[01:29] <paissad> hi all, i would like to retreive the public key of the ppa/compiz repository
[01:29] <paissad> i did "sudo apt-key adv --recv-keys --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com 42C24D89", but the server seems down  or unreachable
[01:29] <paissad> https://launchpad.net/~compiz/+archive/ppa
[01:30] <paissad> is there another way to retreive the public key ?
[01:30] <paissad> so that i do something like this --> cat <<"eof" | sudo apt-key add -
[01:30] <paissad> thanks in advance for helping ...
[07:22] <nxvl> hello, a couple of scripts just got broken because of a call to import launchpadbugs, which use to come with python-launchpad-bugs package that isn't present in lucid
[07:22] <nxvl> any idea why?
[07:22] <nxvl> are there any docs on what should i change in my scripts to make them work again
[07:26] <lifeless> I'm ont sure
[07:26] <lifeless> perhaps launchpadbugs was screen scraping
[07:26] <lifeless> and you should switch to launchpadlib now ?
[07:27] <nxvl> yeah i assume the same, but there should be any bug report or something about that
[07:37] <lifeless> presumably the bug requesting removal of python-launchpad-bugs would say
[07:39] <geser> paissad: use one of the many other available keyservers
[07:41] <wgrant> nxvl: python-launchpad-bugs has been deprecated for years.
[07:41] <wgrant> A launchpadlib port of your scripts should be reasonably easy.
[07:41] <nxvl> wgrant: it was in the archive for karmic
[07:41] <geser> "upstream authors say the project is dead and the package doesn't work in Lucid anyway (LP: #552953)"
[07:41] <nxvl> ok, thanks!
[07:41] <wgrant> nxvl: Yes, but it had been deprecated for a very long time.
[07:41] <nxvl> will try to check tht
[07:41] <nxvl> that*
[07:53] <om26er> what do I do if I want a package to be build(in my ppa) for two different versions of ubuntu
[09:10] <maxb> Is there any nicer way in launchpadlib to get the ID of a SPPH to be able to call getBuildSummariesForSourceIds, other than spph.self_link.split('/')[-1] ?
[09:12] <noodles775> maxb: No... that method was originally added for some AJAX work where the SPPH ids were already present on the page. I'm not sure why (in this specific case) we wouldn't just expose the id... do we have a policy against this?
[09:13] <maxb> I suppose I could iterate the builds for the SPPH and summarize them myself, but I'd rather not do gratuitiously more roundtrips
[09:36] <maxb> See this is why I haven't bothered to port my screenscraper to the API until now. It's ~250% slower
[09:36] <maxb> :-(
[09:58] <bigjools> urgh
[09:59] <bigjools> maxb: did you file a bug describing the functionality you want?
[10:03] <jetienne> q. i deleted all my packages from the ppa, and it still show im using 136mbyte ... how come ? https://launchpad.net/~jerome-etienne/+archive/neoip/+packages
[10:06] <jetienne> 0 source packages (132.5 MiB) 0 binary packages (3.7 MiB) <- this is what is on the page
[10:06] <bigjools> jetienne: you need to wait for the packages to be deleted from the repository area, it's not instant
[10:07] <jetienne> bigjools: not instant = how long ? minutes? hours? days?
[10:07] <bigjools> good question, I can't remember!
[10:08] <jetienne> ok :)à
[10:11] <cjwatson> Normally branch format upgrades I request through the UI happen within minutes.  I requested an upgrade of lp:~ubuntu-core-dev/partman-partitioning/ubuntu last night before I went to bed, and it's still pending.  Is something stuck?
[10:14] <bigjools> thumper: still around?  ^^
[10:16] <thumper> cjwatson: how big is the branch?
[10:16] <thumper> cjwatson: alternatively, the upgrade script operates in serial
[10:16] <thumper> cjwatson: there could be a big branch before you
[10:16] <cjwatson> <cjwatson@sarantium ~/src/ubuntu/partman-partitioning>$ du -cs .bzr
[10:16] <cjwatson> 1752    .bzr
[10:16] <cjwatson> must be honking enormous
[10:17] <cjwatson> I wouldn't have asked except that this is approximately six hundred times longer than it's taken in the recent past :-)
[10:18] <thumper> -cs means?
[10:18]  * thumper doesn't run that very much
[10:18] <cjwatson> habit.  the output is in kilobytes
[10:18] <thumper> 1.7 meg?
