[09:39] gmb, hi, do you have any idea why we don't have structural subscriptions on ISourcePackage (distroseries-specific, as compared to IDistributionSourcePackage, which we do have them on)? [09:41] Danilos: not a clue, sorry. [09:42] gmb, ok, I've added a card to investigate and chat later on with Gary [09:42] Ok [10:00] gmb, just to confirm something else, if I am subscribed to a "primary" bug, I *won't* get email from a duplicate that I have nothing to do with, right? (i.e. I didn't file it, I was never subscribed...) [10:02] danilos: That's correct, yes. [10:02] At least I *hope* it is :) [10:02] (There's actually a flag for this somewhere in the code; if we flipped it we could spam everyone with notifications from duplicates) [10:04] gmb, ah, I like flipping flags! :) [10:05] danilos: Just remember to tell everyone that it was someone else's idea so that they get all the shit for it. [10:05] Note: NOT MINE. [10:05] gmb, naturally! [10:06] :) [11:55] * danilos -> lunch [12:59] danilos: re: ISourcePackage, I'm unsure why they are not IStructuralSubscriptionTargets either [13:29] bac benji danilos gmb looking at board; meeting in 2 [13:29] Yup [13:30] bac & benji I don't see you on Skype; maybe it lies [13:30] there's bac [13:31] * benji restarts skype [13:31] gary_poster, I usually just try calling people in such cases and it suddenly starts seeing people [13:31] gary_poster: now? [13:35] gary_poster, nobody hears me? [13:35] danilos I guess not :-/ [13:35] gary_poster, please re-invite me [13:36] gmb, btw, grep for "setStyle" as well [13:37] danilos: Indeed, thanks. [14:09] gary_poster: I just summarized the PQM situation in -dev [14:22] benji: In bug 750561 are you talking about adding subscriptions via the overlay or on the +subscriptions page? [14:22] <_mup_> Bug #750561: Spinner for adding/editing subscriptions < https://launchpad.net/bugs/750561 > [14:23] gmb: overlay (although both probably need it) [14:23] Okay, I'll take a look, see how easy it'll be. [14:24] gary_poster: w.r.t to the CSS stuff, I think it needs more thought, i.e. should we also accomodate setStyle() calls? What about styles that are very specific to only one element? that kind of thing. [14:24] I'll update the bug. [14:26] gmb, yeah, that's the kind of thing I was thinking about too [14:26] if there's not a clear action to do then I return to questioning the bug, but maybe that's being...antu-progress [14:26] anti [14:27] Well, I'll add my thoughts to the bug... maybe we should take this to the launchpad-dev list and make it a Policy decision. [14:27] so gmb, are you up for a 1400 line review, since you are offering reviews so generously? :-) I can probably figure out some way of dividing it up, and we probably should not continue to set this precedent... [14:28] gary_poster: Yes, I can fit that in. actually should take me up to my slightly-earlier-than-normal EoD, so it works well. [14:31] ack gmb thanks. I'll go run make an mp now [14:31] quickly. :-) [14:31] Cool [14:39] benji, you comfortable with what wgrant is suggesting? [14:40] gary_poster: yep; I managed to get the conflict in my working copy and it's an easy fix, so I think we'll be good [14:40] benji cool. So getting it on db-devel will be mildly annoying [14:40] you'll either need to use bzr land with a new MP to db-devel [14:41] gary_poster: I'm confused; this is targeted at devel [14:41] was the conflict in devel or db-devel? [14:41] I'm pretty sure it was devel; double checking [14:41] k [14:42] if it is devel then nm, yeah, sraightforward [14:42] gary_poster: grrrrrrr [14:42] ? [14:42] it was db-devel [14:42] yeah, figured [14:42] so that means it is in devel but didn't make it through to db-devel [14:42] so that's back to what I was saying [14:43] you have three options [14:43] 1) make an mp and bzr land. that seems heaviweight if this is only JS tests *and* windmill is turned off. [14:43] eh [14:43] that was supposed to be "make an mp and ec2 land" [14:44] 2) make an mp and bzr land. That's easier, and uses tools that are fairly user friendly. it is still heavierweight than you need because you don't really need a review, but practically it might be the easiest, unless you are comfortable with... [14:45] 3) use bzr pqm-submit directly. This has an incantation-y feel to me, but does not require an mp. [14:45] if you have not used it much, I think it would probably just frustrate you [14:45] So my recommendation is #2, or #3 if you want to. [14:46] I've done pqm-submit a little so I'll give that a shot [14:46] ok cool [14:50] gary_poster: so let me get this straight, even though my branch was originally targeted to devel, since we have a conflict with the merge of db-devel