[00:02] <dhillon-v10> bdmurray, hi :D I see that a lot of bugs that require packaging have broken upstream links so should they be marked invalid or incomplete, which is better in this case
[00:03] <bdmurray> dhillon-v10: incomplete asking the reporter for working links
[00:05] <dhillon-v10> bdmurray, thanks :D you are awesome
[00:11] <micahg> bdmurray: is a bzr checkout the only way to play with search-bugs right now?
[05:48] <chih> secret!!!
[05:48] <chih> absolutely no telling
[06:25] <micahg> chih: ??
[06:26] <chih> micahg,  sorry. i was posting on the wrong channel :)
[06:26] <micahg> ok
[06:47] <nigel_nb> micahg: ping, aroudn?
[06:47] <micahg> nigel_nb: yep :)
[06:47] <nigel_nb> been long since I triaged, but I guess today's also lost to work
[06:47] <nigel_nb> anyways, any idea who's responsible for Ubuntu QA blog?
[06:48] <micahg> nigel_nb: pedro I think
[06:48] <nigel_nb> micahg: a little bit of spam which should be removed http://blog.qa.ubuntu.com/node/28
[06:49] <nigel_nb> its kinda crazy for the QA team website to get spammed, bad publicity
[06:49] <micahg> nigel_nb: it's a blog, if you want comments, you can't avoid it
[06:49] <nigel_nb> micahg: true, but I thought I could alert someone to remove it :)
[06:50] <micahg> of course :)
[06:51] <nigel_nb> do notify pedro if u catch up to speed with him,
[06:51] <micahg> ok
[09:57] <kaddi> hi, can someone help me out. I'm trying to get a bugreport for nspluginviewer in konqueror and I can't find the developer packages for it to create a trace
[15:09] <bddebian> Boo
[15:10] <thekorn> hi bddebian
[15:11] <bddebian> Heya thekorn
[16:07] <PrototypeX29A> hi
[16:07] <PrototypeX29A> i wanted to report a bug in the karmic binary of gedit, but i don't find the right package where to report
[16:07] <PrototypeX29A> i only find the source package
[16:08] <PrototypeX29A> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gedit
[16:08] <PrototypeX29A> is this the right place to report problems with the binary?
[16:10] <qense> yes indeed
[16:10] <PrototypeX29A> the "source" did confuse me
[16:10] <qense> PrototypeX29A: the source package is the 'mother' of the binary, it's where it's compiled from.
[16:10] <PrototypeX29A> naturally :)
[16:10] <qense> several binaries can be compiled from one source package, that's why we distinguish between them
[16:11] <PrototypeX29A> thanks
[16:11] <qense> you're welcome :)
[16:25] <PrototypeX29A> lp #499889 it is
[16:25] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 499889 in gedit ""Type name of new folder" does not have focus, when doing "save as" with descending ordering." [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/499889
[17:09] <szim90> hello, I have a question about triaging a bug.
[17:09] <szim90> specifically 485212
[17:09] <szim90> if the reporter seems to no longer care, but someone else has marked that it effects them, should I close the report?
[17:10] <szim90> it seems to be a duplicate of 292051
[17:12] <PrototypeX29A> maybe this falls under can not reproduce
[17:12] <PrototypeX29A> oder to few information
[17:12] <micahg> szim90: I would mark it a duplicate and add an ubuntu task to the upstream bug
[17:14] <micahg> szim90: actually maybe don't do that...
[17:14] <micahg> hggdh: you around?
[17:15] <szim90> micahg, can I mark an upstream bug if I'm not on bugcontrol?
[17:15] <micahg> szim90: hold on, I forgot the policy :)
[17:15] <micahg> bdmurray: what did we agree on when LP is upstream for a bug?
[17:17] <asac> szim90: just try... if it works, it works. otherwise not :)
[17:19] <szim90> it would appear that the developer page links to the launchpad page for bugs.
[17:19] <thekorn> my personal opinion here is: mark this bug as incomplete and address the other user who is affected directly if he still does have this problem
[17:19] <thekorn> ad can provide the neccessary information
[17:19] <thekorn> s/ad/and
[17:20] <micahg> thekorn: well, it seems like a dup, so my question is just what is our LP is upstream dupe policy for non-Ubuntu only apps
[17:21] <thekorn> hmm, good question, do we have one ;)
[17:22] <micahg> thekorn: I thought we decided on one at the last meeting
[17:22]  * micahg goes to check the chat logs
[17:22]  * thekorn greps for the meeting logs
[17:23] <thekorn> micahg, how can you know, you were late ? :)
[17:23] <micahg> thekorn: the discussion didn't start till I got there as it was my item :)
[17:24] <micahg> and the IRC logs for the channel are published, but I'm not looking at those
[17:25] <micahg> szim90: the consensus seems to have been to add a task on the upstream bug
[17:25] <micahg> wait that's not right
[17:25] <micahg> we seemed to skip this use case entirely which was the whole point...
