jelmer'evening poolie, Noldorin00:05
Noldorinhi :-)00:06
Noldorinhow's collocated branch project, i was going to ask?00:06
jelmerNoldorin: which bit in particular?00:17
Noldorinjelmer, all bits. lp, bzr, bzr-git :-)00:18
pooliehi jelmer00:23
poolieso my half-baked idea was that we should just merge the metadir colo stuff00:23
poolieputting it in a side branch has never seemed to work well, because people don't in practice test it much either as users or developers00:24
pooliealso, once you ask users to test it at all, they will basically count on it00:25
poolieit's hard to do more than a smoke test without putting real data in00:25
pooliei think the most you can expect of that kind of tester is that they be willing to have a rougher ride than they normally did00:25
pooliewhich i suppose is kind of what dev formats went towards00:25
jelmerpoolie: I'm a bit wary about using a side branch too, as it just means having to do lots of merge work (and probably bug fixing) later rather than continuously00:27
pooliethat too00:27
jelmerpoolie: John makes a good point about not being able to change it once it's landed though, especially as we're changing an existing format rather than introducing a new one00:27
pooliealso, with the best of intentions, i don't things get the same level of review until they're actually going to come in00:27
poolieand also eventually landing them as one big bump makes things harder00:28
pooliethat is true00:28
pooliei wonder if we can do something about saying "it will be stable by 2.5.0"00:28
poolie(and less stable during the betas)00:28
pooliegenerally speaking i don't like to make plans that rely on predictions like that but it's a tool we can use00:28
jelmerpoolie: I think that might be a reasonable compromise00:29
Noldorinjelmer, hmm....?00:30
Noldorinpoolie isn't hte only one here ;-)00:30
jelmerpoolie: especially as I don't really expect us to make changes to the format, but it's nice if we can crawl back through the trap door if we really have to00:31
jelmerNoldorin: sorry00:31
jelmerNoldorin: we're talking about colocated branches though :)00:31
Noldorinit's ok00:31
Noldorinoh right00:31
Noldorindidn't notice00:31
jelmerNoldorin: so, the support for importing colocated branches on launchpad hasn't landed yet. No further changes are necessary to bzr-git00:32
Noldorinok cool00:32
Noldorinand 2.5b1 coming soon?00:32
jelmerNoldorin: yes, the 15th - https://launchpad.net/bzr/+milestone/2.5b100:37
Noldorinnot soon enough ;-)00:37
Noldorinbut okay00:37
Noldorinthat's good00:37
Noldorinjelmer, when is LP support coming?/00:37
jelmerNoldorin: there's an approved branch that adds it, which still needs to land and then be deployed. So, hopefully a couple of days, perhaps more.00:43
Noldorinjelmer, probably by time of 2.5b1 release though right?00:43
jelmerNoldorin: probably, but they're unrelated01:10
Noldorinjelmer, in terms of release, yeah i'd presume so...ok godo to know :001:13
pippijnhow can I show the diff between my own repository and upstream?06:05
bob2diff or commits?06:05
pippijnI just need a complete patch against upstream06:06
pooliepippijn: probably 'bzr diff -rsubmit' or 'bzr diff -rancestor:UPSTREAM_URL'06:07
poolieinserting the right relative path there06:07
pippijnupstream is lp:inkscape, I think06:08
pippijnah, I think it works06:09
pippijnbut it has to connect to upstream for this.. isn't this information also in my repo?06:12
vilahey guys !06:25
lifelesspippijn: the data is, but the information about what is current isn't.06:27
lifelesspippijn: you can have an explicit local mirror of lp:inkscape if you like06:35
pippijnit's ok for now06:36
lifelessit would then be up to you to pull in changes into that mirror, but you could diff when offline06:36
pippijnI'm not doing many diffs06:36
pippijnand I'm certainly not doing diffs when offline06:37
pippijnI'm only doing a diff when updating the patch in our (*puke*) svn repo06:37
lifelessheh :)06:40
vilavila_: Wrong machine ;)06:55
vilaLand ! bzr committers, land ! With our new shiny pqm, running 'make check' is down to 23 mins ! \o/06:57
vilaAnd that's without /tmp mounted as tmpfs AFAICS (S == say ;)06:58
lifelessvila: do you have --parallel=fork in place ?07:03
