[00:00] <fatharrahman> http://paste.ubuntu.com/540847/
[00:00] <fatharrahman> I did that before
[00:02] <fatharrahman> gpg: Signature made Wed 08 Dec 2010 01:40:00 AM EAT using RSA key ID D1214575
[00:02] <fatharrahman> gpg: Good signature from "Fatharrahman Tijany <fatbish@hotmail.com>"
[00:03] <maxb> The content that you pasted is missing three lines from the top
[00:03] <maxb> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
[00:03] <maxb> Hash: SHA1
[00:03] <maxb> and a blank
[00:03] <fatharrahman> these three lines when there
[00:04] <fatharrahman> an error came saying the code of conduct is not the same
[00:04] <fatharrahman> they were tow errors
[00:05] <fatharrahman> after erasing the lines remain this one
[00:05] <fatharrahman> should I paste it again?
[00:05] <maxb> erasing the lines will have made things worse. put them back
[00:05] <fatharrahman> fully?
[00:05] <fatharrahman> ok
[00:06] <maxb> no need, those lines are constant, so I don't need them
[00:07] <maxb> You appear to have added your full name to the bottom of the CoC before gpg-signing it
[00:07] <maxb> This is most likely what's broken it
[00:07] <maxb> The text must remain exactly the same
[00:07] <fatharrahman> oh I added nothing
[00:07] <fatharrahman> only copy paste
[00:08] <maxb> fatharrahman: No, in what you pasted, "Fatharrahman Abbashar Alfaky Tijany" appears at the end. You must have added that, because there's no inserted name when I download the CoC from Launchpad
[00:09] <fatharrahman> I did not
[00:10] <fatharrahman> i found it like this in the txt
[00:10] <fatharrahman> how can I confirm to you?
[00:11] <fatharrahman> now fully pated the same error
[00:11] <fatharrahman> There is 1 error.
[00:11] <fatharrahman> The signed text does not match the Code of Conduct. Make sure that you signed the correct text (white space differences are acceptable).
[00:12] <fatharrahman> this error was the first one
[00:13] <maxb> So, you're saying that when you download the file from https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct/1.1/+download, you get a file with your name on the last line?
[00:13] <aaron01> I'm getting "bzr: ERROR: No such file: foo" when trying to branch of LP. Any pointers?
[00:13] <fatharrahman> no
[00:13] <maxb> aaron01: say the exact bzr command line you are executing
[00:14] <fatharrahman> my name was not in the downloaded file
[00:14] <aaron01> maxb: bzr branch lp:~pantheon-developers/pantheon/response_update
[00:14] <maxb> fatharrahman: Right, exactly what I said. You added it. That is what has broken the validation when you try to upload it
[00:14] <fatharrahman> no
[00:15] <fatharrahman> I did not add any thing
[00:15] <fatharrahman> may be the terminal add it
[00:15] <fatharrahman> I did not
[00:15] <spiv> fatharrahman: well, regardless of what added it, it is the problem.
[00:16] <fatharrahman> maybe it is in the key but I did not write anything
[00:16] <spiv> fatharrahman: you need to sign the text of https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct/1.1/+download, without any text added or removed.
[00:16] <fatharrahman> should I erase it and try?
[00:16] <maxb> aaron01: That branch is apparently damaged on Launchpad. Data is missing from it
[00:17] <spiv> fatharrahman: yes
[00:17] <fatharrahman> ok
[00:17] <aaron01> maxb: any way to fix?
[00:18] <fatharrahman> this is the result after I erased my name
[00:18] <fatharrahman> There is 1 error.
[00:18] <fatharrahman> (7, 8, u'Bad signature')
[00:19] <maxb> aaron01: aha, the problem is with the pantheon trunk / trunk-old rename, and a bug in launchpad
[00:20] <aaron01> maxb: will renaming back resolve issue?
[00:20] <maxb> Launchpad knows that after the rename, response_update is supposed to be stacked on trunk-old, but Launchpad currently does not update the bzr-level metadata when a branch on which others are stacked is renamed
[00:20] <fatharrahman> please?
