| === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan | ||
| === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away | ||
| lifeless | so I have my test machine up and running, but boy was it more work than I expected | 08:46 |
|---|---|---|
| wgrant | lifeless: Around? | 09:11 |
| lifeless | yes | 09:12 |
| lifeless | 'sup? | 09:12 |
| lifeless | wgrant: ^ | 09:13 |
| wgrant | lifeless: I tried to use testresources in lazr.amqp, with ResourcedTestCase. But it cleans and sets up the fixture for every test. Do I have to work in OptimisingTestSuite somehow? | 09:13 |
| lifeless | yes | 09:14 |
| lifeless | what test runner are you using ? | 09:14 |
| wgrant | At the moment it's zope.testrunner, but we're not tied to that. | 09:14 |
| wgrant | Will gladly abandon it. | 09:14 |
| StevenK | jtv!!! | 09:15 |
| wgrant | Still QA? | 09:15 |
| jtv | StevenK: ? | 09:15 |
| lifeless | wgrant: you will have to | 09:15 |
| wgrant | lifeless: Excellent. | 09:15 |
| StevenK | jtv: You have 4 or 5 branches of QA! | 09:15 |
| lifeless | wgrant: it messes with uites | 09:15 |
| wgrant | lifeless: Should I just use unittests? | 09:15 |
| jtv | StevenK: no I don't think so | 09:15 |
| wgrant | s/unittests/unittest/ | 09:15 |
| lifeless | wgrant: subunit.run :) | 09:15 |
| jtv | StevenK: I had to fix an ancient +queue timeout though before I could do meaningful Q/A | 09:15 |
| wgrant | lifeless: Can I integrate that with buildout, or should I just use testr? | 09:15 |
| StevenK | jtv: Sorry, 3. r13302, r13318 and r13326 | 09:16 |
| lifeless | wgrant: I don't know about buildout and tests | 09:16 |
| jtv | StevenK: I have zero branches in qa-needstesting. | 09:16 |
| jtv | Your view may be lagging. | 09:16 |
| StevenK | When did you change the bugs? | 09:17 |
| bigjools | pay attention gentlemen | 09:17 |
| jtv | StevenK: Sometime in the past 4 minutes. | 09:17 |
| * StevenK makes a ... sign at bigjools | 09:17 | |
| StevenK | lifeless: I am disabling parallel-test again. | 09:19 |
| LPCIBot | Project parallel-test build #83: ABORTED in 11 hr: https://lpci.wedontsleep.org/job/parallel-test/83/ | 09:20 |
| lifeless | wgrant: chatting with jml for a quick 'how to glue it together' bootstrap may help you | 09:20 |
| StevenK | Because of ^ | 09:20 |
| wgrant | lifeless: Thanks. | 09:20 |
| jtv | bigjools: pay attention | 09:21 |
| wgrant | lifeless: So we can't use test discovery? | 09:23 |
| lifeless | sure can | 09:23 |
| lifeless | need the discover egg | 09:23 |
| wgrant | How do we make it use OptimisingTestSuite then? | 09:24 |
| lifeless | and a root level load_tests hook to wrap things and reenter into discovery to gather the children | 09:24 |
| wgrant | k | 09:24 |
| wgrant | Will hopefully talk to jml. | 09:24 |
| danilos | jtv, hey, the approach of not having a separate expander/content box is not going to work because the spinner still ends up in the expander box | 09:34 |
| lifeless | matsubara: hi | 09:36 |
| lifeless | matsubara: I just wanted to check you saw my comment on the bug you incompleted | 09:36 |
| matsubara | lifeless, hello | 09:36 |
| lifeless | matsubara: (because you might not be subscribed ;)) | 09:37 |
| matsubara | lifeless, I have now. thanks | 09:37 |
| lifeless | :) | 09:37 |
| matsubara | lifeless, yeah, I didn't get a mail notification :-) | 09:37 |
| matsubara | hmm I always thought incomplete could be used as a needs info | 09:38 |
| lifeless | if we turn bug expiry off, it could | 09:38 |
| lifeless | but bug expiry *ignores* whether a bug has had a reply | 09:38 |
| matsubara | right, got that. I won't do that anymore | 09:38 |
| lifeless | even if we turned it off, its a bit orthogonal | 09:39 |
| lifeless | we over-conflate things in the status field | 09:39 |
| matsubara | lifeless, btw, do you have an answer to the question I asked there? | 09:39 |
| lifeless | e.g. is-valid, is-bug-or-is-feature-request, is-ready-to-code and filer-has-been-asked-a-question | 09:40 |
| lifeless | matsubara: remind me :) | 09:40 |
| matsubara | lifeless, Would it be sufficient to add another bullet point to the +mailinglist page (e.g. https://qastaging.launchpad.net/~oops-tools-dev/+mailinglist) saying something like: "Non-Launchpad users won't be able to post to this list. Launchpad doesn't send non-delivery receipts to non-LP users if they try to post to this mailing list."? | 09:40 |
| jml | lifeless: yes, that's what the BugLifecycle thing is partly aiming to address (or diagnose) | 09:40 |
| lifeless | jml: yes ;) | 09:40 |
