[00:00] <wgrant> You fail at apostrophes.
[00:01] <lifeless> yes, yes I do.
[00:07] <sinzui> /topichttps://launchpad.net/ | Help contacts: wgrant | Mail notifications for bugs can see a delay of 4 hours | Launchpad is an open source project: https://dev.launchpad.net/ | This channel is logged: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/
[00:11] <poolie> is there a ui for changing branch privacy, if you have access to use private branches?
[00:13] <lifeless> yes
[00:13] <lifeless> you can unhide a private branch
[00:14] <lifeless> you can't hide a public branch
[00:15] <poolie> how do you create a private branch then?
[00:16] <lifeless> two ways
[00:17] <lifeless> either a privacy policy for a team you are in that says private-by-default [or always-private] or
[00:17] <lifeless> create an empty branch and ask a losa to privatise it
[00:17] <lifeless> these are both a bit awkward
[00:17] <lifeless> we may overhaul this during the upcoming disclosure and privacy work
[00:18] <fta> wgrant, hi, did you have a chance to look at the stats problem yesterday?
[00:18] <lifeless> one of the challenges is bzr not being deeply integrated here - if you have a context where you /might want/ privacy, it would be nice to say '--private' or add a fake path element or something to get it private and tell LP what privacy group to grant access to the branch
[00:19] <fta> wgrant, btw, i fixed my script. should work with both ff4 and ch now
[00:19] <poolie> that would be nice
[00:19] <lifeless> remember that we permit different groups to have private branches in the same namespace - and they can either have partitioned membership or overlapping - both are supported
[00:19] <poolie> if there was an api to control it, we could add a ui for it
[00:19] <wgrant> fta: Sorry, lots of other stuff came up :/
[00:19] <wgrant> fta: I'll try to get to it today.
[00:19] <lifeless> the experience of pushing to a branch that lp 'knows' about but doesn't exist is pretty poor at the moment
[00:20] <lifeless> so I think it would be nice to have a create-branch verb that knows how to talk about this
[00:20] <poolie> are losas involved because they do direct db access; or because they're a human sanity check; or ...?
[00:20] <lifeless> (as well as not requiring launchpadlib chatter during initial push)
[00:20] <lifeless> poolie: ... [I don't know]
[00:20] <Chex> lifeless: you are on RC mode, with DEVEL closed now.
[00:20] <fta> wgrant, ok, n-p. do you still see the long legend in my page?
[00:20] <lifeless> Chex: right, we want to be unrc'd
[00:22] <wgrant> fta: Ah, that's much better. Yesterday it showed *every* package in the one graph.
[00:24] <fta> wgrant, weird, i should have been like that for only a few minutes 2 days ago, maybe you had the old js in cache or something
[04:32] <marvin2> Hi, is the launchpad site down? I'm getting timeouts.
[04:35] <wgrant> marvin2: Which pages?
[04:35] <wgrant> It's working OK for me.
[04:37] <EvilPhoenix> works fine for me too
[05:20] <poolie> what's the deal atm for getting spam removed?
[05:20] <poolie> i saw some bug updates from jcs
[05:20] <poolie> ask a losa still?
[05:21] <wgrant> poolie: Bugs we (or you) can do.
[05:21] <poolie> do you mean, removing the whole bug?
[05:21] <wgrant> Questions still needs a LOSA, but the necessary DB changes are being rolled out tomorrow night.
[05:21] <wgrant> Bug comments.
[05:21] <poolie> ah, quite clearly it's an existing valid account that was compromised
[05:21] <spm> questions can't be done at all atm
[05:21] <wgrant> Which account?
[05:21] <poolie> wgrant, oh, how?
[05:22] <wgrant> poolie: There's no UI yet, but the API is there and accessible to ~registry.
[05:22] <wgrant> And will be for comments in a week or so too.
[05:22] <poolie> is there a cli to drive it?
[05:23] <poolie> https://launchpad.net/~starplant is the troublesome account
[05:23] <poolie> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr-windows-installers/+bug/341465 is an example
[05:23] <wgrant> There's no common script, no.
[05:23] <wgrant> I think I saw a question about that account...
[05:23] <wgrant> Oh.
[05:23] <poolie> >  will be for comments in a week or so too.
[05:24] <wgrant> No, I hid all his comments last week, I thought.