[00:21] <maxb> aaron01: There is an easy fix, if you are in ~pantheon-developers?
[00:21] <aaron01> maxb: yes
[00:21] <aaron01> I am
[00:21] <maxb> If you download this small script I wrote: http://j.maxb.eu/~maxb/bzr-set-stacked-url
[00:21] <maxb> you can run 'bzr-set-stacked-url lp:~pantheon-developers/pantheon/response_update lp:~pantheon-developers/pantheon/trunk-old'
[00:22] <spiv> maxb: hmm, I'm a bit surprised that a stacking issue manifests at tree build time rather than sooner.  Hmm.
[00:22] <spiv> Only a bit, though.
[00:22] <maxb> spiv: yeah, odd
[00:22] <maxb> aaron01: What is the nature of trunk vs. trunk-old ?
[00:22] <fatharrahman> hello
[00:23] <fatharrahman> erased my name or leave it the same error
[00:24] <aaron01> maxb: Someone else did the change, but I believe the idea is that we are moving our active development to github, but will maintain mirror on launchpad (which is now trunk, I believe). trunk-old (I'm guessing) is at the point of moving the code to github
[00:24] <spiv> fatharrahman: so you downloaded a fresh copy of https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct/1.1/+download and signed that?  Does it pass a local gpg --verify?
[00:25] <fatharrahman> yes
[00:26] <fatharrahman> gpg: Signature made Wed 08 Dec 2010 01:40:00 AM EAT using RSA key ID D1214575
 gpg: Good signature from "Fatharrahman Tijany <fatbish@hotmail.com>"
[00:26] <maxb> aaron01, spiv: Ah, right, it's a bzr-git import of a git conversion of the bzr trunk-old. Huh. OK.
[00:27] <maxb> I am very surprised bzr didn't error out before getting to tree building
[00:28] <spiv> fatharrahman: pastebin what you tried pasting into the form?
[00:29] <aaron01> maxb: :) I'll talk it over with the person that set it up, maybe come up with a better solution. Thanks for your help
[00:29] <fatharrahman> spiv : http://paste.ubuntu.com/540860/
[00:32] <spiv> fatharrahman: once again your name is in the signed text
[00:33] <maxb> aaron01: Just to be clear, nothing wrong was done here, it's just a stupid bug in Launchpad that no one has worked out the proper solution for yet
[00:34] <fatharrahman> I did not type that name into text and when I erase my name it gave me the same error
[00:34] <fatharrahman> spiv
[00:35] <spiv> fatharrahman: well, something is adding it.  Perhaps the program you use to save https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct/1.1/+download to disk?
[00:35] <fatharrahman> I downloaded the code of conduct the signed throgh terminal  open it copy paste only
[00:35] <aaron01> maxb: but your restacking script should work in this case, correct?
[00:36] <fatharrahman> my name is not added to the downloaded text
[00:36] <fatharrahman> it is open now too
[00:36] <fatharrahman> with getid
[00:37] <maxb> aaron01: Yes. All the script does is to drive the bzrlib API to reset the stacking location to where it actually now is
[00:41] <fatharrahman> spiv : I found my name automatically in the UbuntuCodeofConduct-1.1.txt.asc it is not in the downloaded tet so if the name is the problem and erasing the name is not solving it why not change the options of the key or signature but how?
[00:42] <fatharrahman> only guessing
[00:43] <spiv> fatharrahman: how are you generating your UbuntuCodeofConduct-1.1.txt.asc ?
[00:44] <fatharrahman> through terminal command: gpg --clearsign UbuntuCodeofConduct-1.1.txt
[00:46] <spiv> fatharrahman: what does "tail -1 UbuntuCodeofConduct-1.1.txt" output?
[00:50] <fatharrahman> spiv: a gap
[00:51] <spiv> fatharrahman: yet somehow the final line of the signed text is not a blank line.
[00:51] <spiv> Odd.
