[00:47] <cjohnston> I'm getting "bzr: ERROR: At lp:ubuntu-community-webthemes/light-wordpress-theme you have a valid .bzr control directory, but not a branch or repository. This is an unsupported configuration. Please move the target directory out of the way and try again.
[00:47] <cjohnston> " when I try to push a branch..
[00:48] <cjohnston> I don't see anything on LP.. how can I fix this?
[00:49] <lifeless> cjohnston: did you make the branch by hand ?
[00:50] <lifeless> cjohnston: bah, I mean 'in the web UI'
[00:50] <cjohnston> yes
[00:50] <cjohnston> The other three I did have worked
[00:50] <lifeless> try adding --use-existing-dir to your command
[00:51] <lifeless> generally speaking, don't create branches in the web UI
[00:51] <cjohnston> I'm using that
[00:51] <cjohnston> oh.. I didnt know there was another way
[00:51] <lifeless> cjohnston: easiest thing to do is to delete the branch
[00:51] <lifeless> cjohnston: and then just push
[00:51] <StevenK> bzr push is magical
[00:52] <cjohnston> so I have to push it to the team branch and then create the series?
[00:53] <lifeless> cjohnston: yes
[00:53] <lifeless> cjohnston: or create the series, push to the team branch, then link the two.
[00:53] <lifeless> we should make this a little nicer
[00:53] <cjohnston> +1
[00:54] <lifeless> the push to create bit works great
[00:54] <lifeless> but you can't push to create a series branch yet
[00:54] <lifeless> we're kindof-there, but not entirely.
[00:54] <cjohnston> this one I got: bzr: ERROR: Permission denied: "+branch/ubuntu-community-webthemes/light-django-theme/"
[00:55] <lifeless> right
[00:55] <lifeless> push to
[00:55] <lifeless> lp:~teamname/ubuntu-community-webthemes/light-django-theme
[00:55] <lifeless> *thats* the team branch url
[01:03] <cjohnston> fixed.. thanks lifeless
[01:14] <lifeless> cjohnston: de nada
[01:59] <ovnicraft> hello there is any sprint for starred/ following/watch projects for users
[01:59] <ovnicraft> we need know more about project in lp
[02:13] <wgrant> ovnicraft: We don't have any immediate plans for adding that sort of functionality. Do you have any particular ideas for using that?
[02:13] <ovnicraft> so i am looking several projects
[02:13] <ovnicraft> rss helps
[02:14] <ovnicraft> but we need in our profile a list with projects marked by user as important
[02:14] <ovnicraft> i dont know what concept wants to implement lp
[02:15] <ovnicraft> as you know bitbutcket has follow, github has watch google code has starred
[02:15] <wgrant> And events from those projects show up on your personal pages?
[02:16] <ovnicraft> commits
[02:16] <wgrant> Right.
[02:17] <wgrant> We have some plans for that sort of thing. Could you file a bug?
[02:19] <ovnicraft> off course :)
[02:20] <wgrant> Thanks.
[02:31] <ovnicraft> i found this http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/developers/colocated-branches.html
[02:32] <ovnicraft> this will supported in LP?
[02:34] <wgrant> ovnicraft: That's not clear at the moment.
[02:34] <wgrant> We may, but it's not clear that there's any benefit in doing that server-side.
[02:34] <wgrant> Since there are no working trees, and repositories are handled by stacking.
[02:35] <ovnicraft> stacking means it will works maybe w/o changes in server side?
[02:36] <wgrant> http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/latest/en/user-guide/stacked.html
[02:39] <ovnicraft> ok so will see what happen with this i work in a big project hosted in lp and modules repository start to be too big
[02:39] <ovnicraft> thanks for all
[02:39] <wgrant> ovnicraft: Branch stacking handles that well.
[02:39] <wgrant> ovnicraft: When you push up a new branch, you only have to push the data that is not in trunk.
[02:39] <ovnicraft> yes we working in that way
[02:39] <wgrant> You don't need server-side colocated branches for that.
[02:40] <wgrant> (not in bzr, at least. hg and git do)
[02:40] <ovnicraft> but when i need clone our modules need clone all modules and i need just work in one
[02:41] <wgrant> Is that a big problem? Don't you already have the whole lot cloned locally?
