[00:34] <Ampelbein> hi there. i have trouble uploading to my ppa('s). I tried twice to upload but got neither an accept/decline mail nor does the package appear in my ppa.
[00:43] <Ursinha> wgrant, have you filed a bug about the r/o bug error in LP?
[00:48] <Ursinha> nevermind, just did that
[00:48] <Ursinha> :)
[01:00] <Ampelbein> hello again... i still can't upload to my ppa. I don't receive any mail and the packages don't show up. Is this a problem on my side? (dput doesn't give an error, see http://paste.ubuntu.com/181632/ )
[01:01] <bigjools> Ampelbein: LP was just upgraded, please wait a while for the upload queue to be processed
[01:01] <Ampelbein> bigjools: ah, ok. thanks you.
[01:01] <bigjools> also, check that you signed the changes file, and signed with a key that LP knows about
[01:02] <Ampelbein> bigjools: judging from dput-output i signed it correctly, it's the same key i used before.
[01:03] <Ampelbein> (see the pastebin)
[03:49] <JontheEchidna> just thought I might turn your attention to bug 380738. Somebody's trying to impersonate someone else and post a spam bug. The person being impersonated sounds pretty unhappy, and I don't know if they've come here first since they last commented on it five hours ago
[03:51] <JontheEchidna> ah, silly IRC client. the join message showed up in a different tab. I suppose I'll report this to answers.launchpad.net then :)
[03:55]  * Hobbsee headdesk at the stupidity of that bug
[03:55] <JontheEchidna> https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/72394 , in any case
[03:57] <meoblast001> hi
[03:57] <meoblast001> why won't launchpad be completely free?
[03:58] <wgrant> Argh, and all the LOSAs are asleep.
[03:58] <Hobbsee> errr, launchpad...
[03:59] <Hobbsee> oh, sweet.  it's already gone
[03:59] <wgrant> Hobbsee: What has it done now?
[03:59] <Hobbsee> wgrant: i'm just misreading it.
[03:59] <meoblast001> does Canonical not want to free all of launchpad?
[03:59] <wgrant> meoblast001: Apparently not...
[03:59]  * Hobbsee prods it to being private
[03:59] <meoblast001> why not?
[04:00] <wgrant> Hobbsee: Not much use, unfortunately.
[04:00] <wgrant> Hobbsee: Actually, don't!
[04:00] <Hobbsee> wgrant: oh?
[04:00] <wgrant> Hobbsee: Unassign, then privatise.
[04:00] <wgrant> Or there'll be lots of people subscribed.
[04:00] <wgrant> If you've privatised already, it's too late.
[04:00] <Hobbsee> yeah
[04:00] <ajmitch> which would be a Bad Thing if they're still getting spammed by it
[04:01] <wgrant> I suppose we will have LOSAs in a few hours.
[04:01] <ajmitch> looks like the account has been deleted
[04:01] <meoblast001> what is the purpose for making software non-free?
[04:01] <wgrant> Huh.
[04:01] <wgrant> So it has.
[04:01]  * JontheEchidna closes the LP answers task for that then
[04:01] <wgrant> Well, deactivated.
[04:02] <LaserJock> meoblast001: I'm guessing to make some money, just a guess though
[04:02] <wgrant> Deactivated by the user.
[04:02] <wgrant> They can reactivate it at any point.
[04:02] <wgrant> So leave it open.
[04:02] <SamB> LaserJock: how ?
[04:02] <SamB> ads?
[04:02] <wgrant> SamB: Magic!
[04:02] <ajmitch> wgrant: No, ponies
[04:02] <meoblast001> LaserJock: why does Launchpad contain proprietary software
[04:02] <LaserJock> by selling the services that are not-free
[04:02] <Hobbsee> oh, blargh
[04:02] <Hobbsee> one can't edit multiple tasks at once.
[04:03] <LaserJock> like, what all is not going to be open-sourced? Soyuz?
[04:03] <meoblast001> i heard some parts are not going to be
[04:03] <wgrant> LaserJock: The Soyuz backend, and Codehosting.
