[06:27] <stub> StevenK: How does the new ancestor column interact with supersededby ?
[06:28] <stub> We will need an index if we want to know what our child records are. Or if we ever delete records - I guess we should add it now or we might be sorry.
[06:46] <StevenK> stub: ancestor and supersededby are seperate -- we use ancestor to find out the prior version
[06:47] <StevenK> stub: Thanks for the review, I'll switch it to 34 and add the index
[06:48] <stub> Sure. I'm fine with parent too if jml insists. I think it is a better name, as it is the direct ancestor, but with bow to consistency with the rest of soyuz.
[06:48] <stub> c/with/will/
[06:49] <StevenK> stub: Yeah, I'm more partial to ancestor, but I was going to mention it to Julian to get his thoughts too.
[14:30] <jtv> Nobody on call today?  allenap, rockstar?
[14:31] <allenap> jtv: Oh yes. I thought it was Wednesday today for no good reason.
[14:31] <jtv> I find that days rarely change for no good reason.
[14:32] <jtv> Sometimes I hear people of a certain religion claim that certain days are unexpectedly Sunday, but that sounds to me like a bit of a kludge to cover up some design problem or other.
[14:33] <jtv> A bit like saying "it's monotheistic since the three main deities are really the same one in different dimensions"
[14:34] <allenap> jtv: Now that we're on the same team I'm really going to have to make an effort to understand you :)
[14:34] <jtv> That's like the old battle between armour and armament.  Sorry, the armament always wins out.
[14:35] <jtv> As soon as you think you understand what I'm on about, you'll find I'll have moved on to new spheres of madness.
[14:35] <jtv> It's sort of a mission, like
[14:36] <jtv> But this once I'll explain.  I exploited a scoping ambiguity in your statement that you "thought it was Wednesday today for no good reason."
[14:37] <jtv> You probably thought it for no good reason, but I went off on an inane tangent about today suddenly deciding for no good reason to be Wednesday.
[14:37] <jtv> There is some system to this.  Sometimes.
[14:40] <jtv> Dear internet: I know, I know, but that was no reason to disconnect me.  Thank you.
[14:41] <gmb> allenap: Is it wrong that I understand everything jtv just said?
[14:41] <jtv> Very.
[14:41] <jtv> I'd be worried.
[14:42] <jtv> Also, it means I'm not working hard enough at this.
[14:42] <allenap> What?
[14:43] <allenap> I'm looking forward to longer discussions like this at MegaThunderLightingFrogsToadsDome in January.
[14:47] <jtv> allenap: gmb seems to follow what I said.  Unless he's bluffing, that means I'm not all that mad after all.  Which means I need to work harder at it.
[14:48] <allenap> jtv: Okay :) I'll just go and review your branch, shall I?
[14:48] <jtv> Yes, that may be the easiest way to get rid of me thanks.  :-)
[14:52] <jcsackett> ...that was the oddest thread to try and follow in irc in my adult career.
[15:09] <allenap> jcsackett: In your career as an adult, or ... no, no, that's jtv territory ;)
[15:10] <jcsackett> allenap: :heheh. please, please don't embark on that. :-P
[15:10] <jtv> allenap: I'm not _that_ much older.
[15:10] <jtv> Anyway, as future teammates it's important that we all understand each other, is it not?  :-)
[15:10] <jtv> Ohhhh, "adult."  I get it.
[15:11] <jcsackett> there was something to get?
[15:11] <jtv> I think.  I'm trying to follow allenap's sometimes naughty lines of reasoning here.
[15:11] <jtv> Tsk, tsk.
[15:12] <allenap> jtv: I wasn't being naughty!
[15:12]  * jtv gives allenap a look of doubt and suspicion
[15:13] <jcsackett> oh, we're going to have so much fun at standups.
[15:20] <jtv> Well they call it standup for a reason.
[15:20]  * jtv got himself some DVDs of The Best of Jasper Carrot and Rowan Atkinson's standup shows last weekend.
[15:21] <jcsackett> oh dar.
[15:21] <jtv> Not to mention the complete Blackadder and Fawlty Towers.
[15:21] <jcsackett> s/dar/dear/
[15:21] <jtv> If you need me to get serious, just say the word.  I also got the director's cut of Blade Runner.
[15:22] <jtv> It was a charity fair so probably not polite to haggle, but the prices were too good to resist anyway.
[15:22] <jcsackett> so the word is "replicant"?
[15:22] <jtv> Not on Earth it isn't.  Illegal.
[15:22]  * jcsackett laughs.
[15:23]  * jtv trundles off for supplies.
