[00:00] <ianm_> it's funny how 1000+ code commits gets second place in karma to asking 1 question in Answers :D
[00:01] <wgrant> ianm_: Karma is (for historical reasons) weighted evenly between each category.
[00:01] <BUGabundo> @ianm_ replying, not asking :)
[00:02] <wgrant> ianm_: So if few people are using Answers, and lots of people are using Code, Code karma is worth a lot less.
[00:03]  * BUGabundo why the heck did i use and '@' in there ??!?! 
[00:03]  * BUGabundo slaps him self
[00:04] <ianm_> RT @BUGabundo slaps him self
[00:07] <ianm_> wgrant: by "using code" do you mean bugs or should commits count?
[00:08] <wgrant> ianm_: Code and Bugs are separate categories.
[00:08] <wgrant> ianm_: Commits count as Code, bug changes count as Bugs.
[00:08] <ianm_> I don't see Code on the Top Contributors page ( https://launchpad.net/luz/+topcontributors )
[00:09] <wgrant> ianm_: Karma is only updated daily.
[00:10] <wgrant> That branch probably just missed it.
[00:11] <ianm_> wgrant: I've been committing code there for years :)
[00:11] <ianm_> btw this is not a problem, I'm just curious
[00:12] <ianm_> same thing happens in other projects eg https://launchpad.net/audioverse/+topcontributors
[00:12] <wgrant> ianm_: Oh, you're right, just all the recent commits were yesterday.
[00:12] <wgrant> ianm_: The problem is that it can't attribute the karma to anybody, because the email address you've used doesn't match any that Launchpad knows about.
[00:12] <ianm_> oh I see
[00:12] <wgrant> ianm_: You should run 'bzr whoami Your Name <your@email.address>'
[00:13] <wgrant> ianm_: Er, with quotes around the name and email address."
[00:14] <zsquareplusc> it matches against the email address? so just the launchpad user name alone is not wnough?
[00:14] <wgrant> zsquareplusc: That's right. Most revisions don't reference the Launchpad username at all.
[00:15] <ianm_> wgrant: done.  so will this fix past commits or only going forward?
[00:15] <wgrant> ianm_: Only going forward. commits are immutable.
[00:15] <ianm_> wgrant: ok thanks for the help
[00:16] <wgrant> ianm_: np
[00:17] <ace_suares> hi, i sem to have problems with signing the code of conduct. I did all the steps., but i get 'bad signature' anyway
[00:18] <SamB> ace_suares: and this is on ubuntu?
[00:19] <ace_suares> yep
[00:19] <ace_suares> https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct/1.0.1/+sign
[00:20] <SamB> strange!
[00:20] <ace_suares> ohhhhh
[00:20] <ace_suares> i just got it.
[00:20] <SamB> did your mail client mangle the file or something ?
[00:21] <ace_suares> I cat Code...txt.asc and I didn't see before 9like three times) that the whole message comes before the signature, and only copied and pasted the signature.
[00:21] <ace_suares> It's working now. Sorry to bother :-)
[00:21] <SamB> hehe ;-)
[00:34] <Daviey> bazaar.launchpad.net poorly?
[00:35] <wgrant> Daviey: Yes.
[00:35] <wgrant> spm ^^
[00:36] <Daviey> :(
[00:43] <spm> been yoyo'ing all morning
[00:54] <spiv> The web UI for code review offers me a "Needs Information" vote, but https://help.launchpad.net/Code/Review#Email%20interface doesn't seem to have an equivalent option.
[00:54] <spiv> Does anyone know if " review needs-info" or similar will work?
[00:55] <thumper> spiv: yes
[00:55] <thumper> spiv: yes I know, and yes, it'll work
[00:55] <spiv> thumper: yes "needs-info" works, or yes something similar will? ;)
[00:55] <thumper> as will needs-information, needsinfo, needsinformation
[00:55] <spiv> Great, thanks.
[00:55] <spiv> (p.s. update your help :P)
[01:23] <zsquareplusc> i have 2 bzr branches converted from CVS. should i push each one separately or is there a way to get them both at once uploaded (i assume cvsps-import created a repo)
[01:25] <mwhudson> zsquareplusc: separately
[01:25] <zsquareplusc> ok. thanks
[01:31] <zsquareplusc> mmh. can i directly push w/o registering the branch in the web interface beforehand?
[01:32] <thumper> zsquareplusc: yes
[01:32] <thumper> zsquareplusc: in fact it is preferable
[01:33] <zsquareplusc> yeah i always had errors about pushing to an existing branch and hd to use "force" :-)
[01:33] <zsquareplusc> the problem is just, how to figure out the name lp:... :-)
[01:36] <thumper> zsquareplusc: I have my locations.conf set up so I just say "bzr push" and it works
[01:40] <zsquareplusc> thumper: but you still have to figure out the location once. lp:~user/project/name or something like that
[01:40] <thumper> yes
[01:40] <thumper> push_location = lp:~thumper/launchpad
[01:41] <thumper> push_location:policy = appendpath
[01:41] <thumper> then if I havea branch "bob"
[01:41] <thumper> and go push
[01:41] <thumper> it goes to lp:~thumper/launchpad/bob
[01:42] <thumper> mwhudson: I'm confused
[01:42] <thumper> d'uh wrong channel
[02:59] <robert_ancell> There is an obsolete glchess project in LP: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glchess.  glchess was merged into gnome-games, should this LP project be removed?
[03:00] <robert_ancell> I ask as people keep reporting bugs against the old project
[03:01] <spm> robert_ancell: sounds like a good idea in that case. I assume that's a semi formal request to "pls make it so?
[03:01] <micahg> hold on
[03:01] <robert_ancell> spm, I just wanted to check if it needs to remain in the database as there is a hardy package for it
[03:02] <spm> robert_ancell: oh hang a sec. I just missed par tof that. that's under ubuntu
[03:02] <micahg> where is the package in hardy?
[03:02] <micahg> yeah
[03:02] <micahg> it's in ubuntu
[03:02] <spm> https://edge.launchpad.net/glchess M== is already obsoleted.
[03:03] <robert_ancell> is there a way to close it for bug reporting?
[03:03] <micahg> robert_ancell: where is the package in hardy?
[03:03] <robert_ancell> But I guess in theory a hardy user might want to report against it
[03:03] <micahg> exactly
[03:03] <micahg> 20 more months :)
[03:03] <robert_ancell> :)
[03:03]  * micahg has the same problem with the firefox package which is EOL
[03:04] <micahg> robert_ancell: maybe we should move this to #ubuntu-bugs
[03:17] <poolie> bug 151129 :-)
[03:17] <poolie> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 01:13:43PM -0000, Matthew Paul Thomas wrote:
[03:17] <poolie>  > I don't think this has anything to do with having official tags.  That's because you don't know what the implementation will look like.
[03:17] <poolie> heh
[03:17] <robert_ancell> Who owns the python-opengl package: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/python-opengl, I want to update the info but it doesn't seem to have any edit links
[03:18] <micahg> robert_ancell: that's in ubuntu again
[03:18] <robert_ancell> micahg, yeah, how do I link it to the PyOpenGL project?
[03:19] <robert_ancell> the equivalent gcalctool page has more info..
[03:19] <wgrant> robert_ancell: That's difficult, because the package doesn't exist.
[03:19] <micahg> it doesn't exist :)
[03:20] <wgrant> It did in Warty.
[03:20] <wgrant> But that's all.
