01:05:31  * ferosspart
03:07:46  <thealphanerd>so ummm http://ci-release.nodejs.org/ is just an nginx page
03:07:47  <thealphanerd>jbergstroem rvagg ^^^
03:09:46  <thealphanerd>mhdawson &&&
03:15:25  * ofrobots_awaychanged nick to ofrobots
03:24:07  <jbergstroem>thealphanerd: it probably just restarted after backup
03:24:08  <jbergstroem>?
03:24:25  <thealphanerd>now we are working as expected :d
03:24:48  <jbergstroem>it does a reload from disk after we've deleted old jobs
04:07:32  * rmgquit (Remote host closed the connection)
04:34:03  <rvagg>ppcbe is down for ci-release, I'll take a look later if I have a chance but it'd be nice to have it for the security releases
05:08:11  * rmgjoined
05:12:37  * rmgquit (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
07:23:20  <jbergstroem>we've sent emails to osuosl support
07:24:44  <jbergstroem>there are some known issues
07:24:54  <jbergstroem>i'm not fully up to date; perhaps michael__ can assist?
07:59:02  <rvagg>thealphanerd, evanlucas: when building these releases, you may not get a ppcbe binary, just let the job hang waiting for it to finish and it should get built when we get a server back and we can promote later
08:31:26  * node-ghjoined
08:31:26  * node-ghpart
09:09:56  * rmgjoined
09:14:51  * rmgquit (Ping timeout: 276 seconds)
10:48:56  * thealphanerdquit (Quit: farewell for now)
10:49:27  * thealphanerdjoined
11:52:44  <evanlucas>rvagg will do
12:02:00  <rvagg>evanlucas: did we come to any kind of agreement about who would be doing v5 and v6?
12:07:37  <evanlucas>I think I was scheduled to do v5. not sure about v6. I can handle that to if needed
12:09:40  <rvagg>hm, how about you just do it then evanlucas
12:09:48  <evanlucas>k
12:10:24  <rvagg>can include additional commits, like v5, that V8 `undefined` fix would be good at a minimum!
12:10:36  <evanlucas>ok cool
12:14:40  <evanlucas>what time are we planning to do the releases? or is it anytime today?
12:21:41  <rvagg>evanlucas: let's aim for 4pm Pacific / 11pm UTC
12:22:00  <rvagg>evanlucas: Myles already has his built in ci-relese, ready to promote, so you can do the same if you want
12:22:05  <rvagg>I'm doing that now
12:22:12  <evanlucas>ok yea that is what I was planning to do
12:47:09  <evanlucas>are failures on alpine acceptable right now?
12:55:26  <rvagg>evanlucas: yes, v5 shouldn't pass and I'm not sure the fixes in master have worked back
12:55:34  <evanlucas>ok cool
12:55:35  <evanlucas>thanks
12:55:42  <rvagg>you could cherry pick that if you want tho
12:56:06  <evanlucas>does it make sense to for v5?
12:56:18  <rvagg>yeah, but it's a test fix, nbd
12:56:40  <evanlucas>got a link to the pr by chance?
12:58:03  <rvagg>evanlucas: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/5099 / 1a1ff77feb3ed003e71bcbd066deadcaf9a82652
12:58:09  <evanlucas>thanks!
12:58:44  <rvagg>evanlucas: fwiw I'm going with language similar to Myles' @ https://github.com/nodejs/node-private/pull/41/files in the changelogs
12:59:02  <evanlucas>k, i'll cherry-pick the alpine fix and update the messaging as well
13:00:38  <rvagg>folks go pretty crazy for docker / alpine stuff so saying v6 is green makes them happy
13:11:07  <rvagg>evanlucas: my version of the message at the top of the changelog is:
13:11:08  <rvagg>This is an important security release. All Node.js users should consult the security release summary at https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/june-2016-security-releases/ for details on patched vulnerabilities.
13:11:23  <rvagg>I'll post an update to the top of that page
13:11:40  <evanlucas>ok, I'll add that
13:12:44  <rvagg>s/This is an important security release/This is a security release/
13:12:51  <rvagg>it's actually not that important as far as we know
13:12:56  <rvagg>evanlucas: ^
13:13:01  <evanlucas>k
13:16:13  <evanlucas>rvagg updated. That wording look better to you?
