[00:06] <thumper> james_w: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghostscript
[00:06] <thumper> james_w: new layout
[00:12] <Lumiere> back
[00:13] <thumper> Lumiere: ok, a few quick questions:
[00:13] <thumper> Lumiere: what version of bzr do you have, and which format were you upgrading to?
[00:13] <Lumiere> 19:13:31 jstraw@shipon:~ 1$ bzr version
[00:13] <Lumiere> Bazaar (bzr) 1.13.1
[00:13] <Lumiere> I was just doing bzr upgrade without flags
[00:15] <thumper> ok
[00:15] <thumper> Lumiere: is your local copy upgraded?
[00:15] <Lumiere> I couldn't get it checked out to me
[00:15] <Lumiere> but the person I am working with had branch type 6 vs 5 on lp
[00:16] <thumper> ?
[00:16] <Lumiere> thumper: which seemed odd to me
[00:16] <thumper> are you using checkouts?
[00:17] <thumper> are you a member of the team that owns the branch?
[00:17] <Lumiere> yea
[00:17] <Lumiere> using branches
[00:17] <Lumiere> and I am jasonstraw in that team
[00:17] <Lumiere> the person who had the upgraded one is jelkner
[00:18] <thumper> have you done a `bzr lp-login`?
[00:18] <Lumiere> on other projects
[00:18] <thumper> bzr should remember
[00:18] <thumper> so you should have been able to do a checkout
[00:18] <Lumiere> it times out halfway through
[00:18] <thumper> although we recommend branches
[00:18] <thumper> bzr branch lp:gasp-lessons
[00:19] <thumper> that'll give you a complete local copy
[00:19] <thumper> which you can upgrade
[00:19] <Lumiere> yes
[00:19] <Lumiere> it was a network issue
[00:19] <thumper> mthaddon: how about we just run upgrade for Lumiere?
[00:19] <Lumiere> please
[00:19] <Lumiere> and thank you
[00:20] <mthaddon> thumper: sure - leave dirs as is and just run upgrade?
[00:20] <Lumiere> the branch was taking so long to do it
[00:20] <thumper> mthaddon: you'll need to (re)move the current backup.bzr
[00:20] <Lumiere> that it timed out/crashed
[00:20] <thumper> mthaddon: and just a vanilla bzr upgrade
[00:20] <mthaddon> Lumiere: ok, that's done
[00:20] <Lumiere> thank you
[00:21] <thumper> mthaddon: thansk
[00:21] <mthaddon> np
[00:21] <Lumiere> 19:21:01 jstraw@shipon:~/compile/gasp 24$ bzr branch lp:gasp-lessons
[00:21] <Lumiere> bzr: ERROR: The branch lp:gasp-lessons has no revision None.4
[00:23] <mthaddon> thumper: any ideas? ^
[00:23] <thumper> mthaddon: can you run check on the branch?
[00:24] <thumper> Lumiere: what do you have in ~/compile/gasp ?
[00:24] <Lumiere> nothing
[00:24] <thumper> Lumiere: no existing .bzr?
[00:24] <Lumiere> correct
[00:25] <mthaddon> thumper: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/214009/
[00:25] <thumper> mthaddon: that was the broken upgrade :(
[00:25] <mthaddon> :( didn't give me any errors when doing it
[00:26] <mthaddon> so what now?
[00:26] <thumper> mthaddon: did you keep the old backup.bzr?
[00:26] <mthaddon> yep
[00:26] <thumper> ok
[00:26] <thumper> delete the existing .bzr
[00:26] <thumper> move the oldest backup.bzr to .bzr
[00:26] <thumper> and do a check
[00:26] <thumper> (pre upgrade .bzr hopefully)
[00:26] <thumper> failing all this, we can grap the mirrored copy
[00:27] <mthaddon> ok, should be all good now
[00:27] <mthaddon> bzr check worked fine before and after the upgrade
[00:27] <thumper> mthaddon: check was good?
[00:27] <thumper> kk
[00:27] <thumper> Lumiere: try now?
[00:28] <Lumiere> it is branching
[00:30]  * thumper afk, bbs
[00:40] <james_w> thumper: I saw, thanks
[00:40] <james_w> looks great
[01:06] <micahg> where would I file a bug to request ppa build cancellations?
