[03:50] <bbigras__> What rights are required to upload a package to natty-proposed?
[03:54] <micahg> bbigras__: upload right to the package in natty
[03:54] <micahg> *rights
[03:55] <bbigras__> micahg: thanks
[04:07] <micahg> bbigras__: need anything sponsored?
[04:08] <bbigras__> micahg: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lfm/+bug/786491 I just wonder if my patch does too much. I think the only proble is with the "mtime2" line. Also it seems the bug affects both natty and lucid.
[04:11] <bbigras__> micahg: The bug is fixed in Oneiric.
[04:12] <micahg> bbigras__: is that enough to fix it?
[04:12] <micahg> ah, you got both pieces, nm
[04:14] <micahg> bbigras__: upstream did the fix, just add dep-3 headers and I think you're good, have you confirmed that fixes the crash?
[04:18] <bbigras__> micahg: Yes it fixes the crash on my side. How do you add dep-3 headers?
[04:20] <micahg> bbigras__: dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/
[04:23] <bbigras__> micahg: Is the dep-3 headers required for Ubuntu or to send to Debian or both?
[04:23] <micahg> bbigras__: we like them in Ubuntu, it helps keep track of where stuff comes from
[04:25] <bbigras__> micahg: Ok thanks. One last thing, can I also attach a patch for Lucid on the same bug report or I should open another one?
[04:29] <micahg> bbigras__: same report is fine, should go in maverick as well in that case
[04:29] <bbigras__> micahg: ok thanks!
[04:30] <micahg> bbigras__: is there a bug confirming this in maverick and lucid as well, I'll add a task for natty now
[04:31] <bbigras__> micahg: There's only one bug. The guy had Lucid. I reproduced it on Natty.
[04:32] <micahg> bbigras__: that bug says natty :)
[04:38] <bbigras__> micahg: oh sorry I was confused by "InstallationMedia". I think it doesn't affects Lucid since I can't reproduce the bug with 2.1 from mercurial. Maverick should be affected since it has the same version as Natty.
[04:39] <micahg> bbigras__: sounds good, BTW, you'll need to adjust the changelog version for multiple releases (see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update_the_packaging (look at the blue box)
[04:44] <bbigras__> micahg: ok thanks
[04:45] <micahg> bbigras__: thank you for the fix :), please subscribe ubuntu-sponsors when you're done
[04:51] <bbigras__> micahg: Is it possible that you send me the wrong link? I don't see the blue box at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SecurityTeam/UpdatePreparation#Update_the_packaging
[04:52] <micahg> bbigras__: oh, sorry, whatever color the box with the versions is :)
[05:38] <bbigras__> micahg: By "adjust the changelog version for multiple releases" do you mean I need to append ~maverick in the maverick changelog since both chanlogs can't have the same version or that I can have one changelog for both release?
[05:40] <micahg> bbigras__: use $VERSION.0.XX.YY.1 where XX.YY is the release number
[05:40] <micahg> oops
[05:40] <micahg> that should be $VERSIONubuntu0.XX.YY.1
[05:41] <bbigras__> micahg: I see, thanks.
[06:50] <micahg> can anyone actually get mk-build-deps -ir work?
[13:39] <thelinuxer1> hi, i am trying to  requestsync a package I built in Debian unstable. http://packages.debian.org/sid/gdigi
[13:39] <thelinuxer1> I use the following command: requestsync --lp -s -d sid gdigi
[13:40] <thelinuxer1> and get this error E: The package 'gdigi' does not exist in the Debian primary archive in 'sid'
[13:41] <thelinuxer1> I event tried running the code requestsync uses to get the source package and it gets the package information correctly
[13:42] <geser> thelinuxer1: requestsync --lp uses the Launchpad "mirror" of Debian which is undergoing some changes currently (more precisely the script doing the mirroring)
[13:43] <geser> it looks like the LP Debian mirror doesn't know gdigi yet
[13:44] <geser> did you look at the code which uses LP API (--lp) or rmadison only (default)?
[13:45] <geser> and btw: we are in FeatureFreeze currently which means no new packages (unless you have an exception)
[13:45] <thelinuxer1> geser: i was going to just request the sync now. Don't really care when it will be synced :)
[13:46] <thelinuxer1> no i haven't checked the lp api and rmadison code
[13:46] <geser> we will autosync at the start of the next development cycle
[13:46] <thelinuxer1> i just want to make sure that i am not doing anything wrong
[13:46] <geser> no need to file a sync request if it shouldn't happen now
[13:46] <thelinuxer1> geser: ok gr8, thank u
[13:47] <thelinuxer1> geser: and i will still be the maintainer on ubuntu ?
[13:50] <geser> you can be (but there is no Maintainer-lock in Ubuntu as in Debian). You can maintain your package in Debian and sync it to Ubuntu (preferred), get your uploads sponsored to Ubuntu (e.g. Ubuntu-specific changes which don't apply for Debian) and get upload rights for your package(s) (PerPackageUpload (PPU) rights) if you want
[13:55] <geser> thelinuxer1: if you have any questions about Ubuntu processes feel free to ask
[14:03] <thelinuxer1> geser: I chose the first path as it was mentioned in REVU wiki page. I guess what ur saying is that I will do all the work on debian side, and then it's pulled into ubuntu automatically.
[14:04] <thelinuxer1> so no work from my side in ubuntu's side
[14:06] <geser> thelinuxer1: yes, you might need to file a sync request as we only automatically sync packages from Debian in the first few weeks of a development cycle, after that and till FeatureFreeze syncs only happen if someone requested them
[14:08] <thelinuxer1> i guess i will wait as I don't think I will able to get an exception for this package ...
[14:21] <geser> it's very unlikely to get an exception for a new package at this time (we want to release end of October). Expect to see your package get synced early November (it takes a couple days after release till the archive set up and the new toolchain uploaded)
[14:24] <thelinuxer1> geser: thanks for your help :)
[22:00] <dupondje> Its still possible to sync package from debian at this stage?
[22:00] <dtchen> yes.
[22:01] <dupondje> just a requestsync or ? :)
[22:01] <dtchen> that's one way, yes.
[22:01] <dupondje> other is ?
[22:02] <dtchen> manually filing the bug with a web browser ;)
[22:02] <dtchen> asking an archive admin ;)
[22:02] <dtchen> etc.
[22:04] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/roundcube/+bug/853515
[22:04] <dupondje> there it is :D
[22:05] <dtchen> dupondje: for the sake of time, do you have debc output as well? If not, I can generate it in about an hour.
[22:06] <dupondje> debc ? :)
[22:07] <dtchen> dupondje: e.g., debc foo_1.1_amd64.changes
[22:13] <dupondje> debc: no appropriate .debs found in the changes file roundcube_0.5.4+dfsg-1_source.changes!
[22:13] <dupondje> bleh :s
[22:16] <dupondje> attached :)
[22:32] <dtchen> dupondje: thanks