[07:46] <radekp> hi, i have registered CVS import for dotgnu-pnet project, the page is here: https://code.launchpad.net/dotgnu-pnet/trunk It is now importing only module "pnet", is there a way how to make it import all modules in the repository?
[08:14] <jamesh> radekp: you'd need to create separate imports for the other modules. (possibly registering separate projects for them, if appropriate)
[08:17] <radekp> jamesh: thanks, but then i would have to do bzr pull for each module - right?
[08:17] <jamesh> radekp: yes.
[08:18] <jamesh> radekp: I guess the question is: if you ran "bzr commit", at what granularity would you expect the commit to occur?
[08:21] <radekp> jamesh: i understand, when we use CVS we have to commit for each module
[08:22] <radekp> jamesh:  imho it was bad decision to have this layout (each module for subproject that are tightly coupled)
[08:23] <radekp> jamesh: we'll have to live with this somehow, thanks for help
[08:25] <jamesh> radekp: the other question to ask is "if I was going to create a branch to develop a new feature, how much of the repository would I branch?"
[08:26] <jamesh> the answers to those questions would help in deciding where the branch boundaries should be
[08:28] <radekp> jamesh: if you want to develop one new feature, then you'll touch at least 2 modules in CVS
[08:29] <radekp> jamesh: if you commit only one module, then the other can get broken
[08:30] <jamesh> radekp: are you planning on migrating the dotgnu-pnet project over to Bazaar completely, or is this just for your own work?
[08:31] <radekp> jamesh:  this project will always have main trunk on savannah
[08:31] <carlos> morning
[08:32] <jamesh> radekp: you mean a CVS trunk on Savannah, or any version control system on Savannah?
[08:32] <radekp> jamesh: CVS trunk
[08:33] <radekp> jamesh: but we could use launchpad for developing new features - when they are tested we commit them to CVS
[08:33] <Fujitsu> Why are you so attached to CVS?
[08:34] <Odd_Bloke> Fujitsu: I think they're attached to Savannah. :p
[08:34] <jamesh> well, Savannah supports hosting with a number of VCS types, iirc
[08:34] <jamesh> which was why I asked my question
[08:36] <radekp> jamesh:  last time i checked it was only CVS, but maybe they added SVN support now
[08:37] <radekp> jamesh:  i guess this could solve the problem
[08:37] <Fujitsu> They seem to have git, so they must have others too.
[08:37] <jamesh> radekp: my understanding was that they had GNU Arch support, which is effectively dumb-server file access (i.e. they publish whatever you upload)
[08:38] <jamesh> which would probably be sufficient to publish Bazaar branches
[08:39] <radekp> https://savannah.gnu.org/maintenance/WhenSvN
[08:41] <jamesh> https://savannah.gnu.org/maintenance/UsingGnuArch makes it sound like you could publish a branch to sftp://arch.sv.gnu.org/archives/project/something
[08:43] <radekp> jamesh:  yes, it looks like it could be used for bazaar then, i will try
[08:44] <radekp> jamesh: thanks for information, you was very helpful
[08:45] <jamesh> it looks like you wouldn't have any viewvc type tools though.  But people would still be able to do "bzr branch" from it (either via sftp or http)
[08:47] <radekp> jamesh: yes, that could be nice
[08:47] <jamesh> radekp: of course, you can register any branches you host on savannah with Launchpad
[08:48] <jamesh> they'll then be regularly mirrored, which will make them available in our branch browser
[08:49] <radekp> jamesh:  that would be even nicer :)
[09:51] <Fujitsu> That wouldn't be for giving our portlet back, would it?
[09:51] <Hobbsee> yes
[09:51] <Hobbsee> although it's not on edge yet, it seems
[09:52] <Hobbsee> ooh, wait, yes it is!
[09:52] <Fujitsu> It was there yesterday.
[09:52] <Hobbsee> rev #'s are screwed, but it's there
[09:52] <Fujitsu> But the proper one isn't.
[09:52] <Hobbsee> wonder why it's the bottom panel
[09:52] <Hobbsee> no?  which was the proper one?
[09:53] <Fujitsu> r5008 is the proper one. It was
[09:53] <Fujitsu> Bah.
[09:53] <Fujitsu> It was readded in r4997, but something was bad about it,it seems.
[09:54] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: i didnt like the r4997 version, and whinged about it.
[09:54] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: er, i think it was that one.  oh well
[09:54] <Fujitsu> What was wrong with it?
[09:54] <Hobbsee> it only showed the current source package version, and only when you clicked on the status, etc.
[09:54] <Fujitsu> You mean you didn't like the one hidden under the task?
[09:55] <Hobbsee> nope
[09:55] <Fujitsu> That's not the r4997 one.
[09:55] <Hobbsee> oh, then i never saw that one
[09:56] <Fujitsu> Yes you did. You can see it on edge now.
[09:56] <Hobbsee> oh, then i'm confused.  so we've never seen the proper one?
[09:57] <Fujitsu> Well, I think it'll be the same, but it was displaying in the wrong contexts or something. The comment in the bug isn't clear to me.
[10:09] <Hobbsee> bigjools!