vilalifeless: not even :) But we don't need a losa for that, so I'm waiting for all losas tweakable stuff to be done before looking into it :)07:03
pooliehi lifeless, vila07:32
vilapoolie: hello !07:32
pooliehi there07:38
vilaI just did a 'bzr pull' on my bzr trunk and things look alarming !07:47
vilacan anybody running from source try a 'bzr missing' ?07:47
vilaI' afraid something may have gone wrong when switching on pqm maybe ??07:47
poolieworked for me07:50
lifelessvila: alarming in what way?07:53
pooliewhat actually goes wrong?07:53
vilaNote the 'Removed revisions'07:54
vilawhere are they gone ?07:54
poolie ah, you should have said07:55
pooliegood question07:55
pooliethat does sound like something like the pqm branch being out of date07:55
vilaha, ok, they are still there07:56
vilalook at revno 612407:56
pooliethey're still merged?07:56
poolieok, so it was out of date, but jelmer's branch was based on the tip07:57
pooliethat's probably why it didn't fail to push to lp07:57
pooliewell, that's a bit unfortunate but i think not worth doing anything about now07:57
vilasorry for the false alarm but well, that was unexpected07:58
lifelessappend_revision_only=False :P07:58
vilamy thoughts exactly07:59
pooliecould you get one of the losas to set that on our branches?08:00
pooliei don't see why not08:00
vilaon the other hand pqm guarantees that under normal circumstances08:00
poolieobviously there is a bit of horse-has-bolted08:00
vilapoolie: I kind of fear that it would make it harder to recover (we can ask for a push --overwrite if we want to fix such issues today)08:02
pooliethat's true08:02
poolieso, we could ask them to push over it now and then remerge the later revisions08:02
pooliethat's not really clearly objectively better08:03
pooliesince none of the revisions that got pushed to the side were tagged for a release i think we should just live with it08:03
vilapoolie: oh yes, let's just live with it08:06
pooliei'm glad you noticed though08:07
poolieyou did have me a bit worried there was some horrible corruption :/08:07
fullermdI worry about corruption from vila all the time...08:10
vilafullermd: thanks for recognizing my hard work !08:10
vilaI mean, I put a lot of effort into *not* fixing my tyops and such...08:10
vilaBecause it provides such an endless source of tests...08:11
vilastress tests even :)08:11
fullermdOh, totally.  I mean, if you didn't, people might start thinking your were a chatbot!08:11
vilaThat's how you recognize aproject with a true TDD mentality: search for the most awkward member and nominate him as RM :-D08:12
pooliei hope eliz's mail doesn't turn into a futile thread about what's reasonable or not09:09
pooliethere are a lot of things about windows that aren't reasonable09:09
vilaone key point here is that it's hard to setup a windows dev machine09:11
vilaas in: not documented enough or even automated09:12
vila573 spurious import failures09:22
vilainterestingly 8 other ones were qualified as spurious and retried automatically09:25
vilai.e. the importer can already do that but not all cases are recognized09:25
vilajelmer (huh, where are you ?), Riddell : investigating http://package-import.ubuntu.com/status/73aaec3da59a46ab68e18ea8c195a6e7.html aka PristineTarError, it looks like pristine-tar can't recognize the bzip2 produced here09:30
RiddellI can't imagine what would be unusual about KDE's tars09:32
Riddellalthough I can recreate it locally09:36
Riddell"pristine-bz2 failed to reproduce build of kde-l10n-is_4.7.1.orig.tar.bz2"09:36
poolieo/ riddell09:50
poolieRiddell, vila, if either of you get a chance could you look into https://bugs.launchpad.net/udd/+bug/82067109:50
ubot5Ubuntu bug 820671 in Ubuntu Distributed Development "no libvirt in maverick-updates or natty-updates udd trees" [Critical,Triaged]09:50
vilaRiddell: yup, me neither09:51
vilaRiddell: I digged a bit into pristine-tar itself, and well, once you found the code involved, it's basically try with this executable with this params and if you get a different result, barf09:54
vilaRiddell: so while I can't imagine *what* is different in kde, it's still surprising that *only* kde packages have triggered that so far09:55
Riddellit works fine with older versions, just this version it doesn't like09:55
vilaRiddell: did they jump on bzip2 wagon ahead of time ?09:55
