[13:32] <brendand> hey pedro_
[13:33] <pedro_> hello brendand!
[13:33] <brendand> pedro_ - i got an email today about my bug-control membership expiring. do i need to do anything?
[13:34] <pedro_> brendand, you just did it :-P, give me a second and i'll renew it
[13:36] <pedro_> brendand, all done
[13:36] <pedro_> hggdh, hello to you Sir!
[13:37] <pedro_> jibel, salut! :-)
[13:37] <hggdh> pedro_: salutaciones (??)
[13:37] <hggdh> jibel: salut
[13:38] <hggdh> and Happy New Year!
[13:38] <pedro_> New year? did i lost the Chinese new year again?
[13:38] <hggdh> LOL
[13:39] <hggdh> no, today is hosh hoshanah, Jewish new year
[13:40] <pedro_> AH! then
[13:40] <pedro_> hggdh, micahg Happy New Year! :-)
[13:40] <hggdh> pedro_: why, thank you, same to you :-)
[13:57] <jibel> Hey pedro_ hggdh micahg and all
[13:58] <jibel> hggdh, you're too early, New Year starts at sundown IIRC
[13:58] <jibel> (although it's already sundown somewhere)
[14:27] <hggdh> jibel: why wait?
[14:28] <hggdh> and yes, it is officially at sundown today
[15:42] <micahg> thanks pedro_, just a little less that 8 hours away :)
[16:23] <roadmr> hggdh: morning, getting in touch with you to prevent my ubuntu-bugcontrol membership from expiring, as per an email I got today :)
[16:27] <hggdh> roadmr: looking. Will cost you a beer ;-)
[16:28] <roadmr> hggdh: UDS is coming, so the timing is good :)
[16:30] <hggdh> roadmr: done
[16:30] <roadmr> hggdh: awesome, thanks a bunch!
[16:30] <hggdh> roadmr: the pleasure is ours... we appreciate the help
[17:49] <pedro_> so is there an easy way to grab the version of a package from launchpad?
[17:49] <Ursinha> pedro_, might be?
[17:49] <Ursinha> pedro_, not easy, but I think so
[17:50]  * Ursinha goes through the docs
[17:50] <Ursinha> might consider bdmurray knows the answer already
[17:50] <pedro_> so my first thought was to start looking at the dates and comparing those
[17:50] <pedro_> like a bug fixed upstream with no change for a year probably would be also fixed in our packages
[17:51] <Ursinha> so it has an upstream bugtask, which is closed, and an Ubuntu one?
[17:51] <bdmurray> One thing I did with needs-packaging bugs with two that were similar was say in bug A "hey look at bug B" and in bug B "say hey look at bug A"
[17:51] <pedro_> and an Ubuntu task which remains open
[17:52] <bdmurray> In the hopes that people interested in the bugs and already subscribed would merge them
[17:52] <bdmurray> this worked surprisingly well and would be a good first step
[17:52] <pedro_> but i can hit some false positives with software with no recent tarballs
[17:52] <pedro_> which we just pick 'some' fixes and not the whole repository
[17:53] <pedro_> so that's why I'd like to also consider the version number to try to avoid that
[17:53]  * Ursinha tries to understand how it works
[17:54] <Ursinha> pedro_, can you give me a bug as example so I can visualize that?
[17:54] <Ursinha> please
[17:54] <pedro_> Ursinha, visualize what part?