[02:44] <ovnicraft> yes i have many branches
[02:44] <lifeless> ovnicraft: wgrant: we will support it in lp eventually; its not on our immediate roadmap though: our first priority is making things faster
[02:44] <ovnicraft> when i need fix something need clone it then propose to merge
[02:45] <ovnicraft> i dont want to get all repo just what i will fix
[02:45] <ovnicraft> lifeless, it sounds good IMHO 2.3 is faster in 2.1 i was gonna die
[02:51] <ovnicraft> maybe its OT wgrant but write a bzr plugin can help me
[02:51] <ovnicraft> if you are in #bzr can tell my idea (and have time )
[02:52] <wgrant> I'm in #bzr.
[05:06] <EvilPhoenix> is there a testing environment so that a potentially new project creator can create their project and get used to launchpad in a testing environment (rather than the full non-testing launchpad.net environment)?
[05:06] <wgrant> EvilPhoenix: Try qastaging.launchpad.net.
[05:07] <wgrant> It runs on a copy of the production database that's erased every couple of weeks.
[05:07] <wgrant> It also doesn't send email, so you can do just about whatever you want there without spamming people.
[05:08] <EvilPhoenix> ah, so basically the project creator can stage their code there in a testing environment, get used to the launchpad way of things, and then if they dont want to use launchpad, the db in that area (which contains the project that was created) gets purged and no record(s) exist?
[05:08] <EvilPhoenix> forgive me for being slightly non-concise or understandable, dealing with lawyers from 5AM until 11PM can be a pita, and messes you up a tad
[05:09] <EvilPhoenix> :P
[05:11] <maxb> qastaging's DB is occasionally replaced with a fresh copy from the production instance
[05:15] <EvilPhoenix> so any testing stuff I do in the qastaging area will eventually be purged in an overwrite from the production database?   (whenever said purge occurs)
[05:19] <wgrant> EvilPhoenix: Yes.
[05:27] <EvilPhoenix> that answers my questions.  thanks :)
[08:37] <dpm> hi lifeless, good morning. I sent an e-mail re: AppDeveloperWeek to the bazaar mailing list yesterday. May I ask you to approve it in the moderation queue? Thanks!
[08:39] <lifeless> dpm: hmmm, I don't know if I still have the password
[08:40] <dpm> lifeless, ok, no worries. Do you know which admin from the list at https://lists.canonical.com/mailman/listinfo/bazaar I should better ping?
[08:40] <lifeless> found it
[08:40] <dpm> even better :)
[08:48] <dpm> ok, thanks lifeless
[08:48] <lifeless> de nada
[08:48] <dpm> ;)
[08:53] <mok0> hm
[09:29] <arvind_khadri> Hi, when will the site be up again?
[09:30] <soren> Apart from retrying "bzr push" every 15 seconds, how can I be notified that Launchpad is back up?
[09:31] <wgrant> soren: identi.ca/launchpadstatus
[09:31] <wgrant> We're just waiting for some hardware maintenance to finish.
[09:31] <StevenK> The topic should have been changed, here, too ...
[09:32] <arvind_khadri> wgrant, 48 hours ??
[09:32] <soren> wgrant: Oh, that's being used now? I've looked there the last three times I've had LP problems and there was no info.
[09:32] <wgrant> arvind_khadri: Hm? Should be back up well within half an hour.
[09:32] <lifeless> arvind_khadri: a few minutes to go
[09:32] <evilvish> can we use bzr?
[09:33] <arvind_khadri> Oh ok :) thanks
[09:33] <wgrant> soren: Occasionally people forget to update it, but we're better now.
[09:33] <soren> wgrant: Coolness.
[09:33] <wgrant> evilvish: Launchpad is down for maintenance. It should be back in a few minutes.
[09:33] <wgrant> soren: you can see there's been a fair bit of activity on it lately.
[09:33] <soren> evilvish: Can' push to launchpad, but bzr on its own works fine, of course.
[09:33] <evilvish> cool, i'll wait then :D
[09:34] <soren> wgrant: Ah, yes. Excellent.
[09:35] <arvind_khadri> Its up :)
[09:35] <soren> Not entirely. bzr push still doesn't work.
