[08:36] <ari-tczew> hello
[08:40] <ari-tczew> dholbach: could you run update sponsoring overview?
[08:40] <dholbach> good morning
[08:40] <dholbach> ari-tczew, it's a cronjob that runs every 10 minutes
[08:41] <ari-tczew> dholbach: are you sure? Last updated at: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 12:24:59 +0000
[08:41] <dholbach> well 15
[08:41] <dholbach> if not if failed
[08:42] <micahg> dholbach: bug 653952 :)
[08:42] <dholbach> ok, found the bug - brb
[08:42] <micahg> dholbach: and good morning BTW :)
[08:42] <ari-tczew> bdrung: ^^
[08:42] <dholbach> ari-tczew, I'm on it - take it easy
[08:43] <ari-tczew> dholbach: ok :)
[08:43] <dholbach> if anyone would have tried to run the script locally the bug would've been obvious
[08:45] <ari-tczew> why this cycle will be released faster than previous releases? (10th, not 29th)
[08:46] <dholbach> ari-tczew, because 101010 (base 2) is 42
[08:47] <ari-tczew> dholbach: ?
[08:47] <dholbach> 10.10.2010
[08:48] <ari-tczew> dholbach: ah, due to special release date?
[08:48] <dholbach> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrases_from_The_Hitchhiker's_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#The_number_42
[08:48] <dholbach> yes
[08:57] <dholbach> micahg, ari-tczew: fixed
[08:58] <ari-tczew> thanks dholbach :)
[08:58] <micahg> dholbach: thanks
[08:59] <ari-tczew> dholbach: curiosity question: you removed ubuntu-universe-sponsors, why not ubuntu-main-sponsors?
[09:00] <ari-tczew> dholbach: btw you should set as merged https://code.launchpad.net/~stefanor/ubuntu-sponsoring/no-more-universe-sponsors/+merge/37356
[09:01] <dholbach> ari-tczew, I dunno why u-m-s still exists
[09:01] <dholbach> ari-tczew, I didn't check my mail yet and didn't see the merge proposal
[09:01] <dholbach> ari-tczew, within seconds after I joined IRC you jumped on me with the request to fix it
[09:02] <dholbach> and I had a few other complications here, etc - I'll dive into mails now
[09:02] <ari-tczew> dholbach: ah :) what do you think about add branch info to bottom page like on http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/main.html
[09:02] <ari-tczew> Updated: 2010-10-04 05:14 UTC (commit 3048)
[09:03] <ari-tczew> and there is a link to source code
[09:03] <dholbach> ari-tczew, please file a bug or even better, attach a pat ch
[09:03] <dholbach> I won't have time for it in the next weeks
[09:03] <ari-tczew> understand
[09:18] <ari-tczew> dholbach: curiosity question: why did you merge main&universe sponsors to ubuntu-sponsors?
[09:20] <dholbach> ari-tczew, because of archive reorganisation
[09:21] <dholbach> ari-tczew, theoretically (because of all the packagesets, etc.) we would have to have 4292469426 individiual sponsoring teams for all kinds of packagesets/components - that doesn't make sense
[09:21] <dholbach> also does it make the process for the 'end user' a lot more complicated… having to remember which team to use for which purpose - it's not really obvious anyway
[09:21] <dholbach> also was it done for ubuntu-sru and ubuntu-release
[09:23] <ari-tczew> dholbach: with bdrung we want to create a policy about contributing MOTU to main sponsoring.
[09:24] <dholbach> ari-tczew, I'm not sure I understand
[09:24] <micahg> ari-tczew: not just MOTU, any -dev in theory
[09:26] <micahg> dholbach: I think ari-tczew is referring to https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2010-September/031519.html
[09:27] <ari-tczew> dholbach: what is different between core-dev and motu? upload access. but as micahg said, -dev (MOTU including) developers can review subscribed bugs - e.g. check patch for correct policy, suggest changes and add a tag 'reviewed-by-motu' or something. then core-dev can check which bug is closer to sponsor.
[09:27] <dholbach> ah ok, I see
[09:27] <dholbach> it'd be good to update the sponsoring overview to indicate that a motu already reviewed it
[09:28] <ari-tczew> micahg: exactly.
