/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2008/08/19/#bzr.txt

markhjam: good evening!  Bug 45719 refers to a branch https://code.launchpad.net/~jameinel/bzr/update-r, which is failing to mirror.  Do you still have that branch available?  Helping 'bzr up' grow a '-r' option sounds like something I could do in idle time...00:08
ubottuLaunchpad bug 45719 in bzr "update command cannot take a revision number" [Medium,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/4571900:08
markhit looks like it must be close to done already too00:08
markhhtm00:09
jammarkh: Yeah, LP just didn't like it when I upgraded my repo, and it had to re-fetch everything00:09
jamIt tends to timeout while downloading a full branch from my server00:09
jammarkh: you can get it from the source00:10
markhA status of " [Medium,Fix committed]" doesn't look correct00:10
markhoh - cool00:10
jamjust make sure you are going into a repo00:10
jamhttp://bzr.arbash-meinel.com/branches/bzr/0.11-working/update-r00:10
markhexcellent - thanks00:10
markhI'm not sure what you mean by "make sure you are going into a repo"00:11
markhI can't just branch it?00:11
jammarkh: branch it into a shared repository, so you don't use up all my upload bandwidth00:12
jamyou *can* get it without that, but it is *nicer* to me if you do00:12
* markh feels clueless :)00:13
markhI'm not quite sure what you are asking :)00:13
jammarkh: I'm guessing at some point you did 'bzr init-repo', just make sure you 'bzr branch' underneath that point00:13
jamthen again, maybe you didnt'00:13
markhnope, I didn't00:13
markhI think its time I educated myself a little more on a few of these things...00:14
jammarkh: if you do: "bzr init-repo repo; bzr branch bzr.dev repo/bzr.dev" it will copy revisions into the repo/.bzr/repository, future branches underneath 'repo' will share them00:14
jamrather than copying them again00:14
LarstiQmarkh: you can create one later and seed it with data from the original branch, what jam just said00:14
jamanyway, family time now, I'll try to get back later to get 1.6rc4 put out tonight00:15
markhoh, right - that makes sense.00:15
kikohey there00:15
kikoquick question00:16
LarstiQmarkh: and the relevant point for jam, if you branch update-r it will only download the revisions that you didn't have before, not hammering his upstream :)00:16
LarstiQkiko: shoot00:16
kikois there a way of saying 'give me the code as it looked in january 1st 2004'?00:16
markhmy current workflow is, eg, branch bzr.dev into its own folder, then make other branches from that directory.  If I followed that workflow, wouldn't I still only download from John's server once?00:16
kikousing bzr checkout ideally00:16
Peng_kiko: There's a "date:" revspec.00:16
kikohey LarstiQ00:16
kikoaha. date:.00:16
markhie, wound;t a shared repo only save copies between my own local dis directoroes?00:16
kikoPeng_, thanks!00:16
Peng_:)00:16
* markh slaps his fingers...00:17
markhhi LarstiQ!00:17
markhhrm00:18
LarstiQmarkh: if you just branch inside a directory the branches will be all standalone and not sharing any revisions00:18
markhor are you saying that I need to have *both* bzr.dev and john's patch in the same shared repo?00:18
LarstiQmarkh: you can confirm that by checking for branch/.bzr/repository/00:18
markhLarstiQ: yeah, but doing that wouldn't hammer upstream any more would it?  ie, once I have the upstream copy in my local dir, other branches don't hit upstream at all00:19
markhbut - is the point to not pull revisions that are also in bzr.dev?00:19
LarstiQmarkh: now, if you are branching something (remote or local), bzr will check which revisions it should get, and if some of those are already present in the target repository, it will not fetch them again.00:20
LarstiQmarkh: true.00:20
LarstiQmarkh: exactly.00:20
LarstiQmarkh: since update-r is largely the same as bzr.dev, you would avoid downloading all those common revisions.00:20
markhok cool - that makes more sense.  I thought the advice was to put that branch in its *own* shared repo :)00:20
markhwhich doesn't make much sense ;)00:20
LarstiQmarkh: ah no, that wouldn't help any :_)00:20
LarstiQmarkh: to continue my train of explanation, when your are not branching to a shared repository, there will be no pre-existing target repository, hence no revisions you already have, and you need to get everything again00:21
LarstiQmarkh: if you are however branching into a shared repository, there _might_ be revisions in there that you would otherwise have to fetch.00:22
markhLarstiQ: that makes alot of sense - thanks00:22
LarstiQmarkh: since we know update-r and bzr.dev are similar, we can make sure we are branching into a repo that includes bzr.dev's revisions00:22
LarstiQand hence, avoid doing more work than we really need to.00:22
LarstiQmarkh: cool00:22
LarstiQmarkh: I personally have a ~/src/bzr/ repository where I have all my bzr branches under.00:23
markhnow we have stacked branches, would that be the preferred way to make such patches now?00:23
markhLarstiQ: yes, I think I need one of them :)00:24
* LarstiQ is clueless about stacked branches, alas00:24
markhfrom 10,000 feet, I understood a usecase was all about avoiding fetching stuff that is common.00:24
LarstiQmarkh: two effects you should notice after doing that, the size on disk of repo/ with multiple related branches is much smaller than just a directory of related branches00:25
LarstiQmarkh: and, branching within it is much much faster, since you need to do zero moving of revisions00:25
Peng_Stacked branches are sort of like lightweight checkouts, where bzr doesn't download and sae the revisions at all.00:25
markhPeng_: ahh, thanks00:25
LarstiQmarkh: oh right. I guess that might work.00:26
* LarstiQ 's mind is still molded to think of how bzr used to work00:26
Peng_But with stacked branches, it still works like a branch, with local commits and all.00:26
LarstiQmarkh: I have some catching up to do.00:26
lifelessLarstiQ: it hasn't really changed00:26
markhLarstiQ: and you make your branches in subdirs under ~/src/bzr?00:26
LarstiQmarkh: yup00:26
lifelessLarstiQ: how are you btw, long time no see00:26
LarstiQmarkh: ~/src/bzr/{bzr.dev,1.5,1.4,bug1234,etc}00:27
markhand you still branch "normally" - bzr just magically works things out?00:27
Peng_If you "bzr init-repo", "bzr branch --stacked http://bazaar-vcs.org/bzr/bzr.dev/" and then commit something, the only revision in your local repo will eb the one you committed (or maybe a couple revisions from bzr.dev, I don't remember)00:27
Peng_markh: Was that question directed at me?00:27
LarstiQlifeless: long past my bedtime atm :) But otherwise good, had my last exam for a while today, starting september I won't be studying this academic year.00:27
LarstiQmarkh: yup00:27
markhPeng_: I think you answered it in the next line anyway :)00:27
markhok great - thanks guys!00:28
Peng_markh: Other than passing "--stacked" to "branch" commands, it'll all magically work.00:28
markhI just read the "quick into to bzr.dev" or whatever that doc was called and have stuck with that ever since :)00:28
LarstiQlifeless: and I just spent 5 weeks in Finland with my girlfriend, so things are looking good now00:29
markhgood, but exhausted :)00:29
lifelessnice:)00:30
LarstiQlifeless: and as you may have noticed, jam has dragged me back to reading mail again.00:30
