[13:09] <ajmitch> highvoltage: so, with some screen-scraping magic, I produced https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/ToReview to get a list of all apps that we can't see in the needs info state
[13:09] <ajmitch> there are a lot
[13:09] <ajmitch> wendar: you may be interested in the url above as well
[13:10] <highvoltage> ajmitch: ah great, how do you get the needs-information ones? I thought they just dissapear from us once they go into that state
[13:10] <ajmitch> highvoltage: they do
[13:11] <ajmitch> but you can guess the url, so I poked the urls from 1 to 800 & saw which had information I could see
[13:11] <highvoltage> ah
[13:11] <ajmitch> it's ugly, but the bug hasn't been touched since it was filed 3 months ago, even after poking a canonical person
[13:12] <ajmitch> there are a few submissions there where they've given info & we haven't been able to see it, like https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/575/feedback/
[13:13] <ajmitch> others might be rejected because they haven't responded in a couple of months to a request, we might want to discuss how long that should be before we mass-reject
[13:13] <ajmitch> anyway, I hope it helps :)
[13:14] <highvoltage> I think it will
[13:15] <ajmitch> wendar: does https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bamf/+bug/903843 still affect precise? it was holding up crabhack (https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/174/feedback/)
[13:16] <highvoltage> ajmitch: should I go ahead and reject ibus-table-burmese with a nice message?
[13:19] <ajmitch> highvoltage: I think so, our guidelines (which likely aren't linked anywhere from the developer.ubuntu.com site) state they must be graphical applications, not content
[13:19] <highvoltage> where is that link btw?
[13:20] <ajmitch> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/Review/Guidelines
[13:20] <ajmitch> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/Review/Responses has the canned responses that you can edit when replying
[13:24] <ajmitch> highvoltage: you never got the reply on https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/398/feedback/, I guess?
[13:26] <highvoltage> ajmitch: indeed
[13:26] <ajmitch> epic
[13:27] <ajmitch> please complain on https://bugs.launchpad.net/developer-portal/+bug/927588 and https://bugs.launchpad.net/developer-portal/+bug/915902 :)
[13:28] <ajmitch> highvoltage: worth rejecting that .net app if it can't be built with mono
[13:28] <ajmitch> just apologise for not seeing his reply ;)
[13:31] <highvoltage> ajmitch: ok
[13:32] <highvoltage> ajmitch: he could submit it as a non-free app if he compiles it on windows, right?
[13:32] <ajmitch> not unless he changes the license
[13:33] <ajmitch> it's LGPL, so needs to have source & I doubt that the commercial apps team would ship something that must have source with it, that cannot be built
[13:34] <ajmitch> of course I could be wrong, but that's why I rejected zeroballistics rather than pushing to the commercial queue
[13:36] <highvoltage> hmm, how do I reject an app in a needs-information state?
[13:36] <ajmitch> ...
[13:36] <ajmitch> it doesn't look like you can
[13:36] <ajmitch> win!
[13:37]  * ajmitch goes to file a bug about that
[13:37] <highvoltage> heh
[13:37] <highvoltage> is there a bug for that too that I can click on affects-me?
[13:37] <ajmitch> going to file one now
[13:37] <highvoltage> or should I file a new one?
[13:37] <highvoltage> ok
[13:40] <ajmitch> https://bugs.launchpad.net/developer-portal/+bug/983965
[13:41] <highvoltage> maybe jono and mhall119 could help getting someone to fix that
[13:41] <ajmitch> yeah, maybe
[13:42] <ajmitch> I've already poked david pitkin by email about some of these other bugs with needs info apps
[13:42]  * ajmitch is about ready to give up on myapps & use LP for everything
[13:44] <highvoltage> if myapps' kinks could be ironed out it could be useful
[13:44] <ajmitch> yeah, one day
[13:46] <ajmitch> sorry if I seem a little cynical, I shouldn't be up so late :)
[13:51] <highvoltage> I understand. I'm a cynical asshole.
[14:02] <mhall119> ajmitch: I think only pitkin's group can make those changes, the community team just has access to the Wordpress side of the developer portal
[14:02] <ajmitch> mhall119: that's what I suspected
[14:02] <ajmitch> I've emailed him about bugs in the past
[14:04] <ajmitch> mhall119: so can we have a session at UDS about allowing other teams to edit the wordpress content?
