[07:51] <persia> So, I'm a little confused by https://launchpad.net/builders
[07:51] <wgrant> What about it?
[07:51] <persia> I see some stuff as "private source" and other stuff in detail, when I know other folk see it as "private source".  What governs how it gets seen?
[07:51] <wgrant> persia: Whether you can view the archive in which it is building.
[07:52] <wgrant> Or the branch, soon.
[07:52] <persia> Ah.  So if it's building for a P3A to which I've been granted access, I can also see the builds, and if not, not?
[07:53] <wgrant> For the P3A case, 'granted access' meaning upload access, not just a subscription.
[07:53] <persia> OK.  That makes more sense.
[07:54]  * persia has to go dig through indirect memberships at some point : the mess is too complex
[10:56] <mrintegrity> hi, is there any integration between launchpad and netbeans?
[10:58] <persia> Not directly.  What sort of integration do you seek?
[10:59] <mrintegrity> versioning with bazaar
[10:59] <persia> Based on http://wiki.bazaar-vcs.org/IDEIntegration there is an open call for a plugin.
[11:00] <mrintegrity> cool
[11:00] <persia> Well, kinda.  Needs someone to write it :)
[11:00] <wgrant> #bzr may be better informed about Bazaar integration issues.
[11:00] <persia> Indeed.
[11:00] <mrintegrity> thanks
[11:01] <persia> And #netbeans on netbeans
[11:01] <mrintegrity> I have been using netbeans because of it's relatively good php and symfony support.. was wanting to use launchpad too
[11:01] <persia> Just needs a plugin.  Both bzr and netbeans have good plugin support.  This just isn't the best channel to ask :)
[11:02] <mrintegrity> ok, thanks :)
[11:10] <mrintegrity> think i will just have to use netbeans local versioning and then manually bzr it to launchpad
[11:26] <persia> How long should "Scanning for processes to kill in build" take?  https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gedit/2.29.9-0ubuntu2/+build/1569828 seems like it ought to have finished some time ago.
[11:26] <wgrant> Gnargh.
[11:27] <wgrant> How long has it been at that point?
[11:28] <persia> Dunno precisely.  At least half an hour.
[11:28] <persia> Finished was > 2 hours ago, but I'm unsure if there's lag in the rest of the commands for some reason.
[11:32] <wgrant> Oh, right, it's been a while, yeah.
[11:32] <wgrant> I've not seen a build hang there before.
[11:32] <persia> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/likewise-open/5.4.0.42111-1/+build/1568679 is even more extreme
[11:32] <manish> wgrant: You there?
[11:33] <wgrant> And let's not even mention https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ghc6/6.12.1-12/+build/1526050
[11:33] <wgrant> manish: I am.
[11:33] <manish> wgrant: As you recommened using .NET libraries, I was digging through them
[11:33] <persia> wgrant: That's intentional, actually.  it has an infinite activity loop because it's expected to take 1-2 weeks to build.
[11:33] <manish> I stumbled across X509 certificates
[11:33] <wgrant> Hah.
[11:33] <manish> is it used in launchpad?
[11:34] <manish> i could not find it any the hacking document
[11:34] <wgrant> manish: Launchpad uses SSL, yes.
[11:34] <wgrant> Normal HTTP libraries take care of that for you.
[11:34] <manish> wgrant: just have a look at this http://code.google.com/p/devdefined-tools/wiki/OAuthConsumer
[11:35] <manish> this guy is using X509 certificates which he generated
[11:35] <manish> Google allows uploading X509 cerificates.. IIRC Lauchpad has no such option
[11:35] <wgrant> Oh, no, Launchpad doesn't use client certificates.
[11:35] <manish> then what should be done in this case?
[11:36] <manish> should I set that client certificate section to null?
[11:38] <manish> wgrant: so should I still use .NET Oauth libraries or continue from the code I showed you last night?
[11:38] <manish> means re-doing things
[11:38] <wgrant> I think you should use the provided library.
[11:38] <wgrant> You shouldn't need a certificate. I would check the code and see what it does with it.
[11:40] <manish> wgrant: even I am trying how to deal with it
[11:49] <qense> Will lazr-js get packaged for Lucid? I assume it's already too late, but I'd love it when it would.
[11:52] <wgrant> I don't know of any plans.
[11:53] <qense> ok
[11:53] <qense> then I'll use the branch
[11:54] <lifeless> bst way to get it packaged: do it
[11:55] <qense> of course
[11:55] <qense> maybe I'll provide a PPA, most of the work needed for packaging it is already done in setup.py and distribute_setup.py
[12:09] <persia> lifeless: Hey.  You use netbeans, don't you?
[12:37] <lifeless> persia: when I'm doing java stuff, yes
[12:38] <persia> lifeless: How do you use it with bzr?  Just bounce to CLI?
[12:45] <lifeless> persia: yes
[12:46] <lifeless> we need someone that use netbeans for java, knows bzr, and wants to build and maintain a bzr vcs plugin
[12:46] <lifeless> I don't have time :(
[12:46] <persia> Oh well.  I understand, but you meet all the other criteria so well :)
[12:48] <lifeless> I know :P
[12:48] <lifeless> I did actually branch netbeans to have a look
[12:48] <lifeless> but I ended up yak shaving bzr fast-import performance
[12:55] <persia> So instead of actually working on netbeans, you just made bzr good at hg?  That's still a win.
