[00:01] <lifeless> thats in the api definition at the moment
[00:01] <lifeless> on +apidoc
[00:01] <lifeless> I don't know what it looks like in wadl
[00:03] <wgrant> lifeless: I mean, how do I derive 'getFooByName(name="bar")' from "foos['bar']" without defining that in the WADL?
[00:05] <lifeless> wgrant: its the other way around
[00:05] <lifeless> wgrant: you compile the wadl right?
[00:06] <lifeless> wgrant: hell, even if its interpreted [zomg], when you create an object 'base', you could do:
[00:06] <lifeless> for method_name in wadl-methods-for-base: if methodName.startswith(get):
[00:06] <lifeless>   collectiontype = wadl.returntypeformethod(methodName)
[00:07] <lifeless>    and so on
[00:07] <wgrant> I think that's well within the realms of fragile evil.
[00:07] <lifeless> wgrant: compilers do this all the time
[00:07] <wgrant> It *will* break with the methods we have exposed now.
[00:07] <lifeless> wgrant: I haven't looked at whether wadl is interpreted or compiled, but I'd expect compiled
[00:07] <lifeless> wgrant: how ?
[00:08] <wgrant> lifeless: Distribution.getSeries takes name_or_version, while others take just name. Other getters are getFooByName, rather than just getFoo. Still others use a shorter name than the corresponding collection.
[00:09] <wgrant> Making assumptions like that seems really evil, when it's easy to do it properly.
[00:09] <lifeless> wgrant: I have no idea how hard wadl is to change, so I can't assess difficulty there
[00:51] <Daviey> Hey, I really want to use quilt 3.0 in karmic PPA but getting a rejection email from Launchpad.  Is there any way around this?
[00:54] <wgrant> Daviey: No. Karmic's dpkg doesn't quite fully support 3.0 (quilt).
[00:56] <Daviey> wgrant: damn, trying to think of a sane work around
[00:56] <lifeless> Daviey: 'do not do it' :)
[00:59] <wgrant> Daviey: It's trivial to convert to 1.0...
[00:59] <wgrant> (unless you have multiple orig tarballs)
[01:00] <geser> what's the best/easiest way to check if I've an anonymous or non-anonymous login to the LP API?
[01:00] <Daviey> i suppose that is our only option. :/
[01:01] <Daviey> geser: check what api functions you are using in code, or mv your auth file :)
[01:01] <wgrant> geser: Check if launchpad.me returns a 401, perhaps.
[01:03] <geser> wgrant: looks like this seems to be the best way
[01:09] <geser> Daviey: I've written some wrapper code around the LP API for usage in ubuntu-dev-tools and now also added support for anonymous login and looking for a way to do isAnonymousLogin() which could be used for guarding code that needs non-anonymous login
[01:10] <Daviey> ah
[01:13] <Laibsch> Hi
[01:13] <Laibsch> The launchpad OOPSes are becoming pretty annoying lately.  Today's oops is OOPS-1513K110
[01:14] <wgrant> Laibsch: What were you doing at the time?
[01:14] <Laibsch> reporting a new bug against git-buildpackage
[01:14] <Laibsch> patch included, ready for sponsorship
[01:14] <Laibsch> so I feel it's slightly more important than average ;-)
[01:15] <Laibsch> And launchpad completely forgot about all the text I entered :-(
[01:16] <Laibsch> wgrant: Is there any way to recover the text I entered without hitting the page refresh button?  Going back, I lose all entries.  Hitting refresh, I get another oops.
[01:16] <beuno> hrm
[01:17] <beuno> NotImplementedError
[01:17] <wgrant> Ah, that one.
[01:17] <wgrant> What's the URL?
[01:17] <beuno> http://paste.ubuntu.com/380681/
[01:17] <beuno> is the full traceback
[01:17] <wgrant> What was the request URL?
[01:17] <beuno> from https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/git-buildpackage/+filebug
[01:17] <wgrant> Hm.
[01:18] <beuno> to https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/git-buildpackage/+filebug-inline-form
[01:18] <Laibsch> thanks guys, for taking a look
[01:18] <wgrant> Well, it's probably bug #508302.
[01:19] <wgrant> Laibsch: What happens if you try on edge.launchpad.net instead?
[01:19] <wgrant> It's meant to be fixed there.
[01:19] <Laibsch> I will have to start from 0 in edge, right?
[01:20] <wgrant> Yes, unfortunately.
[01:23] <Laibsch> will the sync from launchpad happen automatically?
[01:23] <wgrant> What do you mean?