[17:55] <pedro_> I don't have an example right now of the second part i was describing
[17:55] <Ursinha> sorry, the first one, that would be a real positive
[17:55] <Ursinha> if that can be said
[17:55] <Ursinha> :)
[17:55] <pedro_> sure, one sec
[17:56] <pedro_> bug 105874
[17:56] <ubot4> pedro_: Bug 105874 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/105874 is private
[17:56] <pedro_> no is not :-P
[17:56] <Ursinha> lol
[17:56] <pedro_> bug 115634
[17:56] <ubot4> pedro_: Bug 115634 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/115634 is private
[17:57] <pedro_> haha the bot hate me
[17:57] <bdmurray> bug 1
[17:57] <ubot4> bdmurray: Bug 1 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/1 is private
[17:57] <Ursinha> wtf
[17:57] <pedro_> anyways there's the link, the bug is not private , just too old
[17:57] <Ursinha> that means it's failing
[17:57] <Ursinha> with something as a timeout
[17:57] <pedro_> i blame hggdh
[17:57]  * bdmurray grabs pitchfork
[17:58] <Ursinha> haha
[17:59] <Ursinha> pedro_, the upstream bugtask is necessarily linked to an upstream bug? as bug 115634
[17:59] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 115634 in gedit-plugins (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "include *bib in gedit comment plug-in" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/115634
[17:59] <Ursinha> ha, what
[18:00] <Ursinha> bug 1
[18:00] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 1 in tilix (and 28 other projects) "Microsoft has a majority market share (affects: 946) (dups: 2) (heat: 4488)" [High,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1
[18:00] <Ursinha> yeah, bot hates you both :P
[18:07] <hggdh> Ursinha: not necessarily. Some upstreams do not have a BTS we can link to (for example, bug 860871)
[18:07] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 860871 in ntfs-3g (Ubuntu) (and 1 other project) "typo in error string regarding cluster references (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/860871
[18:09] <bdmurray> pedro_: you might check and see if bryce has done any work in this area
[18:15] <pedro_> bdmurray, ok, will ask him and also check in arsenal just in case they have something similar there
[18:16] <bdmurray> pedro_: bug 423817 is desktop right?
[18:16] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 423817 in brother-cups-wrapper-common (Ubuntu) "brcupsconfpt1 assert failure: *** buffer overflow detected ***: /usr/Brother/Printer/dcp560cn/cupswrapper/brcupsconfpt1 terminated (affects: 97) (dups: 66) (heat: 710)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/423817
[18:17] <pedro_> bdmurray, more like a MOTU/Till
[18:21] <Ursinha> hggdh, in that case, how do we know if there's a fix upstream?
[18:21] <bdmurray> pedro_, Ursinha: fyi I'm working on a search-bugs --package --consolidate script for every package with a pattern
[18:22] <Ursinha> bdmurray, great
[18:22] <pedro_> bdmurray, ie: we don't have to use --package=ubuntu anymore?
[18:23] <bdmurray> no something that runs regularly seeing if any new desktop couch bugs came in matching a pattern
[18:23] <hggdh> Ursinha: it depends. In the example I gave, the bug & the patch were communicated to upstream in what seems the single way they accept it; I do not know if they will ever tell us anything more
[18:23] <bdmurray> so parse bugpatterns.xml for packages and run search-bugs --package package --tags apport-crash --consolidate
[18:23] <pedro_> bdmurray, ah that's cool :-)
[18:23] <Ursinha> hggdh, but do we proactively look for fixes?
[18:24] <bdmurray> hggdh: I believe the starting point for this is ubuntu bugs with a bug watch that is fix released
[18:24] <bdmurray> hggdh: so your silly bug wouldn't be in the list
[18:24] <Ursinha> lol
[18:24] <Ursinha> bdmurray is mean
[18:24] <hggdh> Ursinha: sometimes -- for example, coreutils -- you open a bug via email (to bug-coreutils@gnu.org); looking at the thread you will know if it was accepted
[18:24] <bdmurray> hggdh: again with the corner cases
[18:24] <pedro_> oh it's because hggdh is celebrating the New Year?
