schierbeckjelmer: still awake?00:56
schierbeckhey guys, is anybody besides me having trouble opening the bzr mainline with the viz in bzr-gtk trunk?01:06
fullermdIt does seem to be working very hard at doing nothing...01:07
fullermdNo CPU, no IO...01:07
fullermdOh, wait.01:08
fullermdThat may be that error in bzr with ghosts; not bzr-gtk.01:08
* fullermd doesn't really know; just guessing.01:09
schierbeckwell, i'm hoping :)01:09
schierbecki've got enough work already!01:09
fullermdIt works on other trees, and the backtrace looks like a place a ghost could cause cliff-off-falling.01:10
schierbeckin Repository.sign_revision(), what the heck does gpg_strategy mean?01:12
schierbeckcan i just leave it as None? it's not documented at all...01:12
mw-homeI just install bzr-svn by running bzr branch in my home plugins dir.  Now bzr won't do anything.  Keeps complaining about cannot import CachingParentsProvider.01:36
mw-homeDo I need to run sudo python setup.py install first?01:37
mw-homecd -01:37
lifelessmw-home: I think you have a version mismatch01:38
mw-homelifeless: between the plugin and my base bzr?01:38
mw-homeI'm running bzr 1.0 and bzr-svn 0.4.10dev0.01:39
=== kiko is now known as kiko-zzz
lifelessmw-home: http://bazaar-vcs.org/BzrForeignBranches/Subversion?action=show#releases01:40
mw-homeso i clearly need something different than bzr 1.0.  lifeless, thanks for straightening me out.01:44
fullermdTrunk bzr-svn generally goes with trunk bzr.dev.  It may still work with 1.3 currently, but 1.0 is back far enough now that it's not too surprising.01:45
lifelessigc: ping01:45
lifelessmw-home: or an older bzr-svn :)01:45
igchi lifeless01:46
lifelessigc: I really want to nuke that cache01:46
lifelessigc: our discussion seems to have petered out01:46
igcthe one in fastimport for the inv_vf?01:46
igcno problem01:46
justdaveso maybe I'm just completely blind, but I'm not finding what I'm looking for in the docs...  if I want to update a working directory to a revision that's older than the head of the branch, what do I do? (equiv of cvs/svn up -rREVSPEC)01:47
justdavebzr up doesn't seem to take a revision as an argument01:47
lifelessjustdave: revert01:47
igclifeless: as long as you're aware that it was helping, I'm ok with it going ...01:47
justdavethat works going forward I assume, too?01:47
mw-homedo most people in here use a distribution pkg for bzr, or download some other way?01:47
lifelessigc: it doesn't seem to help enough to justify its existence to me.01:47
justdavelike if my working directory is on r5179 and I want to update it to r5185, while the repository I'm pulling from is actually on r5190...01:48
fullermdjustdave: bug 4571901:48
justdaveyeah, looks like that does work. :)01:48
justdavethe name of the command just makes it confusing :)01:49
igclifeless: understood. I think the stuff you're doing is more important than the short term gain I'm getting01:49
fullermdName of the command?01:50
fullermdOh, you mean using revert?01:51
justdaveso if I'm updating a website based on a tag that gets moved periodically to the revision that we want to be live on the site, my cron job needs to do "bzr revert -rtag:production"01:51
fullermdWell, not really.  It needs to update -r.  The option just doesn't exist.01:52
fullermdOf course, if it's a branch by itself, you can use pull -r; that may be the best solution in that case.01:52
justdaveusing pull just tells me "No revisions to pull."01:53
justdaveno matter what revision I specify01:53
mw-homethanks for all the help.01:53
fullermdWell, if that rev is already the head, that's what you expect.01:53
igclifeless: removed and pushed to lp01:54
justdavedoesn't seem to matter.01:54
justdaveI can bzr revert -r(older rev), and then bzr pull -r(current) and it still says that01:54
fullermdDon't do the revert beforehand.01:55
* fullermd sighs.01:56
fullermdPulling 1 rev of bzr.dev:01:56
fullermdNow on revision 3320.01:56
fullermd5.352u 0.434s 1:29.75 6.4%      114+147k 274+19io 7pf+0w01:56
fullermdPulling 4 months of mutt changes (hg):01:56
fullermdadded 199 changesets with 417 changes to 121 files01:56
fullermd119 files updated, 0 files merged, 10 files removed, 0 files unresolved01:56
fullermd5.813u 0.396s 0:12.90 48.0%     124+161k 459+32io 0pf+0w01:56
justdave# bzr up01:57
justdaveTree is up to date at revision 5181.01:57
justdave# bzr pull -r517901:57
justdaveNo revisions to pull.01:57
fullermdYou need --overwrite to step backward.01:57
fullermd(or sideways)01:57
justdaveAll changes applied successfully.01:57
justdaveNow on revision 5179.01:57
fullermd(of course, that pull if you had the files reverted might do some wacky things...)01:58
justdaveok, so "bzr pull --overwrite -rtag:production" is what I want on my cron job then01:58
sssslanghi there, could some one give me an advise about which gui to use under windows. i'm a newbee, thanks.01:58
fullermdNoop pull on bzr.dev takes as long as that whole hg pull.  Sigh.01:58
* fullermd wants smarts.01:58
fullermdsssslang: I think the main choices are bzr-gtk and qbzr.  bzr-gtk is more complete and seems to be a bit more work to get installed.  qbzr looks more native.01:59
fullermd(all that AIUI; I don't really use either one)02:01
sssslangfullermd: thanks. what about TortoiseBzr? i heard of it before when using cvs.02:02
=== mw is now known as mw|out
fullermdI think it's still more "proof of concept" than "use this to get work done".02:03