[03:20] <poolie> hello robert_ancell
[03:20] <robert_ancell> poolie, hey
[03:21] <wgrant> robert_ancell: The source is now just 'pyopengl'
[03:21] <robert_ancell> Ah, ok
[03:21] <wgrant> And it's already linked.
[07:45] <poolie> thumper/jml, do i understand correctly that https://code.edge.launchpad.net/bzr/+activereviews now contains all non-closed reviews?
[07:45] <poolie> if so, great
[07:46] <jml> poolie, I believe so.
[07:46] <poolie> that is a really good step
[07:46] <poolie> the contents are a bit baffling though
[07:46] <jml> poolie, please comment on my blog.
[07:47] <jml> poolie, and surely they can't be baffling to you after all these months!
[07:47] <poolie> in that i have 20+ "Other reviews I am not actively reviewing"
[07:47] <poolie> heh
[07:47] <jml> I'm pretty sure we changed that text on your suggestion :P
[07:48] <jml> poolie, that section is a bit hard to deal with though.
[07:48] <poolie> i think the problem is this page is sorted by overall state, but it doesn't actually show the overall state?
[07:49] <jml> that seems orthogonal to me.
[07:49] <jml> poolie, or rather, that sounds like a solution to me, not a problem :)
[07:50] <jml> poolie, all of the reviews other than the "Approved" ones have the same overall state of "Needs Review"
[07:51] <poolie> hm
[07:52] <poolie> what's the difference between 'reviews i can do' and 'other' then?
[07:52] <poolie> it seems like they are 'reviews i can't do' :-) but why?
[07:53] <poolie> jml, anyhow, comment posted
[07:53] <poolie> i'm not totally sure we should do this on random blog posts
[07:53] <poolie> but maybe we should!
[07:54] <jml> poolie, well, it's not that much better than random IRC channel discussions
[07:55] <jml> at least on my blog, Americans can participate in the discussions
[07:56] <jml> poolie, my blog ought to be on planet launchpad too.
[07:57] <jml> poolie, first up, do you really not understand the categories?
[07:57] <wgrant> Nobody knows about Planet Launchpad, though.
[07:58] <thekorn> there is a planet launchpad? me googles
[07:58] <micahg> ??
[07:58] <wgrant> It's very new.
[07:58] <poolie> jml, i'm not being intentionally thick
[07:58] <micahg> I thought Launchpad was part of Planet Ubuntu
[07:58] <poolie> to be clear, the issues are
[07:58] <spiv> Planet Launchpad would be Magrathea, presumably ;)
[07:58] <poolie> 1- i'm not sure how to get something out of 'reviews i'm doing' when i've said my piece
[07:59] <poolie> and 2- i'm not sure what qualifies as 'other' and what action i should take on them
[07:59] <poolie> i guess in practice i can just pick any one of them and finish it
[07:59] <spiv> micahg: "Planet" just is a term for a blog aggregator (both for some software that runs it, and for specific instances).
[07:59] <poolie> or keep mental state as to which ones still matter
[07:59] <jml> poolie, ok. I'll explain and then we can figure out what to do to prevent future confusion.
[07:59] <poolie> but it is not quite as gtd-ish as it could be
[08:00] <jml> poolie, wrt 1-, it sticks until the proposal is Approved, Rejected, Merged or otherwise finished.
[08:00] <micahg> spiv: I know :) ... I just thought it was part of the Ubuntu Planet...where is this LP Planet?
[08:00] <jml> poolie, there's no state in the system for whose court the review ball is in
[08:00] <spiv> micahg: http://planet.launchpad.net/, of course :)
[08:01] <micahg> ha :)
[08:01] <poolie> ok
[08:01] <jml> poolie, wrt 2-, they are all the reviews on bzr that have nothing to do with you, basically.
[08:01] <jml> poolie, but are "Needs review"
[08:01] <micahg> thanks spiv
[08:02] <poolie> ok, so they seem to typically have been reviewed by someone else, but not have been set to a conclusive status
[08:03] <jml> poolie, that's exactly the case.
[08:03] <poolie> but https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~vila/bzr/releasing-clarified/+merge/10854 is strange
[08:03] <poolie> presumably i should review it but it hasn't requested review from anyone
[08:03] <jml> poolie, yes, that's odd. I don't know how that happened.
[08:05] <poolie> the review i just did for ian was like that too
[08:05] <poolie> maybe it's a recent change in behaviour?
[08:06] <jml> poolie, I don't know, tbh.
[08:06] <jml> poolie, if so, I'd consider it a regression
[08:06] <jml> maybe you changed the default review team or something like that?
[08:06] <jbergstroem> hey, this thing gives me a internal server error (and has for the latest 12 hours): http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~trond-norbye/libmemcached/memcapable/revision/572
[08:06] <jml> the plural "you"
[08:06] <poolie> mm, we did change it
[08:07] <poolie> ok
[08:07] <poolie> so now i understand better
[08:07] <poolie> i'm not sure quite what to change
[08:07] <jml> me neither
[08:08] <jml> We could hide the "other section" by default
[08:08] <jml> but we'd still need to link to it
[08:08] <poolie> i think part of it is a model question about review requests vs just taking reviews for the project
[08:08] <poolie> perhaps we need
[08:09] <poolie> reviews requested from me; reviews being done by others; reviews i can do; reviews i can't do
[08:09] <poolie> and perhaps rather than 'i am doing' have 'i'm involved in' or something
[08:09] <poolie> to convey that i may not actually be doing or able to do anything much else
[08:09] <poolie> not sure
[08:09] <jml> "reviews i can't do"?
[08:09] <poolie> yeah
[08:10] <jml> I think "Reviews being done by others" is clearer than the heading we have now
[08:10] <poolie> does that even make sense
[08:10] <jml> I don't think it does, no.
[08:10] <poolie> if i'm not allowed to even comment on it, i probably shouldn't even see it
[08:10] <poolie> right
[08:11] <poolie> but there is some kind of other heading
[08:11] <poolie> which is reviews nobody has done anything on yet
[08:11] <poolie> the initial comment by the proposer doesn't count
[08:11] <jml> that's the "reviews I can do", atm.
[08:11] <poolie> probably they should be lumped in with those i can do
[08:11] <poolie> right
[08:11] <jml> not lumped in -- that's what they are
[08:12] <poolie> so the question then is, do you want to separate 'reviews people specifically asked me to do' from 'reviews i can do'
[08:12] <jml> well, that's what we do right now.
[08:12] <jml> and I think "yes"
[08:12] <poolie> possibly i should prioritize the first category
[08:12] <poolie> ok, so 'reviews requested from me' vs 'reviews i can do'
[08:12] <jml> yeah, those categories exist
[08:13] <poolie> for the first category to be small enough to matter it probably needs to only count those where they asked for me personally, not the project team?
[08:13] <jml> yes, and that's what we do right now.
[08:14] <poolie> so if 'reviews nobody is doing' is 'requested reviews i can do' then where is 'reviews specifically requested from me'?
[08:14] <jml> poolie, it's not shown if it's empty
[08:14] <poolie> oh, maybe it exists but isn't shown because there are none?
[08:14] <poolie> i see
[08:14] <jml> poolie, I was just about to say, maybe we should show it even then
[08:15] <poolie> with (none)
[08:15] <poolie> zaro boogs
[08:15] <jml> and have some text saying "No one has asked you specifically to review anything, but maybe you want to review one of the branches below"
[08:15] <jml> or words to similar effect.