vilawhich version of what ?09:56
vilaRiddell: wag: 32bits/64bits ?09:56
Riddellpristine-tar from 4.6.90 to 4.7.0 works fine09:56
vilaRiddell: hmm, thanks for the detail09:57
Riddellvila: I have an upstream asking for more information if he might be of use09:58
vilaRiddell: you mean kde upstream or pristine-tar upstream ?10:00
Riddellvila: kde upstream10:00
vilaRiddell: ha10:01
pooliei'm going to sign off soon10:01
vilamy understandin gso far is that it's a pristine-tar bug, but they will indeed need more information10:01
vilapoolie: enjoy your week-end !10:01
pooliethanks, i hope to10:01
vilaRiddell: may be some change in bzip2 itself...10:05
vilaRiddell: if this is the case, people producing the bz2 should not be able to reproduce the issue with pristine-tar ?10:05
Riddellthat'll be a suse guy, I wonder if I can install pristine-tar on suse and try10:06
vilamay be unrelated but the bz2 I'm looking at has root/root as user/group for all files10:09
vilanah, irrelevant, that's part of tar which bz2 don't read10:10
Riddell"<bcooksley> suse 11.4+ use bzip2 1.0.6, debian stable has 1.0.5"10:15
Riddellpristine-bz2 runs fine on suse with that tar10:15
Riddellnext step would be to try upgrading bzip2 on debian and try it10:15
* Riddell tries10:15
Riddell"The current version is 1.0.6, released 20 Sept 2010"  hmm, we're slacking10:16
vilaRiddell: I tried running pristine-tar from sources and reproduced the issue...10:21
vilaRiddell: that was yesterday though and maybe I missed some point or used the wrong sources... let me double-check10:21
Riddellvila: how do you mean pristine-tar from sources?10:21
Riddellhmm, installing bzip2 1.0.6 doesn't seem to help pristine-tar10:22
Riddellwell that leaves one solution, move the UDD importer to a suse machine10:22
vilaRiddell: bah, misread, that's bzip2 that needs to be updated ? But won't that break other tars ?10:24
RiddellI presume bzip2 is backwards compatible10:24
Riddelland mostly forwards compatible since these tars can be read by normals tools10:24
Riddellhowever it doesn't seem to help10:25
vilawhat I mean is that if we use a new bzip2 to recognize old ones, it may fails the way it fails today by using an old bzip2 to recognize new ones10:25
=== jelmer is now known as Guest27145
vilaRiddell: that's confusing... do you see what I mean ?10:26
vilaGuest27145: don't try to hide10:26
Riddellvila: it might but surely it's going to be backwards compatible?10:27
=== Guest27145 is now known as jelmer_
RiddellI wonder if libbzip2 is to blame rather than bzip210:27
vilaRiddell: well, in this case, I'm afraid it means: so compatible you can't see a single difference :)10:28
vilaRiddell: but it's up to pristine-tar devs to speak on that matter, I'm not sure I understand all the cases here nor the way to address them10:30
=== jam2 is now known as jam
jelmer_vila, Riddell: have you seen bug 57611910:33
ubot5Launchpad bug 576119 in libmemcached "Crash in Init() in memcached.hpp" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/57611910:33
jelmer_Debian bug 57611910:33
ubot5Debian bug 576119 in pristine-tar "pristine-bz2 failed to reproduce build of kde-l10n-it_4.4.2.orig.tar.bz2" [Normal,Fixed] http://bugs.debian.org/57611910:33
vilajelmer_: Yeah ! Of course not :)10:34
jelmer_The changelog entry mentions -t to try harder, which I don't think bzr-builddeb uses yet10:35
jelmer_       -t  Try harder to determine how to generate deltas of difficult bz210:35
jelmer_           files.10:35
jelmer_worth a shot :)10:35
Riddellall programmes should have a -t Try harder option10:36
Riddell"pristine-bz2 will have to try especially hard to reproduce kde-l10n-is_4.7.1.orig.tar.bz2 (This could take a long time.)" I can see it breaking sweat10:38
jamRiddell: I'm curious what it actually does. It sounds like it randomly samples time-stamps, whatever then bz2's it, then checks to see if the sha hash matches.10:39
jamWhich IMO certainly does fall into the "try especially hard"10:39
jamhaving to indirect through *both* bz2 and sha would be terrible10:39
vila-t takes indeed far longer and... doesn't work here :-/10:42
jelmer_jam: it looks like it's indeed doing brute-forcing, but of the block size10:42
jamjelmer_: who uses bz2 that doesn't just use -9?10:43
jam(the default, and the highest level)10:43