| lifeless | matsubara: that would be a good thing to do. I don't think it will eliminate the confusion. It may reduce it. | 09:41 |
| lifeless | matsubara: I don't know if it would be sufficient. | 09:41 |
| lifeless | matsubara: its probably necessary (unless we change the behaviour, which is problematic for a whole other set of issues) | 09:41 |
| matsubara | lifeless, is there other place that documentation could be added? | 09:43 |
| lifeless | theres probably stuff on h.l.n about lists in general | 09:43 |
| matsubara | lifeless, right. | 09:45 |
| matsubara | I'll work on it today | 09:45 |
| lifeless | cool | 09:46 |
| bigjools | jtv: do you reckon we could make a query fast enough to make +localpackagediffs look for matching packages, packagesets and people associated with packages all at the same time? | 10:03 |
| wallyworld_ | jcsackett: i've found some issues with non lazr-js build. am fixing now | 10:07 |
| jml | rvba: please use a bigger font :) | 10:09 |
| === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan | ||
| === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away | ||
| jtv | bigjools: we'll have to talk about it — I may not fully understand what it is you want | 10:35 |
| rvba | StevenK: qa-ok! | 11:28 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: hi | 11:37 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Hey there | 11:37 |
| lifeless | so bug 697489 | 11:37 |
| _mup_ | Bug #697489: "Participation" and "Involvement" portlets order is different from "applications" links <easy> <ui> <users> <Launchpad itself:Won't Fix> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/697489 > | 11:37 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: how do you want to hae this discussion? | 11:41 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Is here ok? | 11:41 |
| lifeless | its fine by me | 11:41 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: the getting involved portlet shows up on only one page | 11:43 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: I don't see how it can be such a key element | 11:43 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: It appears in various forms on project pages, user profiles, bug listings, bugs, answers etc. | 11:44 |
| lifeless | nope | 11:44 |
| lifeless | project and person only AFAICT | 11:44 |
| lifeless | specifically the overview (root domain) view for pillars | 11:45 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: it may have been intended to be widely deployed, but it hasn't been | 11:46 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: How do you think most people file a bug? | 11:47 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: apport | 11:47 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: (statistically) | 11:48 |
| NCommander | StevenK: wgrant we should probably meet up tonight to talk about LP | 11:48 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: excluding that special case they use the 'report a bug' link which is visible on bugs.l.n/project | 11:48 |
| StevenK | NCommander: Tonight, ronight? | 11:48 |
| StevenK | s/r/t/ | 11:48 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: log analysis can tell use if folk start from the project front page, but this involvement portlet is new | 11:49 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Right, so that would seem like a pretty important part of the UI to me | 11:49 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: I suspect muscle memory has most folk starting with bugs.l.n/project | 11:49 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: thats a different portlet | 11:49 |
| NCommander | StevenK: well, its tonight, or tomorrow night, and I find that friday nights are less likely to get something done | 11:49 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: isn't it? | 11:49 |
| StevenK | NCommander: Tonight is the LP team dinner | 11:50 |
| StevenK | I'd suggest this afternoon | 11:50 |
| NCommander | StevenK: that works. | 11:50 |
| StevenK | NCommander: Pop your head into the LP breakout room and ask wgrant and bigjools | 11:50 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: even if it is the same one, the proposed change wouldn't alter that portlet on bugs.l.n, as its already in the same order as the applications bar | 11:50 |
| NCommander | StevenK: I'll be over in ~30 minutes | 11:51 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: The proposal is that all those portlets would be the same as the main tabs | 11:51 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: I don't think it is a bug that they are in a different order | 11:52 |