[01:23] <wgrant> edge.launchpad.net uses the same database, just with newer code.
[01:24] <Laibsch> I'd just let the tab open and hit refresh page if all I have to do is what a couple of hours for regular LP to catch up and be updated
[01:24] <Laibsch> with the fix
[01:24] <wgrant> Production will not be updated with the fix for nearly two weeks.
[01:28] <wgrant> (yes, this sucks. there's a process redesign in progress that should make it a lot less slow.)
[01:41] <Laibsch> in times like these all this AJAX really sucks
[01:55] <asdasd> hi
[02:06] <Laibsch> wgrant: you're telling me this will take two weeks before it's fixed on the main site?
[02:06] <Laibsch> incredible
[02:09] <wgrant> Laibsch: It occurs in very few situations.
[02:09] <Laibsch> I see
[02:09] <Laibsch> that's at least some consolation
[02:09] <Laibsch> but I seem to magically attract them
[02:09] <Laibsch> I've got another one where I can't convert a bug to a question
[02:10] <wgrant> And the problem here appears to be that it crashed while rejecting your input. So it wouldn't have worked anyway -- it just didn't display the right error message.
[02:53] <keithy> hi there
[02:53] <keithy> I tried to register the project "squeak" but it says that it is already in use
[02:53] <keithy> I would like to know where
[02:54] <keithy> any ideas?
[02:54] <keithy> I found squeak-vm
[02:54] <keithy> in ubunto
[02:54] <keithy> ubuntu
[02:56] <wgrant> keithy: That normally means that there has been a squeak project created in the past, but it has been deactivated.
[02:56] <keithy> k
[02:56] <keithy> cant I nab it?
[02:56] <keithy> I might have been the culprit
[02:56] <wgrant> keithy: If you ask at https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+addquestion, an admin can either reactivate it or free up the name for you.
[02:59] <keithy> k done
[02:59] <keithy> now I wonder if anyone is awake
[03:01] <wgrant> Unlikely, given that it's a weekend and both the Americas and Europe are asleep.
[03:02] <persia> There ought be some folk still up in the Americas, but not likely acting as admins.
[03:04] <keithy> k
[05:19] <bjsnider> is there any issue with the ppa build system applying patches?
[05:20] <wgrant> bjsnider: It's very probably a bug in your package.
[05:20] <wgrant> The PPA build system just does what your package tells it to.
[05:20] <bjsnider> the patches apply in pbuilder but the ppa system ignores them
[05:20] <wgrant> Link?
[05:21] <bjsnider> configure-arch-stamp: $(QUILT_STAMPFN)
[05:21] <bjsnider> that's the rule
[05:21] <wgrant> We just call dpkg-buildpackage.
[05:21] <bjsnider> QUILT_PATCHES=debian/patches quilt --quiltrc /dev/null pop -a -R || test $? = 2
[05:21] <bjsnider> No patch removed
[05:21] <bjsnider> that's it
[05:21] <wgrant> Where is the build log?
[05:21] <bjsnider> then it goes on
[05:22] <bjsnider> http://tinyurl.com/yjkzyqw
[05:24] <wgrant> bjsnider: That's in the clean rule.
[05:24] <wgrant> It's removing patches there.
[05:27] <bjsnider> could it have been some problem that was momentary?
[05:27] <wgrant> bjsnider: Do you actually call the patch target at all in debian/rules?
[05:27] <wgrant> It does not look like it.
[05:27] <bjsnider> i didn't design the rules file
[05:27] <bjsnider> it's mplayer's rules file
[05:27] <bjsnider> i don't want to go messing with it
[05:29] <bjsnider> quilt.make is included, quilt_stampfn is called int he configure target and unpatch is called in the clean target
[05:30] <bjsnider> maybe this thing is too old to work anymore or something
[05:32] <wgrant> bjsnider: Have you built it in a clean Karmic environment locally with both PPAs activated?
[05:32] <bjsnider> exactly so
[05:32] <wgrant> The Launchpad build system doesn't magically go around messing with your rules file, so it is probably a bug there.
[05:36] <bjsnider> it looks from the build record like configure-arch-stamp isn't being called at all
[05:36] <bjsnider> how can it do something like that and not spit out an error
[05:37] <wgrant> install-arch doesn't depend on it.
[05:37] <wgrant> So it's unsurprising that it's not called.
[05:39] <bjsnider> install-indep-stamp does
[05:40] <wgrant> bjsnider: But binary-indep is only called on one arch.
[05:40] <wgrant> i386.
