[02:28] <AlexKaluzhny> wgrant, here is an example: def get_milestone(project, name):
[02:28] <AlexKaluzhny>     """Return a milestone object for a project."""
[02:28] <AlexKaluzhny> # for milestone in project.active_milestones:
[02:28] <AlexKaluzhny>    for milestone in project.all_milestones:
[02:28] <AlexKaluzhny>         if milestone.name == unicode(name):
[02:28] <AlexKaluzhny>             return milestone
[02:29] <AlexKaluzhny>     else:
[02:29] <AlexKaluzhny>         return None
[02:30] <wgrant> AlexKaluzhny: It looks like you probably want project.getMilestone(name=name)
[02:31] <AlexKaluzhny> wgrant, ok, let me try that. Thanks!
[02:36] <nigelb> I'm unhappy about Ubuntu Mono on lp.
[02:36] <nigelb> Mostly because there's no clean way to increase the size and fallback correctly if Ubuntu Mono isn't installed.
[02:38] <wgrant> That sounds like an Ubuntu Mono bug :(
[02:39] <nigelb> Well, I talked to sladen.
[02:39] <nigelb> I don't think it will get fixed there :(
[02:40] <wgrant> Why not?
[02:40] <wgrant> It's much smaller than all the other monospace fonts.
[02:40] <nigelb> There was a bug about it.
[06:49] <sladen> wgrant: (Ubuntu Mono is metrics compatible with Inconsolata)
[06:50] <wgrant> sladen: Well, that's one I've never heard of...
[06:51] <wgrant> While it is a counterexample to my hyperbolic universal statement, it's not quite what I was looking for :)
[06:51] <sladen> wgrant: it was the best-in-breed open monospace we were trying to get anywhere close to
[06:52] <wgrant> sladen: Do you have suggestions for improving the font's presentation in LP?
[06:52] <sladen> wgrant: created by Raph Levien, the author of Ghostscript and similiar
[06:53] <sladen> wgrant: short-term?  perhaps some Javascript   *shudder*
[06:54] <nigelb> Noooooo
[06:54] <nigelb> wgrant: Can we use another monospace so launchpad doesn't look ugly?
[06:54] <wgrant> I don't think it looks ugly now.
[06:54] <wgrant> It's just pretty small.
[06:54] <nigelb> Ok, not ugly, just less readable.
[06:54] <nigelb> and slightly less accessible.
[06:55] <nigelb> OTOH, Ubuntu Mono wasn't granted default install by release team.
[06:55] <sladen> nigelb: no, it'll be shipped and installed
[06:56] <nigelb> sladen: but the bug was marked Invalid :|
[06:57] <sladen> nigelb: fc-list 'Ubuntu Mono'
[06:58] <nigelb> I'm on Maverick :)
[06:58] <nigelb> sladen: Oh, it will be shipped but not default?
[06:58] <sladen> nigelb: oh, I'll SRU it when the dust has settled
[06:58] <nigelb> sneaky! :P
[06:59] <sladen> nigelb: it'll be shipped.  Whether it is the default monospace or not is not known
[06:59] <nigelb> :)
[07:01] <dpm> hi, good morning. Could a losa have a look at  https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/170787 ? The support request has now been open for a while. It's just about transferring team ownership, and it would be quite helpful for the translation team requesting it
[07:02] <spm> dpm: don't mark it answered in future if it isn't. from our perpective, that's been completed.
[07:03] <sladen> nigelb: in about another day, the Ubuntu Mono should be deployed through Google Web fonts' staging process.
[07:04] <sladen> nigelb: then one can be reasonably sure of its availability
[07:04] <dpm> spm, oh I see, thanks, I'll have that into account for the future. I assigned the project to be launchpad, so I cannot change back the status now. Would you mind having a look at it?
[07:04] <spm> yah, just re-opened.
[07:04] <dpm> thanks spm :)
[07:05] <nigelb> sladen: oooh \o/
[07:05] <nigelb> sladen: That would totally solve everything.
[07:06] <spm> dpm: and done.
[07:14] <dpm> awesome, thanks spm!
