[00:11] dobey, ping [00:11] who wants to live forever? [00:14] okay, since dobey is away I will tell the fairy tale. The emblems are broken but the fix is pretty easy. It looks like the code was refactored for some reason and some pieces went missing [00:22] Done, patch sent, battery's dying, wife's asleep :) [00:23] And directories are not handled properly but that would be another fix :) [00:23] rtgz_: i want to live forever! i assume that was an offer of some sort. :) [00:24] donpdonp, don't know, i became a little bit crazy after finding the reason behind the emblems, so that was just an attention-attractor, sorry, no U1 support for eternal life for now. [00:24] donpdonp, but you may file a feature request :) [00:25] ok. carry on providing freedom in distributed storage. [00:34] how do you sync all you files w/ this service [00:35] z/ [00:35] ? [03:50] Anyone know if someone is working on UbuntuOne support for gnote? [05:34] hey, how us U1 working? [07:32] * rtgz really needs to learn how to do the bzr things... [08:01] ubottu, search bug for timestamps not being preserved, launchpad search does not help [08:01] (search ) -- Searches for in the current configuration variables. [08:01] Found: ubuntuone, restrictedformats, omgvorian-#ubuntuforums, kde docs, browsers, scp, supybot-#ubuntu-bots, lgpl, ichthux, free formats [08:01] ubottu, pleeeease [08:53] Note to self and ubuntulog: Is CouchDB sync happening independently from syncdaemon connection state, i.e. replication is being performed even if we force our "cloud" to be disconnected? [08:59] lp does not allow to link tickets. Why? [09:15] rtgz, you can use tags to link tickets together [09:16] as in, put the same tag in two or more tickets you want to link [09:16] teknico, hm... good idea, I will try this next time :). Thanks! [09:16] then you can refer to them with a link like https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntuone-client/+bugs?field.tag=apport-bug [09:17] you're welcome :-) === rtgz is now known as rtg|very_away === rtg|very_away is now known as rtg|z [11:33] UbuntOne notifies "finished updating 0 files" if no files were added, only removals were made === rtg|z is now known as rtgz [11:39] * rtgz is uploading 2.6 Gb of data, wanna see how this is handled... [11:40] rtgz, I put 9GB of music into U1 a few days ago :) [11:41] aquarius, are you a user of free 2Gb account? [11:42] rtgz, nope, paid account [11:42] aquarius, eeexactly [11:42] rtgz, oh, you're testing "what happens if I go over quota"? [11:42] aquarius, yup [11:44] aquarius, if I had 50Gb account it would take forever to test it since my ISP caps the upload to 1Gb and I don't have 50Gb of data... Unless i craft it via /dev/random... [11:44] heh [11:44] * 1Mbit/s [11:49] hmmmm [11:50] guys, if sha1 sum matches something that you already have on the server then it is not uploaded, right? [11:53] ah, false alarm, it is not hashed so Nautilus shows it as (checked) (see bug 479475, comment 2) [11:53] Launchpad bug 479475 in ubuntuone-client "File emblems don't display correct sync status" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/479475 [11:53] misleading, indeed. [11:54] ok, since this is gonna take some time, will go see the real clouds (since sun is missing for some reason)... === rtgz is now known as rtg|away [12:50] hello hackers === statik` is now known as statik [13:49] morning, all === rtg|away is now known as rtgz [14:01] rtgz: hrmm [14:02] dobey, emblems ? [14:02] yes [14:04] rtgz: and yes, couchdb sync has nothing to do with syncdaemon [14:04] rtgz: couchdb has built-in replication support, which we use [14:08] dobey, yup, then ubuntuone-client-applet controls file sync only, everything els happens automagically [14:09] yes [14:10] dobey, sorry about hit-post-run cycle in that ticket, it was too late in the evening, I was on the battery so I wanted the logic of debugging to be available no matter what :) [14:16] I want you all to know: UNTESTED CODE IS BROKEN CODE [14:16] ok, thanks, you can continue now [14:17] dobey: you have a critical bug assigned to you. Please work on that before anything else bar none (well, mostly. I think you can go to the doctor's) [14:17] you're too kind to the code [14:17] ALL CODE IS BROKEN CODE [14:17] Chipaca, http://www.google.com.ua/search?q=No+marshaller+for+signature+of+signal [14:18] Chipaca, it looks like ubuntuone-nautilus has