[04:03] <ajmitch> and parts of the code hosting, namely the branch scanner iirc
[04:03] <LaserJock> ah
[04:03] <meoblast001> i'm curious of two questions... what and why
[04:03] <LaserJock> so most of what people will want will be open-sourced
[04:03] <wgrant> ajmitch: There will be a version of the scanner available. THe puller and SSH server and importing stuff isn't being released.
[04:03] <meoblast001> i loathe proprietary software
[04:04] <wgrant> LaserJock: FSVO people
[04:04] <ajmitch> wgrant: As I understand it it'll be a fairly basic version
[04:04] <LaserJock> wgrant: sure
[04:04] <Hobbsee> oh, way cool.  new ways to unsubscribe people
[04:04] <meoblast001> yes.. it will be free'd... but won't launchpad.net still run this non-free software?
[04:04] <LaserJock> meoblast001: I think it will run the open-sourced bits
[04:04] <Hobbsee> except i can't unsubscribe ~ubuntu-bugs from a bug, for some reason.
[04:05] <LaserJock> meoblast001: but also the couple bits that aren't being open-sourced
[04:05] <meoblast001> hmm... i don't like non-free software
[04:05] <LaserJock> yes, you made that clear
[04:05] <wgrant> LaserJock: The couple of very very important bits.
[04:05] <leo_rockway> isn't an opensource ideology to "release early, release often", though?
[04:05] <SamB> leo_rockway: it's one way of working, yeah
[04:05] <meoblast001> LaserJock: i still don't know why they wouldn't free it.. the service is free of charge.. they don't make money through it being non-free
[04:05] <LaserJock> leo_rockway: LP was "released" a long time ago and releases once a month ;-)
[04:06] <SamB> leo_rockway: Emacs seems to do the exact opposite
[04:06] <wgrant> meoblast001: They do, actually - they sell services to commercial users.
[04:06] <leo_rockway> LaserJock: cool, how do I get the source then?
[04:06] <LaserJock> meoblast001: they do charge companies and stuff
[04:06] <leo_rockway> SamB: Emacs is not opensource ;-)
[04:06] <SamB> release late, release rarely
[04:06] <LaserJock> leo_rockway: you said release, you didn't specify release of what
[04:06] <leo_rockway> LaserJock: I also said "opensource"
[04:06] <JontheEchidna> crap, he reactivated
[04:07] <ajmitch> and we know that launchpad isn't currently open source for the majority of it
[04:07] <wgrant> JontheEchidna: As I said. He just wanted to get us off him.
[04:07]  * JontheEchidna nods
[04:07] <meoblast001> LaserJock: i still don't understand why Canonical can't free those parts of Launchpad... these parts being free won't prevent commercial users from doing their non-free things
[04:08] <LaserJock> meoblast001: well, Canonical *could* free those parts. They made a business decision to not
[04:08] <ajmitch> meoblast001: We can't give any more than our opinion on the situation in the same way you can
[04:08] <LaserJock> it's their code and their prerogative
[04:08] <wgrant> Hobbsee: If he does it again, leave the bug alone.
[04:08] <meoblast001> ok...
[04:08] <wgrant> Hobbsee: No point mailing any more people.
[04:09] <Hobbsee> wgrant: yeah.  Launchpad is taking ~30 seconds for each turn around anyway, so i dont' want to touch it much
[04:09] <LaserJock> I'm glad to see how much they're opening up, and wish they'd do more, but well we don't get everything we wish for :-)
[04:09] <Hobbsee> (browsing via proxy)
[04:09] <wgrant> Hobbsee: It's not the proxy's fault.
[04:09] <Hobbsee> i know.  just saying that's why it's taking so long
[04:09] <Hobbsee> (further travelling distance, and such)
[04:10] <JontheEchidna> I guess I'll leave it up to you guys then, g'night
[04:10] <leo_rockway> LaserJock: I understand what you say, but I still think it's a bit hypocritical for one of Canonical's main developments to be nonfree.
[04:11] <wgrant> JontheEchidna: Did you reopen the question?
[04:11] <LaserJock> perhaps, I don't know
[04:11] <JontheEchidna> wgrant: yeah
[04:11] <LaserJock> I love free software but I still use a lot of non-free stuff
[04:11] <LaserJock> just the nature of things sometimes
[04:12] <leo_rockway> LaserJock: I only use free software. I wouldn't use Launchpad even if it were free, though, because I don't need it. But I was curious about the future freeing of the code.
