[00:30] <maco> bdmurray: you rock
[00:31] <bdmurray> maco: why thanks! ;-)
[00:31] <maco> you're making all the changes to lp that frequent-users need
[00:34] <bdmurray> well, thats my background- frequent launchpad user ;-)
[00:35] <maco> yay dogfood?
[00:38] <lru> is it possible to report a bug in ubuntu via email, like Debian?
[00:39] <micahg> lru: https://help.launchpad.net/Bugs/EmailInterface
[00:40] <lru> micahg: nice, thanks :-)
[00:40] <micahg> lru: np
[00:40]  * micahg thinks the idea of rotations is cool
[00:41] <lru> Ubuntu sure is paranoid about getting anonymous bug reports though
[00:41] <micahg> lru: it's more to prevent spam I would think
[00:41] <lru> Debian doesn't need it
[00:42] <micahg> lru: Ubuntu is higher profile (more exposure), more potential for abuse
[00:43] <wgrant> And the Ubuntu bugtracker has a far lower learning curve.
[00:43] <micahg> lru: plus launchpad isn't just for Ubuntu
[00:43] <micahg> the safeguards must be for all the projects
[00:45] <lru> it's the "if you want to play with us, you must be a member of our club" attitude that I find irritating and arrogant :-)  The number of hoops a user has to jump through just to report a bug is amazing.  I even had to file a bug on creating my account.  Sad state of affairs :-)
[00:45] <wgrant> The number of hoops?
[00:45] <lifeless> lru: its a shame that you encountered a bug creating an account
[00:45] <wgrant> You mean clicking the 'New Account' button?
[00:45] <wgrant> If you have to do more than that, there is something wrong... what happened?
[00:46] <lifeless> lru: however its important for bugs that we be able to have a conversation with the reporter, because usually the report has insufficient data to go on.
[00:46] <poolie> wgrant: well, there is an email verification hoop
[00:46] <lru> lifeless: true, but you can do that with email
[00:46] <wgrant> Ah, true.
[00:47] <poolie> i think that one is particularly insidious because it inserts a stall in to the process
[00:47] <lru> if a user is reporting a bug via email, the email likely works  :-)
[00:47] <poolie> possibly minutes, possibly more
[00:47] <wgrant> lru: Why?
[00:47] <lifeless> lru: exactly what we do do infact. I think we could make things a bit easier, but the basic structure seems ok.
[00:47] <wgrant> poolie: It's a few seconds for me.
[00:47] <lru> wgrant: why have a conversation in email?
[00:47] <poolie> you can't start reporting only by email
[00:47] <lru> poolie: you can in Debian
[00:48] <poolie> lru, i meant "in launchpad, you can't"
[00:48] <lru> ahh
[00:48] <wgrant> lru: Why is the email likely to work?
[00:48] <wgrant> You can't trust an email's sender address.
[00:49] <poolie> so i think we could do better
[00:49] <lru> wgrant: because why report a bug if you don't expect to get any feedback?  The user can't expect much progress if people can't reply.  It's a natural two way handshake... user expects help, helper expects a contact point... email does that.
[00:49] <poolie> lru, the point is that there is a lot of forged email out there
[00:49] <poolie> spam etc
[00:49] <lru> yes, but is spam a bug report?
[00:49] <lru> no
[00:49] <poolie> sure
[00:49] <wgrant> Is spam filtering perfect? Also no.
[00:49] <poolie> of course it's not
[00:50] <poolie> the point is that we don't want spam getting in to launchpad, and we don't want spam being bounced back to you
[00:50] <lru> if it looks like a bug report, it's probably from a user who cares enough to report it, rather than a spammer... am I wrong here?
[00:50] <poolie> i think the current setup is very far from perfect, but that's the reason we verify email first
[00:50] <poolie> lru, sure, but it's actually a bit hard to distinguish them
[00:51] <poolie> you may say "well it has a valid apport file attached" but not all users report bugs that way
[00:52] <wgrant> And once you accept bugs filed through an untrusted mechanism, how do you distinguish them from bugs where the identity is verified?
[00:52] <poolie> i think it would be nice to tweak the account creation process in a couple of complementary avenues:
[00:52] <kklimonda> lru: even now, with registration we do getreports from people who never follow up when we ask them for more info, it would get even worse if they didn't have to register.
[00:52] <kklimonda> wgrant: gpg signatures! ;)
[00:52] <poolie> 1- if we get an email filing a bug from a user we've never heard of before, quarantine the mail, send them one confirmation, if they acknowledge that then create a valid trusted account
[00:52] <lru> I guess I don't understand why you care if you can verify a bug reporter's identity... if it is a valid bug, and you can reply to him, why demand a whole account / password hassle?
