[03:39] <lfaraone> bdrung: hey, I tried to use your ack-sru script as follows: "ack-sync 587229", but I got the following error: "ack-sync 587229". Any idea the source?
[03:39] <lfaraone> bdrung: * ValueError: You tried to access a resource that you don't have the server-side permission to see.
[03:45] <lfaraone> bdrung: hm. this seems to happen if the user's email address is not provided.
[05:12] <aalex> DktrKranz, eh! I figured out you're mentoring my first package! That's nice! :)
[10:55] <ari-tczew> debfx: ping
[10:55] <debfx> ari-tczew: pong
[10:56] <ari-tczew> debfx: why did you this change: Add build-dep on libqt4-webkit-dev. in kadu?
[10:57] <debfx> ari-tczew: QtWebkit has been seperated from libqt4-dev into an own package
[10:58] <ari-tczew> debfx: could you send changes to debian?
[10:58] <debfx> ari-tczew: they don't have this seperation yet
[10:59] <ari-tczew> ok
[11:36] <dupondje> crimsun: you want to sponsor another thing for me ? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/librapi2/+bug/587346
[12:00] <dupondje> using requestsync, that makes a bug right ?
[12:02] <dupondje> ok :) it does
[12:02] <dupondje> crimsun: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pidgin-sipe/+bug/587467 another :P
[12:07] <ari-tczew> dupondje: are you talking alone with themselve?
[12:07] <dupondje> ?
[12:08] <ari-tczew> dupondje: my irc: http://ubuntu.pastebin.com/Shdvzh8s
[12:08] <dupondje> else its so silent here :)
[12:09] <ari-tczew> I don't see answers from crimsun, so I guess that you're talking to himself
[12:09] <iulian> dupondje: I can do that for you.
[12:09] <iulian> (sponsoring the merge)
[12:09] <dupondje> feel free :)
[12:10] <iulian> OK.
[12:10]  * iulian looks
[12:10] <iulian> Hey mok0.
[12:12] <ari-tczew> I'm glad that Ubuntu development has got a new supporters
[12:12] <DktrKranz> aalex: :)
[12:13] <ari-tczew> DktrKranz: could you check whether package raul is ready to sync?
[12:15] <DktrKranz> ari-tczew: yes (together with patchage and flowcanvas)
[12:15] <dupondje> iulian: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libopensync-plugin-evolution2/+bug/587479 another one :)
[12:17] <ari-tczew> DktrKranz: but are you sure about this change: python (>= 2.5) ? not 2.6?
[12:18] <DktrKranz> ari-tczew: yes. embedded waf supports python versions from 2.5 onwards
[12:18] <ari-tczew> ok
[12:19] <iulian> dupondje: librapi2 uploaded.
[12:19] <dupondje> iulian: thx!
[12:27] <iulian> libopensync-plugin-evolution2 ack'd.
[12:28] <iulian> I'm now looking at pidgin-sipe.
[12:28]  * iulian hopes that's all for now.
[12:30] <dupondje> oops :)
[12:34] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/burn/+bug/587491 this is the last :P
[12:40] <iulian> dupondje: pidgin-sipe ack'd as well.
[12:40] <dupondje> thx alot :)
[12:42] <iulian> dupondje: No problem.
[12:51] <mok0> iulian: hey
[14:03] <Rhonda> ** Tags added: canonical-losa-lp
[14:03] <Rhonda> What's that?
[14:30] <ari-tczew> does someone got an idea for overtaking orphaned packages.ubuntu.com?
[14:36] <geser> ??? -EPARSEERROR
[14:46] <jpds> Rhonda: A tag?
[15:28] <Rhonda> jpds: Yes, but what does it mean?
[15:29] <Rhonda> geser: If you had the uderstanding issues about ari's message: packages.ubuntu.com still doesn't mention maverick, even though I did commit the required change to the git repository a month ago.
[15:29] <geser> ah
[15:31] <Rhonda> geser: From what I was told is that a single person is able to do that and that canonical doesn't seem to care enough to fix that given that that person is busy for well over half a year now already, at least.
[15:35] <geser> Rhonda: that seems to match what I've heard (http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/05/21/%23ubuntu-motu.html#t14:11)
[15:38] <Rhonda> geser: In what respect does it list maverick? Wasn't aware of that?
