[01:06] hi [01:06] is there any channel to talk about launchpad development? [01:06] Some stuff is on-topic here, details have #launchpad-dev [01:07] does it envolves soyuz dvelopment? [01:08] Soyuz is part of Launchpad, so it belongs in #launchpad-dev with the rest. [01:08] What is your question? [01:11] I only want to talk about this wishlist bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/soyuz/+bug/188564 [01:11] Launchpad bug 188564 in Soyuz "Build also packages for Debian in PPA's (affected: 41, heat: 310)" [Low,Triaged] [01:11] some people think that adding unstable or testing Debian suits is as easy as adding a new Ubuntu suit, is it true? [01:12] Not precisely, no. [01:12] It's mostly an issue of build resources. [01:12] what is the difference? [01:12] Not a technical problem. [01:12] wgrant, Well, there's the virtual/non-virtual game, and questions of build-environment, etc. But yeah, only minor technical: mostly financial. [01:13] if a new Ubuntu suit is added each 6 months, can't be a Debian siut added as the same way? [01:15] at least for i386 and amd64 archs [01:17] Non-trivially, and not without significantly more machines (as people would want to use them) [01:18] do you think that more servers would be needed? more cost? [01:18] Yes. [01:19] really? it would be just one or two new suits.. [01:19] we deprecate an ubuntu release every 6 months as well (usual case for non-LTS) [01:20] EagleScreen: It would probably be two new series. And if most people are building for only two or three Ubuntu series already, that doubles the amount of hardware required. [01:21] EagleScreen: we regularly use all our machines with a significant backlog [01:21] EagleScreen: as wgrant says adding a new target would also need machines to build it to be feasible [01:21] then I understand that it is a economic issue [01:22] EagleScreen, I suspect that if you approached Canonical with significant financial incentive, you may be able to make that happen. I do not believe that attempting to get the bug closed will achieve much, as the operators probably wouldn't enable the additional suites even if they were turned on. [01:22] (alternately, if you run a private LP instance, it oughtn't be that hard to implement, to run on your machines) [01:23] I see.. [01:23] is already natty available for PPA upload? [01:24] Happens the same time as natty appears anywhere else. [01:24] I have receibed this email: [01:24] Launchpad failed to process the upload path '~/ppa/ubuntu/natty': [01:25] EagleScreen: '' is not a valid Launchpad username. [01:25] remove < > ? [01:26] Right, but a Launchpad username is also lowercase. [01:26] eg. 'eaglescreen' [01:33] at upload: [01:33] Unable to find distroseries: experimental [01:33] this package was obtained from Debian experimental repo [01:34] but doesn't launchpad allow upload it if I specify the subfolder to natty? [01:34] One last thing to bug the LP admins in here about -- I need to set the Bug Supervisor to the LoCo Council -- I am not an admin on the team ( council members are members of the team ), and I asked persia ( on the CC, which owns the LC ), and he was not able to see the pages. What should I do? [01:34] EagleScreen: Yes. I suspect that you didn't specify it properly. [01:34] ok [01:35] will pastebin my dput.cf [01:36] EagleScreen, it's not about dput: it's about your changelog entry. [01:37] I think changelog can be experimental or unstable if I specify the Ubuntu suit upload subfolder [01:37] persia: The dput path can override the changelog entry. [01:37] wgrant, Sure, but does Soyuz process that? I thought it just followed .changes [01:38] persia: It respects the path in preference to .changes. [01:38] This is, however, fairly widely regarded as evil. [01:39] Ah, then I'll keep telling folk it works the way it should, and just wait for some Soyuz developer to unexpectedly fix it one day. [01:39] this is http://pastebin.ca/1982382 [01:40] persia: The way it should? [01:40] persia: It obeys the .changes unless you explicitly specify a distroseries in the upload path. [01:40] I have uploaded packages to PPA with unstable in the chnagelog [01:41] but some time ago [01:41] EagleScreen: That's fine. But why are you regularly uploading packages with the wrong series in the changelog? [01:41] wgrant, And about the evil bit? [01:42] persia: It is often abused to upload unmodified Debian source packages, when this is not in fact an appropriate thing to do. [01:42] wgrant: why not? time ago they were accepted, any change about this? [01:42] EagleScreen, it wastes time [01:42] EagleScreen: It will be accepted, but it's not always the right thing to do. [01:42] wgrant, Right, which is why I don't like path