[00:49] <wgrant> lifeless: security-related and private are separate flags.
[02:04] <thumper> maxb: ping
[02:04]  * thumper wonders if maxb is up at 2am
[02:51] <lifeless> wgrant: at one point one implied the other
[04:40] <wgrant> lifeless: If you check the security vulnerability checkbox when filing a bug, it will start private as well.
[04:40] <wgrant> But that's about it.
[05:49] <poolie> at this point 'security' is almost just a special tag
[05:50] <thumper> poolie: a tag that adds heat :)
[05:54] <wgrant> I thought the heat stuff was gone now.
[05:54] <wgrant> But maybe it isn't.
[05:54] <thumper> ah... I don't think so...
[05:54] <thumper> I could be wrong
[05:54] <thumper> it would be a lot of work to toss out the window
[05:57] <wgrant> thumper: I mean the security/private flags' contribution to it.
[05:57] <wgrant> The actual flawed concept still exists.
[05:57] <thumper> hah
[05:57] <wgrant> Although it's much better now.
[05:57] <thumper> I'm not clear on the heat calculation
[06:04] <lifeless> it just became a stored procedure
[06:04] <lifeless> which, I think, means noone will ever know again.
[06:32] <stub> Its in Python in database/schema/trusted.sql
[06:32] <stub> (need to break that file apart)
[06:54] <lifeless> stub: yeah, I know; I was mostly joshing
[06:54] <lifeless> I think its a bit sad a stored proc was needed
[06:57] <stub> It wasn't strictly needed. Things could have been refactored to calculate heat for batches of bugs at a time and would be more efficient than the current stored procedure.
[06:57] <stub> Though that would have probably meant encoding the algorithm in SQL...
[07:01] <lifeless> I thought storm can get pretty close to arbitrary sql?
[07:14] <poolie> back onto dkim stuff
[07:14] <poolie> spm, are you home?
[07:19] <lifeless> poolie: see facebook
[07:19] <lifeless> air canada airplane fail
[07:20] <stub> Maybe, but more complex stuff is so under documented SQL gets used instead. I don't think anyone on the team can drive Storm to that level.
[07:21] <poolie> urk
[07:21] <poolie> can't he fix it?
[07:21] <poolie> i thought sysadmins were there to abstract over hardware issues
[08:21] <adeuring> good morning
[08:36] <noodles775> Hi adeuring .... Can you open: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+ppas  for me?
[08:37] <noodles775> And turn off the edge redirection (bottom-right link on the page)
[08:38] <noodles775> adeuring: nm... I've got help from StevenK :)
[08:53] <wgrant> When's the release?
[09:20] <noodles775> wgrant: I haven't seen any email to launchpad-announce either... I'll send an email to sinzui (who is checking email afaik).
[09:23] <wgrant> noodles775: Thanks.
[12:14] <henninge> anybody here used lp.testing.record_statements before?
[12:14] <henninge> I want to count SQL statements but I only get zero. :(
[12:16] <noodles775> henninge: I haven't... and I'm assuming you've seen the example in lp.testing.tests.test_testcase.TestRecordStatements.
[12:17] <noodles775> henninge: actually... note the test_store_invalidation_counts there (store.flush and reset).
[12:18] <henninge> noodles775: you are assuming wrong ... ;)
[12:18]  * henninge goes to look
[12:18] <noodles775> Great... then the answer is probably there :)
[12:31] <henninge> noodles775: My error. Lazy execution. I used it on a method that only returned a (storm) iterator, so no statements happened until that was actually iterated over ... ;)
[12:32] <henninge> Thanks for the pointer, though. ;)
[12:32] <noodles775> Aha. np.
[12:59] <thumper> henninge: I've used record_statements :)
[12:59] <thumper> given that I wrote it
[12:59] <thumper> although I see you've solved your problem
[13:00] <henninge> I saw that but I expected you to be in bed .... ;)
[13:00] <henninge> Yes, I did. Thanks a lot!
[13:00] <thumper> just heading that way now :)
[13:00] <henninge> good night ;)
[16:27] <sinzui> henninge, ping
[16:27] <henninge> sinzui: Hi! ;)
[16:28] <sinzui> henninge, can you verify this issue is fixed: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/rosetta/+bugs?field.tag=qa-needstesting
[16:28] <sinzui> your team is the last to land...it was QA-OK
[16:29] <sinzui> henninge, I think you may have already verified it as OK if you have use the language js or the js on the import queue page lastg week
[16:29] <henninge> sinzui: let me try right now ... ;)
[16:30] <henninge> Argh, login is broken on staging. I cannot log back in ...
[16:31] <henninge> I get a nice django error on loging.staging.lp.net
[16:31] <henninge> sinzui: but it worked on the languages page. Cannot try out imports atm.
[16:31] <henninge> and actually, I have not looked at that page lately. Shame on me.
[16:32] <henninge> oh, edge should have it, too, right?
[16:33] <henninge> sinzui: QA done
[16:33] <sinzui> thanks
[16:35] <sinzui> henninge, I believe you team is now down with QA. Are you ready for release?
[16:36] <henninge> sinzui: hey, danilos's still around, my stint only starts tomorrow ... :-P
[16:36] <henninge> sinzui: but I not aware of ony issues, so I consider us ready.
