=== sale_ is now known as sale === mcasadevall is now known as NCommander [00:38] superm1: yeah - looking atm - we appear to have a repeat of a problem we had on Sunday. [00:40] hello. i have an inactive signature of a code of conduct. how can be reactivated? [00:56] how do i contact a Launchpad adminstrator to reactivate my signature of code of conduct? [00:57] mkhlnsh, Just sign it again with your updated key. [00:58] i didn't change my PGP key; i just deactivated my signature and i want it reactivated back. [00:58] mkhlnsh: You could ask a question at https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad [00:58] Somebody killed the topic again. [00:58] Then just sign it again with the same key. [00:59] then please explyn me why is there this: Once Inactive, a signature can only be reactivated by a Launchpad Administrator. if is not available? [00:59] s/explyn/explayn === wgrant changed the topic of #launchpad to: Topic for #launchpad is: https://launchpad.net/ | Channel logs: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com | https://help.launchpad.net/HelpRotation | Community help contact: - [00:59] Hrm. That's unexpected. You want to ask a question. [00:59] persia: That's intended. [00:59] You can workaround it by resigning it, I believe. [00:59] wgrant, It is? Why? [00:59] But you could just ask a question. [01:00] persia: Because Launchpad is strange. [01:00] It has been that way forever. [01:00] I know that you can resign for expired keys. Seems odd you can't for inactive signatures. [01:00] Is that just WoT vs. LP DB? [01:01] * wgrant -> lecture [01:03] so, what should I do? [01:11] mkhlnsh: open a question [01:11] ok [01:15] superm1: soyuz should be happy again now [01:16] superm1: we had some db contention issues that are resolved for now [02:07] Did someone already file a bug that when someone submits a bug the default is that the bug doesn't affect the submitter? [03:59] persia: There are several. [03:59] Then I won't add another :) [04:29] hrm, the bug number being a hyperlink at the top of each bug page ... that's something new on edge.launchpad, right? [04:29] kirkland, At least it doesn't work that way on lpnet [04:30] packages.ubuntu down? [04:30] persia: it's kinda annoying, because i usually like to copy-and-paste from there into my changelogs, etc. [04:30] persia: and a link that just sends me to the same page i'm on is rather useless [04:31] * persia has nothing useful to say about the current state of LP UI improvements [04:31] kirkland: i noticed that, too [04:32] kirkland: I did wonder why they implemented that [04:32] beuno: any idea? [04:32] Hobbsee: thumbs up, or down? [04:32] kirkland: down, for the same use case. [04:32] probably for consistency [04:32] but i *really* liked that one not being linked ;-) [04:32] i fail to see why launchpad wants to reimplement the browser's 'reload' button. I thought the browser button worked fine? [04:33] I type the bug numbers rather than copy&paste, but it seems pointless to have a self-reference link when that's already in the location bar of most of the browsers we ship (and the default browser in all flavours but server) [04:33] only think I can think of is for context if it's reached from another URL [04:33] ajmitch, but that's handled through URL rewriting already. [04:34] I won't pretend to know why it was changed then :) [04:35] a "feature", presumably [04:36] allows for drag&drop of URL for some browsers, which was probably the considered use case. That's the advantage of specs that involve wide user review. I'm looking forward to those. [04:37] from what I heard, that'll be soon? [04:38] That's seems to be the consensus from those watching these things. [04:42] Anyway, the feature is still only on edge. If you don't like it, file a bug. There's a chance it won't get to lpnet. [05:15] can i attach multiple files at onceto a bug report yet? [05:18] Hobbsee: By email, perhaps. [05:18] The API still doesn't permit it? [05:20] It might. [05:21] ffs,launchpad... [05:21] Error ID: OOPS-1027EC19 [05:21] What was it? [05:21] +filebug, for ubuntu. [05:22] Error ID: OOPS-1027EC20 [05:23] so, um, how am i supposed to report bugs when I don't know what the source package is now? [05:23] Hey. You got two in a row. [05:23] use lpnet? [05:24] ask for help in Ubuntu Bugs to find the package? [05:25] persia: that's a good idea. [05:25] oh, there we go. [05:25] took 24 seconds, but did come up with a result. [05:33] Hobbsee: looks like a timeout doing the full text search on your bug title. [05:34] spiv: That's what I thought it might be, yes. [05:34] i'm sure that used to work, too. [05:35] Hobbsee: possibly just an unlucky moment of database contention? No doubt the real LP devs will look at it properly when they wake up. [05:35] spiv: right. I reproduced it 3 times on edge, but not on production. Very odd. [05:35] it must be time to file some more launchpad bugs,too. === jaypipes is now known as jaypipes-afk [05:41] * Hobbsee adds https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/287935 [05:41] Launchpad bug 287935 in malone "[EDGE] Bug # in the top left corner is trying to implement the browser 'reload' button. Why?" [Undecided,New] [06:44] this is a problem with putting all the LP devs in one time zone ... [06:50] spm: is langpack export running atm ? [06:50] spiv: the real devs are all in training :P [06:50] lifeless: they have a lunch break, right? ;) [06:50] This channel seems to be overrun with .au Canonical gods. [06:51] gods are everywhere [06:51] so how can they overrun something? [06:51] lifeless: not that I can see - just rosetta-approve-imports.py [06:51] spm: cool; [06:51] spm: just being...cautious [06:52] I can appreciate that :-) [06:54] Worked out what has been going wrong over the past few days? [06:54] lifeless: fwiw langpack (currently) runs Mon, Wed & Sat @ 22:00 BST. hardy, intrepid, intrepid. [06:55] wgrant: to fix? yes. To prevent? getting there. :-) [06:57] spm: Aha. Good. LP does like to die around Ubuntu releases, so it's good to have the problems known about... [06:59] heh - so long as it doesn't die on Sundays (again)... === Adri2000_ is now known as Adri2000 === geser__ is now known as geser [09:23] Do "affect me"s add to the number of duplicates? [09:24] no [09:28] So how can I list bugs sorted by the number of "affect me"s? [09:29] cyberix, not yet, no [09:29] you will be eventually :) [09:29] I don't think that is implemented yet : it's planned to be one of the selectable orders, last I heard. [09:29] (but beuno really knows) [09:29] :-D [09:29] ok [09:32] hiya [09:32] is logging in on staging broken right now? [09:32] for me it doesn't work [09:33] it doesn't for me either [09:33] all LP devs in learning mode [09:33] it breaks a launchpadlib script for me :) [09:33] staging's DB is fscked. [09:33] ahh ok [09:33] It has none of my teams. [09:33] dholbach, I'll ask as soon as we pause for a bit [09:34] * dholbach hugs beuno [09:34] Wow. [09:34] That's broken. [09:34] gracias! [09:34] https://staging.launchpad.net/projects [09:34] siretart, ping [09:34] 20 projects registered. [09:34] That wins. [09:34] Aha. "There are currently 48 people and 17 teams registered in Launchpad." [09:35] ok, it's a known issue [09:35] being worked on [09:35] rock and roll [09:35] not sure about the ETA though [09:35] trying to learn new skillz, makes actually doing things harder [09:35] What kind of skillz? [09:36] Wait. [09:36] Hmmm. [09:36] That's the sampledata, isn't it? [09:36] yes [09:43] Rinchen: pong [09:43] hi siretart [09:43] siretart, what's the process to request something packaged in universe? [09:43] siretart, I need a particular program which exists on sourceforge (as a .deb no less) to be in Universe. [09:44] Rinchen: there is currently a discussion about involving brainstorm for that on the ubuntu-mailing list [09:44] Rinchen: the current process is to file a bug in launchpad and tag it 'needs-packaging' [09:44] Rinchen: .deb no less? this means without source? [09:48] siretart, source is available [09:48] * wgrant notes that upstream