[09:36] <arvind_khadri> I just want a pull :P :D
[09:36] <lifeless> we're bringing it up now
[09:36] <soren> \o/
[09:36] <lifeless> there are 60 or so services to come up
[09:36] <lifeless> so its not instantaneous
[09:36] <soren> Wow. 60? *boggle*
[09:36] <lifeless> soren: about to increase somewhat in a few weeks
[09:37] <soren> lifeless: orly? Anything particularly interesting?
[09:37] <lifeless> soren: tweakin the load balancer <-> zope instance layer
[09:38] <soren> So...  no? :)
[09:38] <wgrant> lifeless has this crazy idea that Launchpad is slow or something.
[09:38] <wgrant> And an evil plan to fix it.
[09:38] <soren> pft
[09:38] <lifeless> soren: + 2 of our oldest machines are being swapped out for newer hardware with more memory and cpus - and so more instances will be running on them
[09:40] <soren> Yay, codehosting.
[09:42] <lifeless> soren: anyhow numbers - 2xapache-ssl, squid, haproxy, codebrowse, poppy, librarian, then 28 zope appserver instances, 3 postgresql, the code import worker daemons, backend workers for email, merge proposals, branch scanning
[09:42] <wgrant> And lots of cron jobs.
[09:43] <soren> What's poppy?
[09:43] <soren> publisher, perhaps?
[09:43] <soren> Or would that be too obvious?
[09:43] <soren> :)
[09:43] <StevenK> soren: Poppy is the upload daemon
[09:43] <StevenK> The publisher is the well, the publisher
[09:43] <soren> Oh, so close.
[09:44] <arvind_khadri> soren, can I /msg you?
[09:44] <soren> You can try.
[09:44] <lifeless> oh, I forgot the build master
[09:44] <arvind_khadri> soren, needed help with bzr :)
[09:45] <soren> Why not just ask (here or in #bzr)?
[09:46] <arvind_khadri> hmmm, bzr branch lp:ubuntu-bots is not working.  Says wrong branch format.
[09:48] <arvind_khadri> What am I doing wrong ?
[09:49] <arvind_khadri> soren, ^
[09:49] <wgrant> arvind_khadri: Which version of bzr are you using?
[09:50] <arvind_khadri> 1.5
[09:50] <arvind_khadri> wgrant, ^
[09:51] <lifeless> you will need a 2.something version
[09:51] <lifeless> 2.3 would be best
[09:51] <wgrant> arvind_khadri: Wow, that's really really old.
[09:51] <arvind_khadri> :) My OS had only that
[09:51] <jfi> Uploading to ppa still fail (connection refused), I guess the server is still not available? Or that's on my side?
[09:52] <wgrant> jfi: Known issue, just working on that.
[09:53] <arvind_khadri> wgrant, so how I can't branch at all using that ?
[09:53] <arvind_khadri> I mean can't I branch at all.
[09:53] <wgrant> arvind_khadri: Most branches are in a format which was introduced in 1.16
[09:53] <jfi> wgrant, ok thx for confirmation:)
[09:53] <arvind_khadri> ohhh ok
[09:53] <wgrant> So no, 1.5 isn't going to be useful for most stuff.
[09:54] <soren> arvind_khadri: Are you on Lenny, by any chance?
[09:54] <arvind_khadri> soren, yes :(
[09:54] <soren> arvind_khadri: backports/lenny has 2.0.3-1~bpo50+1.
[09:54] <arvind_khadri> soren, awesome, was searching for that now
[09:58] <wgrant> jfi: PPA uploads should be back now.
[09:58] <jfi> wgrant, hummmm.... got a strange error
[09:59] <jfi> Uploading to ppa (via ftp to ppa.launchpad.net):
[09:59] <jfi>   Uploading liferea-unity-count_0.1.2-0ubuntu1.dsc: done.
[09:59] <jfi>   Uploading liferea-unity-count_0.1.2.orig.tar.gz: done.
[09:59] <jfi>   Uploading liferea-unity-count_0.1.2-0ubuntu1.debian.tar.gz: done.
[09:59] <jfi>   Uploading liferea-unity-count_0.1.2-0ubuntu1_source.changes: 1k/2k426 Transfer aborted.  Data connection closed.
[09:59] <wgrant> bigjools: ^^
[09:59] <bigjools> le sigh
[09:59] <jfi> wgrant, it uploads the first 3, but not the last :/
[10:00] <bigjools> is your changes file signed properly>?