LarstiQbut now I think I'll try to get some sleep.00:31
LarstiQmarkh: you good to go?00:31
markhLarstiQ: yeah, thanks for your hel00:31
markhp-00:31
markh:)00:31
LarstiQglad to be of help, bug me anytime (I don't promise to know everything though :)00:32
markhthanks!00:32
kikothmmm00:36
kikoPeng_, date: is kinda weird. if the branch checking out hasn't been modified since the date specified, it fails.00:36
kikothe branch you're checking out00:37
kikobzr: ERROR: Requested revision: u'date:2007-01-01' does not exist in branch: BzrBranch5('file:///home/kiko/devel/archives/sourcecode/pygpgme/')00:37
kikothat fails because pygpgme hasn't been touched in god knows how long00:37
lifelessyou might try before:date:2007-01-0100:37
lifelessif that fails, i think its arguably a bug00:37
kikookay, I will try that00:39
kikobut I think it's weird, and nothing in bzr is weird, usually00:40
lifelessits not entirely satisfactory00:40
* markh should have known about shared repos long ago :)00:41
jamkiko: date is one of those black sheep. we sort of have it, but it has a lot of points where the answer is unclear, so we sort of guess02:53
jambeuno: If you get a chance: https://edge.launchpad.net/bzr/1.6/1.6rc402:54
=== jam changed the topic of #bzr to: Bazaar version control system | http://bazaar-vcs.org | please test 1.6rc4! / http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/ | http://planet.bazaar-vcs.org/ | http://blogs.mysql.com/kaj/2008/06/19/version-control-thanks-bitkeeper-welcome-bazaar/
jamman, I really don't feel like sending *another* email to bazaar-announce ....02:58
beunojam, how about tomorrow morning?  I'm exhausted now, and will probably mess it up   :/03:00
jambeuno: np, you never did write up those better docs :)03:01
beunojam, no, but I have notes!03:01
beunoI will send the patch for that tomorrow03:01
beunoand, it seems I may have time to try and put a script together during the week03:01
beunoso hopefuly I'll at least get started03:02
VSpikeIt must be because it's 3.20am here, but how can a file be in the removed, added and conflicts sections of bzr st?03:22
Peng_When should rc4 make the PPA?03:22
=== kiko is now known as kiko-zzz
* VSpike thinks kiko probably has the right idea03:24
mwhudsonVSpike: if you have files with different file id trying to occupy the same path, i can imagine that happening03:24
VSpikemwhudson: I'm not aware of having done anything unusual03:25
kiko-zzzVSpike, sleeping beats trying to understand pretty much any software artifact. good night! :)03:25
VSpikekiko-zzz: night :)03:28
VSpikemeteoroid: how can I resolve the issue?03:28
VSpikemwhudson: ^ sorry03:28
mwhudsonVSpike: hard to say without knowing more03:29
mwhudsonVSpike: i suspect it may make more sense after some sleep :)03:29
VSpikeYeah, you're probably right03:30
VSpikeAh well - g'night03:30
=== VSpike is now known as VSpike-zzz
jamPeng_: it sounds like beuno will try to make rc4 => .deb early tomorrow03:52
mkanatHey loggerhead question--is the front page supposed to have "Exception: name 'url' is not defined" at the top?03:53
bob2it's a feature!03:56
Peng_mkanat: That was fixed quickly.03:57
lifelessPeng_: its in the 1.6 release tarball03:57
Peng_lifeless: Ah.03:57
Peng_Whoops.03:57
lifelessPeng_: I think03:57
lifelesshttp://www.squid-cache.org/bzrview/03:57
lifelessbeuno: ^ is da fugly03:58
Peng_mkanat: Where do you see this? What version of LH is it running?03:58
mkanatPeng_: http://bzr.everythingsolved.com/ It's running 1.6.03:59
Peng_Maybe that's a different issue.04:01
Peng_mkanat: If you have a few minutes, could you try running the trunk? (bzr branch lp:loggerhead)04:01
lifelessPeng_: looks the same as the squid copy04:02
lifelessboth are 1.604:02
lifelesssquid is using a loggerhead.conf, which I think is a mistake, but I've mailed beuno already as to why04:03
Peng_1.6 should have the same 'url' fix as the trunk does.04:03
lifelessmkanat: are you using a loggerhead.conf, or serve-branches?04:03
mkanatconf04:03
fullermdjam: I dunno that much about that bug; the devil told me to mark it crit.  Or maybe it was lifeless.  One of the two...04:05
lifelessPeng_: do you use a loggerhead.conf?04:05
Peng_Yeah, 1.6 has that fix, so I guess this is a different issue.04:05
Peng_lifeless: Nope, I use serve-branches.04:05
Peng_I'm using hte trunk too04:06
lifelessPeng_: try with a loggerhead.conf file, bet it will cause the problem04:06
Peng_Sorry, but I've never used loggerhead,conf, and I'm lazy.04:07
Peng_You try serve-branches. :P04:08
lifeless:P04:10
mwhudsonew, the browse view is sure super hideous04:17
lifelessmwhudson: so loggerhead 1.6.1 soon ?04:45
mwhudsoni guess04:50
lifelessthe listing page is quite a regression04:50
thumperlifeless: gee, what happened?05:18
lifelesshttp://www.squid-cache.org/bzrview/05:32
lifelessthumper: ^05:32
thumper:)05:33
lifelessthumper: see the horrible output?05:33
thumperyes I did05:34
Peng_Has somebody filed a bug? Should they?05:34
lifelessthats loggerhead 1.6 using loggerhead.conf05:34
lifelessmwhudson: have you?05:34
mwhudsonlifeless: no05:35
lifelessI shall05:35
lifelessbug 25927305:49
ubottuLaunchpad bug 259273 in loggerhead "loggerhead.conf usage borked" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/25927305:49
gourhi, attempt to merge branch produced with vs import on lp (from cvs) with the branch produced by running tailor on cvs repo gives: "bzr: ERROR: Branches have no common ancestor, and no merge base revision was specified.". by looking at LP, i've found the latest common revision, but the problem is that revision number differ on both branches. how am i supposed to update my local branch (tailor-generated) with the more-up-to-date branch08:16
gourfrom LP (vsc-import-generated) ?08:16
bob2revision numbers don't matter08:19
lifelessgour: well bzr thinks of them as totally separate08:19
gourhmm08:19
lifelessgour: they have different file identity08:19
gourlifeless: how is it so?08:19
lifelessgour: because they were separate imports08:20
gourbut those are same stuff, only one is more up to date08:20
lifelessgour: if you run bzr inventory --show-ids08:20
lifelessgour: you will see that they may have the same paths but are different file ids08:21
lifelessgour: you can force it to merge, but it will conflict across the whole tree08:21
lifelessgour: the question is, have you been committing to your local tailor generated branch ?08:21
gourlifeless: ahh, it means that import us useful only as one-time affair?08:22
gourlifeless: no, i just imported earlier08:22
lifelessthen just replace it with the launchpad one08:22
lifelessongoing imports are useful, but separate imports generate separate histories08:22
gourthat i know...i wanted to see how to merge them in case i'd have some local changes08:22
lifelessin particular with CVS, where 'history' is arbitrary anyhow :)08:23
gourthe branches are at https://code.launchpad.net/gnumed08:23
gourheh, that's why i'm pushing GNUmed to adopt bzr :-)08:23
gourlifeless: how to force merge? supplying --force does not help08:25
lifelessgour: merge -r 0..-108:25
lifelessgour: and then cry08:25
jameshgour: you could potentially use tailor to transfer the commits from one branch to the other08:26
gour:-)08:26
lifelessgour: normally, to deal with a local edit in this situation, you'd generate 'bzr diff -r LAST_FROM_CVS..-1' > some_file08:26
