[00:11] <poolie> hi all
[00:12] <rick_h__> hey poolie
[00:25] <cjwatson> wgrant: Yeah, we might want that (post-release restriction) turned off for -proposed anyway at some point because we were thinking of using that for a britney-style workflow
[00:26] <cjwatson> It'd be pretty harmless to kill it across the board
[00:26] <wgrant> cjwatson: Yeah, that's what I've been thinking for a while.
[00:26] <wgrant> It's a pretty pointless restriction.
[00:28] <cjwatson> Oh, hey, people are around again.  I can has landing attempt of https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/new-python-apt/+merge/85649 ?
[00:29] <wgrant> Bah, sorry, forgot about that.
[00:29] <wgrant> ec2ing now
[00:30] <wgrant> Huh
[00:30] <wgrant> No conflicts.
[00:30] <wgrant> How did you manage that, after I changed 1200 files on Sunday...
[00:30] <cjwatson> I merged a couple of times
[00:30] <cjwatson> Oh, not since that though?
[00:35] <cjwatson> Dunno then, just lucky I guess
[00:36] <wgrant> Yeah
[00:38] <broder> cjwatson: yeah, the patch i have drafted drops the post-release check for all pockets, though i guess i'm not sure whether the restriction is desirable for security
[00:38] <broder> err, rather, it allows uploads to all pockets pre-release
[00:38] <cjwatson> I suspect they don't care for similar reasons
[00:39] <cjwatson> Might be polite to ask, I suppose
[00:39] <wgrant> Direct security uploads are rejected anyhow.
[00:39] <wgrant> They use copies.
[00:39] <wgrant> Which bypass this.
[00:39] <wgrant> (and a 0-day security upload is not unprecedented)
[00:39] <broder> Ah, right. I was just thinking that I thought that was the case
[00:40] <wgrant> I'm pretty sure just dropping that check is the way to go.
[00:40] <broder> I'm getting rocketfuel setup so I can figure out which tests I'm breaking, then I'll throw up a MP
[00:41] <wgrant> The whole test suite takes 4-6 hours -- you probably only want to run the soyuz and archiveuploader tests.
[00:42] <StevenK> wgrant: O hai, Mr OCR -- https://code.launchpad.net/~stevenk/launchpad/bugalsoaffects-packaging-no-series/+merge/87309
[00:42] <wgrant> Oh right, it's Tuesday.
[00:42] <StevenK> Bwaha
[00:43] <wgrant> Hm, 329 criticals
[00:43] <wgrant> Awesome.
[00:43] <poolie> winning
[00:43] <StevenK> FSVO
[00:43] <wgrant> FSVO
[00:43] <wgrant> Heh
[00:43] <cjwatson> wgrant: For values of "not unprecedented" including "ever since the very first Ubuntu release"
[00:44] <wgrant> cjwatson: Before my time, sadly.
[00:45] <cjwatson> Actually release candidate, I think.  IIRC https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/warty-changes/2004-October/001585.html was something like an hour before RC - I remember there being some apache2-related drama, anyway, where the coordinated release date was right on the edge of our planned release schedule
[00:46] <wgrant> Heh, useful.
[00:47] <micahg> wgrant: I can almost promise a 0-day security upload for precise :)
[00:48]  * cjwatson longs for the days when we could turn around an upload plus an entire Ubuntu CD set plus testing in an hour
[00:49] <wgrant> Heh
[00:49] <micahg> Firefox 12 releases 2 days before precise :)
[01:13] <cjwatson> wgrant: Could you have a look at https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/germinate-all-dev-series/+merge/86909 when you get a chance?
[01:16] <wgrant> cjwatson: getComponents seems to no longer exclude partner.
[01:16] <wgrant> cjwatson: The list comprehension has no condition, so is entirely superfluous.
[01:17] <cjwatson> Err, oops
[01:17] <cjwatson> Moved that code around too many times
[01:17] <wgrant> Heh
[01:21] <cjwatson> Fixed, thanks
[01:24] <wgrant> cjwatson: Also, find_operable_series would be 2/5 the size as a list comprehension.
[01:24] <wgrant> Apart from that it looks good.
[01:26] <cjwatson> The line breaks get unwieldy to satisfy code style
[01:27] <wgrant>    return [
[01:27] <wgrant>        series for series in distribution.series
[01:27] <wgrant>        if series.status in (SeriesStatus.DEVELOPMENT, SeriesStatus.FROZEN)]
[01:27] <cjwatson> Hm, maybe not
[01:27] <wgrant> Isn't that bad...
[01:27] <wgrant> The last line just fits.
