[00:29] nigelb: I = all instances? (of what? ;)) === PabloRubianes_ is now known as PabloRubianes [00:48] ScottK, Laney, tumbleweed, micahg: i've finished my draft of the new docs for backports if you guys would like to read them - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nAk3tJN_G5TOI4RucVudI0xGPqmRO2ZFWV9UEwr01qM/edit [00:48] broder: thanks, will try to get to it this weekend [00:50] i'm also happy to mail out edit links if people want them; i just didn't want to make it publicly editable [06:58] Laney: Morning! Around? [07:56] good morning [08:31] morning nigelb [08:32] Laney: There was someone in #ubuntu-classroom looking to help Ubuntu development. I refered them to #ubuntu-motu. I thought I'd hand off to you :) [08:32] i'm sure all of us in here can help out :-) [08:32] That's ankit-tulsyan in #ubuntu-devel. [08:34] good, he got some help already [08:34] Hello, universe package should be build against gtk3 instead of gtk2 if possible? (for precise) [08:34] that would be nice === almaisan-away is now known as al-maisan === huats_ is now known as huats === yofel_ is now known as yofel [13:32] hm, requestbackport didn't ask me to check the package installs and runs [13:32] that's one of the checkboxes i nthe report you edit [13:32] nein [13:32] that's what i mean [13:32] Laney: which package? [13:33] haskell-hashtables [13:33] * oneiric: [13:33] [ ] Package builds without modification [13:33] No reverse dependencies [13:34] it didn't see any published binaries, I'm guessing [13:34] aha [13:34] ok, so we should add a check there [13:35] we should wait for packages to get trhough NEW before allowing backport requests [13:37] is that reasonable policy? [13:39] broder: read your draft this morning. I'm not convinced we should be telling people how to install from backports by default [13:39] maybe make sure the package has at least one published binary [13:40] yup, that's the easy check :) [13:41] committed [13:41] rock [13:42] still filing this request :P [13:42] oh, er, HTTP Error 400: Bad Request [13:42] apparently not [13:43] presumably that's the newline in title issue [13:43] oh, no, that was uploaded [13:43] i'll try from bzr [13:43] wait, it won't let me file it now [13:43] FOILED! [13:45] File "/srv/home/laney/bin/ubuntu-dev-tools/ubuntutools/question.py", line 195, in get_report [13:45] title = u' '.join(match.group(1).spit(u'\n')) [13:45] AttributeError: 'unicode' object has no attribute 'spit' [13:45] :P [13:45] :) [14:07] grumble, that means I should do another ubuntu-dev-tools upload, because requestsync will also be broken [14:07] * tumbleweed could have sworn he tested this [14:21] err, no it was post 0.136 [14:35] Uploading libjavascript-minifier-perl_1.05-1ppa1_source.changes: 1k/2k550 Changes file must be signed with a valid GPG signature: Verification failed 3 times: ['General error', 'General error', 'General error'] : Permission denied. Note: This error might indicate a problem with your passive_ftp setting. [14:35] w0t? [14:35] i signed it just fine [14:36] launchpad bug [14:36] it'll be accepted [14:37] ah ok :) yeah just got the mails :) === EvilResistance is now known as Resistance [15:19] tumbleweed: i certainly wouldn't recommend it, but if somebody wanted to pin backports back to 500 i don't see any reason to stop them. i've done that before (before notautomatic) and it's been fine [15:20] i'm not generally a fan of omitting information from docs as a way to prevent people from doing things, because it doesn't work and they just end up getting bad information elsewhere [15:20] and there are at least 3 different points where "the Ubuntu Backporters Team recommends that you configure Backports in manual mode" :) [15:21] that's a reasonable argument [15:21] yes, it does say that quite clearly [15:24] broder: at any rate, no complaints from me. It looks reasonable [15:25] and yes, it is still long-winded :) [15:26] yeah, i'm not really sure what to do there. i may settle for the "you know, if you had read the docs you wouldn't asking this question" approach [15:26] :) === al-maisan is now known as almaisan-away === emma_ is now known as em [16:21] "Functionality the Backported package" → "…of…" [16:21] I don't like admitting that is our standard for running, and prefer people to actually test stuff at least a bit [16:22] any developer can upload a backport, and actually I'd rather not be on the hook for everything I approve [16:23] similarly can we fix the script or workflow to credit properly? [16:23] (the no-change script) [16:27] not that it's clear what 'properly' means [16:27] broder: feedback [16:27] * Laney PUB [16:28] He turned into a Pub. [16:28] * tumbleweed is still pretty broken from last night's pubbing [18:53] Laney: sorry, went back to sleep for a few hours :) [18:53] i'll fix the typos and i don't mind removing the definition of "running" [18:53] and i originally had backport-helper give credit to the bug reporter; cjwatson asked me to change it [18:54] i guess if there was some way to set both changed-by and signed-by.... [18:57] did we ever figure out whether backports can be uploaded by anybody on ubuntu-dev or just motu and core-dev? [19:08] broder: I still thought it was you can upload whatever you have rights to upload [19:12] broder: unless ubuntu-backporters has special rights, go try to upload pidgin to -backports and see if you get rejected :) [19:16] oh, can I, please? :) [19:47] broder: as currently implemented, any restriction to motu and core-dev will be for packages that require overrides - so anything not in the distroseries being backported to [21:59] EL PUB! [22:00] * Laney swooshes his cape [22:31] dear doom bar, why are you so nice yet so naughty? [22:33] Hi