[01:02] <nellery> I get this error when running apt-get update to update my PPA, anyone know how to fix this?
[01:02] <nellery> W: GPG error: http://ppa.launchpad.net jaunty Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY 4A42D1C1E825A177
[01:02] <thumper> is your gpg key with a key server?
[01:03] <nellery> thumper: yes, it is uploaded to keyserver.ubuntu.com, and on LP
[01:03] <nellery> (I'm updating my own PPA)
[01:03] <thumper> has it worked for you before?
[01:04] <nellery> thumper: yes, but I that was before keys for PPA's existed
[01:05] <nellery> https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA#Adding%20a%20PPA%20to%20your%20Ubuntu%20repositories
[01:05] <nellery> mentions I need to confirm it
[01:05] <nellery> But I don't see how this is possible.
[01:05] <thumper> it isn't some apt-key thing is it@?
[01:06] <thumper> I don't know that much about ppas
[01:07] <nellery> thumper: I've updated my PPA on my system many times before, but never with signed PPAs.  I'm guessing that it's because of that
[01:07] <nellery> and the error mentioned on the help pages looks to be the same.
[01:08] <thumper> I think it is due to PPAs now signing things
[01:08] <thumper> and what you are seeing is a warning from apt
[01:09] <thumper> as it doesn't know about the key
[01:09] <thumper> however I'm not sure how to tell apt about it
[01:09] <thumper> I'm sure someone here does though
[01:09]  * thumper looks around
[01:22] <james_w> apt-key
[01:22] <thumper> thanks james_w
[01:22] <james_w> nellery: you need to use "apt-key add" to inform apt to trust that key
[01:32] <nellery> james_w: got it, thanks!
[04:12]  * jelmer wished somebody uploaded python-launchpadlib to Debian :-/
[06:42] <bialix> hi, I have a question about difference between maintainer and driver roles
[06:43] <bialix> I want to create new team for my project. Does I understand correctly the team members can work on the same branches?
[06:43] <bialix> even if the team is not associated to specific project?
[06:44] <bialix> and if I set the team as driver all members will be responsive to triage bgs?
[06:44] <bialix> bugs
[06:44] <bialix> does it correct?
[06:45] <bialix> anybody home?
[06:46] <spiv> bialix: it's been pretty quiet in here so far today... I guess it's still the weekend for many people.
[06:46] <spiv> (And it's a public holiday in .au)
[06:46] <bialix> spiv: oh, ok.
[06:46] <bialix> but may be you know the answer ;-) ?
[06:47] <bialix> and today is chinese new year too
[06:47] <spiv> Oh, yeah, that's right.  A busy day for holidays :)
[06:47] <spiv> I don
[06:48] <spiv> I don't know the difference between drivers and maintainers, though.
[06:49] <bialix> I'm just never realized that the team can share code without be attached to particular project
[06:51] <bialix> heh, ok. thanks anyway
[08:58] <Hew> Hi. It looks like edge has a problem with making private bugs public, as the private checkbox is not filled. Can someone else verify this? Do I report this against Malone / Launchpad / something else?
[09:00] <spiv> Hew: yes, file it against malone.
[09:00] <Hew> spiv: Thanks, will do.
[09:02] <stdin> is bazaar working for anyone on staging? seems to be down for me
[13:26] <milovanderlinden> Hi there, I am maintainer for merkaartor. How can I change project details? I cannot find an edit details button anywhere
[13:29] <jrib> Hi, can I search for a project by programming language?  I'm on edge by the way
[13:31] <cprov> milovanderlinden: let me check for you.
[13:33] <cprov> milovanderlinden: right, you are the maintainer and a link called 'Change details' (with a yellow pencil at the right) should be presented to you on the page upper-right corner
[13:33] <milovanderlinden> cprov; ok, thanks
[13:33] <cprov> milovanderlinden: do you see it now ?
[13:34] <milovanderlinden> This is the project url https://launchpad.net/merkaartor
[13:35] <milovanderlinden> cprov: yes, there is a change details button now, thank you!
[13:35] <cprov> milovanderlinden: you are welcome.
[13:45] <milovanderlinden> Another question; I am requested to set translation to be maintained in launchpad (done) and translation owner to "openstreetmap". How can I change the owner for translation?
[13:46] <jtv3> milovanderlinden: there's no owner for translation as such,
[13:47] <jtv3> milovanderlinden: though if you're using a translation group, that does have an owner.
[13:47] <milovanderlinden> Can I see if openstreetmap as such is owner of a certain translation group?
[13:48] <jtv> milovanderlinden: (note: a project doesn't own a translation group, since one group can manage translations for multiple projects)
[13:48] <jtv> milovanderlinden: it's indicated here and there in the translations UI, let me dig it up for you.
[13:49] <jtv> milovanderlinden: are we talking about josm?
[13:50] <milovanderlinden> no, about merkaartor which is the QT, C++ "based brother" application for JOSM
[13:50] <jtv> milovanderlinden: oic
[13:50] <jtv> milovanderlinden: I suppose a lot of non-Dutch people will be wondering about that name...
[13:50] <milovanderlinden> ;-)
[13:50] <jtv> So this one? https://translations.launchpad.net/merkaartor
[13:51] <milovanderlinden> yes
[13:51] <jtv> milovanderlinden: the information you're looking for is on the right, in the pink box.  It says Translation group: Not assigned.
[13:52] <jtv> milovanderlinden: if you want somewhat tighter control of the translations, you may want us to set up a translation group; or you could choose the Launchpad translation group as your translation group.
[13:53] <milovanderlinden> Ok, thanks for the hint. I will consult the german person who contacted me on setting up localization. I see other issues coming up because merkaartor uses ts (Qt) templates for translations and I am not sure launchpad will handle those?
[13:54] <jtv> milovanderlinden: unfortunately, no, we don't support those.
[13:54] <milovanderlinden> ok, clear. thanks
[13:54] <jtv> milovanderlinden: glad to be of help.
[17:24] <loic-m> I've got problems with the doc at https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA#Using%20packages%20from%20other%20distributions
[17:25] <loic-m> I'm trying to upload my package so it's build for Intrepid and Hardy
[17:25] <loic-m> however "Upload to ~<lp_name>/ubuntu/<suite> and the suite you specify will override the suite named in the upload changelog"doesn't make sense
[17:26] <loic-m> I do either "my launchpad name"/ubuntu/intrepid, ~"my launchpad name"/ubuntu/intrepid or my_ppa/ubuntu/intrepid
[17:26] <loic-m> But I get "no host ### found in config"
[17:27] <calc> would it be possible (or is there already a bug) to have x-launchpad-rationale added for to Blueprint emails?
[17:28] <calc> s/for//
[17:30] <cprov> loic-m: first you cannot build the same source in more than one series when you have a pool/ based repository.
[17:30] <cprov> loic-m: it would result in the same set of binary packages (same name and version) with conflicting contents.
[17:31] <cprov> loic-m: regarding the the dput error, which fqdn are you using the your dput configuration ?
[17:32] <loic-m> cprov: fqdn = ppa.launchpad.net
[17:34] <loic-m> cprov: what is the solution if I want to provide packages for multiple releases of Ubuntu (+ maybe Debian)?
[17:36] <cprov> loic-m: dput on ppa.l.n works fine from here. Does `ftp ppa.launchpad.net` works for you ?
[17:37] <loic-m> cprov: I can dput fine for Jaunty, the only problem is for other targets
[17:38] <cprov> loic-m: dput itself should work, but the upload will be rejected and you will receive an notification about it
[17:38] <cprov> loic-m: is that what happens ?
[17:38] <loic-m>  cprov: ftp works fine too (I can login)
[17:38] <cprov> loic-m: assuming you use `dput -f ...` or remove the '.upload' file before re-uploading.