[08:20] <maxb> Urgh
[08:21] <maxb> Can we add a restriction to Launchpad Answers such that you're not allowed to file questions on Launchpad itself unless you use a capital letter somewhere in your question? :-)
[08:22] <nigelb> heh
[08:34] <wgrant> maxb: There have been a few of those lately.
[08:35] <wgrant> And then the reporter comments twice with the same text.
[08:35] <wgrant> And marks it solved.
[09:01] <jimakira> Hi everyone
[09:02] <jimakira> i just found that there is open bug in ldap+ssl when using with sudo and su
[09:03] <jimakira> i need some help to compile libgcrypt11 with openssl to workaround that
[09:03] <jimakira> anyone have a clue how to do that ?
[09:15] <czajkowski> aloha
[09:21] <Laney> guess the affecting bugs page isn't having much fun right now :-)
[10:36] <dpm> danilos, there's no contact being listed on the topic, so I thought I'd ping you directly: we're nearing release and we've noticed that on evolution only the POT files but not the PO files were imported in the last upload on the 27th Sept. I'm not sure this is a common pattern or it only affects evolution. Could someone in Launchpad have a look at it? I want to make sure Oneiric is not just partially translated because upstream translations are not being i
[10:36] <dpm> mported
[10:37] <dpm> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/evolution/+imports
[10:38] <dpm> it was first noticed in Hungarian, where the upstream translation in the source package uploaded is 100% translated, but it didn't seem to make it to LP
[10:51] <jimakira> hey can i ask something
[10:51] <jimakira> i need some help to compile libgcrypt11 with openssl
[10:53] <wgrant> jimakira: This channel is for support for Launchpad.net. Do you perhaps want to ask #ubuntu?
[10:53] <jimakira> yes sorry
[10:54] <jimakira> i just told someone might know how
[11:05] <danilos> dpm, hi, I don't see them as approved, but I am not sure why is that (no problems are being reported in the log files either)
[11:09] <dpm> danilos, I first thought the PO files would have been imported from the upstream project through message sharing, but the upstream project's translations are not active, so they should have been imported the regular way. Is there any way we can track what happened to them once they entered LP?
[11:18] <danilos> dpm, fwiw, there is no special magic that stops one when the other is available yet, at least not afaik
[11:19] <danilos> dpm, well, not much really happens: they get into the queue, and rosetta-approve-imports tries repeatedly to approve them until it can
[11:19] <danilos> dpm, new uploads overwrite existing entries, but the visible dates are not updated (there is an internal record with a date_updated which does get updated)
[11:20] <dpm> danilos, oh, I was always told that that was part of the feature: that Ubuntu translations would be then only imported through the upstream projects' bzr imports
[11:20] <dpm> once the translations in the upstream project were enabled and sharing set up
[11:20] <danilos> dpm, if that is really so, I don't know about it :)
[11:21] <dpm> ok, let's leave that one out for another discussion
[11:21] <dpm> danilos, could the latest translations be the ones that are In Review in the queue right now?
[11:22] <dpm> https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/evolution/+imports?field.filter_status=NEEDS_REVIEW&field.filter_extension=all
[11:22] <dpm> I thought they were old files
[11:22] <dpm> but your remark on the date field not being updated might mean that they were the files uploaded from the 27th
[11:23] <dpm> and might be in there because a POT file was not uploaded along them
[11:23] <dpm> so they couldn't be approved
[11:23] <dpm> which is weird, because the POT file seems to be up to date
[11:24] <danilos> dpm, yeah, the latest PO files are probably the ones in the queue
[11:27] <danilos> dpm, fwiw, on staging some of them have dates of 2011-09-09 so there are indeed more recent files
[11:28] <dpm> danilos, I would have expected them to be from 2011-09-27, though
[11:29] <danilos> dpm, well, staging was probably last updated before 27th, and an upload before that was on the 9th
[11:30] <danilos> dpm, actually, looking at it more carefully, they don't seem to reuse existing import queue entries
[11:31] <dpm> danilos, ok, let me check the translations tarball that was uploaded on the 27th, to discard a problem on the Ubuntu side (it might be that the templates were not included in the tarball?)
