Moved all scripts over to https://tools-static.wmflabs.org/cdnjs/ which was totally awesome and easy to do. Thanks for that and for this task!

Closing as invalid for now since I can no longer reproduce. I'll keep an eye out for cases where this happens, there may be an upstream bug in here somewhere.

In T243061#5812911, @dcausse wrote:

The patch was just merged, I wonder if it's not because of the submodule and trying to detect conflicts with another patch that touches this deleted module (https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/wikidata/query/rdf/+/564063).
There might be some logs server-side?
Feel free to decline this task, it does not seem it caused any harms except that it did not properly displayed the conflict section.

In T239880#5803313, @RobH wrote:

So this is a LOT of hardware churn that is non-desired by DC-Ops, at least from my perspective.
If we are upgrading both contint1001 and contint2001, why can't one become active while the other is reimaged/upgraded? Otherwise we have to take these perfectly good servers (R430s) and move them to the spares pool, where they likely to never be re-used due to their relative ages compared to the rest of the spares pool (which are mostly R440s).
The end result is this, in reality, will prematurely end of life these servers currently used for contint assignment. That is non-ideal.
Can this upgrade be handled by upgrading either the codfw or eqiad first to test and then fail to it to upgrade the remainder?

In T105683#5808477, @Ladsgroup wrote:

In T105683#5783933, @gerritbot wrote:

Change 558243 merged by jenkins-bot:
[mediawiki/tools/scap@master] Add the part for rebuilding array l10n cache
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/558243

Please let me know once a new version of scap gets deployed.
It's not blocked on me? Just double checking if I need to do anything.

​Do we need very first patchset or just patchset created by gerrit user that is newer than 3 months (or something similar)?

Task description all looks right to me. I guess this task is based on a couple of assumptions of mine that I'd like to lay out:

In T234610#5779848, @Krinkle wrote:

Awaiting code review, @zeljkofilipin or @hashar.

tentatively assigning to greg to see if he can figure out what's going wrong with that panel. Reassign as needed :)

hrm, is this possibly from 06abb84939331458b1187fd9c3a562b82731b329 by @jbond ? Not exactly sure what lvs/realserver.pp is attempting to pass here, but it's making type checking angry it seems.

In T242446#5793753, @Amire80 wrote:

Is this just the branch cutting, which usually happens on Tuesdays? Or does it also affect the time of the actual deployment?

Release-Engineering-Team doesn't have any expertise in the jobqueue's inner-working. It'd likely be faster for another team to take a look.

Closing as invalid again, for different reasons this time: I closed the parent task as mysteriously resolved.

This hasn't happened in 2 months; i.e., since we migrated to gerrit1001 from cobalt.

Assigning to @hashar to give more details.

In T240955#5754644, @Jdforrester-WMF wrote:

OK, I've bumped the jobs back down to the old image (which has Firefox 60 not 68), and all seems to now pass. We'll need to work out what's broken here and fix it before rolling them forward again.

Looks like we have a few options available: