[00:57] <yml> I there somewhere here that could approve the import of a branch from an external vcs to launchpad ?
[01:00] <jml> yml: in general, the help contact (see the topic) or mwhudson / rockstar.
[01:02] <yml> jml: thanks
[01:16] <rockstar> yml, got a link?
[01:16] <yml> rockstar: yes
[01:17] <yml> rockstar: https://code.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/django-massmedia/trunk
[01:17] <yml> rockstar: thanks
[01:17] <yml> I need to branch this app
[01:17] <rockstar> yml, approved.
[01:17] <yml> and I start to be really addict at launchpad and bzr do this
[01:18] <yml> rockstar: you are my rock star tonight
[01:18] <yml> rockstar: thank you very much
[01:21] <fidji> someone can help me to create a build source, have just shell script, no compilation
[01:26] <wgrant> Aren't the &[lr]aquo;s indicating merge proposals on the branch page around the wrong way?
[01:26] <wgrant> The one for branches proposed for merging into this branch points *out* of the branch page.
[01:48] <jml> wgrant: pls send pics
[01:48] <jml> (or urls)
[01:50] <wgrant> jml: Find your favourite branch page (https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~bzr/bzr/trunk).
[01:50] <wgrant> In the merge proposal section.
[01:50] <wgrant> (the new merge proposals diffs are awesome, by the way)
[01:54] <thumper> wgrant: thanks
[01:54] <thumper> wgrant: I've got more to do on them
[03:24] <MTecknology> Anyone around that can assign this to a LOSA? https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/63536
[03:33] <thumper> MTecknology: assigned
[03:33] <MTecknology> thumper: thanks, i'm trying to figure out why it's not working for this guy :P
[04:35] <mrooney> Hm, why does bzr want an ssh password when trying to branch an lp project on Windows?
[04:35] <mrooney> this is new and confusing
[04:35] <wgrant> mrooney: You don't have your key.
[04:36] <mrooney> wgrant: oh, branches aren't read-accessible to everyone?
[04:37] <wgrant> mrooney: It will always use bzr+ssh if you have run bzr launchpad-login.
[04:37] <mrooney> fascinating
[04:37] <mrooney> is there a way to branch without an ssh key? I am pretty sure this happened before I launchpad-login'd, as I did that in an attempt to fix it
[04:37] <wgrant> Since it dereferences the lp: URL early on (it doesn't store it in the branch anywhere), it has to.
[04:38] <wgrant> lp: will use HTTP if you haven't launchpad-login'd.
[04:38] <wgrant> Otherwise you could always use HTTP directly, I suppose.
[04:38]  * wgrant -> gone for a while.
[04:46] <MTecknology> mrooney: I'm having that problem too...
[04:46] <MTecknology> Permission denied (publickey).
[04:46] <MTecknology> bzr: ERROR: Connection closed: please check connectivity and permissions (and try -Dhpss if further diagnosis is required)
[04:46] <MTecknology> but I don't wanna have comit privs :P
[04:47] <mrooney> MTecknology: yeah, I am rather sure I hadn't run bzr launchpad-login, alas
[04:47] <mrooney> well, I do eventually, so I am just generating a new ssh key
[04:47]  * MTecknology runs to man
[04:48] <mrooney> oooh Windows how you pain me
[04:48] <MTecknology> I know the dfeeling
[04:49] <mrooney> that's what I get for supporting it and having to debug in it, I suppose!
[04:50] <MTecknology> I have enough fun trying to build a theme for IE
[04:51] <MTecknology> hrm - I know this command is right
[04:51]  * wgrant returns.
[04:51]  * wgrant devises a way to exploit BMPs with automatic landing.
[04:53] <MTecknology> GRR! checkout doesn't even work
[04:54] <mrooney> I know this is epically challenging
[04:55] <mrooney> wgrant: is there a way to clear launchpad-login such that it will use http?
[04:56] <mrooney> or maybe I should just use the direct http URL although I don't know what that would be, let me have a look-see
[04:56] <jml> mrooney: edit your ~/.bazaar/bazaar.conf
[04:56] <wgrant> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~path/to/branch, as well.
[04:56] <mrooney> jml: I don't seem to have one of those on cygwin, this is Windows
[04:56] <jml> mrooney: oh right.
[04:57] <mrooney> I tried that when tortoise-bzr did the same thing
[04:57] <mrooney> but I guess it hasn't helped so I should figure out how to do it the windows way
[04:59] <rockstar> wgrant, what automatic landing are you talking about?
[05:00] <wgrant> rockstar: If I have something like tarmac running against my project.
[05:01] <rockstar> wgrant, how would you you exploit that?
[05:01] <wgrant> rockstar: I am Joe 'Evil' Contributor. I create an innocent branch, and propose it for merging into a project with tarmac running on */10 against it.
[05:02] <wgrant> John Developer comes along, reviews my branch, and sets the BMP to approved.
[05:02] <wgrant> I then push --overwrite the branch with something evil.