[11:31] <danilos> dpm, if the template was updated on 27th, it was probably uploaded as well; there is clearly a LP problem anyway (translations get approved for the template even if the template is not in this particular upload as long as it is in the database)
[11:33] <dpm> danilos, POT-Creation-Date on the template's admin page is 2011-09-28, so it seems it was indeed uploaded and updated
[11:35] <danilos> dpm, right, it seems the import queue entries were not matched, I even remember fixing a bug along those lines (i.e. finding existing entry, not sure if it was related to this)
[11:35] <danilos> dpm, I am still surprised approver does nothing with these though
[11:36] <dpm> ah, it might be a domain issue. I see the translations domain is evolution-3.2, and I'm wondering if that changed at some point. If the domain changes, are the PO files are no longer automatically approved? Or do they end up in review only if the path changes?
[11:36] <dpm> danilos, ^
[11:36] <dpm> actually, the path matches the domain, so it might be that the path changed
[11:36] <danilos> dpm, I don't think domain affects the translation approvals since they don't contain the domain anyway
[11:37] <danilos> dpm, oh, then that might be the problem
[11:37] <danilos> dpm, only path is used to match up translations with templates in the database
[11:37] <dpm> yeah, that might explain things
[11:37] <danilos> dpm, though, I thought I checked that (that's usually the first thing I check)
[11:38] <danilos> dpm, path seems correct on https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/evolution/+pots/evolution/+edit
[11:38] <dpm> danilos, it's just a guess. I can't remember when the path changed, but it was definitely changed from 2.x to 3.0 or 3.2 at some point
[11:39] <danilos> dpm, are you referring to the actual file name or the directory path? when I say path, I only think of the containing directory
[11:39] <danilos> dpm, i.e. "po/" in "po/evolution-3.2.pot"
[11:40] <dpm> danilos, oh, by path I thought about dir + filename, as in "po/evolution-3.2.pot"
[11:40] <dpm> for the template
[11:40] <dpm> but scratch that, we're talking about po files
[11:41] <dpm> and you're right, the po files do have the correct path: "po/"
[11:48] <danilos> dpm, yeah, everything seems to have the right paths, but auto-approver is not approving them, which is where the problem is :)
[11:48] <danilos> dpm, a bug is in order, I'd say
[12:00] <dpm> danilos, bug 867411 - is there any chance someone could look at it before release? I just want to make sure all translations are imported and we don't end up with a partially translated Oneiric
[12:03] <danilos> dpm, two words for you: "escalate, escalate" :P anyway, it sounds like a regression, so it's enough if you convince any of the maintenance rotation engineers to look into it; however, since it's time-critical, you may want to go the escalated route because it then gets worked on right away; it'd be useful if you added a note as to when the final language packs will be produced (i.e. what is the deadline you are after)?
[12:04] <dpm> danilos, ok, I'll talk to them. However, I don't know who they are. Where can I find out which team is on maintenance?
[12:08] <danilos> dpm, heh, it's the team I am on :P
[12:08] <dpm> danilos, you were keeping it very secret!
[12:09] <danilos> dpm, I just want to ensure you get appropriate status set for this because it makes it easier for us to decide what's the next step
[12:09] <dpm> let me add the additional info you required to the bug report
[12:09] <danilos> dpm, and, it'd be very good if someone else works on this considering I'll be moving away from LP soon; I'll see if anyone on my team is interested in a call in 20 mins
[12:14] <dpm> ok, thanks danilos. I've added a note with the final langpack deadline on the bug report. Even if this cannot be fixed by then, it'd be great if someone could at least assess if it only affects evo or all other templates too. Is there anything else I need to do?
[12:16] <danilos> dpm, well, as I said, escalating would warrant all these things happen
[12:18] <dpm> danilos, I thought escalating meant convincing the maintenance engineers? I'm always confused to what the procedure is. So how can I exactly escalate this bug?
[12:43] <mdeslaur> Is there any way to approve the oneiric nominations on bug 706999 without getting a timeout?
[12:43] <mdeslaur> a work-around maybe?
[13:12] <czajkowski> gmb: go fix my easy bug please!! :D
[13:13] <gmb> czajkowski: Remind me, which bug is this?
