[04:30] <rockstar> mwhudson, around you around to take a branch?
[04:30] <rockstar> Er, take==review
[04:30] <mwhudson> rockstar: hmm, maybe
[04:31] <mwhudson> rockstar: how big?
[04:31] <rockstar> mwhudson, it's not very big.  One new method on IBranch.
[04:31] <mwhudson> rockstar: ok then
[04:36] <rockstar> mwhudson, here's the diff: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/304776/
[04:36] <rockstar> mwhudson, and here's the mp: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~rockstar/launchpad/ibranch-upgrade/+merge/14201
[04:40] <mwhudson> rockstar: well that was easy
[04:41] <rockstar> mwhudson, I aim to please.
[04:42] <rockstar> mwhudson, if I change that assert, I can probably remove the other assert as well, ent?
[04:45] <mwhudson> rockstar: actually, the assert probably won't work as is
[04:45] <mwhudson> rockstar: i think you probably want assertEqual([job], list(getUtility(IBranchUpgradeJobSource).iterReady()))
[04:45] <mwhudson> rockstar: if you can get something like that working then yes, you don't need the other assert
[09:21] <wgrant> noodles775, al-maisan: Can I grab one of you to look at https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~wgrant/launchpad/bpr-ddeb_package-db/+merge/14008?
[09:22] <al-maisan> hello wgrant, is it something that needs to land today?
[09:22] <al-maisan> It's Friday of week 3 :P
[09:22] <noodles775> wgrant: debug_package +1
[09:23] <wgrant> noodles775: OK. I was following bigjools' advice with ddeb_package.
[09:23] <noodles775> wgrant: although, I'm guessing Julian would agree with your original name...
[09:23] <noodles775> wgrant: yes, exactly
[09:23] <wgrant> al-maisan: Hm, forgot it was that late, sorry.
[09:24] <al-maisan> wgrant: no problem .. it is just that I really need to land 2 branches myself today.
[09:24] <noodles775> wgrant: so although i'd prefer debug_package, I think we can assume that julian would go for ddeb_package, but if it doesn't need to land now, he'll be around next week to confirm.
[09:24] <wgrant> noodles775: It doesn't need to land this cycle, as the rest won't.
[09:25] <wgrant> So I guess I shall confirm with him.
[09:25] <wgrant> Sorry for the noise.
[09:32] <al-maisan> hello adeuring, I am in dire need of a review (https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~al-maisan/launchpad/newuris-399186/+merge/14204)
[09:32] <al-maisan> would you be willing to look at the branch above?
[09:32] <adeuring> al-maisan: review just done :) r=me
[09:33] <al-maisan> adeuring: thanks .. but this another branch :P https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~al-maisan/launchpad/newuris-399186/+merge/14204
[09:33] <adeuring> al-maisan: Ah, i'll look at it
[09:34]  * al-maisan sends virual cookies to adeuring 
[09:34] <al-maisan> *virtual
[09:39] <adeuring> al-maisan: could you add a doc string for the new method traverse() (diff line 21)
[09:40] <al-maisan> adeuring: will do.
[09:52] <adeuring> al-maisan: in ArchivePermissionSet._nameToPackageSet() you are using ubuntu.currentseries as the series. Is there no use case where this method should search for a package in another series?
[09:52] <adeuring> ...i mean search for a pkg set
[09:53] <al-maisan> adeuring: the "problem" here is that the user only specified a package set *name* which is not enough to find a package set
[09:53] <adeuring> al-maisan: right. 
