[00:10] <lifeless> bman2: do a search for bugs you are subscribed to
[00:10] <lifeless> bman2: and then, as appropriate, unsubscribe from the bug; unsubscribe the team(s) you're in from it, or leave the team(s) subscribed to it.
[00:11] <lifeless> e.g. if you're in a product qa team you might reasonably expect that team to be subscribed to its products bugs :)
[00:11] <bman2> nah
[00:11] <bman2> its lists for laundpad itself
[00:11] <bman2> i use myown sso
[00:11] <bman2> how do i search?
[00:16] <lifeless> bman2: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/bugs/+bugs?advanced=1
[02:03] <poolie> did bug expiry ever end up being reenabled?
[02:04] <lifeless> there is a spec
[02:04] <lifeless>  / wiki page thingy
[02:04] <lifeless> I saw an edit go by the other day
[02:04] <poolie> is that a "no"?
[02:05] <poolie> not complaining, just confused
[02:05] <poolie> https://help.launchpad.net/BugExpiry and the ui imply it's active
[02:05] <wgrant> Current schedule is for right after Maverick.
[02:05] <lifeless> oh
[02:05] <lifeless> so 'no'
[02:05] <wgrant> It was going to be around now.
[02:05] <lifeless> coming, but it needed more work
[02:05] <wgrant> But Ubuntu wanted it delayed.
[02:05] <lifeless> something like:
[02:05] <lifeless>  - ubuntu needed some tweaks
[02:06] <lifeless>  - ubuntu gets turned on
[02:06] <lifeless>  - other people can opt in after that
[02:06] <poolie> that's fine, i just want the docs to reflect reality
[02:07] <lifeless> https://dev.launchpad.net/Bugs/CommuncationForBugExpiry
[02:09] <poolie> thanks
[02:27]  * poolie contemplates writing an api client to copy tracebacks from the attachment into the description and bug title
[02:27] <wgrant> poolie: Sounds like you need apport.
[02:28] <poolie> i have one; can it be told to do that?
[02:28] <wgrant> I thought it did by default.
[02:29] <poolie> then i will try to work that out before duplicating it, thanks
[02:30] <wgrant> For Ubuntu it certainly does.
[02:30] <poolie> hm
[02:30] <poolie> so i think we have a few problems
[02:30] <poolie> one is that i don't think it ever copies the stack trace into the bug description?
[02:30] <poolie> (or does it?)
[02:31] <poolie> and i really find that helpful for bzr
[02:31] <poolie> the other is that users tend to upload crash files manually rather than using apport-bug
[02:31] <poolie> maybe we can steer them towards it
[02:31] <poolie> oh another is they may be on windows and just paste a log file, not using apport at all
[03:51] <micahg> lifeless: convert to question is still broke on edge
[03:52] <lifeless> micahg: yes, for that bug
[03:52] <lifeless> micahg: I have a branch that takes us a good way towards knowing why
[03:52] <micahg> lifeless: ok :), I got worried when I saw your post about lowering the timeout
[03:52] <lifeless> micahg: hopefully that will land today; and in a follow up I'll instrument mail, memcache etc
[03:53] <lifeless> micahg: well, convert to question isn't *systematically* broken
[03:53] <lifeless> micahg: its db times were very reasonable IIRC
[03:53] <micahg> lifeless: yeah, it just timeouts
[03:53] <lifeless> micahg: so its got a bad scaling factor in it which means it breaks sometimes
[03:53] <lifeless> we will definitely fix it
[03:53]  * micahg must just have bad luck with it :)
[03:53] <micahg> lifeless: so, with the lower timeout, I should file bugs again for oopses?
[03:54] <lifeless> micahg: you always should if they are not in https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/launchpad-project/+bugs?field.tag=timeout
[03:54] <lifeless> micahg: or if its not a timeout oops
[03:54] <micahg> k
[03:55] <lifeless> micahg: we've fixed lots this last month
[03:55]  * micahg adds that to LP links
[03:56] <lifeless> micahg: note that aiming for -0- timeouts is not a sane goal, we'll aim to minimise, but things will always happen
[03:56] <micahg> lifeless: of course, the convert to question one is just one I hit every time on edge :)
[03:56] <lifeless> micahg: sorry! you hit it on prod too though right ?
[03:57] <micahg> lifeless: yes, about half the time
[03:57] <lifeless> it may get a little worse
[03:57] <lifeless> this will get it fixed sooner
[03:57] <micahg> lifeless: now I know where to check for timeout bugs though, so I'll file new ones if I hit something
[03:57] <lifeless> please do.
[03:58] <micahg> if I don't have time to code for LP at least I can report bugs :)
[10:36] <Ryuzaki`> Hi, anyone about?
[10:37] <wgrant> Ryuzaki`: Sure.
