[02:30] <mpt_> Goooooooooooooooooooood afternoon Launchpadders!
[02:30] <Hobbsee> afternoon mpt!
[08:19] <carlos> morning
[08:41] <janimo> are PPA packages built against gutsy updates or proposed versions as well? The sugar package built in my PPA depends on a  libpango that is not in the gutsy archives enabled by default
[08:42] <janimo> needs  1.18.3-0ubuntu1 vs the current 1.18.2-0ubuntu1
[08:43] <Fujitsu> janimo: They're built only against the RELEASE pocket at this time.
[08:44] <janimo> I wonder how come sugar ends up with a depneds that's not there
[08:45] <janimo> RELEASE pocket ==  components enabled by default in a gutsy system?
[08:45] <Fujitsu> RELEASE as opposed to BACKPORTS, UPDATES, SECURITY, PROPOSED.
[08:45] <janimo> Fujitsu: aha, I did not kwno this so far, thanks
[08:45] <janimo> I'll mention this from now on when calling for testers
[08:46] <janimo> but pango 1.18.3-0ubuntu1 is not in release yet AFAIK
[08:46] <janimo> so still can't see how it ended up as a dep
[08:47] <Fujitsu> Er, once a distrorelease is released, RELEASE is never changed.
[08:48] <janimo> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/10379818/buildlog_ubuntu-gutsy-i386.sugar_0.65%2Bgit20071114-1_FULLYBUILT.txt.gz
[08:48] <janimo> this has gutsy-updates mentioned in it
[08:48] <janimo> and secutiry too
[08:49] <janimo> Get:117 http://ftpmaster.internal gutsy-updates/main libpango1.0-common 1.18.3-0ubuntu1 [63.5kB]
[08:49] <janimo> so it clearly includes UPDATES if that is a pocket, no?
[08:49] <Fujitsu> Oh, you can't be serious. This design is so broken.
[08:49] <Fujitsu> janimo: Right, PPA just doesn't make sense.
[08:50] <janimo> well, ot's ok as long as it is mentioned somewhere, I just did not expect it
[08:50] <Fujitsu> It only started building against them all recently.
[08:51] <Fujitsu> I love the listing of changes we get.
[08:56] <ubotu> New bug: #163053 in rosetta "KDE files with non gettext plural forms include plural form header" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163053
[09:13] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: but we knew ppa was broken.  *shrug*
[09:13] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: i'd imagine it includes updates and release.
[09:14] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: It includes updates, release and security, but only since the last rollout.
[09:14] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: dont expect a changelog.  next, you'll start expecing the documentation to be correct, too.
[09:14] <Hobbsee> ah, right, good.
[09:14] <Fujitsu> This wasn't documented, right.
[09:14] <Hobbsee> but appears to only sometimes use what's already in the ppa.
[09:14] <Hobbsee> presumably dependant on the moon phase.
 mdz: Isn't there? I was sure that previous versions of the policy mentioned that Soyuz would remain non-free, as it will always be a service sold to other distros.
[10:29] <mdz> Fujitsu: there are a number of services which Canonical hopes to offer through Launchpad, though as far as I know that does not imply that it will never be open source
[10:30] <Fujitsu> mdz: I am trying to dig out the version of the Launchpad FAQ to which I made reference.
[10:31] <mdz> this isn't really an area of direct responsibility for me, so I can't speak authoritatively, but there are people on this channel who can
[10:32] <Fujitsu> It mentioned that Canonical was unable to open much of it, because it was all very integrated, and components such as Malone wouldn't run without Soyuz, and Soyuz wouldn't be released because it was sold as a service for other companies producing distributions.
[10:36] <Fujitsu> I can find no full copies of it, but an excerpt is as follows:
[10:36] <Fujitsu> "Launchpad is a large, monolithic, web application. We would be happy to release ... however, that code will not run without the distribution management code, which is part of of the service that Canonical provides to other companies that make their own distributions."
[10:37] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: i would guess that that was the case, but that it's now deemed safe - as soyuz and friends are so utterly and totally convoluted they wouldn't be much help to anyone without an awful lot of study.
[10:38] <Hobbsee> (and we know this, due to how they explode differently each time)
[10:39] <Hobbsee> mdz: do you know if the plan changed, or that FAQ was wrong?
[10:40]  * Hobbsee is well aware that it has to be big, and do lots of stuff, but still...
