/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2011/06/30/#launchpad-dev.txt

=== almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan
=== al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away
lifelessso I have my test machine up and running, but boy was it more work than I expected08:46
wgrantlifeless: Around?09:11
lifelessyes09:12
lifeless'sup?09:12
lifelesswgrant: ^09:13
wgrantlifeless: 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
lifelessyes09:14
lifelesswhat test runner are you using ?09:14
wgrantAt the moment it's zope.testrunner, but we're not tied to that.09:14
wgrantWill gladly abandon it.09:14
StevenKjtv!!!09:15
wgrantStill QA?09:15
jtvStevenK: ?09:15
lifelesswgrant: you will have to09:15
wgrantlifeless: Excellent.09:15
StevenKjtv: You have 4 or 5 branches of QA!09:15
lifelesswgrant: it messes with uites09:15
wgrantlifeless: Should I just use unittests?09:15
jtvStevenK: no I don't think so09:15
wgrants/unittests/unittest/09:15
lifelesswgrant: subunit.run :)09:15
jtvStevenK: I had to fix an ancient +queue timeout though before I could do meaningful Q/A09:15
wgrantlifeless: Can I integrate that with buildout, or should I just use testr?09:15
StevenKjtv: Sorry, 3. r13302, r13318 and r1332609:16
lifelesswgrant: I don't know about buildout and tests09:16
jtvStevenK: I have zero branches in qa-needstesting.09:16
jtvYour view may be lagging.09:16
StevenKWhen did you change the bugs?09:17
bigjoolspay attention gentlemen09:17
jtvStevenK: Sometime in the past 4 minutes.09:17
* StevenK makes a ... sign at bigjools 09:17
StevenKlifeless: I am disabling parallel-test again.09:19
LPCIBotProject parallel-test build #83: ABORTED in 11 hr: https://lpci.wedontsleep.org/job/parallel-test/83/09:20
lifelesswgrant: chatting with jml for a quick 'how to glue it together' bootstrap may help you09:20
StevenKBecause of ^09:20
wgrantlifeless: Thanks.09:20
jtvbigjools: pay attention09:21
wgrantlifeless: So we can't use test discovery?09:23
lifelesssure can09:23
lifelessneed the discover egg09:23
wgrantHow do we make it use OptimisingTestSuite then?09:24
lifelessand a root level load_tests hook to wrap things and reenter into discovery to gather the children09:24
wgrantk09:24
wgrantWill hopefully talk to jml.09:24
danilosjtv, 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 box09:34
lifelessmatsubara: hi09:36
lifelessmatsubara: I just wanted to check you saw my comment on the bug you incompleted09:36
matsubaralifeless, hello09:36
lifelessmatsubara: (because you might not be subscribed ;))09:37
matsubaralifeless, I have now. thanks09:37
lifeless:)09:37
matsubaralifeless, yeah, I didn't get a mail notification :-)09:37
matsubarahmm I always thought incomplete could be used as a needs info09:38
lifelessif we turn bug expiry off, it could09:38
lifelessbut bug expiry *ignores* whether a bug has had a reply09:38
matsubararight, got that. I won't do that anymore09:38
lifelesseven if we turned it off, its a bit orthogonal09:39
lifelesswe over-conflate things in the status field09:39
matsubaralifeless, btw, do you have an answer to the question I asked there?09:39
lifelesse.g. is-valid, is-bug-or-is-feature-request, is-ready-to-code and filer-has-been-asked-a-question09:40
lifelessmatsubara: remind me  :)09:40
matsubaralifeless, 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
jmllifeless: yes, that's what the BugLifecycle thing is partly aiming to address (or diagnose)09:40
lifelessjml: yes ;)09:40
lifelessmatsubara: that would be a good thing to do. I don't think it will eliminate the confusion. It may reduce it.09:41
lifelessmatsubara: I don't know if it would be sufficient.09:41
lifelessmatsubara: its probably necessary (unless we change the behaviour, which is problematic for a whole other set of issues)09:41
matsubaralifeless, is there other place that documentation could be added?09:43
lifelesstheres probably stuff on h.l.n about lists in general09:43
matsubaralifeless, right.09:45
matsubaraI'll work on it today09:45
lifelesscool09:46
bigjoolsjtv: 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 now10:07
jmlrvba: please use a bigger font :)10:09
=== almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan
=== al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away
jtvbigjools: we'll have to talk about it — I may not fully understand what it is you want10:35