packaging rarely helps :( [09:49] http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=199315 [09:49] it's under a funky license though [09:49] well, not really funky [09:49] http://projity.com/license/index.html [09:49] Rinchen: in any case, I'd suggest filing such a needs-packaging bug, and start a discussion about the license and who is going to package it there [09:49] hi [09:50] ok siretart thanks. [09:50] i have a "basic" LP subscription.. my project is using private bzr branches fine but i'd like bugs to be private as well [09:51] hi there [09:51] oh bac replied my mail ;) [09:51] is there a list of the next features available in lp? [09:51] ace, you mean like a roadmap? [09:51] yes [09:51] or just a wishlist [09:52] well, bugs and blueprints [09:52] for example, will a wiki be available in lp? [09:52] and we have milestones: https://edge.launchpad.net/launchpad-project [09:52] bugs and blueprints are more of a set of trail blazes than a roadmap per se. [09:53] ace, wikis have been talked about, yes. But there's no ETA for them yet [09:53] where do you talk about this? in a blueprint? [09:53] you can see what's being targeted for the next release in: https://edge.launchpad.net/launchpad-project/+milestone/2.1.11 [09:53] ok [09:53] there is no roadmap, yet [09:53] thanks siretart. I'll contact the package owners since I can't find the source. Once I get the data I'll file the packaging request bug [09:54] I suspect there will be something similar soon-ish [09:55] Rinchen: feel free to advertise that bug on the #ubuntu-motu channel, though [09:55] perhaps i miss something, but is there something to write doc in lp? [09:56] ace, no, there's no feature available to write it in Launchpad [09:56] i say that because when i click on "read full spec" on a blueprint , it goes to a documentation with close access [09:57] for example: https://launchpad.canonical.com/Translations/Licensing#remove-translations-by [09:57] well, in other projects, you can link to public wikis instead [09:57] so that would work [09:57] ok [09:57] Launchpad currently uses a private wiki, but that may change as well [09:57] ok i see [09:58] blueprints ar emore for tracking then the actual content of the spec [09:58] so you can target it to a release, assign it to people, etc [09:58] ok like a little post-it [09:58] a clickable post-it! :) [09:59] do you think LP and sourceforge have the same goal? they compete in the same category? [09:59] I don't think so, but I really wouldn't know [10:00] i m looking at where i ll put my project [10:00] well, Launchpad has more features, that's for sure [10:00] there are info about how many ppl and project on LP? [10:01] you have a nice tour at: https://launchpad.net/+tour/index [10:01] SF is slightly more flexible for some uses. [10:01] But LP wins everywhere else. [10:01] SF is damn slow too [10:01] ace, https://launchpad.net/projects and https://launchpad.net/people [10:02] ok only 9k projects [10:02] i thought it was more used [10:03] well, Ubuntu uses it [10:03] so you have a massive amount of packages [10:03] which aren't projects per-se [10:03] I got a PPA upload rejected with this message: Unable to identify file gimp_2.6.1.orig.tar.bz2 (graphics) in changes. [10:04] ubuntu use it but not for the code hosting [10:04] ace, they will very soon [10:04] ah ok [10:04] nice [10:04] davidfraser: You must use a tar.gz. [10:04] The previous original file was gimp_2.6.0.orig.tar.gz [10:04] What do I need to do to fix this? [10:05] i find that LP is really close the ubuntu community, but will it work for a windows opensource project or we ll be bashed :) [10:05] as long as it's open source, it sure won't be bashed [10:06] ace: see https://launchpad.net/windows-ssh-server :) [10:06] ah yes :) [10:06] a one man project :) [10:07] bac: hi, the bug contact was set ;) [10:08] wgrant: So if the upstream software only releases .tar.bz2, I must extract and recompress it... [10:10] davidfraser: Yes. That's the normal practice in Debian and Ubuntu. [10:10] OK, Thanks [10:10] But