[09:28] <micahg> dholbach: well, it already notes if a dev w/out uploads rights commented last
[09:28] <dholbach> yes
[09:28] <micahg> but I guess that's not really enough
[09:29] <ari-tczew> dholbach: your feedback is welcome @ these mail lists :)
[09:30] <ari-tczew> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2010-September/031533.html
[09:30] <dholbach> ari-tczew, I came back after 3 weeks of holidays - it's not the only mail I got - I got thousands
[09:30] <dholbach> ari-tczew, plus I have lots of other things to get done quickly - I'm a bit of a hectic
[09:30] <ari-tczew> dholbach: sorry, I don't want stress you.
[09:31] <dholbach> no worries
[09:33] <ari-tczew> also I want to get to know Laney 's feedback on mail lists ^^
[09:42] <Laney> looks ok
[10:30] <Rhonda> uhm
[10:30] <Rhonda> Can someone check what a removal of boost1.40 from maverick might affect?
[10:30] <Rhonda> Or … is there an easy way for myself to check that?
[10:30]  * Rhonda . o O ( Rhonda: You usually brag around using grep-dctrl, why don't you do it this time? )
[10:34] <Rhonda> dammit
[10:34] <Rhonda> And no, that's no !omg. That's a package name that depends on libboost-filesystem1.40.0 in maverick. %-)
[10:40] <Rhonda> I guess it's definitely too late in the release to request removal of boost1.40 and request rebuilds against boost1.42 for all those packages that currently use boost1.40?
[10:41] <Rhonda> ScottK? cjwatson?
[10:45] <pwuertz> hi, I'm trying to debianize an application by using this dh_make tool. When I run debuild the process stops when trying to install the files.. as the install process tries to modify files on my actual root system.
[10:46] <pwuertz> Isn't fakeroot supposed to prevent that? How can I fix this?
[10:48] <tumbleweed> pwuertz: firstly #ubuntu-packaging is the right channel for this. second: fakeroot just pretends to be root, doesn't let you write all over the filesystem. Your buildsystem clearly isn't respecting DESTDIR http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/DESTDIR.html
[11:01] <cjwatson> Rhonda: sounds implausible that we could get that all done in time
[11:02] <cjwatson> Rhonda: http://paste.ubuntu.com/505637/ is what the archive admin tool for this says
[11:02] <cjwatson> ok, some of those will be dependencies within the source package, but still ...
[11:08] <Rhonda> I only now noticed (because it's also in lenny-backports), but yeah, too late.
[11:08] <Rhonda> Should be first thing to do in nutty me thinks. :)
[11:09] <Rhonda> Erm, that typo wasn't on intention. %-)
[12:50] <nigelb> Rhonda: heh, nutty :p
[13:25] <ScottK> Rhonda: Keeping Boost 1.40 is intentional.  Since we don't want openmpi in Main, the Boost in Main has the MPI bits removed.  There was user demand for that, so we decided to keep an older Boost in Universe with those bits all present.
[13:27] <ScottK> Moving as much as we can to 1.42 would still be good though.
[13:27] <ScottK> cjwatson: ^^^ FYI.
[13:31] <Rhonda> So will it be kept around for natty, too?
[13:37] <cjwatson> ScottK: thanks
[13:37] <ScottK> Rhonda: Probably.
[13:37] <ScottK> (unless some new Boost appears, which I expect is unlikely with Debian in Freeze)
[13:43] <Rhonda> ScottK: Never say never, the release might happen. ;D
[14:31] <directhex> yay openmpi
[15:44] <ari-tczew> are there any list who from ubuntu-dev is Debian Developer?
[15:53] <geser> ari-tczew: http://castrojo.tumblr.com/post/977240439/developers-with-feet-in-debian-and-ubuntu
[15:56] <ari-tczew> geser: would be nice to create a team on Launchpad and adding there these people.