[01:27] <cjwatson> Yeah, I just got there :)
[01:32] <wgrant> Hah ha hahha
[01:32] <wgrant> /tmp/slonikjHv2Ae.sk:27: PGRES_FATAL_ERROR
[01:32] <wgrant> ALTER TABLE EmailAddress ADD CONSTRAINT valid_account_for_person CHECK (check_email_address_person_account(person, account)); - ERROR:  check constraint "valid_account_for_person" is violated by some row
[01:32] <cjwatson> Pushed that fix now.
[01:32] <wgrant> Seems to have taken two minutes as well :/
[01:37] <StevenK> lifeless: Can you scribble your thoughts on bug 872496?
[01:37] <_mup_> Bug #872496: All package stats now report zero "Incomplete" bug reports <api> <regression> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> <Ubuntu QA Website:Fix Released by brian-murray> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/872496 >
[01:39] <cjwatson> wgrant: Doesn't bug 905322 need an ftpmaster rollout?
[01:39] <_mup_> Bug #905322: Lower required dpkg version for xz-compressed packages <qa-ok> <Launchpad itself:Fix Released by cjwatson> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/905322 >
[01:39] <StevenK> It ought
[01:39] <StevenK> Oh, if it's binary, cesium is fine
[01:40] <wgrant> cjwatson: As StevenK says, it's a binary check, and binary uploads happen on cesium.
[01:40] <wgrant> In fact, I think I corrected StevenK about this very bug 2 or so weeks ago :)
[01:40] <cjwatson> I thought cesium was currently cowboyed and out of NDT
[01:40] <StevenK> We fixed that
[01:40] <cjwatson> That's what LPS suggests
[01:40] <StevenK> This morning, in fact
[01:41] <wgrant> spm mustn't have updated LPS yet.
[01:41] <spm> I keep getting pinged to do other stuff
[01:41] <spm> it's about 3rd on my interrupted stack
[01:41]  * StevenK fixes that too
[01:41] <spm> :whine:
[01:53]  * StevenK tries to figure out where canonical_url() went.
[02:01] <wgrant> StevenK: lp.services.webapp.canonicalurl, should be
[02:01] <wgrant> Yeah
[02:01] <StevenK> Yeah, I ran bzr grep after saying :-)
[02:12] <StevenK> wgrant: bug 897999 == the validator is complete rubbish?
[02:12] <_mup_> Bug #897999: validate_enabled_restricted_families applies to all non-virtualized archives, not just main archives <regression> <soyuz-core> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/897999 >
[02:13] <wgrant> StevenK: It's always been broken, and is now more broken than ever :)
[02:15] <StevenK> wgrant: I'm a little unclear how to fix it, without just ripping it all out
[02:19] <wgrant> StevenK: It should only apply where archive.is_main, rather than not archive.virtualized
[02:27] <nigelb> Morning!
[02:42] <StevenK> nigelb: O HAI
[02:42] <StevenK> wgrant: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/791232/ plus test fallout?
[03:02] <wgrant> StevenK: Check the code.
[03:02] <wgrant> I'm not sure if there is a virt check
[03:02] <wgrant> Oh, that is the code.
[03:02] <wgrant> That's not what you want to change.
[03:03] <wgrant> You need to change validate_enabled_restricted_families to match the check you just changed.
[03:03] <wgrant> The check that you changed was already correct.
[03:03] <StevenK> Right, so the validator doesn't match the behaviour in IArchive.
[03:06] <StevenK> wgrant: So http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/791249/ and related fallout?
[03:13] <wgrant> StevenK: That would partly fix it for now sort of.
[03:13] <wgrant> StevenK: But the real issue is that archivearch is entirely ignored for those archives -- there's no point showing the widget at all.
[03:13] <wgrant> Or if you do, it should have everything checked and should be disabled.
[03:15] <StevenK> wgrant: Do you like http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/791251/ better?
[03:15] <wgrant> StevenK: No. Needs the non-virtual check too.
[03:16] <wgrant> Remember that         if self.is_main and not self.require_virtualized:
[03:16] <wgrant>             return getUtility(IProcessorFamilySet).getRestricted()
[03:16] <StevenK> But it needs to backward, right?
[03:16] <StevenK> if not self.context.is_main and self.context.require_virtualized:
[03:16] <wgrant> No.
[03:17] <wgrant> The check is the same.
[03:17] <wgrant> (self.is_main and not self.require_virtualized) == ignore_archivearch
[03:17] <StevenK> But you said you wanted to hide it for those archives ...
[03:18] <wgrant> Er, true.
[03:18] <wgrant> But you didn't invert it properly.
[03:18] <wgrant> not self.context.is_main or self.context.require_virtualized
[03:18] <wgrant> That's more like it.
[03:19] <StevenK> Right.
[03:20] <StevenK> Hmmm.
[03:21] <StevenK> I think ArchiveAdminView might need a axe for this.