[00:53] <poolie> if they don't ack, don't proceed
[00:53] <poolie> 2- trust openid from third parties
[00:53] <lru> yeah, you could even have a captcha in the email ack response
[00:53] <poolie> 3- don't require email to have an active account
[00:53] <wgrant> lru: In Ubuntu, for example, we use bugs for some workflow tasks. If an Ubuntu developer files a bug requesting a sync, we know that the user is who they say they are.
[00:54] <lru> wgrant: that's fine... you can limit important requests to verified users... but the average guy wanting to report a bug?  Why does he need to create another account with another password to remember?
[00:55] <wgrant> lru: That's where OpenID comes in.
[00:55] <wgrant> But Launchpad isn't quite to the stage of accepting external OpenIDs.
[00:55] <poolie> mm
[00:55] <wgrant> It's nearly there, but not quite.
[00:55] <kklimonda> wgrant: btw, is it just me or does  any email containing commands have to be signed, even if actions are available to anyone?
[00:55] <wgrant> kklimonda: That's right.
[00:55] <poolie> so there is a concept of "strongly or weakly authenticated" for incoming mail
[00:55] <kklimonda> wgrant: is it a limitation or a design decision?
[00:55] <wgrant> kklimonda: Otherwise I could impersonate another user changing the status. And that's bad.
[00:55] <poolie> at the moment, to report a new bug, you must be strongly authenticated
[00:55] <lru> OpenID is a hack to fix a problem that shouldn't exist.  I have an email address.  You can reach me by it.  I'm willing to respond with an ack if you want to prevent spam.  Why do I need a password in this transation?
[00:56] <poolie> likewise to change a status
[00:56] <micahg> lru: most bug trackers work this way
[00:56] <lifeless> lru: you're wrong about spammers here
[00:56] <wgrant> As I see it, there are the bug trackers that require accounts.
[00:56] <wgrant> And then there is Debian.
[00:56] <kklimonda> :D
[00:56] <lru> micahg: I know most trackers work this way... which just makes it worse, not better :-)
[00:56] <lifeless> lru: we get lots of spam (that we block) and we get spam that we miss and have to go back and deal with.
[00:58] <lru> lifeless: you're saying that spammers create new accounts and manage to spam your bug tracking system, with a valid account / password or GPG signature, and you have to delete their spammy reports?
[00:58] <lifeless> lru: yes
[00:58] <lru> lol
[00:59] <lru> then the average spammer is more persistent than the average bug reporter :-)
[00:59] <lifeless> they create an account - which is easy, we don't have captcha - and then do various things.
[00:59] <lru> there was captcha in my launchpad account creation today
[01:00] <lifeless> oh, maybe thats new
[01:00] <lru> I have no trouble with captcha... I don't have to track that like I do an account / password
[01:01] <wgrant> There has been a captcha for a few months.
[01:01] <lru> anyway, thank you very much for taking me seriously enough to have this conversation with me
[01:01] <lru> I appreciate it
[01:01] <lru> and once my account creation bug is fixed, I can finally report my bug lol
[01:02] <wgrant> Which is the bug?
[01:02] <lru> I tried doing a debootstrap in lucid, and then dist-upgrading to maverick, but in the chroot system, upstart complains about a missing socket
[01:03] <wgrant> I mean the account creation bug.
[01:03] <lru> wgrant: ahh, it would accept one address but not another
[01:03] <lru> wgrant: I expect it is zealous spam protection rearing it's ugly head again
[01:05] <lru> were you asking for the bug number?
[01:05] <wgrant> If there is one.
[01:06] <lru> The ack said: Launchpad login case 00012896
[01:06] <wgrant> Ah, one of them.
[01:06] <wgrant> Have you had a response?
[01:06] <lru> interestingly, the bug report response arrived, but not the launchpad account creation instructions
[01:07] <wgrant> login.launchpad.net is a different set of servers.
[01:07]  * lru nods
[01:10] <lru> I'm liking maverick's installer.... asking for non-critical information during the copy process
[01:10] <lru> very smart
[01:10] <wgrant> Yeah, it's had a bit of a makeover this time.
[01:18] <lru> wgrant: are you looking into the login bug?  should I stick around?
[01:23] <wgrant> lru: I can't help with that, I'm afraid. Have you received a response to the ticket? When did you file it?
[01:24] <lru> wgrant: I only filed it about 2 hours ago
[01:24] <wgrant> Ah.
[01:24] <lru> thanks... didn't want to dash off if you were going to ask questions :-)
[01:25] <lru> take care
[01:25] <wgrant> You should receive a response in the next couple of days.