[09:53] <al-maisan> in other cases where the user does not specify the distro series for the package set we use `currentseries` as a default
[09:54] <al-maisan> using it here is hence consistent with the rest of the package set API
[09:55] <al-maisan> if they want a package set in a different series they can pass in a `IPackageset` instance as opposed to a name
[09:55] <adeuring> al-maisan: Ah, now I undertsnd! thanks
[09:55] <al-maisan> in which case there is no need to second guess their intentions :)
[09:55] <al-maisan> yup
[10:00] <BjornT_> adeuring: could you review https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~bjornt/launchpad/windmill-more-problems/+merge/14172? i didn't add it to the irc topic yesterday, since i wouldn't be around for the review. but if i would have added it, i would have been first in the queue :)
[10:00] <adeuring> BjornT_: sure
[10:01] <BjornT_> thanks. it should be quite quick, it's only changes to tests
[10:05] <adeuring> al-maisan: s/aleady/already/ in the added tests.
[10:05] <adeuring> al-maisan: r=me
[10:05] <al-maisan> adeuring: thanks! Will fix that.
[10:06] <al-maisan> that = typo
[11:17] <danilos> henninge, jtv: anyone of you have time to take a look at my branch for #459132 (350 lines)?
[11:17] <mup> Bug #459132: Clean up existing untranslated credits messages <Launchpad Translations:In Progress by danilo> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/459132>
[11:17] <jtv> danilos: I don't, sorry!
[11:18] <danilos> jtv, ok, that's a shame :) let's see if henning does or will I have to go for a slot in the queue :)
[11:18] <henninge> danilos: will look,  if you look at mine ;-)
[11:18] <jtv> danilos: queue's pretty full, so I'd take henning's offer :)
[11:18] <danilos> henninge, sounds good, diff line for line :)
[11:19] <danilos> jtv, it's not like I haven't noticed :)
[11:19] <jtv> that's why you asked in the first place... got it.
[11:21] <henninge> danilos: although I am liable to drop out at any time ... ;-)
[11:21] <henninge> danilos: here is my mp, https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~henninge/launchpad/bug-461756/+merge/14211
[11:21] <danilos> henninge, mine is at https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~danilo/launchpad/bug-459132/+merge/14210
[11:21] <henninge> I was about to ask ...
[11:24] <danilos> henninge, just one question about yours: is there a reason not to default to ordered_by_names=True?
[11:25] <henninge> danilos: the risk of breaking other code/tests. That is the only reason.
[11:25] <henninge> backward compatibility
[11:25] <danilos> henninge, right, it'd be nice to see how much stuff breaks, but not that important right now
[11:26] <danilos> henninge, it looks good, a very nice branch, r=danilo :)
[11:26] <henninge> danilos: thank you
[11:28] <danilos> henninge, judging by the complexity of our branches here, I'd say you didn't get the better of it :)
[11:29] <henninge> danilos: I wasn't expecting that ... :-/
[11:33] <danilos> henninge, it's not too bad I hope :)
[11:36] <adeuring> leonardr: I see that you are in the review queue but i can't find any MP from you
[11:36] <leonardr> adeuring: i'll look it up
[11:36] <leonardr> you probably dont' see it because it's a launchpadlib branch
[11:36] <leonardr> https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~leonardr/launchpadlib/trusted-workflow-tests
[11:37] <leonardr> er, https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~leonardr/launchpadlib/trusted-workflow-tests/+merge/14167
[11:38] <adeuring> topic on call: adeuring || reviewing: leonardr || queue: [maxb] || This channel is logged: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/
[11:39] <henninge> danilos: no, it's fine. After all, I am familiar with the stuff.
[11:40] <henninge> danilos: I see you use the storm "In" operator in pofile.py. I had tried to use it in potemplate.py which your branch touches, too.
[11:41] <henninge> danilos: it didn't work some how. You left the sql code in there (line 85), did you try to use storm In here, too?
[11:41] <danilos> henninge, I haven't tried, most likely
[11:42] <danilos> henninge, I can try it and it should probably work
[11:43] <henninge> danilos: would be nice. I cannot remember why I couldn't get it to work.