[05:41] <wgrant> And indeed, the i386 build shows the patches being applied.
[05:41] <wgrant> This is what is known as a bug in that horror of a rules file.
[05:41] <bjsnider> and guess what? the patches are applied in the i386 build
[05:42] <bjsnider> i just pulled this rules file out of the karmic build.
[05:42] <bjsnider> this should be a problem witht he karmic build of mplayer
[05:42] <bjsnider> unless i've been screwing with it in my sleep
[05:43] <wgrant> It could well be.
[05:44] <bjsnider> so if i add configure-arch-stamp to install-arch, everything will be fine
[05:44] <wgrant> Probably.
[05:44] <wgrant> But watch for unintended side-effects.
[05:44] <bjsnider> but this raises another wuestion
[05:45] <bjsnider> why did pbuilder build this correctly on amd64?
[05:45] <bjsnider> it applied the patches
[05:45] <wgrant> pbuilder probably builds arch-indep by default wherever it runs.
[05:46] <wgrant> But because we build it on multiple architectures, we can only build arch-indep on one arch.
[05:46] <wgrant> Otherwise we'd have multiple conflicting arch-indep binaries.
[05:49] <persia> pbuilder does do this.
[05:49] <persia> One of the nice features about sbuild is that one can use (or not use) the -A flag to test both classes of build.
[05:49] <persia> (someone should add this feature to pbuilder)
[11:20] <geser> persia:  it's already there "pbuilder build --binary-arch ..."
[11:20] <persia> geser: Cool!  Thanks for the hint.
[11:23] <geser> the defaults between sbuild and pbuilder just differ: while with sbuild you have to specify that arch-indep should also be build and with pbuilder you have to specify that only arch-dep should be build
[12:12] <AnAnt> is there a plan to add ARM archictecture to launchpad builders ?
[12:13] <wgrant> AnAnt: That relies on there being a reliable and secure ARM virtualisation technology.
[12:14] <AnAnt> I see
[12:14] <AnAnt> the reason I ask is because it seems that ARM is being used in many stuff recently: netbooks, and that new Nokia N900 that got Debian on it
[12:14] <wgrant> It's something that a lot of people want.
[12:15] <wgrant> It's just not technically possible yet.
[12:15] <AnAnt> which gives me the impression that ARM would be as popular as i386 & amd64
[12:15] <persia> AnAnt: Have you seen any good servers?  I can't imagine a collection of N900s in the data centre :)
[12:15] <AnAnt> persia: servers ? for what ?
[12:15] <persia> Building the packages?
[12:15] <AnAnt> persia: erm, I dunno what Debian guys do
[12:16] <persia> They have a collection of NAS boxes, but those can't run Ubuntu (too old)
[12:16] <persia> also, those can't handle virtualisation (as mentioned previously)
[12:16] <AnAnt> what's a NAS box ?
[12:17] <persia> Network Attached Storage.  I believe the Thecus is the model of most of the Debian buildds.
[12:17] <wgrant> Are there any actual implementations that use ARMv7's virt extensions?
[12:18] <persia> Not that I've seen, but my experience is limited to the i.MX51, and I know that other implementations are better suited for server stuff.
[12:18] <persia> (i.MX51 doesn't even have a drive controller available)
[12:18] <wgrant> Hah.
[12:18] <wgrant> The lack of ARM hardware is disappointing.
[12:19] <AnAnt> persia: I remember that you were involved in making Ubuntu for netbooks/MIDs, right ?
[12:19] <persia> Well, the devices I've seen in retail (Efika MX, Netwalker) have "4G SSD" which is really just through MTD flash.
[12:19] <persia> AnAnt: For MIDs, yeah.
[12:20]  * persia is philosophically opposed to the concept of "netbook"
[12:40] <persia> wgrant: Do you happen to know if Soyuz sbuild still has features not supported by Ubuntu sbuild?
[12:41] <wgrant> persia: It writes info to /CurrentlyBuilding and copies ddebs into ~/public_html, but that's about it.
[12:43] <persia> $log_dir is easy enough.  I'll have to hunt about ddeb copying.
[12:44] <wgrant> $log_dir?
[12:44] <wgrant> Also, why?
[12:45] <persia> Oh, /CurrentlyBuilding isn't $log_dir, right.
[12:46] <persia> And because it'd be nice to have the same codebase so that I knew that if something worked in Ubuntu it ought work in Soyuz.
[12:46] <wgrant> Right, that would make sense.
[12:46] <wgrant>  /CurrentlyBuilding has the archive purpose and component and the like.
