[12:26] <Ubugtu> New bug: #84988 in launchpad "Broken link in Launchpad beta" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/84988
[12:40] <Ubugtu> New bug: #84989 in launchpad "Launchpad beta Opera rendering bug" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/84989
[03:00] <mdz> lifeless: around?
[03:00] <lifeless> yes
[03:00] <lifeless> whats up?
[03:00] <mdz> lifeless: bug 84992
[03:01] <mdz> Ubugtu: this means you
[03:01] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 84992 in apport "Apport not working due to edge.launchpad.net failure" [High,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/84992
[03:01] <mdz> lifeless: do you know what's up with edge?
[03:01] <lifeless> yes
[03:01] <lifeless> stuart mailed the lp list - are you on that ?
[03:02] <lifeless> theres database changes in production
[03:02] <mdz> I am, but it's way low on the mailing list folder pecking order
[03:02] <lifeless> edge needs to be merged and tested before it can be turned on again
[03:02] <lifeless> stub is working on this at the moment
[03:02] <mdz> lifeless: do you know whether the cloakroom bits needed by apport are in production yet?
[03:02] <mdz> it may no longer be necessary for it to use edge, I'm not sure
[03:03] <lifeless> mdz: I dont know; easiest way is to have pitti test.
[03:03] <lifeless> I think it probably is
[03:03] <mdz> would you mind updating the bug report with your insights?
[03:05] <lifeless> done
[03:05] <mdz> thanks
[03:10] <Ubugtu> New bug: #84992 in apport "Apport not working due to edge.launchpad.net failure" [High,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/84992
[04:35] <stub> Launchpad will be going down in 15 minutes for a scheduled code update. Estimated downtime is 15 minutes.
[09:49] <poolie> hello
[09:49] <poolie> the "report a bug" link in Beta is oopsing :/
[09:55] <poolie> bug 85036 filed
[09:55] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 85036 in launchpad "beta +filebug page gives 404 oops" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/85036
[09:55] <poolie> hello seb
[10:00] <Ubugtu> New bug: #85036 in launchpad "beta +filebug page gives 404 oops" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/85036
[10:30] <Ubugtu> New bug: #85040 in malone "support for attaching blobs to existing bugs" [Medium,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/85040
[10:36] <poolie> BjornT: thanks for your attention to bug 85036
[10:36] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 85036 in launchpad "beta +filebug page gives 404 oops" [High,In progress]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/85036 - Assigned to Bjrn Tillenius (bjornt)
[10:36] <poolie> BjornT: at the moment typing a bug number into the search field on the bugs.beta homepage doesn't get that bug - is that known?
[10:38] <BjornT> poolie: thanks for reporting it :)
[10:38] <BjornT> poolie: yes, there's a bug reported about it, and i'm planning to fix it today
[10:39] <BjornT> bug 84800
[10:39] <Ubugtu> Malone bug 84800 in malone "no way to jump to a bug from frontpage of beta UI" [High,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/84800 - Assigned to Bjrn Tillenius (bjornt)
[10:55] <Ubugtu> New bug: #84976 in apport (main) "Report Problem Could not upload report data to Launchpad (dup-of: 84992)" [Undecided,Needs info]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/84976
[11:00] <Ubugtu> New bug: #1922 in malone "Unhelpful "Invalid value" error when requesting fix for non-existent package/product" [High,Fix released]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/1922
[12:20] <Ubugtu> New bug: #85065 in launchpad "supermirror_rewritemap.py optimization" [Critical,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/85065
[12:28] <carlos_> morning
[12:58] <tfheen> https://launchpad.net/+builds/palmer for instance lists a build which started eight or so hours ago and which has barely gotten out of the starting pit.
[12:58] <tfheen> and new builds are not scheduled, not even after I ran the queue builder.
[01:06] <salgado> stub, did you run the mirror prober manually on production?
[01:28] <cprov> good morning folks !
