[00:17] <thumper> mwhudson: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~thumper/launchpad/fix-windmill-reply-test/+merge/16106 one line fix for the windmill test
[00:18]  * mwhudson waits for the diff
[00:24] <thumper> it's there
[04:47] <StevenK> Awww, no on call reviewer. Damn this Australian timezone!
[04:48] <mwhudson> StevenK: i can probably do it for you if it's simple
[04:49] <StevenK> mwhudson: It's a patch change for a cronscript that is run by the publisher
[04:49] <mwhudson> StevenK: let's see it
[04:49] <mwhudson> StevenK: i may run away screaming, but i'll take a loot
[04:49] <mwhudson> look
[04:49] <StevenK> mwhudson: I'll be running it past cjwatson when he wakes, but a second pair of eyes is what I wanted
[04:50] <StevenK> mwhudson: http://paste.ubuntu.com/340938/ ; in leiu of pushing it as a branch yet
[04:51] <mwhudson> StevenK: looks fine to me, but hardly my area of expertise
[04:52] <StevenK> mwhudson: I'll throw it past Colin, and push it as a branch if he says go, if that sounds fine
[04:53] <mwhudson> StevenK: i don't see why you couldn't push it as a branch now
[04:53] <StevenK> Point.
[04:53]  * StevenK pushes
[04:53] <mwhudson> and propose a merge
[04:54] <mwhudson> StevenK: once colin has said ok, you should be able to find an eu-timezoned dev to approve it easily enough
[04:54] <mwhudson> StevenK: is this urgent?
[04:55] <StevenK> mwhudson: It's a germinate change, so the sooner the better
[04:55] <mwhudson> StevenK: because launchpad is being released on thursday, we're in pre-release freeze
[04:55] <mwhudson> danilo[home] is the man to convince to get it past the freeze
[04:55] <StevenK> mwhudson: My commit message won't appear in PQM's message, since I've noticed in bzr log they have "special" formatting
[04:56] <StevenK> Sigh, that's supposed to be a question
[04:56] <mwhudson> StevenK: that's ok, we have magic to add the "specialness" now
[04:59] <StevenK> mwhudson: The Reviewer should be 'launchpad' ?
[04:59] <mwhudson> StevenK: the default should be fine
[05:00] <StevenK> mwhudson: In that case, I've pushed the branch, and proposed it for merging
[05:00] <mwhudson> StevenK: cool
[05:00] <StevenK> Except that Launchpad just OOPS'd on it
[05:00] <mwhudson> StevenK: you can request a review from colin too
[05:00] <mwhudson> StevenK: :(
[05:00] <mwhudson> StevenK: what was the oops?
[05:00] <StevenK> OOPS-1444EA779
[05:02] <mwhudson> oh except the log syncing is disabled
[05:05] <StevenK> mwhudson: Shall I try it again, or you're looking/added it to a list to be looked at?
[05:05] <mwhudson> StevenK: definitely worth trying again
[05:06] <mwhudson> StevenK: it was a timeout, which is a bit odd, but try again indeed
[05:06] <StevenK> And it worked \o/
[05:09] <mwhudson> yay
[05:53] <jml> hi
[12:16] <intellectronica> henninge: i haven't added my name because i'm chr and also catching up with stuff after a week and a bit of absence. but if things get busy by all means ask me to help out
[12:17] <henninge> intellectronica: that's fine. Enjoy your CHR week! ;)
[12:18] <intellectronica> :D
[12:49]  * henninge lunches first, though.
[13:00] <al-maisan> henninge-lunch: I'd appreciate it if you could review this simple branch as well: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~al-maisan/launchpad/disable-ppa-495975/+merge/16125
[13:02] <al-maisan> henninge-lunch: .. and BTW, we plan to get an RC for the branch and it's tiny .. so, please give it preferential treatment if possible. Thanks!
[13:26] <danilos> StevenK, bigjools: I assume we will want an RC for https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~stevenk/launchpad/netbook-cron/+merge/16115? bigjools, if so, can you please review it first?
[13:27] <bigjools> danilos: ok
[13:28] <bigjools> danilos: approved
[13:28] <danilos> bigjools, cool, who will be landing this if I RC it? StevenK, can you land it or someone from the LP team needs to do it?
[13:29] <bigjools> danilos: it will need to be one of us
[13:29] <bigjools> danilos: maybe you :)
[13:29] <bigjools> there are no tests, just pqm-submit it
[13:30] <danilos> bigjools, I have so many things on my hands right now that I am afraid I can't do it :)
[13:31] <bigjools> join the club :/
[13:31] <danilos> bigjools, I am IN the club already!