jameshbut it is probably best to pick one CVS -> bzr import as the canonical one08:26
lifelessthen bzr patch some_file in the import you're keeping08:26
gourjamesh: yeah.08:26
gourif my local branch would be older revision of LP's gnumed with local changes, then merge won't be a problem, right?08:28
gourthe branches would have same ids08:28
gouror different vcs import still produces different ids?08:29
jameshgour: neither tailor or cscvs (what the Launchpad imports use) produce repeatable imports08:29
jameshthey'll have different revision IDs and different file IDs08:30
jameshboth of which are important to "bzr merge"08:30
gourjamesh: so, all the imports listed at https://code.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/gnumed/trunk are not suitable for merge then?08:30
jameshgour: if you branch from that import and do work, you'll be able to merge newer changes from that same location08:31
jameshand merge between branches that derive from that import08:31
jameshthe same goes if you used a tailor generated branch as the canonical import08:31
gourjamesh: ahh, that's what i wanted to hear08:31
jameshyou'll only see problems when you take branches derived from different imports and try to merge between them08:32
gouri can use LP's import, work on the branch and then update from the newer imports which are regularly done08:32
jameshyes.08:33
gourLP does new import every day...08:33
gourgood08:33
jameshthe Launchpad imports are done incrementally08:33
gourahh, that's the catch ;)08:33
jameshit doesn't redo the import every day -- it updates the existing import08:33
jameshsimilarly, you can maintain a tailor import incrementally08:34
gourhowever, i do not propose this as normal workflow...the idea is to contribute something via bzr to LP's import and prepare devs to migrate to bzr :-)08:34
gourright...just not mixed the two :-)08:34
jameshthe Launchpad imports don't really help too much for two-way communication08:39
jameshyou can't move changes back to CVS in a way that will be recognised by the CVS -> bzr importer08:39
jameshif you're lucky, it'll come up as a null merge08:39
jameshif you're unlucky it'll be merge conflicts08:40
gourwell, i'll contribute to bzr branch on LP and let them patch upstream if they don't want to use bzr, but i won't use CVS08:41
jameshif you're using short term feature branches, this isn't too bad: you can throw away the branch once it gets merged08:41
gourbtw, does it make sense to sign for Ubuntero for someone not using Ubuntu, but using LP08:42
jameshit is up to you08:42
jameshthe only things that require it at the moment are becoming an Ubuntu member and getting access to Launchpad's personal package archive feature08:43
jameshif those don't interest you, then you aren't missing out on anything08:43
gourhmm, ppa08:43
gourthat might be handy08:44
gourbut that's, again, only ubuntu pkgs, not source releases, right?08:44
jameshright.08:45
gourheh, then i do not need it...which does not prevent me to follow the good codes uven without signing :-)08:45
gour*even08:46
robstaping bkor09:06
=== gour is now known as LaskoPivo
=== LaskoPivo is now known as gour
=== VSpike-zzz is now known as VSpike
VSpikeI'm confused how files can be in the removed, added and conflicts sections of bzr status?09:51
VSpikecommand output at http://www.pastebin.com/m422b0b9609:51
VSpikeSorry that should be http://pastebin.com/m422b0b9609:52
leopoldHi All. I have a problem with a bzr repository returning a "Revision .. not present in .." error, does anyone have the time to help me out with the problem?10:06
lifelessVSpike: what is confusing?10:20
VSpikelifeless: I don't understand what it is telling me.  From my point of view, I have done nothing different other than change the contents of the binary files Bin/Geonix.dll and Bin/Geonix.pdb, which normally results in them showing as changed10:28
VSpikeI don't understand how to resolve the conflict and commit the changes10:28
enquestwhen I want to install bzr 'aptitude install bzr' it wants to install x-server and so on... ???10:33
enquestI only need command line with bzr10:33
enquestany tips?10:33
lifelessVSpike: so, being in conflict means bzr couldn't decide for you how to do a merge for you10:34
lifelessVSpike: if you see the one file both deleted and added, it means someone had added them in parallel elsewhere, so you have the same file /name/ with two different histories, and you need to choose one10:34
lifelessVSpike: use bzr mv and del to arrange the tree how you want, then bzr resolve NAME10:34
lifelessenquest: uhm, its bzrtools I think10:35
lifelessenquest: it uses graphviz or something, and that pulls in X10:35
lifelessenquest: if you are using aptitude, try going in via the gui10:35
lifelesssudo aptitude10:36
lifelessthen /, bzr, i10:36
lifelessand then edit the actions list and change stuff10:36
VSpikeenquest: I've solved that problem on a debian server - just trying to remember how10:37
enquestthis is a securtiy problem using bzr on your server... If you not good at managing servers you don't know these things10:37
lifelessenquest: huh?10:38
luksaptitude installs recommended packages by default?10:38
VSpikeluks: it's configurable10:39
VSpikeenquest: try "sudo aptitude install bzr --without-recommends"10:39
enquestok I did not know that with apt-get you don't have that problem10:39
enquestVSpike, thanxs10:39
VSpikeenquest: or use the ncurses interface as lifeless suggested10:39
VSpikelifeless: sorry if i'm being obtuse, but I can't see how it got to this state...10:44
VSpikelifeless: I'm working in a single branch, doing modify/commit, modify/commit.. and occasionally modify/commit/push10:45
VSpikelifeless: so there should have been no merges into this branch10:45
Peng_Some sort of file name case wackiness, maybe?10:46
VSpikePeng_: I wondered that, but they show the same in bzr stat at least10:48
Peng_Yeah.. it's still possible though10:48
VSpikeThe irony is, this is a binary generated by the build of a sub-project10:49
VSpikeI only check it in so that I can recreate a past situation exactly, because bzr doesn't allow me to connect the two projects yet10:49
VSpikeSo if I delete it, it will just get regenerated10:50
lifelessVSpike: could you pastebin the output10:54
VSpikelifeless: of?10:55
VSpikeI just did "bzr mv Bin10:55
VSpikeI just did "bzr mv Bin\Geonix.dll Bin\Geonix.dll.old" and the same the .pdb file10:55
VSpikeBut not sure I'm any better off10:55
VSpikelifeless: you want bzr stat --show-ids again?10:56
lifelessVSpike: again?11:15
lifelessVSpike: anyhow, I'm heading off sorry11:15
VSpikelifeless: I posted it back aways...11:16
lifelessVSpike: perhaps Peng_ or someone else still awake can comment on a pastebin output for you11:16
VSpikehttp://pastebin.com/m422b0b9611:16
lifelessso11:17
lifelessto get conflicts, you _must_ have done a pull, or merge, or update11:17
VSpikenow http://pastebin.com/d49a6711711:17
VSpikelifeless: anyway I can check that in a log?11:17
lifelessas for the delete + add pairs; simplest thing would be to save the copy you want to keep, bzr rm the new file, bzr revert PATH to restore the old fileid, then copy the one you want back in11:17
lifelessbzr --version will list your log file11:18
lifelessbzr commands are listed in the log11:18
lifelessI must go though - good luck11:18
VSpikethanks!11:18