[14:04] <mhall119> ajmitch: I don't think that needs a UDS session
[14:04] <mhall119> if a team should have access, an email/RT should suffice
[14:05] <ajmitch> is it currently just the community team that can fix things like broken links, outdated documentation, etc?
[14:05] <mhall119> ajmitch: fyi, you can ping achuni in #ubuntu-app-devel about MyApps stuff
[14:06] <achuni> hi :)
[14:06] <mhall119> or here
[14:06] <mhall119> :)
[14:06] <ajmitch> mhall119: the session wouldn't just be about giving people access, but what the general plans are for the site
[14:06] <achuni> mhall119: who was asking about bug #983965?
[14:06] <ajmitch> hi achuni
[14:06] <mhall119> ajmitch: talk to dpm about a devportal session
[14:06] <ajmitch> achuni: I filed that
[14:07] <mhall119> ajmitch: we're almost certainly going to have such a session, since both dpm and I have that as a major focus
[14:07] <ajmitch> mhall119: great, I'll sign up :)
[14:08] <achuni> ajmitch: I was wondering why you need to reject the apps, instead of leaving them in the Needs Information state
[14:09] <achuni> ajmitch: do you carry stats about apps in different states?
[14:09] <ajmitch> achuni: with some screen-scraping, I generated https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/ToReview
[14:09] <achuni> ajmitch: awesome! there should be an API for that :)
[14:10] <ajmitch> achuni: right, there should also be a way to see submissions in the needs info state
[14:10] <ajmitch> because we;ve had replies from people that I haven't been able to see until I wrote up scripts to scrape the site :)
[14:11] <ajmitch> #927588 & #915902 if you want to see why it's a concern :)
[14:12]  * achuni reads
[14:12] <ajmitch> actually because of #927588, we can't even approve apps if they've supplied updated info
[14:13] <highvoltage> or reject them
[14:14] <ajmitch> right, that was the bug I filed, I just realised that I can't approve https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/183/ though they've now supplied a source package
[14:15] <achuni> ajmitch: #927588 is caused by the fix for #894092 --- before that the only way to provide feedback was to change the app state
[14:16] <achuni> ajmitch: I can't really think of a way to fix #927588 that doesn't involve rolling back #894092
[14:17] <ajmitch> achuni: but is there a way that we can manually change the state, and see apps that need information?
[14:18]  * ajmitch also found #927553
[14:18] <ajmitch> it's just that perfect combo of not getting information & not being able to act on it as well
[14:19] <achuni> right
[14:19] <achuni> ajmitch: making apps in all states visible: +1. that's been on the list for some time, sorry it's not done yet :/
[14:21] <achuni> ajmitch: manually changing state... feels kind of wrong.  Did the dev intend to change the state, but accidentally didn't?  If he intended to not change the state, why are you wanting to reject/approve?  If he did, isn't that the real bug, and not that you can't then change the state?
[14:21] <ajmitch> achuni: the developer did want to change the state, you said it couldn't easily be done without rolling back a fix for #894902
[14:22] <ajmitch> I haven't experimented with things from the developer's perspective, but I'd expect as a developer that replying to an email would usually be enough for the reviewers to be able to proceed
[14:22] <achuni> ajmitch: the developer can always change the state.  #894902 gives them *also* the option to send feedback without changing the state
[14:23] <ajmitch> is there a button that they have to click that says "I've supplied information now"?
[14:23] <achuni> ajmitch: for responses as in "Hi, ack, I saw your comments but I'm busy atm, I'll get back to you asap"
[14:23] <achuni> ajmitch: there's the "Resubmit for review" button, and then there's the "Send comment" button
[14:24] <achuni> ajmitch: they're probably not the most intuitive set of buttons
[14:24] <achuni> ajmitch: "Resubmit for review" sends information and changes the state back to PendingReview.  "Send comment" only sends information
[14:24] <ajmitch> I find it awkward that we'll have to chase down a number of developers just to ask them to click a resubmit button
[14:25] <ajmitch> until then, the app is in limbo
[14:25] <achuni> ajmitch: agreed
[14:25] <ajmitch> it's like too much control has been given to developers, not enough to reviewers :)
[14:25] <achuni> ajmitch: it feels like it would be better to remove fix for #894902.  iirc allison / dpm had asked for that originally, but I'm not sure if it was on behalf of somebody else
[14:26] <ajmitch> hence the request for being able to manually change the review state
[14:26] <achuni> right
[14:26] <dpm> bug 894902
[14:27] <dpm> ah, no bugbot
[14:27] <ajmitch> sorry, no luxuries here :)
[14:27] <achuni> dpm: http://pad.lv/894902 :)
[14:27] <ajmitch> achuni was faster than I was at that...