[04:12] <LaserJock> yeah, so translations, bugs, blueprints should all be free
[04:12] <wgrant> And Answers.
[04:13] <LaserJock> it's just soyuz and some code hosting that won't
[04:13] <wgrant> And Registry/Foundations.
[04:13] <LaserJock> right, I knew I was missing some
[04:13] <LaserJock> I'm mostly excited about bugs
[04:13] <wgrant> But the two bits I use primarily won't be.
[04:13] <LaserJock> as Malone kicks bugzilla butt
[04:13] <wgrant> It does
[04:13] <leo_rockway> is there a roadmap to free those parts in the future? is that being considered?
[04:13] <ajmitch> not that I've seen
[04:14] <wgrant> leo_rockway: There are no Canonical employees involved in this discussion.
[04:14] <wgrant> leo_rockway: But I don't know of any.
[04:14] <leo_rockway> wgrant: oh, ok. Thanks for the information.
[04:36] <nhandler> nellery mentioned Bug #380738 on identi.ca. If you look at the table at the top, you will see that the various tasks are assigned to different spoof accounts. These should probably be deactivated.
[04:38] <wgrant> nhandler: A question has been filed to deal with the bug.
[04:38] <wgrant> But the accounts are another matter..
[06:00] <jfroy> I am getting an Internal Server Error trying to see one file in one of my project. Is LP having difficulties, or did I just find a problem?
[06:47] <mwhudson> jfroy: you probably found a problem
[06:47] <jfroy> I'll file a bug then.
[08:58] <pkern> Wow.  Having git imports is certainly cool.  In my case trunk isn't on the master branch, so I somehow question the policy of not importing other branches than master.
[09:00] <mwhudson> pkern: it's just a walk-before-run thing
[09:02] <pkern> I mean is vcs-import generally able to manage multiple branches?  Or was it trunk-only with Subversion?  Still git is different and like bzr and you want import different branches.  But sure, if it's on the agenda... (:
[09:05] <mwhudson> the thing about subversion was that the import tool does not understand svn branches
[09:05] <mwhudson> so you can't merge between two imports from the same repo at all
[09:05] <mwhudson> we should switch to bzr-svn and that will make this particular issue go away
[09:06] <mwhudson> for git, it's strictly a (hopefully temporary) technical limitation
[09:13] <pkern> mwhudson: Ok, fine. (:
[09:14] <pkern> On the other hand I wonder if there's something git-bzr'ish so that "upstream" or whoever it's imported can also effectively fetch stuff back.
[09:14] <mwhudson> you can push from bzr to git
[09:14] <mwhudson> (or dpush)
[09:18] <pkern> mwhudson: With such a repository made by vcs-import?  And it would require access to the upstream repo, which is with DVCS not always taken as granted.  (Some people want the git format-patch workflow, others prefer people pushing/pulling directly.)  But that's another interop question that doesn't really affect lp I think (:
[09:19] <pkern> mwhudson: Should I file a bug on the "different branch" thing, which looked like policy on the blog post but is mainly a technical limitation?
[09:23] <jelmer> pkern, one of the things that's also should be happening soon is having "bzr send" against a git:// URL use the git format-patch format
[09:33] <mwhudson> pkern: yeah, filing a bug would be good
[09:44] <pkern> mwhudson: I filed it against launchpad-code, I hope that wasn't completely off.  380871 it is.
[09:45] <mwhudson> pkern: that's right, thanks
[10:04] <jml> mwhudson: can you please review https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/timidity/trunk
[10:06] <jml> mwhudson: I've done _all_ the others :)
[10:09] <mwhudson> jml: woo
[10:11] <jml> mwhudson: did you see bug 380871?
[10:13]  * pkern giggles
[10:13] <mwhudson> jml: i told pkern to file it
[10:13] <pkern> jml: see backlog (:
[10:13] <jml> oh, right
[10:16] <jml> mwhudson: in that case, maybe I just wanted to chat with you in person :)
[10:33] <alexharrington> Anyone know why downloads are broken from the release page? I posted a Q in Answers a couple of hours ago but nothing yet.
