[02:22] hi, I'm getting permission denied while cloning one of the LP project [05:52] wgrant: around ? [05:52] bah === yofel_ is now known as yofel === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan === iBasic is now known as BasicOSX [16:21] howdy [16:21] hey mathrick [16:21] will I be very sad down the road if I init my new tree with development-colo? [16:22] hey jelmer, did you have a nice christmas? [16:29] oh well! [16:29] * mathrick adopts the init now, regret later approach [16:33] mathrick: sorry, lots of things going on here [16:33] mathrick: still there? [16:33] yep [16:34] jelmer: don't worry, there's not a lot of things in the tree yet, I can afford risking it for now [16:34] mathrick: it won't really eat your data, but the colo stuff in general isn't very polished yet [16:34] aye [16:34] how exportable is it in case a showstopper bug happens? [16:36] mathrick: very [16:37] ah cool, in this case I'm happy to help testing [16:37] bug reports are very welcome - please tag them with "colocated" [16:37] https://bugs.launchpad.net/bzr/+bugs?field.tag=colocated [16:37] will do [16:38] jelmer: is there an easy intro somewhere to outline colocated trees vs. bzr colo? [16:40] mathrick: not that I'm aware of [16:41] mathrick: there has been some effort to make bzr-colo with development-colo though afaik [16:41] ah, that'd be cool [16:59] so, if I have foo/bar and baz/ (no files), if I ignore foo/** and baz/**, I see 'baz' in the 'unknown' output, and if I ignore 'foo' and 'baz', I see foo/bar in the 'unknown' output [17:00] is there some variant that will ignore folders *and* their files? [17:00] (I tried 'foo/' and 'baz/' too - no jazz) [17:00] or do I really just have to ignore 'foo/', 'foo/**', 'baz/' and 'baz/**' ? [17:37] elmo: why'd you expect foo/** to have any effect on baz/ ? [17:37] I'm not sure I follow what you tried to achieve there [17:39] mathrick: I'm looking for the best way to ignore a folder and any sub-folders/files [17:39] mathrick: right now, it looks like I have to ignore both 'folder' and 'folder/**' [17:39] mathrick: if that's the case, that's fine, I just wanted to make sure I wasn't being dense [17:40] mathrick: sorry, my original explanation sucked [17:40] ah, ok [17:40] elmo: that might be the case, I don't know the exact details of ignoring; was just making sure you're not trying to do something that shouldn't work and confusing yourself :) [20:37] elmo: you can use a regex [20:38] lifeless: e.g. "RE:^foo/.*" ? [20:39] bzr ignore 'RE:foo($|/.*)$' [20:39] erm, probably with the ^ too [20:39] ok [20:39] elmo: however, ignored folders are not recursed into [20:39] elmo: unless they are already versioned, so most folk don't run into wanting/needing this [20:40] lifeless: hmm, that's not what I'm seeing [20:40] oh, yes it is, lala [20:40] hmm [20:41] using your foo/bar + baz/ example, I would expect bzr ignore foo/ + bzr ignore ./baz [20:41] to do what you want [20:41] assuming foo is versioned, and baz isn't. [20:41] lifeless: http://paste.ubuntu.com/785006/ [20:42] elmo: will you be in budapest? [20:42] lifeless: yes [20:42] cool [20:43] elmo: bzr ls -V -R -v lvm/archive [20:43] (versioned, recurse, verbose) [20:43] ah [20:43] so there are versioned files [20:43] in that dir [20:43] and that's enough to trigger a recurse [20:43] that implies the dir is versioned [20:43] the dir isn't in st, because it hasn't changed. [20:44] ok, so I guess the .bzrignore came along after this was committed [20:44] so if I bzr rm --keep lvm/archive, I guess I should be good [20:44] or before - bzr add overrides ignores [20:44] if someone did bzr add lvm/archive/foo [20:44] bzr will do it. [20:45] ok [20:45] cool, thanks - I understand now [20:45] a plugin could be written to enforce 'if it is ignored it must not be versioned' [20:45] if that would be helpful to you [20:45] no, it's fine - I don't mind them being versioned, and now I have a work around for the few cases where this pops up [20:46] cool === deni_ is now known as deni === Noldorin_ is now known as Noldorin