I think Soyuz (and thus Launchpad's PPA service) is meant to be growing support for bz2 tarballs in the next couple of months. [10:10] what is the best way to create a sandbox project? [10:11] wgrant: that true, but don't expect it live in the next cycle :( === sabdfl1 is now known as sabdfl_epic [10:12] cprov: We've been waiting a while, so I'm sure we can wait a bit longer. [10:12] wgrant: Great. It was just a slightly cryptic error message [10:19] funny, i don't find the link to create a new LP project [10:20] ace: https://launchpad.net/, Open Source Projects, Register a project [10:22] lol ok [10:22] thank you [10:22] Rinchen: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages [10:23] thanks dholbach [10:29] LP doesn't use subversion? [10:29] ace, no. bzr is the future. :) [10:30] of course :) [10:30] launchpad too [10:30] rockstar: And the present. [10:30] wgrant, well, only because we have a time machine. [10:30] rockstar: True [10:34] ace, we can import svn of course (maybe somebody else has said that already) [10:34] yes i read that [10:34] cool === oojah_ is now known as oojah [10:35] but there a big lack in the GUI client [10:35] olive isn't bad for bzr. [10:35] for windows :) [10:35] Not entirely fully-featured, I guess. [10:35] Ah. [10:35] tortoiseBazaar [10:36] http://bazaar-vcs.org/TortoiseBzr [10:36] ahaha it exists [10:36] I wonder if it's still alive... [10:36] Oh, it is [10:37] yes, there's someone working on it quite a lot [10:37] "3 commits by 1 person in the last month " [10:37] Mark Hammond [10:37] beuno: um, what? (#287935) [10:37] that's not just "someone" it's "the one" [10:37] :) [10:38] the One [10:38] Hobbsee, click the link on the top, takes you to the right place [10:39] top right that is [10:39] beuno: yes. and? [10:39] uhm, that's why it's there.......... [10:39] I'd imagine it'd be useful for getting to a valid context if you arrive at one in which the bug doesn't exist. [10:40] Is that your point, beuno? [10:40] yes [10:40] That is obscure but useful. [10:41] right, so i'ts useful when you're not already at that page. [10:41] yes [10:41] wgrant, tortoise bzr is actively maintained. [10:41] and [10:41] i guess for consistency's sake,it should always be there, whether it's just actually useful or not [10:41] to give people a link [10:42] yeap [10:42] rockstar: So beuno said. I just hadn't heard much about it. [10:42] Hobbsee, so, I propose we mark it as a suplicate of the other bug, which should be easy to fix this way now [10:42] just to put pressure :) [10:43] beuno: except for the fact that it's a bug about the fix of that bug. [10:43] Hobbsee, well, sure. But there is a relevant comment [10:43] otherwise it's just invalid [10:43] so, whatever makes you happier [10:44] well, if you're into marking A a dupe of notA...it's probably best to mark it invalid. [10:45] right, so it's one or the other [10:46] if you don't feel it's a dupe, we'll just mark it as invalid and I'll move on to try and get that ported to the sibgle-comment page [10:46] Is it not possible to show the link iff the context differs from the current page (as mpt suggests)? [10:46] That makes the presence of the link a useful indicator as to whether you are on the correct page. [10:46] I like consistancy [10:47] eh, why are you still talking about marking it as a duplicate? [10:47] persia: well, i would have thought that. [10:47] They're completely different bugs [10:47] and, that's a link to the bug which will always do the right thing [10:47] I guess. I think you're losing information. I think mpt has a very good point. [10:47] why they didn't use Git? [10:47] mpt: i've got NFI - and i've no idea how the comments on the bug actually relates toeither of the other comments, either. [10:48] it's not invalid, either [10:48] It could be Won't Fix. [10:49] mpt: more won'tfix, but i'm unconvinced that beuno has actually read the bug sufficiently to grasp what's being said, tbh. [10:49] But it's not Invalid. [10:49] maybe i was unclear to start with, i'm not sure [10:49] Hobbsee, I'm here, explain! :) [10:50] beuno, ever since people stopped using Netscape 4 for Mac, no browser has made it easy to copy text inside a link. [10:50] So, copying a bug number from inside a "Bug 12345" link is difficult. [10:50] beuno, It breaks a current use case, but does not add value when the bug is in the correct context. [10:50] which is 99.99% of the time. [10:51] And the other 0.01% could be handled better another way. [10:51] (All percentages approximate.) [10:51] mpt++ [10:52] mpt, Well, I'm not sure about "could be handled better another way". When out of context, having a link to return to proper context is nice. [10:53] Mind you, the link as currently constructed doesn't do that well for multitask bugs. [10:53] persia: I was wondering about that. Doesn't really help you there anyway [10:53] Having such a link be unobtrusively in the upper left isn't bad. [10:53] persia, the other way being, making it imspossible to not be in the proper context. [10:53] mpt, Except I routinely abuse the context to work around the ACLs. [10:53] yes [10:54] Which would also have the benefit that each bug report would no longer have ~100000 possible URLs. [10:54] the reason is there, is because so many people URL hack around [10:54] persia, what do you mean by ACLs? [10:54] Do you make it not exist, or redirect to /bugs/432432423432523? [10:54] Well, it's arguable that the fact one can abuse the model is a bug : perhaps it ought detect the right context and redirect when e.g. changing the bug number. [10:54] wgrant, redirect. [10:55] Then use URLrewriting to feed the browser the correct context anyway. [10:55] persia, Answers already does that, so it's perfectly possible for Bugs to do it too. [10:55] So it does. [10:55] Forgot that. [10:55] mpt, Yep. [10:56] so I think it's unobtrusive, and sovles a few problems [10:56] it's possible, just harder [10:57] I opened a bug to do a redirect [10:57] so this was a middle ground [10:57] I approved the UI change, but opened a bug to do redirects in the future [10:57] it's hard to do redirects because it can be linked to multiple projects [10:57] beuno, but it breaks use cases. Can it be reverted in the meantime? I've yet to see any user comment positively on it. [10:57] and, as it's said, mayne people URL hack [10:57] * persia doesn't personally care about it, but it generated more traffic than most commits [10:58] persia, revert the link? [10:58] Yes, but generally when URL hacking, we want to be in the "wrong" context. [10:58] I think it would make more people happy than sad to revert the link. [10:58] I think the bug you want to fix is a valid and useful one, but I think your redirect bug is a better solution. [10:59] I fail to see why it makes anyone unhappy [10:59] like, a real workflow =breaker [10:59] so, reverting involves a lot of steps [10:59] Copy & Paste. Three users (kirkland, mpt, Hobbsee) have complained about it. Nobody has said anything good. [10:59] you have the bug # on the url [10:59] it takes much less precision to copy it from the url [11:00] Not that can be reliably copied in many browsers. [11:00] e.g. firefox does DnD for the URLbar unless you are very careful. [11:01] beuno, I don't disagree with any of your statements : I'm just not seeing any positive reaction from any of the users, and I see some negative reaction. Since you seem to agree there exists a more elegant solution, I don't see the benefit of not maintaining the status quo until it is resolved. [11:02] (and it doesn't break my use case, so I probably shouldn't even care much) [11:02] persia, the time needed to revert [11:03] so, if we're going to invest time in that, we need some sort of benefit [11:03] clear benefit [11:03] happy users? Lack of complaint? Lower sense of unresponsiveness of LP to user requests? [11:03] I can see that it's a bit annoying if you're used to copy n pasting from that place [11:03] well, people who are happy with the change are usually less vocal ;) [11:04] the link is different than the URL [11:04] so it's useful in