[17:38] <loic-m> "No host ppa/ubuntu/intrepid found in config"
[17:39] <cprov> loic-m: oh, you have to create new configuration snippets for series-specific uploads.
[17:39] <loic-m> cprov: `dput -f ...` won't overwrite the packages for Jaunty?
[17:40] <cprov> loic-m: no, it won't, it will just ignore the '.upload' file created locally by the previous upload.
[17:40] <loic-m> cprov: "you have to create new configuration snippets for series-specific uploads" - I didn't find that information. Do you have a link?
[17:41] <cprov> loic-m: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA#Using%20packages%20from%20other%20distributions, right where you are.
[17:42] <cprov> loic-m: in the previous section it describes how to create dput.cf sections for each PPA you have access, the it describes how to create new section for series specific uploads
[17:43] <cprov> loic-m: it doesn't say run `dput ~<lp_name>/foo/bar`, does it ?
[17:44] <cprov> loic-m: either way, the series-override only helps when you want to upload a pristine source package, for instance a debian source to a ubuntu distroseries.
[17:44] <loic-m> cprov: you're right. However it doesn't say you have to create that in dput.cf either. i'll try right now
[17:45] <loic-m> cprov: what I want is to upload a package for Jaunty and build it for Intrepid/Hardy
[17:45] <cprov> loic-m: yup, I will tweak that paragraph to make it clearer. It's confusing the way it is
[17:46] <cprov> loic-m: right, you can't do this in a pool/ based repository, as I said before. Did you understand why ?
[17:47] <loic-m> cprov: thanks a lot. Could you also add the command to run -or say you need the -f option)?
[17:48] <loic-m> cprov: I understand it's because "it would result in the same set of binary packages" as you said
[17:48] <cprov> loic-m: exactly, so you have two alternatives
[17:49] <cprov> loic-m: you could build the source in the oldest series you think it will work, let's say hardy; then copy source and binaries to the newer series
[17:50] <cprov> loic-m: since the toolchain is very likely to be backwards compatible, the binaries will work fine in intrepid and jaunty.
[17:50] <loic-m> cprov: I copy them in Launchpad (web interface)?
[17:51] <cprov> loic-m: OR, if you really depend on series specific features (libraries/ABI) you have to create a new source version and reupload it.
[17:52] <cprov> loic-m: yes, on the first alternative you can use launchpad.net/people/+me/+archive/+copy-packages UI
[17:52] <cprov> loic-m: after the source was fully built in the oldest series.
[17:54] <loic-m> cprov: I'm not sure I'm looking for either solution ;)
[17:55] <oojah> loic-m: And copying like that ^ means the process is a lot quicker.
[17:56] <cprov> oojah: copying binaries means you don't have to wait them to be rebuilt; so quicker when it fits your needs.
[17:56] <oojah> cprov: Exactly my point :)
[17:56] <loic-m> cprov: in the link you gave me, there's an option "Rebuild the copied sources"
[17:57] <loic-m> cprov: could I use this option so I upload to Jaunty, then it rebuild packages for Intrepid & Hardy?
[17:58] <cprov> loic-m: yes, and if you select it together with 'this PPA' (copy destination) is will fail if the source being copied has already built a binary in the same repository
[17:58] <loic-m> cprov: you're right, it did
[17:58] <oojah> loic-m: To clarify, you can use that option only if you tell it to rebuild in a different ppa.
[17:59] <cprov> oojah: yes
[17:59] <loic-m> cprov: so if I want to support Hardy and Intrepid along with Jaunty, the only solution is either to accept building it for Hardy, or having multiple ppa?
[17:59] <oojah> I've struggled with this myself in the past, it's not immediately obvious.
[17:59] <cprov> oojah: it might confuse your mind, but you can also rebuild the same source in a newer suite if its original builds have all failed.
[17:59] <cprov> oojah: but that's a corner case.
