[01:16] <RoAkSoAx> hi guys, is there somwthing wrong going on with lp, since I'm trying to upload a branch and it gets stuck
[01:24] <spm> RoAkSoAx: sort answer is no; I gather you're doing a bzr push of some sort? large bunch of code? small?
[01:25] <RoAkSoAx> spm, small
[01:28] <RoAkSoAx> bzr push --no-strict lp:~andreserl/testdrive/module
[01:28] <RoAkSoAx> Write failed: Broken pipetching revisions:Inserting stream
[01:30] <spm> hmm. not yet pushed to.
[01:31] <RoAkSoAx> spm, it actually creates the branch in lp but doesn't push the code
[01:32] <spm> RoAkSoAx: can we try a simple one file new repo (bzr init test; echo "blah" > test/aaa; bzr add etc etc etc) and push that to your junk directory? eg bzr push lp:~andreserl/+junk/aaa
[01:34] <RoAkSoAx> spm, it pushed
[01:35] <spm> RoAkSoAx: cool; can you try the same thing with the module branch above; but send it to +junk/bbb ? (names are optional, I don't care :-) )
[01:36] <RoAkSoAx> spm, pushes successfully
[01:36] <spm> bleh
[01:37] <spm> my 2c suggestion - try deleting that failed branch - lp:~andreserl/testdrive/module and push again to the same place? may be worthwhile checking for any hung bzr ssh activity on your local machine as well.
[01:38] <RoAkSoAx> spm, done that already but still doest not push
[01:38] <spm>  .../module2 ?
[01:39] <RoAkSoAx> spm, tried that already
[01:39] <RoAkSoAx> and still
[01:39] <spm> argh
[01:41] <spm> mwhudson: ^^ any thoughts?
[01:42]  * mwhudson looks
[01:43] <mwhudson> something to do with stacking i guess
[01:43] <mwhudson> RoAkSoAx: what does bzr info -v say in your local branch?
[01:44] <RoAkSoAx> mwhudson, http://paste.ubuntu.com/399067/
[01:45] <mwhudson> ok nothing there is at all surprising
[01:46] <mwhudson> RoAkSoAx: where is the +junk branch you successfully pushed?
[01:46] <RoAkSoAx> mwhudson, just deleted everything :)
[01:47] <mwhudson> oh
[01:47] <mwhudson> can you push it again so that i can try?
[01:47] <RoAkSoAx> mwhudson, sure wait a sec
[01:49] <RoAkSoAx> mwhudson, now it is not pushing to lp:~andreserl/+junk/aaa
[01:50] <RoAkSoAx> but pushed to lp:~andreserl/+junk/bbb
[01:50] <RoAkSoAx> i tried to push again to aaa, with resultks:test$ bzr push lp:~andreserl/+junk/aaa
[01:50] <RoAkSoAx> This transport does not update the working tree of: bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~andreserl/%2Bjunk/aaa/. See 'bzr help working-trees' for more information.
[01:50] <RoAkSoAx> Created new branch.
[03:55] <spm> *** FYI. Codehost will be going down shortly for a code update. ~ 5-10 mins before I'll be doing so; ETA of outage < 30 secs, all going well. ***
[04:05] <spm> *** About to restart codehost for a code update ***
[04:07] <spm> *** all done ***
[05:59] <xnox> Please review code import - https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~mingw-w64/mingw-w64/trunk =))))))
[06:00] <xnox> I've just adopted upstream
[07:22] <dhart> hey, if I'd like a private instance of launchpad (just bug tracking for present), who do I ask?
[07:23] <spm> dhart: no one. it's open source; grab the code and fill your boots.
[07:24] <wgrant> There is also the possiblity of commercial usage of Launchpad.net for non-free projects.
[07:29] <jussi01> Is there a plan that LP will be put into packages at sometime, similar to wordpress?
[07:32] <wgrant> No. It's not well suited at the moment.
[07:32] <spm> I'm not aware of one. my ****personal**** opinion is that wouldn't help us with launchpad.net; so the incentive is reduced. again. very much my opinion, not Canonicals.
[07:32] <wgrant> It has a few external dependency mechanisms, which would all need to be replaced with packages.
[07:32] <wgrant> It would need to have its branding replaced.
[07:33] <wgrant> It would need to be renamed.
[07:33] <jussi01> hrmm... ok
[07:33] <wgrant> It would be an added incentive to not use launchpad.net, which sort of breaks Launchpad.
[07:35] <spm> my main reason, in addition to wgrant's above; is that the code moves *very* quickly. 1 release per month; numerous cherrypicks off trunk thru the month. I'm unconvinced that packaging would help us manage that.
[07:36] <persia> I'd argue that it would be specifically unhelpful in managing that.