[12:46] <wgrant> But we have code to write that from outside sbuild now, so it's not critical that sbuild support it.
[12:47] <persia> So it can be written on dispatch?
[12:47] <wgrant> Which means that once LP supports ddebs, stock sbuild would probably just about work.
[12:47] <wgrant> Right.
[12:47] <wgrant> We already do it for source package builds.
[12:48] <wgrant> lamont: Did you ever track down that old lp-buildd repository so we can find the complete Debian->Soyuz diff?
[12:48] <persia> The trivial way to handle ddeb copying in the meantime would be to use schroot scripts.
[12:49] <wgrant> Right.
[12:49] <wgrant> It can't be any more of a hack than it is now.
[12:50] <wgrant> It's just a few extra lines in sbuild to glob for and tar up ddebs, then copy them to ~/public_html/ddebs, where another external hack picks them up later...
[12:51] <persia> How hard would it be for Soyuz to understand them natively?
[12:51] <wgrant> I have most of the work done.
[12:51] <persia> Are you likely to complete prior to lucid being deployed?
[12:51] <wgrant> But, well, it breaks assumptions that a lot of code makes.
[12:51] <wgrant> It's unlikely. There are non-code barriers too.
[12:51] <persia> Ah :(
[12:52] <wgrant> (librarian space, removal policies, that sort of thing)
[13:13] <goundy> Hi
[13:13] <goundy> guys I messed up a launchpad-foundations bug
[13:13] <goundy> Actually I was just playin with the status but I didn't know I could change it... Since I've nothing to do with this project I mean I'm not even subscribed in
[13:13] <goundy> Could someone check it out ? https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad-foundations/+bug/240067
[13:13] <goundy> thx
[13:14] <goundy> here it is
[13:52] <Laney> someone may wish to kill https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghc6/6.12.1-9/+build/1512008
[13:53] <Laney> it's been going for days and I uploaded a new version of the package anyway
[14:03] <persia> Laney: You may find that running emulated builds to ensure they *can* complete is a good idea :)
[14:04] <Laney> persia: Actually, I made a pbuilder-armel chroot and it doesn't work :(
[14:04] <Laney> just ends up spinning "unsupported operand"
[14:07] <persia> Laney: unsupported operand?  Not unimplemented syscall?
[14:08] <Laney> maybe
[14:08] <Laney> let me do it again
[14:10] <persia> There's a few syscalls (most noticeably for me 335) that aren't implemented, but builds should succeed.
[14:10] <Laney> unsupported syscall 335
[14:10] <persia> stderr fills with junk, but that doesn't affect the actual processing.
[14:10] <Laney> I didn't wait for too long
[14:11] <persia> Yeah, just ignore that.
[14:11] <persia> 276 comes up once in a while too.
[14:11] <persia> But I've been able to run the binaries created that way on hardware, so I don't believe it matters much.
[14:12] <Laney> makes the build logs huge though :(
[14:13] <persia> Indeed.  I complained about that, but was told that it was better to have the errors than hide them.
[14:13] <persia> I'd rather only report the error once per session or something.
[14:13] <persia> But I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable to implement the syscalls, which was what was suggested to my continued complaint.
[14:17] <Laney> oh hey, it did finally finish!
[14:18] <persia> Your pbuilder, or the ghc6 build on jaboticaba?
[14:20] <Laney> the pbuilder update
[14:20] <persia> Yeah, it's just slow.  My armel schroot update seems to take forever each day.
[14:20] <Laney> 225M log file just from doing that
[14:21] <persia> That's *huge*  I only get 161MB building mono.
[14:21] <persia> Well, almost 162.
[14:22] <persia> But that's 5 *million* "qemu: Unsupported syscall: 335" lines.
[14:24] <Laney> it goes up by 1-2M every 2 seconds
[14:24]  * Laney is `watch'ing it
[14:26] <persia> RIght.  Any nifty ideas as to how to trap that?  Maybe we can put a filter in the output chain, since the qemu folk don't seem to want it on input?
[14:27] <Laney> oh, hey
[14:27] <persia> Because we *know* that it's going to mostly be "Unsupported syscall: ###\n"
[14:27] <Laney> bug 520480
[14:29] <Laney> hm, I *do* have that version
[14:29] <Laney> maybe I need to rebuild the chroot?
[14:29] <persia> And you're still getting that message?
[14:29] <persia> I bet lool would be glad to try to fix it.
