=== fta2_ is now known as fta === fta is now known as fta_ [02:33] does anyone know what "Disabled for Enablement" means? (on one of the builder pages) [02:38] Guest19873: Most of the PPA build machines are just on loan from their normal jobs. [02:38] Guest19873: That means they've been returned to their assigned task, for now. [02:39] and they drop the build they're working on to do so, huh [02:44] Guest19873: Yes. They can be taken away at any time. It retried it automatically, didn't it? [02:49] yea, another node took over, but the original one was in the middle of a 2+ hour build [02:49] which is strange, too, because the other two arches finished in ~1 hour [03:42] !ops [03:42] Help! SteveA, kiko-phone, Kamion, daniels, Kinnison, stub, daf, carlos, spiv, BradB, salgado, lifeless, or jamesh === mcasadevall is now known as NCommander [06:13] when i've merged a branch, it sticks around with its comments [06:14] if i clean it up, the comments go with it. they really ought to go into the bug or something. why don't they? [06:32] MFen: a merged branch is hidden by the default searches, though. [06:34] MFen: so removing it isn't really any cleaner, because it's not in anyone's way. And leaving alone leaves the comments intact, as you say. [06:35] well, i needed to delete a branch which this branch depended on [06:35] so it's not inert. [06:35] Depended on in which sense? [06:36] As in, a prerequisite branch of a merge proposal? [06:36] yes [06:36] and you can't do that when the other branch still exists [06:36] Hmm, and deleting the prerequisite removes that merge proposal? That does sound suboptimal. [06:37] The merge proposal should probably be deactivated, but I agree with you that it should still exist. [06:37] Sounds like something it's worth filing a bug about. [06:37] I'm curious about why you needed to delete that branch, though? [06:40] i made a mess of several branches and needed to start over === oubiwann_ is now known as oubiwann === MTeck-Linux is now known as MTeck-ricer === menesis1 is now known as menesis === yofel_ is now known as yofel [16:01] hi, can anyone explain me this: No translation activities recorded for . [16:02] why doesn't translations show up there? [18:28] hi [18:28] the topic of #canonical points to a web page... and this web page is private (not accessible) please fix that [18:29] 2) I found a bug n launchpad website layout, but whilre reporting it I get oops: Error ID: OOPS-1470H2771 [18:29] https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=1470H2771 [18:32] anyone? [18:35] !weekend [18:35] It's a weekend. Often on weekends, the paid developers, and a lot of the community, may not be around to answer your question. Please be patient, wait longer than you normally would, or try again during the working week. === oubiwann_ is now known as oubiwann === oubiwann_ is now known as oubiwann [20:24] hi, i am trying to register an account on bugs.launchpad.net. But after clicking on "register" i can an Oops: OOPS-1470L3116 [20:24] https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=1470L3116 [20:28] hendrik: I get OOPS all the time, it seems something is broken today === sale_ is now known as sale === mcasadevall is now known as NCommander [23:45] Where on launchpad should I file a bug report about a laptop not being able to resume from standby? [23:47] against linux; ubuntu-bug linux [23:47] bugs.launchpad.net/linux ? [23:48] No; run “ubuntu-bug linux". That'll grab lots of useful information, then file the bug. [23:49] i would prefer to file the bug report manually and attach relevant information [23:50] Why? [23:50] because last time i used ubuntu-bug i submitted tons of irrelevant information that just made my report look messy. [23:51] The Ubuntu project would like you to use ubuntu-bug; the kernel team have a bunch of scripts to grab information that they need before you submit the bug. [23:52] It's easy to filter out the irrelevant stuff from an apport-filed bug; it's much more annoying to have to ask for information that would have been attached.