[00:18] <mhall119> cjohnston: I got a different error
[00:18] <mhall119> today_view() got an unexpected keyword argument 'summit_name'
[00:18] <mhall119> did you not change the today_view function?
[00:19] <cjohnston> even when removing summit_name it didnt fix it, and i had no idea what else to do
[00:24] <mhall119> cjohnston: where did you get the error?
[00:27] <cjohnston> when visiting uds-p/oday
[00:28] <cjohnston> uds-p/today
[00:30] <mhall119> I don't have a uds-p
[00:30] <mhall119> I went to uds-o/today and didn't get the error
[00:30] <mhall119> could the error be caused by data?
[00:32] <cjohnston> i wonder if its because there isnt any info other than just the uds-p and the dates
[00:32] <cjohnston> no items
[00:33] <cjohnston> so mhall119 I can propose that merge then?
[00:34] <cjohnston> any idea why https://code.launchpad.net/~chrisjohnston/loco-directory/608289/+merge/68182 hasnt merged in?
[00:39] <mhall119> no merge without fixing today_view to expect a summit name
[00:40] <mhall119> cjohnston: either nigel's tarmac is down, or there's a merge conflict perhaps?
[00:41] <cjohnston> mhall119: soI need to remove summit_name from today?
[00:42] <mhall119> no, the view function needs to know about it
[00:42] <mhall119> hang on, I'll have an MP to your branch
[00:46] <mhall119> cjohnston: https://code.launchpad.net/~mhall119/summit/today/+merge/68199
[00:46] <mhall119> see if you still get the error with that merged into your branch
[00:53] <cjohnston> Done.. Thanks mhall119
[00:53] <cjohnston> mhall119: you still gonna be able to do reviews tonight?
[00:53] <mhall119> what, you want more work out of me?
[00:54] <cjohnston> Yes
[00:54] <cjohnston> It would be nice to get some summit work done :-)
[01:00] <mhall119> don't we have a jam scheduled for that?
[01:01] <mhall119> man, you've been busy with summit, I thought we gave that to nigel
[01:01] <cjohnston> lol
[01:02] <mhall119> at least they're mostly short
[01:02] <cjohnston> the bzr-apps one is cool
[01:03] <mhall119> except it didn't work in LD production
[01:03] <cjohnston> ?
[01:03] <cjohnston> true
[01:03] <mhall119> something about bzr/ssh local env they were using
[01:03] <cjohnston> forgot about that
[01:03] <cjohnston> well.. can you figure it out on summit since you have access to that?
[01:04] <mhall119> maybe
[01:05] <mhall119> I need to dig into the launchpad plugin for bzr to see what it does with lp: branch paths
[01:06] <mhall119> also, remind me in the morning to talk to IS about getting the new django-openid-auth available to LD and summit
[01:07] <cjohnston> and the status of django
[01:10] <cjohnston> you should merge in the bzr apps anyway cause it will make it easier to set it up to start fresh
[01:10] <mhall119> yeah
[01:11] <cjohnston> I think there are plenty of MPs waiting for you to merge in tongiht and then push live tonight
[01:15] <cjohnston> nigel broke tarmac
[01:16] <cjohnston> mhall119: https://code.launchpad.net/~chrisjohnston/loco-directory/need-trans/+merge/68201
[01:25] <cjohnston> mhall119: im off for the night.. i expect that all MPs will be reviewed in the AM
[01:26] <cjohnston> ?
[01:43] <mhall119> I expect a hot breakfast and fresh coffee when I wake up
[01:43] <mhall119> I guess we'll both be disappointed
[11:41] <daker> mhall119, review pls https://code.launchpad.net/~daker/loco-directory/fix.806005/+merge/68173
[11:42] <mhall119> daker: did you get the test running?
[11:44] <daker> yep
[11:44] <mhall119> cool, did the test code make sense to you?
[11:44] <daker> yeah i understand now
[11:44] <mhall119> great!
[11:45] <mhall119> your branch has been approved
[11:59] <daker> thanks!
[12:25] <coalwater> this is about the 32k bug? what is the max now ?
[12:30] <daker> 100
[12:46]  * nigelb hugs daker 
[13:21]  * daker hugs nigelb
[13:24] <daker> coalwater, 100 is a big number, i don't think someone will bring 100 guests with him.
[13:25] <nigelb> If needed, we can always increase it.