[08:16] <jml> it could get a bit awkward, though.
[08:16] <jml> poolie, have you looked at https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~mbp/bzr?
[08:20] <jml> poolie, we could also add some more explanatory text to the page, or popup help or something.
[08:20] <poolie> i think just simple links to a wiki page would help a bit
[08:21] <jml> poolie, I think if there were controls for setting the status from Needs Review, that would help too.
[08:21] <poolie> i think my personal page looks ok
[08:21] <poolie> right
[08:21] <poolie> some of this is an artifact of people not setting that field
[08:21] <jml> poolie, at least that way one could blunder about on that page and learn that setting the status changes the way a thing is displayed
[08:21] <poolie> the only thing i would say about my personal page is that it looks a bit odd that the 'approved reviews ready to land' are not my branches
[08:22] <poolie> it's almost like they should be 'reviews i'm involved in that are ready to land'
[08:22] <poolie> as opposed to my own branches
[08:22] <jml> yeah, I mentioned that to thumper
[08:22] <jml> there's an interesting use-case there though
[08:23] <jml> because you also want to have something telling you to land approved patches from contributors without commit rights.
[08:24] <jml> jbergstroem, there's been some instability with the code browsing section... I've asked a sysadmin to look into it.
[08:25] <poolie> right, that's getting into 'you touched it, you're responsible for it'
[08:25] <poolie> which makes some sense if it's a non-core patch; less so for a core dev patch
[08:25] <jml> poolie, yeah
[08:25] <jml> poolie, at this point, I start wondering exactly how smart this thing should be.
[08:25] <poolie> i'm not sure
[08:26] <jml> particularly for PQM managed projects, where we can't infer if you have write permissions!
[08:26] <jml> s/if/whether/
[08:29] <jml> I guess we could derive that information from the review team.
[08:29] <jbergstroem> jml: ok, thanks for the info
[08:29] <jml> Again, I think that the UI would be clearer if we had a control that could land the branch.
[08:30] <jml> as it is, it's too static, and gives you little idea of the flow of the thing.
[08:31]  * jml is now officially late for dinner.
[08:31] <jml> see you :)
[09:01] <poolie> staging seems to be down?
[09:21] <czajkowski> ~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~[6~/c
[09:22] <czajkowski> oops
[09:22] <alkisg> Hello. I copied dnsmasq 2.50 from the karmic ppa to my ppa: https://launchpad.net/~ts.sch.gr/+archive/ppa Now it shows that it's published there, even with no signer.
[09:23] <alkisg> The problem is that the users that have my ppa in their sources don't see the update
[09:23] <alkisg> I.e. sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get dist-upgrade still leaves them with the stock dnsmasq 2.47
[09:24] <maxb> "no signer" is expected behaviour for a package synced from debian
[09:24] <bigjools> alkisg: I will look
[09:24] <bigjools> alkisg: you copied it from the ubuntu archive, not a PPA, BTW
[09:25] <bigjools> alkisg: I suspect you have a problematic proxy between you and ppa.launchpad.net
[09:28] <alkisg> bigjools: I'm experiencing this myself, from my laptop while I've moved to 3 different ISPs, and also some users reported that back to me from different ISPs, so I suspect it isn't a proxy problem...
[09:28] <bigjools> alkisg: ah, did you notice the binary name has changed?
[09:28] <bigjools> dnsmasq-base vs dnsmasq
[09:28] <alkisg> bigjools: these are 2 different packages
[09:29] <alkisg> Both are supposed to be in 2.50 version now... :-/
[09:29] <bigjools> oh I see, sorry, I missed the other one
[09:29] <alkisg> dnsmasq-base is in main, dnsmasq in universe
[09:29] <bigjools> ummm interesting
[09:30] <wgrant> Ummmmmmmmm.
[09:30] <wgrant> Yes.
[09:30] <wgrant> Very interesting.
[09:30] <alkisg> Thanks for your feedback. I'll try to manually upload a jaunty version with a new changelog to immediately fix the problem for my users, and I'll leave the hardy/intrepid versions for you to look :)
[09:30] <bigjools> alkisg: what sources.list entry are you using
[09:30] <bigjools> one with main only?
[09:30] <alkisg> deb http://ppa.launchpad.net/ts.sch.gr/ppa/ubuntu jaunty main
[09:30] <alkisg> deb-src http://ppa.launchpad.net/ts.sch.gr/ppa/ubuntu jaunty main
[09:30] <alkisg> Ooops
[09:30] <bigjools> however, !main is not supposed to exist for PPAs
[09:30] <alkisg> :) ah, so if I put universe there I'll be ok, eh?
[09:31]  * alkisg tries...
[09:31] <alkisg> Yup that explains it all. My users got dnsmasq-base 2.50, but not dnsmasq 2.50
[09:31] <alkisg> bigjools: you're a genious :)
[09:31] <Daviey> i thought every ppa package was built as "main", if you liked it or not?
[09:31] <bigjools> yet another reason why using +copy-packages  is BAD
[09:31] <bigjools> (with primary archive I mean)
[09:32] <bigjools> Daviey: it's a bug :(
[09:32] <Daviey> ah, i thought it was as designed :)
[09:33] <bigjools> I mean it's a bug that it's not all main
[09:33] <bigjools> it's because it was copied with binaries
[09:33] <alkisg> OK. Lesson learned, *don't copy packages from the primary archive. rebuild sources* :)
[09:34] <alkisg> Thank you bigjools, thank you all :)
[09:34] <bigjools> alkisg: welcome, sorry for your troubles
[09:35] <maxb> (and don't copy sources, rebuilding binaries, either)
[09:35] <bigjools> well, copying from main will be ok
[09:35] <bigjools> anything else will leave you with problems
[09:35] <wgrant> The main reason I've seen it used is to get debhelper 7 in hardy.
[09:35] <wgrant> And for that it works.
[09:36] <maxb> yup, done that :-)
[09:36] <maxb> but then I needed 7.0.50
[09:37] <wgrant> Should I not be revolted upon seeing lp.soyuz.scripts imports in webapp code?
[09:37] <bigjools> wgrant: err, ew?
[09:37] <alkisg> So, is manual uploading the only way to fix it now? Or would deleting the packages + copy/w/rebuild from the karmic archive work?
[09:37] <wgrant> bigjools: The IArchive.syncSource(s) and the archive copy view use lp.soyuz.scripts.packagecopier
[09:38] <wgrant> alkisg: Copy with rebuild would work if you hadn't already copied it.
[09:38] <wgrant> alkisg: But you have, so you must upload to get a new version.
[09:38] <alkisg> Ah. Manual it is, then :-/ Thanks, wgrant :)
[09:38] <bigjools> wgrant: there's probably more than that as well... :(
[09:38] <alkisg> Ah, final question, so now I'll need 2.50+ppa1, right?
[09:39] <maxb> alkisg: never copy with rebuild into previous series
[09:39] <wgrant> bigjools: I just happened to stumble upon them, so probably.
[09:39] <alkisg> Or 2.50-0ubuntu1~ppa1 ?
[09:39] <wgrant> Both of those are wrong.
[09:39] <wgrant> 2.50-1~something
[09:39] <alkisg> maxb: I'll copy with rebuild to my repository for karmic, then copy binaries to previous versions - will that work?
[09:40] <alkisg> wgrant, thanks
[09:40] <wgrant> Best to do a manual upload.
[09:40] <alkisg> OK. Thank you all.