[05:05] <daws> is there a room for the TI launchpad?
[05:08] <wgrant> I don't know of one.
[05:08] <wgrant> It's certainly not this one.
[05:11] <persia> Although TI might be pointing folks using Ubuntu to this launchpad.
[05:11] <lifeless> persia: the launchpad is a hardware device
[05:12] <lifeless> persia: http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/MSP430_LaunchPad_(MSP-EXP430G2)?DCMP=launchpad&HQS=Other+OT+launchpadwiki
[05:12] <persia> Oh, heh :)
[05:12] <lifeless> the name clash is exacerbated by it being a 'development tool'
[05:18] <lru> is it possible to avoid upstart in Maverick?
[05:18] <tgm4883> lru, you are probably looking for #ubuntu+1
[05:18] <lru> +1 ? :-)
[05:19] <lru> ahh, thanks
[05:19] <tgm4883> np :)
[07:51] <micahg> would someone be able to check if the any of the chromium-daily PPAs were scored down?
[08:05] <nettezzaumana> hi there
[08:06] <nettezzaumana> bloody hell, how can i *comment in that sucking launchpad .. there is no way to comment someone .. eg. to have in some quoted form what someone else said
[08:07] <nettezzaumana> i need to react on just a *comment no. $x and i can't see any way howto do it without some inane pasting original text to new comment
[08:08] <noodles775> micahg: afaics the chromium daily builds are scored at 2505, and I'm not aware of any changes to their scoring? Might it just be the long i386/amd64 queues currently? https://edge.launchpad.net/builders
[08:08] <micahg> noodles775: I saw some at 2455
[08:09] <micahg> noodles775: https://edge.launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/dev/+build/1964099
[08:12] <micahg> noodles775: there seem to be a few of those in that PPA that are from the 11th
[08:13] <noodles775> micahg: yeah, just looking now.
[08:13] <micahg> noodles775: thanks :)
[08:16] <noodles775> micahg: I've rescored that one build to 2505 (matching the others), but I'm not sure why it (and possibly others) would have had different initial scores, given that they have similar attributes.
[08:17] <micahg> noodles775: thanks, yeah, idk why either
[08:17] <wgrant> The archive isn't set to -50?
[08:18]  * noodles775 thought they were all for the same archive.
[08:19] <noodles775> wgrant: right, that one was for the ubuntu chromium dev channel archive.
[08:19] <wgrant> Aha.
[08:20] <micahg> noodles775: there seem to be 8 more :(
[08:26] <noodles775> micahg: Looking at that PPA, it looks like the lpia arch builds are being scored slightly lower than the i386/amd64 arches (which are all built). I assume this is related to managing the resources, but haven't been following the discussions lately.
[08:26] <wgrant> I don't think there's code to do that.
[08:26] <micahg> noodles775: that's why I requested an extra lpia builder so that all can build w/in 24 hrs
[08:27] <noodles775> micahg: I see.
[08:27] <micahg> right now the queue is at 20 hrs
[08:27] <noodles775> wgrant: yeah, I'm not aware of it either.
[08:27] <nettezzaumana> well, would any responsible adult here tell me, howto comment what someone else said in launchpad?
[08:28] <noodles775> nettezzaumana: if you've received their comment via email, just hit reply. If not, which page are you looking at?
[08:29] <nettezzaumana> noodles775: thanks .. https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/638955
[08:29] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 638955 in QEMU "emulated netcards don't work with recent sunos kernel (affected: 1, heat: 10)" [Undecided,New]
[08:29] <nettezzaumana> noodles775: problem is, that my email dpecka@opensuse.org is just a gateway for incoming emails and not usable for outgoing one
[08:29] <nettezzaumana> noodles775: ^^ tru dat, cuz it's a weak place in my plan
[08:30] <micahg> nettezzaumana: you can set it in your mail client
[08:30] <nettezzaumana> micahg: ah. ok, let me see
[08:31] <nettezzaumana> noodles775 & micahg << just confirm that what i need can be achieved only *by *using *email? right?
[08:32] <noodles775> nettezzaumana: I can't see a reply option for individual bug comments there (although I can for merge proposals). You could also work around it by hitting reply in your mail client and pasting the reply text into the comment box.