[10:09] <bigjools> hello
[10:09] <Hobbsee> bigjools: please fix $mypetbug :D
[10:10] <bigjools> join the very long queue ;)
[10:10] <Hobbsee> bigjools: awww, please?
[10:10] <Hobbsee> bigjools: it's entirely and utterly blocking my release management work.
[10:10] <bigjools> it won't be done until next LP cycle I'm afraid
[10:10] <Hobbsee> damn.
[10:11] <bigjools> it's too late to go into the current one, and since it's not a critical bug it won't get cherry picked
[10:11] <bigjools> sorry 'bout that
[10:12] <Hobbsee> but, probably doesnt come under the launchpad version of critical, whatever that is.
[10:13] <Hobbsee> good morning mrevell_ 
[10:16] <mrevell> hi Hobbsee
[10:16] <Hobbsee> mrevell: is it possible to get a list of what launchpad defines as "critical"?
[10:16] <Hobbsee> mrevell: there was a policy which you all had to read, but i dont think it was ever published.
[10:17] <mrevell> Hobbsee: Let me look into that. It may be a few hours before I can get back to you, though.
[10:18] <Fujitsu> From the meetings I've seen, Critical means `wants cherrypicking', but I'm not sure what's used to define that.
[10:18] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: yes, exactly.
[10:20] <Fujitsu> It is unsafe, but there is a slightly acceptable workaround in place.
[10:20] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: called not using the UI.  yeah.
[10:20] <Hobbsee> oh well.
[10:21] <mwhudson> mrevell: hi, there were several enquiries about beta team membership over the weekend
[10:22] <mrevell> mwhudson: Anything in particular?
[10:22] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: The UI is usable, but only the needs-root-on-drescher one. A great UI that is, but one all the same.
[10:22] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: ah, looks like others are doing bits of it anyway.  so, for gutsy+1, this sort of stuff will be useful.
[10:22] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: yeah, but i dont have that :)
[10:22] <Fujitsu> Noted.
[10:22] <mwhudson> mrevell: no, not really, i just promised that i'd give you a prod on monday morning :)
[10:23] <mwhudson> people saying they'd applied, what do they do now
[10:23] <mrevell> mwhudson: Thanks :) I see. Looks like there's a bit of a backlog from the weekend actually. I tend not to go near a computer at the weekend these days.
[10:23] <mwhudson> mrevell: smart man :)
[10:24] <mrevell> :)
[10:34] <mpt> Fujitsu, Hobbsee: 4997 showed the correct box for distribution packages, but showed the distribution table (the same one that's on the right of <http://launchpad.net/ubuntu>) if no package was specified
[10:34] <mpt> That's what I fixed in r5008
[10:35] <mpt> But any revision later than r4997 should be enough to make you happy
[10:35] <mpt> (in that page, at least)
[10:35] <Hobbsee> mpt: woot, thankyou ;)
[10:36] <mpt> Hobbsee, I can also answer your question about Critical
[10:36] <mpt> but not definitively
[10:36] <mpt> The relevant bit is "an essential feature of a launchpad application fails for a proportion of users"
[10:36] <Fujitsu> mpt: Aha, thanks!
[10:37] <mpt> but it's still undecided what proportion that should be.
[10:40] <mpt> Fujitsu, however, we probably will need to find some solution that isn't dependent on the context
[10:40] <mpt> because we want to make bug pages less context-sensitive
[10:40] <Hobbsee> mpt: ah right
[10:41] <mpt> (or at least, context-independent enough that Google groups them under "Google found several pages similar to this one...")
[10:41] <Fujitsu> Yeah, I can see why it was removed, but it can make things more difficult for us.
[10:41] <Fujitsu> Yay, we have the component again.
[10:42] <mpt> Which bits of info do you use in the box, besides version and component?
[10:42] <Hobbsee> maintainer
[10:42] <Fujitsu> (also, that component isn't always right, which there's another bug about...)
[10:42] <Fujitsu> And uploader.
[10:42] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: oh, is this the binary/source differing components bug?
[10:43] <mpt> hmm
[10:43] <Hobbsee> mpt: btw - urgency is completely unnecessary there
[10:43] <mpt> In other words, pretty much all of it
[10:43] <mpt> Hobbsee, ok
[10:43] <mpt> Urgency is release-specific, I assume
[10:43] <mpt> and "Low" 99% of the time?
[10:43] <Hobbsee> mpt: because everything in ubuntu is urgency=low - we dont use it at all
[10:43] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: No, it's the bug that I filed months back about the portal only showing the data from when the current distrosourcepackagerelease was first published, so any component changes are unseen.
[10:43] <mpt> oh, 100% of the time :-=)
[10:43] <mpt> ok
[10:44] <Fujitsu> Only Debian uses urgency, as we don't have testing.
[10:44] <Hobbsee> mpt: well, unless we happen to sync a version of urgency=high from debian
[10:44] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: oh nice...
[10:44] <Fujitsu> Bug #93293
[10:44] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 93293 in soyuz "Details in source package portlet don't change without new upload" [Low,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/93293 - Assigned to Julian Edwards (julian-edwards)
[10:44] <Fujitsu> Hm, targetted for this release, it seems.
[10:45] <bigjools> Fujitsu: it hasn't been done
[10:45] <Fujitsu> bigjools: Ah, again.