[11:44] <danilos> henninge, right, I'm trying it out
[11:44] <danilos> henninge, doesn't work for me either: "NameError: global name 'In' is not defined" :) ok, ok, I'll add an import as well :)
[11:45] <danilos> henninge, doc/potemplate.txt passes if I use In() there
[11:46] <danilos> henninge, http://paste.ubuntu.com/304971/
[11:47] <henninge> danilos: also plase fix the docstrig for CreditsFixer which was copied from the statistics script.
[11:48] <henninge> danilos: very nice, thank you
[11:48] <danilos> henninge, how could you tell? :)
[11:49] <henninge> :)
[11:52] <adeuring> leonardr: you are raising RequestTokenAlreadyAuthorized(self.message(self.NONEXISTENT_REQUEST_TOKEN) -- the combintaion of parameter name/content and the exception name looks a bit odd ;) What about using TokenAuthorizationException?
[11:53] <leonardr> adeuring: ok. the most likely reason the token woudln't exist is that it had already been authorized and exchanged
[11:53] <leonardr> i'm actually thinking of using TokenAuthorizationException for everything
[11:53] <leonardr> i don't know if i need all those exception types
[11:55] <adeuring> leonardr: OK, could you either add a comment to the existing variant or switch to TokenAuthorizationException ?
[11:55] <leonardr> i will either switch to TAE or create a new kind of exception
[11:55] <henninge> danilos: your tests in test_potmsgset.py don't need to call setTranslationCreditsToTranslated explicitely because it is called implicitely now when the POTMsgSet is created.
[11:59] <salgado> adeuring, are you reviewing any of the branches from the queue?
[11:59] <danilos> henninge, right, which means that the test is a bit flakey; how would I test that with the existing data, when there already is a translator-credits message with diverged, imported, current translation, it works correctly?
[12:00] <adeuring> salgado: yes; acutally, I'm reviewing leonard's branch, and reviewed maxb's branch already...
[12:00] <danilos> henninge, i.e. how do I work around that feature of the POTMsgSet creation to be able to test with data as it exists today in LP
[12:00] <adeuring> on call: adeuring,salgado || reviewing: leonardr || queue: [] || This channel is logged: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/ 
[12:01] <henninge> danilos: yeah, it would require a flag all the way down to where the POTMsgSet is created to *not* add the dummy translation.
[12:01] <adeuring> leonardr: a suggestion: you are showing several messages with a simple "print message". Would it make sense to mode the print statement into its own method showMessage() so that people who write GUI client have a single method they need to oberload?
[12:02] <adeuring> s/mode/move/
[12:02] <henninge> danilos: you could add that flag and remove it later once the script has run.
[12:02] <henninge> danilos: is there no relvant case in the test data?
[12:02] <leonardr> adeuring: i do that in the next branch
[12:02] <maxb> adeuring: thanks - will you take care of PQMing it for me?
[12:02] <adeuring> leonardr: ok, cool
[12:02] <danilos> henninge, there might be, but I hate using sampledata for tests :)
[12:03] <adeuring> maxb: sure, will do that. 
[12:03] <henninge> danilos: then we need the flag, which isn't pretty either since it is only transitional.
[12:03] <danilos> henninge, though, in this particular case, that sounds better than a flag
[12:04] <henninge> danilos: I'd say, if there is the right data. Creating new sample data would be dumb, too.
[12:05] <danilos> henninge, of course
[12:05] <henninge> danilos: if you'll excuse me, I have a stand-up call now ... ;-)
[12:06] <salgado> adeuring, can you run 'make check_db_merge' on a pristine devel branch and tell me if it fails?
[12:06] <danilos> henninge, there are 3 translation credits messages in LP, that should do it
[12:06] <danilos> henninge, heh, right :)
[12:06] <adeuring> salgado: just a second...
[12:06] <adeuring> leonardr: r=me
[12:07] <adeuring> on call: adeuring,salgado || reviewing: -,- || queue: [] || This channel is logged: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/
[12:07] <salgado> adeuring, that's not updating the topic. ;)
[12:08] <adeuring> arghhh
[12:08] <adeuring> net my best day....