[09:40] <maxb> alkisg: well, that's a bit more permissible, but I doubt whether LP will let you reuse the version
[09:40] <bigjools> alkisg: no, once a version exists in an archive, it can never be rebuilt or re-uploaded
[09:40] <maxb> Unfortunately there is now NO version you can use which is both correct and allowable by LP
[09:40] <alkisg> maxb: it allows me to copy binaries between versions, but not to copy/w/rebuild
[09:41] <wgrant> bigjools: Binaries can so...
[09:41] <alkisg> *between ubuntu series
[09:41] <maxb> wgrant: I am scared :-/
[09:41] <bigjools> wgrant: eh?
[09:41] <wgrant> bigjools: Multiple binaries with the same (bpn, version) can exist in one archive.
[09:42] <maxb> *blink*
[09:42] <maxb> ewww
[09:42] <wgrant> Not the same (bpn, version, PUBLISHED), of course.
[09:43] <bigjools> I'm not sure how that can happen
[09:43] <alkisg> (11:39:48 πμ) wgrant: 2.50-1~something  ==> but that's a lower version than the already uploaded dnsmasq - will launchpad allow me to use that version?
[09:43] <wgrant> bigjools: It has happened in the primary archive at least once, and it broke the a-f cache.
[09:43] <al-maisan> wgrant: how would such a situation come about?
[09:43] <wgrant> bigjools: Related to a version being uploaded to -proposed, then deleted, then a later security update reused the version, IIRC.
[09:44] <bigjools> ah right, it's a bug :)
[09:44] <wgrant> But it can happen within one pocket if a binary moves between sources.
[09:44] <bigjools> yeah I remember that
[09:44] <wgrant> And it doesn't cause any problems except confusion.
[09:44] <wgrant> (and a-f archive corruption, but stuff the primary archive)
[09:44] <wgrant> alkisg: If you are evil, yes. Delete the package, wait until it's removed... voila.
[09:45] <alkisg> Nice :)
[09:45] <wgrant> I think it's OK here, since nobody should have the binary anyway.
[09:45] <alkisg> Yeah, I understand
[09:45] <wgrant> Normally that is very bad.
[09:45] <bigjools> wgrant: the upload will be refused
[09:46] <wgrant> bigjools: Which? The conflicting binary, or older source?
[09:46] <bigjools> older source at least
[09:46] <bigjools> and probably the conflicting binary
[09:46] <wgrant> I don't believe so. Not if the previous source is gone.
[09:46] <wgrant> I've seen it done,
[09:46] <bigjools> it's not gone though, it's still in the publishing history
[09:47] <wgrant> Right.
[09:47]  * wgrant checks the code.
[09:47] <bigjools> if it can happen, it's a bug
[09:49] <wgrant> bigjools: It (getSourceAncestry) quite deliberately only looks for PENDING/PUBLISHED.
[09:49] <bigjools> ummm ew
[09:49] <wgrant> Perhaps.
[09:49] <wgrant> I wonder if that breaks overrides.
[09:49] <bigjools> see if you can re-create it then
[09:50] <wgrant> You mean upload the same version?
[09:50] <bigjools> same or older should not work
[09:51] <wgrant> Argh. So many methods on Distribution/DistroSeries that should be on Archive.
[09:52] <wgrant> bigjools: You can't ever upload a conflicting source version.
[09:52] <wgrant> bigjools: No problem with an older one AFAICT, though.
[09:52] <bigjools> wow
[09:52] <bigjools> ok
[09:53] <bigjools> I guess apt won't complain too loudly about that
[09:53] <wgrant> (the check for the same version is based on file content check, which uses IDistribution.getFileByName to track down the file. That doesn't care about the status.)
[09:53] <wgrant> Now, I would have thought that same thing would be used for binaries.
[09:53] <wgrant> Maybe it is now.
[09:53]  * wgrant looks.
[09:54] <thumper> wgrant, bigjools: isn't this conversation more suited to #launchpad-dev?
[09:54] <wgrant> thumper: Indeed, it did rather mutate.
[10:11] <saispo> anyone use launchpad.dev ? i have some problem with team mailing list
[10:11] <saispo> i don't receive the mail for the creating request
[10:37] <simon-o> Hi, ~doctiese6 is spamming bug 323239. Can somebody disable his account?
[10:41] <wgrant> Intriguing. That comment clearly exists, but doesn't have a karma entry.
[10:51] <simon-o> wgrant: Do you have an idea how to block him?
[10:53] <wgrant> simon-o: That needs a sysadmin. Is it just the one recent comment?
[10:54] <simon-o> wgrant: No, all his comments are spam, but the bug is not.
[10:54] <simon-o> Are there sysadmins here or do I need to ask in launchpad-dev?
[10:55] <wgrant> simon-o: There are probably no sysadmins around at the moment. Probably best to ask at https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+addquestion.
[11:00] <simon-o> wgrant: thanks, I filled question 82215
[11:01] <simon-o> filed
[11:58] <rithy> Why my ppa not build packages that I upload?
[11:59] <bigjools> rithy: which PPA and package?
[11:59] <rithy> ~/moonos-dev
[11:59] <rithy> I uploaded 1 hour ago
[12:00] <bigjools> which package?
[12:00] <rithy> moonassistant, mooncontrol, moondomain, moongrub, moonmetacity, moonslim, moonsoftware and moonusplash
[12:01] <bigjools> rithy: you need to be patient I'm afraid, there's a large queue of builds today
[12:01] <bigjools> look at your build pages and it gives you an estimate of when it will start building
[12:01] <bigjools> e.g, https://edge.launchpad.net/~moonos-dev/+archive/ppa/+build/1208018
[12:03] <rithy> I can't wait for this. In 1 hours ago it say in 3 hours but now it 4 hours
[12:04] <rithy> Maybe it can up to 5 or 6 hours
[12:04] <rithy> I need it very much for now
[12:05] <maxb> Yes but all the other users of the PPA service also want their builds now. So you queue.
[12:05] <rithy> :)
[12:07] <rithy> Thank for all
[12:08] <bigjools> rithy: another interesting page if you want to know more: https://edge.launchpad.net/builders
[12:08] <maxb> The non-edge version is probably more accessible
[12:08] <rithy> :D
[12:09] <bigjools> maxb: is there something you think we can do to make the new one better?
[12:09] <rithy> :)
[12:10] <maxb> The only things I can think of are in conflict with the future plans for blurring the distinctions between architectures and virtual/non-virtual builders
[12:11] <maxb> The problem with the edge page is that it's hard to see at a glance exactly which builders are capable of building the specific build you're interested in
[12:11] <maxb> Also, has gold got stuck? It's been idle for a while despite the queue
[12:12] <wgrant> maxb: The stats on the right are pretty useful, though.
[12:13] <maxb> Hmm. gold has apparently not built anything since the 12th of August
[12:13] <bigjools> a while is a nice understatement, it's not built anything for a month!
[12:13] <wgrant> It could have been Enabled for much of that time.
[12:13] <bigjools> wgrant: yeah, I really like the new stats, it's a good indication of how loaded the farm is
[12:14] <wgrant> bigjools: It's much nicer to look at than the old one which needed scrolling.
[12:14] <maxb> I have a feeling gold is one of the permanent ones?
[12:14] <wgrant> Although it would be nice if empty queues were faded.
[12:14] <maxb> It certainly doesn't vanish often
[12:14] <bigjools> wgrant: nice idea
[12:14] <wgrant> bigjools: I think idle builders should have their status faded too.