[15:35] <benji> jtv: I have a small bug-fix branch for you when you get a second (https://code.launchpad.net/~benji/launchpadlib/fix-nested-p-tags/+merge/42489)
[15:35] <benji> jtv: oh, well, you're not reviewing, so you can ignore that and continue watching That Mitchell And Webb Look
[15:36] <benji> allenap and jcsackett: I have a small bug-fix branch for you when you get a second (https://code.launchpad.net/~benji/launchpadlib/fix-nested-p-tags/+merge/42489)
[15:37] <jcsackett> benji: i can take a look at it. it'll require follow up though, since i'm being mentored.
[15:38] <benji> I'm down with that.
[15:38] <jcsackett> cool.
[15:42] <jcsackett> benji: is there anything in launchpadlib to test generation?
[15:44] <benji> jcsackett: nope; the generation itself is done in the launchpad Makefile; in fact, we intend on moving the XSLT to LP proper at some point
[15:44] <jcsackett> benji: dig.
[15:44] <jcsackett> benji: this looks super simple, since there's no way to test it. r=me.
[15:45] <jtv> benji, jcsackett: I'm back, so could mentor
[15:45] <jcsackett> jtv: i think sinzui has word on when i've "graduated", so i should probably have him do it. :-P
[15:46] <benji> jcsackett: yep, it's quite simple (the kind of simple that results from 6 hours of banking one's head against XSL)
[15:46] <jtv> ah ok
[15:46] <jcsackett> well yes. xsl is always simple when done, giant pain when figuring out. :-P
[15:46] <jcsackett> (i back that statement up with my own suffering. :-P)
[15:46] <jtv> jcsackett: to quote James Clark in a recent presentation: "I certainly hope I won't be using XML 10 years from now.  That would be kind of depressing."  :-)
[15:49] <jcsackett> jtv: yes. xml has its uses, but i hope we find something better for those uses.
[15:50] <jcsackett> benji: i've gone ahead and requested another review from sinzui. and i've said his name here enough i'm sure he knows something is up. :-)
[15:50] <sinzui> I do
[15:50] <jtv> jcsackett: I heard ASN.1 is pretty good.
[15:50] <jcsackett> see? irc magic.
[15:51] <jcsackett> jtv: i'll have to take a look at it.
[15:52]  * jelmer wonders if jtv is joking or being serious
[15:52] <jtv> jelmer: if you figure it out, tell me.  I don't know the first thing about ASN.1.
[15:52] <jelmer> jtv: I would recommend you keep it it that way.
[15:52] <jcsackett> jelmer: bad, huh?
[15:52] <jtv> *chuckle*
[15:53] <jelmer> I'm not sure if it's bad, it's just not my cup of tea.
[15:54] <benji> jcsackett: just don't say his name three times or you will summon him to your relm.
[15:55] <jtv> Yet, with strange æons, even COBOL may die…
[16:10] <jtv> thanks allenap!
[16:11] <allenap> jtv: Welcome :)
[16:11]  * jtv suddenly remembers that South Park quoted that bit of Lovecraft very differently than he remembered from the Iron Maiden album cover.  Have to look that up.
[16:19] <sinzui> allenap, can you review https://code.launchpad.net/~sinzui/launchpad/closed-teams-0/+merge/42500
[16:19] <allenap> sinzui: Sure.
[16:49] <jcsackett> adeuring: i assume the abel in the queue is you and the MP is https://code.launchpad.net/~adeuring/launchpad/bug-596944-browser/+merge/42505?
[16:50] <adeuring> jcsackett: yes
[16:50] <jcsackett> adeuring: okay, i can grab that.
[16:50] <adeuring> jcsackett: cool, thanks!
[16:56] <jcsackett> adeuring: high level this is about adding the ability on dsp and products to set it so new bugs can skip the "is this a dupe" step?
[16:58] <adeuring> jcsackett: yes
[16:58] <jcsackett> adeuring: nice.
[16:58] <adeuring> jcsackett: see the linked bug report: dupe searches caused some headaches for the kernel team and the Xorg team
[16:59] <adeuring> because people thought wrongly that they were affected by exiting bugs which were filed for different hardware
[17:00] <lifeless> its a bit of a kludge really
[17:00] <lifeless> if we called out to a web service
[17:00] <lifeless> it would be more powerful
[17:01] <lifeless> and let them dup things where the hardware matches even if the description does, and exclude on hardware too.
[17:03] <adeuring> lifeless: right, but that would require some work on better intergration of the HWDB with malone.
[17:03] <adeuring> and there may be other scenarios where the dupe search is not useful
[17:03] <lifeless> adeuring: not really
[17:03] <adeuring> how so?