[15:39] <Rhonda> I think it maybe only got part of the commit incorporated.
[15:39] <Rhonda> Found what you mean.
[15:39] <geser> packages.ubuntu.com has a link to maverick and options in the select fields for maverick, but it's broken when one tries to use them.
[15:44] <Rhonda> geser: Unfortunately I'm unable to investigate that closer, I proofread my commit again and can only guess that it was applied only in parts.
[15:45] <Rhonda> No access to the machine, that's still only up to Frank. At least it looks like he pulled in my changes.
[15:45] <Rhonda> … or parts of it, no clue.
[15:45] <geser> no problem
[15:46] <Rhonda> Well, actually I see it as a problem. But none that I can fix and from what I perceived, none that canonical seems to be worried about.
[15:46] <geser> that's what I meant
[15:47] <Rhonda> :)
[15:58] <dupondje> is there some 'tool' to make merges easier ?
[15:58] <dupondje> like already preparing the changelog ?
[16:00] <lfaraone> crimsun: do you think bug 544910 should be SRUd?
[16:00] <lfaraone> dupondje: not really. use bzr.
[16:00] <lfaraone> dupondje: but to handle the changelog, no.
[16:02] <ScottK> dupondje: Use grab-merge from ubuntu-dev-tools.
[16:03] <ScottK> lfaraone: The bzr UDD stuff is really much more complicated and less mature.
[16:03] <ScottK> People are certainly welcome to use it, but I don't think it's appropriate to be pushing it as "the" way to do stuff.
[16:08] <lfaraone> Unrelated, I'm considering dropping http://launchpadlibrarian.net/38436778/burn_0.4.5-1_0.4.5-1ubuntu1.diff.gz with a sync, but I don't really understand the rationale behind the change. The package builds fine without it, as docutils-writer-manpage is provided by python-docutils. Am I missing something?
[16:10] <Rhonda> There is some changelog merging hook script for git, no clue if that would be possible to port to bzr.
[16:11] <dupondje> lfaraone: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/burn/+bug/512509
[16:11] <lfaraone> dupondje: I saw that, but what's changed?
[16:11] <dupondje> docutils-writer-manpage is dropped in maverick now, and is a virtual package for python-docutils
[16:12] <lfaraone> dupondje: rmadison tells me it wasn't in lucid either.
[16:13] <geser> Rhonda: bzr-builddeb should already have a script (for bzr hooks) to do it
[16:13] <dupondje> lfaraone: weird, seems like it failed in some stage to build in lucid
[16:13] <dupondje> anyway a sync should be safe (it builds for sure)
[16:13] <geser> and ubuntu-dev-tools has also a script for it (merge-changelog)
[16:14] <Rhonda> geser: dupondje was looking for such a script :)
[16:14] <dupondje> lfaraone: did also made an upstream bugreport, as it just should be removed, its a virtual package in debian also
[16:15] <ScottK> lfaraone: If it builds fine without it, then I'd drop it.
[16:15] <lfaraone> dupondje: okay, looks fine. uploading.
[16:15] <geser> lfaraone: lucid had docutils-writer-manpage until 2010-02-03 when it got removed from lucid
[16:15] <lfaraone> geser: ah, that makes sense.
[16:16] <ScottK> lfaraone: I do think it's better to just file the sync request and not upload them all yourself.
[16:16] <lfaraone> ScottK: I've been using ack-sync from lp:~ubuntu-dev/+junk/ack-sync.
[16:16] <Rhonda> Ah.
[16:17] <lfaraone> ScottK: From what I can tell, the only issue raised with using `syncpackage' and the like was lack of a record. With `ack-sync', you're still closing a bug.
[16:17] <Rhonda> geser: Now I understand. I changed config.sh.sed.in but the file that needs to get changed on packages.ubuntu.com is config.sh itself. That one though is generated and not in git, so it needs to get done manually.
[16:18] <lfaraone> ScottK: is there another reason I'm missing?
[16:35] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/hardware-monitor/+bug/587524 => can be done also :)
[17:04] <RunePhilosof> How do I get debuild to only build one of the binary packages?
[17:21] <dupondje> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/iw/+changelog => version 0.9.19 was uploaded directly into ubuntu because debian didn't had 0.9.19 yet. Now 0.9.19-1 is in debian, should that be a direct sync or ?