[07:36] <spm> I was being diplomatic :-)
[07:37] <persia> That said, I think it may make sense to replace the external dependency mechanisms with packages, assuming they are truly external.
[07:37] <spm> we have multiple layers of dependancies. The raw system, stock ubuntu server, more or less;; LP specific packages;; the buildout stuff;; code itself
[07:38] <wgrant> persia: A few of us think like that.
[07:38] <wgrant> But some do not.
[07:38] <wgrant> So we end up with a horrid mess like we have now :(
[07:38] <spm> persia: some are. some aren't. I don't like it; but appreciate the reasons for what we have.
[07:38] <wgrant> (four external dependency mechanisms)
[07:39] <persia> four!
[07:40] <wgrant> dpkg, buildout, bzr checkouts, and stuff embedded in the tree.
[07:40] <persia> There ought be one equivs package that takes care of all the externalities, so folks can concentrate on the actual LP code.
[07:40] <wgrant> I've a branch to remove most of the last set, though.
[07:41] <spm> harumph. I fogot about the bzr branches. yes. them too.
[07:42] <persia> the embedded stuff is just poor practice.  I hope that branch drops soon.
[07:42] <persia> What's buildout?
[07:42] <spm> painful
[07:42] <spm> oh sorry, that came out loud.
[07:42] <wgrant> buildout is this Python thing which takes great delight in downloading unsigned Python packages from the Internet over HTTP and installing them in an app-specific directory.
[07:43] <wgrant> Rather than using dpkg like everything else.
[07:43] <spm> http://www.buildout.org/
[07:43] <persia> Oh, so it could trivially be replaced with packages.
[07:43] <wgrant> Oh yes.
[07:43] <persia> python-stdeb could probably be scripted to generate them all in a hurry.
[07:43] <wgrant> Most of the packages already exist, for SchoolTool's use.
[07:43] <persia> Worse.
[07:43] <wgrant> Hm?
[07:44] <persia> using buildout when dpkg would work, when one is also using dpkg.
[07:44] <persia> For the bzr checkouts: are those all just different LP modules, or are some of them external?  For the external ones, why are they bzr checkouts?
[07:44] <spm> aiui, the main reason it's used is to better/faster track upstream without having to worry about the packaging step; also to trivially select any of multiple versions of X to use @ build time
[07:45] <wgrant> Right, version conflicts are difficult.
[07:45] <wgrant> But not unresolvable.
[07:45] <persia> spm: Yes, but if it's *already packaged*, there's no packaging step, and presumably one wants to use a version for which one can get support from one's OS vendor.
[07:45] <wgrant> persia: One of the bzr checkouts is an LP module (there are plans to move it into the main tree, though), but the rest are there just because.
[07:46] <spm> persia: ref your final point; that's not an issue here. the former can be an issue - sometimes X isn't packaged. yet. or is for karmic; but not hardy with all the backporting funness
[07:46] <persia> So they could use dpkg/buildout if someone wanted to adjust.
[07:47] <wgrant> persia: Right.
[07:47] <wgrant> Some are occasionally migrated to buildout.
[07:48] <persia> spm: with python-stdeb, python packaging is trivially scriptable.  I can accept backports, but I'll bang the "use stuff for which you can get support" drum more anyway :)
[07:48] <spm> heh
[07:49] <spm> it's a pain - minor, but pain - as buildout has to the equiva of ./conf && make on every server; which can be... um... slow. so we prep for a release a LONG time in advance to get the built code ready.
[07:50] <spm> persia: if you want to rip your eyes out sometime; check our LP rollout docco on the internal wiki. >:)
[07:50] <persia> spm: As a further benefit, consider the ease with which buildout is spoofed.  Given scriptability of python packaging for lucid, and that hardy is aging, I'll argue that migrating away from buildout should be considered during the lifecycle of lucid, so that with LTS+1 there is a clean procedure to handle a common set of backports for dealing with LP with only dpkg.
[09:09] <dhart> spm: I know these open source facts.
[09:09] <dhart> I would like to pay for a Canonical-hosted instance of Launchpad. Does anyone know who to ask?