[12:15] <wgrant> But I'm not quite so sure about that one.
[12:15] <bigjools> me neither
[12:15] <bigjools> fancy doing a patch? :)
[12:16] <wgrant> Sure. I've been meaning to do a UI patch for a while.
[12:19] <Ferzzz> Hi, is this the IRC channel for launchpadlib?
[12:22] <intellectronica> Ferzzz: it is
[12:23] <Ferzzz> we ve had some HTTP 500 when trying to attach files to bugs through launchpadlib
[12:23] <Ferzzz> has the API changed lately?
[12:24] <Ferzzz> (first issue was reported around the 1st September)
[12:31] <intellectronica> Ferzzz: that's probably not a launchpadlib problem but a problem with the launchpad api
[12:31] <intellectronica> Ferzzz: do you have an example? have you filed a bug?
[12:32] <wgrant> intellectronica: Wasn't there a change related to that which knowingly broke older clients?
[12:32] <intellectronica> wgrant: nothing i know of. do you mean a change to the api or to lplib?
[12:33] <wgrant> intellectronica: In the API, Something to do with binary content in files. But I think that one was quite some time ago.
[12:34] <wgrant> Yet I saw discussion of it somewhere just last week...
[12:34] <intellectronica> could be. maybe allenap knows?
[12:34] <james_w> yes, there was
[12:35] <wgrant> Bug #423880
[12:35] <allenap> intellectronica, wgrant: Of hand, I don't know, and I'm afraid I have to go very soon.
[12:35] <allenap> s/Of/Off
[12:35] <wgrant> It was actually a month ago that the change was made.
[12:35] <james_w> bug 353805
[12:36] <wgrant> Right.
[12:38] <intellectronica> Ferzzz: anyway, i also must go get some food, but if you could file a bug with an example script, someone can take a look at it later. you should file it against malone, rather than launchpadlib. 500 error means something went wrong on the server, so it's unlikely to be a problem with launchpadlib itself
[12:43] <asac> hi ... somone could please triage bug 424147
[12:43] <asac> ?
[12:43] <asac> or is there another master bug ;)
[12:44] <asac> bad regression ... should be blocker for roll out
[12:45] <wgrant> asac: That's probably because the branch page hasn't been redesigned yet.
[12:47] <asac> wgrant: ok so its WORK IN PROGRESS you say?
[12:47] <wgrant> asac: I believe so. There were discussions about a big redesign of that page a couple of weeks ago, and I imagine it's scheduled for before 3.0.
[12:48] <asac> ok. so someone should mark that bug as a blocker for 3.0 ... even though if its a non-issue as there is a plan :)
[12:49] <intellectronica> asac: as you might have noticed from other pages, the UI is kinda' in flux (until the end of this cycle). most likely this page will see a redesign, but it's probably a good idea nevertheless to target this bug to 3.0 so that it's not forgotten.
[12:50] <intellectronica> asac: rockstar would be good person to ask about that, but i think he's not up yet. i'll ask him when he gets up (if i remember. you can try too)
[12:50] <Ferzzz> thank you very much guys, I ll take a look at bug 423880 and fill a bug if necessary
[12:51] <intellectronica> asac: don't forget that you can disable using edge if you find it difficult to work with the changing UI. rest assured it will stabilize by the time 3.0 is released
[12:52] <asac> intellectronica: right. thaanks for the info. i am not sure when to start filing bugs. any hints? i filed like 4 yestreday, so maybe i should stop doing that while its still in the flux
[12:52] <asac> intellectronica: i know i can disable it
[12:52] <asac> intellectronica: just want to ensure that no bad regressions end up in production eventually ;)
[12:52] <asac> so i rather keep on using it - if possible at all
[12:52] <intellectronica> asac: there's not harm in filing bugs. better file them so the issue is not forgotten
[12:53] <asac> rockstar: 424147 can you please triage and milestone it ;)
[12:53] <intellectronica> anyway...
[12:54]  * intellectronica --> malzeit
[12:54] <asac> intellectronica: sure. but if i know that things are like landing each and every day i would rather wait two more weeks or so
[12:54] <asac> because filing bugs consumes time on my side too ;)
[12:54] <asac> intellectronica: is there a release schedule somewhere?
[12:54] <asac> intellectronica: anyway. enjoy your lunch
[12:55] <wgrant> asac: https://dev.launchpad.net/Releases/2009Calendar
[12:55] <asac> thx wgrant
[12:55] <asac> oh 3.0 is close
[12:55] <asac> guess i should file even more bugs ;)
[13:00] <Ferzzz> sorry
[13:23] <gnomefreak> is LP having problems on server side? i keep getting Sorry, there was a problem connecting to the Launchpad server
[15:10] <mrevell-lunch> gnom/nick mrevell
[15:52] <kfogel> sinzui: Does karma accrue for subrevisions (e.g., like the commits listed under each landing at https://dev.launchpad.net/Contributions) ?
[15:53] <sinzui> kfogel: I do not know
[15:53] <kfogel> sinzui: *nod*  Do you know what dev might know off the top of their head?
[15:53] <sinzui> I believe you only get karma for your commit of the id that is unique
[15:54] <sinzui> kfogel: thumper and jml know
[15:54] <kfogel> sinzui: thanks.  I'm pretty sure jml doesn't, because I think I asked him the other night, but I'll ping thumper.
[15:55] <kfogel> salgado: ping
[16:00] <bigjools> kfogel: I think you do, at least I see karma events for new revisions on my page
[16:00] <kfogel> bigjools: ah great -- including your revs contained in PQM landings?
[16:01] <bigjools> kfogel: well they're the same revision, so it's already accounted for
[16:01] <salgado> kfogel, otp
[16:02] <kfogel> salgado: np, just ping me when ready
[16:16] <kfogel> thekorn: ping re bug #325367
[16:17] <thekorn> kfogel, reading the bug, must be an old one
[16:17] <kfogel> thekorn: you apparently have a branch for it :-)
[16:19] <thekorn> kfogel, but I'm not sure anymore if I really like this branch :)
[16:19] <kfogel> thekorn: I haven't looked at it yet, so I'll believe whatever you say.
[16:19] <kfogel> thekorn: I got to the bug via filing bug #426323, which is about a similar topic.
[16:20] <kfogel> thekorn: mainly just wanted to know if you were planning to continue with it, because if you were, I'd ask you for help testing my 426323 fix :-).
[16:20] <kfogel> thekorn: though I am also interested in seeing the TOC appear.
[16:22] <thekorn> kfogel, my idea was to use the sphinx documentation framework to generate docs + examples
[16:22] <thekorn> problem is: it needs everything in rst format
[16:23] <thekorn> so I thought about writing a wadl-to-rst stylesheet
[16:23] <thekorn> whithout actually knowing how this all works
[16:23] <kfogel> thekorn: mrmrm.  yeah.  I'm going for much more limited solutions, if I can.  I don't want to involve any new tools.
[16:24] <thekorn> so maybe someone with knowledge of xsl can do it more easily and cleaner, if wanted
[16:24] <thekorn> right, that's a problem too
[16:26] <kfogel> thekorn: I'll see what I know after doing the other bug.  If not, maybe sinzui can help; I think he knows more about this than we do.