[10:00] <jfi> bigjools, yes
[10:00] <bigjools> then we have a problem
[10:00] <jfi> Checking signature on .changes
[10:00] <jfi> gpg: Signature made Thu 10 Mar 2011 10:34:10 AM CET using RSA key ID 82A3F5F6
[10:00] <jfi> gpg: Good signature from "Jean-Philippe Orsini <jeanfi@gmail.com>"
[10:00] <jfi> gpg:                 aka "jeanfi <jeanfi@gmail.com>"
[10:00] <jfi> Good signature on ./liferea-unity-count_0.1.2-0ubuntu1_source.changes.
[10:03] <bigjools> ok, we'll get this fixed shortly
[10:03] <jfi> bigjools, do you want the debug log? There is  a traceback if it helps you
[10:04] <wgrant> jfi: We've identified the issue.
[10:04] <bigjools> jfi: no, we know what the problem is, thanks
[10:04] <wgrant> Fix in progress.
[10:04] <jfi> wgrant, ok
[10:04] <wgrant> jfi: Could you try again?
[10:05] <jfi>   Uploading liferea-unity-count_0.1.2-0ubuntu1_source.changes: done.
[10:05] <jfi> Successfully uploaded packages.
[10:05] <jfi> nice!
[10:05] <jfi> thanks!
[10:05] <soren> Is everything supposed to be back? (Read: is it worth mentioning that e.g. http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~zulcss/nova/nova-lxc/revision/758 throws an HTTP 500?)
[10:05] <lifeless> being looked at
[10:06] <soren> Cool.
[10:06] <soren> Thanks!
[10:06] <wgrant> jfi: Thanks for checking.
[10:07] <wgrant> jfi: And letting us know that it was broken.
[10:07] <wgrant> jfi: We just deployed some new checks that weren't quite set up properly.
[10:07] <bigjools> it's checking that the changes file is signed now
[10:07] <bigjools> I'll be blogging about it later
[14:22] <james_w> did anyone else see bzr giving "not a branch" messages during the rollout?
[14:22] <james_w> (for things that are branches)
[14:22] <james_w> (and on LP)
[14:37] <janimo> I got this error from dput: "426 Transfer aborted.  Data connection closed." but the uplaod succeeded
[14:38] <janimo> I wonder if it has anyting to do with recent FTP server side work which I read about n the blog
[14:48] <janimo> gpg: WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!
[14:48] <janimo> gpg:          There is no indication that the signature belongs to the owner.
[14:48] <janimo> I get this as warnings from GPG so maybe this influences the LP side check?
[14:52] <bigjools> janimo: it's possible there are some bugs in the new FTP server
[14:53] <bigjools> if you get gpg warnings that will almost certainly be the cause of the error
[14:54] <janimo> bigjools, ok. Although the upload succeeds in spite of the error, which is an error in itself
[14:54] <bigjools> janimo: not necessarily
[14:55] <bigjools> it could be transient - the final gpg check is done later
[14:59] <jhunt_> hi all - are there any known issues with ppa uploads right now?
[14:59] <bigjools> jhunt_: it would help if you could state what problem you are having
[15:00] <jhunt_> so, more than one eh?
[15:00] <jhunt_> the error I'm getting is "Data connection closed" on dput
[15:00] <bigjools> there are no known problems
[15:00] <jhunt_> consistently.
[15:01] <bigjools> can you pastebin your complete dput output
[15:01] <janimo> bigjools, PPA are handled differently? unaffected by FTP server change?
[15:01] <bigjools> there is a new ftp server today that verifies gpg signatures at upload time
[15:01] <jhunt_> the first 3 files upload ok, but the .changes file gives the error above. It's only 1.6k
[15:01] <bigjools> if the changes file is not signed properly, an error is returned
[15:02] <jhunt_> The file is signed
[15:02] <bigjools> signed properly means with a signature that Launchpad knows about
[15:02] <bigjools> and is not deactivated etc
[15:02] <jhunt_> gpg --verify gives "good signature"
[15:02] <bigjools> ok
[15:02] <janimo> bigjools, LP knows about this
[15:02] <janimo> the warnigns are about not being in the web of trust
[15:03] <janimo> I use the same GPG key  for 6 years
[15:03] <bigjools> ok
[15:03] <jhunt_> I've uploaded to this ppa before using the same key, etc.
[15:03] <bigjools> how long ago did you upload?