[09:11] <wgrant> dhart: https://edge.launchpad.net/launchpad/+faq/208
[10:40] <bialix> hi dpm
[10:58] <dpm> hi bialix
[10:58] <bialix> dpm: I have a question about launchpad-translators group
[10:59] <dpm> sure
[10:59] <bialix> there is many subgroups for many languages
[10:59] <bialix> but there is no group for my native language -- Russian
[10:59] <bialix> I'm not quite understand who will do Russian translations for qbzr/explorer
[11:00] <dpm> bialix, ah, are you Alexander? :)
[11:00] <bialix> yes, that's me
[11:01] <dpm> bialix, ah, nice to meet you :) Right, so on the question:
[11:01] <bialix> nice to meet for me too
[11:03] <dpm> if you choose a Restricted translation permission, there will need to be a Russian team before anyone can translate into Russian. If you choose Structured, anyone will be able to translate into Russian, since there is no team for it yet, but once there is a team, only the members of that team will be able to translate Russian. As you see, Structured is a mixture of Open with Restricted permissions. I think what I'd recommend is to simply create a team for
[11:03] <dpm> Russian
[11:03] <dpm> bialix, ^
[11:04] <dpm> I see you've sent me an e-mail a few minutes ago, but I haven't been able to read it yet. Let me have a look now...
[11:04] <bialix> dpm: it seems I should change permissions to structured
[11:07] <dpm> bialix, it's up to you as a maintainer. Structured is good for projects starting up, but you might want to change to Restricted at some point. Remember that for Russian if there isn't a team and you use Structured, it will be the same as having translations open (i.e. just anyone with a Launchpad account will be able to change them)
[11:07] <bialix> dpm: I'm not ready to start the ru group and lead it
[11:08] <bialix> who can create $lang groups?
[11:08] <bialix> members of lanhcpad-translators? or?
[11:10] <dpm> bialix, that's fine, but perhaps someone else will want to start a team. Anyone can start a translation team. Whoever would do it, would then simply need to ask (https://answers.launchpad.net/rosetta/+addquestion) for the team to be appointed in the Launchpad Translators group. We'd then do some basic checking (asking if the team has got any experience in translations, pointing them to documentation, letting them know about guidelines, etc.)
[11:11] <dpm> I could ask someone from the Ubuntu translations team
[11:11] <dpm> perhaps they'd like to start a Launchpad Russian translation team
[11:11] <dpm> for other things than Ubuntu
[11:11] <bialix> dpm: ok, thanks
[11:11] <dpm> no worries
[11:12] <bialix> so, I will change to Structed for now? We have more languages in our translations than there is lang groups
[11:12] <dpm> bialix, sure, that's fine
[11:12] <bialix> ok
[11:13] <bialix> dpm: thanks for your help. I'm sure I'll have more questions later
[11:14] <dpm> bialix, no probs. Just ping me if I can help in anything else. I'll try to reply to your e-mail now as well.
[11:14] <bialix> ok, that's good you're in europe timezone ;-)
[11:16] <dpm> :)
[11:51] <jussi01> loving it...
[11:52] <jussi01> Someone may want to forward him to ##fix_your_connection for a bit...
[11:59] <Laney> haha
[11:59] <wgrant> We are saved.
[12:30] <m_o_d> hello
[12:32] <m_o_d>  can anyone help with this error: http://wklej.org/id/301695/ i install launchpad on lucid
[12:35] <maxb> Hi m_o_d, it is advisable to use #launchpad-dev for that sort of question
[12:49] <m_o_d> maxb: thanks
[14:07] <cjwatson> hi, could a LOSA have a look at https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad-code/+question/105130 and let me know if it's plausible to temporarily cowboy such a change, or whether it ought to go into the tree proper (in which case I can start poking to try to get that moved along)?
[15:42] <qense> The "All activities" link on user profiles on Launchpad edge points to +karma, just as the karma does. Is that a known bug?
[15:43] <jml> I honestly don't know.
[15:43] <qense> I'll look it up
[15:49] <qense> Couldn't find the issue, so I reported it as bug #544258
[15:49] <jml> qense, thanks.
[15:50] <qense> yw
[17:06] <deryck> bdmurray, ping
[17:07] <bdmurray> deryck: pong
[17:51] <dark_soul> how can i use bzr to delete a branch ?
[18:26] <ircipimp> hi
[18:29] <ircipimp> i want to report a bug, more a feature request, for launchpad itself.
[18:29] <ircipimp> On single-comment views, there is no link back to the bug report itself
[18:29] <jtv> ircipimp: not even in the breadcrumbs?
[18:30] <jtv> ircipimp: now that you mention it, I think I edited a URL a while ago to get around that...
[18:30] <ircipimp> no, especially not in the crumbs, where i looked for it first
[18:31] <ircipimp> because the crumbs are not extended, the last item is the bug itself, which isn't a link
[18:31] <ircipimp> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/light-themes/+bug/532633/comments/167
[18:31] <ircipimp> famous example. :)
[18:31] <ircipimp> i couldn't find a link to the bug itself there
[18:31] <ircipimp> against which project should i file this issue?
[18:31] <ircipimp> or is it enough that i mentioned it here?
[18:32] <jtv> ircipimp: thanks for noting this!  You'd file the bug against malone, which is the Launchpad bugs app.