awilkinsArrgh, rc4 happened while I wasn't looking11:23
awilkins:-) Is BB back up?11:24
awilkinsGuess not.11:25
LarstiQmoin.11:25
ignasmwhudson: it seems that bzr developers have fixed my bug yesterday, and the fix is going to make it to 1.6rc4 :)11:59
mwhudsonignas: i/we found another bug that might mean a 1.6c5 :(12:00
ignasoh. What's the number?12:00
mwhudsonignas: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/25927512:01
ubottuLaunchpad bug 259275 in bzr "pushing a non-stacking format into a non-repo bzrdir with a default stacking policy creates broken branch" [High,Triaged]12:01
ignasmwhudson: hmm, not sure I understand what operations I should be avoiding if I don't want to break things...12:04
mwhudsonignas: this bug is only likely to affect launchpad, realistically12:04
ignasshould I not try pushing to my remote knit repository from my stacked repository for example?12:04
mwhudsonno12:04
LarstiQno, don't do that, or no, no problem?12:05
mwhudsonas in, you should be fine12:05
LarstiQpfew :)12:05
mwhudsonenglish sucks12:05
kiko_hmmm12:05
kiko_bzr st segvs for me in my /etc!12:05
kiko_that is very fun12:05
mwhudsonkiko_: exciting12:05
kiko_mwhudson, SPEAKING of segvs..12:06
kiko_#0  0xb7e54cbf in memcpy () from /lib/libc.so.612:07
kiko_#1  0x08092895 in PyString_FromStringAndSize ()12:07
kiko_#2  0xb7778d4e in ?? ()12:07
kiko_   from /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/bzrlib/_dirstate_helpers_c.so12:07
kiko_mwhudson, I guess this is known..?12:07
kiko_Bazaar (bzr) 1.512:07
mwhudsonkiko_: not by me12:07
kiko_okay, will try and file a bug then12:08
mwhudsoni can imagine a corrupt dirstate tripping up the c parser or something12:08
beunolifeless, ew, template for start-loggerhead seems broken  :/13:08
* beuno waves13:08
scgatai_hi13:10
pickscrapebeuno: the breadcrumbs branch is ready for a further review13:12
beunopickscrape, cool. I'll take a look at it after my coffee  :)13:13
pickscrapebeuno: no rush, just letting you know :)13:15
pickscrapeCould anyone point me at an explaination of when I need to use the record command when using a loom?13:57
Takok, if my bzr-svn checkout failed (ERROR: revision "blah" already present in "revisions"), is there anything I can do to work around it?14:38
beunojam, building rc4 debs now   :)15:34
jambeuno: before you spend too much time, mwhudson wants an rc515:35
jamI'd like to at least look at the bug first15:35
beunojam, ah, heh, ok. I'll start looking intro scripting then15:35
jammwhudson: ping15:53
jamYou have a bug, but do you have a possible fix?15:53
jamEven just an outline of the fix15:53
cr3how can I determine to which host bzr launchpad-login is trying to connect exactly? the --verbose flag doesn't show anything and the error says: ERROR: Connection error: while sending GET /%7Ecr3/%2Bsshkeys: (111, 'Connection refused')15:58
cr3seeing the url, I guess https://launchpad.net. I thought at first it might be the openid url, nevermind15:59
jamcr3: default URL16:01
jamBZR_LP_XMLRPC_URL=http://xmlrpc.launchpad.net/bazaar/16:01
jamyou can set that in your environment, I believe, to override it16:01
jamOops, I'm wrong, it is https://xmlrpc.launchpad.net/bazaar/16:01
jamthe 's' is there16:02
cr3jam: telnet xmlrpc.launchpad.net 443 works, but I'm still getting the same error message16:12
cr3jam: I then tried setting the environment variable, just in case, same thing16:13
=== kiorky_ is now known as kiorky
awilkinsIs bzr push really really slow over a network share if you have virus checking of network drives on?16:27
LarstiQpossibly, I know I've had antivirus software cause locking problems for bzr before16:32
jamcr3: are you behind a proxy? It is a known problem with python's xmlrpc implementation that it doesn't respect http_proxy16:54
jamawilkins: packs or knits? Knits would probably be extra bad because we would touch lots of files16:55
awilkinsjam: Packs16:55
jamthough I could also see a repack of a .pack file causing issues if the software had to virus check the whole pack file16:55
awilkinsjam: It's rich-root-pack, 210MB total, largest pack 160MB16:55
jamthough it is all compressed data16:55
jamawilkins: well, we might read *parts* of some files16:55
jamwhich may cause the virus checker to read the whole thing?16:56
jamSo we might read 100k from your 160MB file16:56
awilkinsjam: I wonder if reading multiple regions of that large pack makes it check the whole file each time16:56
jamand then your virus checker decides16:56
jamit needs to read all 160 MB16:56
awilkinsI'll run it with filemon active next time16:56
jamalso, we may go back multiple times to portions of the file16:56
jamwhich might trigger similar issues16:56
jam(one read from 10-100, another at a later time 1000-1100 etc16:57
awilkinsI'm note sure it's the vchecker16:57
awilkinsI believe I tried it with the service stopped once16:57
awilkinsAnyhow, it's nearing 1700, and I need to catch my train16:58
awilkinsback-in-a-bit16:58
jamkiko_: I just submitted a patch for the dirstate parser which should at least give a proper traceback rather than a segfault.17:01
cr3jam: I am behind a proxy but I don't have the http_proxy environment variable set and I have an iptables rule explicitly allowing connections to xmlrpc.l.n, bazaar.l.n and l.n17:03
jamcr3: can you try it with "bzr launchpad-login -Derror" ?17:04
jamthat should give you a traceback that you can pastebin for me17:04
cr3jam: http://pastebin.com/d36c2c2ae17:06
cr3jam: just to make sure, env | grep -i proxy returns nothing17:08
cr3jam: also, I'm tailing the logs on the proxy and nothing is appearing when running launchpad-login17:10
jamcr3: so, after the xml call, we then do an HTTP fetch, which *does* respect the http_proxy setting17:10
jamAnd that is the point that is failing17:10
jamThe http fetch is going to https://launchpad.net/~user/+sshkeys17:11
jamTry setting http_proxy and see if it works17:11
mxpxpodI made a branch from a branch located on my local file system... I moved the branch I created and now I can't pull from the original branch... it's saying the parent is not accessible given a base and a relative path... is there a way to fix that?17:12
cr3jam: worked!17:13
jamcr3: so it seems you got the xmlrpc stuff to go through without the proxy, but not https://launchpad.net requests17:19
jammxpxpod: 'bzr pull --remember /new/location'17:19
mxpxpodjam: ah, thanks... I figured out I can also modify .bzr/branch/branch.conf17:20
mxpxpodjam: but I figured there was a better way to do it17:20
alexreghi17:26
alexregi've just upgraded to bzr 1.5 and i'm getting an error when using the --use-existing-dir option now17:26
alexregbzr: ERROR: extra argument to command push: use-existing-dir17:27
alexregcouldn't find any notes on the changes to this argument17:27
alexregthis is for the push command of course17:28
alexregany ideas please?17:28
Takis there a way to "force" bzr to invoke bzr-svn for a checkout over http?17:29
TakI keep getting "bzr: ERROR: Transport error: Server refuses to fullfil the request"17:30
jamalexreg: try it with '--no-plugins'17:30
jamI would guess that a plugin is decorating "bzr push" and causing problems17:30
jamTak: "svn+http://" I believe17:30
alexregjam: now i get "bzr: ERROR: extra argument to command push: no-plugins"17:31
jamalexreg: "are you using --no-plugins" ?17:32
Takjam: perfect, thanks!17:32