[05:02] <wgrant> tarmac comes along a couple of minutes later, and merges my evil deeds.
[05:02] <rockstar> wgrant, hm, that's interesting.
[05:02] <rockstar> Fortunately, we have this thing called "Version Control" that allows you to back a change out.
[05:02] <wgrant> It would work for Launchpad at the moment, but nothing open.
[05:03] <wgrant> True.
[05:03] <rockstar> That is spectacularly devious though.
[05:04] <wgrant> Is it?
[05:04] <wgrant> It was fairly obvious...
[05:05] <spiv> I've actually used that against PQM, to intentionally sabotage my own branches.
[05:05] <wgrant> spiv: To stop them from being merged after you've submitted them?
[05:05] <spiv> "Oops, that branch isn't ready for landing yet but it's in PQM's queue, I better break it so that it won't land"
[05:05] <wgrant> Yep.
[05:06] <spiv> And yes, I thought it was obvious :)
[05:07]  * wgrant pokes staging - hasn't it been down for a few days now?
[05:07] <spiv> Basically, having a disconnect between what is approved and what the robot acts on invites this sort of issue.
[05:07] <wgrant> Right.
[05:07] <wgrant> Even storing a revision ID isn't good enough for the malicious case.
[05:07] <MTecknology> how do I branch via http?
[05:08] <spiv> Right, but you can use testaments.
[05:08] <spiv> MTecknology: "bzr branch http://..."
[05:08] <MTecknology> bzr branch https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-drupal-themes/ubuntu-drupal-openid modules/openid
[05:08] <MTecknology> bzr: ERROR: Not a branch: "https://code.launchpad.net/".
[05:08] <spiv> MTecknology: http, not https
[05:08] <wgrant> spiv: Can you?
[05:08] <MTecknology> same error
[05:08] <wgrant> How is a testament useful?
[05:08] <wgrant> Does it have a really unique ID?
[05:09] <spiv> MTecknology: you probably need a /trunk or similar on the end of that URL
[05:09] <wgrant> Joe Developer can't add a testament to the merge candidate.
[05:09] <rockstar> spiv, well, I've also done similar things with PQM.  I just never think people are malicious enough to really be hurtful.
[05:09] <spiv> MTecknology: branch paths are ~USER/PROJECT/BRANCH
[05:09] <spiv> (on launchpad)
[05:10] <rockstar> wgrant, storing the rev id would work.  I would doubt that someone was able to create  a branch with EXACTLY the same rev id.
[05:10] <jml> spiv: for the moment
[05:10] <MTecknology> I did that and got the same error
[05:10] <wgrant> rockstar: Isn't a revision ID randomly generated? Can't I easily hack bzr to generate the same one?
[05:10] <spiv> wgrant: Well, a testament is what bzr gpg signs, so you can verify that the content of some revision is the same as what the signer claims it should be.
[05:11] <rockstar> wgrant, spiv would have to comment on that one.
[05:11] <wgrant> jml: Is there anything other than ~USER/DISTRO/SERIES/PACKAGE/BRANCH coming?
[05:11] <spiv> rockstar: actually, it's very easy to control the revision ID programmatically.
[05:11] <rockstar> spiv, :(
[05:11] <spiv> rockstar: it is trivial to create collisions.
[05:11] <wgrant> Of course, bzr-svn does it. Forgot that.
[05:11] <jml> wgrant: not for canonical branch names. there'll be aliases for those, naturally.
[05:12] <wgrant> spiv: I am aware of how testaments work, but I don't see how it's relevant here. Joe Contributor can sign the new revision just the same!
[05:12] <spiv> rockstar: bzr itself won't generate collisions, but attackers are a different story.
[05:12] <wgrant> jml: Aliases? Excellent!
[05:12] <rockstar> Argh, with staging down, I can't really test my need API code.
[05:12]  * wgrant also has issues with staging being down :(
[05:12] <wgrant> Is it going to be up soonish?
[05:13] <wgrant> No demo, no staging...
[05:13] <rockstar> wgrant, I doubt it.
[05:13] <wgrant> Didn't you just get new hardware?
[05:13] <spiv> wgrant: right, the key isn't to check that the revision is signed by Joe Contributor, but that the testament of the approved code matches the testament of what you try to land
[05:13] <rockstar> wgrant, well, you seem to know more about Launchpad than I do.  :)
[05:13] <wgrant> rockstar: I'm sure I saw a mention of it somewhere...
[05:13] <jml> wgrant: yeah. just like there are aliases for many product branches.
[05:13] <wgrant> spiv: Ah, true, true.
[05:14] <wgrant> jml: So a series link will just imply an alias of that name?
[05:14] <jml> wgrant: lp:ubuntu/<package>, lp:ubuntu/karmic/<package>
[05:15] <wgrant> jml: Oh, I thought you meant arbitrary aliases.
[05:15] <jml> wgrant: no, arbitrary aliases aren't scheduled.
[05:16] <wgrant> So, why is staging down, and what are we meant to do without it?