[08:33] <micahg> nettezzaumana: it's a feature request: bug 102441
[08:33] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 102441 in Launchpad Bugs "Web interface to reply to a comment (affected: 3, heat: 2)" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/102441
[08:34] <nettezzaumana> noodles775: sure .. this what just tortures me .. micahg: yeah, thanks for showing me feature request
[08:37] <nettezzaumana> noodles775 & micahg << anyway. it's resolved now, thanks to both. you've just confirmed for me, that problem is not on receiver site .. i didn't want to believe, that i can't comment what someone else said in launchpad in year of 2010
[08:38] <nettezzaumana> Reported by Johan Dahlin on 2007-04-03
[08:38] <nettezzaumana> aka bug 102441 ^^
[08:38] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 102441 in Launchpad Bugs "Web interface to reply to a comment (affected: 3, heat: 2)" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/102441
[08:39] <micahg> nettezzaumana: every project has limited resources
[08:39] <nettezzaumana> it just a mark of someone's boundless ignoracy
[08:40] <micahg> nettezzaumana: ?
[08:41] <nettezzaumana> micahg: ubuntu/launchpad is a pretty big community .. i'm in oss devels several past years and i couldn't realize that this kind of feature request could hang since 2007 until now
[08:42] <nettezzaumana> micahg: no offense against you personally, don't feel touched mate
[08:42] <micahg> nettezzaumana: It's open source, I'm sure patches would be welcome
[08:42] <wgrant> Ubuntu and Launchpad are also very large projects with a lot of feature requests and bugs to be fixed.
[08:42] <wgrant> Not everything can get done quickly.
[08:42] <micahg> we have 86k bugs open against Ubuntu right now, there's no way we can go through all those
[08:43] <nettezzaumana> wgrant: button in web iface for replying what someone else said is just core thing which should has high priority IMO
[08:43] <nettezzaumana> ** s/has/have/2
[08:43] <nettezzaumana> anyway. thanks for help .. this discussion is pointless
[08:45] <noodles775> micahg: I've rescored the other 8 to 2505 too. I checked with bigjools (who can see secret stuff ;), and apparently the dev ppa does have -50 applied as wgrant suggested it might. I don't know when it was set or why.
[08:45] <noodles775> Only admins can do that, so we can check with them :)
[08:45] <micahg> noodles775: k, well, I guess it made sense with only 2 lpia builders, hopefully with 3 everythign can complete
[08:46] <noodles775> Yep.
[08:46] <micahg> I pushed a lot of builds yesterday which is probably why most of those older builds didn't finish
[08:47] <wgrant> Hm, I thought ~launchpad was in ~commercial-admins...
[08:47] <micahg> thank noodles775
[08:47] <wgrant> I must be mistaken.
[08:47] <noodles775> wgrant: nope, I'm not in commercial-admins.
[08:48] <noodles775> There are a bunch of LP'rs, but just those who need access afaik.
[08:49] <wgrant> Yeah, looks like it.
[08:58] <Eliovir> Hi/Saluton/Bonjour
[08:59] <Eliovir> I wonder about the Translation import process. In the queue, there are many translations marked as "Needs Review". They are not imported. What does it mean?
[09:04] <nettezzaumana> https://bugs.launchpad.net/malone/+bug/102441/comments/7
[09:04] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 102441 in Launchpad Bugs "Web interface to reply to a comment (affected: 3, heat: 2)" [Low,Triaged]
[09:04] <nettezzaumana> bon apetit guys !! ^^
[09:05] <nettezzaumana> :D
[09:06] <micahg> nettezzaumana: comments like that don't help, that's why there a button where you can mark it affecting you
[09:08] <nettezzaumana> micahg: well, it helps me at first .. and also little sharpened fun won't hurt (unless you're sissy) ;)
[09:09]  * micahg won't bother anymore
[09:27] <hrw> hi
[09:27] <wgrant> Did you manage to get it working in the primary archive?
[09:28] <hrw> build of my package failed with "dpkg-genchanges: error: cannot fstat file ../armel-cross-toolchain-base_1.48cross1.48_amd64_translations.tar.gz: No such file or directory" - what do I have to install in my pbuilder to be able to reproduce it so will have a place to test before next upload?
[09:28] <hrw> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/56149448/buildlog_ubuntu-maverick-amd64.armel-cross-toolchain-base_1.48_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz is whole build log
[09:28] <wgrant> hrw: pkgbinarymangler
[09:28] <wgrant> Just install that.
[09:28] <hrw> thx
[09:46] <geser> wgrant: is translation stripping enabled by default? I remember I had to enable some parts of pkgbinarymangler inside my pbuilder but not which ones.
[09:47] <wgrant> geser: I think it's enabled by default.
[09:47] <wgrant> Maintainer mangling probably isn't.
[09:47]  * wgrant checks.
[09:48] <wgrant> pkgstriptranslations is on by default.
[09:48] <geser> ok then
[09:53] <ronny> hi
[09:53] <ronny> where can i actually change my password?
[09:54] <wgrant> ronny: login.launchpad.net
[09:55] <ronny> why is that completely invisible in the ui for everything else?