jamnot "-- no-plugins"17:32
alexregi upgraded from v1.2 but it was occurring even then. so i'm not sure in which version it last worked correctly17:32
alexregjam: yeah17:32
jambecause '--no-plugins' is a global arg that is always parsed before commands are handled, so something weird is going on17:32
jamalexreg: can you pastebin the last part of your ~/.bzr.log ?17:32
alexregsure. one min17:33
alexregjam: http://pastebin.com/m3f3f5e1017:35
alexregthe first is with no command line args, the second with use-existing-dir and the third with both use-existing-dir and no-plugins17:36
jamalexreg: well when you did 'use-existing-dir' you didn't supply the '--' it is '--use-existing-dir'17:37
jamsimilarly for '--no-plugins'17:37
jamFor example: [u'push', u'bzr+ssh://...', u'no-plugins', u'--', u'use-existing-dir']17:38
alexregsorry. i *did* include the "--" when executing bzr17:38
alexregjust not on IRC17:38
jamThat means you wrote "bzr push bzr+ssh://... no-plugins -- use-existing-dir17:38
jamrather than17:38
jambzr push bzr+ssh:// --no-plugins --use-existing-dir17:38
alexregyeah that's what i did....17:38
jamalexreg: notice that you need '--' before the option, and no spaces17:38
jamalexreg: not according to the bzr log file17:39
jamWhat are you using as a shell?17:39
alexreghrmm could it be because i'm executing in powershell?17:39
alexreg^^17:39
jamalexreg: sounds like17:39
jamSounds like powershell is doing weird things to your command line17:39
jamI don't know powershell myself17:39
alexregyeah probably17:39
alexregok17:40
alexregputting the option in quotes seems to fix it17:40
alexregthanks :)17:40
jamalexreg: bad PoS, :)17:43
jamof course, PoS is a great acronym for it anyway :)17:43
LarstiQalfonsodg: is that the old and venerable *nix powershell, or the windows one?17:45
jamLarstiQ: Windows17:45
jamand alexreg left17:45
jamI don't think alfonsodg knows :)17:45
jamsorry for the double ping a l f o17:45
LarstiQbweh17:46
Takhas anybody encountered 'ERROR: revision "blah" already present ...' when checking out from a svn repo?18:22
pickscrapepygi! How goes cheezburger?18:41
=== mw is now known as mw|lunch
pygipickscrape, sorry, will poke later18:51
jbalintHi LarstiQ18:58
LarstiQhey jbalint18:58
jbalintLarstiQ: i came here a few days ago, with a problem with putty link on windows and aliases18:59
LarstiQjbalint: right, I remember that18:59
jbalintLarstiQ: the problem is i am using non-22 port and the command executed is "plink.exe -ssh ...." and -ssh forces this to use port 22 :|18:59
LarstiQjbalint: is there no way around that?19:00
jbalintLarstiQ: i havent looked in bzr code to see how it determines the command, but i do not have any solution thus far, except using paramiko with the port given19:02
LarstiQjbalint: is the -ssh needed on plink? And if so, can plink -ssh uses something else than port 22?19:02
LarstiQjbalint: if not then we would need to document that plink can only be used with port 22 I think :(19:03
jbalintLarstiQ: it will work if i add -P on the command line, but this is saved in the alias. i'm not sure why -ssh overrides it. maybe i should file a bug with putty19:04
jbalintLarstiQ: ok, i just checked, it seems to work if i put the port in the bzr+ssh url too19:04
LarstiQjbalint: is there a way we can query plink for what the alias expands to?19:05
jbalintLarstiQ: not that i know of besides exporting it from the registry19:07
jbalintLarstiQ: but part of the benefit is that you shouldnt need to do that because you can use the alias in place of 'host' for the plink/ssh command and they both work the same way19:08
jbalintLarstiQ: do you know why the -ssh flag is needed?19:08
LarstiQjbalint: I do not, I hoped you would :)19:08
jbalint  -ssh -telnet -rlogin -raw19:08
jbalint            force use of a particular protocol19:08
jbalintthats what plink.exe help says.19:09
LarstiQjam: do you know why we supply -ssh to plink? It seems to override non-22 ports in aliases19:09
jamLarstiQ: well, my guess is to keep it from trying to telnet to the other location, at least what from jbalint says19:10
jamjbalint: so if you just 'plink host.com' rather than an alias, does it do something other than ssh?19:11
jamIf so, then it sounds like removing -ssh, would mean that people would need to configure an alias for every machine they want to connect to19:11
jamrather than "just working"19:11
jamPersonally, I don't like plink much, and just use paramiko19:12
jamplink has a lot of weird bits19:12
jamlike not remembering the username in a saved session19:12
jametc.19:12
jbalintwell i just ran plink host.com and it does ssh19:12
LarstiQdoes paramiko provide any of the alias/session functionality of plink?19:13
LarstiQjbalint: and if you do plink host -P 23 ?19:13
jbalintseems to support pageant19:13
jbalintwell i get connection refused :) dont have telnet running19:14
LarstiQjbalint: I'm thinking the -ssh/-telnet is to force a protocol when the autodetection for a port comes up with something else19:15
jamLarstiQ: paramiko supports pageant, but no, doesn't provide aliases (that I know of). But bzr+ssh://user@host:port/ provides most of what you need.19:15
jamjbalint: which is why we pass -ssh :)19:15
jamLarstiQ: for most of my time, I used cygwin's ssh.exe19:15
LarstiQjam: afaics -ssh only helps if it's port 2319:15
jamLarstiQ: ah, I missed that part19:15
jbalinti dont know if detection is based on port. with both of those protocols, the server sends some header info upon connect, right? so it could be based on that19:16
jamjbalint: so, if you want to work out more details of how to use plink properly, I think we're happy to take patches, etc. I think plink just doesn't get a lot of support because the other solutions work, and in some cases work better.19:16
jam(Like being able to prompt for a password when pageant doesn't have your key)19:16
jbalintbut you're passing -batch, thats why it doesnt prompt19:16
jamjbalint: because if we don't pass -batch it hangs waiting for input because it can't connect to the terminal19:17
jamso we would rather it *fail* and get on with it19:17
jamrather than hang indefinitely19:17
jbalintol19:17
jbalint*ok19:17
jaminterestingly enough cygwin's ssh.exe can connect to the terminal, so I don't really understand *why* plink cannot19:17
=== kiko_ is now known as kiko
jbalinti'll try to get some ideas on plink and ssh. thanks alot for the info so far19:18
kikojam: cool. unfortunately it looks like I've got a corrupted tree.. somehow.19:18
jamkiko: well, I can say that we truncate + write (I *think* in that order) so if you somehow managed to do one without the other (power fail, kill -9, etc) it would be possible to have an inconsistent dirstate19:19
jamkiko: I posted to the bug a workaround using 'bzr co --lightweight'19:19
jamwhich is also in the bug that yours is a dup of19:19
kikojam: oh, my bug is a dupe? I searched quite a bit for it19:22
jamkiko: the problem is that some platforms segfault others give MemoryError19:23
jamkiko: bug #186014 is the same bug19:24
ubottuLaunchpad bug 186014 in bzr "MemoryError on diff/commit due to corrupted dirstate" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/18601419:24
kikoah!19:28
kikohow interesting19:28
jamkiko: yeah, the problem is effectively passing a negative number to malloc19:28
jamI assume some platforms cast it to unsigned19:28