[16:01] <ari-tczew> jcastro: what do you think about it? ^^
[16:05] <jcastro> the plan was adding a query to UDD iirc
[16:05] <jcastro> because there's no team for DDs in launchpad afaik
[16:13] <cjwatson> I recommend against creating one too.  It would be a hideous pain to keep up to date.  Teams should actually be used for something, not just be an artifice for gathering statistics
[16:14] <directhex> i'm a DD, if that counts
[16:14] <cjwatson> you're listed in Jorge's post which geser linked to above
[16:14] <jcastro> it's a simple UDD query, I just haven't followed up with lucas on it.
[16:15] <cjwatson> huh, there actually is a 'debiandevelopers' team.  And indeed it's hopelessly out of date ...
[16:15] <jcastro> ari-tczew: the only recent change I am aware of is the addition of lfaraone
[16:16] <jcastro> I believe UDD gets the info right from the debian ldap so it's likely the most accurate
[16:16] <jcastro> I'd like to have a graph that tracks it over time, would be interesting to see
[16:19]  * Laney is a directhex developer
[16:23] <nigelb> cjwatson: perhaps a script that updates the team with the results of udd query?
[16:23] <Laney> what is the point of the team?
[16:24] <jcastro> yeah, leave it in udd, it's what it's there for
[16:24] <cjwatson> nigelb: experience suggests that people get upset with being non-consensually added to teams when they don't even want to use Launchpad
[16:24] <nigelb> cjwatson: oh, I forget that.  Indeed.
[16:25] <cjwatson> they got upset enough at having userids automatically created (in order that LP could accurately represent their uploads and such)
[16:25] <kklimonda> hmm, am I the only one who gets some mails from ubuntu mailing lists with a long delay?
[16:26] <kklimonda> or do they just end up in a moderation queue?
[16:26] <cjwatson> some Ubuntu lists are moderated
[16:26] <cjwatson> perhaps you're referring to ubuntu-devel, where I just did a moderation pass
[16:26] <kklimonda> :)
[16:26] <kklimonda> indeed
[16:27] <kklimonda> cjwatson: I was under the impression that all mails from @ubuntu.com adress are sent immediately and bypass the queue?
[16:27] <Laney> is the point of the moderation spam reduction, content moderation, or both?
[16:27] <cjwatson> kklimonda: a mistaken impression
[16:28] <cjwatson> Laney: both.  https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2006-December/000227.html
[16:28] <ari-tczew> cjwatson, Laney: hmm, not really statistic point. if someone want forward changes to package in Debian, which is QA, then could look to LP team who can upload the patch
[16:28] <cjwatson> ari-tczew: I think the point that it is pretty much guaranteed to annoy people is more important
[16:28] <ari-tczew> cjwatson: like last time, I asked you for forward changes to palo.
[16:28] <Laney> ari-tczew: we have #debian-ubuntu and derivatives@d.o for something like that
[16:29] <cjwatson> (even if you don't think they should be annoyed)
[16:29] <Laney> cjwatson: Oh OK, I was going to suggest whitelisting signed mail, but obviously not
[16:29] <josephnexus> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/funguloids/+bug/654604
[16:29] <cjwatson> kklimonda: mails from people in ubuntu-dev are supposed to bypass ubuntu-devel moderation
[16:30] <josephnexus> is a bug that affects the recently made installable package
[16:30] <ari-tczew> Laney: wow, 3 users!
[16:30] <cjwatson> (it's a cron job run by sysadmins so I can't easily tell whether it's working or not; it has been working at some points)
[16:30] <Laney> ari-tczew: OFTC
[16:30] <Laney> (no need to be rude)
[16:30] <jcastro> the bridge is broken or something
[16:33] <ari-tczew> Laney: what is OFTC?
[16:33] <Laney> an IRC network. irc.oftc.net
[16:35] <ari-tczew> Laney: ok, now seems to be OK. thanks
[16:37] <ari-tczew> Laney: I thought that it's an acronym like STFU or something.
[16:37] <Laney> ah, well now you know
[16:38] <kklimonda> cjwatson: thanks for the clarification
[19:28] <kklimonda> damn, 73 unread emails and I've just cleaned up my inbox today :/
[19:33] <jpds> kklimonda: You didn't clean it up well enough.
[19:34]  * iulian nods.
[19:34] <iulian> Hey Jon.