[01:06] <micahg> as a feature
[01:07] <micahg> malone?
[01:07] <thumper> soyuz
[01:07] <micahg> ah
[01:07] <thumper> if in doubt, choose launchpad
[03:35] <Turl1> hi
[03:35] <Turl1> how much time does it take to import svn into launchpad's bzr?
[03:36] <lifeless> depends on the project
[03:38] <Turl1> lifeless: it's a small project, it's been 8 hours and it's still pending review :/
[03:38] <mwhudson> Turl1: what's the branch?
[03:39] <Turl1> mwhudson: https://code.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/autoptimize/trunk
[03:44] <mwhudson> Turl1: approved
[03:46] <Turl1> thanls mwhudson :)
[03:47] <Turl1> thanks*
[03:49] <mwhudson> np
[07:12] <wgrant> Can somebody please look up OOPS-1287EC164 in a few minutes? It's repeatedly crashing one of my scripts.
[07:43] <mwhudson> wgrant: looks like something to do with an unsigned publication
[07:46] <wgrant> mwhudson: Thanks.
[07:46]  * wgrant will poke Soyuz people when they appear.
[08:11] <noodles775> wgrant: Have you got a minute to help me understand the context of bug 378876
[08:12] <wgrant> noodles775: Sure.
[08:13] <noodles775> wgrant: so from what I can understand in cprov's comments, the later upload is cruft because there was already a source published that superseded it right?
[08:13] <noodles775> In which case, why isn't the later upload *marked* as superseded?
[08:14] <noodles775> I'm not sure I understand why the front-end code should be checking 'should I really be superseded'... that should be done by the publisher... but I'm probably missing something.
[08:17] <wgrant> noodles775: The problem is that the binaries are superseded, not the source (that's called cruft, in the Debian world)
[08:18] <noodles775> hmm...
[08:18]  * noodles775 tries to wrap his head around the source *not* being superseded, but the binaries generated from that source being superseded...
[08:19] <noodles775> wgrant: ok, I think I've got it... thanks for the help!
[08:20] <wgrant> noodles775: While you're here - is OOPS-1287EC164 likely to have been caused by bigjools' recent addition addition of package_signer to the webservice export of ISPPH?
[08:20]  * noodles775 looks
[08:20] <MaWaLe> morning folks : do someone knows when LP will be released to be donwloadable?
[08:21] <wgrant> That SPPH doesn't OOPS any moe.
[08:21] <wgrant> Probably because it's published.
[08:21] <wgrant> A different unpublished one OOPSes now.
[08:21] <wgrant> MaWaLe: Late July or early August is the latest word.
[08:21] <noodles775> MaWaLe: see the link in the subject
[08:22] <MaWaLe> thx wgrant
[08:22] <MaWaLe> noodles775: i'm asking just to have a confirmation
[08:22] <MaWaLe> as a coordinator of the Web&Tech team of our LoCo, we are planning to hold a classroom on it
[08:24] <noodles775> MaWaLe: Cool! But that link is *the* authority on the subject... you might be able to chat with kfogel (who edits it) when he's around...
[08:26] <noodles775> wgrant: hmmm... so the SPR isn't signed... in primary... I'm not sure whether it's bigjools' change or not, but definitely log a bug for it (if you haven't already)
[08:27] <wgrant> noodles775: That was my suspicion, but I don't see why the SPR wouldn't be signed.
[08:27] <wgrant> Oh.
[08:27] <wgrant> A sync.
[08:27] <wgrant> Of course.
[08:27] <noodles775> wgrant: actually, is it possible that you might be grabbing the SPPH as soon as it's been published...
[08:27] <noodles775> before it has been signed?
[08:27] <wgrant> No, the SPR should be signed on creation.
[08:27] <noodles775> OK, so what did you mean above by sync?
[08:27] <wgrant> But some of them aren't, because they're not really uploaded.
[08:28] <noodles775> Ah ok.
[08:28] <wgrant> sync-source.py (as used by the Ubuntu archive admins) doesn't actually use real Soyuz copying. It generates a new source package, and uploads it unsigned from cocoplum.
[08:28]  * wgrant files a bug.
[08:29] <wgrant> noodles775: Thanks.