[03:30]  * wgrant deletes EmailAddress.account to see what breaks.
[03:30] <wgrant> I think that's probably better than lots of triggers to ensure its consistency...
[03:30] <StevenK> WCPGW
[03:30] <wgrant> It's been superfluous since ShipIt's demise.
[03:30] <wgrant> And it's not exported to SSO.
[03:31] <StevenK> Can you delete shipit.css while you're at it? :-P
[03:47] <StevenK> I can't even see how to get to ArchiveAdminView for the main archive
[03:52] <wgrant> /ubuntu/+archive/primary/+admin
[03:52] <wgrant> But it should also be on /ubuntu/+admin as well, IIRC.
[03:53] <StevenK> /ubuntu/+admin no worky
[03:54] <wgrant> Maybe +edit, then.
[03:54] <wgrant> Some page like that uses that mixin.
[03:54] <StevenK> wgrant: However, your first link works, and it doesn't show the restricted families widget
[03:54] <wgrant> DistributionAddView and DistributionEditView
[03:55] <StevenK> /ubuntu/+edit still shows restricted families
[03:55] <wgrant> https://dogfood.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+admin does too...
[03:56] <wgrant> Down the bottom.
[03:56] <StevenK> I'm testing locally with my change
[03:56] <wgrant> Ah
[03:57] <StevenK> I can cowboy my change onto DF :-P
[03:57] <wgrant> I am murdering DF at the moment, but it might be doable.
[03:57] <StevenK> You bad person.
[03:58] <wgrant> Just attempting to delete the 3 million orphaned accounts.
[03:58] <StevenK> Won't that cause SSO to go all explode-y?
[03:59] <wgrant> No.
[03:59] <wgrant> SSO doesn't care if there's no matching lp_account
[03:59] <wgrant> It only uses lp_account to find the lp_person.
[04:00] <StevenK> wgrant: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/791274/
[04:03] <wgrant> StevenK: Now try toggling the Virtualized checkbox while the form is open, and cry :)
[04:04] <StevenK> I should hide that too?
[04:05] <wgrant> No, it needs to be changble.
[04:08] <StevenK> wgrant: Since I'm hiding enable_restricted_families, looks okay to me?
[04:08] <StevenK> I can't actually *submit* the form, but it looks good. :-)
[04:11] <StevenK> Bleh. I'm no duck on DF
[04:11]  * StevenK fixes
[04:25] <StevenK> wgrant: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/791283/ looks to work
[04:37] <wgrant> StevenK: But what happens if I want to make an archive virtualized?
[04:37] <wgrant> How do I select its archs?
[04:38] <wgrant> Also, lp.registry.model.mailinglist's subscription methods win the award for Most Gratuitous Uses of Outer Joins.
[04:39] <StevenK> wgrant: Bah
[04:42] <StevenK> There has to be a way to fix this crap
[05:17] <wgrant> Ah hm
[05:17] <wgrant> I think I see how our EmailAddress account vs. person corruption is happening.
[05:19] <StevenK> Oh?
[05:20] <wgrant> I'm not sure we handle well the case where someone creates an SSO account with an email address held by an unactivated LP person.
[05:20] <wgrant> It looks like it will just set emailaddress.account
[05:20] <wgrant> And create a new person...
[05:20] <wgrant> But let's see.
[05:20] <wgrant> Ah
[05:21] <wgrant> But no, Account.createPerson() steals all the email address for itself.
[05:21] <wgrant> Although if I then remove that address from my SSO account, and make it the primary address for another...
[05:40] <wgrant> Huh
[05:40] <wgrant> So some of our unactivated persons have accounts, and some of them don't.
[05:40] <wgrant> Depending on just which bit of code created them....
[05:40] <wgrant> Yay!
[05:47]  * StevenK tries to work out bug 907840
[05:47] <_mup_> Bug #907840: Permissions on +nominate are messed up <bugs> <disclosure> <packages> <regression> <series> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/907840 >
[06:47] <lifeless> StevenK: hi
[06:49] <lifeless> StevenK: done
[07:01] <StevenK> lifeless: Stating the obvious. :-)
[07:02] <StevenK> lifeless: What I meant, was do you think Brain's comment that Incomplete should be the sum of the two?
[07:02] <lifeless> yes, that was the original behaviour, and it wasn't meant to be changed
[07:03] <lifeless> searching Incomplete should return both sorts of incomplete
[07:04] <StevenK> Okay, so it should be fixed.
[07:04] <lifeless> totally
[07:16]  * wgrant s/2004-2011/2004-2012/
[07:26] <StevenK> Yes, we should do that.
[07:26] <StevenK> We even have a script!
[07:26] <wgrant> Oh, do we?
[07:27] <wgrant> update-copyright is for updating file copyright notices as you go.