some cases [11:04] OK. I'm just judging by channel traffic. Not worth further argument. [11:05] why should we make those users unhappy, that can't find that URL otherwise? [11:05] there was a bug reported about it, which triggered that work [11:05] (can't find it now) [11:05] so a few people where unhappy, that now are happy [11:05] it's hard to please everyone! [11:05] beuno: impossible even [11:06] Oh, certainly. It's impossible to please anyone. [11:06] o.O [11:07] I just don't think it's useful to go from one bad state to another bad state. If edge is so far down the development pipeline that it's hard to revert, I think the process needs help, but that's entirely separate. [11:07] (and there are plenty of other bugs that need work, so clearly spending a lot of time to revert something isn't ideal) [11:08] :) [11:25] * Hobbsee eyes the above discussion [11:27] it's an interesting problem in general though. [11:28] a particular layout has a bunch of implicit benefits [11:28] which are only made explicit when it changes. [11:29] Indeed. [11:29] Hello, I've tried uploading a source package to my ppa, but I get this error: [11:29] Already uploaded to ppa.launchpad.net [11:29] However, I can't find any uploaded packages at http://launchpad.net/~flimm/+archive [11:30] beuno: could you define "not blocking anyone else" please? [11:31] It's quite clearly not blocking anybody because Launchpad bugs can't block anything. No bug dependencies. [11:31] For no particularly good reason. [11:34] beuno: in particular, how you can "not block anyone" while breaking use cases. [11:54] I get a 404 error when I try to visit http://ppa.launchpad.net/flimm/ubuntu [11:55] I have enabled my PPA though: https://launchpad.net/~flimm/+archive [11:55] nothing will be there until the first upload is processed successfully [11:56] That's strange, bigjools, dholbach's PPA (for example) is empty, but you don't get a 404 error when visiting http://ppa.launchpad.net/dholbach/ubuntu [11:57] he probably used to have something and deleted it [11:57] trust me, you need to upload something [11:57] I have, I've been waiting for half an hour already, bigjools [11:57] you get any emails back? [11:58] No emails [11:58] Oh wait, I did just get one [11:58] Flimm, and your gpg key is registered? [11:58] Yes, gpg keys are registered [11:58] no emails means either you didn't sign the upload or you signed with a key not in LP [11:58] otherwise the email will tell you what you did wrong [11:59] Thank you, that's very helpful [11:59] bigjools: or the uploader borked again? [11:59] welcome [11:59] I just got an email: epidermis_0.1b-10ubuntu1_i386.changes rejected [11:59] Flimm: that'll be why. You needt o upload a *source* changes. [11:59] I had tried to upload an unsigned package a few hours ago, I didn't get any error messages [11:59] bigjools: Malformed Changed-By or Maintainer addresses will generate error mails now? They always used to be silently dropped. [12:00] umm dunno, I'd need to check [12:00] And when I tried to upload it again, it told me I had already uploaded it [12:00] Flimm: see https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA?action=show&redirect=PPA#Building [12:00] So I had to up the version one. [12:00] Flimm: That's just dput being silly locally. Pass -f to it to convince it to upload again. [12:00] Thanks wgrant! [12:01] np [12:01] I've been using dpkg-buildpackage , which is supposed to build both source and binary packages, can I use that? [12:02] We generally use debuild, and you must pass -S in either case. [12:02] Launchpad does not accept binaries. [12:04] I'm going to try dpkg-buildpackage -S first, as I'm unfamiliar with debuild [12:04] Flimm: debuild is a wrapper around dpkg-buildpackage. [12:04] (so most of the options arethe same) [12:05] Oh... I am learning a lot today [12:06] Well, the dpkg-buildpackage -S seems to have worked [12:12] How long will it take roughly to build? === Verterok|out is now known as Verterok [12:16] It's built [12:16] That was ten minutes long [12:21]