[13:31] <bigjools> danilos: ok I'll do it, mark it r-c though will you?
[13:32] <danilos> bigjools, sure
[13:33] <danilos> bigjools, done
[13:33] <bigjools> cheers
[14:33] <allenap> abentley: Fancy a quick OOPS fix to review? https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~allenap/launchpad/bugtracker-snapshot-bug-447100/+merge/16130
[14:34] <abentley> allenap: I can add it to the queue.
[14:35] <allenap> abentley: Thanks.
[14:47] <abentley> adiroiban: I notice you deleted "lp.soyuz.interfaces.archive import ArchivePurpose" from lib/lp/archiveuploader/uploadpolicy.py.  Was this an unneeded import?
[14:48] <adiroiban> abentley: yes. lint was complaining about it
[14:48] <abentley> Cool.  Thanks for fixing lint errors as you go.
[14:49] <adiroiban> I wanted to fix the other errors ... withoud adding ignore comments... but I don't know how to fix them
[14:54] <abentley> adiroiban: I don't know how to fix the F0401 for lazr.* without ignore comments.  For the email ones, you could try using the lowercase module names, e.g. "email.encoders"
[14:55] <adiroiban> ok
[14:57] <abentley> adiroiban: For email.MIMEText, it looks like the new name is email.mime.text.
[14:59] <adiroiban> abentley: thanks. I'll fix that
[15:02] <abentley> adiroiban: approved.  We won't be able to land it until next week because this is a release week.
[15:03] <adiroiban> abentley: no hurry. Thanks!
[15:03] <abentley> adiroiban: Could you remind me next week, please.  And maybe run the full test suite in advance?
[15:04] <adiroiban> abentley: yes
[15:04] <abentley> adiroiban: Great, thanks.
[15:07] <abentley> jpds: Have you run the distributionmirror tests with your change?
[15:08] <jpds> abentley: Yes.
[15:09] <jpds> abentley: And I've tested it on a local Launchpad instance.
[15:10] <abentley> jpds: Normally, I would expect that change to break a test.  Since it didn't, it means this behaviour isn't being tested.  You could add a test for it, or I can if you prefer.
[15:16] <jpds> abentley: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/341226/ ?
[15:17] <abentley> jpds: Exactly.
[15:17] <jpds> abentley: OK, let me test it locally and then I'll push.
[15:17] <abentley> jpds: Sounds good.
[15:20] <jpds> abentley: How strange: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/341229/
[15:21] <jpds> Ah, wait, there's already a test there...
[15:23] <jpds> abentley: My mistakes, pushed new revision with test.
[15:25] <henninge> adiroiban: do you have a good example on launchpad.dev for the template list?
[15:25] <adiroiban> henninge: yes. I'm done :)
[15:26] <henninge> adiroiban: sorry, I am talking about bug 435165
[15:26] <mup> Bug #435165: Make it easier to navigate to the full list of templates in source packages <trivial> <ui> <Launchpad Translations:In Progress by adiroiban> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/435165>
[15:26] <adiroiban> i'm just toggling the unseen class
[15:26] <henninge> what I am just reviewing
[15:26] <adiroiban> ah
[15:26] <abentley> jpds: Thanks.  Approved.  Since this is a release week, it can't land until we reopen for development.
[15:26] <henninge> ETOOMUCHCONCURRENCY ;)
[15:27] <adiroiban> henninge: I have created some templates in the stories
[15:27] <adiroiban> also I set the SHOW_RELATED to 1
[15:28] <henninge> adiroiban: also, you have merge conflicts in the diff ?!?
[15:28] <adiroiban> and everhing was ok
[15:28] <jpds> abentley: Thanks, when do we reopen?
[15:29] <henninge> jpds: Friday night. Late, usually
[15:31] <adiroiban> henninge: uhh... I'll do
[15:31] <henninge> adiroiban: xx-potemplate-index.txt is missing when I get your branch. That's where the conflict is.
[15:32] <henninge> adiroiban: yes, you'll have to fix that first.
[15:32] <adiroiban> henninge: xx-rosetta-potemplate-index.txt was renamed to xx-potemplate-index.tx
[15:33] <henninge> adiroiban: yes ...?
[15:33] <adiroiban> yes.
[15:34] <adiroiban> in another branch that was recently merged
[15:34] <adiroiban> i did that
[15:34] <henninge> adiroiban: I mean, I never mentioned xx-rosetta-potemplate-index.txt
[15:34] <henninge> adiroiban: something is wrong with your branch then. Have a look at the diff on the MP.