[10:45] <bigjools> indeed.  It's low priority so other stuff trumped it.  Soyuz is a very busy place at the moment :/
[10:45] <Fujitsu> Yep.
[10:46] <bigjools> PPA and partner archive fixes took most of the work in this cycle
[10:47] <Fujitsu> What's special about partner? Publishing to an entirely separate archive?
[10:47] <bigjools> Fujitsu: I honestly don't think that would have helped in this case, because our reviewers only have so much time also :)
[10:47] <Hobbsee> mpt: why do we show the 'initially uploaded to $version" at all?
[10:47] <Fujitsu> bigjools: This is true.
[10:47] <bigjools> yes, partner is a totally different archive
[10:47] <mpt> Hobbsee, I don't know, sabdfl wrote that code
[10:48] <Hobbsee> mwhudson: some of us care about whether it works, and want to fix it when ti's seriously, utterly broken, and blocking our work.
[10:48] <Hobbsee> mpt: i dont think we need it - it's duplicated on the overview page - and reasonably confusing anyway
[10:48] <mpt> ok
[10:48] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: DRY?
[10:48] <mwhudson> Hobbsee: yes yes, please don't mistake what i said for a serious remark
[10:48] <Hobbsee> mwhudson: :)
[10:48] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: Don't Repeat Yourself.
[10:48] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: ah
[10:48] <mpt> otherwise known as "parsimony"
[10:49] <Fujitsu> bigjools: RSN.
[10:49] <bigjools> Fujitsu: NFW!
[10:49] <mpt> bigjools, last time I was in rec.humor.oracle.d some posts were almost entirely acronymized.
[10:50] <mpt> (IYKWIM. AITYD.)
[10:50] <bigjools> that's.....disturbing
[10:50] <Fujitsu> Hah.
[10:51] <mpt> Hobbsee, Fujitsu, so, things you need: Latest release version, uploader, maintainer, component. Things you don't need: urgency, architectures, "initially uploaded to". Correct?
[10:51] <Fujitsu> mpt: Yep, and preferably with the component being real.
[10:51] <Hobbsee> mpt: yup
[10:51] <mpt> Right.
[10:51] <bigjools> Do you know what the 7th/8th place playoff is called in the Rugby World Cup?  The Bledisloe Cup!
[10:51] <Hobbsee> mpt: can i bug you with some queue UI bugs too, by any chance?  or want me to do so later?
[10:52] <Fujitsu> "Initially uploaded to" I use, but very rarely. It's useful for detecting packages that were synced from Joe Random's repository in Hoary/Breezy, and not touched since.
[10:52] <sabdfl> mpt, Hobbsee: because, in the case of syncs, we should be able to show that a package is essentially unchanged from its original upload
[10:52] <Fujitsu> Urgency isn't used, and architectures are overriden.
[10:52] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: done by the version number.
[10:52] <mpt> Hobbsee, sure, if you first tell me what you mean by "queue"
[10:52] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: and done by the uploader
[10:53] <sabdfl> Hobbsee: ?
[10:53] <mpt> Hobbsee, but where do you see the version number of the original upload?
[10:53] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: knowing what a sync is, and what it isnt.
[10:53] <Hobbsee> mpt: oh, *original* upload?
[10:53] <Hobbsee> on the overview tab.
[10:53] <Hobbsee> why do you want to see the original upload?
[10:54] <mpt> I don't know! :-)
[10:54] <mpt> I'm just taking notes here
[10:54] <Hobbsee> mpt: that was to sabdfl, not to you
[10:58] <mpt> Probably we can extract "stuff that is useful on the bug page" from "stuff that is useful on the source package's overview"
[10:58] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: *poke*
[10:58] <Hobbsee> mpt: true.
[10:59] <Fujitsu> The maintainer isn't on the overview, but is potentially useful.
[10:59] <Hobbsee> mpt: but i'm unsure as to why you want to know where the package originally came from at all - and which release it was uploaded to really doesnt help with that.
[10:59] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: uh?  yes it is
[10:59] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: see https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/basket/1.0.1-1 ?
[11:00] <Hobbsee> oh, on hte main overview page
[11:00] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: Oh, I see, yes.
[11:00] <Hobbsee> yes, perhaps
[11:00] <Fujitsu> Not the main one.
[11:00] <sabdfl> soyuz is harder than you think
[11:00] <sabdfl> here's the issue - who is the maintainer of a source package?
[11:00] <sabdfl> when you say "apache2 in ubuntu"
[11:00] <Fujitsu> sabdfl: I can see the issue, yes.
[11:01] <sabdfl> there might be 6 different releases
[11:01] <sabdfl> with multiple source releases in each version of the distro
[11:01] <sabdfl> uploaded by different people
[11:01] <sabdfl> the "maintainer" is an abstract concept we might layer on top of that
[11:01] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: in terms of the way ubuntu works, the maintainer listed in the latest upload is the maintainer.
[11:01] <sabdfl> that's why we try to call the person who actually posts a specific version the "uploader"
[11:02] <sabdfl> Hobbsee: ok, so what if there is a security update to dapper, that happens to be the latest upload?