[07:27] <wgrant> I don't believe it updates the global notices in templates and such.
[07:29] <StevenK> Oh. I keep doing that by hand.
[07:29] <StevenK> In fact, I should have done that for the branch I landed today ...
[07:30] <StevenK> When did 2012 happen, anyway?
[08:45] <adeuring> good morning
[09:06] <bigjools> Happy new year all
[09:06] <lifeless> I wonder if it is possible to have multiple tabs share a long poll connection - e.g does the browser security model permit htis
[09:07] <lifeless> (when they are on the same domain)
[09:08] <bigjools> it's possible but given that chrome does separate processes it'd be fun to see how
[09:08] <lifeless> I assume that that would be abstracted out
[09:12] <mrevell> Morning
[09:24] <wgrant> bigjools, lifeless: You can use the HTML5 postMessage API to communicate between tabs, but I don't know if IE supports it.
[09:24] <wgrant> Firefox/Chromium have for a couple of years, though.
[09:25] <wgrant> AIUI there's no other way to communicate, unless you poll cookies.
[09:25] <wgrant> Or poll HTML5 local storage.
[09:26] <lifeless> so it should be possible to setup one tab as 'master', route new listens and events through it, and use the same idle timeout to detect that tab being closed from other tabs
[09:33] <adeuring> wgrant: are you still doing reviews?
[09:35] <wgrant> No :)
[09:35] <lifeless> gmb: hi
[09:35] <adeuring> wgrant: yeah, i assumed that ;) Have a nice evening!
[10:03] <gmb> lifeless: Howdy
[10:03] <cjwatson> wgrant: You said on IRC that https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/germinate-all-dev-series/+merge/86909 was OK with the fixes you suggested, but I just noticed you don't seem to have left any review feedback on the MP itself?
[10:04] <cjwatson> rvba: I made the change you suggested to https://code.launchpad.net/~cjwatson/launchpad/stop-publishing-obsolete-series/+merge/86967 .  Do you think you could land it for me, as I don't have PQM access?
[10:04] <rvba> cjwatson: sure thing.  Thanks for the change ;)
[10:16] <wgrant> cjwatson: Huh, must have become distracted. Shall I throw it at ec2?
[10:17] <cjwatson> wgrant: Please
[10:17]  * cjwatson climbs slowly up the Contributions ladder :-)
[10:17] <rvba> cjwatson: You're branch stop-publishing-obsolete-series is in ec2.
[10:18] <cjwatson> rvba: thanks!
[10:18] <rvba> s/You're/Your/
[10:18] <rvba> np
[10:23] <adeuring> gmb: do you have time for a review? https://code.launchpad.net/~adeuring/launchpad/bug-909318/+merge/87322
[10:28] <gmb> adeuring: Ha, I'd forgotten I was OCR today. Certainly.
[10:29] <adeuring> gmb: thanks!
[10:29] <StevenK> gmb: I blame New Years. wgrant had forgotten too.
[10:29] <gmb> StevenK: New year + the bank holiday means I'm completely screwed this week. I'll be surprised if I actually make it to Budapest.
[10:32] <bigjools> I am going to savour my last short flight to a sprint
[10:32] <wgrant> nyahaha
[10:32] <bigjools> treating the family to premium economy when we leave
[10:40] <gmb> adeuring: One minor comment, otherwise r=me
[10:40] <adeuring> gmb: thanks!
[10:44] <cjwatson> gmb: mvo just merged https://code.launchpad.net/~mvo/launchpad/maintenance-check-precise/+merge/82125 up to current devel; do you think you could try landing it, if the QA procedure I outlined is good enough?
[10:44]  * gmb looks
[10:45] <gmb> Ooh, timeout on the merge proposal page. That's new.
[10:46] <gmb> cjwatson: Looks plenty sane to me. I'll get it landed today for you.
[10:46] <cjwatson> Yay
[10:49] <gmb> cjwatson: Is there a bug to go with this branch (for the sake of having somewhere to track its QA).
[10:53] <cjwatson> gmb: I'll ask mvo
[10:54] <gmb> Ta
[11:05] <cjwatson> gmb: 11:03 <mvo> bug #911175 - its mostly just copy/paste from the MP text
[11:05] <_mup_> Bug #911175: Please update maintenance-timeframe.py for ubuntu 12.04 (precise) <Launchpad itself:New> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/911175 >
[11:05] <gmb> cjwatson: That's perfect, thanks.
[11:25] <rick_h__> morning everyone
[11:26] <bigjools> morning
[11:55] <lifeless> gmb: ah yes - are you actually looking at  https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/380362 ?