[12:14] <salgado> adeuring, did you get around to running that check_db_merge thing?
[12:15] <adeuring> salgado: just ran it: no problems
[12:15] <adeuring> (had to make coffe first...)
[12:15] <salgado> it fails for me on a mainline branch
[12:16] <salgado> I must have a conflict in a sourcecode/ branch or something
[12:19] <intellectronica> adeuring: can you review a patch for me? it's 584, but all removals :)
[12:19] <intellectronica> adeuring: it's the patch for killing the top-level +filebug
[12:20] <adeuring> intellectronica: I'd like to start some work on a small branch myself, so I'd prefer it if you could ask salgado too ...
[12:20] <salgado> sure!  I love removals
[12:20] <intellectronica> adeuring: np
[12:20] <intellectronica> salgado: great! http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/304994/
[12:21] <salgado> intellectronica, why is it being removed?
[12:22] <intellectronica> salgado: for a long time we thought that it's not really useful, but after changing the workflow for filing ubuntu bugs we needed to do something about filing them from the top-level. we decided that we're just going to kill it
[12:25] <salgado> intellectronica, ok.  and how about the tests removed from 'lib/lp/bugs/stories/guided-filebug/xx-filing-security-bugs.txt'?  are aren't we losing some coverage by removing that?
[12:26] <intellectronica> salgado: no, these tests only cover filing security bugs from the top-level (the test is inappropriately named). filing security bugs from pillar contexts is well covered elsewhere
[12:27] <salgado> intellectronica, cool. r=me then
[12:27] <intellectronica> salgado: thanks!
[13:27] <henninge> danilos: review sent
[13:27] <danilos> henninge, thanks
[13:30] <sinzui> barry:  stand-up in 2 minutes
[14:33] <noodles775> adeuring or salgado: could one of you look at this trivial branch: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~michael.nelson/launchpad/458200-p3a/+merge/14216
[14:33] <noodles775> it's mostly tests.
[14:34] <adeuring> noodles775: I'm just writing am MP myself; when that's done, I'll look at it.
[14:34] <noodles775> Thanks!
[15:01] <salgado> + self.libraryfile.expires = datetime.utcnow().replace(tzinfo=pytz.utc)
[15:01] <salgado> adeuring, why do you do that instead of "datetime.now(pytz.UTC)"?
[15:03] <adeuring> salgado: this gives an error when the value is dtpred in the DB. I found the replace() call in several places; simply copied it
[15:03] <adeuring> s/dtpred/stored/
[15:04] <salgado> hmm
[15:05] <salgado> that's weird
[15:05] <adeuring> salgado: seems that I was a bit confused... I'll use datetime.now(pytz.utc)
[15:06] <salgado> + >>> libraryfile.expires <= datetime.utcnow().replace(tzinfo=pytz.utc)
[15:06] <salgado> adeuring, you can use that in the test too
[15:06] <adeuring> salgado: right
[15:07] <salgado> and I think pylint is on crack, so there's no need to ignore the warning there
[15:08] <adeuring> salgado: perhaps; so you think I should removed the suppression again, so that we know that we should send pylint to a drug therapy ;)?
[15:09] <salgado> adeuring, that's what I do in these cases, but it might be time for heavier drugs as I've been seeing this for quite some time now
[15:09] <adeuring> salgado: ;) OK, removed f0401
[15:13] <deryck> adeuring or salgado, can I get in queue for a simple lint clean up branch?
[15:13] <adeuring> deryck: sure
[15:14] <adeuring> let me just finish another review
[15:14] <deryck> ok, thanks, adeuring 
[15:15] <sinzui> salgado-lunch: adeuring I have written a replacement lint for gedit-developer-plugins (launchpad uses a version of my lint script from 2002). I think I can adapt my 100% script to launchpad. It uses PEP8.py instead of pylint.
[15:16] <adeuring> sinzui: nice idea!