rvbaStevenK: qa-ok!11:28
lifelesshuwshimi: hi11:37
huwshimilifeless: Hey there11:37
lifelessso bug 69748911:37
_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
lifelesshuwshimi: how do you want to hae this discussion?11:41
huwshimilifeless: Is here ok?11:41
lifelessits fine by me11:41
lifelesshuwshimi: the getting involved portlet shows up on only one page11:43
lifelesshuwshimi: I don't see how it can be such a key element11:43
huwshimilifeless:  It appears in various forms on project pages, user profiles, bug listings, bugs, answers etc.11:44
lifelessnope11:44
lifelessproject and person only AFAICT11:44
lifelessspecifically the overview (root domain) view for pillars11:45
lifelesshuwshimi: it may have been intended to be widely deployed, but it hasn't been11:46
huwshimilifeless: How do you think most people file a bug?11:47
lifelesshuwshimi: apport11:47
lifelesshuwshimi: (statistically)11:48
NCommanderStevenK: wgrant we should probably meet up tonight to talk about LP11:48
lifelesshuwshimi: excluding that special case they use the 'report a bug' link which is visible on bugs.l.n/project11:48
StevenKNCommander: Tonight, ronight?11:48
StevenKs/r/t/11:48
lifelesshuwshimi: log analysis can tell use if folk start from the project front page, but this involvement portlet is new11:49
huwshimilifeless: Right, so that would seem like a pretty important part of the UI to me11:49
lifelesshuwshimi: I suspect muscle memory has most folk starting with bugs.l.n/project11:49
lifelesshuwshimi: thats a different portlet11:49
NCommanderStevenK: well, its tonight, or tomorrow night, and I find that friday nights are less likely to get something done11:49
lifelesshuwshimi: isn't it?11:49
StevenKNCommander: Tonight is the LP team dinner11:50
StevenKI'd suggest this afternoon11:50
NCommanderStevenK: that works.11:50
StevenKNCommander: Pop your head into the LP breakout room and ask wgrant and bigjools11:50
lifelesshuwshimi: 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 bar11:50
NCommanderStevenK: I'll be over in ~30 minutes11:51
huwshimilifeless: The proposal is that all those portlets would be the same as the main tabs11:51
huwshimilifeless: I don't think it is a bug that they are in a different order11:52
huwshimi(a different order to the main tabs)11:53
lifelesshuwshimi: I thought the reported defect was that the order was inconsistent11:53
lifelesshuwshimi: not that they needed the same content11:54
huwshimilifeless: yes11:54
huwshimilifeless: Are we not saying the same thing?11:54
lifelessI thought for a statement there that you thought the bug was larger than the order11:55
lifeless'same as the main tabs'11:55
lifelesshuwshimi: so I think its fine to say 'the order is different because (reason)' and wontfix it on that basis.11:55
lifelesshuwshimi: 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 expensive11:56
huwshimilifeless: Well the bug merely says they should be the same for "consistency"11:57
huwshimilifeless: There is no data to suggest that that is true either11:58
lifelesswell11:59
lifelessthere is some research out there, but I don't think its conclusive11:59
huwshimilifeless: Can you point me towards it?11:59
* lifeless digs11:59
lifelessNielsen 1989b, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface#Consistency has some references12:00
huwshimilifeless: Oh sorry I thought you meant something specific to this bug12:01
lifelesshuwshimi: we don't have data on the cost of change; we don't have data on the cost of the inconsistency - thats true12:02
lifelesswe have some models about potential costs for the inconsistency; and we can data mine logs to assess the cost of change if we want to12:02
lifelesshuwshimi: 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
lifelesshuwshimi: 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
huwshimilifeless: 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
huwshimilifeless: It is a consideration, sure, but not a bug12:13
lifelesshuwshimi: curtis also says 'We want one order for all three portlet'12:13
huwshimilifeless: Possibly we don12:13
huwshimi*we do12:13
huwshimilifeless: It is not *wrong* that they are different12:14
lifelesshuwshimi: being *wrong* is not a necessary condition to be in the tracker12:14
huwshimilifeless: No, that's why we have statuses like "won't fix"12:15
