[00:04] thumper: ping [00:05] thumper: I have a feature request: ... just like a project can have a devel target branch, I think a project should also be able to have a devel target series and a devel target milestone [00:06] thumper: so that "file a bug against the current devel target series/milestone" and "target a blueprint to current devel target series/milestone" is really easy [00:08] I'm bringing this up because we're currently merging a lot of branches with no bug/blueprint associated with them in drizzle [00:09] but the number of steps I'd be asking someone to go through to add a blueprint aroud merge-request time is sort of redundant [00:10] what would be great is if an unadorned branch that files a merge request could auto-create a blueprint with the merge-request summary as the blueprint description [00:10] and that is targetted to the current stuff - so that we've got a paper-trail of what was done without tons of extra dev work [00:10] thumper: I kept rambling ^^^ [00:12] also - if there _is_ an associated blueprint, the blueprint desc could be used to pre-fill the merge request desc [00:13] sort of helping describe a relationship between blueprints and merge-requests [00:33] mtaylor: it has all that [00:33] mtaylor: devel target branch is modeled as 'branch of the devel series' [00:34] mtaylor: but bug targeting (known as infestation) is underdeveloped - we had bad UI experiences in that space. [00:34] lifeless: well great then [00:37] lifeless: the "create merge-request from blueprint" or "create blueprint from merge-request" isn't there though, that would be a full-on feature request, yes? [00:38] it would be a patch to do it. [00:38] blueprints are unmaintained at the moment. [00:39] some folk put in slack and weekend time on them [00:39] but if there is something specific you want... :) [00:49] mtaylor: oh, and I'd love to see people caring for this [00:56] * wgrant would love to see Blueprint put out of its misery. [00:56] wgrant: one way or another ? [00:56] wgrant: hey, while you're here, let me run something past you [00:57] lifeless: Sure. [00:57] wgrant: seems to me that the package management pages aren't really at home in the http://launchpad.net/* space, and might benefit from being in a dedicated domain like packages.launchpad.net/ [00:57] in the same way that code.* has a more focused UI [00:57] (and bugs etc etc) [00:58] lifeless: It's difficult, because packages are structural. [00:58] Packages *have* bugs. [00:58] not saying that the multi-domain approach is good or bad, just that the soyuz stuff is neither fish nor fowl at the moment, and there is some tension with the registry [metadata only, thanks] goal [00:58] wgrant: so do branches ;) [00:59] Branches are not bug targets. [00:59] But yes, the Registry<-->Soyuz split is rather arbitrary, not done to well, problematic, and otherwise pretty terrible, both code and UI-wise. [00:59] thats true [00:59] wgrant: I would say that Package *names* have bugs [01:00] wgrant: Binary and Source package instances do not. [01:00] [infestation aside] [01:01] wgrant: thanks for letting me run that past you ;) [01:03] lifeless: That's true. [01:03] But the lack of infestations is a bug. [01:04] so there are two descrete concepts [01:04] 'can have a bug' [01:04] and 'can be a place that a bug fix should be done' [01:04] package versions by there very nature are only able to satisfy the former. [01:04] s/there/their/ blah. [01:05] containers-of-packages can do both ('there is a package in this place with the bug', and 'we want to upload a new package here with a bugfix') [01:05] under this model, I think there is a clear separation between registration stuff and package-instance stuff [01:06] what do you think ? [01:06] Indeed. [01:06] What would go on the DistributionSourcePackage Registry page if the Soyuz one was split from it? [01:07] so, like with other subdomains, a split doesn't mean 'do not reference', its about focus and primary presentation [01:07] Right. [01:07] But what would be the focus of the Registry page? [01:07] I'd expect, on a DSP registry page to give primacy to controlling things like: [01:07] - acls [01:08] - policy [disable uploads of this package] [01:08] - history [of things we no longer keep as well as active package files] [01:08] - relationships to other packages [01:08] Just riffing here at this point [01:27] mtaylor: hi, sorry, was out afk === Chex changed the topic of #launchpad-dev to: Launchpad Development Channel | Week 4 of 10.07 | LP will be read-only starting 23.00 UTC July 6th | PQM is RC; devel is closed | Release