[05:17] <jml> wgrant: not sure. I'll find out what the escalation procedure is.
[05:17] <spiv> wgrant: you're meant to only do production-quality work ;)
[05:19] <wgrant> spiv: Could the BMP store the content of the testament, without requiring a sig on the submitter's side?
[05:27] <spiv> wgrant: sure, I don't see why not.
[05:28] <wgrant> spiv: So that solves the issue, then.
[05:29] <wgrant> Also, are private branch diffs stored in the restricted librarian?
[05:29] <wgrant> Or are they going to become another easy target once they have predictable filenames in a release or two?
[05:34] <wgrant> I take it that one is not meant to get quotes around the content of the BMP comment textarea?
[05:39] <spiv> wgrant: I don't know much about the implementation of BMP
[05:40] <wgrant> Alright, the BMP commenting stuff has me completely confused now.
[05:41] <wgrant> Why does hitting reply a second time let me edit my original comment, but as if it has been repr()ed, and then thread the edited version under the original?
[05:43] <rockstar> wgrant, it's putting the original comment in quotes.  I originally wanted to do it like email quoting, but someone wanted actual quotation marks.
[05:43] <wgrant> rockstar: Ohhh.
[05:43] <wgrant> That is completely confusing.
[05:43] <wgrant> And wrong.
[05:43] <rockstar> So it's not a repr, but a quote, since you're replying to another comment.
[05:44] <wgrant> I'm not replying to another comment.
[05:44] <wgrant> The reply button was at the bottom of the comments, not in a comment.
[05:44] <rockstar> wgrant, yes, it's pretty confusing to get the emails and go "Why did you include what I said to you?"
[05:44] <wgrant> But I see now that I was.
[05:44] <rockstar> If it says reply at all, it's a reply.
[05:44] <wgrant> So: 1) Use a proper quoting mechanism. 2) Put the reply button inside the comment.
[05:45] <rockstar> wgrant, the reply button inside the comment is also something I'd like to see, but it sounds like we're the minority.
[05:45] <wgrant> I assumed I was just replying to the proposal. I must have had 'Add new comment' scrolled off my screen.
[05:45] <wgrant> It isn't often that LP's UI manages to completely confuse me - this must be bad!
[05:47] <wgrant> rockstar: Are there Won't Fixed bugs that I need to growl at, or shall I file some?
[05:47] <rockstar> wgrant, no idea.
[05:47]  * wgrant files some.
[05:48] <wgrant> I'm also concerned that it's completely different from bug commenting.
[05:51] <rockstar> Bug commenting isn't threaded though.
[05:51]  * rockstar checks to make sure that's correct.
[05:52] <rockstar> Yeah, that's right.
[05:52] <wgrant> That's a difference.
[05:53] <wgrant> There is no reason for one to be and not the other.
[05:53] <wgrant> Particularly as bugs are often interacted with by email.
[05:53] <wgrant> Which is very much threaded.
[05:53] <wgrant> And has threading headers.
[05:53] <wgrant> I would love bug comments to be threaded.
[05:54] <rockstar> wgrant, that is something I can do nothing about.  :)
[05:59] <wgrant> rockstar: Bugs filed, anyway.
[05:59] <wgrant> Do you know where private branch BMP diffs are stored?
[06:09] <rockstar> wgrant, not particularly.  Lemme look.
[06:13] <wgrant> BMP pages showing outdated diffs also makes me cry.
[06:13] <wgrant> (even though the download link gives me the right one, as I have mad running).
[06:14] <wgrant> Ehem, yes, the two links to the diff are different.
[06:15] <thumper> wgrant: don't worry about where private branch diffs are stored ;P
[06:16] <wgrant> thumper: I'm afraid I can't do that after P3As...
[06:19] <thumper> wgrant: :)
[06:20] <thumper> wgrant: I plan to have better diff behaviour this cycle for projects using lp:mad
[06:21] <wgrant> thumper: How can it possibly know that two different diffs are the current one for the proposal?
[06:22] <thumper> wgrant: because they are generated differently
[06:22] <thumper> wgrant: one is the review diff, created based on the changes in that branch from the LCA of the target
[06:22] <thumper> wgrant: the other is the preview diff, if what the target would look like with the branch merged in
[06:22] <thumper> wgrant: the review diff can never have conflicts
[06:22] <thumper> wgrant: the preview one can
[06:23] <thumper> wgrant: and the proposal has two diff slots
[06:23] <thumper> wgrant: one for the review diff
[06:23] <thumper> wgrant: and the other for the preview diff
[06:23] <thumper> wgrant: the review diff never changes over time
[06:23] <thumper> wgrant: the preview diff does
[06:24] <wgrant> thumper: Ahhh. That confuses me.
[06:24] <wgrant> That is completely opaque.
[06:24] <thumper> :)
[06:24] <thumper> wgrant: I'll write something up soon(ish)
[06:25] <wgrant> If it needs explanation, it is surely a bug.
