[04:52] <Hobbsee> \o/ mrevell!
[04:53] <wgrant> Oh, it wasn't 24 days late?
[04:54] <wgrant> This is good.
[04:54] <Hobbsee> they've ditched the real name policy!
[04:55] <wgrant> So I saw.
[04:58] <Hobbsee> mpt: thanks for trying, anyway.
[04:59] <Hobbsee> mpt: even if the answer seems to be less than satisfactory.
[05:00] <Hobbsee> (imo, anyway)
[09:30] <mpt> Goooooooooooooood morning Launchpadders!
[09:36] <mpt> Hobbsee, judge that by our future availability, not by the exact methods we use to achieve it :-)
[09:37] <mpt> Also, I prefer a recovery system that doesn't require user intervention over one that does
[09:37] <mpt> so what transpired in the meeting is good news, I think.
[09:48] <wgrant> mpt: AFAICS all that transpired was people saying it wasn't an issue, because it was resolved within minutes of people noticing. I saw nothing about making people notice, unless that comment about talking to IS counts.
[09:48] <wgrant> bigjools: Around?
[09:49] <bigjools> wgrant: aye
[09:50] <wgrant> bigjools: I saw your description change on the MOTU archive admin spec... not just anybody in MOTU should be able to do that - you'll still definitely need a new celeb for that.
[09:50] <bigjools> wgrant: it's all in hand, fear not
[09:50] <wgrant> For build administration it's OK without a new celeb, but not archive administration.
[09:50] <bigjools> we are not using celebs, that's all
[09:51] <wgrant> bigjools: OK, as long as you're not opening it up entirely.
[09:52] <bigjools> wgrant: no, we might appear stupid sometimes but we're not that stupid
[09:52] <wgrant> Heh, the spec makes it appear somewhat like it was being restricted to uploaders.
[09:53] <wgrant> Er, bug, not spec. I mixed up my mail
[09:53] <bigjools> I had a long-ish chat with Jordan yesterday and he's clued in
[09:54] <wgrant> Great.
[09:54] <mpt> wgrant, that was just kiko. He didn't mean that.
[10:12] <wgrant> mpt: I thought I saw SteveA say something of the sort, but perhaps.
[12:52] <Hobbsee> mpt: i do too, but i prefer multiple processes for if something screws up.  backups, if you will.
[12:52] <Hobbsee> as in, in the likely event that launchpad dies, AND IS doesn't respond, say, within an hour, then this procedure occurs.
[12:52] <Hobbsee> mpt: or whatever your preferred timeframe is
[12:54] <Hobbsee> mpt: i wasnt' expecting you to replace IS with something community driven.
[12:54] <Hobbsee> just if launchpad and IS fail, which it did over the weekend, and also did over christmas.
[13:03] <mantiena> Hi all
[13:04] <Hobbsee> heya
[13:12] <emgent> heya people
[13:13] <Hobbsee> heya
[13:13] <Hobbsee> good evening mrevell 
[13:15] <mrevell> morning Hobbsee
[14:01] <ubotu> New bug: #221866 in launchpad "mirror sites with multiple hosts behind one name should be probed more completely" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/221866
[15:11] <marnanel> Hey folks.  I am a little tired of seeing the default icon beside https://launchpad.net/metacity (I'm one of the upstream maintainers).  I don't have permissions to change the branding; how do I find out who does?
[15:14] <wgrant> marnanel: Ask a question at the URL in the topic. You could even get the ownership of the project transferred to you, most likely.
[15:17] <marnanel> wgrant: Okay, lovely.  Thank you!
[15:31] <marnanel> wgrant: "the URL in the topic" being help.l.n? I see lots of pages of help there but nowhere to ask a question (and actually it says "Contact us at #launchpad on Freenode").  Sorry to be slow.
[15:32] <wgrant> marnanel: answers.l.n
[15:32] <wgrant> A few characters later.
[15:32]  * marnanel laughs.  sorry
[15:47] <Zelut> can anyone help me with moving my LP project to a new URL?
[15:47] <wgrant> Zelut: Ask a question at the URL in the topic.
[15:47] <wgrant> An admin should attend to your request soon.
[15:48] <Zelut> wgrant: I did post a question on the answers section and then got an email this morning saying after 15 days it has expired.
[15:48] <Zelut> so I thought I'd drop in here and poke someone about it
[15:49] <wgrant> Zelut: Reopen it if you can - it has probably just been overlooked, and the reopening email may elicit a response.
[15:51] <Zelut> wgrant: done. thank you.
[16:04] <ubotu> New bug: #221938 in malone "Email interface crashes when an attachment file name contains a slash" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/221938
[17:03] <ubotu> New bug: #221988 in rosetta "Preserve XPI external entities" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/221988
[17:04] <ubotu> New bug: #221982 in launchpad "Out of list project" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/221982
[17:08] <seb128> hi
[17:08] <seb128> did the upstream watches updates code stopped running or something?