some share in the results :( [14:18] nessita: is that link from rtgz relevant to your crash from minutes ago? [14:19] Chipaca: let me see, I was running nautilus with gdb to try to gather some helpful info [14:19] Am i missing some replies ? nessita? [14:20] rtgz: what can I do for you? [14:20] dobey, but I clearly remember that some time before karmic went into production the emblems were actually changing somehow, at least they were different and then, after karmic release it all turned to checkmarks [14:21] nessita, are you debugging the Nautilus for UbuntuOne emblems? [14:21] rtgz: not really, I'm trying to reproduce a bug for the syncdaemon and nautilus crashed on me, the bastard [14:22] * rtgz had pyinotify crashed on me yesterday after clicking 'connect' button in the Nautilus and syncdaemon stopped seeing the files... But I hope that's only because I was switching libraries too fast... [14:24] Hmmm... 2009-12-03 13:11:41,386 - pyinotify - ERROR - The path /home/rtg/Ubuntu One/testing/untitled folder of this watch must not be trusted anymore [14:25] Chipaca: hrmm, that is not critical. i am not sure why it is marked as critical. [14:25] Erm [14:26] dobey: because a lot of people are getting it [14:26] Launchpad OpenId page: You are signing into: Ubuntu One Your info will be sent to the blog. [14:26] the blog o_O ? [14:26] heh [14:26] the borg. Typo [14:28] Chipaca: bug report #491896 I couldn't get any more info using gdb :-/ [14:28] btw, may I start a flame about the default state of the emblems? [14:28] Chipaca: it happens all the time on my installation [14:28] rtgz: probably not. You can start a discussion, however. But, mailing list is probably better than here [14:30] sigh [14:30] i think the problem is already fixed [14:30] dobey: the critical? [14:30] yes [14:30] dobey: how? [14:31] dobey: actually I should've said "great! how?" :) [14:31] btw, my upload rate to U1 is 1Mbit so it hits the ISP shaper, don't know how to reproduce "Slow upload" speed in this case... [14:31] rtgz: slow upload seems to be due to lots of small files, not few big files [14:31] facundo's fix to the error handling, where syncdaemon/protocol was thinking some other error was "INTERNAL_ERROR" [14:32] dobey: there are two things [14:32] dobey: one is that before (and in karmic right now), getting INTERNAL_ERROR on authorization was interpreted as auth failure [14:32] dobey: that was fixed by facundo's branch [14:32] dobey: another is starting syncdaemon without a token [14:32] Chipaca, ah, so it is not the single file which goes via snail mail to U1, it is the number of files together taking more than expected, I see [14:33] dobey: that is being fixed also (right, __lucio__?) so that syncdaemon goes to auth failure in that case also [14:33] Chipaca: starting syncdaemon without a token is harmless because it doesn't give us AUTH_FAILED [14:33] <__lucio__> Chipaca, dobey: in the queue, yes. [14:33] so it wouldn't cause a loop of authentication [14:33] There was an error sharing the folder 'testing/Perl Development Toolkit': [14:33] callback() takes exactly 2 arguments (1 given) [14:34] but i have a branch in review that avoids starting syncdaemon before we get the token [14:34] in the applet [14:34] dobey: sorry, I didn't follow that. How is it harmless? it blows up in the user's face [14:34] dobey: the problem is nautilus also [14:34] Chipaca: how does it blow up in the user's face? [14:34] Nautilus = There was an error sharing the folder 'testing/Perl Development Toolkit': [14:34] callback() takes exactly 2 arguments (1 given) [14:34] dobey: syncdaemon currently raises NoAccessToken when started without a token [14:34] re: bug nessita has posted [14:34] the ShareCreateError was not properly handled in the code [14:34] Chipaca: yes, but that isn't shown to the user. [14:35] dobey: they get the apport dialog... [14:35] once it is handled, the error message is shown as I provided [14:35] dobey, Chipaca, nessita ^ [14:35] dobey: that branch needs tests, I had to remove my Approve on it [14:36] Chipaca: only if they're running lucid [14:36] Chipaca: apport doesn't pop up automatically in stable release, as i understand things [14:36] nessita: huh? [14:36] SYN [14:37] dobey: the branch you're referring to, doesn't provide any tests [14:37] dobey: so "Needs Fixing" as per what Chipaca mentioned a few minutes ago [14:38] -ENOTPOSSIBLE [14:39] nessita, may I give you the DEB file so that you check whether the crash is actually an unhandled ShareCreateError signal? [14:39] rtgz: sure! [14:40] nessita, http://buzz.rtg.in.ua/~rtg/ubuntuone-client-gnome_1.1+r283-0ubuntu1~ppa1~karmic_i386.deb [14:40] dobey: what's not possible? :-) [14:40] nessita, that is just the standard r283 + the patch from bug #479475 [14:40] Launchpad bug 479475 in ubuntuone-client "File emblems don't display correct sync status" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/479475 [14:41] nessita: unit tests for the applet [14:41] dobey: why? [14:41] nessita: to do so basically means rewriting the entire applet as a mocked object, which means the applet isn't being tested, the mocked object is. [14:41] dobey: 1 sec [14:42] dobey: *maybe* you can convince me that adding tests to the applet now, when it is about to die, is silly [14:42] dobey: *maybe* :) [14:42] Chipaca: well i don't think python lets you import scripts from bin/ either [14:42] nessita, afterward, exit nautilus completely, nautilus -q, since it does not want to reload the libs just because there is a new one... [14:42] dobey: I disagree. Test one: if we have no token, syncdaemon is not started. Test two: if we do have a token, syncdaemon is started. I let you discuss the details with your manahger :-) [14:42] Chipaca: and adding tests that are going away in a few weeks seems silly as well [14:42] dobey: but, going forwards, if we were doing the applet from scratch, I'd definitely want it done TDD [14:43] also, integration tests are not unit tests [14:43] dobey: I didn't say unit tests, necessarily [14:43] Chipaca, dobey: the logic authtoken-syncdaemon should not be in applet code. For instance, you will need that exact same code on the non-applet application [14:44] dobey: and for the parts that are not dying (e.g. nautilus), I want us to add tests to that [14:44] nautilus is even more difficult to test [14:45] nessita: the oauthdesktop code is a module and is already tested. [14:45] dobey: I know, I'm not saying it's blowing and making glass [14:45] * Chipaca wonders if that expression translates well [14:45] Chipaca: I think it would be a good exercise to separate logic from view, so you can be sure to have tests for the business logic [14:45] dobey: yes, and I'm not saying you test oauth. I'm saying I would like to see tests for the oauth<->syncdaemon code [14:45] nessita: yes. But again, the applet is dying. [14:46] nessita: it's going away. [14:46] Chipaca: yes. But again, there is code that you will be using in the new app. [14:46] no [14:46] dobey: oauth <-> syncdaemon isn't, which is I think nessita's point [14:46] Chipaca: yes it is [14:46] dobey: oh? why? [14:47] dobey.verbose = 1 [14:47] Chipaca: because having a thin wrapper to check that a token exists and start the syncdaemon or request one, is silly. syncdaemon should be doing that check itself for lucid [14:47] syncdaemon should say "oh we don't have a token, make a dbus call to get one" [14:48] dobey: you're coupling interests [14:49] eh? i am trying to decouple them. [14:49] dobey: ok, let me rephrase :-) [14:50] Chipaca: by "design", which layer should be managing authentication, and which layer can assume is already authenticated? [14:50] __lucio__: ^ same question for you [14:51] nessita: authentication is one thing, getting the token is another, right? [14:51] no [14:51] auth includes getting a token. if you don't have a token, you're not authenticated. [14:51] IMO it only needs decoupling if there will be alternate means of getting credentials. [14:51] * __lucio__ reads [14:51] Chipaca: hum, I see them both as one thing [14:51] two separate steps. [14:52] urbanape: auth should have NO relation to the applications requesting auth [14:52] authentication can happen according to whatever rules we wish. We happen to act on oauth tokens as the credentials. [14:52] urbanape: which is not how it is now. currently auth is very tied to the start-up of syncdaemon/etc... stuff [14:52] hold on [14:52] and that's what needs to be decoupled [14:53] * nessita holds [14:53] when nessita says "authenticating" I hear "connecting to the server, showing our creds, and getting an AUTH_OK message" [14:53] why does it need to be decoupled if that's the only way we will authenticate people? If there are no affordances for alternate means of authenticating, I don't see a need