[06:25] <thumper> not a bug, a feature
[06:25] <thumper> just not well explained
[06:25] <thumper> perhaps the bug is the lack of explination
[06:25] <wgrant> Right. Or the need for an explanation.
[06:27] <wgrant> thumper: I don't see how it can be a feature that there is no way to make the obvious diff look anything like the current state of the branch.
[06:28] <thumper> wgrant: I'll be working on that this cycle
[06:28] <thumper> wgrant: don't get your knickers in a twist
[06:28] <wgrant> It just seems overly complex for approximately no benefit apart from confusion.
[06:29] <thumper> I'll not go into the pro's and con's right now, but I'll write something up on the wiki
[06:29] <thumper> the con right now is confusing ui
[06:29] <thumper> that we can fix
[06:29] <thumper> then it'll be pro's all round :)
[06:29] <wgrant> We can hope!
[06:29] <thumper> that we can
[06:29] <thumper> do it I will
[06:30] <thumper-jfdi> dumb name length limits
[06:30] <wgrant> Heh.
[06:32] <wgrant> thumper: Why did you tell me not to worry about wherre private branch diffs are stored? Because they are in the restricted librarian?
[06:46] <Peng_> Pointless question, but: When exactly does the branch puller mirror a specific branch? Exactly every 6 hours (or whatever) after it was registered? Roughly every 6 hours, going through all branches in alphabetical order, or what?
[06:47] <jml> Peng_: it schedules it for six hours after the last successful mirror.
[06:49] <Peng_> jml: Exactly six hours, down to the second?
[06:51] <jml> Peng_: it *schedules* it for then, but it doesn't happen then.
[06:51] <jml> Peng_: why do you want to know?
[06:54] <spiv> Peng_: given the vagaries of the internet between the puller and random branches, down to the second precision wouldn't mean much...
[06:55] <Peng_> jml: Just because it mirrored two of my branches within a couple seconds of each other, which is quite a coincidence.
[06:55] <Peng_> Like I said, pointless question. :)
[06:57] <Peng_> s/within a couple seconds of each other/at the same time/
[06:57] <jml> Peng_: oh, so, we mirror branches with a cron job
[06:58] <jml> Peng_: and that mirrors a bunch of branches in parallel.
[06:58] <jml> Peng_: the order is essentially random.
[07:00] <Peng_> jml: Okay.
[07:00] <Peng_> Thanks for answering. :-)
[07:26] <poolie> jml, thumper, bug 339806
[07:52] <Coke> I'm checking in and pushing revision 8 from my local branch, but it remains at revision 3 on launchpad. Why is that?
[07:53] <Coke> Oh, now it updated.
[07:53] <Coke> When I do bzr ci -m "test" it doesn't update launchpads branch? I have to push it?
[07:54] <spiv> Coke: if you have a branch, then yes you need to push.
[07:55] <spiv> Coke: if you have a checkout of a branch, then commits in that checkout are written directly to the branch.
[08:05] <Coke> spiv: does it matter which one I do?
[08:06] <spiv> Coke: nope.  It's just a matter of how you prefer to work.
[08:37] <johnaaronros1> I've created a new bug and attached some messages. However, when I try to attach the last file and message and click save changes, nothing happens. It's bug 338780.
[08:40] <Coke> spiv: hm. actually, this push thing isn't that bad. no need to send to server every time you commit.
[08:41] <Coke> and I usually commit one file at a time, so... I save a few seconds by not sending it. :)
[09:24] <johnaaronrose> anybody there?
[10:09]  * wgrant pokes people about https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/62675
[10:11] <bigjools> wgrant: noted, thanks
[10:13] <wgrant> bigjools: Thanks.
[10:33] <wgrant> Why can a branch be a series branch for something other than its own project?
[10:55] <ttx> Help needed: builds in my PPA fail with "W: Failed to fetch http://ppa.launchpad.net/ttx/ppa/ubuntu/dists/jaunty/main/binary-i386/Packages.gz  404 Not Found"
[10:56] <bigjools> ttx: let me check
[10:57] <ttx> bigjools: there was a username rename recently so it might have borked something.
[10:57] <bigjools> ttx: re-try it
[10:57] <bigjools> ttx: ag
[10:58] <bigjools> ah, I mean
[10:58] <ttx> retry in progress
[10:58] <bigjools> renaming yourself with a PPA is not really supported
[10:58] <bigjools> ttx: please file a Question on answers.launchpad.net/launchpad and ask for an admin to fix your repository
[10:59] <bigjools> ttx: it will be horribly broken until someone fixes it
[10:59] <ttx> bigjools: ok thx
[11:09] <ttx> bigjools: filed.
[11:10] <ttx> https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/63573
[11:51] <johnaaronrose> I recorded a new bug 338780 with some attachments OK. But refuses to save last comment with attachment. Any ideas?
[11:52] <wgrant> johnaaronrose: 'refuses'?
[11:52] <johnaaronrose> I clickon Save button (after keying in text for comment and attaching file) but nothing happens
[11:54] <wgrant> Nothing at all happens? The page doesn't even reload?