[14:28] <dpm> thanks achuni ;)
[14:28] <dpm> ajmitch, lol
[14:28] <ajmitch> sorry, it's 2:30AM here, I'm not entirely present :)
[14:28] <achuni> ajmitch: we'd need to check which manual state changes wouldn't introduce inconsistencies, but NeedsInformation -> PendingReview should be fine.  From there you could then approve / reject it?
[14:29] <ajmitch> achuni: I assume so - we'd like to be able to reject applications that appear to be effectively dead & get no response for months from the submitter
[14:29] <achuni> ajmitch: for NeedsInformation->Rejects would be nice to provide  a reason for the developer, and NeedsInformation->Approved would involve providing all the technical details (approved distro arch series, package name, etc)
[14:30] <ajmitch> achuni: ah, that brings up another point, that most of those fields are irrelevant at the moment for the ARB
[14:30] <ajmitch> I think a bug was filed about that as well, I'll have to find it
[14:30] <achuni> ajmitch: we could do NeedsInformation->Rejected and just leave the reason blank, or provide a boilerplate copy like "Due to lack of response from the developer" or something
[14:30] <dpm> achuni, I believe https://bugs.launchpad.net/ares/+bug/894902 is not exactly the bug we're talking about :)
[14:30]  * ajmitch would like to be able to write in a reason for rejection
[14:31] <ajmitch> pad.lv/894092
[14:31] <achuni> dpm: hah sorry, it's 894092
[14:31] <achuni> what ajmitch said :)
[14:32] <dpm> thanks guys :)
[14:32] <dpm> for the record, I didn't ask for that feature, I just happened to add the 'arb' tag to the bug
[14:33] <ajmitch> ok
[14:34] <achuni> dpm: ack
[14:36]  * ajmitch thought there was a bug open about those technical details currently being unused but required to approve an ARB app
[14:36] <ajmitch> I'll add one, as we're putting junk into the fields, such as on https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/589/
[14:36] <achuni> ajmitch: that's an issue for the regular queue already, there's a fix landed or in progress, 1 sec
[14:36] <ajmitch> ok
[14:37] <achuni> ajmitch: https://bugs.launchpad.net/developer-portal/+bug/965296 --- has a branch up for review currently
[14:37] <achuni> (should be landing later today)
[14:38] <ajmitch> ah nice, I'd already 'me too'ed that bug
[14:41] <ajmitch> achuni: so, what are the chances of the parts of the code that matter to us being open source? :)
[14:42] <achuni> ajmitch: we're on it, but it'll take a while
[14:42] <ajmitch> good to know it's being looked at
[14:42] <achuni> ajmitch: as in, I wouldn't commit to it during Q even
[14:43] <ajmitch> oh well
[14:43] <achuni> ajmitch: it was unfortunately coded as part of the software-center-agent, so we need to split out the developer portal codebase.  once those two DBs are split, it should be relatively straight forward
[14:44] <achuni> (it makes sense from the architectural pov too, as they're really separte services)
[14:44] <ajmitch> if we can get these bugs looked at in the near term, it'd be nice
[14:44] <ajmitch> since I don't want to guess urls & scrape the site to generate wiki pages :)
[14:49] <ajmitch> achuni: thanks for talking through this with me, I think I should go & sleep now since I have to be up in ~4 hours or so :)
[14:50] <achuni> ajmitch: I've added #915902 and #983965 to our commitment queue (stuff that usually gets done in around a week).  those two should make #927588 bearable, or do we also want to remove the ability to comment without changing state?
[14:50] <achuni> ouch
[14:50] <ajmitch> it's almost 3AM, I don't know why I'm still awake :)
[14:51] <ajmitch> achuni: I don't know how often comments are made that shouldn't change state, so I don't have enough info either way on it
[14:51] <achuni> ajmitch: thank you, I'll auto-join this room, grab me if I'm around so next time we can do it closer to your time zone
[14:51] <ajmitch> thanks, NZ time isn't the most conducive to talking to others
[14:52] <achuni> :)
[14:52] <ajmitch> night :)
[21:52] <ajmitch> morning