[02:31] <MTecknology> could one of you guys maybe do me a favor?
[02:32] <MTecknology> go to http://staging7.profarius.com and click the login button; when it spits out a big white page, pastebin the whole response (except for the pass)
[03:32] <cjohnston> I'm finding something kinda odd.. I'm looking at bug 697157, which I had assigned to myself.. now if I click to edit the assignee I see: Change Assignee      Select a team of which you are a member     Is that normal?
[03:40] <wgrant> cjohnston: You can only assign yourself or one of your teams.
[03:40] <wgrant> Is that odd?
[03:42] <cjohnston> wgrant: is that for the launchpad project only? other projects I can assign people or teams
[03:43] <cjohnston> and there is also no remove assignee
[03:44] <lifeless> the launchpad project isn't special cased
[03:44] <lifeless> but your permissions on other projects may be different
[03:44] <wgrant> cjohnston: Hmm, there should be a link to remove the assignee.
[03:44] <cjohnston> ok.. what about missing the remove assignee?
[03:44] <wgrant> But as lifeless suggests, only the bug supervisor can assign anyone.
[03:45] <cjohnston> gotcha
[03:45] <cjohnston> I guess most places where I work with bugs I have the elevated permissiosn
[03:46] <cjohnston> permissions
[03:46] <wgrant> Indeed.
[03:46] <lifeless> cjohnston: you should be able to unassign yourself
[03:47] <wgrant> Ah, you have to refresh the page.
[03:48] <wgrant> user_can_unassign isn't updated when you assign yourself.
[03:48]  * wgrant files.
[03:49] <cjohnston> http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/580/bug697157inlaunchpadits.png/
[03:49] <cjohnston> gotcha
[03:51] <wgrant> Bug #783271
[03:51] <wgrant> I thought I'd broken it (I was working on that picker last week), but this has been around for years :(
[03:51] <cjohnston> lol
[03:51] <cjohnston> ty
[03:51] <cjohnston> wgrant: is 403
[03:52] <cjohnston> not forbidden?
[03:52] <cjohnston> or am I missing something else
[03:52] <micahg> wgrant: so, I saw the bug about PPU uploads and nominations appeared to be fixed, but I don't see the Target to release button
[03:52] <wgrant> cjohnston: 403 is Forbidden.
[03:52] <wgrant> cjohnston: But the Referer error is also a 403.
[03:52] <wgrant> micahg: Are you an Ubuntu bug supervisor?
[03:53] <micahg> wgrant: yes
[03:53] <micahg> wgrant: all uploaders are :)
[03:53] <wgrant> Right, but that's all that's necessary to see the button.
[03:53] <wgrant> Unless you mean it has the wrong text (Nominate instead of Target)
[03:53] <micahg> wgrant: no, that's nominate for release, I'm referring to accepting the nominations
[03:53] <cjohnston> wgrant: so should they both then be forbidden?
[03:53] <wgrant> Acceptance is done with a different UI.
[03:54] <micahg> bug 451390
[03:54] <wgrant> cjohnston: They are both Forbidden at the HTTP level. But the referer error should have different text.
[03:54] <cjohnston> suggestion and I'll fix it while I'm back in there
[03:54] <wgrant> micahg: You should have an "(approve/decline)" link next to each existing nomination.
[03:54] <micahg> wgrant: right, still don't have that for stuff in main
[03:55] <micahg> that I can upload :)
[03:55] <wgrant> eg?
[03:55] <micahg> firefox
[03:55] <wgrant> Which bug?
[03:55] <wgrant> Which series?
[03:56] <micahg> wgrant: bug 765970
[03:56] <micahg> oneiric
[03:56] <micahg> or anything really
[03:56] <wgrant> There are no nominations there.
[03:56] <micahg> oh, hmm, it worked
[03:56]  * micahg just guesses the UI isn't clear..
[03:56] <micahg> time to file another bug I guess
[03:56] <wgrant> Bug #297528
[03:57] <wgrant> I filed it years ago :)
[03:57] <micahg> oh, so that's also fixed now
[03:57] <wgrant> No.
[03:57] <micahg> it worked fine before
[03:57] <wgrant> Should not be closed.
[03:57]  * wgrant reopens.
[03:57] <wgrant> The difficulty is that you may have privileges to target some contexts, but only to nominate others.
[03:57] <wgrant> So a single link can't really be worded correctly.