for decoupling. [14:54] urbanape: I think when you say authenticating, you're saying something else [14:54] authentication is the process of establishing the identity of the requestor [14:54] ok, so we agree :) [14:54] I wrote pluggable authentication system for Zope. I get the authn/authz distinction. [14:55] urbanape: *you* wrote the pluggable auth system for zope? [14:55] when i say authentication, i am talking about the openid/oauth process, and not the use of those credentials by other applications to validate themselves with another part of our services [14:55] urbanape: wow :) i have some friends that hate you, but wow :) [14:55] Chipaca: for Zope 2. Tres Seaver and I [14:55] Chipaca: hah! [14:57] urbanape: unfortunately, what dobey just said is not what I said I understand nessita means by authentication, but it does match your definition. Is that your intention? [14:58] it's a very important distinction, especially if we're going to switch to having per-app authorization tokens [14:58] as opposed to one token per user, per machine [14:58] I may have missed some context [14:59] what is the behavior/process that nessita suggests needs decoupling? [14:59] * Chipaca gives nessita back her voice [14:59] and it means the piece that gets the token, can't be starting syncdaemon or other apps, when something else requests a new token [15:00] Chipaca: I still don't get the difference of concepts [15:01] MEETING BEGINS. Say 'me' to claim a slice of the stand-up meeting, then take your turn by saying DONE/TODO/BLOCKED. [15:01] nessita: we continue after the standup [15:01] me [15:01] me [15:01] me [15:01] me [15:01] me [15:02] me [15:03] me [15:04] me [15:04] teknico, go! [15:04] DONE: done more reviews, triaged my 20 bugs, finished exposing SMS methods in Funambol Server API (#381398) [15:04] TODO: expose Funambol Server API via REST/HTTP, disable free phone sync after 30 days (#403941) [15:04] BLOCK: none [15:04] next: urbanape [15:05] DONE: Went through my bug list and marked many "fixed released", updated some to tie to specific branches, commented on some. Basically cleaned my shit up. [15:05] DONE (cont'd): Chatted with aquarius, CardinalFang, and thisfred about desktopcouch delete propagation techniques. Got some good feedback on Bindwood 0.5 PPA release. [15:05] TODO: Get some branches landed, work on SRU for Bindwood 0.5 PPA release. [15:05] CardinalFang: The comfy CHAIR! [15:05] BLOCK: None [15:05] DONE: some work on attachments. thinking and talking about record deletion of deletion. [15:05] TODO: finish attachments. [15:05] BLOCKED: My understanding of attachments. Bah. [15:05] aquarius, sir! [15:05] ⚀ DONE: music store planning; music store user flows mockup; discussion about delete propagation in DC [15:05] ⚁ TODO: look at oauth-enabling twisted; make tomboy first-sync experience nicer; continue work on desktopcouch developer docs; write up things learned at UDS/sprint; work with rodrigo on Music Store, much more music store architecture planning; talk to thisfred and vds about sequence numbers etc; list of music store tasks for joshuahoover; feel less rough [15:05] ⚂ BLOCKED: [15:05] Chipaca: go [15:05] DONE: proposed branch to close #381398 again mail to funambol support, skype with funambol, support ticketing with funambol support on the same topic, packaging funambol and sort timestamps out [15:05] TODO: looks like the next thing is the 30 days plan but I'm not sure, I'll find out soon [15:05] BLOCKED: nope [15:06] jblount: go go go [15:06] DONE: Touched base with mt. about getting stuff finalized on /files/, got a branch landed [15:06] TODO: Work on the invoices for mattgriffin [15:06] i think vds hit a time dilation bubble [15:06] BLOCKED: Nope [15:06] Next: EOM? [15:06] Thanks, all. [15:06] no no no [15:06] next is Chipaca [15:06] you sill humans. you have erred. :) [15:06] DONE: ran around the city doing paperwork and trying to build my tech base back up to a tolerable level. TODO: get back on top of bugs, plans, planning, etc. BLOCKED: no [15:07] NEXT: dobey [15:07] ☺ DONE: Triage, Found/fixed #491573 [15:07] ☹ TODO: Fix #437165, Review/Fix #479375, Finish Backporting, Triage, Prepare releases/SRUs [15:07] aquarius: re sequence numbers and such: I'm about to start on a funambol exchange timestamps branch [15:07] ☹ BLCK: None. [15:07] now you can EOM i guess [15:07] dobey: I wish I have, I could fine