[11:13] <Ursinha> alexharrington, hi, there's a bug about it
[11:13]  * Ursinha searches
[11:15] <Ursinha> alexharrington, see if your problem is bug 378740
[11:15] <Ursinha> please
[11:15] <Ursinha> do you have the Q link?
[11:17] <jpds> Ursinha: https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/72417
[11:17]  * Ursinha looks
[11:18] <Ursinha> ouch
[11:18] <Ursinha> indeed the same bug
[11:18] <Ursinha> I'll link them
[11:19]  * wgrant wonders why that isn't Critical
[11:28] <alexharrington> Ursinha: Thanks.
[11:28] <alexharrington> I had a quick search but didn't hit on that bug
[11:29] <Ursinha> alexharrington, sorry about that
[11:29] <alexharrington> np
[11:29] <alexharrington> we're so pleased with lp that the odd glitch like this isn't a big deal
[11:29] <alexharrington> for us at least
[11:32] <Ursinha> alexharrington, glad to hear :)
[11:52] <daniel_ki> hi
[11:52] <daniel_ki> Could someone have a look at the launchpad-users mail about PPA buildd cache corruption?
[11:52] <daniel_ki> I think it's pretty serious
[11:53] <daniel_ki> and the affected PPAs will probably require admin intervention to get rid of the corrupted cache
[11:56] <wgrant> daniel_ki: The incremental diff isn't actually used for anything... what in the build log suggests that?
[11:57] <daniel_ki> wgrant: fact is that the packages are corrupted
[11:57] <wgrant> How did you build it that you were able to get the fixed binaries?
[11:57] <daniel_ki> let me look at the logs
[11:57] <wgrant> I'm pretty sure there's actually a problem with the uploaded packages.
[11:57] <daniel_ki> I thought so too
[11:57] <daniel_ki> at first
[11:58] <daniel_ki> the diff may not be used for anything
[11:58] <daniel_ki> but perhaps it is generated from the buildd diff?
[11:58] <wgrant> No.
[11:58] <wgrant> It's generated using plain old debdiff by a cronjob.
[11:58] <wgrant> How can I tell if this patch has been applied or not?
[11:59] <daniel_ki> look at /usr/share/anjuta/GBF/Generic.pm
[12:00] <daniel_ki> er, General.pm
[12:00] <daniel_ki> sub canonicalize_name
[12:01] <daniel_ki> the correct version uses an s'''g expression
[12:01] <daniel_ki> the old one tr/
[12:01] <daniel_ki> if I build the package without any changes on my own machine, it produces correct binaries
[12:02] <daniel_ki> and the diff shouldn't be different either, right?
[12:02] <daniel_ki> whatever the diff is generated from, it's corrupted
[12:02] <wgrant> daniel_ki: How did you build the package?
[12:02] <daniel_ki> debuild
[12:03] <daniel_ki> not in a pbuilder, if that's what you mean, but I'm pretty sure that'll give the same result
[12:03] <daniel_ki> RUN: /usr/share/launchpad-buildd/slavebin/unpack-chroot ['unpack-chroot', '1038085-2269071', '/home/buildd/filecache-default/4b9960bada5b7c9083148f0a57950dc7a83f34b7']
[12:03] <daniel_ki> it's definitely caching something here
[12:03] <wgrant> That's the chroot.
[12:03] <wgrant> Not the package.
[12:03] <daniel_ki> ok, then the chroot is reused but corrupted
[12:03] <SteveA> who is on CHR today?
[12:04] <daniel_ki> the binary packages are broken, not the source ones
[12:04] <wgrant> SteveA: THere's been no CHR for the past 1.5 weeks.
[12:04] <SteveA> that sucks
[12:04] <SteveA> thanks wgrant
[12:04] <wgrant> daniel_ki: The chroot isn't going to break that. The chroot is used for building all of Ubuntu.
[12:04] <wgrant> If it's corrupted, we have much bigger problems.
[12:05] <daniel_ki> ok, I don't know how Launchpad works
[12:05] <daniel_ki> but I think the symptoms indicate that something has been corrupted on the LP side
[12:06] <daniel_ki> last deb revision + incremental diff == orig source + normal source diff.gz
[12:06] <daniel_ki> right?