[17:59] <oojah> aaargh :)
[18:01] <oojah> loic-m: You could use different version names as well - name-1.0.0-1~ppa1~jaunty
[18:02] <oojah> loic-m: But if your package doesn't need to be rebuilt for different releases, then just do the copy. afaict, the most likely cause that you need to worry about rebuilding is if you depend on a library that breaks abi compatibility.
[18:02] <loic-m> cprov: that's an idea, however it will confuse other people
[18:03] <loic-m> s/cprov/oojah/ sorry
[18:04] <loic-m> oojah: I think I'll do a copy then. It would just have been nice to have it working like pbuilder-release-arch work though. I must be spoilt
[18:06] <cprov> loic-m: we have plans for automatic rebuilds, where we could automatically dispatch new builds without requiring source changes and adding a rebuild-index ('+b<index>')  to the resulting binaries.
[18:06] <cprov> loic-m: but it will take some time to be implemented.
[18:08] <loic-m> cprov: that's really good news.
[18:08] <loic-m> btw, any reason why a build for Jaunty amd64 works on my en with pbuilder, but fails on my ppa?
[18:08] <loic-m> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/21650338/buildlog_ubuntu-jaunty-amd64.desmume_0.9-0ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[18:12] <cprov> loic-m: let me check.
[18:13] <cprov> loic-m: missing build-deps, the buildlog list them after 'The following packages have unmet dependencies: '
[18:14] <cprov> loic-m: I don't know exactly what changed in jaunty regarding gtk
[18:15] <cprov> loic-m: you could check with MOTU guys in #ubuntu-motu, they know everything ;)
[18:16] <loic-m> cprov: I'll do that. Thanks for checking.
[18:16] <pkt> hi, my ppa has reached its quota?
[18:17] <pkt> I got an email saying I 'm using 1927MB from 1024MB
[18:17] <pkt> But I can't see how this is happening
[18:17] <pkt> I have eclipse which takes a total of ~400MB
[18:17] <cprov> pkt: what's your PPA url ?
[18:18] <pkt> https://launchpad.net/~pktoss/+archive
[18:18] <pkt> but the rest are small packages, I can't figure out how they can be taking 1.5G
[18:19] <pkt> unless the deleted packages count too?
[18:21] <cprov> pkt: well, counters don't lie, you repo uses about 2GiB
[18:22] <pkt> strange, I don't say anything is lying, I just can't figure out how this happens
[18:22] <cprov> pkt: you have 3 eclipse publications using the same orig.tar.gz
[18:22] <pkt> aha, that could be it
[18:23] <pkt> but I only see one
[18:23] <pkt> eclipse - 3.4.1-0~pkt2
[18:23] <cprov> pkt: but the old version were removed from disk on 18th and 19th, so it's not the problem.
[18:24] <pkt> yes, I remember deleting them
[18:24] <cprov> pkt: 1.1G    ./f/firefox-qt
[18:25] <pkt> aha
[18:25] <pkt> I never expected firefox to be that big!
[18:25] <cprov> pkt: but it also says -> Removal requested       3 minutes ago.
[18:25] <pkt> yes, but I cleaned this up after I got the email
[18:25] <cprov> pkt: you will be back into your quota very soon
[18:26] <pkt> so this could well be the problem, thanks :-)
[18:26] <cprov> pkt: you have to wait the repository clearner process to run, hourly.
[18:26] <pkt> yes, I don't mind :-)
[18:27] <pkt> thanks again a lot for your help :-)   Now things make sense
[18:28] <cprov> pkt: the upload warning will become a rejection next cycle and we will re-add the "repository size" section to the PPA index page.
[18:29] <pkt> what do you mean "next cycle?"
[18:29] <cprov> pkt: by the end of the next 'month', roughly.
[18:30] <pkt> If quota is to be enforced, it would be nice if very large packages in a ppa could be flagged as such
[18:30] <cprov> pkt: next Launchpad release cycle.