[12:55] <lifeless> better at
[14:04] <slacker_nl> hi,
[14:06] <slacker_nl> i'm backporting an appliction, did a backport to karmic, now want to do the same for jaunty. I only changed the release in the changelog and now I keep getting the following error File <UPLOADED_FILE> already exists in <LOCATION>, but uploaded version has different contents
[14:06] <nhandler> slacker_nl: Change the version to append something like ~jaunty1
[14:07] <slacker_nl> that is the only solution?
[14:07] <slacker_nl> mkay
[14:07] <persia> It is often wise, when uploading to PPAs, to upload to the *oldest* release you plan to support, and copy the packages to the newer releases, rather than work in reverse-chronological order.
[14:07] <mok0> slacker_nl: yes
[14:08] <persia> (it being usually more unsafe to copy backwards than copy forwards)
[14:09] <slacker_nl> persia: yes.. but.. i made the original backport request for karmic, just wanted to see if it would work in jaunty, if so, create a backport request for that..
[14:10] <persia> If you're using PPAs to preview the Ubuntu backport procedure then you need a new upload for each release, versioned as nhandler recommends.
[14:10] <slacker_nl> persia: but the oldest to newest approach would give me the same error?
[14:10] <slacker_nl> ok
[14:11] <persia> For normal PPA use (not backports prep), oldest to newest lets you copy without uploading again.  Usually this is fine.  Sometimes you need to reupload to fix something.
[14:11] <mok0> slacker_nl: this is also what happens when Ubuntu moves from one release to the next... binary packages are copied
[14:12] <slacker_nl> mok0: that I know
[14:13] <slacker_nl> i was just suprised that I need to change the version to upload the same package for different releases
[14:13] <slacker_nl> ce'st tout :)
[14:14] <mok0> slacker_nl: so if you do like persia says, you will understand that it works
[14:14] <slacker_nl> yes
[14:14] <slacker_nl> thnx for the help
[14:15] <slacker_nl> mok0/persia/nhandler ^^
[17:09] <rdb> Where can I change my password? This is a stupid question, but I can't find a link to change it anywhere.
[17:13] <nigelb> rdb: login.launchpad.net
[17:14] <rdb> nigelb, thanks!
[18:23] <slacker_nl> question, will it be possible to support debian release pockets for ppa's? is this somewhere on a roadmap/wishlist?
[18:30] <cwickert> maybe this is a comletely stupid question, but...
[18:30] <cwickert> when I'm on bugs.launchpad.net, where is the link to file a new bug or to the advanced search?
[18:39] <crimsun> cwickert: you need to pick a project
[18:39] <crimsun> e.g., bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu
[18:40] <cwickert> crimsun, I don't want to query bugs, I want to file one.
[18:42] <cwickert> say I'm on bugs.launchpad.net and want to file a bug against launchpad. where is the link or where would I start?
[18:52] <crimsun> cwickert: bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad
[18:52] <crimsun> cwickert: trailing vertical edge, see e.g., https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+filebug
[18:53] <cwickert> crimsun, and how to i get from bugs.lp.net to bugs.pl.net/lp without googeling?
[18:54] <cwickert> IMO the start page of a bug tracker should have direct links to file and query bugs
[18:54] <cwickert> I just filed a bug, see https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/542889
[18:55] <cwickert> bug why is it in "malone" and not in "launchpad"?
[18:55] <cwickert> https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad reads "bugs in launchpad itself"
[18:55] <crimsun> probably hysterical raisins
[18:56] <crimsun> it was originally called malone
[18:56] <cwickert> when I filed the bug I selected "launchpad itself" as project and the bug ended up in malone
[18:56]  * cwickert is confused
[18:57] <crimsun> I would be just as confused
[18:58] <cwickert> oh, I selected "launchpad bugs". not launchpad itself
[18:58] <cwickert> but I still don't get the difference
[18:59] <cwickert> anyway, thanks for your help
[18:59] <cwickert> c u
[19:24] <geser> "launchpad" is all of launchpad and should be used when filing a bug about launchpad and you don't know which LP sub-project is the correct one
[22:21] <geser> does https://edge.launchpad.net/builders/ list all available buildds? as I've a PPA build running on samarium which isn't listed on the builders page
[22:24] <wgrant> geser: Unless samarium has been marked un-OK or inactive recently, it should be listed.
[22:24] <wgrant> lamont: ^^?
[22:26] <lamont> hrm
[22:26] <lamont> I'll check that before filing my virt-manager bug
[22:27] <geser> it's just the listing on the overview page, as my PPA build got dispatched to samarium (10 min ago and currently building)
[22:27] <geser> I was just surprised to the see the amd64 build in the buildd overview page
[22:28] <geser> https://edge.launchpad.net/~geser/+archive/ppa/+build/1571098
[22:36] <lamont> geser: it's an interesting feature of the UI
[22:37] <lamont>  Active == Whether or not to present the builder publicly.
[22:37] <lamont> because that's a totally correct definition of the word
[22:37] <wgrant> Heh, yes, that was my suspicion.
[22:37] <wgrant> The field is unavailable publicly.
[22:38] <lamont> and I suspect that someone marked it inactive, and then it got cycled through the airlock.  I'll make sure that we mark the buildd active when we give it back to buildds
[22:39] <wgrant> Of course, I don't think inactive builders are actually listed anywhere.
[22:40] <lamont> wgrant: you can still go .../builder/$NAME
[22:40] <wgrant> lamont: Right, but you can't find them except by looking at build listings.
[22:41] <lamont> on the bright side, having fixed samarium, there are no builders where  active=false and manual=false and builderok=true
[22:41] <wgrant> How do you determine that? DB query?