| huwshimi | (a different order to the main tabs) | 11:53 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: I thought the reported defect was that the order was inconsistent | 11:53 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: not that they needed the same content | 11:54 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: yes | 11:54 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Are we not saying the same thing? | 11:54 |
| lifeless | I thought for a statement there that you thought the bug was larger than the order | 11:55 |
| lifeless | 'same as the main tabs' | 11:55 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: so I think its fine to say 'the order is different because (reason)' and wontfix it on that basis. | 11:55 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: closing something we agree is a defect really rubs me the wrong way; in the bug so far you have not indicated a preference for the status quo, rather indicated that change might (and we have no data only guesses) be expensive | 11:56 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Well the bug merely says they should be the same for "consistency" | 11:57 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: There is no data to suggest that that is true either | 11:58 |
| lifeless | well | 11:59 |
| lifeless | there is some research out there, but I don't think its conclusive | 11:59 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Can you point me towards it? | 11:59 |
| * lifeless digs | 11:59 | |
| lifeless | Nielsen 1989b, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface#Consistency has some references | 12:00 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Oh sorry I thought you meant something specific to this bug | 12:01 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: we don't have data on the cost of change; we don't have data on the cost of the inconsistency - thats true | 12:02 |
| lifeless | we have some models about potential costs for the inconsistency; and we can data mine logs to assess the cost of change if we want to | 12:02 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: so I'm not invested either way; As I read the report its a valid defect - but I wouldn't have called it high. | 12:09 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: my objection to closing it is based around whether its a valid defect or not; we shouldn't close bugs just because its tricky to do right now. | 12:10 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: I don't believe it is a valid defect because there is an inconsistency. As curtis mentions on the bug the order was chosen (however arbitrary that may have been). | 12:12 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: It is a consideration, sure, but not a bug | 12:13 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: curtis also says 'We want one order for all three portlet' | 12:13 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Possibly we don | 12:13 |
| huwshimi | *we do | 12:13 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: It is not *wrong* that they are different | 12:14 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: being *wrong* is not a necessary condition to be in the tracker | 12:14 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: No, that's why we have statuses like "won't fix" | 12:15 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: huh? thats unrelated | 12:15 |
| lifeless | we have wontfix for things we don't want to do. | 12:15 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Right, and I don't think we want to fix this | 12:16 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: At least not just for the sake of making it "consistent" | 12:17 |
| lifeless | thats not consistent with what curtis wrote earlier in the bug | 12:18 |
| lifeless | (heh, sorry about the reuse of consistent, brain-broke) | 12:18 |
| lifeless | I'm concerned that we're closing off something we would like to do (have them consistent) because the cost of change is higher than we're willing to pay for consistency. | 12:20 |
| lifeless | Thats getting trapped in a local trough | 12:20 |
| lifeless | a better thing to do is to say that we won't change it *solely* for this, leave the bug open, and when we have other reasons to change the portlets do this at the same time. | 12:20 |