[09:56] <ronny> oh, and thanks
[09:57] <wgrant> Because it's actually a separate application now, and the links back to it aren't exactly great yet.
[10:01] <Eliovir> I wonder about the Translation import process. In the queue, there are many translations marked as "Needs Review". They are not imported. What does it mean?
[10:01] <Eliovir> I saw nothing in the help.
[10:02] <wgrant> henninge: ^^
[10:25] <henninge> Eliovir: different reason. For translations it may be that either the file name does not match a language code or that no template can be found to which the translations belong.
[10:26] <henninge> Eliovir: For templates it's usually the manual approval process being slow because we are busy. Feel free to ping us about any of those. But there are also a few other reasons why templates might not be approved.
[10:26] <henninge> wgrant: thanks ;)
[10:27] <Eliovir> henninge: wgrant: thanks
[10:27] <Eliovir> All were OK before, I'll check again later.
[10:27] <Eliovir> (the templates were well integrated.)
[10:28] <Eliovir> bye
[10:29] <fta> wgrant, bigjools-afk, about bug 139855, what's left to be done? i remember a script was supposed to run somewhere
[10:29] <ubot5`> Launchpad bug 139855 in Soyuz "Display stats about PPA usage (affected: 29, heat: 214)" [Low,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/139855
[10:29] <wgrant> noodles775: Do you know what's happening with the script?
[10:29] <wgrant> I think all the known performance problems are fixed.
[10:30] <noodles775> Yes, they should be... afaik it just needs to be tried now on germanium and start working through the backlog.
[10:42] <noodles775> wgrant, fta: I've just emailed losas asking if they could try the updated cronscript.
[10:43] <wgrant> noodles775: Thanks.
[10:50] <fta> is it already in the API?
[10:51] <noodles775> fta: wgrant added https://edge.launchpad.net/+apidoc/devel.html#binary_package_release_download_count
[10:52] <noodles775> (see methods above that too, such as getDailyDownloadTotals etc.)
[10:52] <fta> \o/
[10:52] <noodles775> It's just the data that is missing :/
[10:58] <wgrant> It's been in the API for 6 months now, yeah
[10:58] <wgrant> Just taking a while to get the script to run without destroying the world.
[11:00] <wgrant> getDownloadCount returns a single total, getDailyDownloadTotals returns a dict mapping days to counts, getDownloadCounts returns per day/country totals.
[11:28] <fta> wgrant, can i have it per dist / arch ?
[11:31] <wgrant> fta: The counts are per binary package.
[11:31] <fta> oh, ok
[11:31] <wgrant> So, yes, you *have* to have it per dist/arch.
[11:32] <wgrant> If you have suggestions for a better way to expose it, I'm all ears.
[11:32] <wgrant> I just implemented a basic API thinking that it'd be up and running quickly and improved soon.
[11:33] <fta> once it's populated, i'll give it a try
[14:08] <moonflux> since a few days I'm trying to report a bug against the ubuntu kernel package and launchpad just timeouts after I submitted it
[14:08] <moonflux> last Error ID: OOPS-1725C1074
[14:08] <ubot5`> https://lp-oops.canonical.com/oops.py/?oopsid=1725C1074
[14:11] <fta> what's happening with the ppa builders again today? the q keeps growing and there a lot of free builders.
[14:12] <fta> none of my builds from last night (11h ago) got a chance to start yet :(
[14:24] <noodles775> fta: the PPA builders look near full atm? Also, I rescored your lpia builds for chromium-daily/dev this morning - they're almost done now (one waiting).
[14:25] <noodles775> hrm, full with lots of translation templates build jobs.
[14:26] <wgrant> All for the one branch, too.
[14:26] <wgrant> That appears suboptimal.
[14:27] <noodles775> bigjools, jtv: looks like currently almost 50% of i386 builders are building a translations template for the same branch.
[14:27] <henninge> wgrant: it is and we are aware of that ... :(
[14:27] <noodles775> Ah, good.
[14:27] <wgrant> henninge: It creates them without checking if there's a pending job already?
[14:27] <henninge> wgrant: yes ... :(
[14:28]  * henninge is embarrased
[14:28] <wgrant> Heh.
[14:29] <wgrant> henninge: Does it at least only create them on tip changes, not every new revision that's pushed?
[14:29] <henninge> wgrant: not sure
[14:29] <fta> noodles775, thanks for the rescores from earlier today, almost 10 days for those :P
[15:32] <bigjools> henninge: that's a critical bug IMO
[15:32] <henninge> bigjools: let me see if we have a bug for it at all ...