[18:33] <ircipimp> ok, i'll go ahead and do that
[18:33] <jtv> So just adding a breadcrumb for the single-comment view would do it.
[18:34] <ircipimp> jtv: yes, actually that's all that's missing
[18:35] <ircipimp> jtv: someone else noticed earlier: https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/78565
[18:36] <jtv> ah
[18:37] <ircipimp> and it was updates 2h ago, so i guess it'll soon be fixed.
[18:37] <ircipimp> so never mind. But thanks for the quick help!
[18:45] <jtv> :)
[20:12] <cjwatson> jtv: do you know if https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad-code/+question/105130 is likely to be a reasonable thing to cowboy onto codehosting machines in order to debug an import, or will it need to go into the codebase proper?
[20:12] <cjwatson> jtv: and whom should I beg to run it through the tests for me? :-)
[20:12] <jtv> cjwatson: I must warn you I am not a well man right now
[20:12] <jtv> so I may talk nonsense
[20:12] <cjwatson> ah, well I'm just asking the help contact :-)
[20:13] <jtv> loading up the page now
[20:14] <jtv> cjwatson: I don't understand what would need cowboying, but I'd ask mwhudson or thumper who should be in the process of starting their day
[20:14] <cjwatson> mwhudson seemed to think it was vaguely reasonable the other week, but I'd like to try to move it on a little bit from that point ...
[20:15] <jtv> oh, see it now...
[20:15] <mwhudson> oh right
[20:15] <mwhudson> losa ping i guess
[20:15] <cjwatson> yeah, I tried earlier :)
[20:15]  * cjwatson is flailing slightly, not quite sure whom to prod
[20:15] <mbarnett> mwhudson: heya, i am currently running down an issue with edge codehosting, but should be able to help shortly
[20:55] <aiedail92> hi
[21:55] <alkisg> Erm, to download something from http://paste.ubuntu.com/123456/plain I need to logon to launchpad?!!! Is that necessary?!
[21:56] <wgrant> alkisg: You should probably talk to #canonical-sysadmin. That's not a Launchpad service.
[21:56] <alkisg> Thank you
[21:56] <Hellow> alkisg: Just to save you the trouble, all that paste contains is "1024*768".
[21:56] <wgrant> It may be related to attempting to limit abuse of the pastebin service.
[21:56] <alkisg> Hellow - heh, that was a random number, I'm surprised it's actually valid...
[21:58] <Hellow> And now I'm having issues. Requested delete of a busted Launchpad PPA package, it's not appearing on the PPA package listing, and yet I'm still receiving emails on the source package already being accepted, and that I can't re-upload.
[21:59] <Hellow> Is there something I'm missing?
[21:59] <wgrant> Hellow: You still can't upload the same version again. That would be a lie, and very confusing.
[22:00] <Hellow> wgrant: Ah, thank you.
[22:06] <Hellow> wgrant: I'm confused about this: "0 source packages (0 bytes)"
[22:06] <Hellow> I'm still very, very new to PPA uploading, so excuse me if these are highly idiotic questions.
[22:10] <wgrant> Hellow: It probably means that there are no source packages published. How is that confusing?
[22:11] <Hellow> I'm apparently missing the difference between published and accepted.
[22:12] <wgrant> There shouldn't be much of a difference, but there may be a couple of minutes' latency. Are you sure your package was accepted?
[22:14] <Hellow> It was accepted, but it failed to build for both i386 and amd64.
[23:08] <nhandler> Is there a PPA for python-launchpadlib yet ?
[23:08] <nigelb> nhandler: I think you need to get the source and compile for latest
[23:09] <nhandler> nigelb: It isn't just python-launchpadlib. A lot of its dependencies are also not in karmic, which is why I was asking about a ppa
[23:10] <nigelb> nhandler: ah
[23:10] <maxb> python-launchpadlib |     1.5.1-0ubuntu1 |            karmic | source, all
[23:10]  * maxb looks confused
[23:10] <nhandler> maxb: 1.5.5-1 is in lucid
[23:11] <maxb> I realize it's grown a few nifty new tweaks, but isn't 1.5.1 good enough in most cases?
[23:12] <nhandler> maxb: It would be if I knew enough python to not need to simply modify examples made by some other people that only appear to work in lucid and not in karmic
[23:12] <maxb> hmm
[23:14] <maxb> You should probably ask for help with that here, then
[23:14] <maxb> Unless it's something pretty esoteric, I would think it would be karmic-able
[23:18] <nhandler> maxb: Ok, I'll do that the next time I have an issue like that.
[23:41] <dhart> wgrant: okay thanks, I'll try that out!
[23:43]  * wgrant is confused.