[14:30] <persia> (he being the person who told me to go implement it when I complained)
[14:48] <Laney> persia: yeah, it's better with a new chroot
[14:49] <persia> Laney: So it needs a complete new chroot, rather than just getting updated with the new version?
[14:49] <Laney> seems to be so
[14:49]  * persia suspects copying /usr/bin/qemu-arm-static might work, and tries that to see if a new chroot can be avoided
[14:50] <Laney> however, qemu doesn't implement a syscall that it seems ghc requires
[14:50] <Laney> qemu: Unsupported syscall: 257
[14:50] <Laney> ghc: timer_create: Function not implemented
[14:51] <persia> Hmm.  Is it supported on the buildds?
[14:51] <Laney> must be, else the build would have died in configure
[14:52] <persia> remap_file_pages
[14:54] <persia> Hrm.  It's at least implemented for neo1973 in qemu.
[15:09] <nhandler> What needs to be done in order to be able to set one project as a sub project of another ?
[15:13] <persia> nhandler: Create multiple projects, ask a question to have one of them be a superproject.
[15:14] <nhandler> persia: Thanks. I wasn't sure if the question was necessary (as I noticed a new subproject box under the edit details page)
[15:15] <persia> Oh, it might have changed.  My information is probably a year old or more.
[15:29] <lool> Laney: That particular syscall (335) has actually been implemented now
[15:29] <Laney> lool: yes, I saw ;)
[15:29] <lool> Laney: Use the lucid up-to-date qemu-arm, and you wont get it
[15:29] <lool> Laney: Ok; any other issues with your pbuilder-armel?
[15:30] <Laney> lool: yes, unsupported 257
[15:30] <Laney> fails the build unfortunately
[15:33] <lool> Laney: Ok; it might be possible to implement it in qemu-arm, but it looks complex since there's a callback mechanism in this sycall
[15:33] <lool> Laney: It seems quite harder than 335 TBH
[15:34] <lool> Laney: I would suggest you use qemubuilder instead
[15:34] <lool> That runs a real vm, so should work
[15:51] <flower> I've download a project with bzr, how do I update the project?
[15:55] <micahg> flower: https://help.launchpad.net/Code/QuickStart
[15:58] <flower> $ bzr update
[15:58] <Laney> lool: will try, thanks
[16:32] <lamont> wgrant: yeah - I have it somewhere, should upload
[17:31] <issyl0> Hi there.  How long does it usually take to be approved for the launchpad-doc team?  I joined/emailed yesterday.  I know I'm probably a little impatient. :)
[17:41] <beuno> issyl0, usually a few working days  :)
[17:42] <qense> It is Sunday now. :) Not many people are working.
[17:48] <issyl0> beuno: thanks :)
[17:48] <issyl0> qense: that's true :)
[19:14] <SiNiESTrO> hi guys
[19:16] <SiNiESTrO> I have a trouble... I'm trying to create a project group buy I don't know how
[19:16] <mwhudson> SiNiESTrO: you have to make a request at answers.launchpad.net/launchpad
[19:16] <SiNiESTrO> Is it possible or I need to contact with a launchpad admin?
[19:16] <SiNiESTrO> ok
[19:16] <SiNiESTrO> you're fast
[19:16] <SiNiESTrO> :P
[19:17] <SiNiESTrO> very thanks
[19:18] <mwhudson> np :-)
[20:15] <davidstrauss> How can I get this fixed? http://launchpadlibrarian.net/39487013/hiphop-php-trunk-log.txt
[20:44] <thumper> davidstrauss: right now you can't
[20:45] <thumper> davidstrauss: that is dependant on the nested trees feature in bzr which isn't done
[20:45] <thumper> davidstrauss: one way is to go into #bzr and complain about the lack of nested trees :)
[21:25] <benoitc> hi
[21:25] <benoitc> how long a package appear on ppa after upload ?
[21:27] <wgrant> benoitc: You'll receive an email within five minutes, unless you haven't signed the package or there is something catastrophically wrong with it.
[21:28] <benoitc> wgrant: ok
[21:59] <keithy> any sysops about, I asked about using the name squeak as a project name, apparently it is already taken
[22:05] <mwhudson> keithy: the existing squeak project is disabled because the license is non-free
[22:06] <keithy> this isnt for squeak itself
[22:06] <keithy> this is for code on top of squeak
[22:06] <keithy> that is MIT
[22:06] <mwhudson> keithy: then i don't think you should use the squeak name?