jelmer_jam: pbzip2, which is used by the KDE folks10:43
jelmer_(p for parallel)10:44
Riddellif I install SUSE's bz2 RPM onto my ubuntu system then pristine tar works fine11:17
Riddellthey do have some patches to it11:18
jelmer_Riddell: interesting11:27
Riddellthis seems to be the offending patch  https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=bzip2-maxlen20.patch&package=bzip2&project=openSUSE%3AFactory&srcmd5=3ee4cf959e98e3ca50a881d1cdc1357011:31
vilaRiddell: so, in effect, they *reverted* to generate the old (< 1.0.3) .bz2 files11:35
RiddellI guess so11:36
vilaso if this patch is not there, bzip cannot produce such files and pristine-tar is doomed11:37
vilathe weird thing is that it seems that pristine-tar includes zgz just for this purpose (and use 20 there not 17)11:41
* vila lunch time11:43
jelmer_vila: Do you know how the merge tool code works?11:55
Riddellvila: shall I report a bug on pristine-tar or is there more we can look into?12:02
vilaRiddell: I think you've found enough evidence for the pristine-tar maintainers to see (especially the url above and the failing .bz2 from the package importer)12:15
vilajelmer_: superficially yes12:16
vila. o O (It's a bit surprising that bzip2 website doesn't mention any VCS archive)12:16
vilaRiddell: let me know how it goes, it would be nice to link that bug to a udd one too12:18
jelmer_vila: I'm pretty sure it's in git12:21
jelmer_vila: either way, lp:pristine-tar :)12:21
vilajelmer_: bzip2 :)12:22
jelmer_ah, sorry12:22
vilajelmer_: hehe np, I made exactly the same mistake while talking to Riddell :)12:22
mthaddonjelmer_: did you get an error email from PQM?12:23
jelmer_mthaddon: I don't think I did - I got a confirmation email to say one of my branches had landed12:24
mthaddonhmm, maybe it was just that the web UI was stale12:24
mthaddonok, thx12:24
mthaddonvila: I think the web UI was just stale - carry on with your tests pls (one submission to any branch is fine - just want to make sure it goes through with tmpfs in place12:25
* vila prepares12:25
vilamthaddon: I'll ping you first12:25
jelmer_I've just submitted another one12:26
vilajelmer_: against bzr.dev ? I'm preparing for older branches, 2.2 needs to be merged into 2.3 and up12:27
jelmer_vila: yep12:30
vilajelmer_: 1 failure (by the way, mthaddon is testing mounting /tmp as tmpfs so watch for related failures)12:32
jelmer_vila: Yeah, just noticed. Not sure what that's about12:33
vilamthaddon: I'm ready, waiting for your green light12:33
jelmer_vila: btw, did I mention I got the number of failures from running bzr.dev tests against bzr-svn down to less than 100 yesterday evening?12:33
mthaddonvila: go for it12:33
vilajelmer_: the messages about tags updated is... yummy :)12:33
vilajelmer_: no you didn't ! \o/12:33
jelmer_vila: yeah, I noticed. I'll have a look at it later today12:34
vilajelmer_: I didn't mean the bug I filed, I mean all other cases where it's great to have the feedbaclk ! :)12:34
vilawhat with non-sense tyops !!1!!12:35
jelmer_vila: :)12:36
vilajelmer_: but now that I have a '1 tag(s) updated.' message, I wonder which tag it is :D12:36
jelmer_vila: yeah, that might be useful to mention too, indeed.12:36
vilajelmer_: I'll cowardly settle for a mutter() call :)12:37
vilahmm, looking at .bzr.log is... interesting, I didn't realize there was that much noise there ;)12:37
jelmer_vila: I think it makes sense to mention the updated tags in the output12:39
jelmer_I guess the only odd case is if somebody actually updates 200 tags12:39
vilawell, I'd put it under -v with the revisions no ?12:39
vilaand in this case, well, 200 or 1000, you get what you asked for ;)12:41
vilaha ha, xz incoming on jubany: http://package-import.ubuntu.com/status/pleiades.html#2011-09-09%2003:33:07.68692312:46
vilajelmer_: what did you sat about xz ?12:47
vilamthaddon: no noticeable difference with tmpfs, that's.. unexpected12:56
vilamthaddon: you did the change *in* the chroot ?12:57
mthaddonvila: yep, in the chroot12:57
jelmer_vila: basically, xz is supported by bzr-builddeb; it happily calls pristine-tar13:03
jelmer_vila: however, pristine-tar doesn't support xz properly yet, so it will just generate a delta that consists of the entire file13:03
vilajelmer_: so we need a more recebt bzr-builddeb on jubany ?13:04