| lifeless | the aspects of 'would we like this' and 'what is necessary to do it well/acceptably' are quite separatabl | 12:21 |
| lifeless | e | 12:21 |
| abentley | henninge: The RosettaApplicationView dates back to June 12 2005, and was last seriously touched by SteveA. | 12:23 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: this is dragging on too long | 12:27 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: So lets change this to something like opinion then? | 12:27 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: whats your objection to it being open with a caveat about when to do it? | 12:28 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: have I misunderstood you? do you actively want the portlets to have different orders? | 12:28 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: It's possible that a different order is actually better | 12:30 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: do we actually think that? curtis said that he wanted them to have the same order eventually | 12:30 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: if you think a different order *is* better, wontfix is totally fine, but as I understand it you haven't said that. | 12:31 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: you seem to be on the fence about that aspect, and unwilling to inflict a (possibly traumatic) change on our users for something you are ambivalent about | 12:31 |
| lifeless | - which is totally reasonable | 12:32 |
| lifeless | however, curtis was totally clear that he wants all these things to have the same order, which agrees with the reporter, and combining these views suggests a real bug we shouldn't do without either more data about costs/benefits || some other change to alter the cost/benefit ratio by doing at the same time | 12:33 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: I would be happy with a bug that said "the current order of portlet links may not be the best possible order" | 12:34 |
| benji | mrevell: I changed 728193 to "In Progress" | 12:34 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: so change this one to say that :) | 12:35 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: But I don't think that's really a bug | 12:35 |
| lifeless | I'm getting really confused here | 12:36 |
| StevenK | jcsackett: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/365812 | 12:37 |
| _mup_ | Bug #365812: lazr-sam.css should be placed under lazr/build/assets/ along with required image files <easy> <javascript> <lp-foundations> <performance> <ui> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> <LAZR Javascript Library:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/365812 > | 12:37 |
| lifeless | you're not stating that consistency is undesirable; you acknowledge that we may want them to be consistent; curtis *does* want them to be consistent, and the only reason presented not to harmonise things is the cost of change | 12:37 |
| mrevell | thanks benji | 12:37 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: That seems to be more of an opinion thing to actually being a bug | 12:37 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: sure, but its an opinion that the guy which brought in this portlet agrees with | 12:38 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: I've acknowledged your constraint over cost-of-change, but you still don't want this (valid) bug in the system for some reason. | 12:39 |
| lifeless | and I don't understand that | 12:39 |
| lifeless | if you're happy as things are, then cost of change is irrelevant,a nd closing it is appropriate | 12:40 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: So I also think there are bigger things here that make this issue kind of redundant, one of which I mentioned on the bug (about not having the "participation" portlet) | 12:43 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: if we've committed to doing something about it, closing wontfix (because we are doing X whichmakes redundant) also makes sense | 12:45 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: but if we haven't committed to doing that, or if doing that might not solve this thing, then they are different issues | 12:45 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: I don't really care how this is resolved. I don't think it's valid to say the portlet order should be the same as the nav which is why I closed as won't fix | 12:45 |
