[04:52] <lifeless> jelmer: bug 755241 still needs a little polish I think
[04:52] <_mup_> Bug #755241: subunit-filter ability to change fail to xfail based on external list <subunit:In Progress by jelmer> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/755241 >
[08:27] <rick_h__> StevenK: lp:~rharding/launchpad/use-convoy is my branch with some small changes
[08:32] <StevenK> wgrant_: loloptus
[08:32] <wgrant_> Nah
[08:33] <wgrant_> I think my terrible ARM server at home has died this time.
[08:38] <wgrant_> gary_poster: sudo mount -t overlayfs -o upperdir=foo,lowerdir=bar none baz
[08:39] <StevenK> overlayfs *and* LXC? What Could Possibly Go Wrong
[08:39] <lifeless> wgrant_: AIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
[08:45] <wgrant_> well, aufs is dead, so we need to use overlayfs instead on precise
[08:53] <lifeless> I believe it got put back into precise :)
[08:53] <lifeless> anyhoo
[08:53] <lifeless> we can all upgrade to precise easily enough :)
[08:54] <wgrant_> lifeless: Colin said otherwise
[08:54] <wgrant_> And it works in Oneiric
[08:54] <wgrant_> And we can use aufs on old series.
[08:54] <lifeless> ah good, ok
[08:54] <lifeless> wgrant_: hmm, I saw chatter go by in #ubuntu-kernel couple days back
[08:59] <wgrant_> It was killed and revived back in Lucid, but AFAIK it's really gone now.
[09:05] <lifeless> wgrant_: '06:11 #ubuntu-kernel: < apw> tgardner, that is our desire, we are starting to see some problems, which i want to look at at rally, seems pbuilder won't work for instance which is a bit of a problem
[09:05] <lifeless> '
[10:08] <jtv> wgrant_: grar, nasty traceback.  Looks very much as if the pending change was a holdover from either a previous scan cycle or a different builder whose work got interleaved with the failing one.
[10:09] <wgrant_> jtv: Hm. It's possible that concordia was doing stuff, but I don't think so. The full log is at carob:/srv/launchpad.net-logs/staging/buildmaster/buildd-manager.log or so
[10:11] <jtv> Or wait… builder.Build..?
[10:11] <jtv> Sorry: builder.updateBuild
[10:12] <jtv> Calls the build behavior's updateBuild.
[10:12] <wgrant_> Yes, that's where the problem is most likely to be.
[10:16] <jtv> wgrant_: yup, one of the status handlers again, I suspect.
[10:18] <StevenK> Melbourne
[10:23] <jtv> wgrant_: Builder.failBuilder
[10:24] <jtv> wgrant_: in _handleStatus_BUILDERFAIL
[10:25] <jtv> lp.buildmaster.model.packagebuild.PackageBuildDerived._handleStatus_BUILDERFAIL needs a read/write database policy.
[10:26] <wgrant_> Aha
[10:26] <wgrant_> But wasn't this PACKAGEFAIL?
[10:28] <jtv> wgrant_: dunno — haven't looked at the log yet.  The traceback doesn't say.
[10:28] <wgrant_> Look at the first line of the paste.
[10:28] <wgrant_> 2012-01-11 08:41:19+0000 [QueryProtocol,client] Templates generation job blah-5194310 for lp://staging/checkbox finished with status PACKAGEFAIL.
[10:29] <jtv> Ah.  Any chance that that might be exactly because the status update was preempted by this failure?
[13:04] <rick_h__> StevenK: https://pastebin.canonical.com/57967/
[13:11] <mhall119> who can I talk to about https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/188564 ?
[13:12] <_mup_> Bug #188564: Build also packages for Debian in PPA's <feature> <lp-soyuz> <ppa> <soyuz-core> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/188564 >
[13:13] <deryck> mhall119, what sort of talking to are you looking for?
[13:13] <deryck> uncle_ian, lp:~deryck/launchpad/remove-unused-getContentArea
[13:14] <mhall119> deryck: I'd like to get an update on how far the conversation has gone about giving resources to this, and if any decisions have been made
[13:15] <deryck> mhall119, so see mrevell or flacoste
[13:16] <mhall119> deryck: thanks
[13:17] <deryck> mhall119, np!
[13:18] <nigelb> So, I was thinking of doing a hacking on LP sesion at the next ubuntu developer week, can anyone co-host the session with me? :)
[13:20]  * mhall119 hides
[13:21] <lifeless> nigelb: depending on the timing, sure
[13:21] <nigelb> \o/
[13:23] <nigelb> lifeless: Pick one that works for you from https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek/Timetable. I'll adjust my schedule around :)
[13:26] <lifeless> 2100UTC on tuesday is probably good
[13:30] <nigelb> 0230, not bad.