jelmer_vila: well, didn't you update it recently? that version should have included xz support already13:06
jelmer_however, even when we do have that it will be painful for big packages13:06
vilajelmer_: I did, revno 60713:07
vilajelmer_: well, jubany doesn't complain about pain ;) But here it fails13:07
jelmer_ah, the support is there but it assumes lzma rather than xz13:09
vilafor the suffix ?13:10
vilajelmer_: nm, I can see the source... but the source suggests it handles .tar.xz fine, and with tests >-//13:12
jelmer_vila: that's just the upstream tarballs, not the stuff that's in debian13:13
vilaha ok13:13
vilamthaddon: my submission against 2.3 succeeded, I noticed the email is <pqm@cupussao> instead of <pqm@pqm.ubuntu.com> though13:16
vilamthaddon: Patch Queue Manager instead of Canonical.com Patch Queue Manager while I mention nits...13:17
fullermdOnoes, it's a free agent!13:17
mthaddonvila: should we remove the tmpfs since it doesn't speed things up?13:18
jelmer_vila: I'll upload a patch13:18
mthaddonvila: have fixed (I think) the pqm@cupuasso part13:19
vilamthaddon: yes, but that's the first time I see tmpfs *not* providing a huge boost13:19
vilamthaddon: may be I'm confused because it makes a real difference when running with --parallel=fork ...13:20
jelmer_vila:  lp:~jelmer/bzr-builddeb/tar-xz13:21
vilajelmer_: what do you want me to do with that ? Review ? Test on jubany ? Deploy on jubany ?13:23
vilajelmer_: oh, that's *instead of* not *in addition* ?!?!13:26
vilajelmer_: I'm confused, part of this patch seem to implement 'rather than' while other so 'in addition' >-}13:29
jelmer_vila: yeah - debian doesn't actually support .tar.lzma13:31
jelmer_(xz is the second version of lzma)13:31
vilajelmer_: ha, ok.13:33
Noldorin__wha'ts the difference between bzr pull and merge?14:00
LeoNerdpull is for when you are just behind on history, and just adding extra revisions14:01
LeoNerdmerge is for when you have diverged history, in a branch, and need to reconcile changes changes from both sides14:01
henningeHI! Is there a PPA for bzr builder? I need to install bzr-bulider >=0.5 on lucid.14:21
AuroraBorealiswhat is bzr builder?14:22
henningeI don't know exactly, I just need it to satisfy a dependency ...14:25
AuroraBorealiswhat error is it giving?14:25
henningeI am installing a package on lucid that has bzr-builder >= 0.5 as a dependency14:28
henningebut only 0.2 is packaged14:28
henningeThis not really a bzr question, I guess.14:29
AuroraBorealisbuild it using checkinstall?14:29
henningebuild what?14:30
AuroraBorealischeckinstall will prodce a deb14:30
AuroraBorealisi dunno if it will work with that though14:30
henningedpkg-buildpackage -b14:31
AuroraBorealisbuilding debs is like black magic. i have no idea how to do it otther then checkinstall =)14:31
henningethat's ok ;)14:31
NoldorinLeoNerd, so in certain cases merge and pull will do the same thing?14:41
Noldorini.e. when branches haven't diverged14:42
LeoNerdEr.. pass. Not sure offhand. If there's no diversion I just pull14:42
Noldorinheh ok14:42
AuroraBorealisif the branch hasn't diverged then why are you merging :o14:42
Noldorinthat's not my question14:42
NoldorinLeoNerd, there's also bzr merge --pull to confuse things more ;-)14:42
henningeNoldorin: merge and pull are different.14:44
Noldorinhow so?14:44
Noldorinin the case branches haven't diverged14:44
Noldorinseems identical to me14:44
AuroraBorealisdoesn't pull/push make it a mirror?14:44
henningeNoldorin: pull will pull in multiple revisions and put them in your branch.14:45
henningeNephyrin: merge will merge the revisions which you then need to commit.14:45
henningeNoldorin: ^14:45
henningeNoldorin: that creates only *one* revision  on your branch.14:45
Noldorinhenninge, ohh, got it!14:45
henningeNoldorin: and merge --pull will use pull instead of merge if the branches have not diverged.14:46
Noldorinhenninge, and just normal merge if they have diverged, right?14:47
Noldorinhenninge, and bzr update is like bzr merge, except it replies to the working tree rather than the branch itself?14:48
Noldorinit applies*14:49
henningeIt updates your working tree from your branch.14:49
henningeif you are wokring on a full branch and working tree, merge and pull will do that for you.14:50