[11:54] <johnaaronrose> Page does not appear to reload. I've even waited 2 days before trying again. Still nothing.
[11:55] <wgrant> Which web browser are you using?
[11:56] <johnaaronrose> Firefox 3.0.7 as part of Hardy
[11:56] <wgrant> That's really odd. You might be best waiting for a real Launchpad person to appear.
[11:58] <johnaaronrose> Only thing I can think of is that perhaps there's a maximum number of successsive comments/attachments by one person for a bug: I've done 4..
[11:58] <wgrant> It should at least reload the page.
[11:58] <wgrant> As it's just a normal form.
[12:00] <johnaaronrose> I'ce also tried pressing F5 after clicking Save changes button. That reloads forms but 'loses' comment/attachments!
[12:01] <wgrant> johnaaronrose: Have you restarted Firefox?
[12:01] <wgrant> Firefox has this habit of doing nasty things after upgrades if you don't restart once or twice.
[12:01] <wgrant> And there was a Firefox update a day or two ago.
[12:02] <Coke> wgrant: ?!
[12:03] <wgrant> Coke: Erm?
[12:03] <Coke> wgrant: I doubt that has any impact on his problem
[12:03] <wgrant> You would be surprised.
[12:03] <Coke> Yes, I would.
[12:03] <Coke> If anybody has programmed Firefox so badly that it requires not one, but two restarts before acting properly they should be executed.
[12:03] <Coke> And not binary executed, killed executed.
[12:04] <wgrant> It depends on the session management, I think.
[12:04] <Coke> But then again, I actualy have quality standards.
[12:04] <wgrant> But one restart, certainly.
[12:04] <Coke> wgrant: session management?
[12:04] <wgrant> Coke: Yes, its magical session restoration after restart thing.
[12:04] <Coke> ah, those sessions.
[12:05] <Coke> Sounds like a bug in launchpad to me, anyway.
[12:05] <Coke> I've never had any problems upgrading firefox, the process and it's shared objects are loaded into memory, upgrading them does not change anything
[12:05] <wgrant> That would have been my first guess, but it's a perfectly normal unJavaScripty form.
[12:06] <wgrant> Erm, shared objects don't help Firefox.
[12:06] <Coke> wgrant: the interresting portion is what happens once the browser posts the POST
[12:06] <wgrant> Coke: Which it doesn't seem to be, as it's not reloading at all.
[12:06] <Coke> when hanging, it's probably that the server says "well, here's 1.5mb" while in fact there is only 1.4
[12:06] <Coke> wgrant: nothing?
[12:06] <Coke> no reaction from clicking the button?
[12:06] <wgrant> That's the impression I got.
[12:07] <Coke> WEIRD
[12:07] <wgrant> But I of coiurse don't know entirely.
[12:07] <wgrant> Firefox does that after upgrades!
[12:07] <wgrant> It gets its XUL replaced under it, and it fails to load pages semi-randomly.
[12:07] <wgrant> It just won't change anything.
[12:07] <Coke> Well, firefox has turned into a bloated piece of garbage the last, uhm, 5 years.
[12:07] <wgrant> Yes...
[12:07] <Coke> There's no proper web browser available today, only "suites"
[12:08] <Coke> links2 is cool
[12:08] <wgrant> That's why Ubuntu gives the 'You must restart Firefox' notification when it's upgraded.
[12:08] <wgrant> Because otherwise it breaks horribly in obscure ways.
[12:08] <Coke> wgrant: yes, "for changes to take effect" is waht firefox itself says
[12:08] <Coke> but here's my logic: the binary is in memory along with it's shared code already, upgrading it won't do anything for the running process
[12:08] <Coke> certainly not change it
[12:09] <wgrant> It's not the binary.
[12:09] <wgrant> It uses extra stuff from the filesystem!
[12:09] <Coke> must be why it takes forever to start up
[12:09] <wgrant> Of course, this wouldn't be a problem if they did proper security-only updates.
[12:09] <wgrant> But this is waaaay offtopicl
[12:10] <Coke> XUL sounds  lot lik zul or zool or whatever the heck the baddie in ghost busters was named
[12:10] <Coke> im the keymaster are you the gatekeeper
[12:11] <Coke> wgrant: ever tried using gecko for your own project? don't.
[12:11] <wgrant> I don't plan to.
[12:12] <Coke> it's a huge mess. prepare to engage a 1.5G SDK to get access to the 1M layout engine
[12:13] <Coke> I'm on archlinux with rolling releases, firefox frequently segfaults
[12:32] <wgrant> Has the publisher changed recently, or is it broken? One of my sources and lots of my binaries have been PENDING since well before 1200, and at least the source would normally have been published by 1205...
[12:32] <wgrant> (Ubuntu primary, not PPA)
[13:27] <cprov> wgrant: the publisher is having issues in the primary archive.
[13:28] <wgrant> cprov: cjwatson informed me in #ubuntu-devel a while ago. Thanks.