[05:24] <wgrant> Are there more?
[05:24] <poolie> so what is there an api for now?
[05:24] <poolie> there are
[05:24] <wgrant> poolie: Will be for *questions*, sorry.
[05:24] <poolie> he did make some valid comments a year ago
[05:24] <EvilPhoenix> what're the requirements to run an instance of the launchpad source?
[05:24] <wgrant> poolie: Hmm, no comments since the 1st AFAICT.
[05:24] <poolie> great peace of mind
[05:24] <poolie> EvilPhoenix, also, see dev.launchpad.net/Running
[05:24] <poolie> nup, but several that day
[05:25] <wgrant> poolie: Are any of them still there?
[05:25] <poolie> yes, there's one on the page i just sent you
[05:25] <wgrant> I disposed of 12 of them last week, and I see no more now.
[05:25] <poolie> unless you removed it just now
[05:25] <wgrant> Hmmm.
[05:25] <poolie> also bug 235668
[05:25] <wgrant> Oh.
[05:25] <wgrant> It would help if I looked for *all* his commented bugs, not just the open ones.
[05:26] <poolie> heh
[05:26] <wgrant> Fixing, thanks.
[05:26] <poolie> haha
[05:26] <poolie> i'd actually rather learn how to fish in this case
[05:26] <poolie> how are you fixing them?
[05:26] <EvilPhoenix> poolie:  thanks
[05:27] <wgrant> Well, it could be far more automated, but I just have a script a couple of lines long that takes a bug and comment number, shows it, asks for confirmation, and calls bug.setCommentVisibility(comment_number=n, visible=False)
[05:28] <poolie> ok
[05:28] <poolie> i know i could rewrite that script but how about if you put it into say the lp tree?
[05:28] <poolie> or a new lp-admin-clients project or something
[05:30] <poolie> i'll suspend the account i guess
[05:30] <poolie> or deactivate it?
[05:30] <lifeless> sinzui was going to get this in the web UI
[05:31] <poolie> that would be nice
[05:31] <wgrant> poolie: No need.
[05:31] <wgrant> It was a one-off email spam incident.
[05:32] <wgrant> Ah, already done I see.
[05:32] <wgrant> At least we can unsuspend them now.
[05:32] <wgrant> I'll set it back to deactivated.
[05:32] <wgrant> Since we can't reactivate it like this.
[05:32] <wgrant> But this will let the user log in.
[05:33] <poolie> oh i see
[05:34] <poolie> how do you know it was email spam?
[05:35] <wgrant> Well, I don't know for sure, but it was a single incident all at the one time, and hasn't happened again.
[05:35] <wgrant> I don't think suspending for that is useful.
[05:40] <poolie> i guess if it was ongoing it would continue until the account was suspended
[05:40] <wgrant> Right.
[05:40] <wgrant> If it's ongoing then we should suspend.
[05:42] <wgrant> poolie: Anyway, that's all of them gone, for real this time.
[07:57] <poolie> how can the 'tags' portlet show a tag and then find no bugs?
[07:58] <spiv> poolie: maybe it's an official tag?
[08:17] <lifeless> poolie: it shows tags from all bugs ever
[08:17] <lifeless> poolie: which is why its so busy and useless
[08:26] <poolie> i see
[08:26] <poolie> if i scratched an itch by making it show in huw's simpler layout just the official tags do you think that would be accepted?
[08:26] <poolie> (this is a bit hypothetical as my queue is already in train)
[08:27] <poolie> i mean full
[08:30] <lifeless> personally
[08:31] <lifeless> I value the emergent nature of tag clouds
[08:31] <lifeless> I would not like to see officil tags onlyt
[08:43] <poolie> how about showing, in a decent layout, all the in-use tags then?
[08:43] <poolie> i guess, those in use on open bugs
[08:44] <poolie> perhaps truncated to say 50
[08:53] <lifeless> poolie: if I had time to hack on it, the first thing I'd do is measure how long it takes to determine 'in use tags' on e.g. Ubuntu
[08:53] <lifeless> poolie: and use that to guide further decisions about what to do
[08:55] <poolie> good idea
[09:01] <mok0> ls
[09:01] <lifeless> . ..
[09:09] <mrevell> Morning
[09:29] <mok0> mrevell: Good morning, and in case I don't see ya, good afternoon, good evening, and good night!