more time to fix the new office :) [15:08] (oops sry for disrupting, thought the meeting was over) aquarius: so any discussion would be good sooner rather than later [15:08] aquarius: "oauth-enabling twisted" <- eh? [15:08] thisfred, aquarius: Thinking on the funambol thing: I think it would be really helpful for us to come up with a shared understanding of the processes whereby we sync information that is multi-homed (lives on the desktop but gets synced to the cloud for replication, not just resident in the cloud (or Desktop Couch)) [15:09] dobey, the twisted getpage stuff [15:09] dobey, I have a plan to look at it to see how hard it is to make it do oauth [15:09] Having the algorithm hashed out for how various apps should approach syncing/merging would mean that all our apps act consistently WRT DesktopCouch. [15:09] urbanape: +1 on shared understanding [15:09] I'm sure I've been going over the same space with bindwood [15:09] thisfred, yep, it would be good to chat about it [15:10] aquarius: but... why would we do that anyway? [15:10] urbanape: although funambol and bindwood are different in that all communication to and from funambol goes through a single point [15:10] dobey, hrm, I am now trying to remember what put it on my list :) [15:10] all communication to and from Firefox goes through a single point, too. [15:10] our server, and hence we can do all the funambol timestamps there [15:10] ah [15:10] funambol isn't dc? [15:11] doesn't use, rather [15:11] urbanape: correct [15:11] ah [15:11] why not? [15:11] urbanape: it's a server application [15:11] doesn't use Couch at all? [15:11] "Why in Golgafrinchum would we do that?" [15:12] to whom was that addressed, your bathiness? [15:12] nessita: where are you confused about the authn/authz separation? [15:12] urbanape: the data (contacts) is in couchdb, and ultimately ends up on the desktop [15:12] but funambol only talks to the cloud server directly [15:12] urbanape: generally about twisted+oauth [15:12] ah [15:12] dobey: I don't know what those two are :-) [15:13] nessita: authentication vs. authorization [15:13] dobey: well, I see those two as a single layer [15:13] nessita: ie "i am me" vs. "i allow this other thing to access my information" [15:13] authentication is the means of establishing identity. Authorization is the means of determining whether an identity is allowed to do something. [15:13] they're very much not a single layer [15:14] urbanape: from my point of view (syncdaemon) yes they are [15:15] nessita: you're confused about what "authentication" in syncdaemon actually means then i guess? [15:15] nessita: what syncdaemon does isn't exactly authentication of the user. it validates that it was authorized by the user to access user's data. [15:17] dobey: are you referring to the AUTHENTICATING state on the state machine? [15:17] What are the processes at work? Something gets the credentials, something verifies the credentials, something authorizes verified credentials. [15:17] nessita: yes. [15:18] dobey: so it's correct to expect to have the access token when the syncdaemon is running :-) [15:19] no [15:19] that would be equivalent to expecting that the user already typed in their password when they go to a newly visited web page [15:20] dobey: but the user goes to a newly visited page because he want to. The syncdaemon is not started by the user [15:21] dobey: re #437165, please also check all the ones with tag no-access-token [15:21] I never would have thought a program like Ubuntu One would need to be so complicated (obviously it is), I've never had more problems with something like this in my life! [15:21] the user triggers some user-application, like the applet, nautilus, or similar. So those apps should be ensuring the token is present [15:21] ok, bbiab [15:22] Last night I added about 48M of files and it's been trying to sync them for the last 10 hours...it seems to take about 5 seconds for each file (which are only 10-20k each), and use up 100% cpu in the process. :( [15:22] nessita: no, applications needing a token should request one if they don't have one [15:22] It's also timestamping the syncdaemon log files in 2030.... [15:23] dobey: IMHO syncdaemon is not an "application", but a core to other applications [15:23] nessita: it's not a gui application, no [15:24] nessita: it is a consumer of ubuntu one services. some applications might be GUI