Manager and R-C wrangler: mars | https://dev.launchpad.net/ | Get the code: https://dev.launchpad.net/Getting | On-call review in irc://irc.freenode.net/#launchpad-reviews | Use http://paste.ubuntu.com/ for pastes === Chex changed the topic of #launchpad-dev to: Launchpad Development Channel | Week 4 of 10.07 | PQM is RC; devel is closed | Release Manager and R-C wrangler: mars | https://dev.launchpad.net/ | Get the code: https://dev.launchpad.net/Getting | On-call review in irc://irc.freenode.net/#launchpad-reviews | Use http://paste.ubuntu.com/ for pastes [02:20] lifeless: yes. I have put it on my todo list and plan on writing code in support of it [02:20] lifeless: which means step #1 - register a blueprint - will get done at some point :) [02:22] mtaylor: given that LP doesn't really use blueprints for its own dev [02:22] mtaylor: I don't think that that is step 1. Step 1 is 'propose a UI for it on the lp-dev list' [02:22] discuss. [02:22] lifeless: ok. [02:23] lifeless: I imagine I may become the caretaker of all things blueprints... [02:23] lifeless: if there is not currently one, since we really like them ;) [02:24] tag, you're it [02:24] actually sinzui IIRC has spent considerable time on it [02:24] lifeless: awesome [02:24] but all personal. [02:25] * mtaylor doesn't really want ownership - just expects to write some code [02:25] so, start with that. [02:25] Really. [02:25] JFDI :) [02:25] yup [02:25] that's the idea [02:25] step 0) get a working lp dev environment - have you got that ? [02:25] yup. step 0 done [02:26] ok [02:26] step 1) make a branch to work on this; have you got that ? [02:26] step 0.5 - complain about the number of steps needed for step 0 [02:26] ;) [02:26] yup. step 1 done [02:26] patches appreciate. [02:26] step 2) if you are not sure where to start changing stuff, ask here. [02:26] lifeless: pushed onto stack [02:27] remember that we like patches to be < 1000 lines, as a pretty hard limit, for the sanity of the reviewer. [02:27] unless previously agreed. [02:27] yup. we're like that in drizzle [02:27] sequnces of self-contained small changes that don't break shit ftw [02:27] or sequences even [02:29] mars: when does PQM open ? [02:31] it is supposed to be < 800 [02:31] oh, my bad. [02:31] PQM will open again when we have confirmed no massive fubar [02:31] lifeless: bigger can be done with prior agreement with a reviewer [02:32] yeah - I mentioned that just above :P - but I had the # wrong. [02:32] lifeless: I just noticed that after I had written the line [02:32] :) [02:32] lol [02:33] mtaylor: get yourself on the launchpad-dev mailing list :) [02:34] The last comment on bug #474615 [02:34] <_mup_> Bug #474615: lp email 'rationale' header should use most specific criterion, or add header for direct subscription [02:34] Why do people not file bugs about their broken mail providers? [02:35] wgrant: like gmail? [02:35] How is it Launchpad's problem that some mail providers are crap? [02:35] Right. [02:35] well [02:35] I've filed a bug with gmail about not being able to filter on mail headers [02:35] see, people *use* gmail. That we want to use lp. [02:35] leverage. [02:44] wgrant: so that bug, I don't think its really a gmail flaw per se. Yes headers are better. But its still simply nice to see the most proximate subscription - its the most relevant [02:44] wgrant: did you mail the list about API privileges [02:44] wgrant: if not, I can; I've been thinking on it. [02:45] lifeless: I haven't really got time at the moment, I'm afraid. [02:45] ok [02:45] I'll carry your point forward and you can tell me how I do later [02:46] Thanks. [02:46] also, http://www.hemispheregames.com/osmos/ looks awesome, if totally offtopic here. [02:46] It is awesome, yes. [02:46] I discovered it a few months ago, just before the Linux port, but it still ran fine in Wine. [02:52] hrm. no elves, no swords, no sharks with lasers?!?!? can't see the point. [02:53] spm: addict. [02:54] heh, perhaps.... :-) [03:14] lifeless: i was thinking of changing 'make run' to turn on tc slowness [03:14] perhaps with an escape hatch [03:14] heh [03:14] mmm [03:14] I think a target to start and stop tc would be awesome [03:15] I don't know that there is a perception mismatch for most devs though. [03:15] its tempting to think there is. [03:15] what might be really fun is an incrementally slower 'make run' [03:15] like, 1ms slower per second of runtime. [03:16] :> [03:17] make slower [03:17] make faster [03:17] > not implemented yet [03:17] lol [03:18] how do you mean incrementally slower? [03:20] poolie: just that [03:20] slower the