[09:29] <mrevell> heh :) Thanks mok0
[09:29] <mok0> (cf. Truman :-)
[09:29] <mrevell> Superb film.
[09:36] <mok0> mrevell: indeed :-)
[10:34] <EisNerd> moin
[10:35] <EisNerd> someone here who can have a look for my lp account?
[10:35] <EisNerd> there is something wrong
[10:35] <EisNerd> wgrant: according to topic maybe you?
[10:35] <wgrant> EisNerd: What's your Launchpad username?
[10:36] <EisNerd> got the message?
[10:36] <wgrant> Yeah.
[10:36] <wgrant> That account has never been used.
[10:37] <EisNerd> because I can't login
[10:37] <EisNerd> and can't reset password
[10:37] <wgrant> Oh?
[10:37] <EisNerd> it exists since when?
[10:37] <wgrant> What happens when you try?
[10:38] <EisNerd> yesterday or longer
[10:38] <wgrant> Where are you trying to log in? What does it say if you try to log in?
[10:38] <EisNerd> because I tried to create it yesterday but never got this verification mail
[10:38] <EisNerd> https://login.launchpad.net/
[10:39] <EisNerd> says "Passwort stimmt nicht überein"
[10:39] <wgrant> Could you ask at https://forms.canonical.com/lp-login-support/?
[10:39] <EisNerd> damn javascript sides
[10:42] <EisNerd> ok
[10:45] <EisNerd> hm ok where is this member of the gsst?
[10:46] <wgrant> What do you mean?
[10:46] <EisNerd> ;)
[10:46] <EisNerd> the message after submitting the request
[10:46] <EisNerd>  "A member of the Global Support Services team will be in touch shortly to discuss your needs."
[10:46] <wgrant> Ah, right.
[10:47] <EisNerd> so where is this member I have to discuss this with
[10:48] <EisNerd> ok afk
[11:48] <purpleKarrot> Hi, I have a question about binary-indep packages in PPAs. The packages are built on i386 only (which is intended). But the generated packages then should be available on all architectures.
[11:49] <purpleKarrot> And they are not.
[11:50] <purpleKarrot> Do I have to configure somehow that the packages are copied to other architectures?
[11:50] <wgrant> purpleKarrot: Are the packages you generate in binary-indep set as Architecture: all?
[11:51] <purpleKarrot> (checking)
[11:52] <purpleKarrot> no, they are set to 'any'. should I set them to 'all'?
[11:52] <soren> yes
[11:52] <wgrant> Yes, or they will be built for i386 only.
[11:52] <purpleKarrot> OK, thanks! I will try that.
[11:55] <bigjools> any/all is so damn confusing
[11:55] <wgrant> Not so much confusing as badly named.
[11:56] <bigjools> hence confusing :)
[11:56] <bigjools> I still keep getting them the wrong way around after 4 years
[12:00] <EisNerd> wgrant: still noone contacted me
[12:00] <wgrant> EisNerd: It's only been 90 minutes...
[12:03] <EisNerd> oh yesterday when I tried to reset the password I got already a message that it was recorded and will be handled asap
[12:03] <wgrant> Oh, really? That sounds worse than I thought.
[12:04] <EisNerd> wgrant: I could try to reset it again and gove you detailed informations if it occurs again
[12:05] <EisNerd> if not and all is fine I would also be satisfied
[12:06] <wgrant> EisNerd: login.launchpad.net is actually maintained by the Ubuntu SSO (login.ubuntu.com) team, not the Launchpad team, so I can't really help you directly. I'd wait for a response to the form you filled in earlier. If you don't have one within a day or so, poke me and I'll poke them for you.
[12:07] <EisNerd> ok thx
[12:07] <EisNerd> uh is there another way to login into launchpad?
[12:08] <wgrant> Not yet.
[13:00] <dbm> ops
[13:00] <dbm> my bad
[13:56] <idnar> hey, I thought Launchpad accepted DKIM signatures in lieu of OpenPGP; am I confused, or am I doing something wrong? (my mail to new@ bounced)
[13:57] <wgrant> idnar: Only from some domains for now (gmail.com being one), and it's not precisely bug-free yet.