[15:03] <jhunt_> 3 days ago.
[15:04] <jhunt_> worked fine, just now failed.
[15:04] <bigjools> how long ago did you upload your most recent
[15:04] <jhunt_> 5 mins maybe?
[15:04] <jhunt_> do you want me to try again?
[15:04] <bigjools> let me know if you don't get an acceptance email in 10 minutes
[15:05] <jhunt_> ah! just got a mail saying my .changes was rejected.
[15:06] <bigjools> what was the error?
[15:06] <bigjools> janimo: yours was accepted, right?
[15:07] <janimo> yes, just the error was confusing
[15:07] <janimo> so I uploaded thrice
[15:07] <jhunt_> "File upstart_0.9.1.orig.tar.gz already exists in Upstart test packages", however, even re-running the dput with --force doesn't resolve the "Data connection closed" error, so I don't think that's the main problem?
[15:07] <bigjools> jhunt_: yes, the rejection is unrelated
[15:07] <bigjools> I suspect it's the same issue that janimo just reported
[15:08] <jhunt_> right.
[15:08] <bigjools> janimo: would you mind filing a bug please?
[15:08] <janimo> against LP?
[15:08] <bigjools> yes
[15:08] <janimo> ok
[15:08] <bigjools> thank you
[15:08] <jhunt_> if it lets you... sorry! :)
[15:08] <bigjools> jhunt_: http://blog.launchpad.net/cool-new-stuff/launchpad-package-upload-improvements
[15:09] <bigjools> this is a teething problem :)
[15:09] <jhunt_> bigjools: that's not the error I get though.
[15:09] <bigjools> jhunt_: exactly :)
[15:10] <bigjools> some errors we can ignore, but it needs to be fixed in the server
[15:10] <bigjools> right now it's warning about any kind of GPG issue
[15:10] <bigjools> janimo: it would also be super useful if you could attach your .changes file that caused the error to the bug
[15:11] <janimo> bigjools, https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/732638
[15:12] <bigjools> janimo: thank you
[15:13] <janimo> bigjools, yw
[15:13] <bigjools> janimo: can you attach your changes file?  Or did you just do that?
[15:15] <janimo> bigjools, I'll attach it
[15:16] <janimo> bigjools, attached. I thought dput output contains enough info but it does not.
[15:17] <dpm> hey, I like the loggerhead facelift, looks a lot more like LP
[15:31] <bigjools> janimo: can you try self-certifying your GPG key?
[15:34] <janimo> bigjools, uhh if you point me to a short description of how to do it or I casn figure it out later today
[15:34] <janimo> if it does not break my key, sure why not
[15:35] <bigjools> use a key tool (I use kgpg) and self-sign it  (I meant sign not certify earlier)
[15:36] <bigjools> I think that is what dput is complaining about
[15:41] <janimo> bigjools, ok I need to read some gpg manpage and see how to reproduce the warning in the first place without dput
[15:44] <maxb> Erm, isn't the self-signature on a gpg key necessarily existent as part of making it be a key? so should be already there?
[15:48] <maxb> bigjools, janimo: Are we talking about the "WARNING: This key is not certified with a trusted signature!" thing here?
[15:49] <janimo> maxb, yes
[15:49] <maxb> There's nothing you can do the the uploader's key to avoid that.
[15:49] <janimo> and the other line beside it
[15:49] <maxb> Poppy needs to stop trying to do web-of-trust checks, because they are irrelevant here
[15:52] <jhunt_> bigjools: still no auth mails received from launchpad...?
[15:53] <bigjools> maxb: yeah, I aim to get rid of those checks in poppy
[15:53] <bigjools> funny thing is, the checks are identical to the upload processor
[15:53] <bigjools> jhunt_: auth mails?
[15:54] <maxb> bigjools: Different ~/.gnupg/gpg.conf between the two components in production?
[15:54] <jhunt_> bigjools: sorry, I meant acceptance email
[15:54] <bigjools> jhunt_: if there's no acceptance mail it means there's a definite GPG problem
[15:55] <bigjools> or, the changes file is malformed
[15:55] <jhunt_> any clues on how I debug this? "dput -d" gives a backtrace.
[15:55] <bigjools> which user/ppa?  I'll check the log
[15:55] <bigjools> and what time exactly did you upload?
