[00:00] tumbleweed: r894: you need to adjust backportpackage [00:01] micahg: ok, he ask me to wait at bug 692087 [00:01] Launchpad bug 692087 in nginx (Ubuntu) "Sync nginx 0.8.53-2 (universe) from Debian unstable (main)" [Wishlist,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/692087 [00:02] udienz: I think that has 2 of the patches [00:03] bdrung: thanks, pushed. BTW please use --author when landing branches [00:03] oh, I suppose that was debcommit [00:04] tumbleweed: yes (debcommit) [00:04] tumbleweed: "debcommit --author"? [00:05] no, it doesn't support that, although I remember requesting it at soem point :) [00:05] udienz: he suggests waiting for 0.8.54-1 which should have all the patches [00:05] udienz: also, why are you adding the regression-proposed tag? That means that package in -proposed regressed functionality [00:06] micahg: hm.. i think it can be used if we proposed SRU.. okay tahs i'll remove it [00:08] udienz: an SRU is proposed by clicking Nominate for Release (if you still can), adding a debdiff and subscribing -sponsors, or proposing a merge into an lp:ubuntu/ branch and being clear about which release it targets [00:11] micahg: ok thanks [00:18] tumbleweed: merged [00:20] bdrung: thanks. Just noticed I forgot to remove the requestsync import. fixed. [00:21] tumbleweed: now you can work on all packages integrating config.py ;) [00:22] yeah, hopefully not too many hurdles on the way... (and I don't run out of steam) [00:23] tumbleweed: i have these things on the todo list: [00:23] improve debian/copyright [00:23] backportpackage{,.1}: sort command line args alphabetical [00:23] support BACKPORTPACKAGE_UPLOAD [00:23] sponsor-patch: support config.py and add UPDATE_BUILDER and LPINSTANCE support [00:23] syncpackage: use ubu_email() [00:24] bdrung: The sorting order on backportpackage's arguments was very deliberate [00:24] yeah, I tend to go for logical orderings, too. [00:25] And BACKPORTPACKAGE_UPLOAD is difficult because I still dont' think that setting it should result in always automatically uploading - I think uploading should be an opt-in operation [00:25] copyright improvements probably needs tweaks in many files headers [00:25] (I will grant that using optparse's option groups in backportpackage could help) [00:25] ebroder: yeah, group them to make the logical order obvious [00:27] udienz: hm? [00:27] * tumbleweed heads to bed [00:27] tumbleweed: copyright improvements means that d/copyright needs to be more detailed [00:28] bdrung: in that case, it should be automatically generated (to have any hope of maintainability), which means we need to help licencecheck [00:29] tumbleweed: this screams for writing a helping tool placed in ubuntu-dev-tools ;) [00:29] udienz: oh- nvm [00:29] tumbleweed: there are probably scripts floating around [00:30] tumbleweed: the problem of the current d/copyright: according to it i have a copyright on ubuntutools/test/* [00:31] yeah, I've seen some around. I wrote one (that generated most of the current file), but accidently lost it in the bzr mess you witnessed :) [00:32] bdrung: I don't really have a problem with that. it's more descriptive than it was. When I package things I tend to have the copyright as "The $name authors", except for the files they obviously got from outside the project [00:32] otherwise debian/copyright becomes a disaster zone [00:33] tumbleweed: interesting point [00:34] anyway, I'm still here, /me goes [00:36] tumbleweed: we should extent wrap-and-sort to support dep5 d/copyright files [00:40] tumbleweed: bug #692809 [00:40] Launchpad bug 692809 in ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu) "[wrap-and-sort] support debian/copyright in DEP-5 format" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/692809 [01:08] MTecknology: hi, sorry for delay reply [06:02] hello. i am trying to package a new upstream version and would like to know should the entire upstream change log be included in debian/changelog ? [06:02] dnivra: No, the upstream changelog is for upstream changes. debian/changelog is just for changes within the packaging [06:03] ebroder, okay. well the upstream fixes a bug in ubuntu. so i just can mention it as a sub-point? [06:04] dnivra: Yeah, that's basically the exception to not putting upstream changes in debian/changelog :) [06:04] I was just about to get to that [06:04] ebroder, does this look okay http://paste.ubuntu.com/546175/ ? [06:05] that's just what I am adding. i have copied the changelog from the previous version and adding it to that. [06:05] dnivra: Doesn't seem particularly problematic. Although I would mention that Ubuntu doesn't use priority in the changelog [06:06] Oh wait - is that supposed to be a Debian BTS bug closer or a Launchpad bug