[11:55] <_mup_> Bug #380362: Launchpad couldn't import several bugs from Debian Bug tracker. <lp-bugs> <Launchpad itself:Triaged by gmb> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/380362 >
[11:57] <gmb> lifeless: No, I'm not. I'll unassign myself.
[11:58] <lifeless> ta
[12:14] <bigjools> lifeless: I debugged the gpgme poppy problem a bit more
[12:14] <lifeless> \o/
[12:14] <bigjools> lifeless: I am none the wiser though!
[12:14] <lifeless>  /o\
[12:15] <bigjools> basically the error is "general error" and the source of the error is GPG_ERR_SOURCE_GPGME
[12:15] <bigjools> which is basically fucking useless
[12:15] <lifeless> WWWWIN
[12:15] <bigjools> the gpgme code is saying that it has an error but it has no idea what the error is
[12:17] <bigjools> lifeless: so if you have any bright ideas ...
[12:17]  * bigjools would like to educate the person who defined GPG_ERR_GENERAL
[12:18] <lifeless> http://www.gnupg.org/documentation/manuals/gcrypt/Error-Sources.html isn't terribly helpful here
[12:18] <lifeless> I guess we need to look in the gpgme source code
[12:20] <bigjools> I guess so
[12:20] <lifeless> bigjools: I think its a matter of grepping at this point, seeing if anything obvious jumps out, and if not, tweak things in the library to give us more info
[12:20] <lifeless> it may be something like 'using contexts across threads is a bad idea'
[12:20] <lifeless> [which with threadpools and deferToThread may be happening]
[12:21] <bigjools> hmmm there are lots of warnings about thread safe-ness
[12:21] <bigjools> in fact I am willing to lay a bet this is a threading problem
[12:22]  * gmb lunches
[12:30] <StevenK> rvba: Are you right to QA bug 903827 today?
[12:30] <_mup_> Bug #903827: https://launchpad.net/builders timeout <qa-needstesting> <timeout> <Launchpad itself:Fix Committed by rvb> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/903827 >
[12:32] <bigjools> lifeless: the gpgme source has *goto* in it .....
[12:32] <bigjools> this doesn't surprise me a lot
[12:33] <lifeless> :)
[12:36] <bigjools> lifeless: I wonder if we should get libgpgme upgraded... the one in oneiric is 1.2 but latest is 1.4 (or even 2.0)
[12:38] <bigjools> it gets better, someone has mixed tabs and spaces in the source
[12:38] <lifeless> :)
[12:38] <lifeless> its C
[12:38] <lifeless> but yeah, icky
[12:38] <bigjools> well I used to write C/C++ and never used tabs
[12:38] <lifeless> an upgrade is possibly a good idea
[12:38] <bigjools> unless you want your code looking like a dog's dinner
[12:39] <lifeless> gpg2 is a separate package; perhaps libgpgme for 2 has been done like that too
[12:39] <lifeless> astyle ftw
[12:39] <bigjools> oh god, indented braces
[12:39] <bigjools> when will the horror end
[12:39] <lifeless> after you mental floss
[12:40] <cjwatson> goto> there are styles of C in which that's fine as an error-handling mechanism; the Linux kernel uses it well
[12:41] <bigjools> it's bloody evil
[12:41] <bigjools> trying to follow code with gotos in it is a nightmare
[12:42] <cjwatson> with discipline, it can be a good way to avoid duplicating function-exit code all over the place, given the lack of anything like finally
[12:42] <cjwatson> I have no idea whether the code you're looking at is disciplined
[12:42] <bigjools> I mostly used "break" instead of goto
[12:43] <cjwatson> That has its own problems
[12:43] <bigjools> but far fewer than goto :)
[12:44] <cjwatson> I don't agree with that as a dogmatic statement ...
[12:44] <bigjools> well from experience, goto has caused me untold problems, break has never caused me one
[12:44] <bigjools> *shrug*
[12:44] <cjwatson> Our experiences differ :-)
[12:44] <bigjools> but then I mostly wrote C++
[12:45] <cjwatson> In C++ you generally have better destruction mechanisms available so it's less of an issue
[12:45] <bigjools> right
[12:47] <bigjools> 130 line functions don't help
[12:54] <lifeless> hah, just a baby function :)
[13:06] <lifeless> bigjools: https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/408528 - should this be closed? the history looks like it was fixed for soyuz and status lost during the big combine
[13:06] <_mup_> Bug #408528: Packages build but fail to upload due to email address issue <lp-foundations> <lp-soyuz> <motu> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/408528 >
[13:08] <wgrant> Heh. I deleted the code that fixed that just tonight.
[13:08] <wgrant> It's not quite fully fixed.
[13:08] <wgrant> But will be once we clear the personless accounts from the DB.
[13:09] <lifeless> how do we represent 'unclaimed persons' ?
[13:09] <wgrant> Two ways.
