[00:30] http://blog.launchpad.net/ppa/failed-to-fetch-errors-for-ppas contains what is, as far as I can determine, a really confusing typo [00:31] it looks like "All of these refer to different components within the same PPA. You only need the first four PPAs" should read "for" instead of "four" [00:31] idnar: Hah, indeed. Fixing. [00:33] Fixed. [00:34] idnar: I thought it was right when I reviewed it. [00:34] Someone actually corrected it to 'four' afterwards... [00:34] heh [00:37] I would say 'PPAs only need the first component' [00:37] and avoid the ambiguity [00:38] Only need, or only have? [00:42] have would be better [00:42] I was rephrasing the existing sentence [00:43] Right, was just proposing further alterations. [00:43] Is done. [01:22] Is there a way to mark all Committed bugs as Released? [01:31] kalikiana: There's no way to do it directly in Launchpad, but you can do it easily through the API, and there are several existing launchpadlib scripts that do that. [01:34] lp:~mgiuca/+junk/launchpad-tools is one I've used. [01:34] But there are many around that are slightly different. Some close all Fix Committed bugs in a milestone, others all in a project, some add comments, some don't... [01:39] wgrant: that looks perfectly like what I need, thanks a lot. I have only used the UI so far [02:00] who here was working on bind 9.8.0rc1? [02:20] wgrant: I can't seem to use the script, it eats all my memory + swap and I need to kill it before it does anything :-( [02:20] Would you have any idea why that happens? [02:22] kalikiana: What's the traceback if you kill it while it is eating? [02:24] it seems to be in File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/launchpadlib/credentials.py", line 242, in __call__ [02:24] webbrowser.open(self.authorization_url) [02:24] it doesn't really make sense that opening a browser would need much memory [02:26] One would think not... [02:26] wgrant: would you happen to know what url I need to open? [02:27] It varies, because it contains the token URL. [02:27] hmm [02:27] What happens if you strace it? [02:28] oh, very good idea, it seems to choke on xdg-open [02:28] I've never seen that before. Does xdg-open work if you invoke it manually? [02:34] looks like it loops. and changing $BROWSER to not be xdg-open fixes it. which is odd because I didn't touch that variables in months [02:35] but not an lp issue in any case then [02:40] wgrant: works now, thanks again === ferrousw1eel is now known as ferroushweel === ferroushweel is now known as ferrouswheel [08:11] uh, I just had a bugzilla.gnome status just go to unknown [08:29] bug ? [08:30] bug 657227 [08:30] Launchpad bug 657227 in gnome-shell (Ubuntu) "gnome-shell doesn't respect user font settings" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/657227 [08:34] its marked resolved duplicate in the bug watch portlet [08:36] and the duplication was just now [08:36] lifeless: ok, but still, should it go to unknown [08:37] should I set the new upstream or do you need this for testing? [08:37] micahg: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636868 [08:37] unconfirmed [08:37] ok, but unconfirmed = New [08:37] micahg: I don't know quite what the expected behaviour is here [08:37] I would file a question about this and leave it be [08:37] we should be able to do better [08:37] question as opposed to bug [08:38] yes [08:38] bugs are for defects [08:38] questions are for, well, questions [08:38] 'whats meant to happen' is not a bug :) [08:40] https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/146088 [10:41] is there a way someone here could kill https://launchpad.net/~vorlon/+archive/multiarch/+buildjob/2274512 for me? [10:42] it wasn't meant to try to build in that ppa, it was supposed to get binaries copied from a different ppa but I was too hasty and tried to copy before the binaries were fully published [10:44] slangasek: Hm, it shouldn't have let you copy if there were unpublished builds... [10:44] oops ;) [10:46] Unfortunately we can't sensibly kill a building build without poking the builder directly. [10:46] And even if I was to do that, it's possible the aborted build would block you from copying the i386 binaries in later. [10:48] wgrant: well, I'm already routing around the need to copy by playing towers of hanoi with another ppa, but y'all might want that builder back sooner than 9 hours from now [10:49] Heh. Let me try to kill it... [10:50] Ah, actually, I can't. [10:50] I can do it for recipe builds, but not binary builds yet. [10:50] ok :/ [16:21] Hello! [16:21] Is it possible to rename a project, or do I ask for it to be removed and create a new one? [16:21] Removal might actually be better: it's a replacement of a dead project. [16:49] lvh: file a question on answers.launchpad.net/launchpad === marienz_ is now known as marienz [16:58] lvh: Renaming is possible, if it makes sense to do so [17:03] How do I remove tags from a Bazaar branch on Launchpad? [17:05] JoshBrown: 'bzr tag --delete -d lp:.... tagname' [17:06] However... any merging of pushing from another branch which still has the tag will re-add it [17:06] s/of/or/ [17:08] maxb: Thanks, that's exactly what I'm looking for! [17:27] micahg: Thanks, I just did. === kalikiana1 is now known as kalikiana [17:48] When you create an original deb package on Launchpad, what should it be called? Am I correct in thinking it should be something along the lines of `name_1.0-0ubuntu1~ppa1_all.deb`? [17:50] JoshBrown: launchpad only accepts source uploads [17:51] micahg: Okay, but nonetheless, what should the package be designated as? Do I include ubuntu1, ~ppa1, etc? [17:54] JoshBrown: I usually do ~series~ppa1 where series is the release targeted, if this is the first upload of that version, you can use UPSTREAMVERSION-0ubuntu1~series~ppa1 [17:58] micahg: I was mainly wondering whether it was `0ubuntu1` or just `0`. Thanks, that answers my question! [17:59] JoshBrown: technically either would be fine since 0 is lower than 0ubuntu1 [18:56] JoshBrown: People exercise varying degrees of care about version numbers in PPAs, and there are several different schools of thought [18:57] For example, I think micahg's example is inverted, in the sense that series is usually the least significant part of your packaging efforts, so goes at the end. [18:57] maxb: the problem with that is you override official backports [18:58] Also, I'll explicitly avoid including 0ubuntu1 in versions unless I'm actually deriving a PPA package from an official ubuntu package version including that === Lcawte|Away is now known as Lcawte [18:59] hmm. I cynically care little about that on the basis that official backports seldom seem to actually happen :-/ [19:00] maxb: So you'd package as `name_1.0-0~ppa1~maverick`, for example? [19:01] I usually go with ~maverick1, and increment that number if I need to make a series-specific build fix [19:02] maxb: Great, thanks! [19:02] Also, I tend to call things 0ppa1 rather than 0~ppa1 [19:03] Mainly because I believe in using the magical ~ operator only when relevant, rather than as an arbitrary separator [19:04] Though I admit that I'm relying on the happenstance that 'ppa' < 'ubuntu' in doing so [19:09] maxb: actually, now with the extras repo, that isn't necessarily a good idea as it's 0series1 for the versioninig === menesis1 is now known as menesis