[15:56] <bigjools> maxb: no idea, but thanks for the hint
[15:56] <bigjools> maxb: oh actually it's the same box anyway, so no
[15:56] <jhunt_> bigjools: user is lp:~jamesodhunt, ppa is upstart-testing
[15:56] <maxb> bigjools: but is it the same user account
[15:57] <bigjools> ah, no :)
[15:57] <jhunt_> bigjools: last dput was at "Thu, 10 Mar 2011 14:23:28 +0000
[15:57] <jhunt_> " according to the rejection mail.
[16:01] <bigjools> jhunt_: you got a rejection at 15:50
[16:01] <bigjools> upstart_0.9.1.orig.tar.gz uploaded with different contents
[16:02] <bigjools> that will have emailed you
[16:03]  * bigjools stops doing jcsackett's job :)
[16:03] <jcsackett> bigjools: you were doing a better job of it. :-)
[16:04] <bigjools> jcsackett: I am happy to coach you, this is the #1 ppa-related question :)
[16:04] <jhunt_> bigjools: yes, I got that msg too, but as I say, I did a "dput -f" ??
[16:05] <bigjools> jhunt_: that is not going to help you
[16:05] <jhunt_> bigjools: do I have to delete all the existing packages to allow a re-upload maybe?
[16:05] <jcsackett> bigjools: which one? you seem to have been juggling three questions there.
[16:05] <bigjools> no
[16:05] <bigjools> jhunt_: you can never upload the same file version with different contents
[16:05] <bigjools> don't kid yourself it's the same file
[16:06] <bigjools> jhunt_: there's 2, the duplicate file rejection, and the upload with no email reply problem
[16:06] <bigjools> sorry
[16:06] <bigjools> I meant jcsackett ^
[16:06] <jcsackett> bigjools: dig.
[16:06] <bigjools> jcsackett: https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/soyuz/+faq/990 and https://answers.edge.launchpad.net/soyuz/+faq/227
[16:08] <jcsackett> and now those are part of IRCSupport wiki page.
[16:09] <bigjools> suhweet
[16:17] <bigjools> jhunt_: can you tell me if you get that ftp error again, we changed something on the server
[16:36] <fta> all my ppa uploads are rejected since yesterday: http://paste.ubuntu.com/578422/
[16:36] <bigjools> fta: since this morning actually
[16:36] <bigjools> have you tried in the last 20 minutes?
[16:37] <bigjools> the upload is getting through fine, the error is wrong
[16:37] <fta> well, 4am failed, 5pm failed. last reject at 5:32, it's 5:37 here
[16:38] <bigjools> the new ftp server was installed at 10:00 utc, whatever error you got beforehand was not this one
[16:40] <Sarvatt> bigjools: mvo got a failure that actually succeeded 4 minutes ago
[16:40] <fta> here is the last one: http://paste.ubuntu.com/578425/
[16:41] <bigjools> fta: ok, let me know if you don't get a successful upload, as I said the error is wrong
[16:41] <bigjools> this is bug 732638
[16:41] <fta> oh, just got an Accepted, but only the 1st one
[16:42] <fta> the other 4 in the same dput haven't been pushed
[16:42] <fta> ..because dput failed
[16:42] <bigjools> maxb: harmonising the gpg.conf didn't help :(
[16:43] <maxb> HMM
[16:43] <maxb> * hmm
[16:43] <bigjools> the uppercase had more impact
[16:43] <maxb> How close is whatever launchpad does to invoking gpg in the shell?
[16:46] <bigjools> not entirely sure
[16:46] <bigjools> it uses gpgme
[16:48] <bigjools> jcsackett: can you help with this bug?  I need ideas on what's up
[16:48] <fta> ok, dput always fail, by 5, or one by one. nada. it uploads and fails before creating the .uploaded file
[16:49] <jcsackett> bug 732638?
[16:49] <fta> i give up, no time for this today.
[16:49] <fta> bye
[16:49] <bigjools> fta: use sftp for now
[16:50] <bigjools> jcsackett: yep
[16:50] <jcsackett> bigjools: i *think* sinzui found some issues with our keyserver two weeks ago; this could be similar?
[16:50] <jcsackett> i believe that too was triggered by a server change...
[16:50] <maxb> bigjools: Can you point me where in the tree the validation is invoked?