[12:07] <daniel_ki> if you apply the diffs manually, you will see that the tree ends up very different from what it should be
[12:11] <wgrant> daniel_ki: Sorry, my connection is pretty borked... let's look at those diffs.
[12:12] <daniel_ki> ok, cool
[12:30] <wgrant> daniel_ki: Several disconnections later, I have noticed that one of the copies of General.pm in the source uses s''', the other tr//
[12:31] <det> Is it possible for a PPA to depend on backports only for 1 distro ?
[12:31] <daniel_ki> wgrant: there is more than one copy?
[12:31] <wgrant> det: One distro series? No.
[12:31] <wgrant> det: Why? debhelper 7 in Hardy?
[12:31] <det> wgrant, yes :-)
[12:31] <daniel_ki> wgrant: or did you hit the removed patch in the diff?
[12:32] <daniel_ki> ah wait, I see it now
[12:32] <daniel_ki> that makes it even more odd
[12:32] <det> If there is an easy way to copy the source package for debhelper7/hardy, that would work just as well.
[12:32] <wgrant> det: Go to https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+copy-packages?field.name_filter=debhelper&field.status_filter=published&field.series_filter=hardy.
[12:33] <wgrant> det: there you can find debhelper and copy it to your PPA.
[12:33] <wgrant> Then drop the backports dep.
[12:33] <wgrant> daniel_ki: What removed patch?
[12:33] <wgrant> daniel_ki: There are definitely two copies in the extracted Debian source package.
[12:33] <daniel_ki> wgrant: it was previously a Debian patch, but the fix got merged upstream and the Debian patch was dropped
[12:33] <det> wgrant, Thanks, I didnt know primary archive was a target for copy now
[12:33] <daniel_ki> wgrant: yes, I see that now
[12:34] <wgrant> det: It's not linked from anywhere :/
[12:34] <daniel_ki> that means it could be a race condition during install, if both are installed to the same location
[12:35] <wgrant> Possibly.
[12:35] <wgrant> But the package is broken, not Launchpad.
[12:35] <daniel_ki> ok, you're probably right, although I still don't understand why the diffs wouldn't yield the same result
[12:35] <wgrant> I'm looking at that now.
[12:37] <det> wgrant, i386 only :(
[12:38] <wgrant> det: That's a bit misleading; it's actually architecture-independent, so was only built on one arch. But it's published on all.
[12:38] <wgrant> det: So, don't worry.
[12:40] <det> wgrant, in my ppa, it claims to be only building on i386, I will wait 5 min to see if it is actually published on all
[12:40] <wgrant> det: I would have copied the binaries too.
[12:40] <wgrant> But it shouldn't matter much.
[12:40] <wgrant> It will be published on all.
[12:40] <wgrant> daniel_ki: the diff matches for me...
[12:40] <daniel_ki> huh?
[12:40]  * daniel_ki tries again
[12:41] <wgrant> I extracted 2:2.26.1.0-1ubuntu0~ppa2, applied the 2:2.26.1.0-1ubuntu0~ppa2 to 2:2.26.2.0-1ubuntu0~ppa1 diff, and diffed that result against an extracted 2:2.26.2.0-1ubuntu0~ppa1. The resultant diff was empty.
[12:46] <daniel_ki> wgrant: shit, you are right
[12:46] <daniel_ki> I feel stupid now
[12:46]  * wgrant is just glad Soyuz isn't *that* buggy.
[12:47] <daniel_ki> so basically only a difference in behavior of the PPA vs. my machine, but the package is broken so all bets are off
[12:47] <daniel_ki> sorry for the trouble
[12:47] <wgrant> It seems that way.
[12:47] <daniel_ki> well, actually it's an upstream bug
[12:47] <wgrant> No trouble.
[12:47] <wgrant> You or I might want to reply to the email on launchpad-users, to stop more people looking and getting confused.
[12:47] <daniel_ki> yes, I was just about to
[12:57] <daniel_ki> ok, sent
[12:57] <daniel_ki> now I only need to find out what exactly is causing this :)
[12:57] <daniel_ki> but thanks a lot for your help
[13:07] <wgrant> daniel_ki: No problem.