[10:42] <elmo> Hobbsee: dude
[10:43]  * Hobbsee waits, watches for lightning bolts
[10:43] <elmo> archive management is hard.  I know this because, I've written one.  and it's far less ambitious than soyuz (and in a lot of ways, far less featureful).  and it still explodes if people look at it the wrong way
[10:43] <elmo> I'm really not sure your negativity is helpful to anyone
[10:44] <elmo> celso and julian are working as hard as they can to improve things, constantly beating up soyuz in public is hardly going to do wonders for their morale.  especially, when it _is_ getting better all the time
[10:44] <Hobbsee> elmo: noted.  and i wasnt saying it was easy.
[10:45] <Hobbsee> for the record, i think they've done a good job.  I'd just love to see some stuff improved.
[10:45]  * Hobbsee shuts up.
[10:46] <mdz> Hobbsee: no, I'm not familiar with the document Fujitsu quoted there
[10:46] <mdz> SteveA might be in a better position to comment
[10:46] <Fujitsu> mdz: It was the Launchpad FAQ for a looong time. But I guess you wouldn't exactly have needed to read it, so...
[10:51] <mpt> I removed that stuff about Launchpad being highly integrated from the FAQ
[10:51] <Fujitsu> mpt: Aha. So there has not, in fact, been a policy change?
[10:51] <mpt> primarily because it wasn't relevant to the question, but we also aim (eventually) to make it untrue
[10:51] <Fujitsu> People were just laughing at it too much?
[10:51] <mpt> It's not a policy change
[10:52] <mpt> I don't remember anyone laughing at it
[10:52]  * Fujitsu has seen an email or two to launchpad-users laughing at it, and in other places.
[10:53] <mpt> at Launchpad being monolithic, perhaps
[10:53] <Fujitsu> Well, yes.
[10:53] <mpt> There were good reasons for that, I'm told, but that was before my time :-)
[10:53] <Fujitsu> But that paragraph was the only visible reference to it.
[10:53] <mpt> Only visible reference to what?
[10:55] <Fujitsu> It being monolithic.
[10:57] <mpt> I think it was mentioned in #launchpad once or twice
[11:38] <Hobbsee> hiya cprov 
[11:39] <cprov> Hobbsee: hi there.
[11:42]  * Hobbsee belatedly apologises for ranting about the state of parts of launchpad, yet again.
[11:43]  * Hobbsee should just go and help fix it, or something.
[11:56] <Hobbsee> er, what do bugs for the activity log get filed under?
[11:56] <Hobbsee> malone?
[11:56] <Fujitsu> malone
[11:56] <Hobbsee> ok
[11:57] <Hobbsee> activity log says that a bug got marked invalid, but it doesnt say in *which* package it got marked as invalid.
[11:59] <Fujitsu> The activity log is useless. As a backup you can use bugmail archives.
[12:00] <Hobbsee> not if i'm not subscribed to the bug.
[12:00] <Hobbsee> and the activity log is *not* useless.  it just doesnt contain some required parts.
[12:00] <Hobbsee> i can see that some nutter changed the bug wrongly, but nto in which project.
[12:01] <Hobbsee> therefore, i cant see what they were thinking, but i know who it is, to hit them with the "please dont do this" stick.
[12:01] <Hobbsee> this is, of course, suboptimal for multi-project bugs :)
[12:04] <Hobbsee> pretty please launchpad.  please load the bug.
[12:26] <ubotu> New bug: #163091 in malone "+activity does not show which package was changed, only that it was (multiple packages/projects problem)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163091
[12:52] <Ubulette> hi
[12:55] <Ubulette> there's something strange with the ppa builders. in i386, there's a lang pack flood. looking at it, it seems each pack should take 2 or 3 mins, yet, every few packs, some are taking 30+ min (on the 3 i386 builders at the time), for no apparent reason.
[12:56] <Ubulette> meaning that i386 are all blocked more than they should be
[12:57] <Ubulette> https://edge.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-langpack/+archive/+builds?build_text=&build_state=all&start=100&batch=50
[13:09] <Hobbsee> Ubulette: may be a queue botchup.
[13:10] <Hobbsee> cprov: with arch: all packages, is there any particular reason why they *have* to be built on i386?  if they're arch all, cant you just shove sections of them to amd64 / lpia too?
[13:10] <Hobbsee> would make i386 not lag so much
[13:13] <cprov> Hobbsee: we can't yet dispatch arch-all to any builder due to a sbuild bug (lack of feature, in fact)
[13:13] <Ubulette> Hobbsee, it's been like that for weeks (maybe forever) so it may be a bug or at least something that could be improved. loosing 3*30min every 3*7 packages seems a waste
[13:13] <Hobbsee> cprov: oh, so it does depend on sbuild.  right.