[15:33] <bigjools> let's get it fixed either way :)
[16:57] <henninge> Which style is the right style for headings in doctest? I for get ...
[16:57] <henninge> == Heading ==
[16:57] <henninge> or
[16:58] <henninge> Heading
[16:58] <henninge> [16:58] <henninge> oops, wrong channel
[17:34] <StaffanE> Any hints on why I get http error 403 when trying to allow apport to access my launchpad account?
[17:34] <StaffanE> The 403 gives me an error page with no referee error
[17:50] <blueyed> what's up with the ppa buildds? waiting for 13+ hours..
[18:13] <EdwinGrubbs> jelmer, mbarnett: do either of you know anything about the dealy in ppa builds that blueyed noticed?
[18:13] <bigjools> EdwinGrubbs: they are busy because people are uploading lots of stuff.
[18:14] <blueyed> ..and there are not enough build daemons.. ;)
[18:14] <bigjools> there are plenty
[18:15] <bigjools> but when people upload tons of packages, there's going to be a big queue
[18:15] <blueyed> seriously, uploading a package at 5am and not having some report at 7am is seriously disappointing.. just like your patch not being considered for an update of the dotdeb package for 1+ month.
[18:15] <bigjools> we've got some improvements coming on line soon
[18:15] <blueyed> fine.
[18:16] <bigjools> sorry, everyone I speak to thinks their build is more important than everyone else's.  And everyone thinks that this free service should build their packages instantly.
[18:16] <blueyed> The only reason to use a ppa really for me is to have amd64 and i386 builds easily at the same time, but I would not need it for most packages.. therefore the main reason there is to provide updated packages to folks.. but this is nasty.. waiting 1+ day for your php to build..
[18:17] <bigjools> coming in to Ubuntu release time usually sees lots of delays
[18:17] <blueyed> well.. I have pbuilder/sbuild setup at the server itself.. it's more a community thing for me..
[18:17] <bigjools> yeah I understand
[18:18] <blueyed> but only on the PPAs then, cause the other build daemons won't be that busy, by definition of freezes..
[18:18] <maxb> There are a finite number of builders. The service is too popular. It works well enough to be useful.
[18:18] <blueyed> they could help out..
[18:18] <maxb> Though it would be nice if someone could balance the buildds to even out the unequal queue times on various architectures more often
[18:23] <maxb> blueyed: Two problems: the distro builders are not virtualized, the PPA builders need to be to safely run untrusted code.
[18:24] <maxb> And the distro builders tend to be surprisingly busy even in freezes
[18:24] <bigjools> people tend to do a lot of rebuilds close to release time, it causes a big jump in the queue
[18:30] <EdwinGrubbs> StaffanE: can you tell me which apport command you ran?
[18:30] <StaffanE> EdwinGrubbs: apport-collect, and it started lynx under 10.4-server
[18:38] <fta> bigjools, my builds are bouncing again, when did you say the fix will land? it's already tough enough to get a free slot, if it's just to bounce, that's just a waste
[18:38] <bigjools> fta: I don't know when the fix will land, and don't worry too much because it retries very quickly.
[18:38] <bigjools> I know it's a pain, I'm doing everything I can
[18:42] <EdwinGrubbs> StaffanE: I think this is the best way to either work around the problem or troubleshoot it.
[18:43] <EdwinGrubbs> StaffanE: When you run apport-collect and it starts lynx, just quit lynx, but don't hit <ENTER>. Then copy the big url that apport-collect spits out.
[18:45] <EdwinGrubbs> StaffanE: If you want to troubleshoot the problem you can open up another terminal and run "lynx -trace BIGURL" and then look at ~/Lynx.trace afterwords.
[18:45] <EdwinGrubbs> StaffanE: If you don't care about troubleshooting it, you can just paste it into a browser that you know doesn't have any problems accessing launchpad. After you have authorized the token, you can go back and hit <ENTER> in the terminal running appor-collect.
[19:32] <fta> the "A recent upload has resulted in xx pending builds" message in /+packages ppa pages seems bogus
[19:32] <fta> https://edge.launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/dev/+packages  it says 14, while there are, well, none
[19:35] <maxb> https://edge.launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/dev/+builds?build_text=&build_state=pending
[19:35] <maxb> https://edge.launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/dev/+builds?build_text=&build_state=building
[19:35] <maxb> fta: ^ there they are
[19:36] <fta> doh, old ones. not superseded?
[19:38] <maxb> The mark-as-superseded logic only kicks in when the build reaches the head of the queue
[19:39] <fta> sounds suboptimal
[19:40] <maxb> It's the easy way to implement it
[19:41] <maxb> It would be a bit nicer if the process that superseded sources also triggered the status transition on pending builds
[19:53] <bigjools> busted build farm fixed, jobs should get a bit more throughput now
[19:53] <blueyed> bigjools: yay! \o/
[19:54]  * blueyed looking if the 13+h build is finished.