[17:25] <thekorn> hmm, for me it seems we did not cover the duplcate case
[17:25] <micahg> thekorn: right
[17:26] <micahg> and no one seems to be around :)
[17:26] <thekorn> ok, I think in this case it would make sense to just set the bug to incomplete
[17:26] <thekorn> as the user who is affected by it if it is still a problem
[17:26] <szim90> alright. Should I put a link in the comments to the other one, as the other bug as a workaround.
[17:26] <thekorn> and if he can give more information
[17:26] <thekorn> if not, close it
[17:27] <thekorn> if so, let's start to find a solution at this point ;)
[17:27] <thekorn> szim90, I think this would be great
[17:28] <szim90> so, final consensus is mark as incomple - Needs info, and add a note in the comments that the upstream bug as a workaround for other users.
[17:29] <thekorn> that's how I would act in this situation, it will atleast reduce the amount of bugmails send
[17:30] <szim90> ok. Also, though I'm not a developer, is it possible to solve bugs like this on the packaging level (all that's needed to resolve this is to edit one of the .desktop files)
[17:30] <thekorn> szim90, for your info " KaiserSoze" is the other user who clickt the "this bug affects me too" button, just in case you  would like to adress him directly
[17:31] <thekorn> szim90, is this desktop file shipped as part of the upstream release?
[17:31] <thekorn> or added by an patch in the packaging process
[17:32] <szim90> I'm not sure.
[17:33] <thekorn> szim90, the best way here is to solve this in the project itself
[17:33] <thekorn> to keep the diff to upstream as small as possible
[17:34] <thekorn> but you can ofcourse fix it in the package and send the patch upstream
[17:34] <szim90> alright. I mentioned it because this bug has been open in upstream for a year, and it seems like a simple fix.
[17:34] <szim90> Hm, never patched anything before.
[17:35] <thekorn> szim90, maybe it is because upstream is inactive for a long time
[17:36] <szim90> alright, I'll look into patching it and sending it upstream. And I marked 485212 as incomplete.
[17:37] <thekorn> super cool, thanks szim90
[17:37] <szim90> no problem, thanks for the help thekorn and micahg. And I'll email KaiserSoze about the bug.
[17:38] <thekorn> szim90, he is subscribed to the bugreport, so he will get your comments by mail
[17:39] <szim90> even better.
[17:39] <szim90> Thanks.
[17:53] <hggdh> micahg: I am here
[22:09] <nigel_nb> hey everyone
[22:10] <nigel_nb> hggdh: around?
[22:17] <hggdh> nigel_nb: yes
[22:18] <nigel_nb> hggdh: I was just goin through the list of bugs we've been asked to close as invalid because of apport error
[22:18] <nigel_nb> I can't see some of the bugs or change status in the ones I can see
[22:18] <hggdh> this may be due to the fact that some of the bugs are private
[22:19] <hggdh> now, for changing status, you should be able to
[22:20] <nigel_nb> I think when a bug is parked as dup of a private I can change status too
[22:20] <hggdh> I sort of doubt ;-)
[22:21] <nigel_nb> correction
[22:21] <hggdh> the private status should trump all else. If it does not, I would consider it as a bug in itself
[22:21] <nigel_nb> s/can/can't
[22:21] <hggdh> ah
[22:21] <nigel_nb> which means *evil grin* the bug control has to do a whole lot of work
[22:21] <hggdh> yes...
[22:21] <nigel_nb> I tried.. ;)
[22:22] <micahg> hggdh: did you see the scrollback about dups for upstream bugs where lp is upstream?
[22:22] <hggdh> micahg: no, will scroll back and read it
[22:22] <micahg> hggdh: around 11:30 AM
[22:22] <hggdh> nigel_nb: give us the bug #s that you cannot change, and we will do it
[22:23] <nigel_nb> from around 90 to 125 i picked 5 in random
[22:23] <nigel_nb> all of them were unchangeable
[22:23] <nigel_nb> i.e., in the last of bugs, from line number 90 to 125
[22:31] <nigel_nb> is there any way to give a list of bugs and only see them
[23:40] <hggdh> micahg: read the backlog, but I am confused on what is the question
[23:41] <hggdh> brb