jamand get a malloc failure19:28
jamothers just segfault19:28
jamas you saw :)19:28
fullermdErk.  segfault?  That sounds bogus.  malloc is defined to take size_t, which is unsigned...19:37
=== mw|lunch is now known as mw
Toraninaargh, had to reboot, now I have to start the svn-import over again...and it was almost done, too.  Looks like another week until I can play with bzr...19:49
jamfullermd: well, it is PyString_FromStringAndSize, I don't know if it strictly uses malloc under the covers. It might be a PyMalloc which could have more issues, etc.19:56
jamToranin: I believe it starts from where it left off19:56
Toraninjam: I'll try it, but I don't think it got killed cleanly so we'll see how well it goes19:58
=== jakobb is now known as grutte_pier
=== mtaylor_ is now known as mtaylor
mwhudsonjam: i think this might be maybe sort of a fix: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/38892/20:39
mwhudsonit makes test_sprout_stacking_policy_handling fail, but i'm not sure that's a bad thing20:40
jammwhudson: does that ignore the value or always create a new one?20:40
jammwhudson: specifically, what fix are you looking for20:40
jamshould 'bzr push lp:' create a new branch format20:40
jamso it can stack20:40
mwhudsonno20:40
jamor just ignore the fact that it was auto-requested to stack20:40
mwhudsonright20:41
mwhudson_my_ idea, not talked this through with anyone else20:41
mwhudsonwould be for the default stacking to only apply when the formats allow stacking20:41
jammwhudson: sure, I'm a bit hesitant about the whole auto-stacking anyway, but if we at least required the user to be using a stackable source, then there is *some* good. And it sure would be shiny20:41
mwhudsonotherwise people are going to be Surprised(tm)20:41
jammwhudson: well, they might be surprised to have auto-stacking anyway...20:42
mwhudsonjam: well, if there are no format surprises they hopefully won't really notice20:42
jammwhudson: well, what about when --1.6 is the default format?20:43
mwhudsonother than the fact that initial pushes take less time20:43
jamI suppose as long as it is only stacking within the LP universe20:43
jamthere isn't a chance for data loss20:43
mwhudsonanother possible fix for 1.6 would be to disable the auto-stacking stuff somehow20:46
jammwhudson: well, auto-stacking was approved for 1.6, I'm not trying to break it20:47
jamI think we probably want a fix that means lp doesn't have to do something like check the bzr client version20:47
jammwhudson: Though, what if the branch format is 1.6 and _stack_on is set, will it still stack (with your patch)?20:48
mwhudsonjam: not sure20:48
mwhudsoni guess i should check20:48
jammwhudson: so I would probably say the best fix is to have the check for the stack_on policy know if the source supports it20:49
mwhudsonjam: it seems it does still respect the stacking policy with my fix20:52
mwhudsonjam: and it fixes my testcase too, although it still prints20:52
mwhudsonUsing default stacking branch b1 at bzr+ssh://localhost//home/mwh/canonical/checkouts/trunk/sourcecode/t/20:52
mwhudsoneven though it in fact doesn't use it, which is a bit bogus20:53
jammwhudson: isn't telling them that a good thing? Or it says that and then ignores it20:53
mwhudsonit says it, then ignores it20:53
jamok, that is a bit bogus :)20:53
jamand considering all pushes creating new branches will say that ...20:53
jamMakes me wish I had reviewed the repository policy patch myself20:55
jamIt certainly seems to have made following the code logic a bit more complex20:55
jammwhudson: what about passing in "default_format_supports_stacking" to the "determine_repository_policy" function?20:56
jamor ... "source_format_supports_stacking"20:56
mwhudsonjam: i think that would probably be more clear than hacking around trying to work with the data that's there already20:57
jamI'm a bit confused as to where things are happening ATM20:58
jamIt seems that both the branch format and the repository format need to support stacking20:58
jamand they both figure that out at different times :(20:58
mwhudsonoh that's the other fun thing20:58
jammwhudson: so it sounds like the specific bug is that the repository figures out it needs to be stacked20:59
jambut the branch does not20:59
mwhudsonin my test case, the broken branch has a stacking compatible repo but not branch20:59
mwhudsonjam: yes20:59
jamso you end up creating a target where the repo thinks it is stacked20:59
jamand doesn't copy revisions20:59
jambut the branch doesn't20:59
jamso it doesn't include the reference20:59
jamugh.20:59
mwhudsonyeah, you even end up with a 'stacked_on_url' in branch.conf20:59
mwhudsonbut the branch doesn't look at it, of course20:59
jamI'm very hesitant to add a kludge on top of the existing kludge21:00
mwhudsonright21:00
jamespecially when all the people who *did* the work are on vacation21:01
jamI'm tempted to disable the whole lot just to get a clean 1.6 out the door21:01
mwhudson+1 from me21:02
jamwhich would (in a way) show the colossal blunder of delaying 1.6 to get Stacked working21:02
mwhudsoni guess i'd like to hear what jml and thumper say21:02
jamthe whole reason it was delayed was stacking21:02
jamround and round we go :(21:02
mwhudsoni think everyone realizes what a terrible idea that was now :(21:02
fullermdWell, if we disable it, and release 1.7, we can pretend...21:03
jammwhudson: so why in your example21:04
jamdoesn't it find that the branch format needs to be upgraded21:04
jamconsider line 1093 of bzrdir.py21:04
jamisn't it deciding the Branch policy based on the repo policy?21:04
jammwhudson: in other words, pushing to lp would always create 1.6 branches and repos21:05
jamwhich you don't really want21:05
jambut at least they wouldn't be *broken*21:05
mwhudsonyes, that would be almost as bad21:05
mwhudsonum, i did look into this but i forget21:05
vreixohi guys!21:09
vreixocan I ask a little doubt I have?21:09
jam?21:09
vreixoI was working with two branches, then I merged one into the other21:10
mwhudsonanyway, i've only just got up, so i need to breakfast and stuff before i can really think clearly...21:10
vreixoand together with the merge I did a change in a file21:10
vreixoafter that I did several commits21:10
vreixonow I want to revert the change done in the merge commit21:10
vreixobut not the merge itself21:10
vreixois that possible?21:11
vreixoI use bzr 1.521:11
jammwhudson: well 'bzr branch' creates a new format branch under those conditions21:13
jammwhudson: I think the problem is "bzr branch" versus "bzr push" where "branch" uses .sprout() and "push" uses ".clone()".21:13
jammwhudson: I think martin fixed up 'sprout()' but didn't fix 'push()'21:13
jamsorry, .clone()21:13
mwhudsonjam: hmm, so the bug isn't so bad in bzr.dev it seems, we don't create a branch with mainline ghosts21:13
mwhudsonjam: that sounds right (about clone vs sprout)21:14
jamvreixo: well, you can 'bzr revert' just the file21:14
mwhudsonjam: but there's still the default branch/stacked repo thing21:14
jamvreixo: but generally tweezing apart what was done by the merge and what was done by *you* is difficult21:14
jamwhich is why we don't let you merge with uncommitted changes21:14
jamand recommend that you only do enough to get the conflicts resolved before merging21:14
vreixojam: yeah, that's the problem21:14
jamvreixo: so doing "bzr revert -r XX file" isn't fine-grained enough?21:15