lifelesshuwshimi: huh? thats unrelated12:15
lifelesswe have wontfix for things we don't want to do.12:15
huwshimilifeless: Right, and I don't think we want to fix this12:16
huwshimilifeless: At least not just for the sake of making it "consistent"12:17
lifelessthats not consistent with what curtis wrote earlier in the bug12:18
lifeless(heh, sorry about the reuse of consistent, brain-broke)12:18
lifelessI'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
lifelessThats getting trapped in a local trough12:20
lifelessa 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
lifelessthe aspects of 'would we like this' and 'what is necessary to do it well/acceptably' are quite separatabl12:21
lifelesse12:21
abentleyhenninge: The RosettaApplicationView dates back to June 12 2005, and was last seriously touched by SteveA.12:23
lifelesshuwshimi: this is dragging on too long12:27
huwshimilifeless: So lets change this to something like opinion then?12:27
lifelesshuwshimi: whats your objection to it being open with a caveat about when to do it?12:28
lifelesshuwshimi: have I misunderstood you? do you actively want the portlets to have different orders?12:28
huwshimilifeless: It's possible that a different order is actually better12:30
lifelesshuwshimi: do we actually think that? curtis said that he wanted them to have the same order eventually12:30
lifelesshuwshimi: if you think a different order *is* better, wontfix is totally fine, but as I understand it you haven't said that.12:31
lifelesshuwshimi: 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 about12:31
lifeless - which is totally reasonable12:32
lifelesshowever, 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 time12:33
huwshimilifeless: I would be happy with a bug that said "the current order of portlet links may not be the best possible order"12:34
benjimrevell: I changed 728193 to "In Progress"12:34
lifelesshuwshimi: so change this one to say that :)12:35
huwshimilifeless: But I don't think that's really a bug12:35
lifelessI'm getting really confused here12:36
StevenKjcsackett: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/36581212:37
_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
lifelessyou'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 change12:37
mrevellthanks benji12:37
huwshimilifeless: That seems to be more of an opinion thing to actually being a bug12:37
lifelesshuwshimi: sure, but its an opinion that the guy which brought in this portlet agrees with12:38
lifelesshuwshimi: 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
lifelessand I don't understand that12:39
lifelessif you're happy as things are, then cost of change is irrelevant,a nd closing it is appropriate12:40
huwshimilifeless: 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
lifelesshuwshimi: if we've committed to doing something about it, closing wontfix (because we are doing X whichmakes redundant) also makes sense12:45
lifelesshuwshimi: but if we haven't committed to doing that, or if doing that might not solve this thing, then they are different issues12:45
huwshimilifeless: 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 fix12:45
lifelessah, so this is the meat :)12:46
lifelesshuwshimi: do you know why curtis said that we *do* want one order for them all ?12:46
huwshimilifeless: nope12:47
lifelessI 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
lifelessif 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
lifelessWhat 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
lifelesshuwshimi: I'm crashing now before midnight arrives12:52
huwshimilifeless: Ok thanks for that12:52
lifelesshuwshimi: 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
lifelessunclear bug closing tends to set me off (because of the social impact it has)12:53
lifelesshuwshimi: I realise this discussion probably seems a lot larger than you expected when you closed the bug :)12:54
lifelessanyhoo12:55
lifelessnight all12:55
lifelesshave a great day sprinting12:55
wgrantNight lifeless.12:56
matsubaraanyone available for a quick review: https://code.launchpad.net/~matsubara/launchpad/772016-mailinglist-help/+merge/66443?12:59
rvbawgrant: http://paste.ubuntu.com/635746/13:45
wgrantrvba: 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
rvbawgrant: that's the plan yes.13:50
jcsackettsinzui: how does one fire off all YUI tests at once? something with layer=YUI... yeah?14:26