| lifeless | ah, so this is the meat :) | 12:46 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: do you know why curtis said that we *do* want one order for them all ? | 12:46 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: nope | 12:47 |
| lifeless | I suggest you talk to him, since you are both there. | 12:47 |
| lifeless | *if* we want one order, then this bug is squarely on the issue and we should update it to make sure we don't change this willy-nilly but coordinate it at some future time. | 12:48 |
| lifeless | if we don't want one order, then the argument about cost of change is irrelevant and wontfix is fine (but we should update it to be clear that its not wontfix-this-is-hard, its wontfix we don't *want* to be consistent. | 12:49 |
| lifeless | What I want is that the reasoning is clear, so that the reporter understands why, which helps them understand how we're building LP better (lots of our reporters report > 1 bug IME, and we want to help folk become contributors) | 12:50 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: I'm crashing now before midnight arrives | 12:52 |
| huwshimi | lifeless: Ok thanks for that | 12:52 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: thanks for your patience humouring me on this; I look forward to *one* of those things in the bug report in the morning :) | 12:52 |
| lifeless | unclear bug closing tends to set me off (because of the social impact it has) | 12:53 |
| lifeless | huwshimi: I realise this discussion probably seems a lot larger than you expected when you closed the bug :) | 12:54 |
| lifeless | anyhoo | 12:55 |
| lifeless | night all | 12:55 |
| lifeless | have a great day sprinting | 12:55 |
| wgrant | Night lifeless. | 12:56 |
| matsubara | anyone available for a quick review: https://code.launchpad.net/~matsubara/launchpad/772016-mailinglist-help/+merge/66443? | 12:59 |
| rvba | wgrant: http://paste.ubuntu.com/635746/ | 13:45 |
| wgrant | rvba: We could have routing keys like lp.job.MergeProposalJob.1234, or lp.job.MergeProposalJob.1234.status_change, or lp.job.MergeProposalJob.1234.status.completed, or... | 13:48 |
| rvba | wgrant: that's the plan yes. | 13:50 |
| jcsackett | sinzui: how does one fire off all YUI tests at once? something with layer=YUI... yeah? | 14:26 |
| wgrant | jcsackett: --layer=YUI should do it. | 14:34 |
| jcsackett | thanks wgrant. | 14:34 |
| matsubara | jelmer, thanks for the review! | 14:57 |
| jelmer | matsubara: anytime :) | 14:57 |
| benji | StevenK: boo! | 15:00 |
| benji | StevenK: will you review https://code.launchpad.net/~benji/launchpad/bug-436247/+merge/66336 for me? | 15:00 |
| StevenK | benji: I could be convinced. Whaddya got? | 15:00 |
| * benji hands StevenK ten thousand units of his currency of choice. | 15:01 | |
| StevenK | Haha | 15:02 |
| StevenK | benji: My only concern is you drop a tal:define of number_of_dupes | 15:03 |
| benji | ooh, looking | 15:03 |
| benji | StevenK: yep, that block didn't have anything in it (and defines are scoped to the enclosing tag (unless they have "global" on them)) | 15:03 |
| StevenK | benji: Right, so it was utterly pointless | 15:04 |
| benji | absolutely | 15:04 |
| StevenK | benji: r=me | 15:05 |
| benji | cool, thanks | 15:05 |
| jml | poolie: Give lp:~jml/testtools/gassy-failure-660852 a try if you'd like | 15:53 |
| wgrant | allenap: http://paste.ubuntu.com/634326/ | 16:21 |
| benji | StevenK: that was lazr.restfulclient, right? | 16:25 |
| StevenK | benji: Right | 16:26 |
| benji | k | 16:26 |
| benji | StevenK: I don't see a NEWS.txt entry. What's a good one-line description of the change? | 16:27 |
| StevenK | benji: Best person to ask is poolie. | 16:27 |
| * benji sends telepathic waves towards poolie. | 16:28 | |
| StevenK | Did they work? :-P | 16:28 |
| benji | not yet | 16:28 |
| benji | I think I'll just construct some NEWS entries from the bzr log, it looks like several people merged things in without updating NEWS. | 16:30 |
| benji | Bad people. No cookie. | 16:30 |
| StevenK | benji: Haha, thank you for sorting it. | 16:32 |
| huwshimi | deryck: Do you want to review this branch? https://code.launchpad.net/~huwshimi/launchpad/bug-link-focus-749845/+merge/66474 | 16:34 |
| deryck | huwshimi, sure. 5 minutes to finish another review, and I'll take a look. | 16:34 |
| huwshimi | deryck: np | 16:34 |
| deryck | wallyworld_, hey. you really here? | 16:36 |
| wallyworld_ | deryck: yes | 16:36 |
| wallyworld_ | sometimes | 16:36 |
| === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan | ||