things, some might be services like syncdaemon. [15:24] nessita: but consumers that need credentials should request them if they don't have them. [15:24] nessita: not blindly expect they are always available [15:24] dobey: +1 [15:25] dobey: but if you don't design some dedicated layers to do dedicated job, you'll end up with a lot of duplicated code [15:25] so, I agree syncdaemon shouldn't die like a rat in that case [15:25] nessita: "request" here is "call a dbus method" [15:25] we have a ticket for it, let me grab the number [15:25] it's not a code duplication issue [15:27] it is, you'll end up with N applications all implementing the same "if token doesn't exist -> get token, If that fails, do that, etc etc" [15:28] it's like all those applications implementing try: import ssl; except ImportError: do_something_else [15:28] or all of them implementing main() [15:29] I'm that sure is an accurate comparison [15:29] :-) [15:29] then it's not problematically duplicated code. [15:30] try: authenticate(); except INVALID_TOKEN: get_a_token() [15:30] there is only so much you can do with that to avoid duplicating it [15:30] not all applications use the same protocols [15:30] heh I meant I'm *not* that sure [15:30] not all applications use the same language/libraries [15:31] and as i said, if we're going to do per-application tokens, then each app is going to have to request separately anyway [15:31] urbanape: and that too, but that's actually easier to solve for us, than solving the protocol problem [15:31] urbanape: we can presume that anyone integrating with u1, will probably want to use our client libraries. [15:33] urbanape: however, we can't presume they are all the same application. [15:35] dobey, urbanape: this is the issue we're gonna fix on syncdaemon for the noaccesstoken problem #488414 [15:35] dobey: well, the applications should be working at the authorization level. I think it's conceivable to change that try: except: to: [15:35] the noaccesstoken thing isn't actually a problem right now. [15:35] hrm [15:36] dobey: it is, there are tons of bug reports [15:36] urbanape: yes, the application says "i am not authorized, allow me to get some authorization plz" [15:36] and so the authentication step could be decoupled. [15:36] nessita: the NoAccessToken thing is a symptom though, not the problem. [15:37] urbanape: well authentication and authorizing an app will be coupled in the new log-in ui stuff. but it will be separate from the applications themselves [15:37] dobey: I agree, but we need to do something about it, people can't connect to the cloud and are hating us because of that ;-) [15:39] nessita: one valuable metric for that i think, is how many of those bugs are filed from a 1.0.2 versioned package vs. from a 1.1 versioned package [15:39] nessita, dobey: in the current state, Syncdaemon can't call oauthdesktop to get a token...because that implies starting the applet [15:40] verterok: well the dbus call will start the applet. but for lucid that won't be the case. [15:41] verterok: for karmic we have to live with what we have :) [15:41] dobey: so, we have 2 scenarios. The one I care about now (because of the amount of bug reports) is karmic [15:41] dobey: I know that everything will be better on Lucid :-) [15:43] nessita: yes, but we need to determine the problem first. i am pretty certain that the presence of NoAccessToken in the exceptions log isn't the problem. [15:43] it is merely a symptom [15:44] dobey: I agree, but I think we first need to provide a fix, and the look for the root of the problem [15:45] nessita: but provide a fix for what? hiding the symptom and just throwing hands up and exiting instead isn't going to show us the problem :) [15:45] dobey, yep, NoAccsesToken is preceeded by something failed earlier, but I can't reproduce it locally at the moment. [15:46] rtgz: reproducing NoAccessToken is pretty easy [15:46] dobey, yep, if I don't put the token there, right :) [15:47] dobey, but it is hard to make it work first, then suddenly make it stop working as it happens, according to some bug reports [15:48] dobey, and I definitely cannot tie up the issue with CouchDB empty management database which got populated after user restarted couchdb and restarted applet... [15:48] it's nothing to do with couchdb [15:48] Breakfast! Back in a bit. [15:48] breakfast? [15:48] brunch more like it [15:48] we stop serving