[13:09] <wgrant> Person.account IS NULL
[13:09] <wgrant> Or Person.account.status == NOACCOUNT
[13:10] <wgrant> (yes, Account.status can have the value NOACCOUNT)
[13:10] <wgrant> Most are the latter.
[13:10] <lifeless> ok, and after you change, there will be just the latter
[13:10] <wgrant> I think only bugimports do the former.
[13:10] <wgrant> Not my first change.
[13:10] <wgrant> But the one after that, yes.
[13:10] <lifeless> kk
[13:10] <wgrant> I'm just killing EmailAddress.account for now.
[13:11] <wgrant> To deal with the consistency issue.
[13:11] <wgrant> And delete like 1500 lines of code.
[13:11] <wgrant> But this lets us very easily flatten account into person.
[13:12] <lifeless> be sure to update the sso triggers if you tackle that ;P
[13:12] <wgrant> Fortunately this bit doesn't touch the mirrored tables.
[13:12] <wgrant> I was pleasantly surprised to find no lp_emailaddress.
[13:14] <lifeless> gmb: is https://bugs.launchpad.net/trac-launchpad-migrator/+bug/411394 really triaged, or should it be fix committed / fix released ?
[13:14] <_mup_> Bug #411394: Bug nickname is always "elisa-$bugno" <trac-launchpad-migrator:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/411394 >
[13:28] <gmb> lifeless: At least Fix committed, I'd think. I'll look into it.
[13:30] <lifeless> gmb: thanks
[13:30] <benji> gary_poster: link?
[14:14] <lifeless> bigjools: q for you on https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/443071
[14:14] <_mup_> Bug #443071: can't publish a specific architecture after source is already published <lp-soyuz> <oem-services> <soyuz-security> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/443071 >
[14:14] <bigjools> lifeless: no
[14:14] <bigjools> it's the same copier
[14:15] <lifeless> k
[14:25] <lifeless> bigjools: here is the bug on buildd-manager restarts w/db - https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/451349 :)
[14:25] <_mup_> Bug #451349: buildd-manager doesn't deal gracefully with database restart <boobytrap> <canonical-losa-lp> <lp-soyuz> <soyuz-build> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/451349 >
[14:26] <bigjools> lifeless: my elder wand is wearing out
[14:27] <lifeless> :) - just that you were saying it should work ok a while back
[14:27] <lifeless> so I thought you might like to close the bug :>
[14:28] <bigjools> I can't remember what I said this morning, let alone a while back!
[14:30] <bigjools> lifeless: is it fixed? I dunno
[14:30] <lifeless> me neither
[14:32] <deryck> abentley, ping for standup
[14:35] <deryck> rick_h__, abentley, adeuring -- https://dev.launchpad.net/MaintenanceRotationSchedule
[14:35] <lifeless> sinzui: I think you mis-read https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/911189
[14:35] <_mup_> Bug #911189: Bug page tag links are not properly escaped, thus made useless <bug-importer> <bugtag> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/911189 >
[14:36] <lifeless> sinzui: its a tales / ajax escaping issue
[14:36] <sinzui> oh, those that cam from the import are now crippled
[14:36] <lifeless> sinzui: the importer is incidental (and confusing to mention)
[14:36] <lifeless> yes
[14:43] <lifeless> bigjools: whats your take on https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/402935?
[14:43] <_mup_> Bug #402935: Domination of architecture independent binaries is not restricted to the source publication boundaries <boobytrap> <lp-soyuz> <ppa> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/402935 >
[14:43] <bigjools> looking
[14:46] <rick_h__> abentley: ~rharding/launchpad/port_inlinehelp_907443
[14:53] <bigjools> lifeless: struggling with the Portuglish, but got there in the end. Not sure if it's still a bug tbh, it needs verification
[14:54] <bigjools> there were some substantial changes in domination last year
[15:10] <deryck> mrevell, ping
[15:18] <benji> deryck: when you have a second I have a maintenance squad task I'd like to cajole you guys into doing
[15:23] <mrevell> hey deryck, I'm just about to hop on a call. Should I ping you after that?
[15:23] <deryck> mrevell, yes, please.
[15:23] <deryck> benji, cajole away.  Do we need to voice chat about it?
[15:24] <benji> deryck: voice might make the cajoling more potent
[15:24] <benji> deryck: do you do the google hangout thing?
[15:24] <deryck> benji, I do.
[15:25] <benji> deryck: your hangout or mine?
[15:25] <deryck> benji, yours.  let me warm my coffee…. 30 seconds.
[15:53] <rvba> gmb: could you please have a look at this mp? https://code.launchpad.net/~rvb/launchpad/longpoll-stats-903586/+merge/87372
[16:00] <gmb> rvba: Certainly.