[19:39] <kklimonda> jpds: I blame Colin for cleaning up the moderation queue ;)
[20:25] <ari-tczew> jcastro: what do you think about wrap fullnames on your blog? I mean about debian/ubuntu developers
[20:25] <ari-tczew> for better looking
[20:34] <zooko> Dear #ubuntu-motu folks, see this nice table: http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/wiki/OSPackages
[20:35] <iulian> Looks nice indeed.
[20:36] <zooko> iulian: thank you for your help way back when with Tahoe-LAFS v1.6 (?) in Jaunty (?). :-)
[20:36] <ari-tczew> zooko: do you suggesting old version in Ubuntu? ;)
[20:36] <iulian> Yea... don't mention it.  I apologies I couldn't work on it this cycle.
[20:37] <fabrice_sp> Hi. I'm working with enna upstream, to get it fixed in Maverick, but this would require to sync 4 packages from Debian (some have just been uploaded and others are being uploaded to debian). What would be the right place to speak about feasibility?
[20:37] <iulian> I'm really busy these days...
[20:41] <zooko> ari-tczew: I don't understand the question.
[20:41] <zooko> xb
[20:41] <zooko> oops on the "xb" that was a typo
[20:42] <ari-tczew> zooko: nevermind :)
[20:42] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: sync to main or universe?
[20:42] <micahg> fabrice_sp: you might want to ask in -release
[20:43] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, universe
[20:43] <fabrice_sp> micahg, ok.
[20:43] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: then shouldn't be problem
[20:44] <fabrice_sp> anyway, I've just seen a email saying that hte release has not been tested, so I would refrain from requesting the sync
[20:44] <fabrice_sp> but we won't have an enna package
[20:46] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: ah, so this is a sync of new package?
[20:47] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: I would upload a new package (from revu, not from Debian) and I must wait for natty, then upload through backport to maverick.
[20:48] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, 3 libs upgrade, 2 of which changes API and the binary
[20:48] <fabrice_sp> The sync will happen in Natty, and I will rpopose the backport to upstream, after some testing happens
[20:52] <micahg> fabrice_sp: you know enna is in the archive, right?
[20:55] <fabrice_sp> micahg, yes. I'm trying to get it fixed, but it seems a bit late
[20:55] <fabrice_sp> it's not even installable right now
[20:55] <micahg> fabrice_sp: k, yeah, I'd check with the release team
[20:56] <fabrice_sp> ok. Thanks
[20:56] <ajmitch> how many packages would need to be rebuilt for it?
[20:56] <fabrice_sp> none
[20:56] <fabrice_sp> the libs are only used in enna
[20:57] <ajmitch> so the libraries that would be updated don't change SONAME?
[20:57] <ajmitch> ah, useful
[20:57] <ajmitch> you're probably a little more likely to get it approved
[20:57] <ajmitch> still slim, but possible :)
[20:57] <fabrice_sp> they do, but the only rdepends I saw is enna
[20:57]  * ari-tczew is going to triage a couple of bugs till maverick final release.
[20:57] <fabrice_sp> yeah, I know :-)
[20:58] <ajmitch> archive should be closed for upload pretty soon
[20:58] <micahg> ajmitch: wed at noon UTC is unseeded freeze
[20:58] <ajmitch> right
[20:59]  * ajmitch was just hunting for the mail that mentioned it
[20:59]  * ajmitch seems to have a lot of ubuntu-devel mail to read this morning
[21:00] <micahg> ajmitch: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2010-September/000764.html
[21:00] <ajmitch> ta :)
[21:01] <fabrice_sp> backport seems to be the only solution, right now
[21:02] <ajmitch> SRU team probably wouldn't approve it?
[21:02] <fabrice_sp> too many changes
[21:06] <ari-tczew> what is the different between FTBFS and NBS?
[21:07] <micahg> ari-tczew: NBS, is a binary that's no longer buildable from source
[21:07] <Rhonda> FTBFS means that the source doesn't build anymore, usually because of missing Build-Depends or toolchain changes.
[21:08] <Rhonda> And NBS is an old binary package that got removed in newer versions of the source package still sitting in the pool, all by itself, alone, crying and nowhere to turn to.