[13:58] <idnar> ah, I'm using a Google Apps domain :(
[13:58] <jml> idnar: bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bugs?field.tag=dkim
[13:59] <wgrant> idnar: We'll probably open it up a bit more once we've ironed out the bugs.
[14:00] <wgrant> (and worked out what a sane policy is)
[14:01] <idnar> I read some tickets, but I guess I missed the part where only explicitly-whitelisted domains were accepted
[16:07] <fta> uh? is this new? https://launchpadlibrarian.net/68312726/buildlog_ubuntu-natty-amd64.compiz_1%3A0.9.4git20110322-0ubuntu6~fta2_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[16:08] <fta> it worked last week
[16:11] <jcsackett> one second, fta, i'm looking at the log.
[16:12] <fta> it's a log checker
[16:12] <fta> but i didn't touch those files
[16:17] <maxb> That has definitely existed for some time
[16:21] <micahg> jcsackett: bug 750528 was filed due to the plain text nature of the timeout, not the fact that it timed out
[16:21] <jcsackett> micahg: dig, correcting.
[16:21] <micahg> jcsackett: thanks
[16:21] <fta> maxb, but it didn't impact my previous upload, nor does it impact the official builds, why?
[16:22] <micahg> jcsackett: sorry, I should've been more verbose in the description :)
[16:23] <jcsackett> micahg: no worries. it's fixed now, and updated to indicate the actual issue more strongly. :-)
[16:50] <maxb> fta: Well, the relevant compiler warnings did not appear in your build that succeeded.
[16:50] <maxb> Since your package has not changed, I would be inclined to investigate possible toolchain changes in natty in the time between the builds
[18:46] <leoquant> after a revoke ui which is in the terminal revuid the uid key is revoked, but after a serverupload/synch. the revoked uid is still present in launchpad
[18:46] <leoquant> is there a solution for this?
[18:47] <leoquant> seahorse gives the same results....imo there no way to remove revoked uids from launchpad
[18:54] <jcsackett> leoquant: i'm afraid i may be a little confused. you're trying to revoke a gpg key on launchpad? (i'm assuming, based on seahorse reference)
[18:56] <leoquant> jcsackett, via terminal and seahorse a uid can be revoked from the man key/emailadres
[18:57] <leoquant> but after syncht that to the server the revoked emailadres is still visible
[18:57] <geser> leoquant: do you try to "delete" an uid from your key?
[18:58] <leoquant> rev oke geser
[18:58] <leoquant> yes
[18:59] <geser> "revoke": mark the uid as no longer in use
[18:59] <geser> you can't remove that uid from your key completely only mark it as invalid (revoke)
[19:00] <leoquant> yes, but i expected the emailadres/uid to be removed as weel in launchpad
[19:00] <leoquant> (nwe keyboard sorry)
[19:01] <geser> ah, you marked your uid as revoked, uploaded that key and expected that LP removed that uid from your LP page automatically? I don't know if LP can do it
[19:01] <leoquant> seahorse has a "remove" option, even enigmail
[19:01] <leoquant> yes indeed
[19:02] <leoquant> ok geser
[19:02] <geser> leoquant: you can remove a uid from your (local) key, but that doesn't work for keys on keyservers as keyservers have no auth so only can merge new key information
[19:04] <leoquant> ok, understood.
[19:04] <jcsackett> leoquant: if you want to remove/edit email address data on lp, you can use launchpad.net/<yourusername>/+editemails
[19:06] <leoquant> jcsackett, yes but i dont want to remove the complete string of emailaderesses, that  should remove my main pgp key
[19:07] <leoquant> only one which i do not use
[19:07] <leoquant> but that adress is revoked
[19:09] <leoquant> the only thing is to remove the pgp key completely which is  linked to my ubuntu.com/launchpad account
[19:09] <leoquant> but its ok now
[19:45] <manty> hi!
[19:45] <manty> I'm trying to subscribe on launchpad with my debian.org email address but I'm not getting any mails from the system, any problems there?
[19:48] <jcsackett> manty: what's your username on launchpad?
[19:49] <manty> you mean my email?
[19:49] <manty> manty@debian.org
[19:50] <jcsackett> ah, manty, i think i misunderstood. you do not have an account on launchpad, you're just trying to subscribe to a list?