[16:30] <thekorn> kfogel, no matter how this (and similar) bug are solved, but they should be solved somehow, because the more new features are added to the API the more unreadable this large-one-page-apidoc gets
[16:31] <kfogel> thekorn: yuppers
[16:31] <kfogel> thekorn: well, I mean, search does a lot
[16:31] <kfogel> thekorn: but a TOC would still be nice :-)
[16:50] <mathiaz> hi - is there a way via launchpadlib to get the list of packages to which a team is a bug contact (ie the list of packages from https://bugs.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-server/+packagebugs for ex)?
[16:52] <geser> kfogel: I once also tried to look at the .xsl file to see how hard it would be to get a TOC included but got already stuck at the point how to actually use the .xsl file to get a .html file to test any changes I might make. Is there any documentation how to actually build the documentation?
[16:52] <kfogel> geser: that's what I'm looking for too.  I spoke to gary about it a few weeks back; he was doing some work that would make it easier, IIRC.  I need to ping him again.
[18:00]  * mpt submits his first merge proposal, wheeeee
[18:02] <Daviey> mpt: I tried to approve my first merge proposal a few hours ago.. wasn't quite sure what to do!
[18:14] <thekorn> kfogel, geser that's what I used some time ago to build the apidoc, but maybe there is some script in the launchpad source which does the job in a more generic way: http://paste.ubuntu.com/267402/
[18:14] <kfogel> thekorn: thx, will look
[18:14] <kfogel> (but looooooooonch first)
[18:27] <smoser> it appears that 'hide duplicates' button doesn't do anything (at least not what i expected)
[18:27] <smoser> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/+bugs?field.searchtext=&orderby=-importance&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INVALID&field.status%3Alist=WONTFIX&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug
[18:27] <smoser> _supervisor=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.status_upstream-empty-marker=1&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_cve.used=&field.tag=ec2-images&field.tags_combinator=ANY&search=Search
[18:27] <smoser> shoot...
[18:27] <smoser> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/+bugs?field.searchtext=&orderby=-importance&field.status%3Alist=NEW&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITH_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INCOMPLETE_WITHOUT_RESPONSE&field.status%3Alist=INVALID&field.status%3Alist=WONTFIX&field.status%3Alist=CONFIRMED&field.status%3Alist=TRIAGED&field.status%3Alist=INPROGRESS&field.status%3Alist=FIXCOMMITTED&assignee_option=any&field.assignee=&field.bug_reporter=&field.bug
[18:27] <smoser> _supervisor=&field.bug_commenter=&field.subscriber=&field.status_upstream-empty-marker=1&field.omit_dupes.used=&field.omit_dupes=on&field.has_patch.used=&field.has_cve.used=&field.tag=ec2-images&field.tags_combinator=ANY&search=Search
[18:27] <smoser> show the same list (both with multiple entries for the same bug number)
[18:27] <smoser> i would have thought 'hide duplicates' would show a bug only once
[18:31] <smoser> can anyone confirm that ?
[18:31] <smoser> or is this just luser error ?
[18:39] <micahg> smoser: hide duplicates hides bugs marked as duplicates, not multiple tasks for the same bug
[18:40] <smoser> ah. ok. so is there a way to condense tasks ? to only show a single entry for a bug ?
[18:41] <micahg> idk
[20:10] <geser> kfogel: I played a little bit with the .xsl and have now a basic table-of-contents already, needs now a little bit polishing
[20:11] <kfogel> geser: !!!
[20:11] <kfogel> geser: that's terrific.  Is there a branch where I can look?
[20:11] <geser> not yet
[20:14] <geser> kfogel: http://paste.ubuntu.com/267490/ , but it's currently more a test that my idea works (working now on the layout and the indenting of the changes)
[20:16] <kfogel> geser: looking
[20:18] <kfogel> geser: looks sane to me.  Can you tell me what environment you have set up and what commands you're running to test this?  I wanted to make some similar changes for bug #426323, and even have a branch, but ran into some issues trying to test it.
[20:19] <kfogel> geser: (or if you want to just incorporate the tiny changes from my branch into what you're doing, and thus resolve both bugs at once, that would be fine too)
[20:20] <geser> kfogel: I branched lp:launchpadlib (to get the source), used thekorn's script to fetch the wadl file (modified it to store in a file) and use xmlstarlet to go the transformation (using xsltproc works too)
[20:20] <kfogel> geser: thx
[20:21] <kfogel> geser: none of this required a branch of launchpad itself, right?
[20:21] <geser> no
[20:21] <geser> as far as I can tell you just need the .xsl file and the wadl file and a XSLT processor
[20:24] <kfogel> geser: *nod*
[21:22] <geser> thekorn: what's your idea about http://www.bienia.de/tmp/apidoc.html? (+apidoc with a TOC)
[21:24] <intellectronica> geser: wow, chapeau for preparing this. i would have rather it didn't use frames but simply added the toc at the beginning on the page like you often see in wikis, but even this is already a nice improvement
[21:25] <geser> intellectronica: it doesn't use frames
[21:25] <geser> intellectronica: it uses a div with position:fixed
[21:25] <geser> kfogel: look at http://www.bienia.de/tmp/apidoc.html :)
[21:25] <intellectronica> geser: well, i don't mean the implementation, but how it's laid out
[21:26] <kfogel> geser: sorry, dropped off b/c laptop somehow reached critical temperature.  looking.
[21:27] <geser> intellectronica: might really be enough just to list it at the beginning of the page as the ones within the page are linked
[21:28] <kfogel> geser: I'm happy either way, but am more accustomed to non-framey layouts personally
[21:30] <geser> kfogel, intellectronica: updated. the toc is now at the beginning of the page
[21:31] <kfogel> geser: like it!
[21:31] <geser> should I add a link to the TOC at the end of each entry?
[21:33] <intellectronica> geser: that's beautiful!
[21:33] <kfogel> geser: IMHO, no.  Those who use the page often will know where the TOC is.  Those who don't will jump first to the start to see what's up anyway.
[21:33] <intellectronica> geser: i never find those links useful, because i can always stroke Home if i want to go to the top of the page. but i guess it doesn't harm
[21:34] <kfogel> intellectronica: (I think it does harm -- any clutter is noise, a slight distraction to the reader)
[21:35] <geser> when I using the browser I've my hand at the mouse to having a link to the TOC saves me to moving my hand to the keyboard and back again to the mouse
[21:36] <geser> but if consensus it to leave out such a link, I'll leave it out
[21:36] <intellectronica> you see, that's why i only use thinkpad keyboards :)
[21:36] <thekorn> geser, wow, super gut! - thanks alot
[21:41] <kfogel> geser: I'd say leave it out, b/c most likely people will open TOC in one tab, and then open individual items in other tabs anyway.
[21:42] <geser> kfogel: a reader is problably just interested about the object he jumped to and doesn't read the page from top to bottom. after that he either follows a link to an other object or starts from fresh (back to toc). (and the bug also asks about a "top" link to quickly jump to the toc)
[21:44] <thumper> kfogel: you get karma for each revision that launchpad is able to attribute to you
[21:44] <kfogel> geser: I'm just not exactly sure where these back-to-toc links would go, nor how frequent they would be, I guess.
[21:44] <thumper> kfogel: it doesn't have to be a mainline revision
[21:45] <kfogel> thumper: thank you, just what I needed to confirm.
[21:45] <kfogel> thumper: while we're here: do we know what the timeline is on moving all launchpad branches to 2a format?
[21:46] <kfogel> thumper: there's some backscroll in #launchpad that is related to that; I can paste for you if you want.