[00:54] <fatharrahman> spiv
[00:54] <fatharrahman> you are a magician
[00:54] <spiv> What did I do? :)
[00:55] <fatharrahman> you are wright it worked I erased my name and tow other lines and yes it is signed
[00:55] <fatharrahman> Thank you very much
[00:55] <spiv> You're welcome!
[00:56] <fatharrahman> you dont know it is a two days effort
[00:56] <fatharrahman> :)
[00:59] <fatharrahman> should I remove bug report spiv
[01:00] <fatharrahman> ?
[01:06] <spiv> fatharrahman: probably
[03:11] <wgrant> lamont: Is buttercup unwell?
[03:21] <aroman> hey all, I'm working on a new app that is currently in alpha right now, but I could really use bugs/support in improving the app's experience. What is the best way to get people interested in this project? It's on launchpad with a PPA right now.
[03:24] <spm> wgrant: yes
[03:24] <spm> it is, as in.
[03:25] <wgrant> spm: How can you tell?
[03:25] <CarlFK> aroman: find groups that will want to use your app and announce it.  try not to be too spammy
[03:25] <spm> nagios alert is showing it as "ABORTING...."
[03:25] <wgrant> spm: That's what I suspected.
[03:25] <wgrant> But I didn't know you had Nagios alerts for that. That's good.
[03:26] <spm> yeah. they're a bit of a red fatigue tho. almost always one is broken in some way. and trying to have individual alerts for individual builders is insanity making.
[03:28] <ScottK> spm: You just have to make them reliable that it's not.
[03:28] <wgrant> Are they all PandaBoards yet?
[04:54] <MTecknology> crap... I accidentally uploaded -3-ppa4 instead of -3ppa4 and now I can't uploade -3ppa5
[04:56] <cody-somerville> MTecknology, If you delete -3-ppa4 it might let you upload -3ppa4
[04:56] <MTecknology> cody-somerville: worked- thanks :)
[05:08] <MTecknology> How can the 'Bug supervisor:' be set in a source package in ubuntu in lp?
[05:08] <MTecknology> -> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/nginx
[05:13] <wgrant> MTecknology: Source packages don't have bug supervisors. The field on that page is referring to the upstream project, not the source package.
[05:14] <MTecknology> wgrant: oh.. How could I subscribe to bugs for that source package?
[05:15] <wgrant> MTecknology: Look at the top of the sidebar.
[05:16] <MTecknology> wgrant: oh... right in a nice obvious place :P
[05:16] <MTecknology> thanks
[06:16] <dnivra> hello. I am trying to check out a branch when i get "Permission denied(public key)". I am pretty sure that I uploaded the public key properly. so what is wrong?
[06:19] <spiv> dnivra: what does "ssh -v -l <your_launchpad_username> bazaar.launchpad.net" say?
[06:20] <spiv> (It will print a lot of debug output, including which keys it is trying)
[06:22] <dnivra> spiv, http://paste.ubuntu.com/540915/.
[06:23] <spiv> Ah, "Agent admitted failure to sign using the key."
[06:24] <spiv> You probably need to run "ssh-add"
[06:24] <dnivra> but that is only if the key files have a name different from id_rsa and id_rsa.pub right?
[06:24] <dnivra> my key files are both in ~/.ssh/.
[06:24] <dnivra> i mean both the key files are in ~/.ssh/
[06:25] <spiv> I'm not sure exactly what configuration causes the agent to be involved and fail.
[06:26] <dnivra> Step 5 of https://help.launchpad.net/YourAccount/CreatingAnSSHKeyPair says what i just said.
[06:26] <spiv> A few users come into this channel with that error though, and ssh-add fixes or works around the problem.
[06:26] <dnivra> alright I shall give it a shot then.
[06:26] <spiv> Well,
[06:26] <spiv> That's *one* reason to use ssh-add
[06:27] <spiv> Agents solve other problems, like saving you from retyping your passphrase every time you connect.
[06:27] <dnivra> i should just do it for the private key? or both keys?