[08:29] <noodles775> wgrant: Thanks. Also, with the cruft bug above...
[08:30] <noodles775> wgrant: I'm assuming that if the second source package generates 10 binaries, and only one of them superseded, that the summary for the SPPH should be FULLYBUILT_SUPERSEDED?
[08:30] <wgrant> noodles775: I am running away screaming now.
[08:30] <noodles775> heh
[08:30] <wgrant> noodles775: I don't know. Nobody has done this sort of thing before.
[08:31] <noodles775> wgrant: it seems strange to summarise the SPPH as FULLYBUILT_SUPERSEDED when it might only be one binary... OK, I'll comment on the bug and see what the others think...
[08:32] <wgrant> noodles775: Sounds good.
[08:34] <wgrant> Bug #397732
[08:35] <noodles775> Great, thanks wgrant
[09:15] <nfilus> hello
[09:15] <nfilus> can anybody help me in getting the import of .pot files reviewed?
[09:18] <noodles775> henninge: ^^^^ Is that something you could help with?
[09:19] <henninge> nfilus: All files will be reviewed eventually. When did you upload them?
[09:19] <nfilus> last friday
[09:19] <henninge> ok, a week is a lot
[09:20] <henninge> nfilus: what's the project's name?
[09:20] <nfilus> what kind of review is needed?
[09:20] <nfilus> centreon
[09:20] <henninge> nfilus: https://help.launchpad.net/Translations/ImportPolicy
[09:21] <nfilus> henninge: I know this page
[09:21] <nfilus> henninge: the technical criteria are met
[09:21] <henninge> nfilus: cool
[09:22] <nfilus> henninge: a simple ACK would be enough :)
[09:24] <nfilus> henninge: I uploaded 2 templates for stable and trunk. the language files will be added one by one, when we understand the process and advantages of rosetta better
[09:26] <nfilus> henninge: is this ok? or would it be better to upload everything including the requested directory structure?
[09:27] <henninge> nfilus: yes, it would be much better to upload them all in one go
[09:27] <henninge> nfilus: either as a tarball or from a bzr branch
[09:27] <henninge> nfilus: most of all it would be much easier for you ...
[09:28] <henninge> and for us because we see the whole situation at once
[09:28] <henninge> nfilus: but I can approve the templates now
[09:28] <nfilus> the whole sources are outside of launchpad in svn und the director structure is different
[09:29] <henninge> nfilus: what do you mean different?
[09:30] <nfilus> trunk/centreon/de_DE/LC_MESSAGES/messages.po
[09:31] <henninge> nfilus: that is missing some directory ...
[09:31] <henninge> don't see that in your svn
[09:31] <henninge> nfilus: I am at http://svn.centreon.com/trunk/centreon/
[09:31] <nfilus> translations have a seperate svn
[09:32] <nfilus> http://forge.centreon.com/repositories/browse/translations/trunk
[09:32] <nfilus> or ...
[09:32] <nfilus>  http://svn.modules.centreon.com/centreon-translations/trunk
[09:33] <henninge> I see
[09:33] <nfilus> how can we integrate both structures better?
[09:33] <henninge> yes, that will need some scripting or so anyway
[09:34] <henninge> nfilus: I am sorry, Launchpad does not support that format directly
[09:36] <henninge> nfilus: for an automatic approval and import you would have to rename the files to de.po etc...
[09:36] <nfilus> henninge: no problem. currently I can do it manually, but would like to know how to map the structures onto each other
[09:36] <nfilus> henninge: ok
[09:36] <henninge> nfilus: so, de_DE/LC_MESSAGES/messages.po -> centreon/de.po
[09:37] <henninge> please avoid the locales like de_DE or es_ES or el_GR.
[09:37] <henninge> pt_BR is okay, pt_PT should just be pt
[09:37] <nfilus> henninge: I will discuss this with the core devs and must have a look at the needed code changes
[09:38] <nfilus> the naming scheme is inconsistent
[09:39] <henninge> nfilus: I could approve your templates now but that might get people starting to translate before you upload the translations thus causing double work.
[09:40] <henninge> nfilus: or you set the permission to "closed" for now.
[09:40]  * henninge goes to file a bug
[09:40] <nfilus> so should I upload the current translations?
