[02:18] Could someone open a task for precise on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/redeclipse/+bug/1034148 please? [02:18] Ubuntu bug 1034148 in redeclipse "redeclipse: security issues with transmitted map cfgs" [Undecided,Confirmed] === bilal_ is now known as bilal [13:15] hi [13:35] hi [14:28] Hi, after a recent quantal update window controls are now on the right instead of left, should I report this? [14:29] RandomBloke: You should [14:30] Ok, I will. [14:30] I assume this isn't something that should happen then. [14:31] Yep, it shouldn't. [14:31] Thanks, bye! === jbicha is now known as Guest72287 [17:41] hi [18:49] hello [18:50] I've got a question! [18:53] ask it! [18:54] if someone files a bug for some third-party package, what should a triager do? [18:56] can you give an example of a 3rd party package? [18:57] I mean something which is not maintained by Ubuntu [18:57] like someone today filed a bug for 'Calibre'. I don't think it is maintained by Ubuntu (although I'm not sure) [18:57] bug number? [18:58] 1035633. But I cannot access it anymore. [18:58] bug 1035633 [18:59] hmph, where is our friendly bot [18:59] hmph, won't let me either [19:00] Maybe somone removed it. [19:00] green7: I think if it's really a commercial/3rd party package then I'd leave it to them, although if the bug is missing something obvious it's worth asking for it;' like if the bug really no gives no useful info [19:01] And how can I find out whether a particular package/application is maintained by Ubuntu? [19:02] green7: Most things are - you can look at packages.ubuntu.com and apt-cache policy can tell you which repo it came from; if it's in the main/multiverse/universe I'd treat it as normal [19:03] green7: Only something that's from the partner repo or not on packages.u.c would I treat specially [19:03] got it === yofel_ is now known as yofel [19:33] What is the appropriate response when a person runs apport-collect on a bug, and it says that the package is provided by a PPA? Should the bug be marked as invalid? [19:34] Or should I mark as Incomplete, say to run ppa-purge, and then see if the bug still exists? [19:34] bug number? [19:34] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde-workspace/+bug/1035683 [19:34] Ubuntu bug 1035683 in kde-workspace "upon resuming from suspend, kwin crashes" [Undecided,Confirmed] [19:34] In fact, it says: "UnreportableReason: This is not an official Ubuntu package. Please remove any third party package and try again." [19:34] So Apport wouldn't even let the report go through if it was reported correctly. [19:35] Logan_: OK, it's not just any old PPA - it's from the backports ppa [19:35] Right. [19:36] Logan_: Hmm, apport seems to have added almost nothing useful, which is a shame - some logs/backtrace would be useful if they were still there [19:36] And the bug is somewhat sparse as it is. [19:37] Logan_: I'd ask whether it's a repeatable crash; if it's repeatable then yes I'd ask to retry with the non-ppa version and then try an apport [19:37] Okay, will do. [19:38] penguin42: Won't it be a mess if s/he runs apport-collect again in the bug? [19:38] Should I ask him/her to file a new bug instead with Apport once the official package is installed? [19:38] Logan_: I wouldn't bother with a new bug, might need a flag on apport to let it add [19:38] Okay. [19:38] Logan_: I don't think it will be confusing because the existing apport log has almost nothing [19:40] penguin42: Is my response appropriate? [19:41] looks good [19:42] Awesome. [19:51] Logan_: If it was a fairly arbitrary ppa I'd kind of agree it was an invalid, but things like the backports and things like xorg-edgers for latest stuff seem reasonable to track - as long as it's clear (maybe a note in title) [19:52] Makes sense. === _TJ_ is now known as TJ- [20:26] when doing triage, do you assign the bug to yourself or leave it unassigned? [20:29] normally leave it unassigned [20:29] thanks [20:30] how can you practical follow up on these bugs? [20:30] depends on the bug! [20:31] snamellit: Don't try and do every bug you see, only do the ones you're comfortable with [20:33] well, i am not comfortable with any bug right now... I am just trying to bearings... [20:34] snamellit: So some bugs you can find are already fixed, some you'll find are dupes of others, some you can confirm or state are still a problem, some you can ask the reporter for mor einformation, or if they've given enough end up as triaged [20:35] What about 'works as intended' bugs? [20:36] snamellit: You can close as invalid or mark as opinion; but you need to make sure it's really as intended, and even if it is intended is the bug reporter right to say that's bad? [20:37] In this case the reporter complains that FF does not store a password when instructed by the site not to. [20:38] bug number ? [20:39] 1035574 [20:39] bug 1035574 [20:39] Launchpad bug 1035574 in firefox "Does not offer to save password at https://cas.unistra.fr/cas/login" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1035574 [20:39] if you say bug then the bot picks it up :-) [20:39] cas is a single sign on service. [20:40] ok, I don't know enough about password/html foo to know what's reasonable there [20:40] i set one of these up at work... [20:41] snamellit: OK, so if you know why it doesn't and it's a thing from the site, then I'd add a comment explaining why it doesn't, and then mark invalid [20:41] thanks, will do [20:42] snamellit: On something like that always put the explanation about it so that they can see the reasoning [20:45] done, ok like that? [20:48] yep, looks good [22:25] hmm it might be good to /topic that people should quote a bug number if possible [23:15] do we do anything special with overlay-scrollbar bugs - I'm assuming it's appropriate to add overlay-scrollbar to the bug in question === buka is now known as Guest47899