[11:02] <Fujitsu> That's how Debian works. The latest sourcepackagerelease is authoritative with regard to maintainer and the like.
[11:02] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: sorry, latest upload for the development distribution
[11:02] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: same way the bugs work.
[11:02] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: Which way the bugs work?
[11:03] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: bug gets closed if it works in the latest release, task gets opened for the earlier release if someone wants to do a SRU for it.
[11:03] <Fujitsu> Ah.
[11:03] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: so default bugviews are for the latest release.
[11:03] <Hobbsee> (latest ubuntu release)
[11:03] <sabdfl> we could definitely do latest-development-uploader, yes
[11:03] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: That has nothing to do with the LP code, however.
[11:04] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: i still cant see why you would want to know about hte very original release though
[11:04] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: oh true, but i would have expected it to all work the same way - so that everyone doesnt get confused
[11:05] <Hobbsee> mpt: sorry for the delay, the queue stuff refers to https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/gutsy/+queue?batch=500
[11:05] <mpt> Hobbsee, no worries, I'm reporting a bug about this package details thing
[11:05] <Hobbsee> mpt: of course, the minor UI bugs dont really matter if i cant use the entire section at all, due to the major OMGTSIF bugs.
[11:06] <Hobbsee> mpt: but they would be nice to fix when you're looking for something tiny.
[11:06] <Fujitsu> TSIF? This <something> is f'ed?
[11:06] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: The Sky Is Falling.  where have you *been*?
[11:07] <mpt> Well, I can't do anything about the latter, but I can do something about the former :-)
[11:07] <Fujitsu> Ah.
[11:07] <Hobbsee> mpt: :)
[11:07] <spiv> Fujitsu: heh, I guessed what you guessed.
[11:07] <mpt> Hobbsee, that's a nearly-empty page.
[11:07] <Hobbsee> mpt: yes, but it's missing a few bits
[11:07] <Hobbsee> mpt: flip to the unapproved page.
[11:08] <Hobbsee> there's stuff there.
[11:08] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: He probably can't.
[11:08] <Fujitsu> We can't see unapproved.
[11:08] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: yeah, but he's a launchpad guy, so i dont know how far his permissions go
[11:08] <mpt> I'm not a Launchpadmin, and I don't see anything saying "Unapproved"
[11:08] <Fujitsu> Not far enough on production, I'd suspect...
[11:08] <mpt> one moment
[11:09] <Hobbsee> mpt: the dropdown says NEW at the moment.
[11:09] <mpt> yeah, probably :-(
[11:09] <mpt> Ok, there's no "Unapproved" option in that menu for me on launchpad.net, but there is on my local copy
[11:09] <Hobbsee> show:  new uploads with names like <search box>
[11:09] <Fujitsu> Oh, OK.
[11:10] <Hobbsee> mpt: right, well, trust that it does exist then.
[11:10] <mpt> Hobbsee, you guess correctly
[11:10] <Hobbsee> and trust that it works the same way as the new queue
[11:10] <Hobbsee> as in, there are a whole bunch of packages in it usually, and there are 25 to a page by default
[11:10] <mpt> whoops
[11:10] <mpt> *Fujitsu*, you guess correctly
[11:10] <Fujitsu> mpt: I assumed.
[11:11] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: yeha, at some point someoen actually has to test it out, and find the bugs.
[11:11] <mpt> Hobbsee, you're the first person to use it?
[11:11] <Hobbsee> mpt: yeah, i think so.  first non-canonical person anyway.
[11:11] <mpt> Hobbsee, coming to UDS?
[11:11] <Hobbsee> mpt: all the other archive admins are canonical people, so can just ssh into one of their machines (drescher)
[11:11] <Hobbsee> mpt: no, sorry :(
[11:11] <mpt> ok, no worries
[11:12] <Hobbsee> mpt: happy for you to call me, if it makes this stuff easier - i know it's hard for you launchpad people to understand ubuntu practicse
[11:12] <Hobbsee> mpt: the stuff i want fixed is as follows: (and this is the UI section)
[11:12] <Hobbsee> #144796)
[11:12] <Hobbsee> oops
[11:12] <Hobbsee> * No select all checkbox at the top of the queue (https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/gutsy/+queue)
[11:12] <Hobbsee> * If you accept packages from the UNAPPROVED queue, it says they're accepted, and takes you back to the NEW queue.  This should take you back to the UNAPPROVED queue (but the message is good!)
[11:12] <Hobbsee> * The queue page does not show you what the current override for each package is - ie, if it's main/restricted/universe/multiverse
[11:12] <Hobbsee> * No accept/decline button at the top of the queue too - only at the bottom
[11:13] <Hobbsee> mpt: put it this way. i'm the only person to use it, and to be blocked if it's broken :)
[11:14] <mpt> Sooooo ... 100% of people trying to use this feature can't use it
[11:14] <Hobbsee> mpt: yup!
[11:14] <evadave> sounds like a feature.
[11:14] <evadave> uh, I mean, bug. 
[11:14] <Hobbsee> mpt: well, can.  but asked not to, due to the one of the OMGTSIF bugs.
[11:15] <Hobbsee> evadave: yes, sounds like a damned good feature!  :D
[11:17] <poolie> tsif?