[03:57] <micahg> wgrant: ok, I can live with that :)
[03:58] <micahg> at least until someone has time to fix
[03:58] <wgrant> micahg: I thought you were saying you didn't have "(approve/decline)" links next to nominations.
[03:58] <wgrant> That would be bad.
[03:58]  * micahg looks for something to test on
[03:59] <cjohnston> 5
[03:59]  * micahg seems to recall a link to nominations not accepted yet
[04:03] <cjohnston> wgrant: just to make sure we are on the same page before I do it.. we are talking the UnauthorizedVew in /lib/canonical/launchpad/webapp/login.py  ?
[04:11] <wgrant> cjohnston: That's right.
[04:11] <wgrant> micahg: Hm?
[04:11] <wgrant> Oh.
[04:12] <wgrant> https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/natty/+nominations
[04:14] <micahg> wgrant: yep, I have the links, thanks
[04:14]  * micahg hugs wgrant for fixing that long standing frustrating bug
[04:18] <wgrant> micahg: We should be fixing lots of frustrating, long-standing bugs soon.
[08:51] <nigelb> Wasn't there another box below Subscribers which would show all people subscribed because they're part of a team?
[08:51] <nigelb> Or is that removed with the new bug mail features
[08:59] <nigelb> hrm, I guess I'll re-ask my question a few hours later
[09:01] <wgrant> nigelb: It's temporarily disabled for beta testers.
[09:02] <wgrant> nigelb: (you refer to the "Also notified" section, which shows people and teams who get notifications but aren't directly subscribed to the bug -- eg. through subscriptions to the whole project or distribution)
[09:03] <nigelb> wgrant: aha, the "Also Notified" is exactly what I meaent
[09:03] <nigelb> *meant
[09:06] <wgrant> nigelb: So, yes, its removal is related to the subscription improvements. It will likely be restored before the feature is released.
[09:06] <nigelb> Ah, okay
[09:06] <nigelb> wgrant: does this mean that the underlying feature itself isn't working?
[09:07] <wgrant> nigelb: It is working.
[09:07] <wgrant> But the display is complex.
[09:07] <nigelb> Ah, as long as its working, I don't mind the UI being turned off
[09:07] <nigelb> I suppose the new mail subscriptions vs old subscriptions is causing a clash in display
[09:08] <wgrant> As part of this feature work, all such subscriptions can now be filtered, so not all of the subscriptions will be relevant to each bug.
[09:08] <wgrant> eg. some people are subscribed to only open/close notifications.
[09:08] <wgrant> How do we present that?
[09:15] <nigelb> wgrant: its confusing I guess
[09:16] <nigelb> Like (a) You can present everyone like before, but not everyone gets all the changes, (b) You can separate everyone, but then there might be too many boxes which could be even more confusing
[09:16] <wgrant> Yeah, exactly
[09:16] <wgrant> I'm sure Yellow will work it out :)
[09:16] <wgrant> Oh, I'm not on maintenance this week. Curses.
[09:16] <wgrant> s/maintenance/help rotation/
[09:16] <nigelb> heh
[09:17] <henninge> Hi wgrant! ;)
[09:17] <wgrant> Hi henninge!
[09:17] <henninge> Hi nigelb! ;)
[09:17] <nigelb> hey henninge
[09:18] <nigelb> I promised to help jml get a cake on his face at Ireland.  Will be around later since I decided to brick the plan to install VM.  I get stuck that stage all the time when I decide to help LP.
[09:18] <nigelb> s/cake/pie, anything creamy/
[09:18] <wgrant> nigelb: It is getting very bad :(
[09:18] <wgrant> Although I've closed a few today.
[09:18] <wgrant> And fixed six others.
[09:18] <nigelb> wgrant: very bad in a good way or bad way?
[09:19] <wgrant> We have a month to close 230 :(
[09:19] <nigelb> bah
[09:19] <nigelb> can we "uncrticalize" a few bugs?
[09:19] <wgrant> That's how I got rid of a few.
[09:19] <nigelb> Aha
[09:19] <wgrant> But we are running out of such candidates.
[09:19] <wgrant> So I fear for jml's unsafety.
[09:19] <nigelb> are there any candidates like easy + crtical?
[09:20] <jml> heh heh
[09:20] <henninge> nigelb: If you find any, let me know ...
[09:20] <wgrant> nigelb: Lots are fairly easy.
