[07:01] <Zam> hi!
[07:21] <microcai> ...
[10:08] <ElectricPrism> What's the Difference between LaunchPad and GitHub?
[10:08] <tsimpson> lots ;)
[10:09] <ElectricPrism> cool
[10:09] <tsimpson> Launchpad is more geared towards project management, GitHub is mostly code hosting
[10:09] <tsimpson> that, and and LP uses Bzr rather than Git
[10:09] <ElectricPrism> Ah
[10:10] <ElectricPrism> I'm writing a PHP Application Framework, would it be logical for me to choose one of these services or neither?
[10:11] <ElectricPrism> It's mainly in PHP, MySQL5, CSS3, JavaScript...etc
[10:12] <tsimpson> it's up to you really, have a look at https://launchpad.net/+tour to see what things you can do in LP
[10:12] <ElectricPrism> ok awsome thanks
[10:12] <tsimpson> if you mostly just want code hosting, then either would work fine
[14:31] <coffeedude> deryck, morning.
[14:31] <deryck> coffeedude: morning, bro
[17:30] <dvdk> hi, have a question about upload.ubuntu.com
[17:31] <dvdk> accidentally uploaded a *proprietary* in-house package there (my dput was misconfigured)
[17:31] <dvdk> told me it was denied.  still, would like to be sure, that a copy of the package is not retained in incoming
[17:39] <jelkner> Is this an appropriate channel for asking a question about renaming  a project and a bzr branch contained within it?
[17:46] <jelmer> jelkner, hi
[17:48] <jelkner> jelmer, hi
[17:48] <jelmer> jelkner: Please ask a question in http://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad about having the project renamed.
[17:49] <jelkner> i will
[17:49] <jelkner> but i was hoping to get help formulating the question
[17:49] <jelkner> i'm not exactly sure what to ask for
[17:50] <jelkner> basically, we have a series of tutorials we want to translate into spanish
[17:50] <jelmer> jelkner, Ask for a project to be renamed and mention the old project name and the new project name, as well as your relation to the project.
[17:50] <jelkner> ok
[17:50] <jelkner> thanks
[18:35] <CarlFK> /bin/sh: python2.6: not found - https://launchpadlibrarian.net/71593226/buildlog_ubuntu-natty-amd64.dvsmon_1.1-2ubuntu1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz
[18:36] <CarlFK> Build-Depends: cdbs (>= 0.4.49), debhelper (>= 5.0.38), python-central (>= 0.6.0), python (>= 2.4)
[18:36] <CarlFK> what is specifying 2.6?
[18:38] <CarlFK> http://dpaste.de/wy3i/  debian/control
[18:48] <Ampelbein> CarlFK: from your pasted log: "set -e; for buildver in 2.6 2.7; do \"
[18:48] <Ampelbein> CarlFK: probably in debian/rules
[18:49] <CarlFK> rules...  include /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/debhelper.mk  include /usr/share/cdbs/1/class/python-distutils.mk
[18:49] <CarlFK> hmm.
[18:52] <maxb> CarlFK: I'd guess you're missing Build-Depends: python-all-dev
[18:52] <CarlFK> maxb: k - seems harmless :)
[18:53] <CarlFK> should I pull python (>= 2.4) ?
[18:53] <maxb> pull?
[18:54] <CarlFK> remove it from Build-Depends
[18:54] <maxb> Yes
[18:55] <maxb> What Ubuntu series are you targetting with this?
[18:55] <CarlFK> natty
[18:56] <maxb> Only?
[18:56] <CarlFK> kinda.  might do maverick too.  I am 90% of the user base
[18:56] <maxb> k
[18:56] <maxb> If it was natty only, I'd say it's time to stop using python-central
[18:57] <maxb> In any case, you should remove python (>= 2.5) from your binary package dependencies, and include ${python:Depends}
[19:05] <CarlFK> heh - my fresh natty install is broken.  falling back to mav...