[13:13] <Hobbsee> Ubulette: i dont work on soyuz :)
[13:45] <lamont> cprov: could we have a timestamp in NOT-OK status?
[13:46] <cprov> lamont: not easily but yes, we could, file a bug with your use case.
[13:47] <lamont> ok
[14:55] <Diije> muhaha
[14:56] <Hobbsee> ....okay?
[15:00] <lamont> Hobbsee: remind me of that build log that you wanted to have explained?
[15:00] <Hobbsee> lamont: kdebase-workspace
[15:01] <Hobbsee> lamont: why ti didnt take the kdepimlibs5 dep, which is already in the ppa, and instead took the universe version
[15:01] <Hobbsee> (and therefore fell into DEPWAIT)
[15:02] <Hobbsee> lamont: can you email me with the answer?  i need to head to bed.
[15:02]  * Hobbsee has an exam in 7 hours.
[15:04] <lamont> Hobbsee: ok
[15:04] <Hobbsee> thanks
[15:05] <ubotu> New bug: #163118 in soyuz "upload queue fails check on partner archive" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163118
[15:15] <lamont> grumble.
[15:15] <lamont> bigjools/cprov/whoever... how do I find all the ppa's that have kdebase-workspace source in them?
[15:16] <bigjools> lamont: there's no package search facility :/  (yet)
[15:18] <lamont> bigjools: ah, so the answer to my question is "ask someone with SQL-powers"....
[15:18] <lamont> so...  could you find me which ppa hobbsee's problemchild is in?
[15:18] <bigjools> lamont: correct :)
[15:19] <lamont> otherwise I get to go find it in history from a couple days ago
[15:20] <lamont> which actually wasn't that bad. nm
[15:20] <lamont> https://edge.launchpad.net/~kubuntu-members/+archive/+build/44227\
[15:21] <lamont> feh.  and built/published...
[15:50] <ubotu> New bug: #163125 in soyuz "change-override.py crashes with 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'changeOverride'" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163125
[16:22] <ipso> I registered my project and uploaded translation files several weeks ago or maybe even a month ago, however they are still "pending review". Does it normally take this long?
[16:23] <Odd_Bloke> ipso: I believe there's a biiig backlog, but I don't know if it's that big...
[16:23] <Odd_Bloke> There's a helpful answer. :p
[16:24] <ipso> Yeah, it'll be a month in a couple days
[16:24] <ipso> What actually needs to be reviewed with new translation files? 
[16:33] <PriceChild> I asked for my ppa to be cleared, and some debs were immediately removed, but the rest weren't. I was then told I had to wait till 3am for a cron to sort things out... its been two days later and still nothing :/ https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/17826
[17:50] <ubotu> New bug: #163155 in rosetta "Show external suggestions based on both singular and plural text" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163155
[18:05] <Ubulette> elmo, are you there ?
[18:05] <Ubulette> about bug 162723
[18:05] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 162723 in xulrunner-1.9 "xulrunner-1.9 build leaves orphaned find processes, hangs buildds" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/162723
[18:06] <Ubulette> it's a package i've created
[18:07] <Ubulette> elmo, i need info on what you're experiencing. tell me when you're available
[19:20] <Ubulette_> elmo, nevermind, it's fixed (#162723). next upload should no longer do that.
[19:21] <elmo> Ubulette_: super - thanks; how did you fix it?
[19:23] <Ubulette_> &> is a b/dashism. i changed it for the more standard > /dev/null 2>&1
[19:24] <elmo> ok
[19:27] <Ubulette_> those 2 find should not be there anyway. it's a workaround for a bug upstream but mozilla build system is crazy
[19:46] <bkc> does bugs/launchpad have an API that could be used to connect to mylyn/eclipse?
[19:56] <ubotu> New bug: #163180 in launchpad "LaunchpadViewForm shouldn't display (Optional) for display-only widgets" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163180
[20:25] <somerville32> Someone is spamming a bug.
[20:25] <somerville32> or not
[20:25] <somerville32> weird :/
[20:25] <somerville32> Bug
[20:26]  * somerville32 goes to report it.
[21:01] <ubotu> New bug: #163196 in soyuz "partner archive lacks atomic dists/ update" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163196
[23:30] <ubotu> New bug: #163233 in rosetta "Refactor rosetta/xx-pomsgset-translate.txt pagetest and translationgroups/60-translation-suggestions.txt" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/163233