[09:20] <wgrant> I fixed 6 fairly simple ones today.
[09:20] <wgrant> But I've already picked lots of low-hanging fruit :(
[09:20] <henninge> wgrant: I have a hard time finding those
[09:20] <wgrant> There's not a huge amount left.
[09:20]  * bigjools knocks up a script to mark them all won'tfix
[09:21] <nigelb> I hope there's something to start when I get home
[09:24] <jfi> Hello, is there a way to determine that a binary package is arch independent with the lp webapi? (from binary_package_publishing_history)
[09:24] <wgrant> jfi: No, that's not exposed through the API at the moment.
[09:24] <jfi> Hello, the function getDownloadCount duplicates the same count for each architecture
[09:24] <jfi> s/Hello//
[09:25] <jfi> wgrant, ok, is it possible to get the .deb name? or the download url of the package? It can be a workaround
[09:26] <wgrant> jfi: No. But it's not much work at all to expose whether it is architecture dependent.
[09:27] <wgrant> Let me see.
[09:27] <jfi> wgrant, will be nice:) Do you want me to open a 'wish' against LP?
[09:27] <wgrant> jfi: That would be useful.
[09:27] <wgrant> (and I'm fixing it now)
[09:28] <jfi> wgrant, great!
[09:32] <jfi> wgrant: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/783355
[09:38] <wgrant> jfi: Thanks. I've proposed a branch which exposes an architecture_specific attribute on BPPH.
[09:43] <jfi> wgrant: thanks a lot, it will allow me to display once the arch independent packages
[11:02] <ondrej> Hi, seems there is a problem with GPG verification on PPA uploads :(
[11:03] <ondrej> Uploading golang_57.1-1~natty+1_source.changes: 550 Changes file must be signed with a valid GPG signature: Verification failed 3 times: ['General error', 'General error', 'General error'] : Permission denied.
[11:03] <ondrej> $ gpg --verify golang_57.1-1~natty+1_source.changes
[11:03] <ondrej> gpg: Signature made Po 16. květen 2011, 11:58:38 CEST using DSA key ID C20DF273
[11:03] <ondrej> gpg: Good signature from "Ondřej Surý <ondrej@sury.org>"
[11:04] <bigjools> wgrant: has that tmp directory disappeared again? --^
[11:05] <wgrant> It has. gnuoy is fixing.
[11:05] <wgrant> (thanks!)
[11:06] <wgrant> ondrej: Your upload will be accepted OK.
[11:07] <ondrej> wgrant: Looks like it is the case... I have received emails with "Accepted" already and it is already in the build queue.
[11:07] <ondrej> Ok, thanks.
[11:24] <czajkowski> gmb: morning
[11:25] <gmb> Morning czajkowski :).
[11:30] <czajkowski> gmb: it's a daft status  you wouldnt see in any commercial setting
[11:32] <gmb> czajkowski: Weee-l. I know that some of our OEM partners have used it. But I take your point. If anything "Invalid" would be better (because if you're not going to fix it you should say it's not a bug, I suppose). You'd still have arguments about that, though.
[11:33] <czajkowski> yeah but it is a bug in this case...
[11:33] <czajkowski> it's just a 3rd party bug
[11:33] <czajkowski> so we wont fix isn't accurate
[11:33] <czajkowski> it's a will be fixed once we harass 3rd party or find a plan B
[11:34] <czajkowski> gmb: https://bugs.launchpad.net/hr-recruitment/+bug/783392
[11:34] <czajkowski> *mutters*
[11:34] <gmb> Ah.
[11:35] <gmb> czajkowski: I can see some uses for it... But all of those can be expressed better as "We acknowledge this bug but we're going to track it over here in this other report..." I'm guessing that's not your use-case here.
[11:36] <czajkowski> gmb: should be able to see it now
[11:37] <gmb> czajkowski: You're entirely right, I think, in that case.
[11:38] <czajkowski> see I'm not going mad
[11:39] <gmb> Nope.
[11:40] <gmb> Anyway,
[11:40]  * gmb is starving; off to get some dinner.
[11:40] <gmb> Or Lunch, if you speak Southern.
[11:47] <czajkowski> gmb: I;m Irish we just eat food
[11:48] <bigjools> Guinness is food
[12:01] <arand> If I upload a package which builds an arch-indep binary (just a collection of files) to several ~series1 versions, can then binary-arch packages share just one of these binary-indep packages, without actually splitting the source package?