[13:30] <nigelb> I'll book that
[13:31] <nigelb> I'm guessing we need at least 1 hour?
[13:34] <lifeless> depends on what you want to show folk
[13:34] <lifeless> nigelb: 0230 isn't bad?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!
[13:34] <nigelb> I can stay awake that long :)
[13:35] <nigelb> 0400 on the other hand...
[13:35] <nigelb> Would setting up local instance of launchpad and hcaking on a small bug be too hard?
[13:35] <lifeless> well, we can set up a VM the ycan download
[13:36] <StevenK> Depends. You may have to fix it to document how long it takes.
[13:36] <lifeless> it would take an hour to bootstrap a dev environment from scratch
[13:36] <nigelb> boo
[13:37] <nigelb> how about we announce that we expect people to already have their environments setup? (yeah, that's hard as well)
[13:37] <lifeless> yeah
[13:37] <lifeless> we should
[13:37] <lifeless> but we should also make that easay
[13:38] <nigelb> is it harder than it used to be?
[13:38] <lifeless> no harder, no
[13:38] <nigelb> I only had trouble with hanving enough bandwidth to download everything rf wanted to download ;)
[13:44] <lifeless> jml: you are confusing me. And I want to talk to you about ui result objects. Can has voice?
[13:47] <jml> lifeless: not *right* now. in 1hr15 though.
[13:49] <mhall119> hey lifeless , would you be able to give me any insights into how far the discussions went on https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/188564 ?
[13:49] <_mup_> Bug #188564: Build also packages for Debian in PPA's <feature> <lp-soyuz> <ppa> <soyuz-core> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/188564 >
[13:50] <lifeless> mhall119: I don't think they have gone anywhere
[13:50] <lifeless> jml: ping me.
[13:50] <mhall119> lifeless: it sounds like it's not technically difficult, just resource expensive, am I reading that right?
[13:52] <lifeless> there are technical things too, like having a debian archive to build against and publishing the results properly
[15:30]  * cjwatson wonders why lp-remove-package.py bothers taking a lock
[15:30] <cjwatson> Oh well, I guess it'll be moot once that's moved to the API ...
[16:10] <jam> I just got some failures trying to push to bazaar.launchpad.net: "ConnectionReset reading response for 'BzrDir.open_2.1', retrying
[16:10] <jam> ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host"
[16:10] <jam> It is working right now, though. But I'm wondering if we are having capacity issues
[16:18] <wgrant> rvba: Does the PPA notifications thing really delete the PCJ?
[16:27] <StevenK> rick_h__: activateConstrainBugExpiration mochi death is live on qas.
[17:52] <lifeless> jml: yo
[20:58] <mwhudson> "Delete MochiKit.js since it's no longer used" \o/
[21:04] <StevenK> Oh yes
[21:04] <StevenK> We can't kill YUI 2 yet, sadly.
[21:05] <mwhudson> is that going to happen this week?
[21:05] <StevenK> Unlikely. The YUI 3 Calendar widget didn't appear until 3.4, and we're still on 3.3.
[21:06] <mwhudson> ah right
[21:06] <StevenK> And switching to 3.4 using our current system is *painful* since they reorganised the entire bloody tree.
[21:06] <mwhudson> argl
[21:06] <mwhudson> so not difficult, but massively tedious and has to be done in one bit hit?
[21:06] <mwhudson> *big
[21:07] <StevenK> We're looking at being clever and using a combo loader.
[21:07] <mwhudson> ah, that can translate old to new locations?
[21:08] <StevenK> So the class names didn't change, just their locations. This is the YUI combo loader, just not Yahoo's own.
[21:08] <mwhudson> right
[21:09] <StevenK> And let's face it. Our JS is a right mess.
[21:10] <StevenK> We combine all of our JS files in a particular order, and then add YUI onto the end and then minify the entire lot.
[21:10] <StevenK> It is utterly disgusting.
[22:28] <timrc> not sure you can see this, https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloudberry because it's private but the results which should be showing all bugs for this project are not matching up with the statistics in the sidebar...  for example there are 3 results returned, but the side bar says there are 9 open bugs...
[22:29] <timrc> am I missing something?
[22:30] <timrc> clicking on the "9 open bugs" link takes me https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloudberry/+bugs which is still displaying only 3 bugs
[22:31] <mwhudson> timrc: i think that's sort of expected, but i can't remember why
[22:32] <mwhudson> timrc: ah, found the mail
[22:33] <mwhudson> timrc: it's because you probably have multiple paths to visibility on those bugs
[22:33] <mwhudson> i.e. directly subscribed and also in a team that is subscribed
[22:34] <mwhudson> timrc: https://lists.launchpad.net/launchpad-dev/msg06914.html