[13:28] <cprov> wgrant: good
[13:31] <savvas> is there a way to check if a launchpad user is an ubuntero?
[13:31] <savvas> I mean in launchpadlib
[13:33] <wgrant> savvas: It doesn't look like it.
[13:51] <walterl> hi
[13:51] <walterl> is there something wrong with bazaar.launchpad.net?
[13:52] <walterl> or is that what the topic refers to?
[13:52] <persia> walterl, You might describe your symptoms, and someone could look at it.  The topic is likely about staging.launchpad.net
[13:53] <walterl> persia: i'm trying to get to http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~gtg/gtg/trunk, but only get to a page that says "Sorry, there was a problem connecting to the Launchpad server."
[13:53] <walterl> i've tried a few times over the last 15 mins
[13:54] <wgrant> Sounds like a LOSA needs to give Loggerhead a poke...
[14:00] <leonardr> https://launchpad.net/ | Help contact: - | Join https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-users | Channel logs: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com | Help contact: leonardr | staging down, waiting for sysadmins to intervene, no ETA
[14:01] <wgrant> leonardr: You missed.
[14:01] <leonardr> argh
[14:01] <leonardr> https://launchpad.net/ | Help contact: leonardr | Join https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-users | Channel logs: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com | staging down, waiting for sysadmins to intervene, no ETA
[14:02] <walterl> ok, looks like my url is availble :D
[14:02] <walterl> kthnxbye
[14:02] <wgrant> leonardr: And again...
[14:03] <leonardr> there we go
[14:04] <savvas> wgrant: ok thanks :)
[14:10] <cyberix> Have there been any discussions about making PPA's easier to use?
[14:10] <cyberix> My use case:
[14:10] <cyberix> 1.) I throw PPA front page url to a user
[14:10] <cyberix> 2.) The user goes WTF?!
[14:10] <cyberix> What should happen:
[14:10] <cyberix> 1.) I throw PPA front page url to a user
[14:11] <cyberix> 2.) The user can form an understanding about what it is
[14:11] <cyberix> 3.) The user is able to make it work
[14:11] <cyberix> 4.) The user install the software he was originally looking after
[14:11] <noodles775> cyberix: Yeah, the PPA page is very much oriented to the owner of the archive atm., rather than people wanting to use it...
[14:12] <cyberix> I was going to file a "wish list" bug, but I decide to come here and ask, if that is the right way to deal with this problem
[14:13] <wgrant> cprov: I take it that the publisher is no longer crashing?
[14:13] <noodles775> cyberix: Certainly, check if there's not one there already, and if not, create a wish list bug... I think lots of people would like to see a much more user-oriented ppa page :)
[14:14] <cprov> wgrant: right, we've fixed it.
[14:36] <cyberix> noodles775: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/339951
[14:38] <noodles775> cyberix: great... thanks for the details of what you envisage there!
[14:40] <cyberix> np
[14:40] <cyberix> Thanks to you for supporting the idea :-)
[15:24] <mneptok> OpenID LP hackers? show of hands?
[15:39] <jkakar> leonardr: Good morning!  I started using launchpadlib this weekend.  It's really easy to use and I had a good time playing with it.
[15:40] <leonardr> jkakar, good to hear
[15:40] <jkakar> leonardr: I'm having performance issues though.  It seems to be performing a lot of requests to get the data I need.
[15:41] <leonardr> jkakar, what data do you need?
[15:41] <jkakar> leonardr: I'm doing things like finding a project, finding a milestone, finding all bugs in the milestone, getting them all and displaying them in a bug listing.
[15:41] <rockstar> jkakar, what data?
[15:42] <jkakar> leonardr: This code, for a milestone with 44 bugs, takes 45 seconds to run here and generates ~100 requests to launchpad: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/128802/
[15:43] <jkakar> leonardr: Am I don't something I shouldn't be?  I didn't see a way to batch requests.
[15:44] <jkakar> leonardr: The other code used by that snippet is: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/128806/
[15:45] <leonardr> jkakar, there is no way to batch requests right now
[15:46] <jkakar> leonardr: Okay, cool, that's what I figured by poking around.
[15:46] <cjwatson> danilos: some of the "Import problem" mails from Rosetta kind of confuse me
[15:46] <leonardr> jkakar: you might not need to get the .bug of every single bug task
[15:46] <cjwatson> danilos: specifically the one that complains about the PO-Revision-Date header not having been updated
[15:46] <danilos> cjwatson: ah, I'll fix those shortly
[15:47] <cjwatson> danilos: does that mean that the content of the file changed but the date header didn't?
[15:47] <danilos> cjwatson: in most cases, that means that they have not changed at all
[15:47] <cjwatson> danilos: so this is just Rosetta being incorrectly picky and I can stop worrying about those mails?
[15:47] <danilos> cjwatson: yes
[15:48] <cjwatson> danilos: ok, thanks, I'll delete those mails then
[15:48] <danilos> cjwatson: I'll disable those notifications (in some cases, it's about uploading older files than what we have), and disable success notifications, and that should be it
[15:48] <jkakar> leonardr: Oh?  But the data I want is half on bug (id, title) and half on bug task (assignee, status).