[11:18] <ajmitch> Hobbsee: you've confused people now
[11:18] <Hobbsee> [19:06]  <Fujitsu> TSIF? This <something> is f'ed?
[11:18] <Hobbsee> [19:06]  <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: The Sky Is Falling.  where have you *been*?
[11:18] <poolie> (ignore me)
[11:18] <Hobbsee> :)
[11:18] <Hobbsee> ajmitch: and this is different to anything previous?
[11:19] <mpt> Hobbsee, since I can't reproduce the bugs you're talking about, it probably would be best for you to report them yourself (sorry!)
[11:19] <mpt> I will report a bug on the lack of sampledata :-)
[11:19] <Hobbsee> mpt: i thought you were the one who would be fixing them?
[11:19] <mpt> Hobbsee, not necessarily
[11:20] <mpt> And even if I was, I'm all in favor of having just a single tracker for these things
[11:20] <Hobbsee> mpt: you can do it based on just seeing the new queue.
[11:20] <Hobbsee> huh?
[11:20] <ajmitch> Hobbsee: quite true
[11:20] <mpt> Hobbsee, the New queue is empty too!
[11:20] <mpt> And even if it wasn't, I doubt I would see any Accept/Decline buttons
[11:20] <Hobbsee> ajmitch: can you upload some crack please?
[11:21] <mpt> so, pix^Wscreenshots plz
[11:21] <Hobbsee> mpt: oh, there's a point.
[11:21] <Hobbsee> mpt: was about to ask if that would be helpful
[11:21] <ajmitch> Hobbsee: I prefer to keep my skin
[11:21] <mpt> thank you
[11:22] <Hobbsee> ajmitch: i would have been able to reject it once he was finished.
[11:22] <Hobbsee> mpt: http://wedontsleep.org/~sarah/launchpad.jpg
[11:22] <mpt> Hobbsee, I meant, in the bug report :-)
[11:22] <Hobbsee> mpt: ah.  didnt know if it was worth filing a bug report - or whether to file the UI requests separately, etc.
[11:23] <Hobbsee> seems a bit silly for an entire bug report to say "please add a checkbox here"
[11:23] <mpt> That's not silly
[11:23] <Hobbsee> ok, so you do want separate bugs?
[11:23] <mpt> We call our tracker "Bugs", but those kinds of things are equally valid entries in it
[11:23] <mpt> yes please
[11:23] <Hobbsee> but...but...that means i have to use launchpad to file all the separate bugs.
[11:24] <mpt> You're closer to launchpad.net than I am!
[11:24] <Hobbsee> doesnt mean it doesnt take a few secnods to load every single freaking page.
[11:24] <Fujitsu> Edge is particularly shockingly slow.
[11:24] <Hobbsee> which makes doing multiple things with bug pages very annoying
[11:25] <Hobbsee> yeah, i should move off edge - i was hoping it would be a bit faster
[11:25] <Fujitsu> I regularly get >20s to load a page.
[11:26] <mpt> >20s? Luxury! ;-)
[11:26] <Fujitsu> Bah.
[11:29] <sabdfl> Hobbsee: it's not the very original release, iirc it's the original distro/series that *this source package* was uploaded to
[11:30] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: right, but why do you want to know?
[11:30] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: ouch, mine hasnt been that bad for a while.
[11:31] <ubotu> New bug: #152878 in malone "Source package details box hampers bug page context-independence" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/152878
[11:31] <Fujitsu> sabdfl: You mean this sourcepackagerelease, rather than sourcepackage?
[11:31] <Hobbsee> mpt: oh yay, now there's an extra bug i see that i want fixed :)
[11:32] <Hobbsee> hum, i thought there was a "report another bug" option on there a while ago.
[11:32] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: Down the bottom.
[11:32] <Fujitsu> Not the usual button.
[11:33] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: ah.
[11:33] <Hobbsee> text search works remarkably well, for websites that like moving their buttons around.
[11:34] <Hobbsee> mpt: want me to subscribe you to all of them?
[11:35] <ubotu> New bug: #152880 in soyuz "no select all packages checkbox at the top of https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/gutsy/+queue" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/152880
[11:35] <mpt> Hobbsee, no thanks, I see all Launchpad bugmail already
[11:35] <Hobbsee> mpt: ok, cool
[11:36] <Fujitsu> Why are those links down the bottom, anyway?
[11:37] <Fujitsu> The rest have a button in the top right.
[11:37] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: so they dont get found?  it's the idea of reporting less bugs.
[11:37] <sabdfl> Fujitsu: yes
[11:37] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: Ah, good point.
[11:38] <sabdfl> Hobbsee: imagine there are 12 derivatives of ubuntu in LP
[11:38] <mpt> Hobbsee, people didn't find it in its previous position
[11:38] <sabdfl> you want to know which packages have been changed
[11:38] <Hobbsee> mpt: hehe :)
[11:38] <Hobbsee> mpt: seems people dont find buttons much at all, sometimes :)
[11:38] <Hobbsee> nor products
[11:39] <mpt> We'll get there eventually
[11:39] <mpt> Testing, testing, testing
[11:39] <Hobbsee> (products being from my workplace)
[11:39] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: right....