longer its beein running [03:20] oh i see [03:21] it will add 1ms to the service time for each request? [03:21] for instance yes [04:22] Why would the milestone page show bugs as one status but viewing the actual bug show the bugs as a different status? [04:22] its caching very aggressively now. [04:22] Please file a bug [04:23] Ok [04:23] I filed a bug last week, but more dupes is good. [04:26] well, please me-too it. === jtv-afk is now known as jtv [08:10] good morning [09:01] Morning! === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan [10:23] morning [10:32] morning [11:43] is danilo around today? [12:04] Morning, all. [12:12] jml, Danilo's on leave today [12:12] mrevell, thanks. [12:25] jml: hello, how are you today? [12:27] mwhudson, bowel-clenchingly busy. finishing slides for a talk I'm giving in < 3hrs [12:27] jml: oh right === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away [13:50] wgrant: I'm trying to Q/A the launchpad-buildd changes... do you know of a recipe that should build without problems? When I try I get failures that I hear are probably unrelated: http://staging.launchpadlibrarian.net/51388616/buildlog.txt.gz === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan [14:08] abentley, do you know of any recipes that definitely should build without problems on either staging or dogfood? I'm trying to Q/A the latest launchpad-buildd so we can roll it out. [14:10] jtv, https://code.dogfood.launchpad.net/~abentley/+recipe/bazaar but you may need to change the debversion [14:10] henninge: any idea whether you'll be wanting those traits? [14:11] jtv: I think I do ... ;) [14:12] I mean, I'd like to have them. [14:14] jtv: Any recipe build is going to fail like that, since staging doesn't seem to have Soyuz. [14:14] Dogfood should work. [14:23] sinzui, hello, good morning [14:24] sinzui, something very weird is happening with the milestones of this project: https://edge.launchpad.net/iportfolio [14:24] I can't see them [14:24] maybe a typo lead to that? [14:24] s/1010/2010/ [14:25] I think someone put that date there [14:25] users allowed to screw up [14:25] wgrant: staging has builders, a buildd-manager and config. [14:26] bigjools: But no archive. [14:26] Ursinha, looks like you can create a date that the UI cannot support. The API does support it though [14:26] * sinzui reports bug [14:26] sinzui, hm, I see [14:27] wgrant: you don't need an archive to test builds [14:27] bigjools: You do if the primary archive's hostname is set to ftpmaster-staging.internal, and that doesn't exist. [14:28] wgrant: that is being fixed (dunno who set that), then it will work [14:28] Ah. === benji___ is now known as benji === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-brb === thekorn_ is now known as thekorn === leonardr is now known as leonardr-afk === salgado is now known as salgado-lunch === matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch === gary_poster is now known as gary-lunch === mars changed the topic of #launchpad-dev to: Launchpad Development Channel | Week 4 of 10.07 | PQM is open | Release Manager and R-C wrangler: mars | https://dev.launchpad.net/ | Get the code: https://dev.launchpad.net/Getting | On-call review in irc://irc.freenode.net/#launchpad-reviews | Use http://paste.ubuntu.com/ for pastes === mars changed the topic of #launchpad-dev to: Launchpad Development Channel | Week 4 of 10.07 | PQM is open | https://dev.launchpad.net/ | Get the code: https://dev.launchpad.net/Getting | On-call review in irc://irc.freenode.net/#launchpad-reviews | Use http://paste.ubuntu.com/ for pastes === matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara [17:55] Is there anyone from launchpad-foundations who can chat about Bug #602346? [17:55] <_mup_> Bug #602346: Launchpad can save HTTP requests with DataURIs === salgado-lunch is now known as salgado === Ursinha-brb is now known as Ursinha === gary-lunch is now known as gary_poster === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away === EdwinGrubbs is now known as Edwin-lunch [19:58] any soyuz folk around ? [20:01] lifeless: just about to grab a cold one and finish watching the footy, wassup? [20:26] bigjools: hi [20:26] too late I'm drunk [20:26] bigjools: so the new private ppa private-owning-team change [20:27] soren can see the owning team for the font ppa [20:27] as in, see its main registry page. [20:27] yeah we know [20:27] Was this intentional ? [20:27] sorta [20:27] Do you have a bug saying you want to tune it more? [20:27] Just so I can point surprised people at it :) [20:27] I need to start a thread about this on