[19:19] <CarlFK> "[PPA carlfk] [ubuntu/maverick] dvsmon 1.1-2ubuntu3 (Accepted)" - this should have a link to the lp status page
[19:21] <CarlFK> https://launchpad.net/~carlfk/+archive/ppa/+build/2500987           Finished 16 minutes ago                    (took 9 minutes, 16.1 seconds)
[19:21] <CarlFK> huh, I didn't get the email
[19:48] <joh> Hi, is it possible to move a ppa to a new location? Preferably so that users don't have to update their sources with the new URL...
[19:53] <CarlFK> joh: um, what's the point?
[19:53] <joh> CarlFK: https://answers.launchpad.net/alarm-clock/+question/157236
[19:55] <CarlFK> i still don't see the point
[19:56] <joh> CarlFK: I guess it's cleaner to have the ppa under a team rather than a person..?
[20:04] <CarlFK> I think the "preferably... redirect" muddles the cleaner
[20:08] <lifeless> joh: make a new ppa
[20:08] <lifeless> joh: upload the things you want to it
[20:09] <lifeless> and delete the old one
[20:09] <lifeless> we don't support redirects to newer ppa urls (for a few reasons, including apt not having a UI for it)
[20:09] <joh> lifeless: ah ok, then I'm not sure it's worth it...
[20:10] <lifeless> if you want it team maintained it is :), but only you can decide that
[20:11] <joh> yeah, well it's basically just to keep packages which haven't been updated in universe yet.
[20:13] <joh> lifeless: what are the advantages of having it team maintained?
[20:17] <lifeless> joh: multiple people can upload to it
[20:20] <joh> lifeless: ah ok
[20:30] <jcsackett> sinzui: you free for help contact?
[20:30] <sinzui> yes, sorry
[20:31] <jcsackett> sinzui: thanks, and no worries. :-)
[22:10] <dvdk> hi,
[22:11] <dvdk> is this the right place to ask a question about upload.ubuntu.com?
[22:11] <lifeless> sure
[22:11] <dvdk> (already tried to ask before, but didn't got a reply)
[22:12] <dvdk> today i accidentally uploaded a proprietary package to upload.ubuntu.com,
[22:12] <dvdk> which was immediately rejected
[22:12] <dvdk> still, I figure, the data may continue to be stored in the incoming directory for some time?
[22:12] <dvdk> (unreadable to me, it seems, but who knows who has access?)
[22:13] <dvdk> startled? :)
[22:13] <dvdk> package was ment to be but into a company-internal repository via 'dput'
[22:14] <dvdk> but the 'dput' shipped with ubuntu uploads to upload.ubuntu.com by default (i.e. no server given on command line)
[22:17] <dvdk> so my question is: (a) are uploads rejected due to missing signature immediately deleted? and (b) whom to contact to ask for deletion if (a)'s anwer is "no".
[22:20] <lifeless> I believe they are
[22:20] <lifeless> each upload goes into a unique temp dir
[22:20] <lifeless> and that is either blessed or discarded
[22:20] <dvdk> lifeless: ah cool.  that's what i hoped for
[22:20] <dvdk> then maybe i'll be able to keep my job :)
[22:21] <lifeless> I can confirm that in a bit, if you like
[22:21] <lifeless> (to be absolutely sure, I mean)
[22:21] <dvdk> lifeless: that would be incredible (and make me sleep better :)
[22:21] <lifeless> some folk intimately familiar with this part of the system come online in ~1.5 hours.
[22:21] <lifeless> I will double check with them.
[22:22] <dvdk> lifeless: do you need the name of the package? to look for?
[22:22] <lifeless> if the thing hasn't been immediately deleted, only the sysadmins would be able to see it
[22:22] <lifeless> and we can get them to delete all failed uploads if thats the case
[22:22] <lifeless> dvdk: I don't think so, no.
[22:22] <lifeless> but if you want to msg it to me that can't hurt