| deryck | wallyworld_, actually hold on, sorry. taking my advice to jcsackett for a make clean first. | 16:36 |
| wallyworld_ | ok | 16:36 |
| deryck | wallyworld_, false alarm. works beautifully and diff reports the same files now. | 16:40 |
| wallyworld_ | deryck: \o/ | 16:40 |
| deryck | wallyworld_, so r=me. | 16:40 |
| wallyworld_ | awesome, thanks | 16:40 |
| deryck | np | 16:41 |
| deryck | huwshimi, looking at your MP now. | 16:41 |
| deryck | huwshimi, come see me about your bug when you can. | 16:46 |
| deryck | or your MP rather | 16:46 |
| huwshimi | deryck: Sure, be there in a few | 16:46 |
| deryck | huwshimi, cool | 16:46 |
| benji | StevenK: ok, 0.12.0 is released | 16:47 |
| StevenK | benji: Thanks! Where can I grab it? | 16:47 |
| benji | StevenK: https://launchpad.net/lazr.restfulclient/+download | 16:48 |
| poolie | thanks jml | 16:50 |
| === beuno is now known as beuno-lunch | ||
| jml | poolie: you might want to try again with the latest branch. I've applied mgz's suggestions. | 17:16 |
| deryck | huwshimi, http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/635875/ | 17:20 |
| huwshimi | deryck: Thanks for that | 17:22 |
| huwshimi | deryck: Do you want to approve the branch, or are you ok for me to do it? | 17:22 |
| deryck | huwshimi, no problem. I added the pastebin to the MP when I approved it just now, too. | 17:22 |
| huwshimi | deryck: Ah awesome thatnks | 17:22 |
| deryck | np | 17:22 |
| huwshimi | *thanks | 17:22 |
| huwshimi | poolie: If you want to talk about the branch page any more I'm available now | 17:28 |
| allenap | rvba: lp:~allenap/launchpad/routing-key-generation | 17:29 |
| gmb | wgrant: http://oo00.eu | 17:38 |
| poolie | huwshimi, mrevell, would you two like to come and talk about bug workflow with ubuntu people? skaet etc | 17:41 |
| poolie | up on floor 2 | 17:41 |
| huwshimi | poolie: sure, on way | 17:43 |
| === beuno-lunch is now known as beuno | ||
| jml | deryck: re "Big Bang Theory", http://life.metagnome.net/2011/05/crane-transposition.html | 17:59 |
| * deryck looks | 17:59 | |
| === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away | ||
| === salgado is now known as salgado-lunch | ||
| wgrant | gmb: You appear to have failed to push your lazr.amqp changes. trunk still thinks it's 0.0.2. | 18:32 |
| === salgado-lunch is now known as salgado | ||
| timrc | wgrant, ping | 20:21 |
| timrc | or anyone, what's the proper way to branch a private tree and push it back to LP such that it retains its privacy settings? | 20:22 |
| dobey | timrc: if you're pushing to a project that has branches private by default, it will be private by default | 20:42 |
| timrc | dobey, not from my experience | 20:43 |
| timrc | dobey, at least, not with bzrlib | 20:43 |
| dobey | bzr is not a private project | 20:44 |
| dobey | its branches are public by default | 20:44 |
| timrc | dobey, no, I branched a private branch, made some changes, and pushed a new branch back using bzrlib | 20:45 |
| timrc | the new branch was public | 20:45 |
| beuno | timrc, that decision is made by launchpad, not bzr | 20:45 |
| beuno | so it depends on the location | 20:45 |
| dobey | pushed to where? | 20:46 |
| beuno | if you push back to the project with private branches by default, it will be private | 20:46 |
| dobey | timrc: so you're writing some script that uses bzrlib, and does the pushing/pulling bits? | 20:46 |
| timrc | dobey, yeah | 20:46 |
| timrc | maybe it's because the private branch is owned by a user and not a project? | 20:46 |
| beuno | it shouldn't matter | 20:47 |
| dobey | projects don't own branches | 20:47 |
| timrc | a team, rather | 20:47 |
| beuno | you need to find out if a project has private branches by default or not | 20:47 |
| lifeless | moin | 20:47 |
| dobey | could be the project does not have private branches by default | 20:47 |
| bryceh | While: | 20:51 |
| bryceh | Installing scripts. | 20:51 |
| bryceh | Getting distribution for 'lazr.amqp==0.1'. | 20:51 |
| bryceh | Error: Couldn't find a distribution for 'lazr.amqp==0.1'. | 20:51 |
| bryceh | this is from attempting a rocketfuel-branch after updating to latest devel today. ideas? | 20:52 |
| lifeless | update your download cache | 20:55 |
| bryceh | yep, I think that did it | 20:56 |
| bryceh | thanks | 20:56 |
| timrc | I think my problem is that I pushed to +junk ? | 21:09 |
| timrc | are branches that get pushed to +junk made public? | 21:09 |
| lifeless | timrc: +junk is public | 21:10 |
| timrc | so this is just my general lack of understanding :) | 21:10 |