[15:49] <leonardr> ok, i guess you do
[15:49] <danilos> cjwatson: fyi, bug 331094
[15:49] <leonardr> ideally there would be something that returned the bugs instead of the tasks
[15:49] <mneptok> danilos: heh, just switched to this workspace from a browser window of a GNOME sysadmin request with your name in it. :)
[15:49] <mneptok> danilos: nothing you need to think about. just funny timing.
[15:49] <danilos> mneptok: heh, my name is everywhere :P
[15:49] <cjwatson> danilos: thanks
[15:50] <leonardr> jkakar: there are a number of improvements we could make but for now your code is the correct way to do it
[15:50] <jkakar> leonardr: Yeah.  Actually, after playing with launchpadlib I finally understand bug vs bug task (I think), so the separation makes way more sense.  At first it was a bit confusing.
[15:50] <mneptok> danilos: yeah, i know. the permanent marker on the waistband of my underwear is a bit much.
[15:50] <jkakar> leonardr: Cool, good to know, thanks.
[15:51] <leonardr> it is confusing, which is why launchpad tries to hide it, which makes it more confusing when you have to deal with it
[15:51] <danilos> mneptok: fun times, weren't they? ;)
[15:51] <jkakar> leonardr: Even though my commands are slow (show milestones, show bugs in milestone, show bugs with 'review' tag) seeing the output in my terminal is pretty awesome. :)
[15:51] <leonardr> great
[15:53] <bitfish> hi! it seems like i'm having a little problem with importing my pubkey into launchpad.. but i have no clue what the message tries to tell me, since my pubkey works just fine on all other servers! http://ubuntu-pics.de/bild/10749/bitfish__s_ssh_keys_1236613861235_C32ac1.png
[15:54] <mneptok> danilos: i laughed, i cried, i understood what it is to be a man.
[15:56] <savvas> bitfish: er.. I think that your openssl must be outdated
[15:56] <bitfish> savvas: that means what?
[15:56] <savvas> bitfish: what's the link to the security notice? can you paste it here?
[15:56] <bitfish> i mean, i _really_ don't want to create a new ssh key
[15:57] <bitfish> http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/usn-612-2
[15:57] <savvas> ah yeah, hold a sec
[15:58] <bitfish> okay
[15:59] <jpds> bitfish: It might work fine, but it's compromised.
[15:59] <savvas> well, you will have to regenerate it unfortunately
[16:00] <savvas> "As a result of this weakness, certain encryption keys are much more common than they should be, such that an attacker could guess the key through a brute-force attack given minimal knowledge of the system. This particularly affects the use of encryption keys in OpenSSH. "
[16:00] <bitfish> dang :(
[16:00] <savvas> you should check all your keys: sudo apt-get install openssh-blacklist-extra; sudo ssh-vulnkey -a
[16:01] <bitfish> okay
[16:01] <savvas> well look at it this way, you'll be safer :)
[16:02] <bitfish> true
[16:03] <fab2> gmb: it's me again
[16:06] <gmb> fab2: Hi. I take it you've seen the current state of staging; it's rather holding up the show at the moment.
[16:07] <gmb> fab2: I'm still working on getting an empty Launchpad instance up on Amazon EC2 for us to test on but haven't made much progress yet.
[16:11] <fab2> gmb: OK..
[16:12] <gmb> fab2: Give me an hour or so to finish the task I'm on and I'll get going on the EC2 thing again.
[16:12] <fab2> gmb: Yes I try regularily
[16:12] <fab2> gmb: I didn't know you use EC@!
[16:12] <gmb> fab2: We use it for testing - our test suite takes about 2 hours so it's easier than doing it on an underpowered laptop :)
[16:13] <gmb> fab2: So I'm hacking our testing scripts to try and get what I want out of EC2; that's what's taking hte time.
[16:15] <fab2> ok!
[16:15] <fab2> gmb: So I'll keep trying tonight
[16:15] <fab2> gmb: (we are making a new release of Stellarium today)
[16:17] <gmb> fab2: Okay. Well, I'll have something for you to test on tonight, whether it's staging or not (I suspect not, at the moment)
[16:17] <gmb> fab2: Good luck with the release.
[16:32] <fab2> gmb: thanks!
[16:32] <fab2> gmb: it's almost done now
[17:41] <rockstar> statik, did you see bzr-autoreview?
[17:52] <MTecknology> kiko is gone -_-
[17:53] <MTecknology> grr - I guess I'll need to annoy tomorrow :P
[18:23] <statik> rockstar: i hadn't looked since friday, but i just branched it now
[18:27] <rockstar> statik, it's messy code, but it gets the job done.  I'm cleaning it up right now.
[18:28] <MTecknology> leonardr: hey... my karma keeps going up because of answers but I don't think I'm doing near that much work in that section...
[18:35] <leonardr> MTecknology: your answers karma seems within a reasonable range. the specification tracking karma seems a little high, but i don't know. how much work have you done on blueprints?