13:17:09  <rvagg>sure, that's fine
13:18:47  <rvagg>uh oh .. github is giving me the dshaw unicorn
13:18:54  <evanlucas>refresh
13:18:58  <evanlucas>I got it earlier
13:20:32  <evanlucas>I wish one could specify the target branch for a PR. That seems to be where I always get a unicorn for non-master PRs
13:23:45  <rvagg>ah yeah, that's it
14:29:45  * chorrelljoined
15:29:06  * chorrellquit (Quit: Textual IRC Client: www.textualapp.com)
15:58:39  * rmgjoined
16:13:11  * evanlucasquit (Remote host closed the connection)
16:24:53  * lanceballchanged nick to lance|afk
17:23:51  * lance|afkchanged nick to lanceball
18:35:32  <mhdawson>I
18:35:47  <mhdawson>I don't have access to the release machines otherwise I'd take a look
18:36:01  <mhdawson>at the ppc one to see why it is offline
18:46:39  <mhdawson>look at the be release machine and I think it is an issue with the ip it was assigned, we had one lose its ip before
18:46:44  <mhdawson>I've reassociated an ip
18:46:49  <mhdawson>but it needs to be allowed through the firewall
18:46:58  <mhdawson>is there anybody on who can add
18:47:25  <mhdawson>release-osuosl-ubuntu14-ppc64_be-1/
18:48:14  <mhdawson>@joaocgreis you around, I know you've added machines to the firewall rules for me in the past
18:55:40  <mhdawson>Sorry did not respond earlier just noticed the discussion now
18:56:15  <mhdawson>but I'm hoping it should just be to add the rule to the firewall rules and possibly log into the machine and restart the jenkins service
19:00:37  <thealphanerd>ping rvagg / jbergstroem ^^^
19:00:56  <jbergstroem>mmhthat's a new one?
19:01:02  <jbergstroem>mhdawson:
19:02:48  <jbergstroem>done
19:03:35  <jbergstroem>k its building
19:04:19  <mhdawson>Thanks :)
19:04:32  <mhdawson>happy it turned out to be something I could fix easily
19:11:33  <jbergstroem>hopefully it'll stay up :/
19:24:02  * lanceballchanged nick to lance|afk
19:24:29  * lance|afkchanged nick to lanceball
19:26:31  <mhdawson>keeping my fingers crossed, looks like it was the lost ip issue as opposed to the one we are fighting with on the other machines
19:26:38  <mhdawson>which was fixed by associating a new ip
19:36:46  <mhdawson>The machine seems to be up and has run jobs
19:36:53  <mhdawson>but the last couple don't quite look right
19:39:01  <mhdawson>but other platforms seem to have similar output like
19:39:07  <mhdawson>https://ci-release.nodejs.org/job/iojs+release/nodes=armv8-ubuntu1404-release/991/console
20:13:02  <mhdawson>Myles pointed out it was probably because was an 0.12.X build that does not support that platform/ppc
20:13:06  <mhdawson>so nevermind
20:27:38  * starefossenquit (*.net *.split)
20:27:40  * jbergstroemquit (*.net *.split)
20:27:44  * jbergstroemjoined
20:29:01  * evanlucasjoined
20:30:33  * ljharbquit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
20:30:33  * benglquit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
20:31:19  * zkatquit (Ping timeout: 258 seconds)
20:31:30  * starefossenjoined
20:35:39  * ljharbjoined
20:35:54  * zkatjoined
20:47:18  * bengljoined
22:51:04  <thealphanerd>t -10 minutes
22:52:07  <rvagg>thealphanerd: have you happened to poked around in the citgm results for v0.10 and v0.12? I left them running when I went to sleep am a bit afraid to look at them.
22:52:19  <thealphanerd>I'll take a look right now
22:52:31  <thealphanerd>I know one citgm thing was running for like 5 hours and I had to shut it down
22:52:39  <thealphanerd>a test suite was freaking out
22:53:12  <thealphanerd>nvm it is still running
22:53:13  <thealphanerd>https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/314/
22:53:41  <rvagg>taking too long to be practical for this, perhaps we need to focus the testing a bit more for releases
22:53:52  <thealphanerd>looks like this is a problem across all release lines
22:53:59  <thealphanerd>the lodash test suite is causing problems
22:54:53  <evanlucas>yea, something is timing out
22:57:38  <thealphanerd>some test... I have a timeout for install... for getting the package... but not for the test suite
22:57:39  <thealphanerd>sigh
22:58:25  <rvagg>thealphanerd: so am I able to glean useful information from the runs that were aborted?
22:58:31  <thealphanerd>nothing
22:58:39  <rvagg>tbh there's so much information in there that I'm scared to poke around
22:58:42  <thealphanerd>all of the linux runs were completely blocked by lodash timing out
22:59:00  <rvagg>ok, so should I start new ones up? how long should I expect them to go for?
22:59:01  <thealphanerd>TLDR something in the lodash install process stalled the test suite running
22:59:25  <thealphanerd>I'm running citgm quickly on master + a release to make sure that this is not specific to the release and is lodash specific
23:00:16  <thealphanerd>I'll know in just a second
23:00:21  <thealphanerd>https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/317/nodes=fedora23/console
23:00:23  <thealphanerd>doing it on master
23:02:30  <thealphanerd>I've published a new version of lodash
23:02:34  <thealphanerd>I mean citgm
23:02:38  <thealphanerd>skipping lodash
23:02:39  <thealphanerd>while I look into this
23:02:59  <thealphanerd>I had done the v4.4.6 smoke tests earlier and had no problems
23:03:11  <thealphanerd>rvagg do you want to move ahead or do you want to run the smoke tests one more time?
