[02:26] <RenatoSilva> bug 670870 is fixed in LP but not in the hg plugin?? Does that mean LP is using the repo plugin? Anyway, why can't I still import this branch? https://code.launchpad.net/~renatosilva/purple-plugin-pack/trunk
[02:27] <RenatoSilva> s/fixed in LP not plugin/released in LP committed in plugin
[02:40] <StevenK> RenatoSilva: It imported successfully 13 minutes ago?
[03:10] <RenatoSilva> StevenK: oh, after several trials. Just because I entered this channel
[03:10] <RenatoSilva> computers have mood!
[03:14] <RenatoSilva> StevenK: thanks for unlinking
[03:15] <RenatoSilva> what would explain this?
[03:16] <StevenK> RenatoSilva: I'm not sure -- I just saw the import was successful.
[03:17] <RenatoSilva> ok thanks StevenK
[03:17] <wgrant> RenatoSilva: Well, it looks like it hasn't been tried in 1.5 months.
[03:17] <wgrant> bzr-hg has probably been upgraded since then.
[03:18] <RenatoSilva> ok wgrant
[03:28] <RenatoSilva> what if source repo moves? I don't see an option to set the source
[03:28] <wgrant> RenatoSilva: You can either create a new import or poke one of us to move it.
[03:29] <RenatoSilva> ah ok, thanks
[06:57] <diwic> "Failed to fetch package details. Retry" <- is this a known launchpad bug?
[08:05] <Arch1mede> is there a launchpad gui like app?
[08:19] <mrevell> Hello
[12:29] <adeuring> henninge: ^^^
[12:30] <henninge> adeuring: cool, thanks
[13:55] <dobey> Arch1mede: not exactly. there are various apps that use LP API for certain things.
[14:51] <hallyn> can someone tell me how to get the vcs import at https://code.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/qemu-kvm/git un-suspended?
[14:52] <maxb> According to the whiteboard, it requires nested tree support in bzr, which hasn't been written yet
[14:52] <hallyn> ah, is that what that meant :)
[14:52] <hallyn> drat
[14:52] <hallyn> so i'll have to keep doing it manually
[14:53] <hallyn> thx
[16:01] <abentley> adeuring: I relieve you.
[16:01] <adeuring> abentley: thanks!
[16:06] <mneptok> abentley: you should also add "shell rc defined $DEITY" as a support contact. unless it's OpenBSD.
[16:07] <cgregan> Hello Launchpad team! I was wondering who is the contact for having PPAs made private within private projects?
[16:22] <ogra_> heya ... i just ran across an odd list on LP i cant make any sense of, probably someone here can elaborate ...
[16:22] <ogra_> looking at the table at the bottom of https://launchpad.net/project-rootstock/trunk/+ubuntupkg i dont get what the "by" field is supposed to mean, these peaople are totally unrelated to the package
[16:31] <dobey> ogra_: that is the last person to have uploaded that package into ubuntu for that series?
[16:32] <ogra_> dobey, given that neither of the two is ubuntu developer i would highly doubt it :)
[16:32] <dobey> oh
[16:32] <ogra_> thats why i'm so confused, they are both completely unrelated to the package too
[16:33] <dobey> that is weird
[16:33] <persia> That they aren't developers isn't the key bit: lots of folk get sponsored.  More importantly, they aren't listed at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rootstock/+changelog
[16:34] <persia> maverick, natty, oneiric ought be ~rsalveti and lucid, karmic ought be ~ogra
[16:38] <dobey> if you try to expand any of the entries on https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/rootstock it fails; that might be related
[17:15] <abentley> cgregan: I'm not sure, but I'm looking into it.
[17:16] <cgregan> thanks abentley
[17:17] <bac> cgregan: generally mrevell does private PPAs but i can help you out since he isn't around
[17:18] <cgregan> bac: I think vanhoof was able to create one....not sure how....can you please review it to be sure? https://launchpad.net/~hwe-lowell-team/+archive/checkbox
[17:19] <bac> cgregan: looks good to me!  vanhoof has super powers -- be nice to him!
[17:19] <cgregan> bac: heh...good to know! thanks bac
[18:09] <abentley> benji: I'm getting some strange behaviour from launchpadlib 1.9.7: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/657376/ Any ideas?
[18:09]  * benji looks.
[18:10] <benji> interesting
[18:13] <benji> abentley: I don't see a license_reviewed attribute defined anywhere in LP but that doesn't make any sense because of the dir() behavior
[18:13] <abentley> benji: project_reviewed used to be license_reviewed, IIRC.
[18:17] <benji> abentley: my guess would be that your cached wadl is out of date and it says that there is a license_reviewed attribute when there isn't; a deeper problem seems to be that license_reviewed wasn't left in pre-devel versions of the API, breaking backward compatability
[18:18] <benji> you can clear the cache by nuking ~/.launchpadlib/api.WHATEVER.launchpad.net (or .dev if this is a dev instance)
[18:18] <benji> (and we apparently are doing a poor job of validating the cached WADL)
[18:28] <abentley> benji: Yes, nuking the cache fixed it.