[09:41] <henninge> nfilus: you can do that but to have them approved automatically (that is quickly) they need to be renamed as described.
[09:42] <henninge> nfilus: also, I saw that your templates are named differently but I guess they are really the same, right? It is just for a different series.
[09:42] <wgrant> noodles775: You seem to have misunderstood the issue in bug #378876. I've replied.
[09:42] <henninge> nfilus: also!
[09:42] <henninge> nfilus: We have message sharing in place now!
[09:42] <noodles775> Thanks wgrant.
[09:43]  * wgrant fails.
[09:43] <nfilus> henninge: how to setup translations for different series?
[09:43] <wgrant> Two step 3s! And a typo in the first step 3.
[09:43] <henninge> nfilus: you did that right
[09:43] <henninge> nfilus: you uploaded the files to different series.
[09:44] <nfilus> henninge: ah, ok - I will have a targz ready in 3 minutes to upload everything
[09:44] <henninge> nfilus: I am just saying they don't need to be named differently and in fact shouldn't if you want to take advantage of message sharing
[09:45] <henninge> nfilus: we take the name and translation domain from the file name.
[09:46] <noodles775> wgrant: so perhaps I misunderstood when cprov wrote "the later source is cruft"..
[09:47] <wgrant> noodles775: I suspect he meant the former.
[09:47] <noodles775> wgrant: yes, I guess he did. Thanks!
[09:48] <wgrant> noodles775: And there are actually two cases here - the display and handling of the situation needs to differ depending on whether any binaries remain.
[09:49] <noodles775> wgrant: do you mean when the earlier source has some binaries that have been superseded, but others that are not? If so, yes, that's the issue I tried to highlight on the bug...
[09:49] <lamalex> How do I revert a backedup .bzr dir on launchpad?
[09:50] <lamalex> I have a botched bzr upgrade, and need to put the backup.bzr back as .bzr
[09:50] <wgrant> noodles775: Right.
[09:50] <wgrant> lamalex: Use lftp or lp:hitchhiker.
[09:50]  * wgrant -> dinner.
[09:50] <noodles775> Enjoy :)
[09:50] <lamalex> wgrant: it tells me I can't rename something to .bzr
[09:52] <lamalex> also can't rename .bzr to /anything/
[09:55] <nfilus> henninge: please have a look at the new uploaded trunk templates
[09:57] <henninge> nfilus: looks very good!
[09:57] <henninge> nfilus: btw you have a broken locale
[09:58] <henninge> nfilus: zn_TW should be zh_TW
[09:58] <henninge> or we don't know that language ... ;)
[09:59] <nfilus> oh :)
[09:59] <nfilus> how to exchange that?
[09:59] <nfilus> upload again?
[09:59] <henninge> nfilus: yes, you can always upload again, entries with the same file name just get replaced.
[09:59] <henninge> nfilus: also
[10:00] <henninge> nfilus: please change the following locales while you're at it:
[10:00] <henninge> pt_PT -> pt, es_ES -> es
[10:01] <henninge> nfilus: we don't you those and thus they are likely to be missed by translators.
[10:01] <henninge> nfilus: I'll set the others to "Deleted"
[10:01] <nfilus> henninge: ok
[10:04] <henninge> nfilus: ok, I approved the trunk templates, the translation files will get approved and imported automatically now
[10:04] <henninge> give it 30-60 minutes, the overall queue is quite big.
[10:05] <nfilus> woow, thanks
[10:05] <nfilus> should I upload now only the renamed ones or the whole tar.gz again?
[10:06] <henninge> nfilus: use the tar.gz to keep the path
[10:06] <henninge> nfilus: single file uploads lose the path information (HTTP limitation)
[10:06] <nfilus> henninge: but all files included or the changed ones?
[10:06] <mariuz> hello
[10:06] <henninge> nfilus: yes, you can always upload again, entries with the same file name just get replaced.
[10:06] <henninge> nfilus: all files is fine.
[10:08] <mariuz> i have an issue with firebird code import in bzr https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/firebird/trunk
[10:08] <nfilus> henninge: thank you very much!
[10:09] <henninge> nfilus: np, poke me when you need the template for the other series approved.
[10:13] <wgrant> lamalex: Allowed names are .bzr, backup.bzr, and .bzr.backup. I'd just remove .bzr, and rename backup.bzr to .bzr.