[18:24] <hggdh> bdmurray: er, *your* silly bug ;-) I just proposed a patch :-)
[18:25] <bdmurray> ssh don't tell
[18:25] <hggdh> LOL
[18:26] <hggdh> bdmurray: indeed. But Ursinha's question was if we *always* link to an upstream BTS. The answer is no, and two corner cases shown
[18:26] <Ursinha> bdmurray, he made his point :)
[18:27] <bdmurray> hggdh: okay I guess I missed something then
[18:27] <hggdh> Ursinha: we *should* look proactively to fixes; if an upstream is marked fix released, we should consider applicability for us -- perhaps a sync from Debian, etc
[18:27] <Ursinha> hggdh, right. I wanted to know how do we do that currently, if we do
[18:28]  * hggdh thinks we do not, not really
[18:28] <Ursinha> right
[18:28] <hggdh> darn it! My AWS instance just died a horrible death on reboot :-(
[18:30] <Ursinha> so, a case we can cover now: bugs that have linked upstream bugs and are fix released, and have ubuntu tasks opened
[18:30] <Ursinha> having this is a starting point, right?
[18:31] <Ursinha> pedro_, how do you do that manually today?
[18:32] <pedro_> Ursinha, which part? the searching ? the seeing if the fix is included in our package or not?
[18:33] <Ursinha> how do you get the first list of bugs that you'll go through checking case by case
[18:33] <pedro_> i've wrote an script to do it, before that i was doing the search on lp which eek...
[18:35] <Ursinha> pedro_, can I see it? I want to have an idea on the query you're running..
[18:35] <pedro_> Ursinha, ubuntu.searchTasks(bug_supervisor=team, status_upstream='resolved_upstream', order_by='-heat'):
[18:36] <Ursinha> hm, okay
[18:36] <pedro_> and since that returns a lot of false positives, i'm also checking the remote_status
[18:36] <pedro_> of the bug_watch object
[18:44] <Ursinha> hm
[18:44] <Ursinha> fix released in launchpad that are not resolved upstream?
[18:52] <Ursinha> pedro_, the remote_status needs to be what to be valid?
[18:53] <pedro_> it needs to be 'RESOLVED FIXED'
[18:53] <Ursinha> okay
[18:54] <Ursinha> pedro_, what's the difference between closed fixed and resolved fixed?
[18:55] <Ursinha> or any other resolved?
[18:55] <Ursinha> there's also only "fixed"
[18:58] <pedro_> Ursinha, it's different between upstream BTS, in Bugzilla at least (freedesktop, gnome) its resolved fixed
[18:58] <pedro_> in Debian i think its 'done'
[18:59] <pedro_> so not sure from where its that closed fixed
[18:59] <pedro_> and yes there's plenty of other resolved status
[19:00] <pedro_> at least to the BTS i'm looking at there is: resolved fixed, resolved duplicate, resolved invalid, resolved no a bug, wontfix ,etc
[19:00] <pedro_> s/no/not
[19:01] <Ursinha> right, so it varies
[19:02] <Ursinha> I can look at the BTS of the packages that show different values and see the expected ones
[19:31] <hggdh> Ursinha: most of this will have been mapped by the LP folks -- LP translates between the upstream status and ours, so they should have a mapping available for those we know
[19:34] <hjd> After asking the reporter about some more information (I suspected it might be a duplicate), I forgot about bug 770373 for a while and it expired. Any ideas what I should to with? Reopen to new?
[19:34] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 770373 in etherape (Ubuntu) "etherape does not work after installation (affects: 1) (heat: 3)" [Undecided,Expired] https://launchpad.net/bugs/770373
[19:35] <hggdh> hjd: looking
[19:36] <hggdh> hjd: in this case the OP answered, but did not change the status from Incomplete to New -- so it automagically expired
[19:36] <hggdh> hjd: you can reopen it (move status to New) and keep on
[19:39] <hjd> hggdh: reopened it now.
[19:39] <hggdh> hjd: thank you for helping, BTW :-)
[19:40] <hjd> I have to admit I am not really sure what to do with this bug in the future, but I'll leave it open and hopefully someone will come along and sort it out.
[19:45] <hggdh> hjd: well, I am confused as well w.r.t. the OP
[19:46] <hggdh> 's response
[20:29] <bdmurray> bug 858119 sounds like a good thing to me
[20:29] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 858119 in ubuntu "the antenna wi-fi does not ignite (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/858119
[20:30] <pedro_> Houston we're ready to launch the antenna
[20:30] <bdmurray> heh