[10:18] <cjwatson> yes
[10:18] <thumper> that isn't that big
[10:18]  * thumper looks at the log file
[10:19] <mwhudson> ha ha, like that will tell you anything
[10:19] <mwhudson> :(
[10:20] <thumper> useless bloody log file
[10:20] <thumper> it will say more once my other branch lands
[10:21] <thumper> cjwatson: sorry, can't tell right now
[10:21] <cjwatson> when should I ask again?
[10:21] <jetienne> bigjools: fyi the deleted space got updated in less than 15min
[10:21] <bigjools> jetienne: great
[10:31] <cjwatson> put another way, would a LOSA be able to tell whether it's stuck?
[10:31] <lifeless> yes
[10:31] <lifeless> when they wake up
[10:31] <lifeless> they are sprinting this week
[10:32] <cjwatson> ok
[10:32] <lifeless> we are losaless
[10:48] <paolob> Hi guys! A launchpad user set his user name as a terrible blasphemy in italian. What should we do in order to get it changed?
[10:48] <paolob> https://launchpad.net/~b1130560 is his account
[10:53] <lifeless> have you tried talking to him ?
[10:56] <paolob> I've sent him a email now.
[10:58] <paolob> but has launchpad some respect guidelines?
[11:01] <cooloney> hi guys, is that possible for us to remove my initial upload to a PPA?
[11:01] <cooloney> since my first upload build failed, i am planning to upload again but don;t wanna to change my version number
[11:04] <bigjools> cooloney: no you can't do that.  Ideally you should check your build works before you upload
[11:06] <cooloney> bigjools: it is weird, because my build locally works and people tested my build on their hardware
[11:06] <cooloney> bigjools: then i upload it to PPA
[11:06] <cooloney> but it build failed
[11:06] <cooloney> so i fixed it in my local package and wanna upload again
[11:06] <cooloney> it was rejected
[11:07] <maxb> losa: loggerhead appears broken
[11:07] <cooloney> bigjools: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA/Deleting
[11:07] <cooloney> bigjools: how about this? ^^^
[11:07] <maxb> You can delete packages, you can't delete the metadata that records that that version is used
[11:07] <noodles775> cooloney: did you build it locally using pbuilder (or equiv. stripped down build environment)... I'm surprised if it failed on the PPA but built in pbuilder.
[11:07] <maxb> This is good. It would be confusing if it was allowed
[11:08] <cooloney> oh, my package is a kernel package for ti-omap4 hardware
[11:08] <cjwatson> version numbers are cheap
[11:08] <cooloney> so i just built it locally by normal kernel building method
[11:09] <cooloney> cjwatson: ok, looks like i have to bump my ABI
[11:09] <cjwatson> even in kernel packaging land, bumping your version does not mean bumping your ABI
[11:10] <cooloney> cjwatson: i am new to the packaging version. so how to bump my verision without touch my ABI?
[11:12] <cjwatson> 2.6.34-4.11 - "2.6.34-4" is the ABI, you can bump "11" at will
[11:12] <cjwatson> though I assume you also have something like ~ppa1 as a suffix or whatever
[11:12] <cjwatson> anyway, ask your colleagues on the kernel team, they've done this before
[11:13] <cooloney> cjwatson: ok, thanks a lot.
[11:15] <cjwatson> (btw this is purely a kernel convention, no other package works this way)
[11:58] <jetienne> q. ppa builder are ok now ? yesterday i had like 20min of queuing top... and currently i got one package which is queing since 1h50m and is estimated to start in 44m
[11:59] <bigjools> jetienne: the load on the build farm and the number of available builders is constantly changing
[11:59] <bigjools> this will affect your waiting times
[12:00] <jetienne> bigjools: so those kind of variations are normal. an average has been measured ?
[12:01] <bigjools> jetienne: an average for what?
[12:01] <jetienne> bigjools: of the queuing time. like if you push a new version, on average it gonna start building in X min*
[12:02] <bigjools> jetienne: we keep some stats internally, I don't know if that's one of them off-hand
[12:02] <jetienne> bigjools: ok thanks
[12:03] <bigjools> but we do base the build ETAs on the previous build times for all the packages in the queue
[12:03] <bigjools> but if one of the packages is new then it's total guess work
[12:04] <jetienne> bigjools: i understand. just trying to see how i could organize my work.
[12:05] <bigjools> jetienne: sure, ok
[12:54] <slytherin> Can anyone please tell me what does the 'package' corresponds to on this link https://translations.edge.launchpad.net/gnusim8085/trunk/+lang/de
[14:28] <stickystyle> Is  there any kind of markup that can be used in reporting bugs in launchpad?  Such as <code> ?