[17:20] <gmb> seb128: Why do you ask?
[17:21] <seb128> because the desktop bugs have tasks which are in an unknow state for days now
[17:21] <seb128> and I though the update used to run daily or something
[17:22] <seb128> that's handy to know when there is a patch available to backport from upstream for example
[17:25] <gmb> seb128: Can you give me an example bug? I'll look into it.
[17:25] <gmb> Bug watches should get updated once a day.
[17:26] <seb128> gmb: bug #210468
[17:26] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 210468 in gvfs "try to access a .Trash-$USER directory on autofs mounts" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/210468 - Assigned to Ubuntu Desktop Bugs (desktop-bugs)
[17:27]  * gmb looks
[17:28] <seb128> gmb: or bug #216763
[17:28] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 216763 in gvfs "gvfsd-http crashed with SIGSEGV in soup_str_case_hash()" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/216763 - Assigned to Ubuntu Desktop Bugs (desktop-bugs)
[17:28] <seb128> or bug #216763
[17:28] <seb128> ups, #217975 rather
[17:30] <gmb> seb128: Well, the bug watches against bugzilla.gnome.org are being updated.
[17:30] <gmb> So this is a bit weird.
[17:30] <gmb> seb128: Let me look into it and I'll get back to you.
[17:31] <seb128> gmb: right, I got 8 mails from Bug Watch Updater this week
[17:32] <seb128> gmb: and we tens of watch every week usually
[17:32] <seb128> +add
[17:33] <gmb> seb128: Right. I think I know what the problem is, but I just want to check before I put my money where my mouth is. Bear with me.
[17:33] <seb128> gmb: the activity seems "normal" until march 27 in my inbox
[17:33] <seb128> and very slow since
[17:33] <seb128> gmb: alright, no hurry, thanks ;-)
[17:49] <gmb> seb128: Right. I've spoken to our sysadmins and I've done a bit of poking around.
[17:50] <gmb> Basically, the problem is that we've implemented some load balancing to avoid hitting remote bugtrackers for too many bugs at one time.
[17:50] <gmb> For exampl, we have 7000 gnome-bugs watches.
[17:51] <seb128> you are telling me that we open too many GNOME bug upstream there ;-)
[17:51] <gmb> Shh, don't tell anyone else ;)
[17:51] <seb128> ah ah
[17:51] <gmb> Seriously though, our problem was that we weren't updating all of them every day.
[17:51] <seb128> 7000 seems to be a lot, do you count closed bugs?
[17:51] <gmb> seb128: Yes, because they could be reopened.
[17:52] <seb128> alright
[17:52] <gmb> Anyway, we weren't checking often enough, or getting enough bugs in one go.
[17:52] <gmb> So we missed some of them.
[17:52] <seb128> I see
[17:52] <gmb> seb128: We're going to fix that by having our import script run more frequently.
[17:52] <gmb> So come Monday everything should be sorted out.
[17:52] <seb128> ok, thanks
[17:52] <gmb> seb128: No problem.
[17:52] <LaserJock> mrevell: ping
[17:53] <seb128> gmb: one idea for your balancing though, check closed bugs less often
[17:53] <seb128> gmb: that's likely a high number of watchs where things are really not changing often
[17:53] <gmb> True enough.
[17:54] <gmb> We're actually going through quite a bit of refactoring work in that area, so that's one of the things that we might well look into. Thanks for the suggestion.
[17:54] <seb128> you are welcome ;-)
[17:54] <mrevell> hey LaserJock
[17:55] <LaserJock> mrevell: do I understand your blog post correctly to mean that bug contacts will now have access to private bugs?
[17:55] <LaserJock> i.e. we have a rather large privilege escalation
[17:56] <mrevell> LaserJock: I'm sorry, I made a stupid mistake there.
[17:56] <mrevell> LaserJock: I'll post a correction immediately.
[17:58] <LaserJock> mrevell: does "target bugs to milestones" mean they can make nominations or accept nominations?
[18:00] <mrevell> LaserJock: That's setting something a series goal, which is still down to the driver to accept.
[18:00] <mrevell> LaserJock: They can target a bug to a milestone, though.
[18:02] <LaserJock> mrevell: "regular" users can't set the privacy of a bug or mark bug reports as security issues?
[18:02] <mrevell> LaserJock: They can but I included it in the role as it's often something taken on by bug contacts. Perhaps that's confusing. I'll remove it.
[18:03] <LaserJock> mrevell: but can't any users nominate a bug to a milestone?
[18:04] <LaserJock> I'm just trying to figure out what exactly is being changed and what additional privileges bug supervisors are getting :-)
[18:04] <mrevell> LaserJock: No, not as far as I'm aware.
[18:04] <LaserJock> you sure, we have our contributors do it all the time
[18:04] <mrevell> LaserJock: Damn, my blog post has failed, in that case. There are no additional priviliedges.
[18:04] <mrevell> er, privileges
[18:04] <mrevell> it's just a name change.