[16:00] <rvba> Thanks.
[17:10] <rick_h__> gmb: have time for a review please? https://code.launchpad.net/~rharding/launchpad/port_inlinehelp_907443/+merge/87384
[17:11] <gmb> rick_h__: Not for one that size, I expect, but I'll try to get to it before I EoD. If not, I'll ping you.
[17:12] <rick_h__> gmb: sounds like a plan. Thanks
[17:12] <gmb> np
[18:43] <gmb> rick_h__: I didn't get time to get to your branch; apologies.
[18:43] <rick_h__> gmb: no prob, thanks for the heads up
[18:43]  * gmb -> evening things
[18:45] <rick_h__> deryck: or abentley interested in taking a few to review? https://code.launchpad.net/~rharding/launchpad/port_inlinehelp_907443/+merge/87384
[18:47] <deryck> rick_h__, I can take it.  though I'm about to go offline to travel home.  so it may be tonight before I finish.
[18:48] <rick_h__> deryck: ok thanks. No rush.
[18:48] <deryck> rick_h__, ok, cool.  will work on it and reply whenever I'm done.
[19:16] <lifeless> gary_poster: will everyone be around in 104 minutes from now?
[19:16] <gary_poster> lifeless, no, the Europeans are gone by now
[19:16] <gary_poster> and hi
[19:17] <lifeless> ah
[19:17] <lifeless> so I have a call at my 10pm tonight
[19:17] <lifeless> which makes a 7am call unappealing
[19:18] <gary_poster> lifeless, understood.  (you won't be at team lead call?)  is 8am any better lifeless?
[19:18] <gary_poster> or sufficiently better, I should say :-)
[19:18] <lifeless> hmm, I didn't think the team lead call was at 6am
[19:18] <lifeless> my calendar thinks it is at 8am
[19:18] <gary_poster> maybe I miscalculated
[19:18] <gary_poster> I probably did then
[19:19] <lifeless> my 0800 is 1700Z
[19:19] <gary_poster> I tend to miss the 12-is-not-10 in my timezone math sometime
[19:19] <lifeless> erm no
[19:19] <lifeless> 0800 is 1900Z
[19:19] <lifeless> yes, thats right
[19:19] <gary_poster> maybe you do too :-)
[19:20] <gary_poster> ah right
[19:20] <gary_poster> ok
[19:20] <gary_poster> that's the calculation I had done earlier
[19:20] <lifeless> anyhow, I have a call with mat right after the tl meeting, but I think we're more in sync so I'm sure he will be happy to take a raincheck
[19:20] <gary_poster> ok lifeless, if I were able to get everyone tomorrow at 2000Z that would work for you?
[19:20] <gary_poster> oh
[19:20] <gary_poster> ok
[19:21] <lifeless> I've sent a calendar invite for then
[19:21] <gary_poster> cool thanks lifeless.  That's 8 UK/9 Italy so it's not a given, but Francesco already said it is ok.  Thanks!
[19:22] <lifeless> I think I trust you to relay whatever we chat if gmb can't make it
[19:22] <lifeless> I'd rather a partial call sooner than a complete call deeper into the project
[19:22] <gary_poster> lifeless, sounds good
[19:23] <lifeless> separately, I wanted to talk about the milestones tags thing per the thread in december
[19:23] <lifeless> who should we rope in for that ? you, me, curtis? more? less?
[19:31] <lifeless> gary_poster: ^
[19:36] <gary_poster> oh sorry lifeless.  the full set would be you, me, brad, francesco, and curtis.  I think the only must-haves are you and brad, depending on the outcome.
[19:37] <lifeless> francesco is in italy yes?
[19:37] <gary_poster> lifeless, yes.  getting the rest of us for now would be reasonable
[19:39] <lifeless> my google calendar should be fairly accurate as to availability; would you care to pick a convenient time (You'll know non-calendar preferences better than I) and send it? I have nothing late on thursday, so I can probably do the same time as the tl meeting (or after) on the following dat
[19:39] <lifeless> *day*
[19:40] <gary_poster> lifeless, can do.  even better might be today.  I'll look for your schedule now, but if you don't object I'll try that first
[19:40] <lifeless> gary_poster: oh *frell* and I just remembered, I have a hospital appointment at 1030 on thursday leaving my only 30 minutes post parallel test call to get there
[19:40] <lifeless> today would be awesome
[19:40] <lifeless> as I suspect I'm about to have to shuffle the parallel test call :P
[19:41] <gary_poster> lifeless, heh, ok.  I'll try to arrange the tag call in the next hour or two.  How would parallel testing be for your Friday then?