[13:16] <czajkowski> gmb: send a mail to a person via the lp contact page and cc the sender
[13:17] <gmb> czajkowski: Ah. What's the bug number?
[13:18] <czajkowski> gmb: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/789171
[13:19] <gmb> czajkowski: Ta. I suspect it's not as straightforward as just cc-ing the sender, since we'd have to disclose the recipient's email address in that case. Sending a copy to the sender, though, should be fine.
[13:19] <gmb> ... which poolie has already mentioned in the comments.
[13:21] <czajkowski> aye I jsut added a comment
[15:29] <bac> hi dpm
[15:29] <bac> i'm working on bug 867411 and wanted to talk to you abou tit
[15:29] <bac> er, about it
[15:30] <dpm> bac, I'm about to hop on a call, does it work for you to talk in 30 min?
[15:30] <bac> dpm: sure
[15:33] <dpm> thanks bac
[16:12] <bac> dpm are you free now?  if not, perhaps in 30 minutes or so?
[16:12] <dpm> bac, I was about to ping you, I'm free now
[16:13] <bac> dpm: so i've been working with danilos.  he thinks the autoapprover is getting confused by multiple templates with the same directory in the path
[16:13] <bac> dpm: like the two evolution entries shown at https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+templates
[16:14] <bac> even though one is marked inactive
[16:14] <bac> as an experiment i've changed the directory portion of the path of that inactive one to see if the next run of the approver will clear out some of the needs review backlog
[16:15] <dpm> bac, ah, I see, so do you think moving that inactive template out of the way, so that it's not under +templates might solve the problem?
[16:15] <bac> dpm: i don't know.  the long term solution is to teach the approver to ignore inactive templates
[16:16] <bac> dpm: i'm just not sure if any code changes to solve this problem will be deployed in time for your deadline and wanted to give you a heads up
[16:16] <bac> dpm: i think i'll know more when we get the results from the next run
[16:17] <dpm> bac, ok, thanks. That is fine: the important part for me is to know that this is an issue affecting only that particular template (or other source packages with inactive templates), and not all Ubuntu templates
[16:18] <bac> dpm: i can't say definitively.   it most certainly isn't limited to evolution but the latter scenario makes sense
[16:19] <bac> dpm: i'll let you know what happens.  thanks.
[16:19] <dpm> bac, also, I'm guessing translation teams which notice this will manually upload PO files from upstream, so that they're imported in time, but I assume this won't affect your testing, right?
[16:20] <bac> dpm: i hope not.  unfortunately the approver doesn't have great logging atm
[16:20] <dpm> ok, thanks bac
[16:20] <bac> dpm: if the NEEDS REVIEW queue gets driven way down in the next little bit i think it would be safe to assume it was my change
[16:20] <bac> dpm:  need to run.  ttyl
[16:21] <dpm> bac, thanks, let me know if the test is successful and if there is anything I can help with
[16:50] <dobey> https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/867661 <- best feature request ever that will take launchpad beyond the early adopter phase ;)
[16:59] <micahg> dobey: that would require writing an AI for parsing bug comments which I think is beyond the current scope of Launchpad work, otherwise you run the risk of removing useful comments as well
[17:02] <dobey> micahg: no it wouldn't
[17:02] <dobey> micahg: a few fairly simple regular expressions should be plenty
[17:03] <charlie-tca> Is there any way to tell launchpad to stop confirming bugs when the reporter himself adds a comment?
[17:03] <charlie-tca> It counts that as a multiple user now
[17:04] <micahg> charlie-tca: do you have evidence of this?
[17:04] <micahg> s/evidence/an example/
[17:05] <charlie-tca> I have to go find it again, I had one yesterday that did it.
[17:07] <charlie-tca> I will come back with the number when I find it again
[17:29] <bac> dpm: i just checked https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/evolution/+imports?field.filter_status=NEEDS_REVIEW&field.filter_extension=all and it has gone from 267 in NEEDSREVIEW to 9
[17:32] <dpm> bac, oh awesome, so do you think as the next step (as a workaround waiting for the fix) I should move the evolution-3.2 template out of +templates?
[17:33] <bac> dpm: TBH I don't know what that does.
