with 20.04.3 (in August) we will be
trying a bit of a safer approach. Basically the main noticeable change
is that we will now be following the SRU procedures even for any
release blockers
Hello everyone!
I'm only sending this e-mail now as previously we were still resolving
some unexpected issues regarding the .2 point-release. After a rough
start, we now have a *hopefully* stable set of 20.04.2 release
candidate images built and published on the .2 milestone:
http://iso.qa.ubuntu
Thank you for bringing this up again Seb, Iain.
You brought it up at the right moment as I just encountered the
aforementioned problem while reviewing an SRU in the queue.
Laney: I glimpsed through your proposition and this sound sane to me.
The section name isn't super pretty, but at least it's
As of a short while ago, groovy has entered the beta freeze, with a
goal of releasing Beta images sometime late Thursday. *From now until
the beta is released, please only upload updates for packages on any
release images if you /need/ to get them into the beta itself.* Please
hold off
with everyth
Thanks for the exception! We'll probably make it a bit more shiny, but
it's good as it is. Exception approved!
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020 at 20:00, Eric Desrochers
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to request an SRU special case for the Sosreport project:
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SosreportUpdates
>
> Regards
Hello Erich!
Sorry to hear that you are not satisfied with the release process so
far. The last thing I, and possibly all other release team members,
would want is for flavors and flavor leads to feel underrepresented
and ignored. With most releases (point-releases) I tend to always
check with fla
Hello everyone,
First of all, big thanks to everyone involved in this week's 18.04.4
point-release candidate image testing! All the classic ISOs and images
seem to look good and ready for release.
That being said, due to some issues noticed during our final rounds of
testing of the Ubuntu Core 18
Hello everyone,
We have just built our first release candidate images for 18.04.4 and
posted them to the ISO tracker [1]. Those are all fully-prepared, with
all base-files and label thingies in place, with hopes of no actual
re-spins required. Fingers crossed that these will be the images
released
Hello everyone,
Following last week's xenial 16.04.6 security-oriented point-release, we
are now preparing a similar release for trusty this week. The target date
is 7th of March.
We have now built the first set of RC images - hopefully there will be no
re-spins needed [1].
The situation is a bit
/milestones/400/builds
Cheers,
On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 at 15:29, Lukasz Zemczak
wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> In the light of the recently discovered and fixed apt vulnerability,
> we have decided to re-build all our supported isos that could be
> potentially affected. We did
Hello everyone,
In the light of the recently discovered and fixed apt vulnerability,
we have decided to re-build all our supported isos that could be
potentially affected. We did not plan for another xenial point-release
but oh well, what can you do. Security is important.
We prepared the first s
On it.
https://media.giphy.com/media/JIX9t2j0ZTN9S/giphy.gif
On Sun, 14 Oct 2018 at 01:32, Adam Conrad wrote:
>
> Over the next few hours, builds will start popping on the Cosmic Final
> milestone page[1] on the ISO tracker. These builds are not final.
> We're still waiting on a few more fixes,
Hello,
In my humble opinion, for this particular case I would be inclined
toward lifting the aging requirement. Yes, it's not a completely
straightforward thing, even though I usually approved of releasing
early of this package before after validation was performed. From my
point of view a strong
Hey!
On 31 July 2018 at 06:33, flocculant wrote:
> On 31/07/18 02:19, Lukasz Zemczak wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> The first set of official working builds for the upcoming xenial
>> 16.04.5 point release (due this Thursday, August 2nd) have been ad
Hello everyone,
The first set of official working builds for the upcoming xenial
16.04.5 point release (due this Thursday, August 2nd) have been added
to the tracker [1] for all supported flavours. We had a few images for
this milestone already but had to re-spin due to quickly spotted
regressions
Hey Dimitri,
Noted, I will be releasing the package soon. Since the systemd/armhf
is a known failure that should be ignore, I will also be updating the
hints for it so that it doesn't pop up all the time - but please
remember to fix it with the next upload.
Cheers,
On 19 July 2018 at 11:43, Dimi
Hello everyone,
For the first upcoming point-release for bionic we have decided to do
a full base language-pack refresh for all languages. We already did a
similar thing for xenial 16.04.1 so it's not anything completely new
and unusual, but it's worth noting as the usual steps for upgrading
trans
Hey Dimitri,
I agree we should potentially be more informative about what to do in
the uncommon case of tests needing being ignored and packages hinted
in because of, let's say, some other package in the archive
introducing a regression what went unnoticed, thus blocking package
migration (requiri
Usually, whenever I see an SRU that only attempts to fix an
autopkgtest regression, I first check how frequently the given package
receives regular updates. If I see the package is really 'popular' and
gets a lot of love for the stable series, I reach out to the uploader
for him/her to consider bun
.
Please wait for the builds to finish (should only take a little while)
and then resume testing.
Thank you!
On 28 February 2018 at 19:30, Ian Bruntlett wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
>
> On 23 February 2018 at 22:33, Lukasz Zemczak
> wrote:
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> Some
ease
> carry over test results from the previous RC where needed.
>
> Thanks,
>
> On 23 February 2018 at 23:33, Lukasz Zemczak
> wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> Some time ago our first release candidate builds for all flavours that
>> released with x
the previous RC where needed.
Thanks,
On 23 February 2018 at 23:33, Lukasz Zemczak
wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Some time ago our first release candidate builds for all flavours that
> released with xenial have been posted to the ISO tracker [1] into the
> 16.04.4 milestone.
&
Hello everyone,
Some time ago our first release candidate builds for all flavours that
released with xenial have been posted to the ISO tracker [1] into the
16.04.4 milestone.
As with each point-release, we would need volunteers to grab the ISOs
of their flavour/flavours of choice and perform gen
Hello Christian!
As you can see on the SRU policy page [1] the MRE for DPDK has been
already approved some time ago. I thought I communicated that on IRC,
but maybe I should have been more explicit. Sorry for that.
Cheers,
[1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates#DPDK
On 4 January 2018
As announced previously the release of the 16.04.4 point release has
been delayed. Seeing that things are now settling in, we have set the
1st of March as the new planned date release date. We expect to have
all the required pieces available in the archive by that time and will
provide images with
Due to the ongoing evolution of the fixes for the recently announced
Meltdown and Spectre security vulnerabilities [1], we are delaying the
16.04.4 point release, originally scheduled for the week of February
15. We intend that, when it is released, 16.04.4 will include kernels
which mitigate thes
62 matches
Mail list logo