[11:39] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: i would have thought that the changelogs told you that, and that there are easier command line tools to give you nice outputs?
[11:40] <ubotu> New bug: #152884 in soyuz "If you accept packages from the UNAPPROVED queue, it says they're accepted, and takes you back to the NEW queue." [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/152884
[11:40] <Fujitsu> sabdfl: Shouldn't it then state that synced sources are from sid? Or is that reliant on gina importing Debian and copying sources over?
[11:42] <Fujitsu> Does anybody here know of the rationale behind hiding UNAPPROVED from all but ubuntu-release?
[11:43] <Fujitsu> (there is a nasty workaround, but...)
[11:44] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: what's the workaround?
[11:44] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: http://people.ubuntu.com/~ubuntu-archive/queue/gutsy/unapproved, or so.
[11:44] <Fujitsu> Yes, that's it.
[11:45] <ubotu> New bug: #152886 in soyuz "The queue page does not show you what the current override for each package is" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/152886
[11:45] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: oh, that's long known
[11:46] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: updates every 5 mins or so - i ended up needing it for tribe 3.
[11:46] <Fujitsu> Ah.
[11:46] <Hobbsee> mpt: okay, added to my buglist.
[11:46] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: was hard to do RM with pitti, when i couldnt see the unapproved queue :)
[11:46] <Fujitsu> This is true.
[11:47] <Hobbsee> at least now i can see it, even if i really shouldnt accept it.
[11:48] <iwj> Would anyone like to comment on the fact that bug 141597 is still happening despite a statement from an LP developer that the janitor was turned off ?
[11:48] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 141597 in malone "bug janitor expires bug reports that should remain open." [High,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/141597 - Assigned to Curtis Hovey (sinzui-is)
[11:48] <Fujitsu> iwj: I noticed it closed a few, and mentioned it in here a couple of hours later, but got no response..
[11:55] <ubotu> New bug: #152890 in soyuz "No accept/decline button at the top of the queue" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/152890
[12:06] <Fujitsu> Umm, what has happened with mplayer in feisty? The same version seems to now (as of 5 days ago) be published in -security and -updates, and I didn't see any bugs requested it be copied to -updates.
[12:06] <Fujitsu> s/requested/requesting/
[12:07] <elmo> Fujitsu: -security is being automatically copied to -updates, where it's trivial/obvious to do so, version-wise to help with bandwidth on security.ubuntu.com
[12:07] <elmo> (well, pseudo-automatically)
[12:07] <elmo> hi Hobbsee 
[12:09] <Fujitsu> elmo: Thought it might be something like that. Thanks.
[12:32] <Daviey> x93~/j #samba
[12:32] <Daviey> erk
[12:36] <Hobbsee> hmmm, how much stuff does ppa ahve to build?
[12:37] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: A lot of language packs, some more language packs, a few more language packs, and not much else.
[12:37] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: i thought that was the main archive
[12:37] <Fujitsu> For stable releases they're built in PPA.
[12:37] <Hobbsee> oh, i know.
[12:38] <Fujitsu> amd64 will build quickly.
[12:38] <Fujitsu> But i386 is DoSed.
[12:38] <Hobbsee> yay...
[12:40] <sabdfl> Fujitsu: debian asks us to change the package rather than just sync it
[12:40] <sabdfl> though i still hope they'll drop that as its a bizarre decision by them which they don't ask any other derivative
[12:41] <Hobbsee> sabdfl: which is why we do the maintainer mangling?
[12:42] <Fujitsu> sabdfl: We only change sources if they're modified.
[12:42] <Fujitsu> .... oops, that didn't make much sense.
[12:43] <Fujitsu> We only make any modifications to the sources if we're introducing an Ubuntu-specific delta manually... the majority of source packages are bit-identical to Debian.
[12:43] <BrianB04> Morning all.
[12:43] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: i thought that was changed when all the build1'
[12:43] <sabdfl> Hobbsee: yes
[12:43] <Hobbsee> s were done - to mangle the maintainer field
[12:43] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: didnt you see pitti trashing the gutsy-changes?  :)
[12:44] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: That was only for ubuntuX releases that hadn't had it mangled already.
[12:44] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: ah, right.
[12:44] <BrianB04> Have a small problem with hosted Launchpad. I pushed a revision up last night (First one) and it's still showing "This branch is not published yet"
[12:45] <Fujitsu> Directly synced sources only have the resulting binaries mangled.
[12:45] <Hobbsee> right, yes.
[12:45] <Fujitsu> Which makes sense.
[12:45] <Fujitsu> (well, as much as mangling them at all makes sense)
[12:45] <Hobbsee> yeah, well
[12:45] <BrianB04> How long do hosted branches take to publish?
[12:45] <Fujitsu> BrianB04: No more than a few minutes, I believe.
[12:46] <BrianB04> I wonder why mine isn't publishing then...
[12:46] <Hobbsee> then a maintainer in debian whines about how we've taken all the credit, as he's not the maintainer anymore, adn you didnt do the packaging, and ZOMG IT'S NOT FAIR!!!  UBUNTU SUCKS!!!!
[12:46] <Fujitsu> I haven't seen any of that... yet.
[12:46] <Fujitsu> Lovely.