[21:08] <fabrice_sp> also, NBS indicates rdepends that has not been rebuilt
[21:11] <ari-tczew> aha
[21:12] <Rhonda> ahyes.
[21:13] <Rhonda> ari-tczew: Do you know what bilalakhtar might have meant with the offensive words message, to ask me about it? Because I can't remember. :)
[21:14]  * fabrice_sp has been rebuilding more than 50 packages to reduce the NBS list ;-)
[21:15] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: I don't want be informant :P
[21:17] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: http://paste.ubuntu.com/505961/
[21:18] <Rhonda> I read the context but still don't know what he was refering to, but yes, you surely can't know neither, I should ask him. :)
[21:19] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: That's right, I dunno what's going on :P
[21:24]  * ari-tczew can't wait for open natty archive.
[21:24] <fabrice_sp> ari-tczew, there still work to do on Maverick :-P
[21:25] <fabrice_sp> s/there/there is/
[21:25] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: but more restricted :(
[21:25] <fabrice_sp> hmm,. more focused :-)
[21:25] <ari-tczew> fabrice_sp: we will start natty with less to-merge packages than maverick started
[21:26] <fabrice_sp> not for me: I uploaded a lot of packages lately that I will have to check (sync or merge) for NAtty
[21:26] <fabrice_sp> basically, to fix FTBFS or non installable packages
[21:31] <ari-tczew> sigh
[21:34] <ScottK> ari-tczew: Not suprising.  Since Debian is frozen now, the pace of uploads to Debian will be reduced.
[21:35] <ari-tczew> ScottK: when Debian will be open?
[21:35] <Rhonda> ari-tczew: after squeeze release
[21:36] <ScottK> The answer to your next question is "When it's ready".
[21:36] <kklimonda> :)
[21:37] <Rhonda> According to lucas' udd bug query it might be as far or as short of 172 RC bug fixes away. ;)
[21:37]  * Rhonda . o O ( ignoring all pending, patch and security tagged RCs )
[21:59] <ari-tczew> I think that -buildX shouldn't be included in Merge-o-Matic.
[21:59] <ScottK> ari-tczew: You are correct.  Patches welcome.
[22:00] <ari-tczew> ScottK: ha-ha-ha :P
[22:03] <micahg> ScottK: do I need a release team ack to reenable JavaScript in mediatomb (it was disabled to drop the build-dep on xulrunner, but the people want it reenabled, so I was going to make it work with xulrunner + wrapper) bug 568275
[22:03] <ScottK> Was it disabled in Maverick or Lucid?
[22:03] <micahg> ScottK: lucid
[22:04] <ScottK> So it's not a regression for Maverick.
[22:04] <ScottK> Technically yes.
[22:04] <ScottK> Go ahead though (there's your release team ack), but please test carefully.
[22:05] <micahg> ScottK: k, thanks
[22:17] <ari-tczew> ScottK: what do you think about merge epiphany-browser? It's in universe and merge could fix one bug which causes crash.
[22:18] <ScottK> ari-tczew: No opinion.  If you think it's an important bug fix and it's not seeded, go ahead.
[23:29] <ChogyDan> hey folks, deluge has a major issue that stops it from working.  There is a fix.  Should I just file a bug report?
[23:30] <ari-tczew> ChogyDan: do you have a patch?
[23:32] <ChogyDan> ari-tczew: http://code.google.com/p/libtorrent/issues/detail?id=112
[23:32] <ChogyDan> I applied the patch locally, and deluge is now running without incident
[23:33] <ari-tczew> ChogyDan: which Ubuntu have you run?
[23:34] <ChogyDan> this is just an issue with maverick
[23:34] <ari-tczew> ChogyDan: ah, fine. could you prepare a debdiff?
[23:34] <ChogyDan> ari-tczew: hmmm, any directions on how to do that?
[23:35] <ari-tczew> ChogyDan: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Howtos/Debdiff
[23:36] <ari-tczew> ChogyDan: but if you feel not strong to prepare a debdiff, I can do it, upload to PPA, you will test it for feedback.
[23:36] <ChogyDan> one sec
[23:36] <ari-tczew> just file a bug, attaching a patch.
[23:39] <ari-tczew> ScottK: around yet?