[01:28] <Hobbsee> hey cprov, kiko-who-is-actually-kiko-today
[01:29] <kiko> heh
[01:29] <kiko> indeed that's me
[01:29] <kiko> me the cataclismic
[01:34] <jamesh> not to be confused with kiko the cataclysmic
[01:34] <kiko> that would be someone else
[01:34] <kiko> who spells better than I
[03:15] <Ubugtu> New bug: #57708 in soyuz "Language pack uploads require manual intervention" [Undecided,In progress]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/57708
[03:40] <Ubugtu> New bug: #85117 in rosetta "Review interface doesn't work with alternative language suggestions" [High,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/85117
[03:56] <salgado> flacoste, quick question... I currently have two versions of my image widget: one used in add views and the other in edit view. the only difference between them is the set of visible options and their labels
[03:56] <flacoste> salgado: what's the question?
[03:56] <salgado> would it be okay to merge them into a single one and use a special flag (passed to custom_widget()) identifying whether I want the addform version or the other?
[03:58] <flacoste> salgado: how would that simplify things?
[03:59] <flacoste> the call site still has to determine what style it needs
[03:59] <flacoste> personnally, i don't find conditional branching simpler than extending a class
[03:59] <salgado> exactly. it wouldn't simplify anything right now
[04:00] <salgado> but I wrote a new widget which extends the image widget and returns two images (the original and a smaller one)
[04:00] <flacoste> ok, i see and you don't want to have to extend that one as well for the add case
[04:01] <flacoste> and want to use a flag in the base class
[04:01] <salgado> exactly!
[04:01] <flacoste> then it is a simplification then
[04:01] <flacoste> go for it
[04:02] <flacoste> did you think the name of the flag?
[04:02] <salgado> no, not yet
[04:02] <salgado> do you have any suggestions?
[04:03] <flacoste> maybe 'style'
[04:03] <salgado> btw, just passing an extra keyword argument to custom_widget() will cause it to be stored as an instance variable in the widget?
[04:03] <flacoste> with a value of either 'EditStyle' or 'AddStyle'
[04:03] <flacoste> i think so, but I'd have to check
[04:04] <flacoste> it does
[04:05] <flacoste> so how about custom_widget('image', UploadImageWidget, style=UploadImageWidget.AddStyle)?
[04:06] <flacoste> (i'm not sure of the widget name anymore, but this gives an idea)
[04:06] <salgado> that sounds good to me
[04:06] <salgado> thanks a lot, flacoste!
[04:06] <flacoste> my pleasure!
[04:09] <salgado> as usual, I forgot one detail... I need the style to be passed to my widget's __init__() method, and I have the impression that custom_widget() won't do that
[04:09] <salgado> is that right, flacoste?
[04:09] <flacoste> salgado: it won't no
[04:10] <flacoste> it could though
[04:10] <flacoste> if you don't use kw args
[04:10] <flacoste> like that:
[04:10] <flacoste> custom_widget('image', UploadImageWidget, UploadImageWidget.AddStyle)
[04:11] <flacoste> i.e.: it pass positional arguments to the constructor and use setattr for the keyword arguments
[04:11] <salgado> ah, right. is that the "self._widget_factory(*args)" call?
[04:12] <flacoste> no, its zope.app.form.CustomWidgetFactory._create
[04:12] <flacoste> hmm, sorry, yes, you were at the right line :-)
[04:14] <salgado> I mean, the context and request given to my widget... are they provided by an adapter or something like that?
[04:14] <salgado> ('cause custom_widget() doesn't pass them to CustomWidgetFactory())
[04:18] <flacoste> salgado: it's handled by zope.formlib.form.setupWidgets
[04:19] <salgado> aha! the component.getMultiAdapter() thing?
[04:26] <flacoste> salgado: no, the line (247) before that
[04:26] <flacoste> if form_field.custom_widget is not None: widget = form_field.custom_widget(field, request)
[04:26] <flacoste> the getMultiAdapter() thing is to find a proper widget when none was specified
[04:28] <flacoste> so your __init__ method will receive: context (an IField), request, and whatever positional arguments you used in the custom_widget() call
[05:04] <salgado> flacoste, but if it calls form_field.custom_widget() passing only the field and the request, it won't work
[05:04] <flacoste> salgado: that's because you didn't take a look at CustomWidgetFactory.__call__ :-)
[05:05] <flacoste> that's where the extra positional arguments passed on to the CustomWidgetFactory.__init__ are tacked
[05:07] <Yannig> Hello everybody :)
[05:09] <salgado> flacoste, dude, you're always one step ahead of me
[05:12] <Yannig> Another dumb question :)
[05:12] <Yannig> We are translating OpenOffice via Rosetta but no way to view it in Occitan in Ubuntu :(
[05:12] <Yannig> Do someone know why?