[12:47] <Hobbsee> so i pointed to the place where the thing about "debian maintainers requesting this, and here were the votes" is, and that shut him up.
[12:47] <Fujitsu> Hahaha.
[12:47] <Hobbsee> (and got him into the pkgmangler)
[12:47] <ddaa> Hobbsee: thank your for this
[12:47] <Hobbsee> ddaa: for what?
[12:48] <BrianB04> Okay, so it is published in my home, which is ~brianbomamrito/phumbler/phumbler-dev...hrmmm
[12:48] <ddaa> informing angry debian developers of why Ubuntu packages do not name them as the maintainer
[12:48] <Fujitsu> BrianB04: Which branch is it?
[12:48] <Hobbsee> ddaa: ah yes :)
[12:48] <Fujitsu> Ah.
[12:48] <ddaa> BTW, I think Ubuntu debs DO mention them as "X-Original-Maintainer" or somesuch.
[12:48] <Hobbsee> we do.
[12:48] <Hobbsee> but that's not good enough for him - he wanted to be listed in maintainer only
[12:48] <Fujitsu> ddaa: Yes, in both sources and binaries.
[12:48] <BrianB04> I see the .bzr in there...it has all the files that are needed.
[12:49] <Hobbsee> ddaa: (fujitsu's a MOTU and i'm a core dev, fi that helps you context-wise)
[12:49] <ddaa> Hobbsee: the heat that led to this situation was unpleasant enough, it's not nice being flamed again about things being the way Debian wanted them...
[12:49] <Hobbsee> ddaa: yeah, well.
[12:50] <iwj> I think you guys must be just unlucky.  I've had no trouble at all from Debian maintainers.
[12:50] <Fujitsu> BrianB04: Doesn't look like it pushed properly.
[12:50] <BrianB04> Any admins around to maybe see what's locked itup?
[12:50] <ddaa> iwj: maybe your reputation precedes you
[12:50] <Hobbsee> iwj: yeah, but you're a DD too.
[12:50] <BrianB04> Fujitsu: Didn't push properly?
[12:50] <ddaa> people probably think thrice before flaming you
[12:50] <Fujitsu> BrianB04: Have you tried pushing it again?
[12:51] <Hobbsee> what surprises me is that i havent been flamed for uploading to debian with a @ubuntu.com address.
[12:51] <Hobbsee> but maybe uploading 1 package is not enough :p
[12:51] <BrianB04> Pushing it again.
[12:51] <Fujitsu> My uploads are @ubuntu.org.au, and I'm still alive :)
[12:51] <ddaa> Hobbsee: that would be kinda silly
[12:51] <BrianB04> Tells me no new revisions to push.
[12:51] <Fujitsu> ddaa: Use --overwrite
[12:51] <Fujitsu> Oops.
[12:51] <Hobbsee> ddaa: tell me about it....
[12:51] <Fujitsu> BrianB04: ^^
[12:52] <ddaa> Hobbsee: it seems to me DD that complain, complain mostly about "ubuntu not giving back to Debian"
[12:52] <Hobbsee> yup
[12:52] <ddaa> drawing attention to @ubuntu.com uploads would kind of defeat the point
[12:53] <Hobbsee> actually, most of the time, my uploads seem to get mangled - as in, the team takes them, and says "changes by Sarah Hobbs" - but never actually mentions ubuntu in there.
[12:53] <Hobbsee> so they can get away with saying that we never contribute back
[12:53] <BrianB04> Fujitsu: Still saying no changes to push.
[12:53] <Fujitsu> BrianB04: Have you actually committed anything to your local branch?
[12:54] <BrianB04> Yes.
[12:55] <BrianB04> Now it just took.
[12:55] <Fujitsu> That looks a bit better.
[12:56] <Fujitsu> What did you do differently this time?
[12:56] <BrianB04> Well, aside from using the ssh+bzr vs the sftp nothing:)
[12:56] <Fujitsu> Ah.
[12:57] <BrianB04> So, perhaps that was the problem.
[12:58] <Fujitsu> I suspect it only worked because bzr+ssh is more violent - it seems to upload an entire tarball of the directory and clobbers whatever was there.
[12:58] <spiv> Fujitsu: it never uploads tarballs.
[12:59] <spiv> The tarball hack is for the initial pull only.
[12:59] <Fujitsu> spiv: Oh, I thought that was what bzr+ssh did.
[12:59] <Fujitsu> Ah.
[12:59] <Fujitsu> Sorry.
[12:59] <spiv> BrianB04: I'm pretty surprised that just changing sftp:// to bzr+ssh:// would make a difference to "no changes to push".
[01:00] <BrianB04> spiv: It still said no changes to push, but for some reason, it triggered the publishing.
[01:00] <spiv> Ah, I see.
[01:00] <spiv> That makes slightly more sense.
[01:01] <BrianB04> spiv: Not much more, but some;)
[01:01] <spiv> (Although if there was nothing to push, it shouldn't have done anything that would trigger publishing...)
[01:01] <spiv> BrianB04: If you see any other weirdness, please let us know.