23:03:32  <rvagg>thealphanerd: how long should they take these days?
23:03:38  <thealphanerd>about 2 hours
23:03:52  <thealphanerd>we can attempt to use my threaded branch
23:03:58  <thealphanerd>which can take it down to 40 minutes
23:04:01  <thealphanerd>but that is still experimental
23:04:30  <thealphanerd>and probably will still be slow if we are compiling 0.10 and 0.12 due to the lack of ccache
23:04:34  <rvagg>too long, I can't hang around for that long, how about we push forward and fix if something comes up, testing so far suggests there are no problems although the libuv upgrade on v0.10 is non-trivial
23:04:55  <rvagg>i.e. let's start citgm for both of these (v0.10 priority) but move ahead anyway
23:05:22  <thealphanerd>Ok
23:05:32  <thealphanerd>lets do the release and then I'll do a run of citgm on all release lines
23:05:34  <thealphanerd>¯\_(ツ)_/¯
23:05:49  <thealphanerd>good to do the gamut once in a while and make sure the modules themselves are not messed up
23:09:44  <thealphanerd>v4.4.6 is cut
23:10:31  <rvagg>cool, evanlucas ^
23:10:39  <evanlucas>working on it now
23:22:37  <evanlucas>this cherry pick of the release commit back to master is a nightmare
23:23:21  <thealphanerd>is the release post script completely borked for anyone else?
23:28:43  <rvagg>thealphanerd: you have to get your changelog entries onto master for it to work
23:28:49  <thealphanerd>I did that
23:28:51  <rvagg>it's annoying but actually a good reminder that you need to do that
23:28:52  <thealphanerd>I didn't include ### Notable Changes
23:29:00  <thealphanerd>I think that is why it is breaking
23:29:04  <rvagg>hm, I don't think that should matter
23:29:18  <thealphanerd>it needs it
23:29:25  <thealphanerd>the parsing in the script breaks without it
23:29:30  <rvagg>0.10 and 0.12 are fully out
23:30:15  <thealphanerd>rvagg did you see all the weird artifacts that ppc created?
23:30:28  <rvagg>thealphanerd: more than just ppc
23:30:39  <rvagg>you mean for old versions?
23:30:44  <thealphanerd>yeah
23:31:00  <rvagg>I'm going to email everyone with access about that, it's quite a concern having random artifacts drop in staging like that
23:31:26  <rvagg>we need to figure out who or what has done it
23:34:27  <evanlucas>v5.x is done
23:36:20  <thealphanerd>evanlucas so I don't think we need to add the headers to the main changelog
23:36:29  <thealphanerd>I'm sending PR to remove mine, I'll remove yours as well if you don't mind
23:36:34  <evanlucas>please
23:36:36  <evanlucas>thanks
23:37:18  <evanlucas>wait, what??
23:37:30  <evanlucas>all of them have the header
23:37:34  <evanlucas>or am I missing something?
23:38:29  <thealphanerd>https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/7394
23:38:33  <thealphanerd>you'll see in this one
23:38:40  <thealphanerd>it is the extra bit about specific changelogs being moved
23:38:43  <thealphanerd>I made that mistake too
23:38:56  <thealphanerd>we don't need to keep adding to that list, those were to keep links alive
23:39:08  <evanlucas>oh
23:39:15  <evanlucas>ok
23:39:19  <thealphanerd>I could be wrong on that
23:39:38  <thealphanerd>feel free to flag it in the issue if you think we should have all that data... and I'll go and update it
23:39:49  <evanlucas>im indifferent
23:39:50  <thealphanerd>but it makes sense to me that we don't want to be adding any more data to that file
23:39:55  <evanlucas>agreed
23:40:50  <evanlucas>bbiab
23:42:30  <thealphanerd>rvagg are we able to publish the security post?
23:43:24  <rvagg>thealphanerd: it's ready to go, have you both got your releases up on nodejs.org?
23:43:29  <thealphanerd>yup
23:43:33  <thealphanerd>they are all there
23:43:58  <rvagg>neato, will do it now then
23:44:17  <rvagg>remember this is just an update to the previous post
23:44:57  <thealphanerd>idneed
23:46:10  <rvagg>thealphanerd: would you mind updating nodejs.org to put a link to https://nodejs.org/en/blog/vulnerability/june-2016-security-releases/ on that security banner on the front page?
23:46:18  <rvagg>I'm pressed for time here
23:46:29  <thealphanerd>yeah I can look into that
23:46:40  <thealphanerd>will figure it out :D
23:47:40  <rvagg>it's in a template .. somewhere
23:47:42  <rvagg>grep for it
23:49:30  <thealphanerd>found it
23:49:36  <thealphanerd>should I get rid of the openSSL one?
23:50:50  <thealphanerd>I I got it :D
23:53:10  <rvagg>thealphanerd: yeah, ditch that one, should have been removed a while back
23:53:17  <thealphanerd>ok cool landing