[18:36] <_Andrew> quick question about my ppa.. If I include multiple distributions in the changes file launchpad rejects it? Am I doing it wrong because I want to make packages to multiple ubuntu versions
[18:37] <_Andrew> packagename (versioninfo) hardy intrepid jaunty; urgency=low
[18:37] <_Andrew> that's correct, no?
[18:48] <_Andrew> Oh never mind I just found out you can now copy them over in launchpad
[19:35] <MTecknology> leonardr: How come I keep having blueprints show up in my project that are entirely unrelated... https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-drupal/+spec/warning-themes-under-sudo
[19:36] <MTecknology> I can't even retarget this one to ubuntu
[19:37] <leonardr> MTecknology: I don't know. this might be related to your abnormal karma in blueprints
[19:38] <MTecknology> leonardr: actually, my karma in blueprints in just - I did a lot of work on them at one point and blueprint karma is massive
[19:39] <leonardr> ah
[19:40] <leonardr> MTecknology: just to be clear, ubuntu-drupal is your project?
[19:40] <MTecknology> ya
[19:41] <MTecknology> leonardr: and that blueprint has nothing to do with us
[19:41] <MTecknology> I tried to target at Ubuntu instead of Ubuntu-drupal
[19:42] <MTecknology> leonardr: I'm an admin in the team that owns the team owning the project :P
[19:43] <leonardr> MTecknology: the blueprint was filed on the 4th. assuming it was initially put into your project instead of Ubuntu, would you have noticed it before today?
[19:44] <MTecknology> No, because the team wasn't assigned  to it and I'm jsut now going to start building some blueprints for our next release
[19:49] <MTecknology> leonardr: anything you can do about it?
[19:49] <leonardr> MTecknology: i'm looking around. i'm pretty sure it's a bug
[19:49] <MTecknology> oh, ok
[19:52] <leonardr> MTecknology: so, in general, you can't retarget a blueprint
[19:52] <leonardr> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/blueprint/+bug/320889
[19:52] <leonardr> the question is whether that blueprint was accidentally filed in your project or somehow got assigned to your project by accident
[19:52] <leonardr> er
[19:53] <leonardr> got assigned to your project even though the creator chose the right project
[19:53] <leonardr> in either case, the solution is to close out the blueprint. the original author should get an email when you do, but i'll send them an email just to be safe
[19:53] <MTecknology> leonardr: when I try to assign it to ubuntu I get this - "There is already a blueprint with this name for Ubuntu Drupal Development. Please change the name of this blueprint and try again."
[19:54] <leonardr> right, check the bug
[19:54] <MTecknology> I can only mark invalid though, right?
[19:56] <leonardr> MTecknology: actually, can you just ignore it for now? i was able to retarget some test blueprints, so there's probably something broken and potentially useful in that one
[19:56] <leonardr> i'll add your example to bug 320889
[19:57] <MTecknology> leonardr: I can ignore it - no problem
[19:57] <leonardr> cool
[20:20] <wgrant> cprov: Wow, that data trimming was easier/quicker to arrange than I expected.
[20:21] <cprov> wgrant: yeah, I like when things are simple ;)
[20:31]  * wgrant groans at the important information in the footer of Answers emails that everybody is expected to read but nobody will.
[21:31] <cjwatson> danilos: I need https://answers.launchpad.net/rosetta/+question/62725 done quite urgently, if possible. Could it be bumped up the queue?
[21:37] <bob_> hello, does anyone have a few minutes to help me with a problem signing the code of conduct?
[21:39] <bob_> I recently started using Intrepid, and created and registered a key.  I've also set it as the default key in System > Preferences > Encryption and Keyrings.
[21:40] <bob_> However, when I run the gpg --clearsign UbuntuCodeofConduct-1.0.1.txt" command, it returns an error:
[21:40] <bob_> gpg: no default secret key: secret key not available
[21:40] <bob_> gpg: UbuntuCodeofConduct-1.0.1.txt: clearsign failed: secret key not available
[22:25] <lldaedalusll> Hello
[22:26] <lldaedalusll> as it was last friday
[22:26] <lldaedalusll> I have problems accessing http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mysql/mysql-server/mysql-5.1-telco-6.4-win/files
[22:27] <lldaedalusll> please take care that it works more reliable, because it has been fixed somehow last friday and now it does not work again.
[22:29] <lldaedalusll> I need it working tomorrow morning
[22:29] <danilos> cjwatson: sure, it's quite late today, but ping me tomorrow and I can do it (unfortunately, answers doesn't send any emails when questions are assigned to you)
[22:29] <cjwatson> ah, ok
[22:29] <cjwatson> danilos: will do, thanks
[22:29] <lldaedalusll> I can not tell you tomorrow
[22:29] <lldaedalusll> as IRC is blocked at work
[22:29] <lldaedalusll> :-(
[22:30] <lldaedalusll> good night
[22:30] <lldaedalusll> bye and thx