closer? [06:06] ebroder: also, it should be LP: #XXXXXX to close a bug in launchpad, Closes: #XXXXX is for Debian [06:06] oops [06:06] dnivra: ^^ [06:06] launchpad closer. [06:07] thanks for that! did that. [06:07] well dch -i gave me a standard template with the urgency and so edited it :). will revert to the default. [06:09] one more question there wouldn't be any problems if i just copy debian/control from old version to new version right? [06:10] dnivra: you should generally just copy the whole debian dir or just use uscan and uupdate if there's a watch file [06:11] and i am packaging subversion so that is a single binary right? [06:13] micahg, okay. copied the entire debian directory. [06:13] dnivra: you don't need to close that bug for natty since it was already fix in natty with 1.6.12dfsg-2 [06:14] micahg, the bug wasn't opened for natty at all i think. [06:14] dnivra: the Fix Released task is for the development release (natty in this case) [06:14] micahg, so should i retain 1.6.12 as version number since natty hasn't incremented the version number? [06:15] dnivra: no, the version should reflect the upstream version, but the upstream tarball needs to be cleaned [06:15] micahg, cleaned? in the sense? [06:15] dnivra: made dfsg compliant or at least ufsg compliant [06:16] dnivra: are you packaging 1.6.15? [06:17] micahg, no i am packaging 1.6.13 now. i thought i'll start making a patch to the security issue. [06:18] dnivra: well, 1.6.15 is out according to Debian's watch file, the security debdiffs are probably more important than a new upstream version right now in any case [06:18] dnivra: also, the version in natty already has the security patch for 1.6.12 [06:19] micahg, yeah i did check the upstream version. i did comment on the launchpad bug page too. thought i shouldn't waste time if it is a security bug. [06:19] micahg, so you think maybe i should just backport it from 1.6.12 in natty? [06:19] dnivra: that's the only way :) [06:19] micahg, only way? sorry didn't get you? why not package the latest source? [06:20] dnivra: we generally don't take new versions in stable releases unless it's in -backports [06:20] micahg, ubuntu policy eh :). not very familiar with that. i know a bit about development release cycle; that's about it. [06:21] !sru | dnivra [06:21] dnivra: Stable Release Update information is at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates [06:21] dnivra: although, you're actually looking for this: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation [06:22] micahg, yeah i went through the above link. [06:23] micahg, guess i didn't notice the "make only minimal changes" part :). [06:23] :) [06:25] isn't it enough to download the orig.tar.gz, diff.gz and .dsc file from lauchpad. or should i download the latest bzr branch? [06:25] dnivra: up to you which tools you work better with [06:26] dnivra: i user grab-merge from ubuntu-dev-tools [06:26] dnivra: and i don't need to latest branch [06:27] dnivra: take a look at pull-lp-source in ubuntu-dev-tools, you can get the natty and maverick builds [06:27] udienz, grab-merge will automatically download the natty packages? [06:27] micahg, will do. thanks! [06:27] dnivra: no, grab-merge is for merging from Debian [06:28] oh okay. don't think debian is patching this one. let me check once more. [06:28] dnivra: Debian patched it already, that's why it's fixed in natty :) [06:28] dnivra: ow.. sorry if you want to packaging SRU [06:29] micahg, oh okay! i don't remember clearly :). was all sleepy when i checked on this today morning at about 5:30 :) [06:30] udienz, knowledge never hurt. i never knew you could do that. thanks! [06:30] one question does grab-merge download the latest development version? or latest stable version? [06:31] dnivra: grab-merge grabs from devel release and debian unstable [06:31] hello [06:31] dnivra: grab-merge downloaded latest debian and latest ubuntu [06:31] any tip on how I could solve a "could not read symbols" error in natty? http://launchpadlibrarian.net/60988724/buildlog_ubuntu-natty-i386.clipit_1.3.9-1ppa1natty1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz [06:31] udienz, micahg okay. thanks a lot! [06:35] is it the order in which I pass the flags? I can't really explain this... :-\ [06:35] evaluate: what's package? [06:35] fbfs? [06:35] udienz, ^^ [06:36] no, it's a PPA I have un launchpad, I pasted the link to the buildlog in my previous reply [06:36] s/un/on/ [06:37] evaluate: PPA packaging help is in #ubuntu-packaging unless you're staging for the archive [06:37] micahg, ok :-) [07:17] good morning! === hannesw__ is now known as hannesw [09:12] dholbach: is it a bug on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers that MOTUs don't have any