[22:06] <keithy> how mean is that
[22:06] <mwhudson> i think that would be fairly confusing
[22:06] <keithy> anyhow there are versions of squeakwithout the licence issue
[22:06] <keithy> and the licence is free
[22:07] <mwhudson> ah, so i see, that's interesting
[22:07] <keithy> just defined before oss really got started
[22:07] <wgrant> "free" by which definition?
[22:07] <mwhudson> yeah
[22:08] <keithy> by whatever definition you want
[22:08] <keithy> I think you could give squeak a break
[22:08] <mwhudson> the official license on "http://squeak.org/SqueakLicense/" doesn't look gpl compatible
[22:08] <keithy> there was not mit licence back in 1996
[22:08] <mwhudson> because of the choice of law thing, if nothing else
[22:08] <keithy> anyhow
[22:09] <keithy> lets put it this way
[22:09] <mwhudson> keithy: sure there was
[22:09] <mwhudson> 96 isn't that long ago :-)
[22:09] <keithy> this repo is to develop stuff FOR the licence frree version
[22:09] <keithy> version 4.0
[22:09] <keithy> you are refering to the licence for <3.x
[22:10] <keithy> so you allow squeak-vm
[22:11] <keithy> and all users of squeak use it as if it was under a free licence because the Squeak_L was a pioneering free licence
[22:11] <mwhudson> keithy: hang on, let's take a step back
[22:11] <keithy> no I fed up with anal approcah
[22:11] <keithy> all I wanted as a project area to put code for
[22:11] <mwhudson> sure
[22:11] <keithy> taking code out of squeak
[22:12] <mwhudson> why use the name 'squeak' if it's not sqeak?
[22:12] <thumper> keithy: what are you trying to do exactly?
[22:12] <keithy> Ok... take an example
[22:12] <keithy> I have a smalltalk image, called cuis
[22:12] <keithy> it is licence free before you ask
[22:13] <keithy> in order to develop with cuis
[22:13] <keithy> I write some code which spits out the source of the bit I want to develop
[22:13] <keithy> then I write some code which installs the spat out code
[22:13] <keithy> so I develop for cuis using a cycle
[22:13] <keithy> export -> scm -> checkout -> import
[22:14] <keithy> so I can develop in cuis
[22:14] <keithy> without ever needing to check in the actual cuis image
[22:14] <keithy> all I need to do is refer to the starting point
[22:14] <lifeless> hi keithy
[22:14] <keithy> hi
[22:15] <keithy> so I can develop for squeak
[22:15] <keithy> without ever checking squeak into the squeak project
[22:15] <lifeless> so the launchpad project is 'inactive'
[22:15] <keithy> no idea
[22:15] <keithy> I am just being told I cant use the name
[22:15] <lifeless> I'm telling you :)
[22:15] <lifeless> bear with me
[22:15] <lifeless> need to check a few things off
[22:16] <lifeless> where is the new license - got a url or something ?
[22:16] <keithy> its not relevant
[22:16] <lifeless> keithy: I understand its not relevant for you.
[22:16] <keithy> I tick the MIT box
[22:16] <keithy> because the code managed in there is MIT code
[22:17] <lifeless> however, once a project is marked 'inactive' on LP, we have a checklist.
[22:17] <lifeless> keithy: and if you want to use launchpad - thats great - I need to go through it; you can help me with this :)
[22:17] <keithy> no.. sorry
[22:18] <keithy> if the squeak guys want to use my process to develop they can do it
[22:18] <lifeless> keithy: uh, this isn't anything to do with the squeak upstream per se.
[22:19] <lifeless> keithy: lets take a step up. I understand that you want to use launchpad to do some stuff right?
[22:19] <keithy> it is about ripping code out of the upstream to use somewhere else
[22:19] <lifeless> keithy: what launchpad services do you want to use - code hosting? bugs? translations?
[22:19] <keithy> so you add stff to the upstream which defines projects , packages and slices
[22:19] <keithy> code hosting
[22:19] <lifeless> ok.
[22:20] <lifeless> to use code hosting you have two choices for open source projects: you can use the 'junk code' facility, where you put stuff in ~keithy/+junk/NAME. Or you can get a 'project' allocated where many people can put their own branches. e.g. at ~keithy/PROJECT/BRANCHNAME
[22:20] <keithy> I dont put any input into "squeak"any more"
[22:21] <keithy> we have a group smalltalkers
[22:21] <lifeless> sounds like you want to use a project then.
[22:21] <keithy> with projects cuis
[22:21] <keithy> and pharo
[22:21] <keithy> and squeak
[22:21] <lifeless> or maybe several projects.