[19:41] <gary_poster> Same time
[19:41] <gary_poster> eh I could look at your calendar... me gets back to that
[19:41] <lifeless> superb
[19:46] <gary_poster> lifeless, you can do your Friday, so I'll move parallel testing to then.  I have a call in 1:15 and you have something in :15, right (I ask simply because I don't understand what 1:1 bootstrapping means)?
[19:46] <gary_poster> Actually I suspect it would be easier for you to move the parallel testing meeting
[19:46] <gary_poster> otherwise I have to make a new one
[19:47] <lifeless> I will move it
[19:47] <lifeless> 1:1 bootstrapping is me getting to grips with the rest of CDO as TA
[19:47] <gary_poster> ah right
[19:47] <gary_poster> ok cool
[19:47] <gary_poster> thanks
[19:47] <lifeless> one dept at a time
[19:47] <gary_poster> bac, sinzui, are you available in 13 minutes to have a call with lifeless about milestone tagging?
[19:48] <bac> gary_poster: yes
[19:48] <sinzui> yes
[19:48] <lifeless> gary_poster: sorry was iunclear - that 15 minutes thing is a call with henrik omma
[19:48] <gary_poster> lifeless, oh!
[19:48] <gary_poster> sorry, I misunderstood the moving it part
[19:48] <gary_poster> bac, sinzui, nm, sorry.  I'll propose a call tomorrow afternoon
[19:58] <gary_poster> sinzui, bac, lifeless, I proposed a call in two hours and two minutes (5PM eastern).  It's in Google calendar.  I can't talk longer than half an hour, so hopefully we can determine what to do by then.
[19:58] <lifeless> kk
[19:58] <bac> ok
[19:59] <sinzui> gary_poster, purple squad have a meeting at 5
[19:59] <sinzui> I can talk before then
[20:02] <gary_poster> sinzui, I have a 4 PM :-/
[20:02] <gary_poster> ...
[20:03] <gary_poster> oh, is flacoste not here today?
[20:04] <fjlacoste> gary_poster: i'm here
[20:04] <fjlacoste> under the wrong nick!
[20:04] <gary_poster> heh
[20:04] <gary_poster> flacoste, would you be available for a call at 3:30 rather than 4?
[20:04] <flacoste> gary_poster: sure
[20:04] <gary_poster> awesome thanks flacoste
[20:05] <gary_poster> ok sinzui, bac, lifeless (who is now on the phone), I'm moving the call a half hour earier (4:30 Eastern)
[20:05] <sinzui> okay, 1h 25m from now
[20:06] <bac> still good with me
[20:10] <gary_poster> thanks
[20:19] <rick_h__> gary_poster: +1 on the pyramid stuff :) big fan (re email to -dev)
[20:30] <gary_poster> rick_h__, cool :-)
[20:33] <rick_h__> gary_poster: let me know if you get playing with things. been working on it with my personal app and was working on porting pylons -> pyramid at my last job
[20:49] <gary_poster> lifeless, when you move the parallel testing appt please add flacoste as participant
[21:08] <lifeless> kk
[21:09] <lifeless> gary_poster: it was a simple +24h right ?
[21:10] <lifeless> ok, popping out for a minute, will be back for the call in 20
[21:24] <lifeless> and back
[21:59] <wgrant> Morning
[22:02] <lifeless> flacoste: should we catch up ?
[22:02] <flacoste> lifeless: how about tomorrow?
[22:03] <lifeless> flacoste: hahahahahah :P
[22:03] <flacoste> lifeless: i've been catching up on the phone all day :-)
[22:03] <lifeless> yeah, me too
[22:03] <lifeless> see if there is a slot in my calendar that suits
[22:04] <sinzui> jcsackett, meeting?
[22:07] <jcsackett> sinzui: mumble is misbehaving. i'll have it sorted in a sec.
[22:10] <gary_poster> That since this was tech debt, we will *not* proceed even now.  (My understanding was that we were going into it with our eyes open)
[22:11] <gary_poster> oops :-)
[22:13] <jelmer> 'evening
[22:23] <lifeless> mwhudson: oh hi
[22:23] <mwhudson> lifeless: hello
[22:24] <lifeless> mwhudson: you have https://bugs.launchpad.net/~mwhudson/+assignedbugs
[22:24] <lifeless> also 'affecting bugs' reads oddly
[22:25] <mwhudson> lifeless: ah yes, i saw your comments on the loggerhead bugs i think
[22:28] <mwhudson> i'll reply in due course
[22:28] <lifeless> thank you !
[22:29] <lifeless> I think the search will catch things I haven't yet scanned across
[23:08] <lifeless> flacoste: this is a ref for google interpreting javascript - http://searchengineland.com/google-io-new-advances-in-the-searchability-of-javascript-and-flash-but-is-it-enough-19881
[23:08] <lifeless> 'As of today, they’re able execute JavaScript onClick events.' ..