[15:35] <adiroiban> henninge: anyway, let me fix the branch and then you can review it
[15:35] <adiroiban> :)
[15:50] <abentley> allenap: I may have been offline when I posted, so: "Could you explain the import reordering to me?  it's just that it seems to go against PEP8's recommendation of '1. standard library imports, 2. related third party imports, 3. local application/library specific imports'"
[15:58] <adiroiban> henninge: I have merged with devel and fixed that conflict
[15:59] <adiroiban> sorry for the inconveniences
[15:59] <allenap> abentley: One of us was offline I think :) I think I should put lazr.lifecycle above the lp and canonical imports. The lazr.lifecycle import is new.
[16:01] <abentley> allenap: I agree.  Approved, with that change.
[16:01] <allenap> abentley: Thanks :)
[16:10] <noodles775> Hi henninge, abentley: if either of you has time: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~michael.nelson/launchpad/475808-unembargoing-oops/+merge/16141
[16:14] <abentley> noodles775: I suspect your F0401 lint errors can be fixed by changing the imports to email.mime.multipart and email.mime.text.  Can you check that?
[16:14] <noodles775> abentley: will do, thanks.
[16:19] <abentley> noodles775: On line 163 of the patch, you want "whose", not "who's".
[16:19] <noodles775> yep, btw, that fixed the lint, thanks!
[16:20] <abentley> noodles775: Cool.
[16:21] <abentley> noodles775: Also, you want "its", not "it's" on line 172.
[16:21] <noodles775> gah.
[16:22] <abentley> noodles775: On the bright side, the code looks pretty good.
[16:23] <abentley> noodles775: So for the case where there's no ancestor in the target of the copy, is that a valid case?  Or should we require the first upload to be done without copying?
[16:25] <noodles775> abentley: it's valid. Anyone can upload a pkg to their PPA (and we'll just override the component to 'main')
[16:26] <noodles775> It's just when copying that package to a non-ppa archive, we need to ensure the component will be overridden correctly.
[16:27] <abentley> noodles775: Okay, can you explain why test_do_delayed_copy_wrong_component_no_ancestry should raise an exception?
[16:29] <noodles775> Well, I didn't change that behavior - any copy for an invalid component raises an exception currently. I'm just otp, but after the call I'll try to give a better answer.
[16:34] <adiroiban> abentley: can I have a quick pre-implementation review for this bug https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~adiroiban/launchpad/bug-492375
[16:35] <abentley> adiroiban: looking
[16:36] <abentley> adiroiban: I think it would be better to discuss this with someone from translations.  They have a clearer idea of the kind of changes they want in that area.
[16:36] <adiroiban> lib/lp/translations/browser/distroseries.py - I don't know if this is the right way to augment the view
[16:37] <adiroiban> abentley: thanks. no problem.
[16:59] <noodles775> abentley: ok, back (sorry).
[17:00] <noodles775> So the behavior of raising an exception isn't something that has changed with this branch, I've just added a test for it (together with the fix for bug 475808).
[17:00] <mup> Bug #475808: Unembargoing packages via the API doesn't seem to apply overrides correctly <ppa> <soyuz-security> <soyuz-upload> <Soyuz:Triaged by michael.nelson> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/475808>
[17:01] <abentley> noodles775: Ah, I see.
[17:04] <abentley> noodles775: So the override to main doesn't happen because the target isn't a PPA?
[17:07] <noodles775> abentley: yes, for ppas we always override to main, but not for other archives where we do support different components. We do a different override in that case (in SourcePackagePublishingHistory.overrideFromAncestry()), but that can only be done *when* we've created the SPPH.
[17:08] <noodles775> For delayed copies, this overrideFromAncestry() happens when the delayed copy is realised (see lp.soyuz.model.queue.PackageUpload.realiseUpload()) 
[17:09] <abentley> noodles775: r=me
[17:10] <noodles775> Thanks abentley 
[17:15] <salgado> henninge, I have a RC one; can you take it?
[17:16] <henninge> salgado: I was about to leave. How big is it?
[17:16] <salgado> henninge, https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~salgado/launchpad/bug-495544/+merge/16120
[17:16] <salgado> really small
[17:17] <salgado> henninge, but it will be easy for me to find somebody else to review, if you'd prefer
[17:17] <henninge> salgado: no, that's ok
[17:23] <henninge> salgado: do you know about assertContentEqual?
[17:23] <salgado> I once knew
[17:24] <henninge> ;-)
[17:24] <henninge> it does the sorted() thing for you when comparing lists.