[06:28] <spiv> (and there are other possible solutions if you use key files with different names)
[06:28] <dnivra> guess I'll start over then. let's hope that solves it.
[06:28] <spiv> Just try "ssh-add"
[06:28] <dnivra> for the private or public key or both?
[06:29] <spiv> With no arguments.
[06:29] <dnivra> okay
[06:29] <spiv> Sorry, I should have phrased that as "try just ssh-add" :)
[06:30] <dnivra> it's okay. working now. guess ssh-add was needed. someone should edit https://help.launchpad.net/YourAccount/CreatingAnSSHKeyPair and it as possible step 6 maybe.
[06:31] <dnivra> just to ensure that it does work when they try to pull branches and stuff and not generate this error.
[06:31] <dnivra> thanks spiv!
[06:36] <spiv> It'd be nice to know why this happens :/
[06:36] <dnivra> isn't it supposed to add it to the ssh agent by default?
[06:36] <dnivra> since it is the default filename after all.
[06:37] <dnivra> perhaps ssh-add is not executed at all after a new key is generated?
[06:39] <spiv> Well, if the agent doesn't have the unencrypted key, then I'd expect the client would just prompt for a passphrase as it does when there is no agent.
[06:40] <spiv> (separately the error message the ssh client emits in this case could be more helpful)
[06:40] <dnivra> well client prompting for passphrase does happen. so perhaps ssh-keygen should check is passphrase is blank and auto add?
[06:43] <spiv> Oh, that's even weirder!  If it prompts for the passphrase then I don't see why you'd get an authentication failure.
[06:43] <dnivra> oh no no no prompting happens when there is a passphrase. it doesn't when I leave passphrase is blank like i did now.
[06:44] <dnivra> i meant prompting does happen in general :), not any specific case.
[06:57] <spiv> Woah, the https://launchpad.net/bugs/NNNNNN redirect is broken?
[06:58] <spiv> Hmm, not for all bugs.
[06:59] <spiv> https://launchpad.net/bug/687226 is 404
[06:59] <spiv> Even though https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bug/687226 exists.
[07:02] <spiv> Oh, hmm, "bug" != "bugs".  I wonder where that typoed creeped into this URL.
[08:52] <Daviey> Hi, Is it possible to find out what arches a source package should be built on using the launchpad api?
[08:53] <Daviey> (a source package already in LP)
[08:56] <wgrant> Daviey: No. You could check what it was last built on, but otherwise you'd need to manually parse P-a-s.
[08:56] <wgrant> Why?
[08:58] <Daviey> wgrant: I wanted to use the logic already in LP, rather than parsing *.dsc myself - or using quinn-diff.... doing a local rebuild of a packageset.
[08:59] <YoBoY> hi
[08:59] <wgrant> Daviey: You might as well just check which archs the last upload built on.
[09:00] <Daviey> wgrant: Hmm... would that return i386 for arch' any, and seperate arches for all?
[09:00] <Daviey> ... and other crazy logic?
[09:00] <wgrant> Daviey: Other way around.
[09:00] <Daviey> err, yeah - sorry. :)
[09:00] <wgrant> Daviey: It will return the actually arches on which it was built. Not 'all' or 'linux-any' or that sort of thing.
[09:01] <Daviey> wgrant: nice!  thanks.
[09:02] <Daviey> wgrant: Looking at the API doc, i would need to getPackageUploads and find the package, then inspect package_upload, right?
[09:04] <wgrant> Daviey: I'd probably use getPublishedSources to get a source_package_publishing_history, then call getBuilds on that.
[09:04] <Daviey> ah, thanks for your help wgrant, as ever - appreciated :)
[09:05] <wgrant> np
[09:05] <wgrant> If you really wanted the LP logic you could do a rebuild in a (local?) LP, but I guess that's pointless if you already have rebuild infrastructure.
[09:07] <Daviey> wgrant: yeah good idea... not sure i need the heavyweight nature of LP tho...  and pushing n packages to a PPA looking for regressions feels a waste of resources.