[18:30] <pkt> This way I would never have copied firefox-qt from the other ppa in the first place
[18:31] <cprov> pkt: that's an interesting idea, could you file a bug on soyuz product, please ?
[18:31] <pkt> cool, I will :-)
[18:43] <pkt> cprov: ok, it is now bug #321565
[18:43] <cprov> pkt: thanks a lot.
[18:44] <pkt> np, thank you for your help :-)
[18:44] <pkt> bye
[19:13] <maxb> cprov: What does a milestone of "pending" mean in the context of Soyuz? Particularly with reference to bug 311952? Thanks!
[19:14] <cprov> maxb: it means that the task wasn't scheduled yet
[19:15] <maxb> but somehow different from "no milestone" ?
[19:15] <cprov> maxb: it's there just to not fall off into the ocean of confirmed bugs in soyuz :-/
[19:15] <maxb> right
[19:15] <maxb> a sort of "in tray" for bugs, then
[19:24] <cprov> maxb: yes, sort of.
[19:25] <maxb> What does this mean for the likelyhood of it happening during the jaunty cycle? Indeterminate, at the moment?
[19:27] <mkanat> gmb: Had a chance to look over the APIs?
[19:36] <cprov> maxb: well, in my understanding we have to find time for it before jaunty freeze. However I confess it doesn't look easy.
[19:37] <maxb> really?
[19:38] <maxb> Well, there's always the option of "Ignore any P-a-s info for binary packages, and get the file fixed upstream to refer to the source package when it refers to all binary packages of a source", I guess
[19:51] <loic-m> How can I make a package deleted from my ppa appear again?
[20:12] <fta> OOPS-1122EC281 ?
[20:12] <fta> timeouts everywhere :(
[20:15]  * Ursinha-prQA looks
[20:15] <Ursinha-prQA> fta, which page?
[20:22] <thumper> morning
[20:24] <Ursinha-prQA> fta, ppa/+index?
[20:24] <Ursinha-prQA> cprov, ^
[20:25] <cprov> fta: I'm on it, something introduced recently is making PPA index to suffer on package lists with a lot of binaries.
[20:25] <cprov> fta: apparently, I haven't had time to investigate it properly yet.
[20:25] <fta> cprov, ok. thanks
[20:26] <cprov> fta: try passing ?batch=20 (or smaller)
[20:27] <fta> i was passing batch=150 as i need firefox and xul which happen to be on different pages now and it's very slow to change page
[20:28] <cprov> fta: yes, that will mostly timeout from what I can see.
[20:29] <fta> btw, what happened to the 10+ ppa builders per arch? i see just a few now
[20:30] <cprov> fta: they were redirect to other tasks temporarily. They will be back soon.
[20:30] <fta> ok, great
[20:36] <Chris`>  Sorry, there was a problem connecting to the Launchpad server.
[20:36] <Chris`> Try reloading this page in a minute or two. If the problem persists, let us know in the #launchpad IRC channel on Freenode.
[20:36] <Chris`> Anyone else experiencing that?
[20:52] <andersk> Is it known that the PPA builders lychee and hassium have been stuck on the same builds for 5 days?
[20:53] <cody-somerville> andersk, neither of those buildds are currently in the pool
[20:54] <cody-somerville> andersk, Those buildds are disabled.
[20:55] <cprov> andersk: there are probably being used by other internal tasks
[22:09] <attilacyilmazlar> is ther any turkish guy here???
[23:45] <MFen> when i want to 'target this bug to a release', there's only one release, 'trunk'.  how do i get other releases in there?
[23:45] <MFen> i hope the answer isn't 'register a bazaar branch', because i can't
[23:46] <MFen> i've looked high and low for a list of releases or a place to add one
[23:49] <MFen> oh hell, there it is on the front page
[23:57] <MFen> is "link to ubuntu package" intended to be used with PPA packages?
[23:57] <MFen> i don't intend to try to get my package into ubuntu. not sure what, if any, advantages there might be in having a link between my project page and my ppa