[10:13] <lamalex> wgrant: yah, i got it
[10:13] <lamalex> thanks
[10:15] <wgrant> bigjools: What time does edge update these days? I'll turn off my scripts until then, lest my inbox fill with errors.
[10:17] <bigjools> wgrant: I need to check
[10:17] <wgrant> It had been 4am UTC, but that doesn't seem to have held lately...
[10:18] <bigjools> I might push out a cherry pick to edge, it will be breaking james_w as well
[10:18] <bigjools> yes, that's why I need to check :)
[10:18] <wgrant> That would be good, thanks.
[10:18] <bigjools> it won't be for ~6 hours minimum if that happens though
[10:39] <wgrant> Um. Who stole all of the widgets from +filebug?
[10:39] <wgrant> On the second step, after you choose to report a new bug, only the summary, description and checkbox widgets appear.
[10:40] <wgrant> The rest have labels and descriptions, but the actual widgets are missing from the HTML.
[10:41] <henninge> wgrant: you mean under "extra options"?
[10:41] <henninge> because that WFM
[10:42] <wgrant> henninge: Yes. Hmmm.
[10:42]  * wgrant tries some non-Launchpad projects.
[10:44] <wgrant> Oh, maybe it is Firebug after all. I just noticed the widgets are in the HTML, but I missed them because it's all wrapped in tables.
[10:47] <DeSian> hi
[10:48] <DeSian> your system in translation, everytime with anew version from software, do XXXX problem for us
[10:49] <DeSian> we have translated wordpress 2.7 completlly and now is 2.8, you have imported the 2,7 in 2.8, but we must tranlate every line again.
[10:49] <DeSian> what is that for Bugy system you have?!!
[10:50] <DeSian> https://translations.launchpad.net/wordpress/2.8/+pots/wordpress/ckb/+translate
[10:51] <DeSian> we must edit every page and select the correct line
[10:51] <DeSian> can any one tell me, if you import the last translated version, why make you this mistake ever?
[10:54] <nfilus> henninge: something went wrong, german is translated in 100% (but some are fuzzy), but launchpad shows 0%
[10:54] <nfilus> henninge: same goes for french
[10:54] <nfilus> henninge: what could be the reason?
[11:00] <wgrant> Ooh shiny. Inline bugtask editing is arriving?
[11:01] <henninge> nfilus: German isn't imported yet.
[11:02] <henninge> nfilus: French looks fine now
[11:02] <nfilus> henninge: ok, I though every appearing lang is already imported
[11:02] <henninge> nfilus: wait until all files are "Imported".
[11:02] <henninge> nfilus: do you have "German" as a preferred language for your Launchpad account?
[11:03] <nfilus> henninge: no
[11:03]  * henninge looks
[11:03] <henninge> nfilus: ah, now
[11:03] <henninge> no
[11:03] <henninge> nfilus: the reason is: the language is created when the file is approved.
[11:03] <nfilus> henninge: I'm doing most things in english
[11:03] <henninge> nfilus: just wait for the imports to complete.
[11:03] <nfilus> henninge: that wasn't clear to me
[11:04] <henninge> nfilus: Aber du hast auch Deutsch in deinem Konto stehen ... ;-)
[11:04] <henninge> nfilus: You always see your preferred languages in a template.
[11:06] <nfilus> henninge: you mean the menus "Templates" or "overview" or messages.pot template?
[11:07] <henninge> nfilus: I meant this page: https://translations.edge.launchpad.net/centreon/trunk
[11:08] <nfilus> henninge: I see 9 languages, which several of them are neiter prefered nor spoken by me :)
[11:08] <nfilus> henninge: maybe because I'm project admin?
[11:08] <henninge> nfilus: No, I meant "your preferred languages in addition to those for which there are translations."
[11:09] <henninge> nfilus: for example, I see ten languages.
[11:09] <henninge> nfilus: I have Esperanto as a preferred language and so I see a line for it. Untranslated, of course.
[11:10] <nfilus> henninge: ok :)
[13:39] <wgrant> IArchive.newComponentUploader seems to not work on PPAs, even though it's meant to now... when I specify a component_name of 'main', it gives me a 400 stating that the component name must be 'main'.