breakfast at 10:30 [15:49] dobey: ok, so. Let's round up a bit: right now, the syncdaemon has no ways of getting a token if it doesn't have one, so it's needs to be started only when there is a token in place. Ergo, for now we need the applet to start syncdaemon only when the token was gathered. [15:49] dobey, yes, it is not, however ubuntuone-client-applet somehow interracts with desktopcouch.records, which read some pairing info from management db, i guess [15:49] nessita: and that's what we do [15:49] dobey: the branch you proposed does that, as per you commit messages [15:50] well unless you somehow try to avoid using the applet. but that's not realy supported [15:50] dobey: the branch you proposed doesn't have any test that backups that commit message, so until Lucio and Chipaca say otheriwse, I can not approve [15:50] rtgz: yes, it puts the token in desktopcouch AFTER it gets a token [15:53] i need to get one of those cupcake 3d printers [15:53] i could make a fortune selling replacement door handles for nissan sentras [16:24] * rtgz 2.0 GB Used (98.8%) [16:24] added one more file of 70 Mb and... [16:24] nothing [16:25] so if user puts more than 2Gb he might never know that the files are not being synced anymore until he visits the Web UI that says 'Upgrade to 50Gb'... [16:25] is this bug filed? [16:26] and checkmarks... grrr. I hate checkmarks-by-default, sent a message to ubunutone-users mailing list... [16:27] where's the "Community iFace" message? [16:28] what message? [16:30] dobey, the one that used to be in the room subject line... at least it was so some weeks ago [16:30] rtgz: i guess whoever was setting the topic for that hasn't been doing so [16:30] joshuahoover: was that you doing that? [16:35] ok, nobody knows about ignoring the files that exceed the quota? [16:36] Bug #404098 [16:36] Launchpad bug 404098 in ubuntuone-client "Storage quota notification and enforcement" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/404098 [16:40] dobey: i was when i was on face duty [16:40] webm0nk3y is on face today [16:41] * webm0nk3y blushes [16:58] must eat... bbiab :) [17:16] Here's what came to my mind the other day [17:17] it is possible to get more than 2Gb in free accounts IF: [17:17] 1. the user is determined enough [17:17] 2. GOTO 1 [17:17] Hm..., should I file that as a private bug instead [17:18] but that is not a bug in the real sense, it is just a workaround, I guess... [17:19] rtgz: yeah, it's possible...but (imo) if a user wants free storage that bad, then he/she is paying a price, just not to us :) their time (setting up multiple accounts, managing files across multiple accounts, etc.) must not be worth too much [17:19] joshuahoover, ah, i guess you know how this is possible :) [17:22] And... additionally, we might need to check that "Shared with Me/someshare from someone" folder is also protected by 'The other user has used all his quota, so stop adding more files' [17:23] rtgz: getting syncdaemon working for multiple accounts isn't a simple task [17:30] okay. next: Is there a bug report regarding the 'Share' dialog on the Web UI [17:32] It is good to know that i have shared my folder with openiduser19154... but I'd rather have it as an email [17:33] rtgz: i don't think there is a bug for that [17:36] joshuahoover, I searched for e-mail, email, share, openid - no results, going to create one [17:36] rtgz: great, thanks! === rtgz is now known as rtg|bugReportGen [17:49] joshuahoover, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntuone-servers/+bug/402775/comments/1 [17:50] Ubuntu bug 402775 in ubuntuone-servers "Files that I've shared with a given e-mail address being treated as though they are shared with an openid user" [Undecided,Incomplete] [17:50] ah, there are several Joshuas here === rtg|bugReportGen is now known as rtgz [17:52] rtgz: hmmm...well, apparently that's not quite true based on what you're seeing [17:53] joshuahoover, and dialog contains with "view and copy" in it that got display: none... strange, ok will comment and file new bug for other stuff [18:03] Has web ui got some nice common name, like... oneweb, frontier or something like this :) ? [18:05] I wish we did have a cool name :) [18:05] it's not a separate project (yet) no [18:05] hehe [18:05] farfignugen [18:05] dobey, what does the exception: NoAccessToken: No access token found generally mean for users? [18:06]