[14:45] <bilalakhtar> LP bugs timeouts are reocurring right now.
[14:55] <intellectronica> bilalakhtar: do you have a url of an example bug that times out for you?
[14:56] <intellectronica> or even better, an OOPS number?
[14:56] <bilalakhtar> intellectronica: It occurs randomly
[14:56] <bilalakhtar> intellectronica: Just a min, will recreate that
[14:57] <intellectronica> bilalakhtar: when you get a timeout, it will be good to paste an OOPS here. that way we can check why it timed out
[14:57] <bilalakhtar> intellectronica: ok
[14:58] <bulldog98> could an admin look in this PPA if the packages were deleted? https://edge.launchpad.net/~bulldog98/+archive/invertika/+packages
[14:58] <bulldog98> would be nice if he would delete them then, thanks
[14:59] <bilalakhtar> intellectronica: Good, It is fine now.
[15:50] <grizlurk> Hi, I am trying to fill bug report/questions via launchpad.net and I keep getting timeout error. Any other way to fill a report than the website?
[15:54] <jjardon> Hello, I'd like to update the info from: https://launchpad.net/gtk
[15:54] <jjardon> How can I do that?
[16:07] <jcastro> jjardon: I can update things, what do you need?
[16:08] <marktheunissen> hi team
[16:08] <marktheunissen> i'm seeing an issue where commits from a certain user are not appearing the comments/commits feed on a merge proposal
[16:08] <marktheunissen> any ideas why that may happen?
[16:08] <jjardon> hey jcastro, set the branch of developemt, the stable branch, obsolete. Also set the branding, maybe some announcement
[16:08] <marktheunissen> the commits are simply skipped
[16:09] <jjardon> jcastro, something like  https://launchpad.net/glade-3
[16:23] <jcastro> jjardon: ugh, I can't seem to be able to figure out how to do any of that
[16:23] <jcastro> Also, lp still apparently doesn't resize images for branding/icons. Really.
[16:27] <jjardon> jcastro, I used gimp to resize glade-3 images ;)
[16:27] <jjardon> jcastro, I can create some images for GTK+ if you want
[16:29] <jcastro> jjardon: let's do this since you've been around long enough. I've made you admin, fix what you need. :)
[16:29] <jcastro> then when you're done hand it back over to the registry
[16:30] <sinzui> you do not need to give it back to the registry if you want to maintain the lp information
[16:31] <jjardon> jcastro, oh, thanks a lot ;)
[16:32] <jjardon> yeah, I'll mantain the lp info if you want
[16:34] <jcastro> jjardon: you seem to be the best person to maintain it anyway. <3
[16:38]  * jjardon blushes :)
[16:45] <grizlurk> Hi, I am trying to fill bug reports/questions via launchpad.net and I keep getting timeout error. Any other way to fill a report than the website?
[16:52] <bullgard> Every time when I am going to send an error message to Launchpad, I received during the last three times: "Sorry, something just went wrong in Launchpad." Last time I needed to wait almost 24 hours reading: "Trying again in a couple of minutes might work." Just now It's 3 hours yet and no end to be seen of it. -- Who does a bad job here?
[16:57] <bullgard> (Error ID: OOPS-1607E2129)
[16:58] <sinzui> jjardon, ping
[16:58] <jjardon> sinzui, pong
[16:59] <sinzui> jjardon, I just remembered that by taking gtk, you may become the victim of bug spam
[17:00] <sinzui> jjardon, I am working on a policy change to not send bug mails to project maintainer when the project *does not* use launchpad bugs.
[17:00] <sinzui> jjardon, if you get spammed, feel free to return it to ~registry.
[17:01] <xnox> THANK YOU  =)))))
[17:01] <jjardon> sinzui, I'm already a bug contact of gtk bugs, so no problems ;)
[17:02]  * xnox off to test branch recipes =)
[17:02] <GarrettS-Montrea> are there any Canonical LOSAs here today?
[17:02] <sinzui> jjardon, you are either brave or your inbox is /dev/null There
[17:02] <jjardon> hehe
[17:03] <jjardon> well, not a lot of bugs are filled agains GTK+
[17:03] <jjardon> generally are filled against apps
[17:11] <jjardon> lp:gtk launchap is only a mirror of master upstream branch, rigth?
[17:12] <jjardon> upstream, we have a branch for each release: gtk-2-20 ... etc ..
