[17:58] <hjd> Question about when to use the tag "patch": I guess this is mainly to tag bugs which have an attachment, but I assume diffs in comments would be ok (bug 811849). What about a link to a patch (bug 690625), or a comment on the changes, ie. not a diff (bug 709901)?
[17:59] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 811849 in ripit "ripit 3.8.0 bug and patch" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/811849
[17:59] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 690625 in driconf "driconf: DeprecationWarning with python 2.6" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/690625
[17:59] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 709901 in lirc ""PATCH" to enable lirc over network" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/709901
[18:02] <penguin42> hjd: I'd normally use it for anything that has a patch that looks like it intends to fix it
[18:02] <penguin42> hjd: Whether it's attached, in a comment or pointed to
[18:02] <penguin42> hjd: just as an indicator that someone has found a way to fix it
[18:04] <penguin42> hjd: Although not if it's a pointer to what caused the problem
[18:08] <hjd> penguin42: Sounds reasonable.
[18:25] <Logan_> Can somebody please make Bug 1024533 public?
[18:31]  * penguin42 looks
[18:34] <penguin42> Logan_: Done, didn't seem to be any strings visible in any of the attachments
[18:34] <Logan_> penguin42: Thanks. :)
[18:44]  * penguin42 wonders if there is someone that should be subscribed to check things like bug 228531
[18:44] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 228531 in gaim-themes "Includes non-free images" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/228531
[19:26] <penguin42> bug 235539 is fun
[19:26] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 235539 in acpi "Laptop boots at Midnight, by itself." [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/235539
[23:09] <pabelanger> Evening, I filed bug 1057813 in the wrong location, can a bug marshal move it into Ubuntu Backports for lucid?
[23:09] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1057813 in git-core "Lucid backport request: describe: Refresh the index when run with --dirty" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1057813
[23:09] <pabelanger> I've already attached the debdiff
[23:14] <micahg> pabelanger: is that a bug or a feature?
[23:15] <micahg> on the surface, looks SRUable
[23:15] <penguin42> can't you do 'also affects' and add it to Ubuntu Backports' ?
[23:16] <micahg> penguin42: that's pointless, it's either SRUable or backportable
[23:16] <micahg> and if backportable, better to backport the whole thing
[23:16] <pabelanger> micahg, Ya, it is a bug and other could benefit from it.  I can start a SRU if you like
[23:16] <penguin42> micahg: Sorry yes, I meant for his original request to move what it was against
[23:16] <micahg> pabelanger: that looks more appropriate
[23:17] <pabelanger> micahg, sure, let me do that instead
[23:18] <penguin42> hmm is the 'ecryptfs_sig' shown in the output of mount the actual key or something harmless?
[23:20] <micahg> pabelanger: thanks
[23:21] <pabelanger> micahg: No problem
[23:35] <pabelanger> micahg, are you able to target bug 1057813 for lucid?
[23:35] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 1057813 in git-core "Lucid backport request: describe: Refresh the index when run with --dirty" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1057813
[23:35] <micahg> pabelanger: sure
[23:35] <pabelanger> I'll update the title shortly
[23:35] <pabelanger> micahg, ty
[23:35] <micahg> pabelanger: is it in precise?
[23:36] <micahg> task added
[23:36] <pabelanger> micahg, no, already fixed in precise