[16:51] <bigjools> maxb: yep, one sec
[16:51] <bigjools> maxb: oh actually look in that bug, I pasted the location
[16:51] <bigjools> in my comment
[16:52] <bigjools> maxb, jcsackett: the exact same validation done in the FTP server is done in the upload processor.
[16:52] <bigjools> the latter seems to work fine
[16:52] <jcsackett> hm.
[16:52] <bigjools> let's move to -dev
[19:24] <achiang> hello, if a bug has been marked as affecting a project, but then i decide it actually doesn't affect the project, is there a way to remove the project from the bug?
[19:25] <achiang> currently, i'm just marking it as invalid for the project
[19:25] <micahg> achiang: change the project to the null project
[19:26] <achiang> micahg: you mean literally?
[19:26] <achiang> micahg: i typed in "null" and now it's part of the NULL project
[19:26] <micahg> achiang: yes, change project to null
[19:26] <achiang> micahg: seems inelegant, but ok, thanks
[19:27] <micahg> achiang: yep, the LP team has plans to make it more elegant
[19:27] <achiang> nod
[19:27] <achiang> ok, thanks
[19:47] <tkamppeter> Any progress on bug 732638? Any workaround?
[19:50] <jcsackett> tkamppeter: bigjools earlier narrowed down the possible issues. i believe work on it is still ongoing.
[20:05] <tkamppeter> jcsackett, the uploads worked anyway, so the first of my three uploads of the same package got accepted already and the other two rejected. My package is in place, but the bug needs to get fixed to avoid unneeded upload traffic.
[20:05] <jcsackett> tkamppeter: we know, and it's being worked on.
[20:09] <tkamppeter> jcsackett, thanks anyway.
[20:15] <blueyed> What is this about? "426 Transfer aborted" on PPA upload? http://paste.ubuntu.com/578499/
[20:15] <blueyed> I've tried it multiple times, also without "-sa"
[20:16] <jcsackett> blueyed: see bug 732638.
[20:16] <jcsackett> we're currently working on it.
[20:17] <jcsackett> however, it appears despite the warning, and the last message, the upload *does* successfully complete.
[20:17] <blueyed> ok. thanks. did not happen with another upload (different dist and version only) though.
[20:17] <jcsackett> blueyed: what dist/version? more information could be relevant. :-)
[20:18] <blueyed> jcsackett: I've uploaded for natty, which worked fine, then for lucid, with "~lucid" appended to the natty version.
[20:18] <jcsackett> blueyed: you did both of these recently?
[20:18] <blueyed> yes.
[20:18] <blueyed> just now.
[20:19] <blueyed> exuberant-ctags in https://launchpad.net/~blueyed/+archive/ppa
[20:19] <jcsackett> blueyed: okay. thanks.
[20:20] <blueyed> jcsackett: to make it clear: the first upload for natty had no error, the one for lucid had.
[20:20] <jcsackett> blueyed: that's what i thought. thanks.
[20:38] <blueyed> jcsackett: I have uploaded a second revision of the package now, first for lucid then for natty. Both failed with the 426 error.
[20:38] <blueyed> *"failed"
[20:38] <jcsackett> blueyed: you mean they did go through, despite the "failure" message?
[20:39] <blueyed> jcsackett: that's mentioned in the bug already.. I have not checked for this upload, but the previous lucid upload went through.
[20:39] <jcsackett> blueyed: dig.
[20:51] <kenvandine> any known problems uploading packages to ppas?
[20:51] <kenvandine> 2k/3k426 Transfer aborted.  Data connection closed.
[20:51] <kenvandine> is what i am getting
[20:51] <jcsackett> kenvandine: see bug 732638
[20:52] <kenvandine> ok
[20:52] <jcsackett> double check this, but the uploads appear to be working despite the "failure" message.
[20:52] <kenvandine> oh
[20:53] <kenvandine> yay, it did upload
[20:53] <kenvandine> whew
[20:53] <kenvandine> thx
[20:53] <jcsackett> yw. :-)
[21:10] <lifeless> we're giving an error on every upload?
[21:13] <lifeless> wgrant: jcsackett: ^
[21:13] <jcsackett> lifeless: i believe so. bigjools took a look at it, narrowed down causes, and i believe pulled in sinzui with the intent that sinzui and thumper would chat.
[21:13] <lifeless> sinzui: thumper: ^
[21:13] <kees> ah, so the uploads are landing?