[17:03] <lifeless> adeuring: lp makes a web service call
[17:04] <adeuring> ?
[17:04] <lifeless> the thing we call can use their *existing* mechanism for checking hardware (e.g. tags) on that bug and ther bugs.
[17:04] <lifeless> no changes to hwdb stuff in lp needed
[17:04] <lifeless> adeuring: I'm saying if we implemented a callback for this
[17:05] <lifeless> as for other projects, exactly my point - they can trivially disable dup lookups with a callback that returns [] as the dup list.
[17:05] <adeuring> lifeless: ah, right, that's an intersting approach
[17:06] <lifeless> I think what you're doing is fine fpr now - its what they asked for.
[17:06] <lifeless> I'm simply noting that its a special case of a more general thing of 'let the user determine some policy'
[17:06] <lifeless> and perhaps the most useful and most general thing we can do here is to let them define it using their own code.
[17:09] <adeuring> lifeless: so... something like PythonScripts in Zope2?
[17:12] <jcsackett> adeuring: you've landed multiple branches for this, right? that's why i'm seeing places where the enable_... field you're adding already exists?
[17:12] <adeuring> jcsackett: yes, there are two other branches (already merged) to the DB patch and for the model code.
[17:12] <jcsackett> adeuring: okay, thanks.
[17:14] <lifeless> adeuring: I was thinking an API http[s] endpoint.
[17:15] <adeuring> lifeless: could you explain a bit?
[17:15] <adeuring> I mean: how could an API call defined by a project maintainer help when an ordinary LP user files a bug?
[17:16] <lifeless> user hits the page
[17:16] <lifeless> the page makes an API call
[17:16] <lifeless> lp server -> project maintainer server
[17:16] <adeuring> ah, interesting idea!
[17:17] <lifeless> (or perhaps web client -> project maintainer server)
[17:17] <lifeless> api result comes back with
[17:17] <lifeless> some blurb
[17:17] <lifeless> and candidate dups
[17:17] <lifeless> blurb might be "We do not permit duplicate bugs because our logs and crashes have misleading similarities for unrelated causes."
[17:17] <lifeless> oh also
[17:18] <lifeless> it could come back and say
[17:18] <lifeless> "This crash was caused by running out of disk space. It is probably not a bug as documented <link>, are you sure you want to file a bug."
[17:22] <jcsackett> adeuring: r=me. i have requested another review from sinzui as he is mentoring my reviews.
[17:22] <adeuring> jcsackett: thanks!
[17:22] <jcsackett> if history is any indication, that won't take long.
[17:22] <jcsackett> you're welcome. :-)
[17:33] <allenap> Cheerio.
[17:38] <jcsackett> bye, allenap.
[18:10] <jcsackett> EdwinGrubbs: could you take another look at https://code.launchpad.net/~jcsackett/launchpad/anonymous-api-access-emails-681815/+merge/42309 ? i have dealt with the test issue. there's a diff showing the new test stuff in the last comment.
[18:10] <EdwinGrubbs> jcsackett: sure
[18:10] <jcsackett> thanks.
[18:52] <jcsackett> going on a quick lunchbreak, all, just leave links to MPs and your name in the queue if you need a review.
[19:05] <EdwinGrubbs> jcsackett-lunch: r=me
[20:04] <adeuring> sinzui: can you have another look at my MP?
[20:07] <sinzui> yes
[20:23] <sinzui> adeuring, Your test additions are lovely. Remove the previous additions to lib/lp/bugs/stories/guided-filebug/xx-product-guided-filebug.txt. We want to test something once and test it very well
[20:25]  * jcsackett makes note that things he thinks are polite difference may in fact be objections to the MP...
[20:26] <jcsackett> sinzui: is it generally safe to object to stuff that uses stories for testing?
[20:26] <sinzui> yes
[20:26] <jcsackett> cool.
[20:26] <sinzui> A story is a customer acceptance test that explains the role and the goal, and verifies it is accomplished
[20:28] <sinzui> jcsackett,  1/3 of test time is spent in stories that are not telling us why a feature exists and how the user knows he did it
[20:29] <jcsackett> sinzui: that makes sense (the goal of the story). and i think you've mentioned the test-length we have being an issue of bad stuff in stories.
[20:32] <sinzui> stories/doctests often grow too long. There are non-obvious conditions at play in long doctest. Stories use sample data which is often wrong when telling a story
[20:33] <adeuring> sinzui: I already reverted the story changes
[20:34] <adeuring> ...and thanks for the review!
[20:36] <adeuring> gah, just noticed that reverted only part of it...