[19:55]  * blueyed is really glad to have checked patches before uploading at least.. :P - might get nasty to upload three times in a row (also for others - as a side note..; please calculate "last upload" into build scores..!!)
[19:56] <maxb> bigjools: Great! I don't suppose someone could reassign another builder to lpia, to balance the queues a bit better?
[19:56] <bigjools> I am considering dynamically downscoring the builds the more a single PPA has outstanding
[19:56] <bigjools> maxb: I can ask
[19:57] <maxb> bigjools: The score thingy would be deeply deeply annoying to people who very occasionally, upload one thing, on all active distroseries
[19:58] <bigjools> yeah it would be for like >50 builds or something
[19:58] <bigjools> and then gently ramped down, so as soon as builds finished the others would score up again
[20:01] <maxb> If the initial threshold is above (2 sourcepackages) * (5 distroseries) * (3 architectures) + (a little leeway), it should be already
[20:01] <maxb> uh
[20:01] <maxb> *alright
[20:01] <blueyed> maxb, bigjools: just spread number of builds across distros/targets: the more likely somebody is "insanely rebuilding for testing puposed only" the more likely it's a single target.. ^^l
[20:01] <fta> so i'm doomed
[20:01] <fta> ?
[20:02] <bigjools> well, it's not a done deal :)
[20:02] <bigjools> I'll tender all the options to the -dev list and get feedback
[20:02] <blueyed> maxb: I had basically the same source package on two targets (hardy and lucid), and I am waiting 15+ hours already..?!
[20:02] <fta> sounds like it's time for me to stop producing dailies for good
[20:03] <blueyed> fta: probably not, they rather have a bug somewhere.. I have uploaded 2 builds in ~14 days maybe, or at least 5-7 and then get 15+ wait?!
[20:04] <blueyed> ("bug" might be too less build daemons.. but is looked like they had scoring, which might be buggy)
[20:05] <maxb> fta: Well, perhaps just moderate it a bit? Do people on LTS-1 or release-2 (i.e. hardy / jaunty) really care about daily builds?
[20:05] <blueyed> hardy for sure.
[20:05] <maxb> why?
[20:05] <blueyed> I have mosts of my (virtual) containers at LTS..
[20:06] <maxb> And you need daily builds of a web browser in virtual containers?
[20:06] <blueyed> jaunty is quite irrelevant though, yes.
[20:06] <fta> maxb, each time the ppa misses a single build, i get a dozen emails asking why there's no update
[20:06] <maxb> huh. people are weird
[20:06] <blueyed> maxb: I have 9 browsershots containers running, yes, indeed. But I switched chromium to the beta builds.
[20:07] <blueyed> all containers have chromium, firefox (3.5 (maybe), 3.6 and 4) and opera.
[20:07] <blueyed> (www.browsershots.org)
[20:08] <blueyed> popular PPAs should get bumped, too: give the "number of downloads in the last hour" a quite huge bump: easy scaling.. ^^
[20:09] <blueyed> (but also bump daily winners more than others).
[20:09] <micahg> blueyed: only lpia has such a long wait
[20:09] <lifeless> isn't lpia entirely pointless?
[20:10] <micahg> lifeless: probably why it was dropped for Lucid
[20:11] <blueyed> micahg: I am waiting 14+h for i386 and amd64, too: https://launchpad.net/~blueyed/+archive/ppa/+sourcepub/1299504/+listing-archive-extra and https://launchpad.net/~blueyed/+archive/ppa/+sourcepub/1299505/+listing-archive-extra
[20:11] <blueyed> My only uploads since a while.
[20:11] <blueyed> lifeless: ^^
[20:12] <micahg> blueyed: well, your builds are scored the same as the others
[20:12] <fta> yeah, but that was a new bug, the translation pack thingy
[20:12] <micahg> weird
[20:14] <blueyed> micahg: ? what's weird? like which others? lpia builds scored as i396?
[20:14] <micahg> blueyed: regular builds are scored for 2505 in the PPAs
[20:15] <blueyed> micahg: in contrast to what?
[20:15] <micahg> fta had an issue where some of his builds were scored lower, so they were deferred
[20:15] <blueyed> micahg: that's more than two workdays already.
[20:15] <blueyed> micahg: like mine?