[21:46] <thumper> no
[21:46] <thumper> kfogel: it is a sensitive issue
[21:47] <thumper> kfogel: there may well be users that don't have bzr 2 and if we upgrade their branches it is unusable for them
[21:47] <kfogel> thumper: http://paste.ubuntu.com/267539/   (short read)
[21:47] <kfogel> thumper: I understand, sure.  That's why I'm asking what's our plan?  That is, what have we decided is the condition that needs to be satisfied?
[21:48] <thumper> kfogel: the general thoughts at the last team lead is that we'd be waiting at least a release or two after bzr 2.0
[21:48] <kfogel> thumper: ah, a whiles away.  okay, thanks.
[21:48] <thumper> yes
[21:48] <thumper> kfogel: we have the next ubuntu distro series opening before that
[21:48] <kfogel> thumper: might want to tell that to flacoste.  in the meantime, figuring out the flags to pass to 'bzr init-repo' is going to be painful for those who run bzr nightlies.
[21:49] <thumper> why?
[21:49] <kfogel> thumper: because it now defaults to 2a.
[21:49] <thumper> so?
[21:49] <thumper> are you thinking about repos that aren't in 2a on lp?
[21:49] <thumper> to get branches?
[21:49] <kfogel> thumper: so if the branch you're concerned with is not 2a -- which it usually isn't -- then to create the right kind of shared repository..
[21:49] <kfogel> right
[21:49] <kfogel> thumper: right, on lp, exactly
[21:50] <kfogel> thumper: IOW, when I work with an lp-hosted project, I usually create a shared repo.
[21:50] <kfogel> then I branch trunk into that shared repo, and branch trunk->myworkingbranch in that shared repo.
[21:50] <thumper> kfogel: it isn't any more difficult than not running with nightlies and getting a 2a project
[21:50] <kfogel> thumper: not quite true: in the latter case, the advice is simple: "always run 'bzr init-repo --2a".
[21:51] <thumper> kfogel: perhaps you should look at bzr reconfigure
[21:51] <kfogel> thumper: in the former case, the flags could be any number of things, and it's not easy for a non-bzr-dev to figure out from looking at the English prose on the project's branch pages.
[21:51] <kfogel> thumper: how would that help?
[21:51] <thumper> well
[21:51]  * thumper waves hands around
[21:51] <thumper> bzr branch lp:some-project
[21:51] <thumper> then reconfigure the branch to be a shared repo
[21:51] <thumper> don't have to care about formats
[21:54] <kfogel> th
[21:54] <kfogel> whups
[21:54] <kfogel> thumper: when I read the reconfigure help, it doesn't seem to indicate that it turns an existing branch *into* a shared repo, but rather that it reconfigures an existing branch to *use* a (presumably already existing) share repo.  Is that not how it works?
[21:55] <thumper> kfogel: I think a little experimentation will be needed
[21:55] <thumper> kfogel: the idea would be to branch a project
[21:55] <thumper> kfogel: reconfigure the repo to be a shared repo
[21:55] <thumper> kfogel: move the branch to a directory "trunk"
[21:55] <thumper> kfogel: something like that
[21:56] <kfogel> thumper: well, experimentation is definitely needed, sure.  I'm not sure where "the repo" comes form in the second step there; somewhere in the .bzr directory?  And do we really want to be advising people to futz with their .bzr directories? :-)
[21:57] <thumper> kfogel: inside the .bzr directory there is the branch and the repository
[21:57] <thumper> kfogel: a shared repository is basicly a flag in the repository directory
[21:57] <kfogel> thumper: my point is merely that we are in for some pain either way.  Now that trunk bzr has made 2a its default, we should take that into account -- the cost of not upgrading launchpad branches to 2a has just gotten a bit higher, that's all.
[21:57] <geser> kfogel: if you want to look: I've added the back links to http://www.bienia.de/tmp/apidoc.html
[21:57] <thumper> sure
[21:58] <kfogel> geser: taking a look
[21:58] <kfogel> thumper: geser is solving bug #325367, cheers are in order
[22:00] <thumper> geser: cheers!
[22:02] <BUGabundo> hey
[22:02] <BUGabundo> sinzui: ping
[22:02] <BUGabundo> I'm trying to add a new email
[22:02] <BUGabundo> mustard@BUGabundo.net
[22:02] <BUGabundo> and I'm getting this error
[22:02] <BUGabundo> The email address 'mustard@BUGabundo.net' is already registered to Registry Administrators.  If you think that is a duplicated account, you can merge  it into your account.
[22:02] <sinzui> Hi BUGabundo
[22:02] <BUGabundo> this make absolute NO sense to me
[22:03] <sinzui> BUGabundo: That is strange to wrong. Registry Administrators should not have email addresses.
[22:03]  * sinzui looks
[22:03] <BUGabundo> thanks
[22:04] <BUGabundo> sinzui: FYI page is https://edge.launchpad.net/~bugabundo/+editemails
[22:08] <sinzui> BUGabundo: I cannot see the address. I think you need to ask a question to https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad . An admin needs to perform db surgery to delete the address.
[22:09] <BUGabundo> I never even use that address before
[22:09] <BUGabundo> its not an awnser, it's a bug
[22:10] <sinzui> BUGabundo: ~registry officially does not have an email address. The one that is assigned to it is /dev/null. I cannot see how or why it would have other email addresses.
[22:10] <BUGabundo> I know
[22:10] <BUGabundo> see why I came here?
[22:10] <BUGabundo> I was stuck looking at why it was showing me that
[22:10] <BUGabundo> let me try another fake email
[22:10] <BUGabundo> can you test it too?
[22:11] <BUGabundo> A confirmation message has been sent to 'blabla@BUGabundo.net'. Follow  the instructions in that message to confirm that the address is yours.  (If the message doesn't arrive in a few minutes, your mail provider  might use 'greylisting', which could delay the message for up to an hour  or two.)
[22:11] <BUGabundo> LULZ
[22:12] <BUGabundo> now what
[22:12] <BUGabundo> https://edge.launchpad.net/token/TNJ1SBXH6hdgrMQWHbWr
[22:12] <BUGabundo> Lost something?There’s no page with this address in Launchpad.Check that you entered the address correctly, or search for it:
[22:12] <kfogel> geser: gosh, they look fine.  +1 from me
[22:12] <BUGabundo> LP is broken eheh
[22:14] <BUGabundo> sinzui: what do you think its up?
[22:14] <BUGabundo> can't even validate an email I got :(
[22:14] <sinzui> BUGabundo: I think the email is owned by registry admins, so you cannot access it
[22:15] <BUGabundo> sinzui: asked for a new confirmation email and that seems to have worked
[22:15] <BUGabundo> sinzui: I used a *new* email
[22:15] <sinzui> BUGabundo: Sorry, new? another test address?
[22:16] <BUGabundo> no
[22:16] <BUGabundo> realone
[22:16] <BUGabundo>  mustardml@BUGabundo.net
[22:16] <BUGabundo> already confirmed now
[22:17] <sinzui> BUGabundo: I am still not certain what you are doing with the confirm that relates to the issue of someone else having your email address.
[22:17] <BUGabundo> me neither
[22:17] <BUGabundo> but at least now I have ML working
[22:18] <BUGabundo> I'll take care of opening a bug/anwser for the other email later
[22:18] <geser> kfogel: is there a doc how I get by branch back to LP and get it reviewed? (never done that till now)
[22:19] <sinzui> BUGabundo: How old is the mustard@ address?