[13:58] <bigjools> wgrant: that's err, less than optimal
[13:58] <bigjools> I am going for food now, I'll play with it when I get back
[14:00] <wgrant> bigjools: Thanks. And why are PPA package-specific uploaders not possible?
[15:08] <VK7HSE> Hi... just got the following...  (Error ID:OOPS-1287EB598)   when attempting an edit on https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/jaunty/+source/me-tv/+edit-packaging
[15:11] <VK7HSE> and on a second attempt... (Error ID:OOPS-1287EC593)
[15:12] <james_w> bigjools: hey, was the problem you were talking about earlier an issue with OOPS from getPublishedSources?
[15:12] <bigjools> james_w: yes
[15:13] <bigjools> sorry for the cockup
[15:13] <bigjools> it will right itself next time edge is updated
[15:13] <james_w> AttributeError?
[15:15] <geser> james_w: see bug 397732
[15:15] <bigjools> james_w: I don't know how it manifested itself externally, but it oopsed when serialising sources with no signer
[15:17] <james_w> thanks for the quick fix
[15:17] <james_w> I'll assume it's the same
[15:17] <james_w> e.content just gives 'AttributeError' and nothing else, which is a bit odd
[15:17] <james_w> but it is the same error that the Oops shows
[15:25] <holzmodem> hey, I will rename my account, I can only change the Displayname, not the "Name": This user has a PPA and may not be renamed., I dont need this ppa, its empty. How Can i delete this?
[15:25] <kiko> cprov, ^^ holzmodem
[15:25] <bigjools> holzmodem: file a question on soyuz please, and we'll deal with it
[15:25] <kiko> VK7HSE, so that problem you're getting is because there's already a packaging entry with the data you're inputting. it's a bug, though
[15:26] <kiko> sinzui, does a bug already exist on https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=1287EB598
[15:26] <VK7HSE> kiko: thanks, I was attempting to change the development to stable...
[15:27] <sinzui> kiko: no, infact we have a opposite bug requesting that they no be unique
[15:27] <cprov> holzmodem: did you upload any packages to your PPA ?
[15:27] <holzmodem> yes, but i deleted all (or copied to a team ppa)
[15:28] <kiko> sinzui, I guess you can just lump it in then :)
[15:29] <sinzui> kiko: I see there is a recent bug: bug 352374
[15:29] <sinzui> kiko:  and bug 344376
[15:29] <cprov> holzmodem: cool, but unfortunately it doesn't suffice, we can't purge the history in your PPA.
[15:29] <sinzui> kiko:  both of these bugs can be fixed with a name field or a validator
[15:30] <cprov> holzmodem: for now file a question and we will deal with the required renaming involved.
[15:30] <holzmodem> cprov, the ppa is not the problem i want only change the name
[15:31] <cprov> holzmodem: right, but changing the account name implies in changes to the PPA repository path, and that has to be done manually right now.
[15:32] <cprov> holzmodem: no worries, file a question on soyuz and we will deal with it asap.
[15:32] <holzmodem> ok, filing question, thx
[15:55] <james_w> the dependencies of launchpadlib have ballooned somewhat
[15:57] <holzmodem> cprov, #76597 ^^
[15:58] <cprov> holzmodem: thank, I'm on it, will move the PPA repo path and rename your account.
[16:00] <cprov> holzmodem: 'raa' is taken -> https://edge.launchpad.net/~raa
[16:02] <holzmodem> :-( maybe; "ra"  or "raaa" ?
[16:03] <james_w> it really requires all that zope stuff now?
[16:04] <cprov> holzmodem: you tell me, pick one of your preference.
[16:05] <holzmodem> cprov, if ok "ra"
[16:05] <holzmodem> else "raaa"
[16:06] <james_w> ah, it's for testing apparently
[16:06] <cprov> holzmodem: 'ra' is also taken, going to https://edge.launchpad.net/~raaa. Please confirm that it's what you want in the question.
[16:11] <holzmodem> what i have to do? aking question for "raaa"? (sry english is not my native language)
[16:15] <cprov> holzmodem: nothing special, just post a new comment to the existing question.
[16:16] <holzmodem> done
[16:16] <cprov> holzmodem: thank you.