[09:09] <wgrant> I'm pretty sure it's now easier to set up temporarily than just about any other archive/rebuild manager. But probably not if you have something existing.
[09:10] <MTecknology> Destination series: p-series  <--  Huh??
[09:10] <wgrant> MTecknology: Hm?
[09:10] <Daviey> wgrant: yeah, have something already - thanks.
[09:11] <MTecknology> wgrant: p-series and o-series are options for what series I want to copy my package binaries to
[09:11] <MTecknology> are they supposed to be hidden?
[09:11] <wgrant> MTecknology: Ah, looks like someone has created p and o early.
[09:12] <wgrant> They probably shouldn't be shown in that list.
[09:12] <wgrant> But a copy to them will fail.
[09:13] <MTecknology> also.. I REALLY wish it was possible to rebuild packages in the same ppa but for a different series
[09:15] <MTecknology> like.. I uploaded package-0.1.3-0ppa1~lucid; I want to build that for karmic too; obviously I can't 'copy' the binaries because the dependencies will cause issues.. since most dependencies are package >= 1.2.3
[09:15] <wgrant> Can you upload to karmic first then copy to lucid?
[09:16] <MTecknology> I could, but there's issues with goign forward too - like not being built against the same toolchain the rest of the system was built against
[09:17] <MTecknology> I've been considering writing a script to do it for me
[09:17] <wgrant> You know that's how most Ubuntu packages work, right?
[09:17] <MTecknology> the hard part would be version numbering
[09:17] <MTecknology> is it?
[09:17] <wgrant> We don't rebuild everything for every release.
[09:17] <YoBoY> sorry to ask, but how to make private the archives of a launchpad mailing list ?
[09:17] <wgrant> YoBoY: You need to have a private team for that. They're available with a commercial subscription.
[09:18] <MTecknology> oh..
[09:19] <MTecknology> I've been waiting for this darned package to publish for a while now.. so I can copy and go nappy
[09:19] <MTecknology> woohoo - one of the php builds finished
[09:20] <YoBoY> ok... I see... it's why i can't find this "private" option ^^" the help.launchpad.net don't talk about that
[09:20] <MTecknology> wgrant: I'm kind of surprised by that..
[09:20] <wgrant> MTecknology: Hm?
[09:20] <MTecknology> that most packages aren't rebuilt
[09:21] <YoBoY> wgrant: thanks :)
[09:21] <wgrant> MTecknology: It would take weeks to open a new series if we did.
[09:21] <wgrant> Waiting for everything to rebuild.
[09:21] <MTecknology> ubuntu advantage- interesting
[09:22] <wgrant> MTecknology: We even have some packages which haven't been rebuilt since Wart.
[09:22] <wgrant> +y
[09:22] <wgrant> http://qa.ubuntuwire.org/mdt/unchanged/unchanged_since_warty
[09:22] <MTecknology> wgrant: makes sense- is there anything specific that is rebuilt- or is it just whatever doesn't break?
[09:23] <wgrant> MTecknology: The latter.
[09:23] <wgrant> Occasionally we will deliberately rebuild some things, if there are relevant toolchain performance or security improvements.
[09:24] <MTecknology> how hard is it to know which packages would get a performance boost from being rebuilt?
[09:26] <MTecknology> btw- Warty is when I started using Ubuntu
[09:26] <wgrant> Me too.
[09:26] <wgrant> It's been a while!
[09:26] <MTecknology> err.. lied - hoary, within days of its release
[09:27] <MTecknology> why were there no official releases of ubuntu before 4.10 though?
[09:27] <wgrant> Ubuntu only came into existence in mid-2004...
[09:27] <MTecknology> ..... dumb question
[09:28] <MTecknology> I knew the date relevance - it just took me this long to finally realize that's why there's nothing before 4.10 ... wow
[09:28] <wgrant> Heh.
[09:28] <MTecknology> http://qa.ubuntuwire.org/mdt/unchanged/unchanged_since_maverick <- nice long list
[09:29] <wgrant> Yup.
