Comment 51 for bug 1621507

I've been working on reviewing this over the last few days. Thanks to
everyone for your help and patience, especially Mathieu, LaMont and
Scott for your in-person interactive responses.

We've had various review feedback loops and settled on using the MPs for
coordination. When everyone (including me, for ~ubuntu-sru) is happy, we
can upload and accept from the unapproved queue all at once.

From a code review perspective, I'm done, though am waiting for the
agreed fixes to come through (and be checked by everyone relevant).

From a QA review perspective, I would like a comprehensive test plan for
existing ip= use cases given the previous regressions that we've had.
There isn't currently anything on this in the bug description.

As we've been delayed enough already, I think it's OK to accept the
agreed changes into xenial-proposed now, provided that we agree on a
regression test plan and perform it before marking verification-done.

For everyone, here's the current status for Xenial.

Needed before accepting into xenial-proposed:

[cyphermox] initramfs-tools MP, and reviews from everyone
[smoser] isc-dhcp MP: Scott's review

[not rbasak] initramfs-tools upload from MP (blocked on MP and reviews)
[not rbasak] isc-dhcp upload from MP (blocked on MP review)
[rbasak] Check and accept from Xenial unapproved (blocked on above except for open-iscsi; might as well do all three together when ready)

Needed before accepting into xenial-updates:

Write a comprehensive test plan for existing ip= use cases given the previous regressions.
[rbasak or another ~ubuntu-sru] Agree on test plan.

All SRU review bugfixes incorporated into Zesty.

Standard test case verification for the problem we're fixing (ip6= function).

Mark verification-done (blocked on all of the above).