[17:27] <salgado> yeah, I've even used it in the past, but this time I started with assertEquals as I had a test that was expecting an empty list.  and my test changed I forgot to use assertContentEqual
[17:27] <salgado> but that's changed already
[17:27] <henninge> salgado: also, although I know it is not required, I like the (expected, observed) order better. If you could do that it would be nice.
[17:28] <salgado> sure thing
[17:32] <henninge> salgado: one last nitpick: TestZopelessTransactionManager_reset_store does not look right.
[17:32] <salgado> what would look right?
[17:33] <henninge> salgado: with the underscores in the name and having a Testcase to test just one method.
[17:33] <henninge> (that's what's not looking right)
[17:34] <henninge> salgado: Isn't it one test case per class and test_methodName_special_case in that class as a naming convention?
[17:34] <henninge> salgado: also, it looks like the other test case in that file is the special case as it has no layer
[17:34] <salgado> I don't know about the one test case per class policy
[17:35] <salgado> tests with layers should be the exception, ideally
[17:35] <henninge> so how about calling the first one TestZopelessTransactionManagerNoLayer and yours just TestZopelessTransactionManager?
[17:35] <salgado> sure, that wfm
[17:35] <henninge> cool, r=me
[17:36] <salgado> henninge, thanks!
[17:40] <henninge> adiroiban: I am sorry, I missed your ping earlier and saw it just now. Since your branch is not release-critical, I hope it's OK I finish the review later or tomorrow?`
[17:41] <henninge> salgado: oops, I just flicked the mp status back and forth, remembering that you still need an r-c review.
[17:42] <henninge> just so you don't wonder about the spam hitting your inbox ... ;)
[20:41] <jelmer> abentley: Thanks!
[21:03] <leonardr> henninge or abentley, will either of you have time today to review a short lazr.restfulclient branch?
[21:04] <abentley> leonardr: I expect so.
[21:04] <leonardr> ok, i'll write it up
[21:13] <leonardr> abentley, henninge: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~leonardr/lazr.restfulclient/anonymous-credential/+merge/16164
[22:19] <intellectronica> guess it was the irc connection...
[22:20] <intellectronica> abentley: care to review a very small js fix which is a release blocker?
[22:21] <abentley> intellectronica: I have EODed, but since it's a release blocker, go ahead.
[22:21] <bac> sinzui: got a sec to look at https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~bac/launchpad/bug-496701-mimetypes/+merge/16170 ?
[22:21] <intellectronica> abentley: you rock. as you can imagine i've EODed quite a few hours ago :) https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~intellectronica/launchpad/manage-official-tags-js-error/+merge/16171
[22:23] <abentley> intellectronica: r=me
[22:24] <intellectronica> abentley: thanks a bunch
[22:24] <intellectronica> danilos: can i land the fix above as rc?
[22:25] <intellectronica> or flacoste?
[22:25] <bac> intellectronica: you should add them to the MP with 'release-critical' as the review type
[22:26] <intellectronica> bac: right. thanks for reminding me
[22:26] <bac> np, intellectronica
[22:28] <intellectronica> bac: so is the drill now that i request a review from the release manager with release-critical as the review type?
[22:29] <bac> intellectronica: indeed
[22:29] <bac> intellectronica: there may be something else involving bug tags or marking the bug as critical, but i'm not sure
[22:30] <intellectronica> bac: yes, the bug is tagged 'release-blocker'
[22:30] <intellectronica> no, 'current-rollout-blocker'
[22:42] <jml> hello reviewers
[22:42] <jml> https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~jml/launchpad/fix-release-hot-bugs-486437/+merge/16173
[22:42] <jml> not urgent, of course, but maybe nice and simple
[22:47] <bac> hi jml, could you put on your db-reviewer hat and look at https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~bac/launchpad/bug-490505/+merge/15691 ?
[22:47] <bac> i didnt' think you'd be necessary on it but stub added you.
[22:48] <jml> bac, sure, will do.
[22:48] <jml> bac, is it RC?
[22:49] <bac> jml: good question.  we'd like to get it in this cycle but the review was delayed until yesterday.  so it isn't critical per se, but would be nice to have.
[22:50] <jml> bac, ok.
[22:50] <sinzui> bac: am I correct in understanding that your branch change is to the python env that starts lp?
[22:50] <bac> sinzui: yes
[22:51] <sinzui> yeah, that cryptic
[22:51] <bac> sinzui: that bit of voodoo is shown to work
[22:51] <bac> sinzui: i hate doing it there and hope we get a proper home for such stuff soon
[22:52] <sinzui> bac: I understand and agree. r=me
[22:52] <bac> thx