[18:28] <benji> cool
[18:31] <abentley> benji: Since 1.0 and beta are supposed to be stable, ISTM we shouldn't be re-generating them anymore.  They should be set in stone, and we should assert that Launchpad matches them.
[18:31] <abentley> benji: shouldn't be re-generating the WADL, I mean.
[18:34] <benji> well, it's not /quite/ that simple; we do add things that are backward compatible (whether or not we should is an interesting question) and we occasionally find things that are simply broken and unfixable in a backward-compatible way (or another way to look at it is that the existing thing was so broken that there isn't anything to be backward compatible with)
[18:35] <benji> we've actually tried something along the lines of a test that would fail when the WADL changed and would require a human to inspect the differences to be sure everything was still OK, it didn't work out for reasons I can't bring to mind at the moment
[18:35] <benji> this particular issue certainly deserves a bug though
[18:36] <X3lectric> hi so I thought that FTP upload was fixed but having tried it just now it hangs at last byte
[18:41] <jdobrien>  do:
[19:02] <X3lectric> so anyone able to use ftp to launchpad without it failing on last byte like 6 months ago when a new ftp backed was introduced
[20:55] <cnd> is it possible to have custom bug states for projects on launchpad.net?
[21:51] <lifeless> cnd: not at the moment; but see some design concepts on https://dev.launchpad.net/IssueTracker
[21:52] <cnd> lifeless, ok, thanks
[21:52] <lifeless> you can use tags
[21:52] <lifeless> and that might let you emulate what you need
[21:52] <cnd> lifeless, is there a way to limit who can add or remove specific tags?
[21:54] <lifeless> no
[21:54] <lifeless> they are very freeform today. We don't see much vandalism issues with tags though
[21:55] <lifeless> (vs official statuses which we have had to implement permissions for)
[22:37] <X3lectric> so no one has a clew why ftp upload still fails at one byte to go
[23:05] <TheEvilPhoenix> i just pushed to a bzr branch... how long will it take for code.launchpad.net to recognize the branch which now exists in a project's code branch?
[23:06] <lifeless> should be there now
[23:06] <TheEvilPhoenix> system isnt reading it
[23:06] <lifeless> what do you mean ?
[23:06] <TheEvilPhoenix> bzr push lp:~trekcaptainusa-tw/addgpg-apt/2.0.0  <-- that would push to the addgpg-apt project's 2.0.0 branch, right?
[23:07] <TheEvilPhoenix> considering that's my user and that's what the code page said to do
[23:07] <TheEvilPhoenix> system on my end says it pushed
[23:07] <TheEvilPhoenix> code.lp doesnt reflect it
[23:07] <TheEvilPhoenix> nor can i find the branch
[23:07] <lifeless> https://code.launchpad.net/~trekcaptainusa-tw/addgpg-apt/2.0.0
[23:07] <lifeless> looks fine to me
[23:07] <lifeless> its visible here - https://code.launchpad.net/addgpg-apt
[23:08] <TheEvilPhoenix> then wth is my system on about
[23:08] <TheEvilPhoenix> but there's more than one branch
[23:08] <TheEvilPhoenix> which branch is that main code area focusing on?>
[23:09] <lifeless> You'll have to give me urls or be more detailed. There are many things you might mean.
[23:09] <TheEvilPhoenix> ah there we go
[23:10] <TheEvilPhoenix> i see... i need to manually specify where the branch was...
[23:10] <TheEvilPhoenix> hm
[23:12] <TheEvilPhoenix> ah i see
[23:12] <TheEvilPhoenix> i specified my own area as the first one... lp:~trekcaptainusa-tw
[23:13] <TheEvilPhoenix> by pushing to lp:addgpg-apt/2.0.0 instead of starting wtih myself...
[23:13] <TheEvilPhoenix> it worked.
[23:13] <TheEvilPhoenix> *facedesk*
[23:14] <lifeless> ok, so you do need to link them
[23:15] <lifeless> now they are linked, lp:addgpg-apt/2.0.0 is an alias
[23:16] <TheEvilPhoenix> yeah i should have known that... having system implosions since i last used bzr screwed with that...
[23:16] <TheEvilPhoenix> *facedesks again*
[23:55] <slug> hi, what's the launchpad ppa configuration? I get failed build for i386, works for amd64 and if I run the build on a local machine it works for both using pbuilder
[23:56] <wgrant> slug: Do you have a link to the build log?
[23:57] <slug> this is the failed https://launchpad.net/~slug-debian/+archive/ppa/+build/2661543
[23:57] <slug> for i386. for the successful amd64 build: https://launchpad.net/~slug-debian/+archive/ppa/+build/2661542
[23:58] <slug> and my i386 build: http://slug.aeminium.org/software/ubuntu/ppa/deal.ii/
[23:58] <wgrant> make[2]: *** No rule to make target `/build/buildd/deal.ii-7.0.0/common/Make.global_options'.  Stop.
[23:58] <wgrant> This is while building docs, it seems.
[23:58] <wgrant> Which probably only happens on i386.
[23:59] <slug> wgrant: yeah, i saw that. but why does amd64 and my i386 build with the exact same thing works?
[23:59] <wgrant> As binary-indep is only called on i386.
[23:59] <wgrant> (so the arch-indep packages are only built once)