voting rights? [09:13] geser, yes [09:13] geser, I think we should simplify this document a lot - there's too much repetition in there - instead it could talk about "this is what ~ubuntu-dev people are" and then just explain differences === nhandler_ is now known as nhandler === lifeless_ is now known as lifeless === evilvish is now known as group === group is now known as evilvish === evilvish is now known as whois === whois is now known as vish === Philip6 is now known as Philip5 === duanedes1gn is now known as duanedesign === yofel_ is now known as yofel === jussi01 is now known as jussi === apachelogger_ is now known as apachelogger [13:48] dholbach: thanks for review my merge branch and merge packages. both merge already submit again [13:49] udienz, you could try to ask for another review in #ubuntu-desktop - I was merely stating the obvious, they know much better to review gtkrc changes :) [13:49] thanks a lot for your hard work - I noticed you've been doing a lot of stuff in the last time [13:51] dholbach: :) right. i spend more time this week. okay i'll ask ubuntu-desktop [13:52] excellent, thanks a lot [13:53] good morning [13:53] morning highvoltage [14:45] RAOF, I managed to build it with pbuilder, thank you for your suggestions [15:16] brung: around? [15:19] rrr [15:19] bdrung: around? [15:19] typos [15:20] udienz: use tab-completion [15:20] if your irc client supports it [15:20] geser: hehe, i use pidgin [15:22] pidgin doesn't support it for irc? [15:23] geser: supported, but wow i don't know this feature. new knowledge [15:24] geser: i write a changelog at here http://paste.ubuntu.com/546289/, it's coreect? [15:25] rr correct? [15:26] I don't know the current delta, but it looks ok so far [15:30] udienz: is it worth merging bash? currently most of the changes in the latest package in Debian unstable are already applied in our last Ubuntu version.. [15:31] BlackZ: not all, sudo hint not apllied at Debian [15:32] geser: [u-d-t] lpapicache's metaclass approach makes it tricky to use staging, as it needs the lp server name at import time. I'm doing this hack: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~stefanor/ubuntu-dev-tools/config-681693/revision/904 (requestsync:78) [15:32] udienz: I mean: is it worth merging a new version from Debian unstable? currently our last version of the package in Ubuntu already has most of the changes applied to the last version of the package in Debian [15:34] BlackZ: hm.. i think it is capable, but its better when it sync [15:36] udienz: it doesn't mean we have to drop _all_ of our currently Ubuntu delta [15:38] udienz: I'd wait for a new upstream release and/or a new Debian package revision containing importat change(s) [15:40] BlackZ: hm.... whats the mean "important?" [15:40] bug? [15:41] BlackZ: sorry, if i ask about "important" but i'm really not understant with "important" criteria [15:41] udienz: yes, a bug fixed is an example [15:42] how can I tell a package to use the debian/patches before building? In karmic and beyond it works automagically, but hardy's package has had no such directory [16:03] v3 src package? [16:18] tumbleweed: set ubuntutools.lp.service='staging' before you import the lpapicache module (http://paste.ubuntu.com/546304/) [16:18] geser: that's what I'm doing [16:18] it gets messy, but I can't think of a better fix [16:19] udienz: now [16:19] the other option would be to remove the resource_type checking and trust the dev to pass the right object but IMHO that's worse [16:19] bdrung: yup [16:20] geser: or normalize the URLS / query where we are connected to before comparing resource_type [16:24] tumbleweed: right, one could use 'resource_type_link' from the Launchpad object to deduce the service-root and use this and build the resource type during runtime [16:25] tumbleweed: should I prepare a commit with this change so you can merge it into your branch? [16:26] I can land the requestsync changes in trunk anytime, although bdrung will probably want to look at them first [16:29] tumbleweed: what do you think of using the launchpadlib.Launchpad() class directly in lpapicache and let it set-up the token if necessary? [16:30] that would also have the benefit that all tokens are stored in the same location (currently manage-credentials stores them in a different location) [16:30] geser: did you see the bugs about the launchpadlib 1.8.0 api breakage? login api changes are afoot [16:31] tumbleweed: no, where? [16:35] bug 686690. Sorry must run. chat later. [16:35] Launchpad bug 686690 in launchpadlib "1.8.0 breaks login_with() API compat with existing credentials files, and forces keyrings" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/686690 [16:38] tumbleweed: you can push things directly to