I had a look at this during a patch pilot rotation, but I have to say I'm a bit confused.
Some comments mention "merge the patch into UCA Epoxy", but that's unrelated to what what ubuntu-sponsor can (and should) do. I hope we are on the same page on this? Now, speaking of the SRU. You would like the attached lp2122551_noble.demo.patch sponsored to Noble, correct? The patch itself looks reasonable to me, but I have to say I fail to get a high level understanding of the problem we're trying to fix here. The SRU template says: * User problem: Current host maintenance strategy forces migration operations that may not be suitable for all deployment scenarios. but I don't understand much from that. What happens when a migration is forced on a non-suitable deployment scenario? I'm not asking for much here, something like "for example on condition X we migrate and end up with a VM in bad state Y". Right now, I find the description of the problem to be a bit lacking. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2122551 Title: [SRU] Backport feature for disabling migration to Noble and Plucky To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-archive/+bug/2122551/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