[09:29] <MTecknology> curl http://qa.ubuntuwire.org/mdt/unchanged/unchanged_since_maverick | wc -l   12510
[09:29] <wgrant> ie. most of the archive
[09:30] <MTecknology> I vote for rebuilding the whole thing every five years!
[09:32] <MTecknology> wgrant: I had to try..   nginx 0.9.2-0ppa5 in lucid (Source format '3.0 (quilt)' not supported by target series o-series.)
[09:32] <wgrant> MTecknology: Exactly as I suspected.
[09:32] <MTecknology> same error when I tried to push to karmic
[09:41] <MTecknology> wgrant: is there a cron job that runs around every hour or (XXmin) that looks for unpublished and completed builds and builds that downloadable list for the package manager for the whole ppa?
[09:42] <wgrant> MTecknology: It's meant to run every 5 minutes. But it's being a bit slow at the moment.
[09:43] <MTecknology> oh
[09:43] <bigjools> it will get quicker later today
[09:44] <MTecknology> does the upload work the same way?
[09:44] <MTecknology> cron job that runs around seeing if anything needs to be done?
[09:44] <bigjools> it's a cron job, yes
[09:44] <YoBoY> bye
[09:44] <MTecknology> is that one 5min too?
[09:45] <wgrant> It is.
[09:45] <MTecknology> this one has been 'uploading'z for 6min- I guess it should be done pretty soon :)
[09:46] <MTecknology> bigjools: I see by later you mean 15min?
[09:46] <bigjools> :)
[09:46] <MTecknology> and it's not 'today' it's night
[09:46] <MTecknology> duh..
[09:46] <bigjools> there's only one time, that's UTC
[09:46] <bigjools> which happens to be my time zone :)
[09:47] <MTecknology> nice
[09:47] <bigjools> not so much at this time of year
[09:47] <MTecknology> I don't know if I'm -0500 or -0600 right now
[09:47] <MTecknology> I think it might be -0500
[09:49] <MTecknology> Well that's irritating... my package is published but aptitude is telling me that an update will bring me to the wrong version..
[09:49] <MTecknology> it's saying 0.9.1-ppa3; it's actually 0.9.2-ppa5 that I want
[09:50] <MTecknology> 11min and still not uploaded
[09:50] <wgrant> MTecknology: It's probably turned off for the rollout in a few minutes.
[09:50] <MTecknology> oh...
[09:51] <MTecknology> I was just assuming it's because there's something like 30MB or so to upload
[09:51] <MTecknology> [UPLOADING] Uploading build on pluot (virtual)
[09:52] <MTecknology> I'd ask for an estimated down time - but I'll just assume it'll be at least three hours....
[09:52] <wgrant> It should be under 90 minutes.
[09:52] <MTecknology> that'll be juyst long enough for me to force myself to sleep
[09:53] <MTecknology> wgrant: you mean 180, right?
[09:53] <MTecknology> :P
[09:53] <MTecknology> It's 03:53 here..
[09:54] <MTecknology> g'night
[09:54] <wgrant> Night.
[10:18] <MTecknology> i lied
[10:18] <MTecknology> wgrant: so.. the package was build, uploaded, and published - shouldn't I be able to install it via apt now?
[10:21] <jfi> the package must be published to the ppa repository before, it takes several minutes
[10:23] <maxb> MTecknology: source & binary published? or just source?
[10:24] <jfi> it seens that LP is under maintenance actually "Launchpad is undergoing maintenance and is in read-only mode. You cannot make any changes."
[10:24] <MTecknology> maxb: pretty green check mark next to the package
[10:25] <maxb> hmm. You should be fine then
[10:25] <maxb> I would suggest checking whether the package is present in the Packages file under http://ppa.launchpad.net/
[10:26] <MTecknology> maxb: yup- it's in there
[10:26] <maxb> Then any problem is occurring with your local apt, I think
[10:27] <MTecknology> heh...