wgrantjcsackett: --layer=YUI should do it.14:34
jcsackettthanks wgrant.14:34
matsubarajelmer, thanks for the review!14:57
jelmermatsubara: anytime :)14:57
benjiStevenK: boo!15:00
benjiStevenK: will you review https://code.launchpad.net/~benji/launchpad/bug-436247/+merge/66336 for me?15:00
StevenKbenji: I could be convinced. Whaddya got?15:00
* benji hands StevenK ten thousand units of his currency of choice.15:01
StevenKHaha15:02
StevenKbenji: My only concern is you drop a tal:define of number_of_dupes15:03
benjiooh, looking15:03
benjiStevenK: 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
StevenKbenji: Right, so it was utterly pointless15:04
benjiabsolutely15:04
StevenKbenji: r=me15:05
benjicool, thanks15:05
jmlpoolie: Give lp:~jml/testtools/gassy-failure-660852 a try if you'd like15:53
wgrantallenap: http://paste.ubuntu.com/634326/16:21
benjiStevenK: that was lazr.restfulclient, right?16:25
StevenKbenji: Right16:26
benjik16:26
benjiStevenK: I don't see a NEWS.txt entry.  What's a good one-line description of the change?16:27
StevenKbenji: Best person to ask is poolie.16:27
* benji sends telepathic waves towards poolie.16:28
StevenKDid they work? :-P16:28
benjinot yet16:28
benjiI 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
benjiBad people.  No cookie.16:30
StevenKbenji: Haha, thank you for sorting it.16:32
huwshimideryck: Do you want to review this branch? https://code.launchpad.net/~huwshimi/launchpad/bug-link-focus-749845/+merge/6647416:34
deryckhuwshimi, sure.  5 minutes to finish another review, and I'll take a look.16:34
huwshimideryck: np16:34
deryckwallyworld_, hey.  you really here?16:36
wallyworld_deryck: yes16:36
wallyworld_sometimes16:36
=== almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan
deryckwallyworld_, actually hold on, sorry.  taking my advice to jcsackett for a make clean first.16:36
wallyworld_ok16:36
deryckwallyworld_, false alarm.  works beautifully and diff reports the same files now.16:40
wallyworld_deryck: \o/16:40
deryckwallyworld_, so r=me.16:40
wallyworld_awesome, thanks16:40
derycknp16:41
deryckhuwshimi, looking at your MP now.16:41
deryckhuwshimi, come see me about your bug when you can.16:46
deryckor your MP rather16:46
huwshimideryck: Sure, be there in a few16:46
deryckhuwshimi, cool16:46
benjiStevenK: ok, 0.12.0 is released16:47
StevenKbenji: Thanks! Where can I grab it?16:47
benjiStevenK: https://launchpad.net/lazr.restfulclient/+download16:48
pooliethanks jml16:50
=== beuno is now known as beuno-lunch
jmlpoolie: you might want to try again with the latest branch. I've applied mgz's suggestions.17:16
deryckhuwshimi, http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/635875/17:20
huwshimideryck: Thanks for that17:22
huwshimideryck: Do you want to approve the branch, or are you ok for me to do it?17:22
deryckhuwshimi, no problem.  I added the pastebin to the MP when I approved it just now, too.17:22
huwshimideryck: Ah awesome thatnks17:22
derycknp17:22
huwshimi*thanks17:22
huwshimipoolie: If you want to talk about the branch page any more I'm available now17:28
allenaprvba: lp:~allenap/launchpad/routing-key-generation17:29
gmbwgrant: http://oo00.eu17:38
pooliehuwshimi, mrevell, would you two like to come and talk about bug workflow with ubuntu people? skaet etc17:41
poolieup on floor 217:41
huwshimipoolie: sure, on way17:43
=== beuno-lunch is now known as beuno
jmlderyck: re "Big Bang Theory", http://life.metagnome.net/2011/05/crane-transposition.html17:59
* deryck looks17:59
=== al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away
=== salgado is now known as salgado-lunch
wgrantgmb: 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
timrcwgrant, ping20:21
timrcor 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
dobeytimrc: if you're pushing to a project that has branches private by default, it will be private by default20:42
timrcdobey, not from my experience20:43
timrcdobey, at least, not with bzrlib20:43
dobeybzr is not a private project20:44
dobeyits branches are public by default20:44
timrcdobey, no, I branched a private branch, made some changes, and pushed a new branch back using bzrlib20:45
timrcthe new branch was public20:45
beunotimrc, that decision is made by launchpad, not bzr20:45
beunoso it depends on the location20:45
dobeypushed to where?20:46