vreixojam: no it isn't21:15
jammwhudson: sure, it automatically upgrades when you have a target that says you should stack21:15
vreixoas it reverts the changes in the merged branch21:15
jamwhich doesn't sound like what we want.21:15
mwhudsonjam: right21:15
jamvreixo: so the same file included both21:15
jammwhudson: and is a problem because we *do* want to auto-upgrade if the user says "--stack"21:16
jamand all the other crazy things that have gone into the policy idea21:16
jammwhudson: I really feel like some of this wasn't well thought through21:16
vreixojam: what is strange is that I can see the diff with only the changes I want to revert, but I have no way to revert it21:16
vreixoit would be great to have such feature21:16
jamvreixo: how do you get that diff?21:16
jamI would guess you can do "bzr merge . -r XXXX" with the same parameters as the diff21:17
mwhudsonjam: indeed, and i don't think there's any way to not do the suggested stacking at the moment :/21:17
mwhudsonjam: gee, you think?21:17
jamvreixo: well, reverse them21:17
jamvreixo: so if you do "bzr diff -r 10.1.1..11" to get the diff, do "bzr merge . -r 11..10.1.1" to revert it21:17
jammwhudson: And I'm extra sad because everyone left this week. Why did they all pick the *same* week, and why did we pick it to be the release week....21:18
jammwhudson: I might just punt... but I *really* wanted to force 1.6 out the door21:18
mwhudsonjam: i would support dropping/disabling looking at the default_stacked_on url21:19
vreixojam: with bzr diff -r366..364.1.2921:19
mwhudsonjam: and releasing everything else21:19
vreixojam: oh, let me try!21:19
jamvreixo: so "bzr merge . -r 364.1.29..366"21:19
jammwhudson: good enough21:19
mwhudsonjam: i so very don't want to have to implement client version blacklisting in launchpad21:19
jammwhudson: yeah, that would be extra crummy21:20
vreixojam: bad thing!21:21
vreixoafter bzr st I get an error:21:21
vreixojam: bzr: ERROR: exceptions.KeyError: 'pop(): dictionary is empty'21:21
* mwhudson afk for a few minutes21:23
jamvreixo: you're using bzr 1.5, right?21:24
vreixoyes21:25
jam1.6 won't give you that, and you can "bzr revert" to get back to where you want to be21:25
jamvreixo: actually just "bzr revert --forget-merges"21:25
vreixojam: it was my problem21:25
vreixowhat I want was to do  bzr merge . -r 366..364.1.2921:25
vreixobut I did bzr merge . -r364.1.29..36621:25
vreixoanyway, the error is ugly,,,21:26
jamvreixo: sure, the error has been fixed in future versions21:26
vreixogood!21:26
jamand 'bzr revert --forget-merges' will get rid of it, though you want "bzr revert' right now to get back to clean state21:26
vreixobzr revert worked properly21:27
vreixothen I did the merge with the correct revision order and all is ok now21:27
vreixothanks!21:27
vreixoone more question, can I do that with only one file21:27
vreixoor I need to revert later the files I don't want to revert originally?21:28
hendrixskiIf I have an ubuntu server I want to publish a bzr branch to, which sftp program should I use?  Or is there some package I should install that makes the server a great repo for bzr projects?21:29
jamvreixo: I believe "bzr merge filename -r 364...." should do what yo uwant21:29
jamhendrixski: I would probably just install openssh server21:29
jamhendrixski: and possibly 'bzr' itself21:30
jamif you want to be able to "bzr push bzr+ssh://server/"21:30
jamThere are other packages you might consider (trac+bzr, loggerhead, etc) but they all require a bit of setup.21:30
vreixojam: anyway it is fixed now. Thanks!21:30
jamvreixo: Did the 'bzr merge filename' work for you?21:30
vreixojam: did not test, I had already reverted the other files...21:31
hendrixskijam: yeah, I'm not looking for setup trouble.  just openssh does it eh? and I can push fun new branches to it whenever I want?21:31
jamhendrixski: 'openssh' server and not client (of course), but yeah, it will provide sftp support21:32
jamI would recommend installing bzr as well21:32
jambut that isn't required21:32
hendrixskik, actually, who knows, I might occasionally need to tweek something while on the server itself, bzr might be good there21:33
hendrixskiI would be able to access whatever bzr project is uploaded to the server, right?21:33
jamhendrixski: generally21:34
jamThere is a lot of possibilities here21:34
* hendrixski tries uploading the project21:35
jammwhudson: what do you think about: http://pastebin.com/m49e6e41121:35
mwhudsonjam: looks good to me21:36
mwhudsonjam: it will make a small pile of tests fail21:36
jammwhudson: yeah, but I'll take care of those :)21:37
mwhudsonjam: my vote doesn't fully count though :)21:38
jammwhudson: well, when 4/6 core devs are AFK, there are only 2 of us to approve21:38
jamso non-core's get a lot bigger say21:38
* LarstiQ plays innocent bystander21:38
jamI guess there are a few that still have an official BB vote21:39
jamlike LarstiQ and jelmer21:39
hendrixskijam: yay! it worked!  I needed python-paramiko first, but I got it.  Thanks for spotting me... it's the end of a work day21:39
jamAnd I abuse them as much as I can right now21:39
LarstiQjam: I have not followed 1.6 development, considering its delay I gather some people were invested in getting stacking out.21:40
LarstiQit's a shitty situation you/we are in, that's for sure.21:41
jamLarstiQ: well it is mostly just some of the auto-detection stuff that is acting badly21:41
jamso I think if I just remove it, we can still have stacking21:42
jamthe user just has to request it21:42
jammwhudson: there is another possible fix21:44
jamonly set the "default_stacked_on" value when the development focus is in a format that supports it21:45
jammwhudson: what do you think about that?21:45
jam(with the other fix being to have .clone() upgrade the branch the way .sprout() does.)21:46
jamI'm not 100% happy with it, but I do feel some of this is LP's fault, and not bzr's.21:47
jamLP is getting a bit pro-active, when it may not really be best for the users.21:47
jammwhudson: or it could be a project/user setting21:47
=== kiko is now known as kiko-afk
mwhudsonjam: certainly with hindsight we shouldn't have tried to get stacking-by-default working at the same time as just getting stacking working21:50
mwhudsonjam: but in general, in the long term, i think it's a really good idea for bzr push <lp:url> to dtrt21:51
mwhudsonjam: it's not like you want to be typing bzr push server:/path/repo/branch --use-repo server:/path/repo is it?21:51
fullermdNow, if only it were entirely clear what the rt is   ;)21:51
jammwhudson: well you could have it a project setting, etc21:51
mwhudsonjam: yeah, i guess so21:51
jammwhudson: or as I mentioned, just notice that the dev target is in a valid format21:52
jamthus it is valid for users' to get upgraded if they aren't yet21:52
jamas the *project* is using an upgraded format21:52
mwhudsonwel...21:52
mwhudsonthat still sounds pretty icky to me21:52
jammwhudson: no more icky than doing it to *all* projects21:53
jammwhudson: Also, I'm not planning on propagating this to bzr.dev21:53
jamso you're still going to have a bunch of clients dying21:53
jambut I guess you can hold off on rolling out the feature in LP21:54
jamand you won't have to worry about a broken old client21:54
jamold *released* client21:54
mwhudsonmakes sense21:54