[10:27] <MTecknology> must be - I even see it at the right version in the Packages file
[10:27] <MTecknology> ..
[10:27] <MTecknology> Packages == control ??
[10:27] <maxb> ?
[10:28] <MTecknology> http://ppa.launchpad.net/nginx/development/ubuntu/dists/lucid/main/binary-amd64/Packages
[10:28] <MTecknology> That looks exactly like what's in debian/control
[10:28] <MTecknology> just a few extra thigns like md5sum
[10:28] <maxb> same general format, different fields
[10:33] <Daviey> wgrant: Hmm... seems for my use, source_package_publishing_history only returns what it was built for on the series request - not packages that came from previous releases :(
[10:33] <wgrant> Daviey: Ah, fair point.
[10:34]  * Daviey screams :)
[12:14] <wolfer> hi. i would like to rename a project on launchpad. setting a different name is easy, but I would also like to change the launchpadID
[12:19] <wgrant> wolfer: Ask a question at https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+addquestion, and an admin will take care of that for you.
[12:20] <wolfer> i will try that, thanks wgrant
[13:35] <xnox> What are my options to stop receiving FTBFS emails from daily-build PPA? The mail is currently hitting the team contact adress -> mailing list.
[13:35] <soren> xnox: Which daily build ppa is this?
[13:36] <xnox> ppa:pkgcrosswire/daily
[13:36] <xnox> "Mine / ours"
[13:37] <soren> Ah.
[13:37] <soren> You could fix the ftbfs :)
[13:37] <xnox> True =) but it happened three times and we have received
[13:37] <xnox> We get ~16 emails when it breaks =)
[13:38] <xnox> or something like that.
[13:38] <xnox> Should I move it to a different team?
[13:38] <xnox> Or can it at least email just one person not the whole mailing list?
[14:47] <pcjc2> Hi guys, was just wondering if it is possible to import bugs from Sourceforge if we wanted to switch over to using LP for bug tracking completely?
[15:01] <sinzui> pcjc2, yes. There is a script that can do that. let me look for it
[15:01] <pcjc2> I do appologise, must have closed the window
[15:03] <sinzui> pcjc2, https://launchpad.net/sfbugs2launchpad
[15:03] <pcjc2> super, thanks
[15:03] <pcjc2> I thought it was something only admins could do
[15:04] <sinzui> pcjc2, It may require someone form the bug team to do some work
[15:05] <pcjc2> at the moment, I have tentative approval to move our bugs to Launchpad, but will be doing some discussion with other developers and stakeholders to ensure everyone is happy
[15:05] <pcjc2> will take a poke at sfbugs2launchpad, and call in the admins for help once I know how we are proceeding
[15:05] <pcjc2> thanks for the pointer!
[15:06] <benji> pcjc2: https://help.launchpad.net/Bugs/ImportFormat and https://launchpad.net/sfbugs2launchpad might be of interest to you; someone else might have better suggestions
[15:07] <pcjc2> Thanks, sinzui pointed me to the latter already
[15:07] <benji> ah, cool
[16:24] <matthewg42> Hi, is there a method to get download counts from a pariciular PPA and/or packaging in the main repos?
[16:24] <bigjools> matthewg42: very nearly, it's not quite switched on yetr
[16:24] <bigjools> yet*
[16:25] <matthewg42> bigjools: oh good.  thanks.  is there a news feed or something which I can monitor to be notified when it happens?
[16:25] <bigjools> there's a bug, let me dig it up
[16:26] <bigjools> https://bugs.launchpad.net/soyuz/+bug/139855
[16:30] <matthewg42> thank you very much
[16:30] <bigjools> I am about to add a new comment on the bug detailing some actions
[16:31] <matthewg42> subscribed
[16:31] <matthewg42> what about the main repos for ubuntu?
[16:33] <bigjools> matthewg42: nobody has those stats (and it would be vey hard to obtain them because of mirroring), they will only be supplied for PPAs.
[16:33] <bigjools> very*
[16:34] <jpds> matthewg42: Or you can use popcon.ubuntu.com.