sssslangi don't use gui, but i just want to select one for my partner.02:03
sssslangi see. thank you.02:04
fullermd(though again, I don't use either the GUI's or Windows, so I may be wrong.  That's just what I've picked up watching IRC/mail)02:05
mwhudsonis there bzrlib for 'delete the branch at this url' ?02:57
mwhudsoni guess i want transport.rmtree, which doesn't seem to exist03:00
* igc lunch03:08
lifelessmwhudson: there is03:09
lifelessmwhudson: delete_tree03:09
mwhudsonoh yay03:10
mwhudson(i was looking in the wrong place)03:10
lifelesspydoc bzrlib.transport.Transport :>03:11
AfClifeless: is that exposed on the command line somehow? ie, is there a way to delete a remote branch which I'm accessing via bzr+ssh://?03:13
AfC(right now, of course, I'm ssh'ing to the server, cd'ing, and doing rm -r. Hm)03:14
lifelessAfC: well, 'python -c "import bzrlib.transport; bzrlib.transport.get_transport('url').delete_tree()"' ?03:15
AfCLet me get right on that03:15
lifelessAfC: ssh is simpler :)03:15
AfCThe case I am interested in is where you have ssh access to run bzr commands but not an  remote shell.03:16
AfC(which is what we offer our users)03:16
AfC(I gather Launchpad is the same? Anyway)03:16
AfCI have to delete their obsolete branches for them. Kinda ugly. You're saying I should ask them to run that snippet? Very well.03:17
mwhudsonlaunchpad allows sftp, which somewhat allows the same03:17
spivLaunchpad offers no shell, although it does offer a web UI that can delete branches.03:18
PengThere's no need to delete obsolete branches..03:18
spivPeng: it is useful if you like to browse branches to get a sense of what's being worked on.03:20
spiv(presupposing a mechanism to browse collections of branches, of course)03:21
PengI leave my branches around forever, using Launchpad to mark them as merged or abandoned or whatever.03:21
lifelessAfC: no really saying that that snippet is a good answer; just thats the only answer in bzrlib today03:25
lifelessI hate test_35_wait_lock_changing03:31
PengYay, I had a weird problem with bzr-svn (traceback trying to branch something, then "not a branch"), but I upgraded, and now it's ok. :)03:48
PengSo what's the status of bzr.dev and http://bazaar.launchpad.net/, what with bug 207558?04:57
lifelessbug 207558?04:59
jdongseveas upgraded to hardy.05:01
jdonghilarity ensues.05:01
spivPeng: I'm working on it atm05:03
fullermdspiv: Hey, I had a Q about that root_client_path thing you merged in today...05:07
fullermdspiv: I'm not sure I understand its implications.  Could that be useful in the case where the request paths aren't directly under a common root?05:08
Pengspiv: Ok.05:08
PengOh, ubotu isn't here?05:09
spivfullermd: hmm, I'm not sure.  It's just designed so that you can publish e.g. /home/code/project-x at bzr+http://host/bzr/repos/x-project05:11
fullermdspiv: I have the [recreational] desire to get the smart server in bed with UserDir's...05:12
spivSo you can effectively designate some path in your public URL space as the root of the bzr-served area, and then have that consistently translated to an underlying transport.05:13
fullermdHm.  So that wouldn't really apply...05:13
lifelessfullermd: ~ translation just needs a transport adapter I think05:13
spivfullermd: what lifeless said :)05:14
* fullermd gets his Greek-to-English dictionary out...05:14
spivfullermd: e.g. write a plugin that registers a transport for the "userdir:" URL scheme, and use that as the backing transport for your bzr+http server05:15
spivSo instead of having a SmartWSGIApp that publishes '/home/code/project-x', it could publish "userdir:///".05:17
lifelessspiv: well, I was thinking something that looks for ~ and does userdir expansion05:17
lifelessspiv: but yeah05:17
fullermdEither way, it sounds like it classifies solidly as "bzr hackers might be able to get this working".  So, I guess I'll leave that laying for a while yet.05:18
lifelessalways need more help fullermd05:19
fullermdWell, my port of bzrlib to perl is a little stalled...05:19
lifelessI said help :)05:20
fullermdI am helping; it's stalled   ;)05:20
=== BasicMac is now known as BasicOSX
=== doko_ is now known as doko
mdkelifeless: thanks very much for your email08:19
=== cprov is now known as cprov-afk
fullermdIt's kinda odd that 'missing' doesn't have --remember, and doesn't remember by default either.  And doesn't use the submit branch...09:13
james_wsounds like the start of a soppy song... "oh, if only I could remember all those missing revisions..."09:14
fullermdHm.  Yeah.  Simon and Garfunkel.09:16
=== cprov-afk is now known as cprov
igcnight all09:32
james_wnight igc09:34
james_wigc: thanks for the proposed new hook, it could well make bzr great for use with ikiwiki09:42
james_wdoes anyone understand this?09:48
james_wit seems to be a bit of a circular argument.09:48
james_wit might be http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=bzr-svn that is the root of it then09:49
siretartjames_w: we need to ask the release team to add a hint that the bzr related package need to go in together09:50
siretartjames_w: or we could just prod dato, since he is a member of the debian release team ;)09:51
james_wah, I see, thanks siretart09:54
datosiretart, james_w: I added a hint, should be done in a couple days, when bzr-svn is ready to migrate10:15
james_wdato: thanks10:16
schierbeckjelmer: hi10:38
jelmerschierbeck: hey10:43