| lifeless | timrc: there is /no/ concept of 'is this thing private' for bzr | 21:10 |
| lifeless | timrc: so once you have a local branch, its just like every other branch | 21:10 |
| timrc | lifeless, this is just a result of my misunderstanding | 21:10 |
| lifeless | timrc: /projects/ in launchpad can define privacy rules | 21:10 |
| timrc | lifeless, okay | 21:14 |
| dobey | hrmm | 21:46 |
| dobey | why is most of the content in http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/maverick/gobject-introspection/maverick/view/head:/debian/control.in red text on red background? makes no sense to me :) | 21:46 |
| lifeless | looks lik a pygments fail | 21:49 |
| lifeless | dobey: file a bug ? | 22:07 |
| dobey | ok | 22:12 |
| dobey | against lp, or against... whatever that thing is called that is used for the code browsing? | 22:13 |
| === salgado is now known as salgado-afk | ||
| beuno | dobey, loggerhead | 22:21 |
| lifeless | lp | 22:21 |
| beuno | against loggerhead | 22:21 |
| lifeless | we'll add tasks to loggerhead and a watch to pygments | 22:21 |
| lifeless | beuno: fixed-in-loggerhead isn't fixed-in-lp, so it needs both | 22:22 |
| beuno | true | 22:22 |
| StevenK | lifeless: O hai. Can I trouble you for a small review? | 22:45 |
| lifeless | of course | 22:47 |
| StevenK | lifeless: https://code.launchpad.net/~stevenk/launchpad/branch-approximatedate/+merge/66480 | 22:48 |
| lifeless | thats reviewed :) | 22:48 |
| StevenK | lifeless: Thanks. I didn't think it would be controversial :-) | 22:49 |
| StevenK | lifeless: As an aside, 'a moment ago' is from the branch I landed a few hours ago | 22:49 |
| lifeless | no worries | 22:49 |
| lifeless | yeah, I like the look of it | 22:50 |
| StevenK | I'm not sure if 10 seconds is the right answer, but it's only mentioned in one place ... | 22:50 |
| lifeless | That test could fail, but if wehave 10 second swap storms stalling the test runner, we have a real problem | 22:55 |
| StevenK | Right | 22:55 |
| lifeless | hows the week been ? | 23:00 |
| StevenK | Tiring | 23:01 |
| StevenK | And in fact, on that note, I'm going to bed. :-) | 23:01 |
| * jelmer waves | 23:21 | |
| mwhudson | jelmer: hi! fixed that bzr-svn bug yet? :) | 23:22 |
| jelmer | mwhudson! | 23:26 |
| jelmer | mwhudson: No, but making progress | 23:26 |
| mwhudson | cool | 23:26 |
| mwhudson | nice to see some work on loggerhead, too | 23:26 |
| jelmer | mwhudson, I did some manual imports of gcc today to unblock some people | 23:26 |
| jelmer | mwhudson, and I at least have an idea how to manually fix the issue by disabling tags for the moment | 23:27 |
| jelmer | mwhudson, the memory problem turns out to be the fact that we do one run of "svn log" per tag, and then keep the results of that in memory | 23:27 |
| mwhudson | ah | 23:27 |
| jelmer | gcc has ~700 tags | 23:27 |
| mwhudson | i can see how that would be a problem for gcc | 23:27 |
| jelmer | the fact that we hold that data in memory 700 times is accidental - we start iterators that we don't fully consume; but because we keep a handle to them, and because they consume data generated by independent threads, we use all that memory | 23:29 |
| mwhudson | ah | 23:33 |
| mwhudson | nice software abstractions defeat efficient performance | 23:33 |
| mwhudson | or something? | 23:33 |
| jelmer | yeah, though s/nice// because they defeat efficient performance :P | 23:34 |
| mwhudson | s/^/seemingly / | 23:35 |
| lifeless | how does one tell a doctest to run in a layer? | 23:35 |
| lifeless | a DocTestSuite specifically | 23:36 |
| mwhudson | lifeless: have you encountered test_system_documentation yet? | 23:36 |
| lifeless | probably | 23:37 |
| lifeless | I'll poke at that | 23:37 |
| mwhudson | ah, actually i guess lib/lp/$app/test/test_doc.py is the modern equivalent | 23:38 |
| mwhudson | (but test_system_documentation is still there too) | 23:38 |
| lifeless | ah | 23:39 |
| lifeless | suite.layer = x | 23:39 |
| timrc | I'm getting http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/636053/ when I create (bzr init) a new tree and then push it to an existing project... any idea how I can rectify this? Appears to be some sort of compatibility issue... | 23:40 |
| lifeless | #bzr might be a better place to ask :) | 23:42 |
| timrc | lifeless, good point :) | 23:43 |
| timrc | my brain has married the two projects together :/ | 23:43 |
| jelmer | they're not married, but at least very good friends :) | 23:45 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!