[18:05] <LaserJock> I don't think they're all in the ubuntu-bugcontrol team
[18:05] <LaserJock> well, the statuses thing could be a new privilege right?
[18:05] <LaserJock> what about Importance?
[18:06] <mrevell> LaserJock: No, the statuses have been in place for a long time.
[18:06] <LaserJock> ok, so then what's the difference between a Bug Subscriber and a Bug Supervisor again? :-)
[18:07] <mrevell> Hmm, LaserJock I think I should ask BjornT to intervene here :)
[18:09] <BjornT> mrevell, LaserJock: 'bug contact' has been renamed to 'bug supervisor'. that's pretty much all to it :) we renamed it, since a 'bug contact' doesn't have to be subscribed to all the bug mail anymore.
[18:10] <LaserJock> BjornT: how does that work?
[18:11] <LaserJock> a Bug Supervisor can just unsubscribe from bugs like a normal user would?
[18:13] <LaserJock> doesn't seem to work for me on edge
[18:13] <BjornT> LaserJock: no, not quite. some someone gets set as 'bug supervisor' for a project, he will automatically be (implicitly) subscried to the project's bugs. however, the bug supervisor choose to remove the subscription, and then he won't be subscribed to the implicitly subscribed bugs anymore.
[18:13] <LaserJock> ok, so:
[18:13] <LaserJock> 1) this is only for Projects, right?
[18:14] <LaserJock> 2) current bug contacts are not automatically turned into bug supervisors?
[18:20] <BjornT> LaserJock: this is for Products and Distributions. they current bug contacts are automatically turned into bug supervisors, with a subscription. it's just a name change.
[18:22] <LaserJock> but not for packages, right?
[18:23] <LaserJock> which is very key, since there are waaaaay more package bug contacts than Product or Distribution bug contacts
[18:26] <BjornT> LaserJock: right, not for packages. 'bug contact' for packages were renamed to 'subscriber'. that's what they were, they never had any special privileges.
[18:26] <LaserJock> so that's an important distinction, IMO
[18:26] <mrevell> bjornT So, I should make that clear in the blog post.
[18:26] <mrevell> Okay, thanks LaserJock
[18:27] <LaserJock> you don't necessarily want to write to the 1% of people will be affected ;-)
[18:27] <LaserJock> and get the rest of us all excited ;-)
[18:28] <mrevell> LaserJock: Sorry, the blog post starts off talking about project bug contact but it's obviously not clear enough. Thanks for letting me know.
[18:28] <mrevell> I've got to shoot. Back later.
[18:57] <nxvl> hi!
[18:57] <nxvl> is there any problem with openID login and ubuntu store?
[18:57] <nxvl> i can't log in
[20:06] <emgent> heya
[20:11] <ubotu> New bug: #222097 in launchpad-documentation "help.launchpad.net theme confusingly similar to Launchpad theme" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/222097
[20:31] <mtaylor> statik: around
[20:31] <mtaylor> ?
[22:11] <Rinchen> mtaylor, it's after his normal hours
[22:11] <Rinchen> mtaylor, if he has normal hours :-)
[22:11] <Rinchen> nxvl, really?
[22:12] <Rinchen> nxvl, I would love to hear about it
[22:12] <Rinchen> nxvl, we've been seeing intermittent issues.  I think it's the store's code but I've had some difficulty in pinning it down.
[22:12] <Rinchen> nxvl, can you email me a step by step of what happens?  joey@canonical.com
[22:14] <korpios> Launchpad's "register" form states "Register an *upstream* open source project" ... what if I just want to register a new project that isn't already hosted anywhere else?  Am I at the wrong form?
[22:15] <rockstar_> korpios, you're at the right form.
[22:15] <korpios> okay ... the upstream reference is a bit confusing :)
[22:16] <rockstar_> Just fill out the information, and then you can hash out the details once the project is created
[22:16] <rockstar_> You're right though, the upstream is a bit confusing
[22:19] <Rinchen> yeah, it of course means upstream from Ubuntu/LP
[22:20]  * Rinchen wonders if we have a bug on that.
[22:28] <Rinchen> korpios, https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-documentation/+bug/222172
[22:28] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 222172 in launchpad-documentation "The word "upstream" is confusing on the project registration page" [Undecided,New] 
[22:29] <korpios> Rinchen: thanks :)
[22:35] <ubotu> New bug: #222172 in launchpad-documentation "The word "upstream" is confusing on the project registration page" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/222172
[22:45] <korpios> Hmm, in search results, it's a bit odd that the description, not the summary, is shown for projects.  Is that intentional?  (I'll file a bug report, I suppose.)  ^_^
[23:09] <apachelogger_> anyone working on rosetta around?
[23:41] <ubotu> New bug: #222200 in launchpad "Show number of attachments for held messages" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/222200
[23:55] <Rinchen> apachelogger_, perhaps not at this hour.  Off chance I might be able to help