[00:29] <G> nigelb: I = all instances? (of what? ;))
[00:48] <broder> 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] <micahg> broder: thanks, will try to get to it this weekend
[00:50] <broder> 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] <nigelb> Laney: Morning! Around?
[07:56] <dholbach> good morning
[08:31] <Laney> morning nigelb
[08:32] <nigelb> 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] <Laney> i'm sure all of us in here can help out :-)
[08:32] <nigelb> That's ankit-tulsyan in #ubuntu-devel.
[08:34] <Laney> good, he got some help already
[08:34] <jfi> Hello, universe package should be build against gtk3 instead of gtk2 if possible? (for precise)
[08:34] <Laney> that would be nice
[13:32] <Laney> hm, requestbackport didn't ask me to check the package installs and runs
[13:32] <tumbleweed> that's one of the checkboxes i nthe report you edit
[13:32] <Laney> nein
[13:32] <Laney> that's what i mean
[13:32] <tumbleweed> Laney: which package?
[13:33] <Laney> haskell-hashtables
[13:33] <Laney> * oneiric:
[13:33] <Laney> [ ] Package builds without modification
[13:33] <Laney> No reverse dependencies
[13:34] <tumbleweed> it didn't see any published binaries, I'm guessing
[13:34] <Laney> aha
[13:34] <tumbleweed> ok, so we should add a check there
[13:35] <tumbleweed> we should wait for packages to get trhough NEW before allowing backport requests
[13:37] <tumbleweed> is that reasonable policy?
[13:39] <tumbleweed> broder: read your draft this morning. I'm not convinced we should be telling people how to install from backports by default
[13:39] <Laney> maybe make sure the package has at least one published binary
[13:40] <tumbleweed> yup, that's the easy check :)
[13:41] <tumbleweed> committed
[13:41] <Laney> rock
[13:42] <Laney> still filing this request :P
[13:42] <Laney> oh, er, HTTP Error 400: Bad Request
[13:42] <Laney> apparently not
[13:43] <tumbleweed> presumably that's the newline in title issue
[13:43] <tumbleweed> oh, no, that was uploaded
[13:43] <Laney> i'll try from bzr
[13:43] <Laney> wait, it won't let me file it now
[13:43] <Laney> FOILED!
[13:45] <Laney>   File "/srv/home/laney/bin/ubuntu-dev-tools/ubuntutools/question.py", line 195, in get_report
[13:45] <Laney>     title = u' '.join(match.group(1).spit(u'\n'))
[13:45] <Laney> AttributeError: 'unicode' object has no attribute 'spit'
[13:45] <Laney> :P
[13:45] <tumbleweed> :)
[14:07] <tumbleweed> 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] <tumbleweed> err, no it was post 0.136
[14:35] <verwilst> 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] <verwilst> w0t?
[14:35] <verwilst> i signed it just fine
[14:36] <Laney> launchpad bug
[14:36] <Laney> it'll be accepted
[14:37] <verwilst> ah ok :) yeah just got the mails :)
[15:19] <broder> 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] <broder> 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] <broder> and there are at least 3 different points where "the Ubuntu Backporters Team recommends that you configure Backports in manual mode" :)
[15:21] <tumbleweed> that's a reasonable argument
[15:21] <tumbleweed> yes, it does say that quite clearly
[15:24] <tumbleweed> broder: at any rate, no complaints from me. It looks reasonable
[15:25] <tumbleweed> and yes, it is still long-winded :)
[15:26] <broder> yeah, i'm not really sure what to do there. i may settle for the "you know, if you had read the docs <links to relevant section> you wouldn't asking this question" approach
[15:26] <tumbleweed> :)
[16:21] <Laney> "Functionality the Backported package" → "…of…"
[16:21] <Laney> I don't like admitting that is our standard for running, and prefer people to actually test stuff at least a bit
[16:22] <Laney> any developer can upload a backport, and actually I'd rather not be on the hook for everything I approve
[16:23] <Laney> similarly can we fix the script or workflow to credit properly?
[16:23] <Laney> (the no-change script)
[16:27] <Laney> not that it's clear what 'properly' means
[16:27] <Laney> broder: feedback
[16:27]  * Laney PUB
[16:28] <nigelb> He turned into a Pub.
[16:28]  * tumbleweed is still pretty broken from last night's pubbing
[18:53] <broder> Laney: sorry, went back to sleep for a few hours :)
[18:53] <broder> i'll fix the typos and i don't mind removing the definition of "running"
[18:53] <broder> and i originally had backport-helper give credit to the bug reporter; cjwatson asked me to change it
[18:54] <broder> i guess if there was some way to set both changed-by and signed-by....
[18:57] <broder> did we ever figure out whether backports can be uploaded by anybody on ubuntu-dev or just motu and core-dev?
[19:08] <micahg> broder: I still thought it was you can upload whatever you have rights to upload
[19:12] <micahg> broder: unless ubuntu-backporters has special rights, go try to upload pidgin to -backports and see if you get rejected :)
[19:16] <ajmitch> oh, can I, please? :)
[19:47] <cjwatson> 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] <Laney> EL PUB!
[22:00]  * Laney swooshes his cape
[22:31] <Laney> dear doom bar, why are you so nice yet so naughty?
[22:33] <ItalianNewbie> Hi