the dev list, we just talked about it on the TL call [20:28] sure [20:28] no bug yet [20:28] I'm only asking cause of soren's question on #launchpad [20:28] :) [20:28] we're talking about having a restrictedView permission [20:28] in directory service terms [20:28] what you want is 'traversal' [20:28] as opposed to 'view' [20:28] no, it's view [20:28] really ? [20:28] partial view of a private object [20:29] what bits ? [20:29] the name of the private team is needed to form it's PPA URL for example [20:29] its* [20:29] gah hate that mistake [20:29] (actually, if you're drunk, and this is known, you can stay drunk and watch the sport :)) [20:29] bigjools: I'd say that traversal implies accessing the metadata needed to present anything got at by traversing. [20:30] from a zope PoV, yeah [20:31] lifeless: I'm open to suggestions, thumper had some concerns about dealing with a new permission [20:31] but I'm going back to the footy now :) [20:31] ciao [20:32] bigjools: EPIC stuff. === Edwin-lunch is now known as EdwinGrubbs [20:53] lifeless: yes [20:58] morning [20:58] morning thumper [21:54] wgrant: lp:~leonardr/launchpad/grant-permissions-oauth :P [21:54] wgrant: someone used a time machine, I think. [21:55] wgrant, lifeless, what's up? [21:55] wgrant: its not quite what is needed, but its close [21:55] leonardr: hey! so you've done something that is very very close to what didrocks' gpg/ssh management stuff needs. [21:55] leonardr: which is a API way to manage security sensitive stuff [21:56] lifeless: ok, what do you need beyond what's in that branch (and its implied follow-ups)? [21:56] I don't know yet. [21:57] but its in the space [21:57] did you see the thread on lp-dev, and the LEP ? [21:57] no, i'm looking now [21:57] there is a missing bit which is 'perhaps we shouldn't let *every* API client change gpg/ssh keys, even though email notifications is a great safety net' [21:57] wgrant raised this and I think his points are valid, so we should try to slot something nice into the use case. [21:58] perhaps your tool should manage ssh and gpg keys on lp too [21:58] rather than quickly doing it [21:58] lifeless: given the way GRANT_PERMISSIONS can be used for privilege escalation, it might make more sense to have a separate access level [21:58] and a separate app [21:59] however, the credential manager could administer the granting of this new access level to this separate app [21:59] leonardr: if you'd like to throw some thoughts into the ring, that would be lovely [21:59] its a little time sensitive (isn't it always) [21:59] sure [22:00] from what i've heard here, it sounds like splitting out WRITE_SECURITY_SENSITIVE from WRITE_PRIVATE would work [22:00] if you have a preference as well, please indicate that too [22:01] I think didrocks is really able to tell us best what will work out well in the structure and what may be an issue [22:01] lifeless, can you give me a subject line and/or link to a web archive? my mail skills are notoriously bad [22:01] and i can't find this thread [22:02] [Launchpad-dev] Fwd: [Fwd: Quickly and Launchpad] [22:02] thanks, i had no idea what quickly was [22:03] its a mini IDE kind of thing [22:03] puts program boilerplate together [22:03] builds debs of python programs [22:03] cool. i'll write a response [22:03] sets up a development environment [22:03] thanks! [22:09] lifeless: if i understand the problem correctly, it's the danger of a malicious app making up a fake ssh key and uploading it? [22:10] or a new gpg key [22:10] I think you can add a key for an address you haven't validated previously, and it mails that address automatically [22:10] which the user wouldn't see [22:11] new gpg key would allow exposure of private branch content (but then WRITE_PRIVATE has that anyway) [22:11] sorry [22:11] new ssh key would ... [22:11] new gpg key would allow uploading packages [22:11] that the user hadn't signed, and its currently got more of a security shell around it [22:12] probably the whole set of interactions needs consideration [22:12] I'm not 100% sure wgrant is right in saying we need to do something about this - but I think we have to at least *think* critically about it [22:13] all right [22:18] congratulations lifeless [22:31] lifeless: congrats [22:34] * bigjools hi-fives lifeless === salgado is now known as salgado-afk [23:08] I'm noticing that some of the JS Tests in Launchpad are in YUI Test, others are in Windmill. Is there a preference for new tests? And/or what is the reason for the two frameworks? [23:15] nettrot: Windmill came first === matsubara is now known as matsubara-afk