[19:50] <manty> I wanted to register on launchpad to comment on a bug
[19:51] <manty> I don't think they asked me for a login for that
[19:51] <manty> just my name, the email and a password I seem to remember
[19:51] <manty> it was a while ago, I've been trying to see if the mail had been locked in any of my servers since then
[19:53] <jcsackett> manty: how long ago?
[19:54] <manty> jcsackett: well, about 15 minutes or a little more maybe
[19:54] <jcsackett> and are you waiting on mail related to the bug, or related to registering?
[19:54] <manty> to registering
[19:54] <manty> the system says that I've been sent an email to my debian.org address to verify that it is mine
[19:55] <manty> the mail with the code to fill in the web
[19:56] <jcsackett> manty: it may have been lost in spam or something on your end then; there shouldn't be any problems.
[19:56] <jcsackett> manty: you can also use https://forms.canonical.com/lp-login-support/ for support with registering/logging in to launchpad.
[19:57] <manty> jcsackett: could be but then grep launchpad.net /var/log/mail.log
[19:57] <manty> should return something
[19:57] <manty> and it doesn't
[19:57] <manty> unless debian.org is rejecting launchpad.net mails
[19:58] <manty> or launchpad.net is having problems in sending them
[20:01] <jcsackett> manty: i was just able to get a confirmation email sent to me, so i don't believe launchpad is having any problems sending the email out.
[20:02] <jcsackett> manty: i'm seeing if there's anything else on our end that might be an issue.
[20:02] <manty> I think I'm going to mail feedback@launchpad
[20:02] <manty> jcsackett: can you see if mail has been sent to manty@debian.org recently?
[20:03] <manty> and if it was rejected or something?
[20:04] <manty> I can try to subscribe with my personal address but I'd rather use debian's
[20:05] <jcsackett> manty: you can add different addresses once you're signed up, and change which email is your preferred.
[20:05] <manty> I see
[20:05] <manty> jcsackett: I'll try that then, but it looks to me that if there is a problem mailing debian.org now I'll have the same problem later on
[20:06] <jcsackett> manty: true; but at least in the interim you'll be able to be involved in the bug you were interested in.
[20:08] <manty> yes
[20:08] <manty> this one arrived
[20:08] <manty> without any problem
[20:08] <jcsackett> manty: excellent.
[20:08] <manty> and the machine receiving it is the same one as the debian.org mail
[20:08] <manty> except for it traversing the debian.org systems
[20:09] <manty> I know debian.org is working as I got mail recently
[20:09] <jcsackett> manty, i see also that there is a ~manty that was created automatically a package was initially imported, with your email address. https://launchpad.net/~manty
[20:09] <jcsackett> is that likely to be you?
[20:12] <manty> maybe
[20:12] <manty> I was trying to add the debian.org mail address
[20:13] <manty> and it told me that it was in use
[20:13] <manty> the weird thing is that it didn't told me so when trying to create the debian.org account before
[20:13] <sinzui> manty: the address could have been imported from a changelog
[20:14] <sinzui> manty: You can search https://launchpad.net/people for the address. You want to merge that user into you current profile
[20:14] <sinzui> Lp will send an email to that address to confirm you control it
[20:15] <manty> sinzui: I have already changed the password and gathered control to the debian.org account
[20:16] <manty> but I'd say it's a bug not to inform the guy after all the process that the email already has an account for it
[20:16] <manty> and instead tell him that a mail has been sent
[20:16] <manty> when it hasn't
[20:17] <sinzui> manty: yes. We are working on changing the merge rules this week so that users can reliably do this.
[20:43] <vadi2> My import of a git branch failed for a funny reason (http://launchpadlibrarian.net/68344638/vperetokin-mudlet-trunk.log). Did I provide it the wrong URL? The UI did accept it...
[20:58] <maxb_> "The remote server unexpectedly closed the connection.
[20:58] <maxb_> could just be a transient remote problem
[22:01] <askhl> Hi.  I'm trying to copy a PPA from Maverick to Natty within same PPA.  I get "The following source cannot be copied:" and "gpaw 0.7.6974-1~ppa1 in maverick (same version already has published binaries in the destination archive)".  It's here: https://launchpad.net/~campos-dev/+archive/campos/
[22:02] <askhl> (In this case I chose 'rebuild binaries', but I get a similar error, something about 'already has binaries', if I attempt 'copy binaries')
[22:18] <timrc> wgrant: Thanks, for working on https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/750640