trunk if you won't introduce regression (trunk should be always usable/releasable). big changes or new features should use merge requests. [16:38] tumbleweed: i will review the changes in both cases [16:54] tumbleweed: for every bug that is reported, we should create a testcase if possible [16:55] tumbleweed: can we add a basic test for every script that runs "script --help" or similar to check there are grave bugs in the option parsing [16:55] ? [16:56] bdrung: how would a possible test-case for bug 693060 look like? [16:56] Launchpad bug 693060 in ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu) "lpapicache metaclasses make using staging messy" [Undecided,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/693060 [16:58] geser: we need two types of testcases: one that is run on the build and one that needs to be run manually with online access [16:58] geser: we could use staging for doing the second type of tests [17:17] Hey... [17:19] bdrung: what's the minimum supported python version for u-d-t? [17:19] geser: >= 2.5 [17:20] ok, so no usage of str.format() [17:26] bdrung: when do you except that we can bump it to >= 2.6? [17:26] geser: once 2.6 is the default in unstable [17:27] so after the next Debian release? [17:31] geser: probably === txwikinger2 is now known as txwikinger === Guest43017 is now known as Lutin [19:16] geser: thanks [19:16] sorry, I got caught with some nasty packet loss on my DSL line 15 minutes before I had to go out to dinner. [19:17] tumbleweed: you broke sponsor-patch. now i have to migrate it to use config.py [19:18] bdrung: yay :/ [19:19] bdrung: broken in trunk? [19:19] tumbleweed: yes [19:20] sponsor-patch: Error: Unsupported builder specified: None. Only pbuilder, pbuilder-dist and sbuild are supported. [19:20] oh, I saw it was passing an option, I didn't check if that option could be None [19:21] s/option/argument/ [19:21] tumbleweed: don't worry. i will fix it. [19:22] tumbleweed: shouldn't --lpinstance have an short option, too? [19:22] I removed th eshort option, because it's really not some thing people are going to use much [19:22] tumbleweed: except for testcases [19:22] (but I'm overjoyed to have it, testing was a pain in the past) [19:23] ebroder: your script, any opinion? [19:24] tumbleweed: it had -l [19:25] bdrung: ack-sync has a -l that means something else [19:26] tumbleweed: ack-sync doesn't count, because it's not installed by default (should become part of sponsor-patch) [19:27] is that lvm root directory option not something we are going to want elsewhere? [19:28] tumbleweed: alternative -i [19:31] bdrung: sure. I can do that [19:32] tumbleweed: but i would prefer -l [19:33] tumbleweed: looking at the --lvm option, i am not sure if we really want that option (can't we determine that directly?) [19:33] ok, I've made my case and I'm happy to restore it. re --lvm, yeah one would assume so [19:35] bdrung: Sorry, what's going on? This is -l vs. just --lpinstance? [19:36] ebroder: I renamed --launchpad to --lpinstance to match the variables we are using [19:36] tumbleweed: Ok, I guess. Is that consistent with other scripts that have that sort of option? [19:37] ebroder: --lpinstance is a better name than --launchpad, because requestsync uses --lp whit a different meaning [19:37] bdrung: Ok, sure [19:38] I also dropped -l, but bdrung wants it back. [19:39] grr, my DSL modem is handling this summer heat worse than I am [19:39] tumbleweed: and i tried to build an igloo today :) [19:39] Yeah, I've got no strong opinions on that one. I'm honestly not entirely sure that having a --lpinstance option for backportpackage makes sense. Can you even make interesting soyuz changes on staging? [19:40] good point [19:41] I probably added it because the last script I wrote was backport-helper for u-archive-tools, which makes malone queries. So it was useful to use staging for testing [20:46] tumbleweed: pushed my fix. please review it [20:56] bdrung: nice. missed a comma in SEE ALSO in the manpage :) [20:57] btw, done ack-sync and grab-attachments in my branch [20:59] tumbleweed: pushed comma [20:59] Hey,,,,, anybody willing to review: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/wallch ? Thx :)) [20:59] tumbleweed: now i know who stole my comma ^. :D [21:00] heh [21:01] tumbleweed: ack-sync isn't work getting config support (it should be merged into sponsor-patch) [21:02] bdrung: I know, which is why I didn't spend much time on it. [21:02] tumbleweed: can't you create one branch per updated script? [21:03] tumbleweed: that makes reviewing easier [21:03] bdrung: I can, I was just being lazy. [21:04] tumbleweed: is your branch ready for the merge? [21:04] sure === hanska is now known as dapal === s1aden is now known as sladen