mwhudsoni think we can be a bit less forgiving for people using out-of-date versions of bzr.dev21:55
mwhudsonjam: btw, not sure if this is generally known, but the stacking policy will only be presented for a very few projects in the initial rollout21:59
mwhudson(launchpad and storm, basically)21:59
jammwhudson: sounds like a whitelist to me :)21:59
jamJust not one that you expose to the user yet22:00
jammwhudson: what is the bug # again?22:02
jambug #25927522:03
ubottuLaunchpad bug 259275 in bzr "pushing a non-stacking format into a non-repo bzrdir with a default stacking policy creates broken branch" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/25927522:03
jamfound it22:03
lifelessmoin22:05
jammwhudson, LarstiQ, beuno: Any chance you could look over the patch I just sent to the mailing list?22:05
jamlifeless: morning. I have a patch to review for 1.622:06
jamrc5 .. :(22:06
lifelessjam: ok22:06
beunojam, sure. I'll look at it, however useful that may be22:06
jamthe Subject is: Disable automatic stacking via Bzrdircontrol.conf22:06
jambeuno: well, since lifeless is awake now, it can wait22:06
jamlifeless: I'll be back in about 15 min, need to pick up my son22:07
jambasically, something needs to be fixed, and I went the conservative "disable the feature" route22:07
* beuno lets leaves it to the experts22:07
lifelessjam: I'm looking for it22:10
lifelessjam: have you chatted with abentley ?22:22
jamlifeless: he is on vacation along with martin and spiv22:34
lifelessjam: oh wow22:34
lifelessENOTEAM22:34
jamyeah22:34
lifelessquick22:34
jamnot the best time to be working on a big release :)22:34
lifelesslets do stuff22:34
jam:)22:34
mlhparty!22:34
jamget btree in core, right?22:34
lifelessgc-as-default, nownownow22:34
lifelessactually, I'm just reviewing your changes22:35
lifelessYou are aware I don't want to join the trees right? I just want to do a code drop22:35
jamlifeless: really?22:35
jamWhy not join them?22:35
lifelessI plan to keep on changing and tweaking blooms etc22:35
lifelessand the format hook in stuff and so on is just ugly, it should not merge in , it should be refactored in core so its not needed22:36
jambeuno, mwhudson, jml: Anything else for 1.6rc5 I'd really like to not need a rc622:36
lifeless0730 for jml22:36
jamwell, nobody has said anything on the ML, but it seems that every day someone drops yet another thing22:37
beunojam, I've been using it without any problems. Of course, I haven't done any weird contortions with it22:37
jamwell, I'll put together 1.6rc5, and just not make it a final announced thing until more people have woken up22:38
jamthis bugfix isn't quite as critical as the rc4 one22:39
lifelessjam: if you feel strongly we should do a merge, we can, but I wasn't thinking of this as something we'd incrementally merge from, I was thinking we'd instead be dropping in a new different format if we add blooms later22:46
lifeless(index format that is)22:46
jamlifeless: well, it is really only a couple of test cases, and then one or two files, I guess it doesn't really matter either way.22:48
jamI can always use 'add --file-ids-from' rather than doing a merge22:48
lifelessI can't find your mail22:48
lifelessah yes, totally disconnected thread name :P22:48
lifelessrockstar: you wanted to chat, I don't think the text got past your fingers though23:02
rockstarlifeless, I was trying to get the cscvs tests to run.23:03
lifelessmake check? :)23:04
rockstarlifeless, ah, was using test_all, and one of the tests was hanging.23:05
lifelessgot an onboard rng?23:06
lifelessreprhasing - where was it hanging :)23:07
rockstartestInitProtocolBadHost23:08
lifelessrockstar: check your dns etc23:17
rockstarWhat would I check for?  It works.23:18
rockstarMaybe I'm missing something specific?23:18
LarstiQmwhudson: thumper seems to be awake23:18
mwhudsonLarstiQ: eh?23:18
lifelessrockstar: look at what the test does23:19
LarstiQmwhudson: hmm, I thought you wanted to consult with him or jml.23:20
mwhudsonLarstiQ: i wanted them to see the conversation in here23:20
LarstiQah.23:20
mwhudsonLarstiQ: but thumper told me (somewhere else) that he was reading backlog23:20
LarstiQmwhudson: I should not try to meddle with other's afairs.23:20
LarstiQand go to bed, really.23:21
mwhudsonLarstiQ: no worries :)23:21
thumpernight LarstiQ23:21
mwhudsong'night23:21
LarstiQnight thumper :)23:21
LarstiQand mwhudson (and the rest)23:21
=== kiko-afk is now known as kiko
lifelessvila: ping23:29
lifelessbeuno: indeed it is23:29
lifelessbeuno: I was muttering about 1.6.1 :)23:29
beunolifeless, what is?  I've been jumping from screen to local irssi, so I'm missing a lot of context  :)23:31
lifelessbeuno: 1.6 w/ loggerhead.conf23:31
beunolifeless, ah, so you're proposing a 1.6.1 release with the start-loggerhead fixes in it?  That seems like a good idea23:33
lifelessbeuno: I'd like http://squid-cache.org/bzrview/ not to look like vomit :O)23:33
lifelessbeuno: and yeah, the admins there, like admins everywhere, tend to prefer running releases23:34
beunolifeless, agreed.  I'll bump it up to the top of my list and fix that tomorrow.23:34
lifelessbeuno: if you wanted to add the options for prefix and port to serve-branches, we'd be happy to switch to that too :)23:34
beunolifeless, yeah, I'll actually do that too. I'll file a bug, and add a milestone so I don't forget stuff23:35
lifelesssweet23:35
* beuno goes walk the dog before it explodes23:35
beunomwhudson, btw, I'd like to talk about our next release at some point. Is it going to be 1.7?  (short cycle)  1.8?   I haven't created it yet, and I keep forgetting to ask at time you're actually around23:36
mwhudsonbeuno: so my (vague) idea about this was that a bit before each bzr release (say around the beta) we decide if it's worth doing a loggerhead release23:37
mwhudsonbeuno: for 1.7, i'd be a bit surprised if we get enough done to be worth it23:38
=== TheMuso_ is now known as TheMuso
lifelessmwhudson: release often23:39
jambeuno: how did the 'scripting' attempt go today?23:39
jamI don't see a doc patch yet :)23:39
pickscrapePoor beuno :)23:40
jamI just bring it up because I have an rc5 tarball, which may make it to an upload if jml and thumper don't have anything else to say to me23:41
thumperjam: I'd rather see 1.6 get out23:43
jamanyone know when jml might wake up?23:44
beunomwhudson, ah, ok. So we just fix bugs until we decide on a release?23:44
beunojam, no scripting today. Didn't get to 3/4 of the things I was planning to  :(23:44
mwhudsonbeuno: yeah, i reckon so23:45
beunomwhudson, fair enough23:45
mwhudsonbeuno: though as lifeless says, our threshold for 'worth it' should be pretty low23:45
beunoI'm off to a long and painful dinner then. bbl!23:45
beunomwhudson, agreed. Let's try and not delay it for more than 2 months or so23:46
lifelessI'd do it monthly with bzr23:48
lifelessjust because23:48
lifelessreleases -> visibility, improvements etc23:48
vilalifeless: pong23:52
jamvila!!!!23:52
vila:D23:52
lifelessvila: when do you start?23:53
vilain 56 hours ? :-D23:53
lifelessLOL23:53
vilalifeless: august 22th at dawn, until then I'm still full, but what was your ping for ?23:56
lifelesscuriousity :)23:56
vilaok :)23:56
lifelessman too much homepage wiki spam23:56
vilaI'll go to bed then, see you soon...23:56
lifelessgnight!23:57

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