overrides. [01:42] EagleScreen, and you suck up the build farm time [01:43] EagleScreen, for a package that can be found upstream [01:43] paultag, Not necessarily: binary package differences can be extreme even with the same source. [01:43] persia, if there is a distro check, yeah -- but then it would have been caught in the sync with Debian for Ubuntu it's self [01:43] then usntable is not longer accepted? [01:44] right? [01:44] paultag, Consider build-dependencies [01:45] hummm, true. [02:01] Not permitted to upload to the RELEASE pocket in a series in the 'CURRENT' state. <-- what does this mean?? [02:03] EagleScreen: You tried to upload to Ubuntu itself. [02:03] Not a PPA. [02:04] how is it possible? [02:04] this is my dput.cf: http://pastebin.ca/1982392 [02:05] EagleScreen: Why are there capital letters in your Launchpad username? [02:05] Launchpad usernames cannot contain capital letters. [02:05] I would also strongly encourage you to rethink how you are creating your packages. [02:06] Using the path override should *not* be a normal occurrence. [02:06] wgrant: this last error was with natty and maverick in changelog [02:06] Checking now the capital letters .. [02:07] EagleScreen: Which command did you use to upload? [02:07] I suspect you omitted the target. [02:08] lol; I put the targer after the .changes [02:08] the target go first, right? [02:09] Yes. [02:12] one package didn't build due to a missing build-dependency, if I upload that dependency to my PPA, will the package build later if I retry? [02:14] It should. [02:16] nice === bac changed the topic of #launchpad to: Launchpad: https://launchpad.net/ | Read https://help.launchpad.net/ for help | On-call help contact: bac | Join https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-users | This channel is logged: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/ | Launchpad is open source: https://dev.launchpad.net/ [02:49] Hello, I am the Launchpad help contact for today. Please ping me if you have questions. [06:01] bac: https://launchpad.net/~hjgf [06:01] bac: I suspect spamming - adding all teams in LP ? [06:02] wgrant: you might wanna look too? [06:05] MTecknology: Not another one :( [06:05] sorry.. [06:05] spm: ^^ [06:08] user suspended, team deleted [06:08] * spm wields the sledgehammer. [06:17] spm: yay [06:18] spm: that means now you help me with my package? [06:18] hm? [06:19] I finally made it build without fail - but what's produced isn't at all what I was expecting [06:21] That sounds like a packaging issue, rather than something that a LOSA can help with ... [06:22] StevenK: it is.. but you can't blame me for asking :D [07:00] thanks MTecknology. [07:01] bac: :) Death to spam! [07:05] spm: Could you also delete ~vishnu.team? [07:05] spm: It's the same user, and similar members. [07:06] Also ~ab2.team. [07:06] WTF [07:06] ? [07:07] Those three spam teams all with similar members. [07:07] wgrant: probably the same person too? [07:08] Yes. [07:08] They're all owned by the suspended user. [07:08] bah [07:08] I wonder what the goal of that was.. it's not exactly 'that' disruptive [07:09] no idea [07:10] wgrant: both removed [07:10] spm: Thanks. [07:11] Ohhh. [07:11] It's this same guy again. [07:11] He was at it a few months ago. [07:11] And some of the teams from back then are in this web. [07:15] lovely [07:16] I thought that one of the teams was legit. [07:16] (~india.launchpad.team) [07:16] But most of its 100 members were added within a few minutes of each other. [07:16] I suspect involuntarily. [07:17] perhaps a feature added that doesn't allow you to add a team to a team unless either a) you're a member (admin?) of both or b) an admin approves it? [07:17] MTecknology: That's already the case. [07:18] oh.. [07:18] Those teams he added are also owned by him. [07:18] oh..except ~kernel-bugs - that got added [07:18] Ah, true. [07:19] we need rate limiting heuristics [07:19] for many many things [07:19] oh!... I remember when he was doing that last - I think I even pointed it out that time :P [07:19] You did, yes. [07:21] I need to toss in a little bit more spam control on wiki.nginx.org too... [07:24] lifeless: perhaps.. spam detection that.. once is 95% confident you're spamming.. 1) blocks you 2) warns losa 3) losa confirms spam 4) deletes teams 5) suspends user 6) reaches through the internet and blows up computer 7) if shrapnel causes extra dammage, oh well ?? [07:25] we have orbital deathrays that a nameless person installed when he was in orbit, we can use. [07:25] vader? [07:26] on the grounds I like my job very much thanks, I will strenuously deny that it's vader or a vader like person [07:26] FYI, Debian's w3m maintainer has patched w3m to handle