[16:56] <tumbleweed> question about branch merge requesting:
[16:57] <tumbleweed> when you request on the web interface, it automatically requests review
[16:57] <tumbleweed> when you bzr send or resubmit a merge request, it doesn't
[16:57] <tumbleweed> is there any reason for this difference?
[17:23] <holzmodem> cprov, how long does the change approximately took?
[17:32] <LarstiQ> tumbleweed: where are you `bzr send`ing it to?
[17:33] <tumbleweed> cocooncrash: that'd be you
[17:33] <tumbleweed> LarstiQ: I tend to use the web interface, cocooncrash tends to bzr send
[17:40] <bigjools> holzmodem: you need to wait for an admin to pick up your question, it should be within a day
[18:42] <cocooncrash> LarstiQ: merge@code.launchpad.net
[18:43] <LarstiQ> cocooncrash: and what is the submit branch?
[18:43] <cocooncrash> LarstiQ: lp:ibid
[18:43] <LarstiQ> cocooncrash: because afaik, for the bzr project, it does work fine
[18:43] <cocooncrash> LarstiQ: The merge request is created fine -- it just doesn't set the reviewer.
[18:44] <LarstiQ> cocooncrash: yeah, I meant it setting the reviewer to bzr-core, sorry
[18:44] <cocooncrash> Oh, right.
[18:44]  * LarstiQ checks bzr project settings
[18:46] <LarstiQ> cocooncrash: looks similar to me
[18:46]  * LarstiQ leaves it up to an lp dev
[18:46] <cocooncrash> LarstiQ: Thanks
[18:48] <Hamaryns> ping gmb
[18:50] <rockstar> cocooncrash, you'll need to set the default review team of the target branch
[18:50] <rockstar> cocooncrash, or, you can type the following in your email
[18:51] <rockstar>  reviewer rockstar
[18:51] <rockstar> ...if you wanted me to review it.
[19:21] <DnaX> hi, someone LP admin can change an project name (id, not title)?
[19:24] <jpds> DnaX: File a question here: https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad/+addquestion about it.
[19:27] <cocooncrash> rockstar, LarstiQ: Apologies, bzr send isn't a problem
[19:28] <cocooncrash> But resubmiting merge requests doesn't assign the default reviewer.
[19:28] <cocooncrash> (And you also can't resubmit with bzr send, but I've filed a bug for that.)
[19:30] <tumbleweed> cocooncrash: cool
[19:30] <tumbleweed> you also can't resubmit with e-amil
[19:31] <cocooncrash> tumbleweed: bzr send is via email.
[19:31] <tumbleweed> cocooncrash: hmm, I suppose yes
[19:32]  * tumbleweed leave outta here for now
[19:44] <DnaX> thanks jpds
[23:06] <BUGabundo> guud evening
[23:06] <BUGabundo> I'm experiencing timeouts on Edge
[23:06] <BUGabundo> sending emails to contacts from their profile page
[23:11] <beuno> BUGabundo, could you file a bug with the OOPS ids?
[23:12] <RenatoSilva> what's the difference bewteen SSH and OpenPGP keys?
[23:12] <RenatoSilva> Aren't they both just RSA key pairs?
[23:15] <BUGabundo> beuno: I just get a blank page :(
[23:22] <maxb> RenatoSilva: an OpenPGP key contains more than just a single keypair
[23:23] <maxb> signed user ids, subkeys, potentially other extended information
[23:26] <RenatoSilva> maxb: wouldn't it be easier to just have two key pairs and everytime you want to send signed content you just sign it?
[23:26] <maxb> huh?
[23:26] <RenatoSilva> maxb: sorry
[23:26] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I don't get the sense
[23:27] <maxb> What would be easier? What would it be easier than? I don't understand the reasoning behind your previous question.
[23:28] <RenatoSilva> maxb: let's go abck to the question
[23:28] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I mean, huh for you heheh
[23:29] <RenatoSilva> maxb: why more than a key pair? for what?
[23:30] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I can't imagine what else than a key pair would I need to send signed content out there.
[23:30] <maxb> For starters, associating the keypair with an identity, and cryptographically signing that association
[23:31] <maxb> And not just a self signature - other people can sign the association to assert that the user id is genuine
[23:31] <maxb> This is the basis of the "web of trust"
[23:31] <RenatoSilva> maxb: if you have signed content in your openPGP key, then it's a mix of priv key + pub key + signed content, right?