into devel (after my branch is applied), I'm going to directly merge my branch into db-devel so when the automated merge happens it will work [14:50] benji, uh, I don't think so. Though I admit to being hazy about at least one aspect of it as well. [14:50] So... [14:51] You targeted your branch to devel [14:51] It merged to devel (right?) [14:51] When being automatically merged to db-devel in conflicted [14:51] it [14:52] wgrant resolved it, maybe? By removing the revision entirely? This is the part I know I'm hazy about. [14:52] Now you need to get it back in db-devel [14:52] but devel is fine [14:52] benji, that's my understanding, such as it is [14:57] gary_poster: re. "devel is fine", why don't I see the merge of that revision when I do a bzr log? [14:58] gmb, diff is being generated, but here it is. My cover letter was kinda lame, but I was in a rush. Of course, please feel free to ask questions here or even request a call if goals are not clear. Thank you! [14:58] https://code.launchpad.net/~yellow/launchpad/bug728370/+merge/56942 [14:59] gary_poster: Okay, thanks. I'll see whether I can make head or tail of it... (Though your cover letter is about 900% longer than some I've been given on large branches). [14:59] heh [14:59] ok [15:00] benji, you are right that your new tests don't appear to be on devel. Investigating further... [15:01] benji, would you forward me the conflict email please? [15:02] benji, whatever happened, which I don't understand either, you are right that you need to land this on devel [15:03] gary_poster: forwarded [15:05] benji, my suspicion is that the conflict you forwarded me is for the ss-whatever branch [15:06] and that you had a separate one for the branch you are looking at now [15:06] my further suspicion is that wgrant has resolved the ss-whatever branch into db-devel conflict [15:06] so now, somewhere in your inbox, there is a conflict email about the new test test branch (whatever-2) [15:07] and now that you have resolved it, things will return to be sunny and shiny [15:07] after you submit it to devel [15:07] (which you could just do with bzr land [15:07] ) [15:07] (because it has an approved MP pointed to the right destination already) [15:08] (and you don't need tests) [15:08] (I have to go blow my nose now) [15:14] ok, lp-land fired off, we'll see how it goes [15:22] gary_poster, btw, I keep forgetting about the visa, I'll have to ask about that as well [15:23] danilos, ? ireland? [15:23] gary_poster, right [15:23] gary_poster, (sorry for just blurting half-sentence out :) [15:23] :-) np. is there something I need to do? [15:23] (and doing it again) [15:24] gary_poster, nope, other than ask me if I've booked my travel and arranged everything re a visa :) [15:24] Hey, Danilo...have you booked your travel and arranged everything re a visa? [15:24] :-D [15:24] * gary_poster will add it to my mtg notes [15:25] gary_poster, whoa, I totally forgot about that, thanks for the reminder :) [15:25] lol [15:25] gary_poster, and thanks :) [15:25] np [15:32] gary_poster: I /think/ everything is right with the world. [15:32] benji, now *that* is the best news I've heard in ages :-) [15:32] heh [15:33] but even within the realm of your branch, very good :-) [15:44] gary_poster: r=me with some tweaks. Nice branch - very readable and I understood the concept, which helped, I think. I've got a couple of concerns about the readability of a couple of nested for loops, but it's nothing huge. [15:45] cool gmb, thank you! I'll take a look [15:49] gmb, you have...12 min or hour and 12 min? either way, I did a bit of investigation on staging for bug 753000, which you and I discussed yesterday. Here are some results. I think some of them might indicate problems, but others (like the distribution) may indicate that my query was naive. [15:49] https://pastebin.canonical.com/45864/ [15:49] <_mup_> Bug #753000: NotOneError caused by duplicate stuctural subscriptions

< https://launchpad.net/bugs/753000 > [15:49] but if anything comes to mind, there it is :-) [15:50] gary_poster: I have 11 minutes now, so I'll take a quick sken and come back to it later if needs be. [15:50] no worries on coming back. Go have a vacation! [15:52] gary_poster: So, if I'm reading those results right, there are 819 subs to distros which have duplicates, 6 product subs, 1 project sub (who is user 82, I wonder?) and 58 sourcepackage subs, right? [15:53] (user 2, project 82) [15:53] Ah,. [15:53] Yes. [15:53] So, who's user 2? (Mark, maybe?) [15:53] Anyway... [15:54] yes, I think you are right [15:54] gary_poster: It might be useful to see how many dupes each subscription actually has, but I don't know if that's worth worrying about at