beunoif you push back to the project with private branches by default, it will be private20:46
dobeytimrc: so you're writing some script that uses bzrlib, and does the pushing/pulling bits?20:46
timrcdobey, yeah20:46
timrcmaybe it's because the private branch is owned by a user and not a project?20:46
beunoit shouldn't matter20:47
dobeyprojects don't own branches20:47
timrca team, rather20:47
beunoyou need to find out if a project has private branches by default or not20:47
lifelessmoin20:47
dobeycould be the project does not have private branches by default20:47
brycehWhile:20:51
bryceh  Installing scripts.20:51
bryceh  Getting distribution for 'lazr.amqp==0.1'.20:51
brycehError: Couldn't find a distribution for 'lazr.amqp==0.1'.20:51
brycehthis is from attempting a rocketfuel-branch after updating to latest devel today.  ideas?20:52
lifelessupdate your download cache20:55
brycehyep, I think that did it20:56
brycehthanks20:56
timrcI think my problem is that I pushed to +junk ?21:09
timrcare branches that get pushed to +junk made public?21:09
lifelesstimrc: +junk is public21:10
timrcso this is just my general lack of understanding :)21:10
lifelesstimrc: there is /no/ concept of 'is this thing private' for bzr21:10
lifelesstimrc: so once you have a local branch, its just like every other branch21:10
timrclifeless, this is just a result of my misunderstanding21:10
lifelesstimrc: /projects/ in launchpad can define privacy rules21:10
timrclifeless, okay21:14
dobeyhrmm21:46
dobeywhy 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
lifelesslooks lik a pygments fail21:49
lifelessdobey: file a bug ?22:07
dobeyok22:12
dobeyagainst lp, or against... whatever that thing is called that is used for the code browsing?22:13
=== salgado is now known as salgado-afk
beunodobey, loggerhead22:21
lifelesslp22:21
beunoagainst loggerhead22:21
lifelesswe'll add tasks to loggerhead and a watch to pygments22:21
lifelessbeuno: fixed-in-loggerhead isn't fixed-in-lp, so it needs both22:22
beunotrue22:22
StevenKlifeless: O hai. Can I trouble you for a small review?22:45
lifelessof course22:47
StevenKlifeless: https://code.launchpad.net/~stevenk/launchpad/branch-approximatedate/+merge/6648022:48
lifelessthats reviewed :)22:48
StevenKlifeless: Thanks. I didn't think it would be controversial :-)22:49
StevenKlifeless: As an aside, 'a moment ago' is from the branch I landed a few hours ago22:49
lifelessno worries22:49
lifelessyeah, I like the look of it22:50
StevenKI'm not sure if 10 seconds is the right answer, but it's only mentioned in one place ...22:50
lifelessThat test could fail, but if wehave 10 second swap storms stalling the test runner, we have a real problem22:55
StevenKRight22:55
lifelesshows the week been ?23:00
StevenKTiring23:01
StevenKAnd in fact, on that note, I'm going to bed. :-)23:01
* jelmer waves23:21
mwhudsonjelmer: hi!  fixed that bzr-svn bug yet? :)23:22
jelmermwhudson!23:26
jelmermwhudson: No, but making progress23:26
mwhudsoncool23:26
mwhudsonnice to see some work on loggerhead, too23:26
jelmermwhudson, I did some manual imports of gcc today to unblock some people23:26
jelmermwhudson, and I at least have an idea how to manually fix the issue by disabling tags for the moment23:27
jelmermwhudson, 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 memory23:27
mwhudsonah23:27
jelmergcc has ~700 tags23:27
mwhudsoni can see how that would be a problem for gcc23:27
jelmerthe 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 memory23:29
mwhudsonah23:33
mwhudsonnice software abstractions defeat efficient performance23:33
mwhudsonor something?23:33
jelmeryeah, though s/nice// because they defeat efficient performance :P23:34
mwhudsons/^/seemingly /23:35
lifelesshow does one tell a doctest to run in a layer?23:35
lifelessa DocTestSuite specifically23:36
mwhudsonlifeless: have you encountered test_system_documentation yet?23:36
lifelessprobably23:37
lifelessI'll poke at that23:37
mwhudsonah, actually i guess lib/lp/$app/test/test_doc.py is the modern equivalent23:38
mwhudson(but test_system_documentation is still there too)23:38
lifelessah23:39
lifelesssuite.layer = x23:39
timrcI'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
timrclifeless, good point :)23:43
timrcmy brain has married the two projects together :/23:43
jelmerthey'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!