[10:38] <Ryuzaki`> Ideally a Canonical LOSA? Problem is, I can't recall which e-mail address I've currently got my Launchpad account on, as I've swapped about domains when they've been used for different things
[10:39] <wgrant> Ryuzaki`: Do you know your Launchpad username?
[10:39] <Ryuzaki`> So I can't log in, as I can't recall exactly which address is current for my LP account
[10:39] <Ryuzaki`> I do know it, yeah
[10:39] <wgrant> What is it?
[10:40]  * Ryuzaki` points wgrant to PM
[10:40] <wgrant> Ah, so your email address is private.
[10:40] <wgrant> So you do indeed need a LOSA.
[10:41] <wgrant> LOSA ping: ^^
[10:41] <mthaddon> so what's the account?
[11:06] <maxb> Incidentally, *why* do we log into LP using an email address, not an account id?
[11:07] <wgrant> A good reason now is that accounts don't have non-numeric identifiers besides an email address.
[11:07] <wgrant> As for the original reason? No idea.
[11:30] <geser> it is possible to log-in with ones @ubuntu.com email address? never tried this
[11:34] <wgrant> geser: If you've added it to your Ubuntu Single Sign On account.
[11:38] <geser> Ubuntu SSO account? is that different from my LP account?
[11:40] <lifeless> wgrant: we didn't want to expose numeric ids. we started with basic auth, with the username.
[11:40] <wgrant> geser: Um, sort of.
[11:41] <wgrant> geser: Your Launchpad account is knows the identity of your SSO account. login.launchpad.net and login.ubuntu.com use the SSO account.
[11:44] <geser> is there a seperate page for my SSO account? e.g. to configure the attached e-mail addresses or change the password or comes this from the LP account?
[11:44] <wgrant> geser: Email addresses are configured separately (on login.ubuntu.com or login.launchpad.net).
[11:44] <wgrant> And passwords aren't on LP any more
[11:47]  * geser didn't notice this change
[16:15] <hrw> hi
[16:15] <hrw> is it normal that PPA's APT archive has packages which are not visible on LP PPA page?
[16:16] <bigjools> yes, click on the "View Packages" link
[16:16] <hrw> https://edge.launchpad.net/~hrw/+archive/arm-cross-compiler/+packages does not list libc6-armel-cross
[16:17] <hrw> result of armel-cross-toolchain-base build
[16:18]  * bigjools pokes around
[16:20] <hrw> and (as expected) my next package failed to build cause did not found those in PPA's APT
[16:21] <bigjools> that won't be the reason it failed
[16:22] <hrw> The following packages have unmet dependencies: libc6-dev-armel-cross : Depends: libc6-armel-cross (= 2.12.1-0ubuntu1) but it is not going to be installed
[16:22] <bigjools> hrw: it looks like you're creating arch-all packages of the same version
[16:23] <bigjools> see http://launchpadlibrarian.net/54778928/upload_1945934_log.txt
[16:23] <bigjools> "The following files are already published in ..."
[16:23] <bigjools> and the old binaries got superseded too early
[16:23] <hrw> bigjools: it is first time when this package built on both archs
[16:24] <bigjools> I suspect you're generating the same package on both arches
[16:24] <hrw> yes, will have to change that
[16:24] <bigjools> and one is trying to supersede the other
[16:24] <bigjools> same arch-all package I mean
[16:24] <hrw> but why amd64 build (first finished) published only amd64 packages but arch:all ones got to APT?
[16:25] <bigjools> we only build arch-all on i386
[16:25] <bigjools> I'm not sure of that
[16:25] <hrw> ok, I am now preparing new version of package. will delete current one
[16:25] <bigjools> hrw: don't delete
[16:25] <bigjools> just increment the version
[16:25] <bigjools> the old version will be automatically superseded
[16:26] <hrw> I know, but I prefer to not ship broken versions in meantime
[16:26] <bigjools> ok
[16:26] <bigjools> I'm guessing that your package is generating files that are not in the control file?
[16:26] <bigjools> I'm not a packaging expert, so that's a guess
[16:27] <hrw> man, it is far more complicated
[16:27] <bigjools> yes, it usually is :)
[16:27] <hrw> my package runs dpkg-buildpackage internally, then select set of packages, run some of them though dpkg-cross, then mangle them. then generate debian/control and debian/files
[16:29] <bigjools> yeah it will struggle to show much in the UI since the source package doesn't tell the whole story
[16:29] <hrw> so on i386 "binary-arch" + "binary-indep" are run and on amd64 only "binary-arch" - right?
[16:31] <bigjools> well if we see an arch-indep package we build it on i386
[16:31] <bigjools> but since you're taking that decision away from the build system then you need to manage it yourself
[16:31] <bigjools> either arch will be fine
[16:32] <hrw> I am asking cause I need to split few build steps
[16:39] <tgm4883> How can I turn off Answers in a project? I don't want users to be able to ask questions here on LP?