[12:04] <arand> Also, I was looking at syncSource... it doesn't seem to allow copying packages within one PPA (i.e. from/to different series), or am I missing something?
[12:05] <wgrant> arand: I don't understand your first question.
[12:05] <wgrant> As for the second one, just specify the same archive as from_archive.
[12:05] <maxb> arand: The answer to question 1 is no
[12:05] <wgrant> arand: The source series is not explicit, because you specifcy the version number explicitly.
[12:06] <arand> Ah! ok..
[12:10] <arand> It worked! Thanks \o/
[12:11] <wgrant> Great!
[12:11] <wgrant> It's not an ideal API, but it works for most things.
[12:46] <pfarrell> hi! I have a project (libadjoint) and a PPA with daily builds of my project (which works beautifully, thank you)
[12:46] <pfarrell> I want to also push those packages into another PPA I have write access to (fluidity-core)
[12:47] <pfarrell> is it possible for one recipe to push to two PPAs, or must I add another recipe?
[13:22] <czajkowski> gmb: much better status now on the bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/hr-recruitment/+bug/783392
[13:23] <gmb> czajkowski: Glad to hear it.
[13:23] <czajkowski> indeed
[14:27] <pfarrell> hi! In a launchpad merge request, is it possible to attach review comments to specific lines of the diff?
[14:27] <pfarrell> we used to use reviewboard, and it supported it; it was very handy
[14:28] <spiv> pfarrell: not yet
[14:28] <pfarrell> does that mean it's planned?
[14:29] <pfarrell> is it on a blueprint or bug report anywhere, that I can track its progress/
[14:29] <pfarrell> ?
[14:29] <spiv> I think there's a bug somewhere requesting that feature; I'm fairly sure the LP devs would like to add it but I'm not sure off the top of my head when they're likely to get to it.
[14:34] <dpm> hi could someone from a maintenance squad help me with an RT?
[14:42] <deryck> adeuring, hey, I think you're supposed to be irc for now.  can you help dpm ^^ ?
[14:42] <adeuring> deryck: ouch... yes...
[14:42] <deryck> adeuring, thanks!
[14:43] <dpm>  https://rt.admin.canonical.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=44825
[14:43] <dpm> thanks deryck, adeuring it's ^^
[14:45] <adeuring> hrmmm seems I don't have access to the RT server...
[14:51] <dpm> adeuring, I can give you the username/password, or you can ask #is
[14:52] <adeuring> dpm: henning gave me a clue about the login credentials ;)
[14:52] <adeuring> dpm: I'm still reading the RT, but how can I help?
[14:53] <dpm> adeuring, it's just about the last comment. IS requested for a new DB user to be created who has only access to the right tables
[14:53] <dpm> and they need someone from LP to do it
[14:53] <adeuring> dpm: ah. ok
[14:59] <adeuring> dpm: so, the script is this one, right? http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~rosetta-admins/lp-get-ul10nstats/trunk/view/head:/lp-get-ul10nstats.py
[15:01] <dpm> adeuring, yes
[15:02] <adeuring> dpm: ok. So, you need to run "createuser <somename>", and we need to add this user to database/schema.security.cfg
[15:04] <dpm> adeuring, what do you mean I need to run "createuser ..."?. You mean on each script run the user needs to be created? (this is a script supposed to be run on a regular basis in a cron job)
[15:05] <adeuring> dpm: no, createuser adds a new user to the database. That needs to be done just once.
[15:05] <adeuring> dpm: ah, no, we can let security.py do that
[15:06] <dpm> adeuring, I don't have the permissions to do that. Can't this be done outside the script? I don't quite understand why it should create the user
[15:06] <adeuring> dpm: right, that's nothing for the script itself.
[15:06] <dpm> yeah, that's what I thought
[15:06] <adeuring> what I mean is this: We need the new DB user, and this user should have access to the tables needed in the script.
[15:07] <dpm> adeuring, yeah, the question is who can create the new DB user
[15:07] <adeuring> dpm: stub, I think, and perhaps some of the losas
[15:08] <adeuring> but I'll sort the details of secuirty.cfg
[15:08] <dpm> thanks adeuring
[15:09] <adeuring> dpm: any suggestion for the user name?
[15:10] <dpm> adeuring, I don't care much really. ul10nstats?