[05:20] <LarstiQ> the locale isn't generated?
[05:33] <Yannig> LarstiQ: It seems that no :(
[05:34] <Yannig> I don't understand why: everything else is yet in Occitan
[05:47] <Yannig> LarstiQ: Should I see directly with OpenOffice instead of Ubuntu for that problem?
[05:49] <LarstiQ> Yannig: do other applications work in Occitan?
[05:53] <Yannig> Yep
[05:53] <Yannig> All GNOME apps for example
[06:05] <Yannig> (and not only GNOME apps, all Ubuntu in fact)
[06:09] <LarstiQ> Yannig: no idea then, better ask jordi or so
[06:10] <Yannig> Thanks :)
[06:10] <Yannig> carlos: Here ?
[06:13] <carlos> Yannig: hi
[06:13] <Yannig> Hello hola :)
[06:13] <carlos> Yannig: is it related to OO.org?
[06:13] <Yannig> You mean the package ?
[06:14] <carlos> Yannig: your question about not being able to get it in Occitan 
[06:14] <Yannig> Yes, that's it
[06:14] <carlos> Yannig: I don't know the answer, maybe danilo or doko would 
[06:14] <carlos> help you
[06:15] <Yannig> Thanks :)
[06:15] <carlos> they know how OO.org localisation works better than I do
[06:15] <Yannig> Next... :D
[06:15] <danilos> Yannig: for OOo, you either have to get the language pack, or recompile it (afaik)
[06:15] <Yannig> danilos or doko ( doko_ ) : any idea?
[06:16] <danilos> Yannig: if you've got problems with GNOME translations, they should be simple
[06:16] <Yannig> I've never had problems with language packs
[06:16] <Yannig> How could I recompile it?
[06:17] <Yannig> (and above all, what should I do to make it possible for users to have OpenOffice in Occitan too? :)
[06:17] <doko_> Yannig: you need to build an GSI file from the exported translations. see debian/rules in the OOo package
[06:20] <newz2000> I'm getting ready to release a new version of "ubuntu-website" and want to track its bugs as being distinct from the bugs in the old version.
[06:20] <newz2000> Should I register a new "product series," such as "spring07" This is a bit confusing, because the website isn't like a normal product that may still need support after a new release
[06:21] <radix> newz2000: do the old bugs make sense any more?
[06:21] <radix> maybe you should just reject them
[06:21] <newz2000> hmm... good point. Most will be resolved with the new release
[06:21] <radix> or resolve, yeah :)
[06:22] <newz2000> I have one other goal, and this is to be able to let testers file bugs on the new revision... but I guess it won't be hard to keep track of them
[06:22] <radix> newz2000: ah, like before it is public?
[06:22] <newz2000> yes
[06:22] <radix> newz2000: I would perhaps use a milestone for that
[06:23] <radix> representing the public release of the site
[06:24] <newz2000> ah, ok, I see that now. That looks good, thanks radix
[06:24] <radix> no worries :)
[06:25] <newz2000> I'm having a hard time hitting the submit button on the "date targeted" field. My hand is afraid to click the mouse button. :-)
[06:26] <radix> hee hee
[06:26] <radix> don't worry, it's easy to change later ;-)
[10:20] <Ubugtu> New bug: #85201 in soyuz "wrongly rejects epoched uploads" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/85201
[11:33] <sabdfl> mpt: do we have a call later today your time?
[11:33] <sabdfl> with usman?
[11:59] <mpt> Goooooooooooooooooooood morning Launchpadders!
[12:00] <mpt> sabdfl, that would be fine, same time as last week? (Or should I have a message from Claire already?)
[12:11] <Ubugtu> New bug: #39074 in launchpad-bazaar "pageheading and title of branch pages are broken" [Medium,Fix committed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/39074
[12:11] <Ubugtu> New bug: #51443 in launchpad-bazaar "Soft time out at the +registeredbranches page" [Medium,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/51443
[12:13] <thumper> Damn it, these aren't new, just newly assigned!