[20:15] <micahg> blueyed: no, yours are scored normally
[20:15] <blueyed> 14h did not sound normally above?1
[20:16] <fta> my builds had to wait almost 10 days
[20:16] <blueyed> I have 1/5 of this already.. (might have been a child already)
[20:17] <micahg> blueyed: well, maybe the build estimates are off on the builders list, idk, there is WIP to improve the build system
[20:18] <blueyed> micahg: I would really like to take/pick a job like http://webapps.ubuntu.com/employment/canonical_UP-SE-RS3/ and helpyou with all these things.. do you have any internal pointers to a more appropriate job offering? :)
[20:19] <micahg> blueyed: I don't have anything to do with it :)
[20:19] <fta> https://edge.launchpad.net/~chromium-daily/+archive/ppa/+build/1968713  'created 16 hours ago, Start in 1 hour'
[20:19] <fta> but i bet that wont get built today
[20:19] <micahg> blueyed: I just follow the -dev list and keep apprised of happenings
[20:19] <blueyed> micahg: but it's really quite unacceptable for a 10k+-karma guy having to wait 24h (maybe) for a build?!
[20:20] <blueyed> micahg: too bad.. I should really attack this though.. )
[20:20] <micahg> blueyed: idk about that, there are limited resources for the whole community, if you want to go by karma alone, fta should be the head of the line for all his builds
[20:20] <blueyed> yes, for a reason.
[20:21] <blueyed> at least he's in here.. :D
[20:21] <micahg> blueyed: I think it's amazing we can get by with the builders we have for the PPAs, even 1 day wait isn't horrible for this type of service
[20:21] <fta> 10k karma? what's mine, lets see ;)
[20:21] <blueyed> so why is that not being recognized - even if "you're not in", you should now and fix it.. :D
[20:22] <fta> almost 100k, d'oh! dropped a lot since last time i checked
[20:23] <blueyed> micahg: that's what I am argueing about: 8h+ is terrible already: I have started two builds at 5am this morning (before going to work), and they are not finished at 21:20 yet..
[20:23] <micahg> blueyed: some archive uploads don't build that fast, so I don't think there can be a complaint for the PPAs
[20:23] <tgm4883> 8+ hours? I remember waiting 24+ hours for builds
[20:23] <blueyed> fta.. congrats.. lemme check.. ;) (people waiting for builds and replies are getting drunken more often)
[20:25] <blueyed> tgm4883: yes, I will prolly have this.. I am talking about expectations though: getting up early and uploading a build should provide you a result in the evening (especially if it's been a 10h workday) - but what I am agueing about <== THIS IS IT IF YOU ASK WHAT I AM EXPECTING (YES - I AM DRUNK)
[20:26] <blueyed> fta: are you working for ubuntu / canonical already? if not, is http://webapps.ubuntu.com/employment/canonical_UP-SE-RS3/ awesome for you, too? :)
[20:27] <blueyed> WHO IS USING VIMPERATOR, bitches?
[20:27]  * tgm4883 sighs
[20:27] <micahg> !ohmy | blueyed
[20:27] <ubot5`> blueyed: Please remember that all Ubuntu IRC channels share the same attitude of providing friendly and polite interaction with all users of all ages and cultures. Basically, this means no foul language and no abuse towards others.
[20:30] <blueyed> so, you all switched to vimperator?
[20:30] <blueyed> (just now are before already??)
[21:14] <MTecknology> I wish you could be in a team but not need to get all of the email - work in the team - without getting email for every single action in a bug report.
[21:16] <MTecknology> EdwinGrubbs: Or did I just miss that somewhere?
[21:25] <tgm4883> MTecknology, you don't?
[21:25] <MTecknology> tgm4883: hm?
[21:25] <tgm4883> well, you do, but you don't
[21:25] <tgm4883> set up a bug team :)
[21:25] <MTecknology> tgm4883: not inside my control
[21:25] <tgm4883> ah
[21:26] <MTecknology> I was on the kernel team and couldn't take the mass - even with filters
[21:26] <tgm4883> then yea, any email sent to that team will get bug email as well
[21:26] <tgm4883> AFAIK^
[21:32] <EdwinGrubbs> MTecknology: if you can get the team to set up a mailing list, the bug mail will go there, and you can opt out of the mailing list, but there currently isn't a way to opt out of email if the team doesn't have a contact email address set up.
[21:33] <MTecknology> EdwinGrubbs: I might need to try that..
[21:33] <MTecknology> EdwinGrubbs: thanks
[21:33] <EdwinGrubbs> MTecknology: technically, if the team can also have an email address set instead of adding a LP mailing list, which may help if a mailing list already exists someplace else.
[21:34] <EdwinGrubbs> s/if//
[21:35] <MTecknology> EdwinGrubbs: I should have thought of that too... Thanks :)