[21:13] <thumper> I've not looked yet
[21:13] <sinzui> yes, that is exactly where we are. we need to talk
[21:14] <wgrant> Whaaa?
[21:14] <wgrant> Sigh.
[21:14]  * kees expects a bunch of angry soyuz emails now after retrying the same upload 4 times
[21:14] <thumper> sinzui: let me finish off what I'm doing and we can talk
[21:14] <jcsackett> kees: yes, uploads are going through, per the bug.
[21:14] <lifeless> we did qa this, right ?
[21:15] <kees> jcsackett: okay, thanks
[21:15] <jcsackett> lifeless: "this" == ftp server upgrade?
[21:15] <lifeless> yes
[21:15] <jcsackett> i believe so, but i do not know who was doing the upgrade and in relation to what.
[21:16] <sinzui> lifeless: The first I learned of this was in the TL meeting. bigjools did mention it as something to watch. He tested it but was uncertain of the integration
[21:16] <lifeless> sinzui: is there an incident report for this ?
[21:16] <sinzui> It was not mentioned in the email from bigjools
[21:17] <lifeless> ok
[21:17] <lifeless> so this is in-your-face worrying for [unknown fraction] of uploads
[21:17] <lifeless> we need an incident report
[21:18] <lifeless> if we can revert to the old server, we should do so now.
[21:18] <lifeless> after gathering diagnostic data
[21:19] <sinzui> lifeless: this is the bug bigjools was working on https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/732638
[21:20] <wgrant> We can revert, but let me do a few minutes of investigation first.
[21:20] <lifeless> sinzui: thanks, yes thats the one I'm tlaking abut
[21:20] <lifeless> -> -ops and lets rope a losa in
[21:20] <Chex> 8-o
[21:46] <cody-somerville> Wasn't there a 'reply' link on comments in MPs at one point?
[21:46] <cody-somerville> I can't seem to find it now.
[21:48] <james_w> cody-somerville, there was
[21:48]  * cody-somerville wonders why it isn't there anymore. :(
[21:48] <jcsackett> cody-somerville, james_w: it is still there, in an MP i'm looking at.
[21:49] <cody-somerville> Does it go away if the MP is marked as merged?
[21:49] <cody-somerville> (it would be silly if it did but its the only thing I can think of that might be different)
[21:50] <jcsackett> cody-somerville: it would appear so.
[22:06] <donpdonp> https://launchpad.net/desktopcouch => err screen
[22:07] <wgrant> donpdonp: What's the error message?
[22:07] <wgrant> Does it have an OOPS code?
[22:07] <donpdonp> wgrant: i imagine it will show you the same msg. no OOPS code
[22:08] <wgrant> donpdonp: No, it works fine for me.
[22:08] <wgrant> What's the error that you get?
[22:08] <wgrant> It still works when I'm not logged in, too.
[22:11] <donpdonp> wgrant: sorry laptop just crashed
[22:11] <donpdonp> wgrant: reloading page
[22:11] <donpdonp> wgrant: of course, its working now :)
[22:11] <donpdonp> wgrant: old message was error connecting to the server, please visit #launchpad
[22:12] <wgrant> donpdonp: Oh, that's not good.
[22:12] <wgrant> Thanks for letting us know.
[22:12] <wgrant> lifeless: ^^
[22:13] <donpdonp> ok thx.
[22:14] <lifeless> wgrant: interrupted request
[22:14] <lifeless> wgrant: there is an rt
[22:16] <wgrant> Oh, of course.
[22:16] <wgrant> Forgot that was going on, with the other stuff.
[23:32] <mpt> FWIW, I just tried (as a test) to register with Launchpad using a @yahoo.com address and using an @aim.com address, but haven't received the registration mail at either
[23:33] <mpt> It's a couple of hours later, so I doubt it's greylisting
[23:33] <wgrant> Sigh.
[23:34] <elmo> fwiw, yahoo is one of the providers that frequently blacklists us because of our unbelivably poor story around mail (bounce specifically) handling
[23:34] <wgrant> Someone will need to pester ISD about that.
[23:55] <lifeless> elmo: you were looking up that bug number for me
[23:56] <lifeless> elmo: is it bug 341927 ?
[23:56] <elmo> yes
[23:56] <lifeless> ok, its already critical so, within 6 months