[22:20] <BUGabundo> it aint
[22:20] <BUGabundo> never existed before
[22:20] <BUGabundo> AFAIK
[22:20] <sinzui> you created it today?
[22:20] <kfogel> geser: I can help
[22:20] <kfogel> geser: you branched launchpadlib to make these changes, right?
[22:21] <geser> yes, bzr branch lp:launchpadlib
[22:21] <kfogel> (sinzui: this stuff that geser and I are talking about is probably going to get sent to you for review; fair warning :-) )
[22:21] <kfogel> geser: are all your changes committed into your local branch?  You don't have any necessary parts that are not now incorporated into your launchpadlib?
[22:22] <sinzui> kfogel: for TOC?
[22:22] <kfogel> geser: I could ask that better: "All necessary parts are now incorporated & committed into your launchpadlib?"
[22:22] <kfogel> sinzui: yup
[22:22] <kfogel> sinzui: he's done it.
[22:22] <sinzui> a TOC would be nice
[22:22] <BUGabundo> sinzui: it's a catch all account
[22:22] <kfogel> sinzui: http://www.bienia.de/tmp/apidoc.html
[22:23] <geser> kfogel: yes
[22:24] <geser> sinzui: I already removed that page
[22:25] <sinzui> geser: I can see it when the review is requested. I have other matters I need to attend to today
[22:25] <kfogel> geser: great.  So, assuming your launchpad account username is 'geser', do: "bzr push lp:~geser/launchpadlib/toc" to create a personal branch called 'toc' up on launchpad, based on the launchpadlib project.
[22:25] <kfogel> geser: then we'll turn your branch into a merge proposal, and send it to sinzui or whoever for review.
[22:26] <kfogel> geser: you might want to keep your http://www.bienia.de/tmp/apidoc.html page live for now, so that the merge proposal can point to it.  Makes things easier for the reviewer.
[22:26] <geser> kfogel: ok, will keep it till the review/merge gets done
[22:29] <kfogel> geser: thx
[22:29] <kfogel> geser: let me know when your branch is pushed up
[22:29] <geser> done (pushed)
[22:33] <kfogel> geser: looking
[22:34] <geser> bah, I just realized I put the wrong bug number into my commit log
[22:36] <kfogel> geser: heh, it happens
[22:36] <kfogel> geser: I think this can be fixed, one sec
[22:36] <kfogel> geser: do you only have one commit in your bzr branch?
[22:36] <kfogel> one commit by you, I mean?
[22:37] <kfogel> oh
[22:37] <kfogel> no
[22:37] <kfogel> geser: I see, several, yeah
[22:37] <geser> no, 3 in total
[22:37] <kfogel> geser: yeah
[22:38] <kfogel> geser: so, this is small enough that it might be easiest just to: 1) get your total diff, stash it away somewhere safe.  2) rebranch launchpadlib.  3) re-commit in one commit, with the right log message this time.  4) remove your lp branch.  5) re-push to re-create the lp branch.
[22:38] <kfogel> geser: thoughts?
[22:45] <geser> kfogel: 1), 2) and 3) done. How do I 4)?
[22:46] <kfogel> geser: on phone, one sec
[22:51] <kfogel> geser: back now
[22:51] <kfogel> geser: so go to your lp branch page. see the trash can icon next to the branch?
[22:51] <kfogel> sinzui: whoo hoo!
[22:52] <kfogel> sinzui: oh, I thouoght the planet had been themed now. apparently not.
[22:52] <sinzui> I am not posting on planet until it looks sexy
[22:52] <kfogel> geser: knock on the trash can, it will open up and swallow your existing branch :-)
[22:52] <geser> kfogel: I have seen the edit link but somehow overlooked the trash icon
[22:53] <kfogel> sinzui: my feelings exactly.  If it ain't good lookin', it ain't nothin'.
[22:56] <geser> kfogel: 4) and 5) done too
[22:56] <kfogel> geser: ok, let me refresh the branch page
[22:57] <kfogel> geser: so, on your branch page, see the link "Link to a bug report" ?
[22:57] <kfogel> let's first link this to the bug
[22:58] <geser> done
[23:03] <kfogel> geser: ok, now let's make a merge proposal
[23:03]  * kfogel refreshes the page
[23:03] <kfogel> geser: oh, please say my nick or I may not see it (I'm often away from this screen unless I have reason to think someone's saying stuff at me)
[23:04] <kfogel> geser: ok, click "propose for merging into another branch"
[23:05] <kfogel> geser: we're creating a merge proposal, which is pretty simple: it will have a short "cover letter", which will contain among other things the link to the demo site.
[23:07] <geser> kfogel: filled in initial comment, the other fields can be left at their defaults?
[23:10] <kfogel> geser: hmm, let me see, one sec
[23:10] <poolie> kfogel: do you want to catch up? i'm meant to be calling jam in a sec
[23:10] <kfogel> geser: I'd put "sinzui" for reviewer
[23:11] <kfogel> poolie: I can't, thanks, I will have to run in a bit, but I'll actually be back later tonight & we can chat then.
[23:11] <kfogel> poolie: s/tonight/today for you/
[23:11] <poolie> kk
[23:12] <kfogel> geser: everything else is defaults, yeah.  want to paste the text of your proposal cover letter before you hit submit?  I'm happy to review if you want.
[23:12] <kfogel> geser: when you submit it, an email is sent to the designated reviewer
[23:13] <geser> kfogel: oops, I already hit submit. It's mainly my commit statement and a link to my example page.
[23:14] <kfogel> geser: np, I'll read now
[23:15] <kfogel> geser: looks great to me
[23:15] <kfogel> geser: thank you!
[23:17] <kfogel> geser: I'm going to work on bug #426323, inspired by your example.
[23:24] <geser> kfogel: I'm now going to fix the HTML errors in that page (the W3C validators complains about over 2500 mistakes)
[23:25] <kfogel> geser: is that more than the validator complained about before?
[23:25] <kfogel> geser: IOW, is this unrelated to your change?
[23:25] <geser> it's unrelated
[23:26] <geser> kfogel: I checked the page to see if I didn't introduce any HTML mistakes
[23:27] <kfogel> geser: gotcha.
[23:27] <kfogel> geser: btw, how much longer will you be online today?  (I'm thinking of taking a break before coming back, but on the other hand it might be to my advantage to have you around to ping if I run into anything with my bug.)
[23:28] <geser> kfogel: probably not long (it's past midnight here already)
[23:28] <kfogel> geser: ok, np
[23:29] <kfogel> geser: earlier you said to me "<geser> kfogel: I branched lp:launchpadlib (to get the source), used thekorn's script to fetch the wadl file (modified it to store in a file) and use xmlstarlet to go the transformation (using xsltproc works too)"
[23:30] <kfogel> geser: if you have a transcript of your commands, that might save me some time.  Your instructions are clear enough, but as I haven't run them yet, I don't know what bits of knowledge you might be assuming I have that I don't actually have :-).
[23:37] <geser> kfogel: http://paste.ubuntu.com/267586/ here is the modified script I used to download the wadl file and also how I did the XSL transformation.
[23:38] <kfogel> geser: thank you.  (is that the thekorn script you were referring to?)
[23:38] <geser> yes
[23:39] <geser> kfogel: yes
[23:40] <kfogel> geser: I think you probably just saved me 1.5 hours of work, with a margin of error of 200%.
[23:40]  * kfogel tries to be very precise about these things