[15:18] <sinzui> adeuring: I meant to say my script is 100% python. it checks python syntax + style, markup (knows about HTML entities), doctests, and plain-text files.
[15:19] <adeuring> sinzui: sounds really good!
[15:19] <sinzui> It is better than good, it is fast
[15:20] <adeuring> noodles775: r=me
[15:22] <noodles775> Thanks adeuring 
[15:22] <adeuring> welcome :)
[15:28] <adeuring> deryck: r=me
[15:28] <deryck> adeuring, thanks!
[15:29] <sinzui> adeuring: can you review my blueprint branch?
[15:29] <adeuring> sinzui: sure
[15:29] <sinzui> adeuring: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~sinzui/launchpad/sprint-attendence-1
[15:30] <sinzui> ^ I had to write a lot of tests before I could add the new feature because there was nothing veriying the current behaviour.
[16:11] <adeuring> sinzui: r=me
[16:11] <sinzui> thank
[16:20] <sinzui> adeuring: your grammar is correct. My fingers do not like to type suffixes. I type a lot of unconjugated words.
[16:20] <adeuring> sinzui: ;)
[17:34] <leonardr> adeuring or salgado, can one of you review https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~leonardr/launchpadlib/trusted-workflow-tests-2/+merge/14230 ?
[17:35] <salgado> leonardr, I'll take it
[17:35] <salgado> leonardr, how big is it?
[17:36] <leonardr> salgado: about 600 lines
[17:40] <mrevell> Anyone want to review the what's new branch for 3.1.10? Just text changes. https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~matthew.revell/launchpad/whatsnew-3110/+merge/14231
[17:41] <mrevell> adeuring, ^^^ ?
[17:41] <adeuring> mrevell: sure
[17:41] <mrevell> thanks adeuring
[17:41] <leonardr> salgado: sorry to run when i have a branch in the queue but i'm really hungry and must go fetch lunch. if you run into a blocker just drop my branch until i get back
[17:42] <salgado> leonardr-afk, sure, no worries
[17:49] <adeuring> mrevell: r=me
[17:50] <mrevell> thanks adeuring!
[18:04] <salgado> leonardr-afk, the diff in your MP has a bunch of conflict markers
[18:04] <salgado> abentley, don't MPs show when there are conflicts anymore?
[18:05] <abentley> salgado: The automatic preview diffs don't record whether there are conflicts.
[18:06] <salgado> abentley, but MPs used to say something like '9 conflicts' in red, at the top, no?
[18:07] <abentley> salgado: That was generated by an external script, "MAD".
[18:07] <salgado> oh, right.  and we don't use that anymore?
[18:08] <abentley> salgado: I'm not sure whether it's still running, but the diffs are being generated by LP now.
[19:19] <leonardr> salgado, the version i'm pushing now has the conflicts resolve
[19:19] <leonardr> d
[19:51] <salgado> leonardr, did your push finish?  I got conflicts when merging your branch
[19:53] <leonardr> salgado: yes, version 77
[19:53] <salgado> leonardr, it doesn't seem to be there: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~leonardr/launchpadlib/trusted-workflow-tests-2
[19:54] <leonardr> ah, the name is different
[19:54] <leonardr> pushing now
[19:55] <leonardr> salgado: try again
[19:55] <leonardr> salgado: the reason the method names are the way they are is that i'm using python naming standards, not launchpad naming standards
[19:56] <salgado> leonardr, right, then it's the other methods that ought to be renamed?
[19:56] <salgado> getSingleCharInput and pressEnterToExit
[20:01] <salgado> leonardr, also, what's the reason for this change:
[20:01] <salgado> -        self.web_root = web_root
[20:01] <salgado> +        self.web_root = uris.lookup_web_root(web_root)
[20:13] <salgado> leonardr?
[20:39] <leonardr> salgado: sorry for delay
[20:39] <leonardr> uris.lookup_web_root() lets you specify "staging" instead of "https://staging.launchpad.net/"