[16:56] <SpamapS> https://edge.launchpad.net/+apidoc/devel.html#binary_package_publishing_history
[16:56] <SpamapS> wooooot!
[17:03] <zyga> is launchpad down?
[17:07] <jpds> zyga: No?
[17:07] <matthewg42> bigjools: jpds: ok thanks.  I was wondering if there was a problem because of mirroring.  Tricky if the mirror network has one-way only communication.
[17:07] <matthewg42> popcon is opt-in right?
[17:08] <jpds> matthewg42: Yes.
[17:10] <matthewg42> Is there any guesstimate of the proportion of users who opt-in?
[17:11] <matthewg42> somewhere between 0 and 100% I guess.
[17:11] <bigjools> I'd say that guesstimate is 100% correct
[17:19] <matthewg42> haha
[17:19] <matthewg42> ok, thanks for your help guys.  later
[18:37] <MTecknology> wgrant: heh.. day after we talk about rebuilds - things being uploaded without changes to be rebuilt with the newer python. :P
[18:38] <lamont> let's try that again... wgrant: you around?
[18:39] <MTecknology> lamont: hm?
[18:39] <lamont> I'd asked if he was around and then discovered that I wasn't exactly online
[18:39] <MTecknology> He's marked as being away - probably sleeping
[18:40] <lamont> oh, doh. my tz oops
[18:40]  * lamont is temporally shifted this week
[20:42] <pcjc2> Hi, so I've done an export of one of our sites Sourceforge bugs as a launchpad XML file
[20:42] <pcjc2> Is there anyway I can play with that on staging.launchpad.net without having to bother admins?
[20:42] <pcjc2> I'd love to be able to try some different options on the export
[20:50] <sinzui> pcjc2, no. Someone from the bugs team needs to load it. but I am sure they would be happy to load the data into staging
[20:51] <sinzui> pcjc2,I do not think anyone from the team is available at this hour :(
[20:52] <pcjc2> no problem, I guess they are mostly UK based ?
[20:52] <pcjc2> (Like me , only this is a hobby, not work)
[20:53] <pcjc2> I was just looking to see if there was some APi which I could use, but it doesn't look like it can be done that way yet
[22:09] <wgrant> lamont: Morning.
[23:07] <sconklin> How can I solve this problem? - A source package containing an incorrect .orig.tar.gz (which had the correct file name) was uploaded to a ppa, and now I need to make that orig.tar.gz go away, or replace it with the correct one.
[23:09] <wgrant> sconklin: You can't. That doesn't make sense.
[23:09] <wgrant> sconklin: You need to give it a new name.
[23:09] <sconklin> wgrant: in this case, we can't because it's a kernel package. The package was built against the wrong PPA.
[23:10] <wgrant> sconklin: You can.
[23:10] <sconklin> wgrant: by giving it a gratuitous ABI bump?
[23:11] <wgrant> Ah, I see.
[23:11] <wgrant> Well, you cannot upload a different orig.tar.gz to the PPA.
[23:13] <sconklin> well, there is now a tarball up there that does not accurately represent the actual upstream package of that version, which is a problem by itself.
[23:14] <wgrant> How did such a lie come into existence?
[23:14] <wgrant> One should not be repackaging upstream tarballs.
[23:14] <micahg> wgrant: would uploading a .bz2 version work? (assuming source format 3)
[23:14] <sconklin> wgrant: I agree. I did not do it.
[23:15] <wgrant> micahg: Yes, but ew.
[23:15] <micahg> sconklin: ^^
[23:15] <sconklin> a point release upstream kernel tarball was apparently renamed to have the base version name, and used
[23:15] <wgrant> Yaaaay.
[23:16] <sconklin> I don't know who did that, actually. As a result, we're discussing how to make sure it never happens again
[23:43] <maxb> this is weird
[23:43] <maxb> what on earth are people thinking when they request  svn vcs import from "https://launchpad.net/ocsinventory-deploy-tool/trunk" ?!