[22:21] <keithy> where we have a new process for applying bzr to scm code (NEW) code
[22:21] <lifeless> thats cool.
[22:21] <lifeless> so, what do you need me to do for you ?
[22:22] <keithy> but I dont do anything to work on squeak
[22:22] <keithy> as the ex-release team manager
[22:22] <keithy> but I do want to rip off what they have done
[22:23] <keithy> and put the code in an accessible place for cherry picking
[22:23] <lifeless> ok
[22:23] <lifeless> I'm still not clear what is at issue here. What are you trying to do that isn't working.
[22:24] <thumper> keithy: does their code have a licence text in it?
[22:24] <keithy> create the project squeak
[22:24] <thumper> keithy: that may provide the information we need to activate the squeak project
[22:24] <keithy> the licence situation is that for old images
[22:24] <keithy> some method do exist which they have not found the original authors
[22:25] <keithy> so these have been rewritten and are available as a delta
[22:25] <keithy> sorry to waste your time
[22:26] <thumper> keithy: if you just want the code in an accessible place, you can put it in a +junk branch
[22:26] <keithy> nice name
[22:26] <thumper> keithy: there is history behind the name
[22:26] <thumper> keithy: it is a branch without a project
[22:26] <keithy> No its just I am not going to put any more emotional effort into fighting squeaks corner
[22:26] <thumper> ok
[22:27] <keithy> squeak is the logical name for the project
[22:27] <keithy> for people to use to work on MIT apache2 code on squeak platform
[22:27] <lifeless> keithy: ok, to use the squeak name, I need to go through this checklist.
[22:27] <keithy> yeah but that is their problem not mine
[22:28] <lifeless> keithy: its pretty simple, and I'm aware of the changes that have happened in the community
[22:28] <lifeless> keithy: I'm not asking you to answer for the original 'squeak'
[22:28] <lifeless> but if you want to have something on launchpad called squeak, we need to see the licence of the code you're uploading.
[22:28] <lifeless> plus we need to make an assessment of the confusion because of your project and the original sharing a name,
[22:29] <lifeless> which is non-trivial :)
[22:30] <keithy> and whats wrong with squeakL anyway
[22:31] <keithy> nope this petty splitting hairs that has hindered squeak for so long deserves to be treated with contempt
[22:31] <keithy> honestly forcing the squeak community to chase up the families of dead people for the sake of a licence that proteced a font
[22:32] <lifeless> keithy: thats neither here nor there. Point me at a URL (could be a bzr branch) with your licence in it.
[22:32] <keithy> my linces - MIT
[22:32] <keithy> squeak licence Apache2
[22:33] <lifeless> yes. Where can I see a url or code branch with your licence grant in it.
[22:33] <keithy> I haddnt got that far yet
[22:34] <keithy> I got nowhere to put it
[22:34] <keithy> in the structure
[22:34] <keithy> since the source is exported from the image
[22:34] <keithy> the image doesnt contain the licence stuf afaik
[22:35] <keithy> so its difficult to export it from the image if it isnt ther
[22:36] <keithy> the base image has it
[22:36] <keithy> lp:~smalltalkers/cuis/base
[22:37] <keithy> but even so if I wanted to upload an image an old squeak image in order to rip the code out of it and cherry pick from it
[22:37] <keithy> launchpad wouldnt let me do it
[22:38] <lifeless> not as an open source project; we do provide proprietary code hosting at pretty cheap rates
[22:38] <lifeless> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/40633
[22:39] <lifeless> since that question was asked we've added private branches, but I don't think you're wanting those anyway
[22:39] <lifeless> also I don't know if the price is current. thumper ^
[22:39] <keithy> I wanted to go back and cherry pick the code from the 3.3 release that was abandoned
[22:39] <thumper> lifeless: I'm sure it's one the wiki somewhere
[22:40] <keithy> and the author died
[22:40] <keithy> but it is an oss project
[22:40] <keithy> and I am this close to leaving launchpad on principle after this convo
[22:40] <keithy> squeak has always been an oss project
[22:41] <thumper> keithy: As applied to software, this is not a free software license because it requires all users in whatever country to obey US export control laws. As applied to fonts, it also does not permit modification.
[22:41] <lifeless> keithy: squeak for a long time had a non-free license; thats a fact.
[22:41] <thumper> keithy: that is what has been written w.r.t to the licence
[22:41] <keithy> it was oss
[22:41] <keithy> it was free
[22:41] <keithy> the users treated it as free
[22:42] <keithy> and I want to use launchpad to develop oss softward cherriyn picking form an old version
[22:42] <lifeless> keithy: the definition we use for open source is 'is the license on http://opensource.org/licenses'
[22:42] <keithy> well change it
[22:42] <lifeless> keithy: I think the definition we have is pretty good actually.
