[07:50] <shakaran> Hi, I am using launchpadapi I am wondering if is possible get a list with all branches for a project?
[07:51] <maxb> shakaran: lp.projects[project_id].getBranches(status=("Development", "Experimental", "Mature", "Merged", "Abandoned"))
[07:52] <maxb> without a status param it defaults to all *active* statuses
[07:53] <shakaran> maxb: nice, but then how I get the project_id? I still reading the docs for basics
[08:06] <shakaran> maxb: I am reading https://launchpad.net/+apidoc/1.0.html#project for find the project_id attribute or something similar but no luck
[08:09] <wgrant> shakaran: It's just the name from the URL
[08:10] <wgrant> eg. lp.projects['bzr'] for https://launchpad.net/bzr
[08:15] <shakaran> wgrant: weird, I try that for "ubuntu" and I get AttributeError: https://api.launchpad.net/1.0/ubuntu object has no attribute 'getBranches'
[08:19] <wgrant> shakaran: Ah, Ubuntu's not a project, but a distribution.
[08:19] <wgrant> And you *really* don't want to try to get all of its branchres
[08:19] <wgrant> branches
[08:19] <wgrant> There are several hundred thousand.
[08:20] <shakaran> I know, I need get all here: https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu I am doing a automatic script for update a apport spec bug pattern in several branches
[08:21] <wgrant> What are you actually trying to do?
[08:21] <wgrant> Ubuntu has several hundred thousand branches, not just several
[08:21] <wgrant> And there's no way you're interested in all of them :)
[08:21] <shakaran> I manually did with a bash script for 2 projects https://code.launchpad.net/~shakaran/ubuntu/quantal/unity/bug-pattern-update/+merge/127266
[08:22] <shakaran> https://code.launchpad.net/~shakaran/ubuntu/quantal/connman/bug-pattern-update/+merge/127439
[08:22] <shakaran> now I am searching the same for change automaticly in other projects
[08:22] <shakaran> I will do batch request of 100 or so, it takes days, but I get to update all
[08:22] <wgrant> You probably only care about the quantal branch for each source package
[08:23] <shakaran> yeap, only quantal
[08:23] <wgrant> I'd get a list of Ubuntu source packages and then grab the branches for each, perhaps
[08:23] <wgrant> There's no point iterating through all of Ubuntu's branches when you only care about 20000 or so trunks
[08:23] <wgrant> It's probably also more effective to grab the source package from a mirror that's close to you
[08:23] <wgrant> And avoid grabbing the full history from Launchpad entirely.
[08:23] <shakaran> then, what should be the best way to get that packages names with launchpad api?
[08:24] <SamB_MacG5> why launchpad?
[08:25] <SamB_MacG5> why not just use the debian stuff?
[08:25] <wgrant> Exactly.
[08:26] <wgrant> for c in main restricted universe multiverse; do wget -q -O - http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/quantal/$c/source/Sources.bz2 | bzcat | awk '/^Package: / {print $2}'; done
[08:27] <wgrant> Will rather quickly get you a list of package names
[08:27] <shakaran> so that is ;) 20246 packages ;)
[08:31] <shakaran> wgrant: my old bash script looks like http://pastebin.com/inN1sTYd I will update fetching the projects name from your trick. Thanks
[11:56] <Darxus> Anyone care to interpret this build failure for me?  https://code.launchpad.net/~darxus/+archive/wayland-daily/+recipebuild/316907
[11:56] <Darxus> Ugh, no, not that.
[11:58] <Darxus> https://code.launchpad.net/~darxus/+archive/wayland-gtk-daily/+recipebuild/318484
[11:59] <wgrant> Darxus: bzr-builder recipe format 0.4 isn't fully supported by Launchpad yet
[11:59] <wgrant> You'll need to use 0.3 instead.
[11:59] <Darxus> Thanks, I am actually trying rebuilding with that already.
[12:04] <jelmer> hmm, we still haven't landed the new python-debian on the buildds yet?
[12:05] <wgrant> There's an RT for that.
[12:07] <jelmer> wgrant: I know, I was hoping it had been processed at this point..
[12:10] <nass> Hi everyone. Anyone here to help me ?
[12:10] <jelmer> hi nass
[12:10] <nass> hi jelmer
[12:10] <nass> thankx for your answer and time
[12:11] <nass> I just uploaded some samba build to my brand new PPA repo but can't see anything on the web...
[12:11] <nass> I'm ashamed I missed something...
[12:11] <nass> dput said upload was ok, but I didn't get any email back.
[12:12] <nass> Now this is what I get :
[12:12] <nass> sufred@svn1:/var/cache/pbuilder/result$ sudo dput ppa:nass/samba samba_3.6.8-1ubuntu1_amd64.changes Package has already been uploaded to ppa on ppa.launchpad.net Nothing more to do for samba_3.6.8-1ubuntu1_amd64.changes
[12:15] <nass> Maybe it's because I uploaded with "-u" unsigned option (even if files were signed).
[12:16] <mgz> right, signing issues often mean no email back
[12:17] <mgz> nass: you need to sign the .changes file, and the key you use needs to be associated with your launchpad account
[12:23] <nass> Oh. Didn't read that anywere. Thank you for showing me the direction.
