Comment 10 for bug 1836823

Hi James,

Thank you for the latest updates. The code functionally looks fine (though I'm relying entirely on your testing) but there was quite a bit of tweaking necessary process-wise. I thought it would be easiest to suggest the changes in a Salsa Merge Request that I'll file shortly. For Disco, I've provided one commit per change, with an individual explanation in each commit. Please could you examine the commits to check you're happy with them, ask any questions you need, make any adjustments you think required and then pull them into your branch? Then, please could you apply matching changes to the other stable branches? The Salsa MR will hopefully be a good place/process to ask questions in context if needed, but here is also fine if you prefer.

On the documention side of the process, the bug description adjustments generally look good.

What you've written under Major Changes is good, but I would call this really the justification for the SRU and thus it's really the sort of (useful!) explanation that's intended to go under the Impact section.

For Major Changes what we need is a summary of the changes that will be experienced by the user receiving the SRU. So that's not just the specific changes we're trying to land but in our case it is also everything else that will come bundled with the backport. This will be different and be a bigger list the older the release to which we're backporting. For example, for Disco users, we need to summarise the changes from 0.31.0-1 to 0.31.0-2 only. For Bionic users, we need to summarise the changes all the way from 0.22.2-1ubuntu0.1 to 0.31.0-2. I don't mind how you want to lay this information out, but the information should be present.

I suggest you move what you've written currently under Major Changes to the Impact section, and then fill out Major Changes based on upstream release notes and understanding. Could Brad perhaps help with this?

I will update the template on the exception process page to try and make this clearer for next time.

Here's a summary of what I think are the next steps:

1. Examine the Salsa MR once I file it, go through that with me if needed, with the goal of landing into your branch the review changes I have suggested.

2. Apply equivalent changes to your other branches.

3. Adjust the bug description as I requested above.

Once that's done, I will provide an SRU team +1, and I will ask a colleague to review for a sponsorship +1, and then we can get the package updates into the proposed pockets ready for wider testing.