[23:32] <maxb> yes
[23:32] <maxb> And then you can have subkeys - secondary keypairs with delegated authority
[23:33] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I can't figure out why would I need this default signed content
[23:33] <RenatoSilva> maxb: do you have an example?
[23:34] <RenatoSilva> maxb: and I'd appreciate too if you point me to a tutorial you it's good
[23:34] <maxb> My key asserts that I am Max Bowsher, and that I own a variety of email addresses, and moreover carries the certification of various people that I have met face-to-face that they believe that I, the owner of the key, are that person
[23:35] <RenatoSilva> maxb: humm, ok then would that be kind of a "default signed message for basic questions"?
[23:36] <maxb> um. that's kind of a weird way of describing it, and I don't know how to answer that
[23:37] <RenatoSilva> maxb: such as dose this email belong to him, or does he trust in this guy's public key...
[23:37] <RenatoSilva> s/dose/does
[23:38] <maxb> Essentially yes, though it's less of a "message" and more a core part of the way the keys are defined and used
[23:39] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I've found explanations in lp and ubuntu wiki, but they don't introduce the idea, and they don't point out a clever way to keep your priv key secure, whcih I think it's a very important step.
[23:40] <maxb> You're right, it's a vitally important step, since it potentially may be important to you for your entire lifetime
[23:41] <RenatoSilva> maxb: how to keep it secure? the question is for any pub/priv key pair I think
[23:41] <maxb> Exactly, it's in no way specific to PGP keys
[23:42] <maxb> And really it comes down to being sensible about where you put it
[23:43] <RenatoSilva> maxb: and how about creating many OpenPGP keys? For example, I need one to become an Ubuntero, and set up PPA etc. I want to create an OpenPGP key only for that use, in Launchpad. How about it?
[23:44] <maxb> Certainly doable
[23:45] <maxb> You might choose to indicate in the user id comment if the key is intended for a restricted purpose
[23:45] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I wonder if there are any specific steps, because anyone with physical access to the machine containing your private key would be able to access it
[23:45] <maxb> only if you keep it unencrypted, which would be foolish
[23:46] <RenatoSilva> maxb: encrypt with a password-based algorith?
[23:46] <RenatoSilva> m
[23:46] <maxb> However, you are right that you shouldn't keep high value keys on a machine to which others have physical access, even if they *are* encrypted
[23:47] <maxb> It is normal to keep your pgp key protected with a passphrase - preferably a fairly long one
[23:47] <maxb> mine is > 30 characters
[23:48] <RenatoSilva> I wonder if crypted .zips woud be enougth
[23:48] <maxb> erm, what?
[23:49] <RenatoSilva> maxb: you can put the key in a zip file, protected by pasword
[23:49] <RenatoSilva> maxb: when you want to extract the file, you must type the right password. I don't know if the algorith is trustable tough.
[23:50] <maxb> No, you don't do that - the program you use to sign/encrypt/verify stores it encrypted and decrypts on the fly when using it, never storing it on disk at all
[23:52] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I wonder if such encryption of the key-manager is enough too. PuTTY for example.
[23:52] <maxb> ?
[23:53] <RenatoSilva> maxb: are pass_word_-encrypted files enougth? Or do you really need a pass_phrase_ greater than 30 chars?
[23:54] <maxb> I like to be comfortable that I'm well beyond the possibility of a brute force search *and* sufficiently complex that someone couldn't feasibly watch me type it either
[23:55] <RenatoSilva> maxb: PuTTY is a Windows SSH client, it can generate a key pair. You can protect the private key with a pasword, but I wonder if that is really secure. Are password/phrase-based encryption really secure, enougth, as secure as or more than assimetric algorithm
[23:56] <RenatoSilva> s/Are/Is
[23:57] <RenatoSilva> s/enought/enough
[23:57] <RenatoSilva> s/enougth/enough
[23:57] <maxb> An asymmetric algorithm is irrelevant here. The aim is to secure data using a memorized key. Asymmetry serves no purpose.
[23:59] <RenatoSilva> maxb: I was jsut wondering how they compare, as it is standed that symetric algorithms are "better"