[17:36] <bac> dpm: can you look at the 9 that were left above and try to characterize them?  are they still a problem?
[17:38] <dpm> bac, ah these will not be imported because we don't have the corresponding language codes in LP. This is not a bug, but they'll remain in the imports queue as needsreview unless someone approves them into another language or until language code aliases are set for the package
[17:38] <bac> dpm: great!
[19:35] <NRWlion> hey there. need some help with administration of my account *sigh
[19:36] <pgb> hiall
[19:37] <NRWlion> hey pgb
[19:39] <pgb> when I try to log on to my account on launchpad from firefox 7.0.1(ubuntu) i got stale page, it works fine in chrome though
[19:40] <NRWlion> pgb:  my pw isnt accepted ^^
[19:40] <pgb> NRWlion: google-> ?
[19:40] <NRWlion> sorry?
[19:42] <pgb> NRWlion: I've searched for it
[19:43] <NRWlion> pgb: ok and?
[19:48] <pgb> NRWlion: well... I can not figure out why the heck is that :D
[19:48] <pgb> check with fb, csrf token is there and it'sok
[19:49] <pgb> NRWlion: any ideas?
[19:49] <NRWlion> pgb: nope ^^ otherwise i wouldnt have asked ;)
[20:01] <mdke> does anyone know anything about problems with synching translations between ubuntu and an upstream project?
[20:02] <mdke> I'm concerned they may not be working and need urgently to export translations
[20:31] <ali1234> you know what would be amazing?
[20:32] <ali1234> if update manager, when showing the changing log with eg "LP: #865430" could also compare that changelog against my launchpad profile
[20:32] <ali1234> and then tell me "this bug affects you"
[20:32] <lifeless> thats a cool idea
[20:37] <ali1234> i'm not sure how it could be implemented without hammering launchpad
[21:18] <ali1234> a question about launchpad api: http://paste.ubuntu.com/702445/
[21:19] <ali1234> also, does this hammer launchpad? i've been told that doing similar things with bugzilla is very bad for the server
[21:19] <ali1234> or at least it would be if everyone started using it
[21:28] <micahg> what are the ACLs on being able to hide bug comments?
[21:36] <joey> https://code.launchpad.net/+daily-builds   (Error ID: OOPS-2103DQ100)
[21:46] <GTRsdk> how do I setup a server to be like a Launchpad buildd server?
[21:47] <lifeless> ali1234: LP would need to be prepared, yes, but we do 8M requests a day already, so if done smartly (e.g. one call) it shouldn't be too bad
[21:47] <ali1234> lifeless: i'm patching this into update-manager right now :)
[21:47] <lifeless> ali1234: so yes, that api code you have there will do quite a bit of traffic
[21:48] <lifeless> ali1234: we'd want a dedicated api that takes a list of bugs and returns the ones affecting you
[21:48] <ali1234> at the moment it's going to do that ^ everytime the changelogViewer is instanciated
[21:48] <lifeless> ali1234: (Some users have more than 1000 bugs affecting them, so that loop you have will be very inefficient
[21:49] <ali1234> i only have about 75 :)
[21:49] <lifeless> it needs to be 'relevantbugs = ubuntu.searchTasks(affected_user=me, bugs=[x,y,z,...])' or something like that
[21:49] <lifeless> but we don't actually need the bug data, you just need the ids
[21:49] <ali1234> yeah
[21:49] <lifeless> so I'd add a new API I think
[21:50] <lifeless> you can get some mentoring on doing that in #launchpad-dev, if you are interested. It would be a really cool feature to have!
[21:50] <ali1234> ok, i'll finish this up and then head over
[21:50] <ali1234> thanks :)
[21:58] <achiang> hello, what is the launchpad feature where you can upload the packaging in one branch and the source in another and then LP magically creates debs for different series for you?
[21:59] <achiang> ah, they're called "recipes"
[22:24] <chrysn> hi, i'm trying to get translation exports back -- that won't write back to my git repo from where i imported the bzr branch, would it?