[17:25] <blue_anna> does anyone here work on the powerpc architecture?
[17:35] <ScottK> lfaraone: Generally it's safer to let the archive admin script do it.  Although the risk is low, there's always a chance when you touch the package manually something gets mistaken.
[17:35] <ScottK> At this point in the cycle virtually none of the syncs are urgent.
[17:35] <ScottK> blue_anna: powerpc is community supported and there are a few of us that work on it.
[17:37] <blue_anna> ScottK: ok, hi -- thank you .. I use your product
[17:37] <ScottK> You're welcome.
[17:38] <geser> RunePhilosof: you can't. And what would be the benefit of it as you have to compile the whole upstream code anyways.
[17:44] <dupondje> somebody can tell their opinion on the 'iw' package ? sync or no sync ? :)
[17:45] <geser> dupondje: what did your analysis of it shown?
[17:46] <dupondje> as debian missed the 0.9.19 version, they just took source directly into ubuntu, without any changes
[17:46] <dupondje> now 0.9.19 is in debian, so I think it should be no problem to sync it ...
[17:47] <crimsun> it's syncable.
[17:50] <dupondje> tought so :D
[17:52] <dupondje> got 3 syncs in the queue now :P
[17:57] <ScottL> !proposed
[17:58] <ScottL> there are some significant bug fixes for Ubuntu Studio that I would like to ensure they get in 10.04.1, can someone explain how i would effect this?
[18:10] <geser> !sru
[18:20] <ScottL> geser, thanks
[18:21] <ScottL> persia had mentioned getting these into -proposed and this ties into the link that you gave :)
[18:22] <ScottL> this will greatly improve the user experience in an lts release
[18:41] <lfaraone> If a package does not release source tarballs, but only binaries, can I use debian/watch to at least track their new releases?
[18:51] <lfaraone> ScottK: in https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pytrainer/1.7.1-1.1ubuntu1 , I was keeping over an older change from quadispro for the "python-glade2 -> gtkbuilder" transition. Is this still occuring? (new debian version without dep change builds fine)
[19:27] <RunePhilosof> geser, well. I was kind of hoping to limit the compilation of the upstream code
[21:09] <geser> RunePhilosof: that could only work if upstream supports it
[21:13] <dupondje> bleh, I can't get debuild to make use of my key as default, always need to add -k :(
[21:16] <geser> have you tried DEBSIGN_KEYID=0x... in ~/.devscripts?
[21:24] <dupondje> doesn't seem to work
[21:24] <dupondje> anyway :)
[21:24] <dupondje> grab-merge seems to create a patch into debian/patches for the merge changes
[21:24] <dupondje> is that a better way of doing ?
[21:25] <micahg> dupondje: is your address in the changelog in your key and keyring?
[21:26] <dupondje> email is changed :)
[21:28] <geser> I've configured debuild to not sign at all by default (-us -uc) and only sign (with debsign) what I really want to upload
[21:28] <micahg> geser: it's the exact same thing, right?
[21:29] <geser> the same like?
[21:29] <dupondje> anyway :) patch better or direct changes better ? grab-merge seems to make a patch automaticly :)
[21:32] <geser> I did look at grab-merge for some time, but it should depend on what the package already uses
[21:32] <geser> no patch system -> direct changes, a patch system -> use the patch system
[21:32] <dupondje> there are already some patches in it yea :) but previous merges were directly
[21:36] <micahg> geser: no practical difference between signing at creation or later?
[21:37] <geser> no
[21:38] <geser> no differences
[21:39] <dupondje> the patch contains comment like '+ This patch has been created by dpkg-source during the package build.', needed to include ?
[21:39] <geser> is this a v3 source package perhaps?
[21:40] <dupondje> dpkg-source: info: using source format `3.0 (quilt)'
[21:40] <dupondje> yea :P
[21:41] <geser> then the changes got applied directly but converted into a quilt patch by debuild/dpkg-source
[21:42] <dupondje> hmz :s
[21:43] <dupondje> so it needs to be filled in or ?
[21:51] <ScottK> lfaraone: I'm not sure.  I don't keep close track on gtk/gnome stuff.
[21:54] <dupondje> I fill it in, do debuild, and it gets overwritten :( wtf :s
[21:55] <RunePhilosof> 7j #wesnoth