[15:10] <adeuring> dpm: ok
[15:24] <deryck> adeuring, I can take IRC now.
[15:24] <adeuring> deryck: thanks!
[15:24] <deryck> np!
[16:53] <Laney> how can I use lplib from a script? python-keyring seems to insist on a password.
[16:59] <spiv> Laney: have you seen <https://help.launchpad.net/API/launchpadlib#Getting%20started> ?
[17:02] <Laney> spiv: Yeah, but that doesn't seem to help. I can just use credentials_file though.
[17:02] <Laney> (which means that I can't really use ubuntutools, but oh well)
[17:08] <tumbleweed> Laney: don't use credentials_file if possible (hi btw)
[17:09] <tumbleweed> the NEWS in python-launchpadlib and ubuntu-dev-tools has our notes on the best workarounds
[17:11] <fta> spam in bug 608253 (#8)
[17:44] <deryck> fta, someone removed the comment already, but I just now suspended the user account, too.
[17:45] <maco> deryck: i hear we used to work at the same place
[17:45] <deryck> maco, oh yeah?  Where?
[17:45] <maxb> I just hid ~15 comments from that user
[17:45] <maco> wpni
[17:45] <deryck> ah!  The joys! ;)
[17:46] <maco> deryck: i was talking to dwillis the other day, and when i mentioned ubuntu he goes "oh! do you know deryck? he works on lp!"
[17:46] <deryck> maco, yeah, he and I used to sit across from each other when I was in washington.
[17:46] <maco> deryck: i was his internet in 2007
[17:46] <deryck> heh
[17:46] <maco> til he left for the nyt
[17:46] <maco> er?
[17:46] <maco> spelling fail. intern
[17:47] <deryck> ah
[17:47] <maco> clearly muscle memory won
[17:47] <deryck> I was his internet is such a better statement, though.  Sounds so powerful and impressive.
[17:47] <deryck> it's like saying "he could get nothing done without me" but in a much better way
[17:48] <deryck> maxb, thanks for hiding those comments.
[17:50] <fta> deryck, maco: thanks
[18:57] <deryck> abentley, passing to you for IRC.
[18:58] <abentley> deryck: ACK
[20:53] <davidstrauss> Why does this bug have such absurdly high heat? https://bugs.launchpad.net/nautilus-terminal/+bug/782023
[21:14] <awolfson> Hi all. I am getting error 401 Unauthorized when trying to access staging from the script. qastaging and production work. How can I clear the cach or something on staging? I removed all autorized apps from staging.launchpad.net/~awolfson but that did not help
[21:16] <awolfson> abentley, Hi looks like you are the help contact :) can you please look at ^ ^. I need to allow my script to access staging. It use to work before
[22:27] <kblin> hi folks
[22:30] <kblin> I'm somehow missing a bug I was sure I filed quite a while ago, so I'm thinking of filing it again.. what would I report the bug that I can't update my ubuntu systems if they're on IPv6 only networks against?
[22:32] <micahg> kblin: you'll want to ask in #ubuntu-bugs
[22:33] <kblin> ok
[23:15] <lifeless> I would say 'against your ISP'
[23:15] <lifeless> ipv4 onlyness isn't a bug
[23:16] <ScottK> Some Ubuntu mirrors are IPv6 enabled, but which ones I think is not particularly documented.
[23:19] <lifeless> ScottK: Its not reasonable to run without ipv4 today
[23:20] <lifeless> maybe in 10 years
[23:20] <lifeless> IMNSHO
[23:21] <ScottK> lifeless: I agree, although I expect the timeframe to be less.
[23:22] <ScottK> From the UDS last week: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/foundations-o-ipv6-healthcheck
[23:23] <lifeless> sure
[23:23] <lifeless> I just expect a -very- long tail
[23:23] <lifeless> I mean, by some definitions you can run ipv6 only today
[23:45] <Laney> tumbleweed: I'm just going to write my own functions, it's too painful to use the system ubuntutools like this
[23:45] <Laney> ps hello!
[23:48] <tumbleweed> Laney: ubuntutools doesn't do anything useful for launchpad login (although it used to)
[23:48] <tumbleweed> Laney: it does have lpapicache which is a caching wrapper around some of launchpadlib. Only useful if you are happy within that subset
[23:48] <Laney> that's what i was using yeah
[23:50] <Laney> I did some of the initial implementation of that way back when
[23:50] <tumbleweed> aah