[13:09] <daniel_ki> by the way, I'm getting boxbe spam from michaelantoniocanganelli@gmail.com every time I post to the list
[13:10] <wgrant> I got that a week or so ago, too.
[13:10] <wgrant> It's not really spam
[13:10] <daniel_ki> it is not intended to be spam
[13:10] <wgrant> Just a braindead implementation of a flawed idea.
[13:10] <daniel_ki> indeed
[13:10] <daniel_ki> it ends up being spam
[13:11] <daniel_ki> and the guy probably doesn't even see my reply asking him to unsubscribe or turn of this email overload retaliation scheme
[13:11] <wgrant> Or at least correct the scheme, as sending it to the address in the From field makes little sense.
[13:13] <daniel_ki> well, we're probably lucky that it isn't sent to the list :)
[13:14] <daniel_ki> that would be fun
[13:14] <daniel_ki> infinite loop
[14:28] <det> I asked launchpad to rebuild a package after satisfying its depenedencies and it has gone from 14 minutes estimated start time to 4 hours after nearly 2 hours in the queue >:|
[14:30] <wgrant> det: That's because retries are currently prioritised below other builds.
[14:32] <det> This is annoying, I might as well upload a new package with a bumped version.
[14:33] <wgrant> It is, yes. That scoring isn't something I agree with.
[14:33] <wgrant> But I need to go to bed.
[14:34] <Hobbsee> wgrant: it does make sense, though
[14:34] <wgrant> Hobbsee: Slightly.
[14:34] <Hobbsee> wgrant: in the case of a, shall we say, incompetent person, uploading something that will forever fail to build, but who keeps retrying it in the hope that it will
[14:34] <wgrant> Hobbsee: They can almost as easily keep uploading new versions.
[14:34] <Hobbsee> det: if you give me a link to it, i can prod it for you
[14:34] <wgrant> Oh, true! Superpowers you have.
[14:35] <Hobbsee> wgrant: there is that.  At some point, one needs to hunt them down with a cluebat
[14:35] <Hobbsee> yay, superpowers
[14:35] <det> Hobbsee, https://edge.launchpad.net/~spring/+archive/ppa/+build/1046219
[14:35] <det> Thanks
[14:35] <Hobbsee> wgrant: i was thinking of the case where they think it's LP's fault, as it works on their machine
[14:35] <Hobbsee> ie, for something that requires cpan modules, or something
[14:36] <det> If your ppa is using a disproportionate amount of resources of the course of XXX, then I can understand scoring lower
[14:36] <Hobbsee> det: prodded.
[14:36] <det> Thanks again
[14:36] <wgrant> Hobbsee: In the current case they can upload lots. Then you have to cluebat them. But everybody else is disadvantaged because their retries take ages.
[14:37] <Hobbsee> that's true
[14:37] <Hobbsee> and you're welcome
[14:37] <wgrant> In the alternate possibility, they can retry lots. You then still just have to cluebat them, but nobody else is disadvantaged.
[14:39] <alkisg> Hi, I'm probably missing something trivial, but could someone please have a look at https://launchpad.net/~ts.sch.gr/+archive/ppa and see why my team's PPA isn't signed? It's been 6 hours since putting packages there, I supposed an openpgp key should have been generated by now?
[14:39] <wgrant> Anyway, goodnight!
[14:40] <wgrant> alkisg: You didn't happen to upload all of those packages within around half an hour of creating the PPA, did you?
[14:40] <alkisg> I think so, yes
[14:40] <wgrant> Hm.
[14:40] <alkisg> (just copied them from other PPAs)
[14:40] <wgrant> That's not the usual problem, actually.
[14:40] <wgrant> Your PPA doesn't have a key at all.
[14:40] <wgrant> Maybe something broke in the rollout...
[14:41] <alkisg> The owner wasn't an Ubuntero at the time he created the team and the PPA, could that be the cause?
[14:41] <wgrant> Maybe bigjools knows.
[14:41] <alkisg> He did sign the code of conduct later on...
[14:41]  * bigjools is at UDS but can check later
[14:42] <alkisg> Thanks bigjools, I'll be around.