schierbeckhave a look at lp:~bzr-gtk/bzr-gtk/seahorse-integration10:44
schierbeckit's rocking.10:44
schierbecki've got key fingerprints and trust down nown10:44
schierbeckthough i still need to fix some bugs10:44
jelmerschierbeck: any chance you can review my other two patches I sent to the list?10:52
jelmer([MERGE] Signatures tab and [MERGE] Split identity settings out of main preferences window.)10:53
jameshjelmer: thanks for looking at my commit-notify patch10:55
schierbeckjelmer: sure10:55
=== AnMaster_ is now known as AnMaster
jameshnow I just need to get lifeless to review the bzr-dbus bits10:59
jelmerschierbeck: thanks11:01
schierbecklooked over the settings branch, looks good!11:02
schierbeckjelmer: btw, do you think we should rename the "signature" tab label to "trust"?11:02
schierbecki think it makes more sense11:03
schierbecksince a signature doesn't really mean anything if you don't trust it.11:03
jelmerschierbeck: I'd rather call it signature for now11:04
jelmerSince trust can mean different things here11:04
jelmerDoes it mean you trust the person who made the signature to have made the commit, or does it mean you trust them to write good code without security bugs?11:05
schierbeckthat could be differentiated in the tab ui11:05
schierbecki.e. [x] Trust that this revision was committed by 'John Doe'11:06
schierbeckand [x] Trust the validness of this revision11:06
schierbeckwhere validness would be replaced with a proper word...11:07
jameshjelmer/schierbeck: if you want to do signature verification, maybe try pygpgme11:07
jameshI haven't done much work on it recently, but it works pretty well11:07
schierbeckjamesh: we're looking at using the seahorse dbus service right now, but i'll take a look11:07
james_wI don't know if you guys know, but we had a discussion on signatures at the sprint11:08
jelmerschierbeck: The problem is that bzr can only store signatures at the moment and afaik it's not really clear what they mean11:08
schierbeckjup, that's been an issue for a while11:08
james_wit's not clear that what we have now is the best approach, so it may be re-evaluated.11:09
schierbeckremember discussing it a few months ago11:09
jameshschierbeck: okay.  From memory, seahorse is built on top of gpgme, so they should be mostly equivalent11:09
jameshit just changes who forks and exec's gpg11:09
schierbeckjamesh: i think a review system integrated into bzr would be nice11:09
james_wI've been tasked with writing a spec about it11:09
jelmerschierbeck: that's why I'd rather stay away from assigning trust, etc for now11:09
schierbeckjelmer: i see your point11:09
jameshbzr has enough hooks now that the jam's old signing plugin could be extended to do useful things now11:10
james_wor at least a document about the issues, and the fact that the point of a signature is not currently clear is the biggest problem with the current state for me11:10
jameshlike refuse merges that aren't signed by a trusted key11:10
schierbeckwhat about having review keywords, like "approve", and then just sign the keyword and sha1-sum?11:10
schierbeckbzr review <approve|reject|...> -r <revision>11:11
schierbeckthe idea would be that all history up to that revision would then be "approved"11:13
schierbeckjust an idea, though11:13
schierbeckjelmer: okay, i've pushed some further changes to lp11:20
schierbeckthe new implementation now exceeds the old in functionality11:20
schierbeckjamesh: does pugpgme have any documentation?11:21
jameshschierbeck: not really.  The API is mostly the same as the C one though.11:22
jameshand the tests cover pretty much all the entry points11:22
schierbeckjamesh: okay11:22
schierbeckperhaps i'll switch to it later on11:23
schierbeckalso depends on distribution stuff11:23
jelmerschierbeck: I'd rather use seahorse than pygpgme since seahorses password prompting will always be gtk based11:25
jameshschierbeck: whatever you do, don't use pyme11:25
jameshit is one of the worst kinds of swig generated Python extension11:26
ubotuNew bug: #210053 in bzr "no way to edit subject when using bzr send builtin editor" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/21005311:26
ubotuNew bug: #210092 in bzr "Bazaar raises AssertionError in TreeTransformBase.version_file: 'file_id is not None'" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/21009211:26
jelmerschierbeck: the seahorse-integration branch gives me list out of range exceptions11:27
ubotuNew bug: #209849 in bzr "Bazaar chokes when running commands over SFTP" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/20984911:28
ubotuNew bug: #209948 in bzr "bzr log failure (possible regression)" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/20994811:28
ubotuNew bug: #209998 in bzr-gtk "Should integrate with Seahorse" [Medium,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/20999811:28
ubotuNew bug: #209912 in bzr "--hardlink option produce traceback on Windows" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/20991211:30
g0nzal0hello there, I'm trying use bazaar to do personal version control of a little django project11:36
g0nzal0using Ubuntu 7.1011:36
g0nzal0I get this: http://dpaste.com/42536/ :(11:36
g0nzal0when doing commit11:36
g0nzal0for the first time11:36
AfCg0nzal0: you really want to be using a version of Bazaar that is not 6 versions old.11:37
AfCg0nzal0: upgrade to bzr >= 1.311:37
g0nzal0AfC: OK!11:37