[22:42] <thumper> keithy: give me a minute
[22:43] <keithy> artificially blocking people who are doing oss from using your stuff is not nice
[22:43] <lifeless> keithy: I'm here trying to *unblock* you.
[22:44] <keithy> yes
[22:44] <keithy> but I resent this attitude that has been leveled at squeak for no good reason
[22:44] <thumper> keithy: I'm going to enable it for now
[22:44] <thumper> keithy: and take this conversation to the appropriate people
[22:45] <thumper> keithy: who are not on line at the moment
[22:45] <keithy> yeah but I cant use it without the oss thought police breathing down my neck at some point
[22:45] <thumper> keithy: that's why I'll take it to the appropriate people so they don't breathe down your neck
[22:45] <thumper> keithy: we do really try to be responsive to the open source community
[22:45] <keithy> ok
[22:46] <thumper> keithy: but there are legal issues that we unfortunately have to deal with
[22:46] <thumper> keithy: just because something has been treated as free, doesn't make it so
[22:46] <keithy> we have the same legal issuers
[22:46] <keithy> and it has never been a problem
[22:46] <keithy> apple released their code, so that disney could freely use it
[22:47] <keithy> I was there at the original announcement
[22:47] <thumper> https://edge.launchpad.net/squeak is now active
[22:47] <keithy> ok
[22:47] <keithy>  ty
[22:47] <keithy> sorry
[22:47] <thumper> don't be sorry
[22:47] <thumper> sometimes these conversations are needed
[22:50] <keithy> I think you have the gift of diplomacy
[22:51] <thumper> :)
[22:53] <keithy> looks like I am going to have to put a licence file in each branch
[22:54] <persia> Best to put a license header in each file, if you can (although this sometimes requires lots of research and coordination)
[22:54] <keithy> we smalltalkers are not used to files
[22:54] <keithy> they are a bit of a modern idea
[22:57] <thumper> haha
[23:00] <keithy> it would be helpful if Squeak_L was considered ok for launchpad use so that older stuff could be ripped apart
[23:00] <keithy> and code history preserved
[23:01] <keithy> since 98% of older stuff has been relicenced
[23:01] <keithy> about 10 contributors could not be traced
[23:02] <lifeless> keithy: its not really our business; if you assert that its MIT licence, its MIT licence.
[23:02] <keithy> the new code is MIT
[23:02] <lifeless> what matters is that when someone looks at the code, that the licence is clear.
[23:02] <persia> Well, the act of assertion also matters: as in most jurisdictions, fair dealing applies, and the assertion significantly limits the liability to the hosting organisation.
[23:04] <thumper> keithy: if you want to take control of the squeak project in Launchpad to maintain it, ask a question on the launchpad project
[23:07] <keithy> I did that yesterday
[23:44] <arand> Are there any download statistics for ppas? It would be nice to know if the things are being currently used or not..
[23:46] <wgrant> arand: No, but I completed a preliminary implementation of it over the weekend.
[23:46] <wgrant> So it might well be Coming Soon™.
[23:47] <beuno> wgrant, really?  woooo!  you rock dude
[23:47] <arand> wgrant: Oh, nice, looking forward to it!
[23:48] <wgrant> beuno: I did the necessary parser refactor late last year, and it was only going to be a few more hours work to finish it, so I JFDI.
[23:50] <beuno> wgrant, I remember you started it, but thought there was some sort of unexpected complexity blocking it
[23:50] <wgrant> Bug #139855
[23:50] <wgrant> beuno: The main blocker is working out how to expose the information.
[23:50] <beuno> wgrant, I can help you with that tomorrow
[23:51] <beuno> this is just the number per package, right?
[23:51] <wgrant> beuno: Much like LFA counts, the count is stored by (archive, binary package name, binary package version, day, country)
[23:52] <wgrant> The bug also suggests that we should monitor index downloads, but it's less clear how those will work.
[23:52] <beuno> gotcha
[23:52] <beuno> ok
[23:52] <beuno> so I'll try and propose something on that bug tomorrow
[23:53] <wgrant> For now I've just exposed it reasonably usably through the API.
[23:53] <wgrant> Further API and UI exposure is just about trivial once we work out what's wanted.
[23:53] <wgrant> Thanks.
[23:54] <beuno> sounds like a good plan