[17:12] <sinzui> yes master should be the focus of development
[17:14] <sinzui> ^ jjardon We want to automate builds from tip, so it is fine to have many series, but the series that is an import of master must be the focus of development
[17:14] <jjardon> mmm
[17:14] <jjardon> there is a problem here
[17:14] <jjardon> current gtk master is towards GTK+3
[17:15] <jjardon> Should I create another project for this?
[17:15] <sinzui> no
[17:15] <jjardon> Maybe https://launchpad.net/gtk3/
[17:16] <sinzui> jjardon, We really only want one project. The problem here is that Lp does not have a clear way of dealing with leading and and trailing series
[17:17] <sinzui> jjardon, Ubuntu's development series is built from the GTK and GNOME development series (tip, master, trunk, head)
[17:17] <jjardon> sinzui, note that GTK+3 will have a gtk+-3.0 package
[17:18] <jjardon> This is because GTK+3 will break the abi and the api
[17:18] <sinzui> yes, but that does not mean it is a new project
[17:19] <jjardon> ok
[17:19] <sinzui>  We want a 2x series and a master series (3x) and both will provide packages for Ubuntu
[17:19] <jjardon> true
[17:20] <sinzui> I think most project use trailing series where they build in tip, then fork/cut/tag the series for maintenance.
[17:20] <sinzui> When Ubuntu hits beta1, GNOME and GTK will be creating the 3.x branches
[17:21] <xnox> For gcc i did get 4 imports approved
[17:22] <xnox> currently there are imports running for lp:gcc (trunk) lp:gcc/4.5 lp:gcc/4.4 & lp:gcc/4.3
[17:22] <xnox> and then you will be able to use recipes to build any of them
[17:22] <jjardon> sinzui, no, no 3.x branch will be created until GTK+3 is released
[17:22] <sinzui> jjardon, We never settled on a policy for this situation. It is a lot of work to create a series for each stable GNOME/GTK. We certainly do need to do this for 3x
[17:22] <xnox> sinzui, you really need 3 series "trunk 2 3"
[17:23] <xnox> and series can point to the same branch
[17:23] <sinzui> no, because that breaks milestones
[17:24] <sinzui> xnox, milestones/releases are unique to the project and that is also key to understanding that there is one project with one trunk
[17:24] <xnox> true then you can just have "2 3" series with appropriate milestones and a dev-focus pointing to one or the other
[17:24] <xnox> then you will end up with lp:gtk lp:gtk/2 lp:gtk/3
[17:25] <xnox> and you milestones can only live in the "2" or "3" series
[17:25] <xnox> sinzui, look at launchpad.net/bzr
[17:25] <xnox> or launchpad.net/lp
[17:25] <sinzui> xnox, milestone/release 3.0 can only exist once. if we choose to not place milestones on trunk, then there is no issue. Users often do place milestones on trunk that get stuck
[17:25] <xnox> sinzui, forget about "trunk" series. Just delete it.
[17:26] <sinzui> xnox, bzr uses leading series. it is not a good model since FreeDesktop, GTK, and GNOME are using trailing series
[17:26] <sinzui> No the name is not important, but there must be a series that is a mirror of master set as the focus of development
[17:28] <xnox> sinzui, damnit you are right. I thought you can set "dev-focus" to any branch. But you can only set particular series to become "dev-focus" e.g. lp:gtk
[17:28] <xnox> that's a pain.
[17:28] <xnox> sorry for the noise.
[17:29] <sinzui> xnox, yes, it is a pain :(
[17:29] <xnox> it looks like you will need to keep trunk series - replica of the master and _not_ do any milestones/releases on it
[17:29] <xnox> shame
[17:30] <xnox> sinzui, there is another approach =) not to use series/releases at all
[17:30] <xnox> request as many imports as you want into lp:~vsc-imports/gtk/XX.Y
[17:30] <xnox> and use those for automatic builds =)
[17:30] <sinzui> The series abstraction has flaws. I do not know how to solve them. Part of the problem is the upsteam mindset. A lot of projects use DVCS-branch model like svn
[17:31] <xnox> for my project is easy =) we only have trunk & tags. And we don't do point release updates =)
[17:32] <xnox> Question about recipe-building on launchpad: Does it append Ubuntu series?
[17:32] <xnox> name/version
[17:32] <sinzui> xnox, I do not know, but I think abentley does
[17:33] <abentley> xnox, yes, it will.
[17:33] <jjardon> GTK+ and lot of GNOME projects has branches for each release
[17:34] <xnox> abentley, well I left the version number as 3.1.3-3~{revno}~ and I'll see what will happen in 3hours =)
[17:34] <abentley> xnox, it will fail.  The feature doesn't work yet.