bob2g0nzal0: 'bzr commit -q' might succeed11:37
james_wg0nzal0: what's your locale?11:37
bob2if that error is from trying to print the filename11:37
AfCg0nzal0: 0.90 is ancient11:37
g0nzal0AfC: I thougth so.., thanks11:38
g0nzal0james_w: es_AR.UTF-811:38
schierbeckjelmer: yeah, i noticed11:38
james_wg0nzal0: there is a PPA you can use to get the latest version11:38
schierbeckjelmer: it's if you don't have the key11:39
g0nzal0AfC: I thougth apt-get install bzr would get it11:39
g0nzal0james_w: thanks11:39
* AfC is a bit shocked that Ubuntu doesn't publish updates of things, but that's ever been the Debian way.11:46
siretartAfC: ubuntu does update software, even in released version. the updating policy is documented on wiki.ubuntu.com11:48
AfCUh huh11:48
=== weigon__ is now known as jan
=== jan is now known as weigon
schierbeckjelmer: is it still giving off noise?11:55
jelmerschierbeck: let me try12:04
jelmerdbus.exceptions.DBusException: org.freedesktop.DBus.GLib.UnmappedError.Seahorse.Code1: Invalid key id:12:04
schierbeckjelmer: you're at revision 427?12:06
jelmerschierbeck: yes12:07
schierbecki'll see if i'm running an old version of seahorse12:07
schierbecki'm running 2.20.112:08
jelmerGNOME seahorse 2.22.012:08
schierbeckyou're running hardy, right?12:10
jelmerno, Sid12:10
schierbecki'm not sure what's changed in the api12:11
schierbeckcan you try using self.get_id() instead of self.key in GetKeyField() et al?12:12
jelmerdbus.exceptions.DBusException: org.freedesktop.DBus.GLib.UnmappedError.Seahorse.Code1: Invalid key id:12:14
schierbeckwhat method is throwing it?12:16
schierbeckis it discover() or one of the getters?12:17
jelmernot sure, the machine I was runnig it on just crashed :-(12:18
sabdflis bzr.dev having a crisis of identity?12:32
sabdflperegrine% ./bzr pull                                        ~/software/bzr.dev12:32
sabdflUsing saved location: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~bzr/bzr/trunk/12:32
sabdflbzr: ERROR: Not a branch: "http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~bzr/bzr/trunk/".12:32
Pengsabdfl: >= r3309?12:33
Pengsabdfl: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/20755812:33
ubotuLaunchpad bug 207558 in bzr ""bzr branch http://bazaar.launchpad.net/...." fails with bzr.dev >= r3309" [Critical,In progress]12:34
Pengubotu: When did you get back?12:34
PengFuck! X-Chat's dying again.12:34
PengOr, some less-obscene variant of that sentence.12:34
schierbeckjelmer: still no luck?12:43
ubotuNew bug: #210142 in bzr "Log comments cannot be changed/edited/annotated" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/21014212:48
mtayloris there a way to change a repository from --with-trees to --without-trees without recreating it?12:50
datomtaylor: there is `touch .bzr/repository/no-working-trees`12:50
mtaylordato: nice :)12:51
schierbeckhmm, perhaps i should work on my exam assignment today...12:54
schierbecki always get so god damned productive when i have exams!12:54
schierbeckjust in the wrong areas...12:55
jelmerschierbeck: one sec13:12
jelmerschierbeck: http://pastebin.org/2663613:13
jelmerschierbeck: yeah, I always get that as well.. the more you have to do, the more interesting other things become :(13:14
=== mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch
=== kiko-zzz is now known as kiko
ubotuNew bug: #210218 in bzr ""bzr send" fails if branch nick contains a slash" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/21021813:46
=== abentle1 is now known as abentley
=== mrevell-lunch is now known as mrevell
aantncan I get bzr merge to ignore two revisions from the merge source?14:51
aantnI'd like it to merge all revisions after revision number x14:51
aantnand permanently ignore the revisions before that14:52
aantnThe man page explains that "If you specify two revisions, the first will be used as a BASE,14:54
aantn  and the second one as OTHER."14:54
aantnI'm not sure what the 'other' means14:54
luksyou would need to cherry-pick those revisions14:55
lukswhich has it's disadvantages14:55
luksregular merge will only merge the whole branch14:55
luksno easy way to workaround it, because it would mean that the newer revisions in the new branch have different parents than the same revisions in the old branch14:56
lukswhat you can do is a full merge, and then revert those X revisions with a reversed merge14:57
aantnI'm not sure I follow...14:58
lukswhich part?14:58
luksor the whole monologue? :)14:58
aantnluks: why a regular merge beginning from a specific number wont work14:58
luksbecause revisions in bzr have some identifiers and have defined their parent revisions14:59
luksif you merge from some specific revisions, you would break the original revision parent<->children chain14:59
luksbzr allows you to do that, but it will look differently from a regular merge14:59
luks(it's called cherry-picking)15:00
lukswhat is your use case for this?15:03
aantnI run my own branch that really is probably going to split from the trunk15:03
aantnI've already added the feature that those revisions add to the trunk15:04
aantnAnd I like the way I implemented it more than the way it was done in trunk15:04
aantnI think I'll just merge it in and then restore it to what it was before15:04
luksyes, that's the best solution I think15:04
luksdo a full merge, and revert those specific changes15:04
aantnluks: is there a command to do that, or should I just do it by hand?15:05