[22:24] <chrysn> (tried to export to a branch, didn't find any matches, probably as all of them are git branches)
[22:25] <poolie> chrysn, no, it won't write back to an external git repo
[22:25] <poolie> lp doesn't have write access to any external branches
[22:25] <poolie> you can use bzr and bzr-git locally to push from the bzr branch into git
[22:30] <chrysn> i hoped to do w/o having to touch bzr myself, but i might give it a try, thanks
[22:30] <chrysn> (as far as permissions are concerned: i could grant some to lp, no problem with that -- did it with transifex back in the good ol' days when they supported version control)
[23:15] <chrysn> out of curiosity, poolie: why doesn't launchpad even try? it could publish an ssh public key and be granted write access wherever it wa required.
[23:17] <poolie> chrysn, well, there's just no code to do it
[23:17] <poolie> i mean, people have just not written that feature
[23:18] <poolie> i don't know of any major architectural feature why they couldn't
[23:18] <chrysn> ok :-)
[23:18] <poolie> s/feature/reason
[23:18] <poolie> there is a bit of a question about whether enough people would actually trust it to give it write access
[23:18] <poolie> we can file a bug for it
[23:19] <ali1234> is there a delay between changes on launchpad.net and the changes showing up on api?
[23:19] <poolie> no
[23:19] <ali1234> hmm :/
[23:20] <chrysn> well, it worked for transifex until they decided it to be too unsecure (with rather bad response from the community -- security has to be on the "other side" anyway, and the pushes can go to a branch that is checked before merging)
[23:20] <chrysn> poolie, shall i file one? (against "launchpad itself", i presume)
[23:23] <poolie> ali1234, what happened?
[23:23] <poolie> chrysn, yes pleas
[23:23] <ali1234> see http://paste.ubuntu.com/702486/
[23:23] <ali1234> specifically bug 863038, i just marked as "affects me too" but it doesn't show up on the api
[23:23] <poolie> ali1234, huh
[23:24] <ali1234> i deleted the cache also, no difference
[23:24] <poolie> ali1234, i'm curious, did you think of doing this because of my blog post about +affectingbugs?
[23:25] <ali1234> poolie: no
[23:25] <ali1234> i was just looking at the huge number of bugs fixed in the unity/compiz updates today, and wondered "do any of them fix bugs i face?"
[23:26] <poolie> are you affected by that actual bug, or a dupe of it?
[23:26] <ali1234> both
[23:26] <ali1234> i reported a dupe
[23:26] <ali1234> then i set "affects me" on the main bug, after i started doing this, in order to test
[23:29] <ali1234> what specifically made me think of doing this is a lot of the bugs have apport crash stuff for description eg "compiz crashed in xyz..." which all look the same, so it's hard to tell if it's your bug or just a very similar one
[23:30] <poolie> yep
[23:30] <poolie> so, sorry, i don't know
[23:30] <poolie> there should not be any lag that i know of
[23:30] <ali1234> maybe i'm hit by a transparent cache
[23:30] <ali1234> can you run my test case?
[23:37] <chrysn> poolie: reported as https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/867977
[23:37] <ali1234> 864479 i set as affecting me days ago, that doesn't show on api either
[23:37] <ali1234> maybe "affected_user" doesn't do what i think it does
[23:38] <poolie> ali1234, are you getting any bugs back at all?
[23:38] <ali1234> yes
[23:38] <ali1234> but it looks like all ones i have reported
[23:39] <ali1234> lemme check some more
[23:41] <ali1234> yes every single one is a bug i have reported
[23:43] <ali1234> or maybe it's because i used me.searchTasks... hmm
[23:49] <ali1234> looks like the only way to do it with the existing api is to check each bug number against isUserAffected
[23:51] <poolie> i think working out what's different will either find the bug in your code, or help you report a good lp bug
[23:52] <ali1234> what's different?
[23:52] <poolie> oh, ok, me.searchTasks is only searching bugs already linked to you
[23:52] <ali1234> yeah
[23:52] <poolie> and just being affected doesn't count, it's only bugs you reported etc
[23:52] <poolie> can you file a bug for this? i think it's new
[23:52] <ali1234> exactly
[23:53] <ali1234> sure... i suspect it's not a bug though
[23:53] <ali1234> and that searching for "all bugs that affect user X" would hammer the DB