this point. [15:54] Hmm. [15:54] I think the distribution query *might* be broken [15:55] I wonder if, for instance, source packages also distinguish by distribution [15:55] so 819 might be just wrong [15:55] but the others look "real" [15:55] gary_poster: Hmm, possibly. You could re-run the sourcepackage query with the distro in there too to see what happens. [15:55] gary_poster: Right, I agree. [15:56] If I were doing it right, as I may do later, I would look at the joins defined in structuralsubscription.py and dupe them [15:56] Yeah. [15:56] but this seemed a reasonable naive approximation [15:56] gary_poster: Ideally I'd say "let's write a test to reproduce this" but I fear we'd be groping in the dark a bit. [15:56] right [15:56] we have no idea how to dupe [15:56] we merely know that the data looks bad [15:56] So. [15:57] My proposition would be: [15:57] 1. clean up the data [15:57] 2. add a constraint [15:57] 3. Wait for the OOPSes to roll in (if any) [15:57] (multiple constraints, probably) [15:57] 4. Fix the problem in the tree if 3. [15:57] Right. [15:58] yeah agree. I think I'll need to include Robert on this, since he will want to know and might even want to change the plan somehow [15:58] OK, I'll refine this later [15:58] Thanks for looking [15:58] I think it's time for you turn off IRC now [15:58] :-) [15:58] Have a great 2 weeks! [15:58] gary_poster: np. I think (Robert, Stuart) is the usual pairing for this kind of stuff. [15:58] sure [15:58] gary_poster: Your wish is my command, sir. [15:58] :-) [15:58] * gmb -> exeunt, in pursuit of a Mustang. [15:58] lol [16:00] user 2 is lifeless, fwiw :-) === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-lunch [17:19] lunching & volunteering, back in hour or so === Ursinha-lunch is now known as Ursinha [19:41] gary_poster: I know more about YUI 3 positioning than I ever thought possible. I'm working on the make-the-overlay-start-out-higher-on-the-page card. How's this for the position of the overlay: http://i.imgur.com/wl7e1.png (it's aligned with the top of the side portlet and will scroll into positoin if you're scrolled down when you click on the subscribe link. [19:41] there's not much to the code: [19:41] http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/591400/ [19:42] benji, sounds good. We'll want a UI review for the whole shebang at the end, so for now I Think we can try to improve with impunity. kinda. [19:43] the scrollIntoView makes me the most "nervous" from a UI perspective, but I'm not worried about it [19:43] Our chief tool is impunity! And jslint. Amongst our tools are... [19:43] :-) [21:27] bac, small JS branch review? https://code.launchpad.net/~gary/launchpad/bug754958/+merge/57010 [21:27] gary_poster: sure [21:28] thank you [21:37] benji, I cannot dupe bug 750571 [21:37] <_mup_> Bug #750571: If status "Unknown" is unchecked and the structural subscription overlay is closed, it will be unchecked when reopened. < https://launchpad.net/bugs/750571 > [21:37] could you confirm that it is fixed, or give me better instructions? [21:37] looking [21:38] well, "better"...help me understand better :-) [21:38] So far I have "fixed" one card by discovering it was already addressed, I wouldn't mind making it two ;-) [21:40] bac or benji, do you have anything to point me to if I want to show a spinner for actions [21:41] like add, edit, delete [21:41] no, i've never added a spinner [21:41] I know we do it, but I don't know how, and can't think of where [21:41] ok [21:41] gmb seemed to think it was easy [21:41] yeah :-) [21:41] grep spinner? [21:41] too bad he's gone for two weeks ;-) [21:41] yeah ok [21:42] gary_poster: pay for his transatlantic wifi and ask him to do it tomorrow [21:42] gary_poster: I think you "fixed" this one too. [21:42] heh [21:42] benji, sweet :-) [21:42] thanks for doublechecking. I'll handle the paperwork [22:02] benji for bug 750567 that you are working on, do you happen to know what part of the code you have to change yet? (I'd rather not provoke a conflict unnecessarily) [22:02] <_mup_> Bug #750567: Structural subscription overlay doesn't instantly disappear. < https://launchpad.net/bugs/750567 > [22:02] I'm working on the spinner [22:03] so the full story should probably be click...spinner...close. The way that the handlers work, there's a reasonable chance that we won't step on each other but I thought I'd check [22:08] gary_poster: the change for that was really small and is done if you want to see: https://code.launchpad.net/~benji/launchpad/bug-750573-move-overlay/+merge/56999 [22:08] cool thank you [22:10] gotcha--"add_subscription_overlay.on('submit', clean_up);" + "add_subscription_overlay.hide();" [22:10] thanks