lukswell, if they are touching the same code, you will have conflicts on the merge15:05
luksso you will probably have to do manually anyway15:07
aantnluks: probably15:07
luks`bzr shelve` could help probably15:07
luksthat is, in case you don't have textual conflicts, but want to revert specific changes15:07
luksif those changes affect whole files, you can simply use `bzr revert path/to/file`15:07
aantnluks: that should work15:09
PengWhat's that simple POST to see if an HTTP smart server is alive, that just returns "ok2"?15:12
=== mw|out is now known as mw
james_wPeng: there's a hello plugin15:21
james_wso I think you can do bzr hello bzr+http://wherever15:22
ubotuNew bug: #210280 in bzr "unable to obtain lock after push failure" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/21028015:51
Pengjames_w: That's true. I've even downloaded it, but never installed it.15:53
PengI've got it.15:53
Peng$ echo hello | POST http://.../.bzr/smart15:54
=== kiko is now known as kiko-phone
Pengbzr-hello is neat too.16:06
cody-somervilleWhat is the command to build a debian package from a repository?17:09
LeoNerdapt-get source foo;  debuild ?17:10
PengThere's bzr-builddeb.17:10
cody-somervilleThanks Peng17:10
LeoNerdOh.. that :)17:10
cody-somervilleAre you sure thats the command?17:10
cody-somervilleoh, I guess I don't have it installed17:11
* cody-somerville thought he did.17:11
PengYeah, it's a package. I don't know what the command is.17:13
james_wcody-somerville: try without the -17:24
james_wbzr builddeb17:24
beunopoolie, lifeless, did you manage to send in the paper for debconf?17:47
james_whi besonen_mobile217:51
james_wand beuno, hi to you too17:51
beunohey james_w!  how are you?17:51
james_wgood, how are you?17:52
beunopretty good, finally caught up with most of the stuff I had left fall behind  :)17:52
beunohow's your new work?17:52
james_wit's going great thanks.17:53
beunoI'm glad :)17:54
jelmerhi james_w18:06
jelmerjames_w: Did you see the bug report I filed on bzr-builddeb's timestamps?18:06
jelmerjames_w: Took me a while to figure out what was causing those differing checksums...18:06
james_wjelmer: yeah I did18:06
james_wI haven't had time to look at though I'm afraid18:07
datois it going to work by just using the same timestamps?18:07
james_wI don't know18:07
jelmerdato: yep, a diff on the tarfile showed that was the only thing that differed18:07
datofwiw joeyh wrote pristine-tar for stuff like this18:07
datojelmer: aha18:07
jelmerdato: that's the other way around though18:07
james_wdato: i'd like to integrate it, but there's no easy place to stash the diff in bzr18:08
datojames_w: true...18:08
jelmerjames_w: Hmm, looks like that's actually a bug deep inside the bzr export code...18:19
james_wjelmer: that it doesn't set the timestamps, or something else?18:21
jelmerjames_w: it explicitly sets the timestamp to time()18:22
jelmerthe exporting happens from a revision tree, when there is no revision object around anymore18:23
james_wI can get the revision object in builddeb and set the timestamp then18:24
jelmeryou mean avoid the standard bzr export code?18:25
james_wno, just set the timestamp after18:26
james_wif I could do it with the bzr export code that would be better obviously18:27
james_wa timestamp= parameter or something18:27
jelmerjames_w: there is no generic timestamp argument passed to the argument code at the moment18:29
jelmerthough one could be added, I guess18:29
james_wyeah, I don't know if it could be done without breaking other exporters, I'm not looking at the code at the moment.18:30
james_wthat would probably be the cleanest way though.18:31
jdongjames_w: any hints on http://launchpadlibrarian.net/13012802/buildlog_ubuntu-hardy-i386.bzr-builddeb_0.93_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz?18:36
james_wUnable to load plugin 'builddeb' from '/build/buildd/bzr-builddeb-0.93/build/lib/bzrlib/plugins'18:37
james_wthat's annoying18:37
james_wwe need a -Dplugin_loading or something18:37
james_wit means that I want the ~/.bzr.log to debug it18:38
james_wjdong: there's no easy way to run the testsuite from debian/rules, I thought this way would be it, but it only seems to have built in mine and my sponsor's chroots18:38
james_wso I don't know what the fix is exactly.18:39
james_wperhaps just to disable the testsuite during the build.18:39
james_wthough I don't like doing that18:39
jdongjames_w: odd enough it worked in my pbuilder too....18:40
jdongjames_w: hmm I'll disable the test suite for now so we don't lose the bzr-builddeb binary entirely while we investigate a better fix18:40
james_wthe other alternative is to cat ~/.bzr.log if that command fails, just so we can debug it properly18:41
=== kiko-phone is now known as kiko-afk
schierbec1jelmer: ping19:02
jelmerschierbec1: pong19:06
schierbec1jelmer: i'm tweaking the sig tab labels19:08
schierbec1i'm thinking: a bold headline and a longer description19:08
schierbec1such as:19:09
schierbec1*Authenticity unknown*19:09
schierbec1This revision has not been signed; it may be forged.19:09
schierbec1what do yuo think?19:09
jelmerschierbec1: The fact there is a signature doesn't say the revision is or isn't forged19:10
jelmerschierbec1: I can forge one of your revisions and sign it.19:10
schierbec1jelmer: yeah, but signed + trusted key => not forged, right?19:11
jelmerschierbec1: no, that implies you trust all people whose keys you've signed to not forge revisions19:11