[13:25] <daker> yep
[14:00] <nigelb> mhall119: we should bundle all our deps on our own :D
[14:00] <mhall119> IS doesn't like that
[14:00] <mhall119> it makes keeping up with security fixes more difficul
[14:01] <nigelb> but what we proposed is almost similar
[14:02] <mhall119> this is a temporary thing, once everybody is happy with the stability of the new django-openid-auth, it'll be installed system wide
[14:02] <mhall119> in that respect, we're beta-testing it on LD
[14:04] <nigelb> ah
[14:41] <cjohnston> yay for the community being the driving force on things mhall119  and nigelb
[14:51] <mhall119> cjohnston: I just got off a call with stuartm about the SSO deployment
[14:51] <mhall119> since we're getting the django-openid-auth locally, we'll be able to require the username for login
[14:52] <mhall119> so the only issue there might be is if someone chooses not to pass team membership to LD
[14:52] <cjohnston> ok
[14:52] <mhall119> if they do that, the only thing that would happen is they wouldn't be able to add meetings or events for their team
[14:52] <cjohnston> what about for summit
[14:52] <mhall119> once the local django-openid-auth is working for LD, it should be trivial to add it to summit's pythonpath
[14:53] <cjohnston> was talking about summit with sso
[14:54] <mhall119> summit should be in the same situation as ld
[14:55] <mhall119> ok, anthony says they're running it on 1.3 in their testing environments with no issue
[14:57] <cjohnston> sweet
[15:04] <cjohnston> LD translation template has been pushed to LP
[17:20] <daker> mhall119, with the new SSO deployment, are we going to be able to request the email ?
[17:26] <cjohnston> mhall119: will openid-auth fix currently errored names, or just keep names from breaking in the future
[17:31] <mhall119> cjohnston: it should fix them at the next login
[17:31] <cjohnston> cool
[17:58] <daker> funny account https://launchpad.net/~anonymous-deactivatedaccount-deactivatedaccount-deactivatedaccount
[18:00] <coalwater> lol
[18:00] <cjohnston> coalwater: did you see my reply to your question on the comment bug?
[18:01] <coalwater> yea, i'll work on it when i go home :D
[18:08] <coalwater> ok, goin home :D see you all later
[18:09] <cjohnston> mhall119: any chance of creating and hosting a uds-p db?
[18:10] <cjohnston> (preferably with the previous uds's that are in uds-o db as well
[18:12] <mhall119> cjohnston: you can add data to the one I have on people.u.c and upload it to yours
[18:15] <cjohnston> still trying to figure out why that track leads migration is trying to delete the m2m
[18:15] <cjohnston> i wonder if it is something with south changing
[18:16] <cjohnston> mhall119: https://code.launchpad.net/~chrisjohnston/summit/tl/+merge/68289   do you see any changes that would cause it to delete an m2m in meeting?
[18:18] <cjohnston> it does it in trunk
[18:18] <cjohnston> hmm
[18:20] <cjohnston> mhall119: I think http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~summit-hackers/summit/trunk/revision/120 is causing my problem
[18:20] <cjohnston> maybe?
[18:20] <cjohnston> maybe not tho since its already commented out
[18:22] <cjohnston> mhall119: could you do bzr branch lp:summit test
[18:22] <cjohnston> then: cd test
[18:22] <cjohnston> cd summit
[18:22] <cjohnston> ./manage.py schemamigration schedule test --auto
[18:33] <cjohnston> or nigelb ^^
[18:54] <Ronnie> cjohnston: here it also deletes the M2M table
[18:54] <mhall119> have you tried it with South 0.6?
[18:56] <Ronnie> no, 0.7.3
[18:57] <Ronnie> ill install 0.6
[18:57] <mhall119> try it with 0.6, it might be a difference in how they handle things that makes it think the M2M was removed
[19:02] <Ronnie> mhall119, cjohnston: with 0.6: Unknown command: 'schemamigration'
[19:05] <Ronnie> with the command startmigration : http://paste.ubuntu.com/646733/
[19:07] <cjohnston> hmm
[19:21] <cjohnston> Ronnie: mhall119 http://south.aeracode.org/docs/tutorial/part2.html#manytomany-fields
[19:22] <cjohnston> /31/window number 55
[19:22] <cjohnston> uggh
[19:23] <Ronnie> trough is indeed the 'problem'. is the code still working after deleting the M2M table?
[19:23] <cjohnston> the migrate fails
[19:31] <Ronnie> you probably need to do migrate --fake, but than the other changes in the same merge are not applied too
[19:32] <cjohnston> what would that do
[19:34] <Ronnie> that would tell the migration database that the migration is executed, but does not execute the migration itself
[19:35] <Ronnie> probably there is no m2m table in the database and the migration tries to delete the (non exisiting) m2m table
[19:47] <cjohnston> Ronnie: mhall119 this is what someone just told me:
[19:47] <cjohnston> okay, I think there's something in the NameField that's confused it... maybe just handles it differently because of the  intermediate class, or the intermediate forces some parameter to default differently.  I think I've seen that before in my own work
[19:48] <mhall119> cjohnston: someone told you the NameField is causing problems with an M2M table?
