adsys SRU

[Matthew Ruffell]

Hi JB,

I too would like to go forward with the entire backport too, but time
is running short. This user has a SLA deadline of 2023-07-09. I
submitted patches to the LP bug one month ago on 2023-05-26 and was
subsequently blocked by the 0.12.0 upload in -unapproved on
2023-06-06. The impact for the user isn't too bad, they would like to
consume the fixed adsys so they can run their testsuites internally,
and they see the bug as a blocker to onboard other new users to the
platform as it breaks a widely deployed use case of '-' in domain
names. So low priority, apart from SLA deadlines.

Thanks,
Matthew

On Mon, 3 Jul 2023 at 19:29, Jean-Baptiste Lallement
<jean-baptiste.lallement at canonical.com> wrote:
>
> Hey Matthew,
>
> We are still waiting for a go/no-go from the SRU team, but the discussion seems to have stalled. I'd rather move forward with the entire backport since it fixes much more than just this bug.
> What is the priority for this customer, any deadline?
>
> Thanks.
>
> JB
>
> On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 9:03 AM Matthew Ruffell <matthew.ruffell at canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I know discussions are still ongoing about the adsys 0.12.0 SRU, but I
>> have a user who wishes to have LP #2020834 [1] fixed, which high
>> priority.
>>
>> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/adsys/+bug/2020834
>>
>> Would it be possible to potentially reject 0.12.0 from jammy
>> -unapproved, we get LP #2020834 sponsored and uploaded, verified and
>> released, before we start discussing 0.12.0 again for Jammy and Lunar?
>>
>> I was planning on just letting 0.12.0 happen since the fix is present
>> in 0.10.0, but my user has time restrictions and would like to be able
>> to use dashes '-' in their domain names.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Matthew