Unfortunately this discussion foundered on lack of consensus about whether
to make this change after the fact for stable series; which resulted in both
jammy and kinetic going out without this being set.
I have set the flag now for lunar as it came up in discussion with
Foundations. The question of whether to change this for stable series is
still open (now with some further series that are stable) but can be
discussed separately.
Colin, will this flag be inherited in the future at series opening?
On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 04:27:31PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 11:12:57AM +0000, Iain Lane wrote:
> > I think the Launchpad support is still missing, although we started on
> > this several years ago. That will need to be picked up and finished off:
> >
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/1016776
> >
> > That bug report talks about doing it pre-release (for devel only) but I
> > think I'm now in favour of doing it always, and the proposed
> > implementation in there would allow that. For devel, the main reason is
> > that I frequently come across users who have misunderstood what proposed
> > is for and manually enabled it themsleves, resulting in various degrees
> > of brokenness on their systems and bug reports that take developers'
> > time to triage and eventually close. These are not (always) people who
> > have updated from a previous release, where we could have had tools
> > disable -proposed for them, but also people who have explicitly turned
> > it on after installing a daily out of an attempt to help test the
> > upcoming release.
> >
> > On the client side, as Robie says, we will at least need to update
> > documentation. I'm also not sure what update-manager will do if there
> > are NotAutomatic updates present. It might need some tweaking to show
> > them differently. This could be checked by looking at something in
> > -backports, which is already present with these flags set.
> >
> > And finally, there's some implication for package builds; both Launchpad
> > buildds and other builders would need to ignore this. Launchpad does
> > this for -backports currently, i.e. -backports builds get Build-Depends
> > from -backports wholesale; hoepfully that means the buildd side isn't
> > too hard because we can reuse that.
>
> This is now ready to use from the Launchpad point of view. There's a
> "proposed_not_automatic" flag on distro series exported over the API; if
> this is set to True, Launchpad writes "NotAutomatic: yes" and
> "ButAutomaticUpgrades: yes" to the Release file. We've also arranged
> for *-proposed to be pinned to 500 in launchpad-buildd, so Launchpad
> builds will ignore this; I can't speak for other build environments.
>
> Thus, from the Launchpad point of view this is ready to use, although
> somebody may want to check the behaviour of things like sbuild and
> pbuilder first.
>
> Somebody in ~techboard would need to make the actual change, if you
> think it's appropriate. For example, the following in "lp-shell
> production devel" would do it for all supported Ubuntu series:
>
> for name in ("bionic", "focal", "hirsute", "impish", "jammy"):
> series = lp.distributions["ubuntu"].getSeries(name_or_version=name)
> series.proposed_not_automatic = True
> series.lp_save()
>
> --
> Colin Watson (he/him) [cjwatson@ubuntu.com]
>
> --
> technical-board mailing list
> technical-board@lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer https://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