[14:42] <alkisg> Thanks wgrant, goodnight
[14:42] <bigjools> okidoki
[14:47] <det> i386/lpia builds completed fine
[14:48] <det> and the build you prodded says that debhelper >= 6.XX isnt available even though 7 has been in the repo for some hours
[14:50] <det> Oh, debhelper 7 is pending publication
[14:50] <Hobbsee> that'd do ti
[14:51] <det> completed 2 hours ago, though
[14:51] <det> and the deb is in the pool
[15:53] <stani> is there a way to delete blueprints?
[15:55] <andrea-bs> stani, no, but you can retarget it to the 'NULL' project
[15:55] <andrea-bs> https://launchpad.net/null
[16:04] <stani> andrea-bs: thanks!
[18:00]  * alkisg kindly reminds bigjools to take a look at my https://launchpad.net/~ts.sch.gr/+archive/ppa 's missing key if he has time now. :)
[18:01] <bigjools> sure, I have a few minutes
[18:01] <bigjools> alkisg: when did you create it?
[18:02] <alkisg> The PPA? about 9 hours ago
[18:02] <alkisg> Things that I think could have caused the problem are: (1) the team owner wasn't an Ubuntero when he created the team and the PPA, he became one later on
[18:02] <alkisg> and (2) I didn't upload anything to the PPA, I just copied packages from other PPAs
[18:02] <bigjools> you need to be an Ubuntero to make a PPA
[18:03] <bigjools> ah, (2) might have caused it
[18:03] <alkisg> He told me that launchpad didn't ask him to become an Ubuntero to create the PPA
[18:03] <bigjools> hmmm how odd
[18:03] <alkisg> ...and I told him later on to become one, just in case...
[18:03] <bigjools> can you try uploading something to see if it kicks off the key generation?
[18:04] <alkisg> OK, I'll try
[18:04]  * alkisg tries to find his notes... :-X
[18:06] <bigjools> alkisg: if it doesn't, please file a Question on https://answers.launchpad.net/soyuz explaining the sequence of events and we can check it in more detail.
[18:06] <alkisg> Thank you bigjools, will do.
[18:06] <bigjools> welcome
[20:23] <cody-somerville> Can someone take a look at https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/live-helper/trunk ? Its failing to import.
[20:32] <mwhudson> cody-somerville: one for jelmer
[20:35] <savvas> is there a way to make bzr code branches private?
[20:35] <cody-somerville> savvas, Yes. See http://blog.launchpad.net/?p=551
[20:38] <savvas> thanks but I wasn't looking for a commercial solution, the license is (or is going to be) GFDL of some rst python tutorials in greek - we're making python classes and we wouldn't want to provide the answers this soon :)
[20:39] <cody-somerville> savvas, Unfortunately, private branches are only available to commercial clients of launchpad.
[20:40] <savvas> ok
[20:53] <cody-somerville> mwhudson, who?
[20:53] <mwhudson> cody-somerville: the author of bzr-git
[22:46] <Laney> is anyone able to update  lp:~vcs-imports/banshee/debian-packaging  to point to git://git.debian.org/pkg-cli-apps/packages/banshee.git ?
[23:04] <Ursinha> Laney, the old import is a git one? asking without looking :)
[23:04] <Laney> no
[23:04] <Laney> svn
[23:05] <Ursinha> Laney, hmm, I don't know if that's possible, we'll have to ask abentley or rockstar or jml or mwhudson
[23:05]  * Ursinha runs after highlighting all code team
[23:05] <Laney> har de har
[23:05] <Laney> I could just do a new one
[23:13]  * rockstar looks up
[23:13] <rockstar> Laney, you'll have to create a new import.  We can't just cut over.
[23:13] <abentley> rockstar: It's an invalid import, so presumably yes.
[23:13] <Laney> ok
[23:14] <rockstar> abentley, I'm 90% sure we can't switch VCS types in the UI.
[23:14]  * rockstar looks.
[23:14] <abentley> rockstar: Oh, probably.
[23:45] <Noldorin> hello. i'm trying to register a new branch, but i want to do so under the location of the project
[23:46] <Noldorin> i.e. ~noldorin/darwindotnet/<name> instead of darwindotnet/<name>
[23:46] <Noldorin> launchpad doesn't seem to be letting me.