Noldorinhenninge, bzr update merges changes from the branch into the working tree, whereas bzr pull merges from another branch into the branch?14:50
fullermdWow, that sounds like a wildly confusing way to explain it...14:50
henningefullermd: possibly ;)14:50
Noldorinhow would you explain it?14:50
Noldorinalso, merge and pull don't change the working tree afaik...14:51
henningealso, I am not sure on all aspects of update tbh14:51
fullermdI dunno, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't try drawing parallels between merge and update   :)14:51
fullermdEr.  Both change the working tree...14:51
Noldorinfullermd, they both do merging of a sorts :-P14:51
fullermdWell, so does 'pack'   :P14:52
Noldorini don't use pack14:52
Noldorinthat's out of the question14:52
Noldorinfullermd, so if you do a pull, then an update is not necessary after right?14:53
Noldorinto get to the latest rev.14:53
Noldorinfullermd, and bzr update automatically does a pull in 'bound' branches i suppose?14:54
fullermdOh, you don't want to get me started there...14:54
Noldorinis that right though?14:55
Noldorinmore or less14:55
fullermdSorta, sometimes.14:55
Noldorinwell bound branches make it like centralised VCS afaik14:56
fullermdAnd then sometimes it does a sort of horrific pivot double-merge and completely ruins your life.14:56
Noldorinthat's how i think of them14:56
Noldorinfullermd, hah i think i'll ignore that for now :-)14:56
Noldorinthanks for clearing it up anyway15:00
=== cbz_ is now known as cbz
jelmer_vila: still there ?15:42
vilajelmer_: yup15:42
vilajelmer_: I've tried setting up a bot to do reviews but once debugged he said: nah, I don't want to do that15:43
jelmer_vila: I think we should be good to update to the latest version of bzr-builddeb15:43
jelmer_the worst thing that can happen is that xz tarballs still don't work15:43
vilajelmer_: ok, my concerns were about things like 'Cope with move of features in bzr 2.5' and other 'compat with bzr-svn' stuff15:44
jelmer_vila: those should both be backwards compatible15:44
vilathanks for confirming15:45
vilajelmer_: also, if I can deploy from bzr-builddeb trunk, I know I don't leave a weird setup someone else will be confused by15:45
vila(carrying an uncommitted change to disable the merge hook is bad enough)15:46
vilajelmer.... come back !15:46
jelmervila: sorry15:47
vilaha, good :)15:47
jelmervila: what I was trying to say before the kernel on my other machine oopsed..15:47
jelmervila: those two changes should only affect the test suite of bzr-builddeb anyway15:47
vilahehe, oops, sorry not funny :-/15:47
viladid you get:15:47
vilajelmer_: also, if I can deploy from bzr-builddeb trunk, I know I don't leave a weird setup someone else will be confused by15:48
vila(carrying an uncommitted change to disable the merge hook is bad enough)15:48
jelmerI'm still not sure why that change is necessary15:48
jelmerwhere do we actually merge?15:48
vilajelmer: we need a newer dpkg-dev15:48
jelmervila: yeah, but why is that relevant if that merge hook never gets called15:49
jelmer(also, could we perhaps automatically disable the merge hook in bzr-builddeb if a new enough dpkg-dev is not available)15:49
vilait got called15:49
vilathat will work yeah15:50
vilajelmer: rt #47638 by the way15:52
jelmervila: thanks16:01
vilajelmer: ?? what for ?16:01
jelmervila, for that rt16:02
vilajelmer: it's a week old :-/16:02
jelmervila: for mentioning the RT # :)16:02
jelmer... the music16:02
jelmer.. the joy it's bringing16:02
vilaoh :)16:02
vilareally ? Funny you mention that while a police car was under my windows :)16:02
vilaThat's not me ! Help.asdffglkjjk6yq43t16:03
jelmerhehe :)16:03
fullermdWhy did you throw a police car out your window?16:03
=== Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan
=== beuno is now known as beuno-lunch
vilabecause I'm not done yet16:05
vilatold them to come back later16:05
=== beuno-lunch is now known as beuno
=== supton_ is now known as supton
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
Noldorinhey jel23:12
Noldorini have a branch which i uncommit up to a certain revision, and then run bzr revert...it tells me the working tree is out of date thereafter -- why?23:16

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!