[17:35] <xnox> abentley, so it's just the UI & scheduling implemented? =( at least I can setup all of my recipes =)
[17:37] <abentley> xnox, yes, the actual building doesn't work yet.  There are holes that need to be punched in firewalls, etc.
[17:45] <GarrettS-Montrea> Chex , mbarnett , spm ... around?
[17:45] <xnox> abentley, I'll be waiting for it =)
[17:52] <jjardon> ok, all the GTK+ info updated.
[17:56] <xnox> abentley, will firewalls get punched wtih 10.5 release?
[17:56] <abentley> xnox, it should be sooner than that.
[17:56] <xnox> ok thanks
[18:16] <fta> i386	12	 670 jobs (5 hours 50 minutes)  ??? doing old hardy builds??
[18:45] <zelaz> hello, I've been looking through documentation and can't figure this out: I have a branch hosted on launchpad.  i started coding on machine X, and pushed it to launchpad
[18:45] <zelaz> that was successful.  then, I made a few revisions on machine X, did a commit and then a push, that worked also
[18:46] <zelaz> then, i copied the files over to another machine, and began working there, NOT as a branch... let's call that machine Y
[18:46] <bilalakhtar> zelaz: It would be better if you branch that branch into that machine
[18:46] <zelaz> now machine Y has the same code as my branch.. in the three files that are the same... but then I added a lot of files to machine Y's code directory
[18:48] <zelaz> so if I created another branch on launchpad, with that code, by doing a push to myproject/new ... so i try to do a merge from myproject/new to myrpoject/trunk
[19:14] <zelaz> if i am merging to divergent branches, one with 3 files, the other has the same 3 files (modified) plus another 200 files, how are the additions 'merged' into the first branch
[19:18] <zelaz> hello bilal
[19:18] <zelaz> so what you were saying before, is that you recommend i do the merging entirely on my local machine?
[19:18] <zelaz> issue is that the *new* branch has 200+ new files
[19:19] <zelaz> plus the original 3 files that have changed
[19:20] <zelaz> when i do the merge on launchpad, the 3 existing files are updated, but the new files are not added
[19:22] <zelaz> error: these branches have diverged
[19:30] <maxb> zelaz: Do you have more than one revision in the second branch?
[19:30] <maxb> If not, it would be simplest to simply disregard the fact that it is a branch, and copy that tree over a checkout of the first branch, and commmit
[19:31] <maxb> Or, is the issue that you have worthwhile history in both branches?
[19:44] <zelaz> no worthwhile history
[19:45] <zelaz> i just want to add the new files to my branch
[19:45] <zelaz> and have bzr/lp accept those new files as now new files
[19:46] <godbyk> I received this email about two hours ago:
[19:46] <godbyk> "On 2010-05-26 15:00z (50 minutes ago), you uploaded a translation
[19:46] <godbyk> template for ubuntu-manual in Ubuntu Manual lucid-e1 in Launchpad."
[19:46] <godbyk> But I see no reason why the translation template was updated.  There have been no commits recently that seem relevant.
[19:46] <godbyk> Any ideas?
[19:48] <zelaz> i thought that by copying the files over into my pulled from trunk branch, and doing a bzr add ./ & then bzr commit -m 'comment' , and then pushing to the trunk on LP would work...
[19:48] <zelaz> only the updated file's changed were captured though, not the addition of new files
[19:55] <zelaz> all i'm told is 'has conflicts' are the 'conflicts' listed anywhere?
[19:56] <beuno> zelaz, bzr conflicts
[19:58] <zelaz> this is on launchpad though
[19:59] <zelaz> bzr: ERROR: These branches have diverged.  See "bzr help diverged-branches" for more information.
[20:00] <zelaz> running bzr conflicts returns nothing
[20:09] <Meths> What does 'bzr st' show?
[20:30] <maxb> zelaz: copying and bzr add was the right thing to do
[20:30] <maxb> I don't think you can make merge work for this scenario very well
[20:47] <zelaz> :( problem is, that I did bzr add, and commited on my local
[20:47] <zelaz> but then when i push to LP, the trunk doesn't have the new files
[21:08] <maxb> zelaz: this indicates you didn't actually add&commit everything
[21:19] <zelaz> maxb, you are more correct than you know!
[21:24] <zelaz> i'm not sure exactly where i messed up, I did, starting with a fresh branched trunk, copying in files add commit and push worked just fine :)
[21:24] <zelaz> thank you for being sanity checks ;)