schierbec1well, okay then19:11
schierbec1but then the whole idea of signatures kind of goes away19:12
schierbec1if you can't even trust your trusted friend to f00k you over19:12
jelmerschierbec1: right, but that's what the whole discussion about signatures in bzrlib was about19:12
schierbec1jelmer: what if we match the signature name + email with the committer's?19:13
jelmerschierbec1: yeah, that would make some sense19:14
schierbec1so a revision signed by its author is authentic if the key is trusted?19:14
jelmerschierbec1: yeah19:14
mdkequick question. When I upgrade a branch from dirstate-with-subtree to rich-root-pack (on Launchpad), what will the other users of the branch need to do to get the changes? upgrade their branches too or get them again?19:14
jelmermdke: afaik they should be able to continue pulling if they have bzr >= 1.019:15
mdkejelmer: and pushing?19:15
jelmermdke: pushing will still be possible too19:15
mdkecool, thanks. but to get the benefits they need to upgrade right?19:16
jelmermdke: it'll be slower than it can be though, so I would highly encourage them to also upgrade to --rich-root-pack19:16
mdkefine, thanks a lot19:16
jelmerschierbec1: so I think we have 4 situations then:19:16
jelmeror rather 519:16
schierbec1jelmer: so we have four cases: (unsigned), (signed - trusted), (signed + trusted - committer), and (signed + trusted + committer) ?19:16
schierbec1what's the fifth?19:17
schierbec1well, (signed + committer - trusted)19:17
jelmeryeah, 419:17
jelmerschierbec1: no signature, signed by trusted author, signed by untrusted party, signed by trusted person (not author)19:17
mw-homedoes bzr have keywords like $Id: $ ?19:18
jelmerokay, that matches what you said19:18
jelmermw-home: nope, not yet19:18
schierbec1i think we should only handle unsigned, signed+trusted+committer and signed-trusted+committer19:18
jelmermw-home: there is an open specification about it but nobody working on it yet afaik19:18
schierbec1that's all related to authenticity19:18
jelmerschierbec1: I think we should show if somebody who's trusted but not the author has signed19:18
schierbec1jelmer: yeah, but perhaps delay that a bit19:19
jelmerschierbec1: We should clearly state that that person is not the author19:19
jelmerschierbec1: ok19:19
jelmerschierbec1: We should be checking against committer email btw, not author email19:19
schierbec1jelmer: i think we should have an 'Authenticity' section19:19
jelmerschierbec1: also, if the revision is signed by somebody untrusted it's not relevant if that key's email matches the committer email19:20
jelmersince we can't trust the email on the key to be valid19:21
schierbec1jelmer: but we may like to provide the user with the option of trusting the key19:22
jelmerschierbec1: we should leave that to specific apps such as seahorse imo19:22
schierbec1if he's spoken with the committer and knows the revision is authentic, we can then trust it (marginally)19:22
schierbec1jelmer: seahorse is meant to be integrated like that -- no ordinary user will open up a key manager19:23
jelmerschierbec1: I think we should allow launching a key details dialog or something from seahorse19:23
mw-homejelmer: thanks for the information.19:24
jelmerbut we shouldn't have a "trust this person" key, that's really outside of the scope of bzr-gtk19:24
schierbec1jelmer: i'm not sure -- if that's the way the user extends his trust network?19:25
jelmerschierbec1: signing keys should involve identity verification and the like19:26
jelmerschierbec1: also, seahorse already deals with this task, let's not reimplement that bit19:27
jelmerafaik the key information diaog from seahorse has buttons for trusting the key19:27
schierbec1jelmer: allright, but perhaps we can have a look at it in the future19:27
=== kiko-afk is now known as kiko
schierbec1jelmer: does it still throw exceptions at you?19:29
schierbec1i talked with a seahorse dev, he said the api didn't change19:29
schierbec1jelmer: btw, i've pushed to lp, you can check out the new headings19:29
jelmerschierbec1: yep, still errors19:30
jelmerInvalid key id:19:30
schierbec1can you print out the key?19:30
jelmerthis is on your signed revisions19:30
schierbec1it should be of the format "openpgp:<key>"19:31
jelmerit works fine for my own signed revisions19:31
jelmersuch as 14.1.1 (in bzr-gtk)19:31
jelmerschierbec1: The "Authenticity confirmed" bit is incorrect until we're checking the author email == key email19:33
schierbec1jelmer: yeah, this is just the ui bits, i'll add the comparison asap19:33
schierbec1jelmer: can you add a print in crypt.py so i can see what the key looks like?19:34
=== mw is now known as mw|food
schierbec1just in Key.__init__()19:34
schierbec1print key19:34
schierbec1jelmer: it may also be that my key is not fetched from the server19:35
jelmerschierbec1: We should not rely on seahorse being able to fetch a key19:37
jelmerschierbec1: since you may be offline, for example19:37
jelmerschierbec1: I think I also have automatic key fetching turned off in gpg since it is slow19:37
schierbec1jelmer: i'm not completely sure what the protocol is, but the docs mention that a key may be "missing" at first19:38
schierbec1jelmer: but that may very well be the problem19:38
schierbec1jelmer: i'd like to try something: in __init__(), replace "discover(key)" with "discover(self.get_id())"19:39