[16:37] <sinzui> fab. Since you start on the day of release, I think it is best you are happy with this
[16:38] <henninge> good point
[16:38]  * henninge goes to look at the milestone more closely
[16:38] <noodles775> sinzui: I'm about to EOD, so just FYI, we got most of our soyuz qa done this morning. You'll see two remaining qa items... jelmer is currently working on 503149, and StevenK on 557714.
[16:39] <noodles775> Night all.
[20:38] <lifeless> bug tag bugs -> malone still, right ?
[21:05] <lifeless> I want a metronome in launchpad
[21:05] <lifeless> something like:
[21:05] <lifeless> when a series branch has the first commit done to it after a release
[21:05] <lifeless> start counting
[21:06] <lifeless> 1 month later nag all the series reviewers / committers to do a release.
[21:15] <sidnei_> +1
[21:28]  * maxb wonders what thumper wamted to talk about
[22:26] <thumper> maxb: hi
[23:27] <wgrant> sinzui: Is the namespace pollution useful?
[23:27] <wgrant> He has dozens of teams masquerading as being for projects with which he has no relationship.
[23:27] <sinzui> wgrant, no it is not.
[23:28] <sinzui> Do you want me to delete his useless teams?
[23:28] <wgrant> I think they should probably go. They serve no purpose, and are confusing.
[23:30] <sinzui> I do not think I am a good person to judge this. I world personally (and do) delete projects I am certain are useless. I will be happy to give someone else those teams if they can help other communities
[23:30] <sinzui> wgrant, His misuse of teams is not very different than how *most* users register projects that help no one
[23:31] <wgrant> sinzui: But placeholder project registrations serve a purpose.
[23:31] <wgrant> And they say "Does not use Launchpad for development"
[23:32] <sinzui> Most people who register a project claim a name, There will never be code
[23:32] <wgrant> But they claim the name for a purpose: so they can link bugs upstream.
[23:33] <sinzui> I will ask the user what he intends do do with all this teams, maybe he wants to invade some OSS hosting site
[23:33] <wgrant> These teams have no similarly good reason for existence.
[23:41] <thumper> sinzui: I can't find out how to say "Doesn't use launchpad for code hosting'
[23:41] <thumper> sinzui: have we got rid of that?
[23:41] <sinzui> YES
[23:42] <sinzui> thumper, it is in the model, but I do not know of a reason why a project needs to official use anything.
[23:43] <thumper> sinzui: fair enough
[23:43] <thumper> but it is saying 'uses launchpad for branches'
[23:43] <thumper> when I registered the upstream project
[23:43] <sinzui> thumper, I would we switch to enums that explain how project can use or integrate with Lp services. hostests/not-hosted has been a disservice
[23:43] <thumper> it seems a bit weird
[23:44]  * thumper nods
[23:44] <sinzui> thumper, the official uses in 3.0 control the portlets on project pages, code does not have any portlets.
[23:44] <thumper> yet
[23:45] <sinzui> thumper, Since we decided to extend the Involvement portlet is *not* about what the project owner's ego, anyone can use code if it is configured
[23:45]  * thumper nods again
[23:46] <sinzui> What should be different if you check official_code?
[23:49] <wgrant> sinzui: When that flag is off, the Launchpad project should indicate in a very obvious manner that it isn't actually where the code is.
[23:49] <poolie> hi there
[23:50] <poolie> wgrant, could you sometime do a bit of a security review of the dkim lep and patch?
[23:50] <sinzui> If someone were to provide some design help and use cases, that would help.
[23:52] <sinzui> wgrant, I really do not know if we care if the project use Lp officially. What is important is that Lp can provide code regardless of where it is initially hosted. Why do I care where gedit's code is not officially hosted in Lp
[23:53] <wgrant> sinzui: Because I will Google gedit and find the Launchpad project.
[23:53] <wgrant> Oh look, there's lp:gedit.
[23:53] <wgrant> I will not notice that it's an obsolete import from two years ago.
[23:53] <sinzui> I am still not conviced
[23:54] <sinzui> We only had one item on the page in the past, with bugs regarding the fact that is was useless
[23:54] <wgrant> Projects already often complain that Launchpad is misleading like this.
[23:54] <wgrant> Let's not make it even worse.
[23:55] <sinzui> we have not made it worse because what her made did never told the truth, and since Lp is not a simple hosting service, I do not have an answer for this issue
[23:56] <wgrant> But it previously said "Does not use Launchpad for development".
[23:56] <wgrant> Now all projects have their branches stored on LP.
[23:57] <sinzui> Most project is disable (about 200 this month) used or did not use Lp as they claimed. I can see by activity how the project is really used. I can see by the nature of a branch of bug if the project is a mirror of a project hosted elsewhere.
[23:57] <wgrant> sinzui: How?
[23:57] <wgrant> I am a user who wants to submit a patch.
[23:57] <wgrant> What on Launchpad tells me that it is not the right place?
[23:58] <sinzui> I think the code team has spent years in this domain and have not solved it
[23:58] <sinzui> I do not think I can in the next 3 months
[23:58] <wgrant> Well, until not long ago you could make the project page say "Does not use Launchpad for development."
[23:58] <wgrant> Now you cannot.
[23:58] <wgrant> That was at least something.
[23:58] <wgrant> Not nearly enough, but something.
[23:59] <sinzui> Where would this text be?
[23:59] <sinzui> On the code pages perhaps?