[16:43] <thekorn> tgm4883: I think it's in the very left column on your project's page in the "Configure progress" section
[16:43] <thekorn> click on configure support tracker
[16:43] <deryck> https://launchpad.net/PROJECT/+configure-answers
[16:44] <thekorn> and choose unknown
[16:44] <thekorn> right, or listen to deryck ;)
[16:44] <deryck> no, thekorn knows all as well :-)
[16:45] <tgm4883> see, I would love to have that work then
[16:45] <tgm4883> but i've had it configured that way for weeks now
[16:45] <tgm4883> and someone asked a question 17 hours ago
[16:45] <tgm4883> I have no idea how they did that
[16:45] <deryck> tgm4883, what project?
[16:45] <tgm4883> mythbuntu
[16:45] <tgm4883> https://edge.launchpad.net/mythbuntu
[16:46] <tgm4883> https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/mythbuntu/+question/123711
[16:46] <deryck> weird
[16:46] <tgm4883> thats the question, IDK how they asked it, I can't find anywhere to ask it on our project
[16:46] <deryck> yeah, it looks like it's turned off.
[16:47] <tgm4883> odd
[16:47] <deryck> tgm4883, maybe someone asked it against something else and someone re-targeted it to mythbuntu?  Just a guess.
[16:47] <tgm4883> could be, i'm going to ping aaron about it
[16:47] <tgm4883> if thats the case, would seem like a bug
[16:48] <deryck> tgm4883, I would open a bug against launchpad-answers.  I think there is a bug somewhere.  Unless it was asked before you turned off the app.
[16:48] <tgm4883> definitly not. We've actually had answers turned off for about a year, then when the new (configure..) thing came out we turned it off there as well
[16:49] <tgm4883> so it's definitly been off for a month or so
[16:49] <deryck> yeah, I would file a bug then
[16:49] <tgm4883> will do
[18:02] <smoser> ok, stupid user question: i have a tarball. i want to put that tarball up for others as a released version tarfile.  how would i do that: https://launchpad.net/cloud-init
[18:40] <SpamapS> smoser: add it as a release
[18:41] <SpamapS> smoser: click on 'trunk' series, then in there click "Create release"
[18:42] <SpamapS> smoser: already looks like there is a tarball up w/ a mielstone and everything.
[18:42] <smoser> yeah. i ended up figuring that out, although i'm not sure its right.
[18:42] <smoser> i didn't really want a milestone.
[18:42] <smoser> i wanted a release
[18:42] <smoser> pita
[18:43] <smoser> (that wasn't nice, sorry)
[18:43] <smoser> i'm probably just not a good user, but i was just confused, and wanting an easy way to just add a download.
[18:44] <SpamapS> they're the same thing
[18:44] <SpamapS> releases are the culmination of a particular milestone
[18:45] <SpamapS> I was a little confused by the milestone thing at first too.
[18:45] <SpamapS> but yes, you're a bad user, horrendous really
[21:51] <BUGabundo> evening guys
[21:51] <BUGabundo> what's up with LP anwers?
[21:51] <BUGabundo> I've got two emails from LP project sent to one of my projects contact
[22:51] <thumper> BUGabundo: is it possible that one of them was for a team?
[22:51] <thumper> BUGabundo: if you look at the source of the email there should be some headers that explain a bit about who and why it was sent
[22:51] <BUGabundo> some how one of my teams was set as a contact for LP anweser
[22:51] <thumper> BUGabundo: starting with X-Launchpad
[22:52] <BUGabundo> no idea how it ended up there
[22:52] <BUGabundo> all of the sudden today I started getting mail
[22:53] <BUGabundo> thumper: http://paste.ubuntu.com/487489/
[22:56] <thumper> BUGabundo: X-Launchpad-Message-Rationale is the interesting oen
[22:56] <thumper> one
[22:57] <BUGabundo> thumper: I've "fixed" it
[22:57] <thumper> :)
[22:57] <BUGabundo> but I just want to know HOW to got there in the 1st place
[22:57] <BUGabundo> if it was a fluke, maybe some one else is also affected
[22:58] <BUGabundo> if it was someone on my time, I need to talk to them
[22:58] <wgrant> It was someone on your team :(
[22:58] <BUGabundo> if it was someone unauthorized, then LP needs to be fixed
[22:58] <BUGabundo> wgrant: based on your logs?
[22:58] <wgrant> No.
[22:59] <wgrant> But I know that code, and it's very careful about who it allows to make subscriptions.
[22:59] <BUGabundo> your experience?
[22:59] <BUGabundo> there are 3 ppl in that team
[22:59] <BUGabundo> ill talk to them