schierbec1that's just to see if the api's changed19:39
jelmerschierbec1: that changes the error back to the list index out of range exception19:42
jelmerschierbec1: what does DiscoverKeys() do exactly?19:43
jelmerdoes that try to fetch the key from the web?19:43
schierbec1yup, or the local network19:45
schierbec1i'd like to see the value of "key" -- can you print it out?19:45
jelmerschierbec1: key is an empty string19:45
schierbec1it sounds like VerifyText returns something stupid19:45
jelmerschierbec1: seahorse also has an option to automatically discover keys as they are requested19:46
schierbec1what about cleartext in crypt.verify() ?19:46
jelmerschierbec1: I'd rather rely on that19:46
jelmerschierbec1: cleartext does indeed contain the testament19:47
schierbec1that's funny -- the "key" return value is just empty?!19:48
jelmerschierbec1: dbus.String(u'')19:48
jelmerschierbec1: "print repr(key)" prints dbus.String(u'')19:50
schierbec13 seconds, on the phone19:51
schierbec1jelmer: sorry, my mom called19:56
schierbec1hehe, a bit hard to just hang up...19:56
schierbec1jelmer: but yeah, it's returning an empty string -- i'll just make a test for that and mark the key as invalid then19:57
jelmerschierbec1: s/invalid/unknown?19:58
jelmersince it could be trusted19:58
jelmerschierbec1: it's a bit odd though that it doesn't return anything at all, it should known the key id even if it doesn't have the key19:58
schierbec1jelmer: exactly, but i guess we'll just mark it as unsigned or what?20:00
jelmerschierbec1: unknown should be a separate thing imho20:00
schierbec1jelmer: okay, like "error verifying key"?20:02
schierbec1oh, the seahorse guy is responsive now, i'll ask him20:02
jelmerschierbec1: ah, cool20:03
jelmerschierbec1: it would be nice if seahorse could actually return the key id there20:03
jelmerschierbec1: and it would be nice if a command could be added to the DBus API to display the key information dialog for a particular key20:04
schierbec1jelmer: could i get you to pastebin the crypttext of a revision that doesn't work?20:09
schierbec1in crypt.verify()20:09
schierbec1yeah, that looks like it should20:11
schierbec1i'm talking with the seahorse guy, it seems that it's because the key is not in your keyring20:12
jelmerschierbec1: right, and it shouldn't have to be20:12
jelmerI mean, seahorse should be able to return the key idea20:13
jelmerand we could print something like "signature from unknown key YYYY"20:13
schierbec1jelmer: exactly20:14
schierbec1right now, i think we should just write "Authenticity cannot be verified -- Key not available"20:14
jelmerright, that makes sense20:15
=== mwhudson_ is now known as mwhudson
schierbec1jelmer: okay, pushing a fix to lp20:20
schierbec1let's see if this works20:21
jelmerschierbec1: yep, works now - thanks20:22
jelmerschierbec1: This should not be marked as Authentication error imho20:22
schierbec1i was just about to ask20:22
schierbec1what do you think? "Authenticity cannot be verified"?20:23
jelmeryep, that sounds good20:24
=== mw|food is now known as mw
schierbec1jelmer: ok, it's pushed20:25
schierbec1jelmer: just one last thing -- try replacing VerifyText with DecryptText20:25
schierbec1it could be an error in the VerifyText implementation20:26
jelmer"No data"20:26
schierbec1hmm, well, ok then20:27
schierbec1jelmer: i think i'll rewrite the descriptions20:27
jelmerschierbec1: we shouldn't be calling discover() imho20:28
schierbec1we're not anymore20:28
jelmermy bad, it's just the function that's still there20:28
schierbec1"The revision has been signed by a person you trust" ?20:28
schierbec1s/The/This/ ?20:28
jelmerand which person, if possible :-)20:29
schierbec1or rather "... signed with a trusted key" ?20:29
schierbec1jelmer: yeah :)20:29
jelmerI'd prefer "signed with a trusted key "20:29
schierbec1and then "This revision has been signed, but you do not trust the authenticity of the key."20:30
jelmerwhat about "This revision has been signed with an untrusted key" ?20:32
schierbec1jelmer: i think it's perhaps too close to the trusted version20:33
schierbec1just two letters apart20:33
schierbec1we should emphasize that it's not trusted, as a signature in itself means nothing20:33
jelmerwe need more colored icons :-)20:35
KinnisonIs bzr currently unable to branch from launchpad?20:35
KinnisonI was trying to get the gedit plugin and bzr says it's not a branch20:35
schierbec1jelmer: always :)20:36
schierbec1jelmer: i'm working out a seahorse patch with the dev guy20:36
jelmerschierbec1: cool20:36
* Kinnison hrms, also can't bzr pull from the bzr-svn branch20:38
Kinnisonperhaps launchpad is moosed20:38
jelmerKinnison: I think there was a regression in bzr.dev that breaks it with launchpad or something20:43
Kinnisonjelmer: arse20:45
Kinnisonoh well20:45
Kinnisonno bzr-svn for me until that's fixed :-)20:45
james_wKinnison: you should be able to pull over bzr+ssh://20:46
schierbec1jelmer: what about "This signature has been signed, but the authenticity of the signature cannot be trusted."?20:46
Kinnisonjames_w: from a branch I don't own?20:46
james_wKinnison: yeah, you don't need write permission to pull20:46
Kinnisonschierbec1: "...signature has been signed..." ?20:46
Kinnisonjames_w: I was more incredulous about having ssh access to branches I didn't own20:47
* Kinnison didn't know that was allowed20:47
KinnisonI thought launchpad virtual-chrooted you20:47