[19:48] <cjohnston> mhall119: join #django-south
[19:49] <mhall119> no
[19:49] <mhall119> you can't make me
[19:49] <cjohnston> lol
[19:51] <cjohnston> not sure what it's doing with Participants.  I've used the by-name form for through, so it's probably not that.  Is Participant in
[19:51] <cjohnston>                     the frozen model of the last migration?
[19:51] <cjohnston> 15.47.51 < cjohnston> martinm:
[19:51] <cjohnston>                       http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~summit-hackers/summit/trunk/view/head:/summit/schedule/migrations/0006_add_static_pad_url.py#L94  ?
[19:51] <cjohnston> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[19:51] <cjohnston> 15.50.11 < martinm> the other thing that comes to mind is that I don't think I've used an external relation like that.  and that's interesting, it
[19:51] <cjohnston>                     didn't record the through aspect of it at all?
[20:02] <cjohnston> mhall119: he seems to be suggesting to drop old migrations and do all the migrations under 0.7
[20:03] <cjohnston> and says that may work
[20:03] <mhall119> might not be a bad idea, but let's branch trunk to seek the old series and the new one separate
[20:04] <cjohnston> so do like a v2
[20:04] <cjohnston> do you have time to do that anytime soon? im not sure how
[20:04] <cjohnston> (both the branch and the droping migrations
[20:06] <mhall119> cjohnston: I can do it
[20:06] <cjohnston> mhall119: 16.01.55 < martinm> yeah.  also have to drop the record of the old migrations in south_migrationhistory
[20:06] <cjohnston> 16.03.32 < martinm> depends partly on what's easier... I think this was an unintended incompatability in the frozen model format that came along with  the parser rewrite.  or maybe it was a bug in 0.6 that just didn't show up
[20:06] <mhall119> but first, is there anything that can land now?
[20:06] <cjohnston> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[20:06] <cjohnston> 16.05.23 < martinm> ah, I do have that convo - I had a custom field which was being incorrectly frozen in 0.6.  never saw a symptom of it until 0.7,  whcih had fixed it
[20:06] <cjohnston> that was the issue he had
[20:06] <cjohnston> mhall119: ya.. everything thats sitting https://code.launchpad.net/summit/+activereviews that is mine
[20:08] <mhall119> ok, let's land what we can and deploy, then I'll branch trunk to 1.x, then we can scrap the old migrations directories and generate new 0001 migration files for each app using 0.7
[20:08] <cjohnston> cool
[20:08] <cjohnston> I'll sit and watch the approval emails come in :-)
[20:08] <mhall119> let me review your stuff tonight
[20:08] <cjohnston> boo
[20:08] <cjohnston> :-P
[20:08] <mhall119> nigelb: would you be able to review any of his summit code?
[20:09] <nigelb> mhall119: Well, if he learns some patience, yes.
[20:09] <nigelb> mhall119: I can do some reviews this week (before friday)
[20:09] <mhall119> that's not likely
[20:09] <nigelb> But no instant gratification, sorry.
[20:09] <mhall119> heh
[20:09] <cjohnston> instant.. there are some mps that are almost a month old
[20:09] <mhall119> yeah, only a month
[20:09] <mhall119> geez
[20:09] <nigelb> Yes, UDS isn't tomorrow is it?
[20:10] <cjohnston> no... but im going away before uds
[20:10] <mhall119> he's got a point, we're not even supposed to be working on this until the week prior
[20:10] <cjohnston> so i wont be able to play prior to uds
[20:10] <cjohnston> for being a project manager, your a poor motivator
[20:10] <cjohnston> and a poor planner
[20:10] <mhall119> I'm not a project manager
[20:11] <cjohnston> not you
[20:11] <nigelb> I have real life too, you know.
[20:11] <cjohnston> since when
[20:11] <nigelb> since forever :D
[20:11] <cjohnston> bullcrap
[20:12] <nigelb> Also, summit is not the only webdev project I contribute to. So that's taking time too
[20:12] <mhall119> since he started this "sleeping" business
[20:12] <cjohnston> mhall119: +1
[20:12] <cjohnston> i say we take his bed away from him mhall119
[20:13] <nigelb> cjohnston: https://github.com/mozilla/input.mozilla.org/commits/master
[20:13] <cjohnston> mhall119: yeah, I think you have a reasonable choice, cjohnston: adding the through ought to bring it up to spec for 0.7.  The custom field  stuff was less clear, and would change again after refactoring the custom field out of the app for wider use, and I didn't need  the history of those schema changes, so I punted
[20:14] <cjohnston> nigelb: it isnt summit, or ld, so it isnt important
[20:14] <nigelb> Isn't important for you :P
[20:14] <nigelb> Important for me :)
[20:15] <mhall119> oh, so now you're sleeping *and* wanting your opinion to count?
[20:15] <mhall119> who do you think you are?
[20:15] <nigelb> lol
[20:16] <cjohnston> +2 mhall119
[23:07] <daker> g'night