[01:02] <BrianB04> spiv: I will, absolutely. I really like Launchpad, far simpler in UI than say a sourceforge, and it works with Bazaar which is okay with me:)
[01:05] <BrianB04> spiv: I would like to see an explanation how to setup something like Mozilla though in Bazaar. It's talked about, but never mentioned how to do it.
[01:10] <BrianB04> Like a grouping of software under a group name.
[02:56] <bigjools> lamont: hi - do you have some time to talk?
[02:57] <lamont> bigjools: sure
[02:57] <lamont> a bit laggy as I work on some stuff here, but mostly present
[03:06] <ubotu> New bug: #152940 in launchpad "Home > Projects menu does not show my projects" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/152940
[03:55] <evarlast> PPA is awesome! Now I know what to do with the packages I make for myself, that I think others might like!
[04:19] <ferthur> /brb
[05:38] <Keybuk> hi, I be having a blueprint bug
[05:38] <Keybuk> the +temp-meeting-export XML does not include the meetings
[05:45] <gnomefreak> to change owners of a team do we need the CC or can it be done another way? the owner deactivated himself and he hasnt been seen or contacted anyone in months
[05:46] <Hobbsee> gnomefreak: which team?
[05:46] <gnomefreak> mozillateam
[05:46] <gnomefreak> david left for good it seems
[05:46] <Hobbsee> you can probably get a LP admin to hijack it for you - perhaps SteveA 
[05:48] <gnomefreak> ty ill wait for him since you already pinged him  :)
[05:53] <gnomefreak> Hobbsee: is mathew east the Mailing List contact as well?
[05:53] <Hobbsee> for lp users?
[05:53] <gnomefreak> no or ubuntu ML
[05:53] <gnomefreak> for
[05:53] <Hobbsee> which ubuntu ML?
[05:54] <gnomefreak> i thought there was one person (matt east) to talk to when setting up a ML
[05:54] <Hobbsee> oh, then you want to email rt@canonical.com
[05:54] <Hobbsee> about getting one allocated
[05:55] <Hobbsee> if you want help about how to use it, poke one of the admins of one of th eubuntu lists
[05:55] <elmo> not rt@canonical
[05:55] <gnomefreak> i need to change owners for ML as well
[05:55] <elmo> either rt@ubuntu.com ro mailman@lists.ubuntu.com
[05:56] <Hobbsee> elmo: oh yes, @ubuntu..  brain is dying, i think
[05:56] <Hobbsee> elmo: rt@canonical exists, i take it?
[05:56] <Hobbsee> that'll be the quick way to get stuff done?
[05:56] <elmo> Hobbsee: err
[05:57] <elmo> Hobbsee: no.  there's a company private RT for IS (sysadmins) at rt@admin.canonical.com.  and there's the public RT at rt@ubuntu.com (and http://rt.ubuntu.com) but neither gets special treatment and/or is faster/slower than the other
[05:57] <Hobbsee> elmo: ah right.  coulda fooled me.
[05:59] <elmo> Hobbsee: uhm, what are you basing that on?
[05:59] <elmo> Hobbsee: the public RT has existed for less than a month, and AFAIK you've never filed a ticket in it?
[05:59] <Hobbsee> elmo: just how long it took for my request to get approved ages ago
[06:00] <Hobbsee> elmo: oh dear, then i'm confused.
[06:00] <gnomefreak> so email rt@ubuntu.com about changing owners of ML?
[06:00] <elmo> gnomefreak: yes
[06:00] <gnomefreak> elmo: ty
[06:02] <Hobbsee> elmo: would be right in thin;king that rt@ubuntu.com was private, or at least, unpublished, prior to this?
[06:02] <Hobbsee> or am i just on crack?
[06:04] <elmo> Hobbsee: rt@ubuntu.com didn't exist until about a month ago, up until then, everything was redirected into rt@admin.c.c, including mailman@lists.u.c and mirrors@u.c
[06:04] <gnomefreak> it doesnt seem i have to i guess just being admin i can make all changes
[06:04] <elmo> Hobbsee: as off about a month ago, we setup a new public RT, including rt@ubuntu.com and redirecting mailman@l.u.c and mirrors@u.c there too
[06:04] <Hobbsee> elmo: fair enough.
[06:05] <Hobbsee> elmo: out of curiousity, how long is the time for a request to be done - say a mailing list creation?
[06:05] <elmo> Hobbsee: (mostly due to the influx of loco and other community orientated services we started to host ourselves)
[06:05] <Hobbsee> yep
[06:05] <elmo> Hobbsee: right now, it's a two step process, it gets bounced to jono, he approves/denies, and we have a commitment to process approved lists within 2 working days
[06:05] <Hobbsee> elmo: nice!
[06:06] <Hobbsee> (tjat
[06:06] <elmo> Hobbsee: the jono step is still variable because it relies on one person, but I believe that's one of the reasons he set up the loco council
[06:06] <Hobbsee> (that's a *lot* better than the few months that mine took!)
[06:06] <Hobbsee> yep
[09:20] <yeager> mdke: Swedish ubuntu-docs for feisty should be ok now
[09:28] <mdke> yeager: thanks
[10:00] <ubotu> New bug: #153049 in rosetta "Rosetta didn't import (some) updated GNOME translations from upstream" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/153049
[10:10] <gnomefreak> SteveA: you around for a question?