schierbec1Kinnison: bzr-gtk ui bits for signed revisions20:47
schierbec1oops, s/signature/revision/20:47
Kinnisonschierbec1: aah, suddenly it makes more sense :-)20:47
schierbec1jelmer: could i get you to check out a patch for seahorse?20:49
schierbec1only if you have time20:49
jelmerschierbec1: sure20:50
jelmerschierbec1: or http://people.samba.org/bzr/jelmer/seahorse/jelmer :-)20:52
schierbec1here's the patch20:53
schierbec1jelmer: "This revision has been signed, but the authenticity of the key has not been established"?20:56
schierbec1perhaps s/key/signature/?20:56
schierbec1just chime in, everybody!20:56
jelmerschierbec1: I'd rather just say that the key is unknown or untrusted21:00
schierbec1jelmer: "... but the key is not trusted."?21:02
jelmerschierbec1: yep21:03
schierbec1jelmer: have you tried out the patch?21:05
jelmerworking on it21:05
beunovila, I've got 2 hours separated for the upload plugin today, so I'll give you the feedback I owe you  :)21:05
vilabeuno: great !21:06
mwhudsonbeuno: hi!21:09
jelmerschierbec1: yep, that patch fixes it21:09
schierbec1jelmer: awesome!21:11
beunohey mwhudson!   welcome back  :)21:12
ubotuNew bug: #210422 in bzr-gtk "gpg signer should be part of ui_factory" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/21042221:12
schierbec1jelmer: well, now we just have to wait 6 months until the next stable is released! :)21:16
emgentsome idea?21:18
emgentbzr locked.21:18
chellemgent: nope sorry21:18
chell"locked 123 hours, 27 minutes ago" sounds a bit weird21:19
jelmertry bzr break-lock21:19
emgentjelmer: same error..21:19
beunoemgent, try a few times more (sometimes LP locks it a few times)21:22
emgentbeuno: to push or brack-lock ?21:24
beunoemgent, break lock21:24
beunoemgent: bzr break-lock bzr+ssh://emgent@bazaar.launchpad.net/~emgent/ubuntu-cve-tracker/universe-security-updates21:25
beuno3 or 4 times should do it  :)21:25
emgentyes i know21:25
emgentbut same problem21:25
emgentok :)21:25
beunoemgent, still nothing?21:25
emgentok now work :)21:27
beunoemgent, :)21:27
* beuno wonders when LP will fix that bug21:28
schierbec1jelmer: okay, now we just need to figure out what to do if seahorse isn't installed21:30
jelmerschierbec1: hide the signature tab :-)21:35
schierbec1jelmer: yeah, but we should add a check for seahorse :)21:41
schierbec1the branch is in the team repo, so you can just commit changes if you wish to21:42
schierbec1jelmer: what do you think about left-aligning the table "keys"?21:51
schierbec1i.e. the bold labels21:51
mdkehow can I make changes to the details of my "parent" or "submit" branch?22:07
beunomdke, what kind of changes?22:07
mdkebeuno: well, remove them or specify another branch22:08
beunomdke, just use bzr push/pull/merge new_location --remember22:08
* jdong investigates bzr mailing list... did he break bzrtools?22:09
jdongit worksforme....22:10
beunojdong, he probably has pycentral b0rked22:11
jdongbeuno: also see bug 210452 though22:11
ubotuLaunchpad bug 210452 in bzrtools "error updating bzrtools" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/21045222:11
jdongit seems like a different reporter22:12
jdongperhaps it only happens on an update?22:12
james_wjdong: there's a load of bugs filed with this error22:12
james_won different packages22:12
james_wI can't remember the fix offhand, I think it might have been rebuilds, but that doesn't make sense here22:12
james_whttps://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bzr-svn/+bug/197840 is one22:13
ubotuLaunchpad bug 197840 in bzr-svn "bzr-svn fails to install (Ubuntu Hardy, with ppa bzr)" [Undecided,Fix released]22:13
=== mwhudson_ is now known as mwhudson
ubotuLaunchpad bug 197692 in python-central "package ubuntu-desktop 1.94 failed to install/upgrade: problemas de dependencias - se deja sin configurar" [Undecided,Fix released]22:13
james_wthat's the one22:13
james_wjdong: yeah22:27
james_wjdong: passing it on to python-central may be the right thing to do, I don't know22:28
james_wI don't really know what bzrtools might have done to provoke this22:28
james_walthough, hang on, bzrtools was a merge, so maybe something was dropped22:28
james_wor maybe not dropped, but needs to be improved.22:29
xmawhy does bb crash so often ?23:00
lifelessdoes it ?23:01
xmaeach time I want to read patch entries => no luck (500 internal error)23:04
lifelessxma: whats the last couple of lines of the traceback?23:10
xmaeach time I have seen it, it was a SQL query23:11
pooliehello xma23:11
lifelesslet abentley know, probably via the list23:11
pooliei think it crashes pretty often23:11
xmapoolie: hello23:11
poolieall things considered23:12
pooliei still love it deeply23:12
xmayes it is very valuable23:12
xma(when it works :))23:12
abentleyIt crashes so often mainly because I don't know why it crashes so often :-)23:12
xmaI learnt many python related things when reading people's patches23:12
xmaabentley: hey aaron23:13
xma00:04 <lifeless> let abentley know, probably via the list23:13
xmaso it is down now: OperationalError database is locked23:13
xmagotta go now23:14
xmasee ya all23:14
pooliehello abentley23:18
abentleypoolie: hi23:19
pooliethere was a recent bug report of a failure in treetransform23:19
poolieif you get a sec could you comment on it, if you have not already?23:19
poolieit should still be in the recent list23:19
igcmorning all23:35

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!