[12:58] <nass> Everything worked just fine :-): https://launchpad.net/~nass/+archive/samba
[12:59] <nass> Thank you guys for your precious help. :-)
[13:47] <apw> i have been seeing PPA upload failures where the stated error is a bad email address but the error in the failure seems to be valid: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/118208269/rCCURosRLHlEDDV5S5HyzfJQ8EU.txt apparently is the actual error that triggers the upload failure
[13:49] <wgrant> I wondered when someone would ask about that :)
[13:49] <wgrant> apw: Can you show me the changes file? Strip the sig
[13:50] <apw> wgrant, i don't think i have it, they get dropped when dput is successful
[13:51] <wgrant> apw: dput doesn't delete them locally
[13:51] <wgrant> And someone's uploaded that package at least twice
[13:51] <apw> wgrant, yep its a daily upload, whatever the tip of our tree is (if changed) is uploaded
[13:52] <apw> wgrant, the code which does it does all of them, and oneiric uploaded fine, lucid did not.  different emails of course
[13:52] <wgrant> apw: Ah
[13:52] <wgrant> Can you generate the changes file manually somehow?
[13:52] <wgrant> It looks like Changed-By is probably corrupt
[13:52] <apw> wgrant, i'll go ask the automation to do it again
[13:52] <wgrant> So it'd be nice to see what it was.
[14:02] <apw> wgrant, i think i have it building now ...
[14:03] <wgrant> apw: Locally, or successfully uploaded and building on Launchpad?
[14:04] <apw> wgrant, making the source package only
[14:05] <wgrant> Ah
[14:11] <apw> wgrant thanks for your help, found the issue, its a source package issue
[14:12] <wgrant> Great
[15:50] <BluesKaj> W: Failed to fetch http://ppa.launchpad.net/kubuntu-ppa/backports/ubuntu/dists/quantal/main/binary-amd64/Packages  404  Not Found...yet the ppa is in play for most ..server not up to date perhaps ?
[15:51] <tsimpson> BluesKaj: quantal?
[15:51] <BluesKaj> yup
[15:51] <BluesKaj> tsimpson, ^
[15:51] <tsimpson> well, the PPA is for precise
[15:52] <tsimpson> BluesKaj: http://ppa.launchpad.net/kubuntu-ppa/backports/ubuntu/dists/ nothing for quantal there
[15:52] <ScottK> BluesKaj: I didn't realize is was for quantal.  For quantal 4.9.2 is in the archive.  No PPA.
[15:53] <BluesKaj> ScottK, ok thanks
[15:53] <BluesKaj> and tsimpson
[16:01] <BluesKaj> ok, now it's in the archive ... I guess quantal was briefly overlooked
[16:02] <ScottK> BluesKaj: No.  It was built in quantal-proposed so it wouldn't break quantal and then recently copied over.  No overlooking.
[16:03] <BluesKaj> ScottK, recently must mean 15 mins ago :)
[16:04] <ScottK> A little longer, but then the publisher has to run.
[16:04] <BluesKaj> anyway it's there now , that's what countsd
[16:30] <Darxus> Does launchpad contain bzr branches containing the source of released packages?  Specifically for the gtk+3.0 source package for quantal....
[16:30] <Darxus> I feel like there was some automated import of those somewhere.  But I guess that may have been imports from debian.
[16:31] <tsimpson> for ubuntu, you can try code.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/<source package>
[16:32] <Darxus> tsimpson: Yeah, what I want is exactly an lp: source containing the source from https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gtk+3.0/3.6.0-0ubuntu2 - but I don't see it there.
[16:32] <Darxus> ...For an automated daily build.
[16:34] <tsimpson> best place to ask would be #ubuntu-devel I guess
[16:34] <Darxus> Thanks.
[17:10] <dobey> Darxus: lp:ubuntu/gtk+3.0 would give you the source from the development version of ubuntu. if it's not the latest version, then there's probably an issue with importer
[17:13] <Darxus> dobey: Yes, that's the conclusion from #ubuntu-devel, thanks.  The import is somehow broken, I opened a bug:  https://bugs.launchpad.net/udd/+bug/1061083
[17:45] <Darxus> Is this the best place to ask about daily build recipes?  I'd like to create a recipe that uses lp:~darxus/weston/trunk for the base branch, and uses nest-part to import the packaging from lp:ubuntu/weston.  What I don't know how to do is the 1 line modification I need to make to the packaging before its imported.  Currently I have a branch I copied and modified, but that doesn't get automatically updated, which is what I'm trying to do.  Is ...
[17:45] <Darxus> ... there a way to merge a modification into a branch *before* nest-part'ing it, or some other way to do this?
[17:46] <Darxus> Oh, huh, I guess I can just nest-part it and then do the merge... buildig doesn't happen until after anyway.  This is going to be awesome :P
[17:57] <Darxus> Hmm, one of the changes I made in my branch of the packaging was bumping the version due to this:  "INFO File weston_0.95.0-0ubuntu3+20120928~quantal1.tar.gz already exists in wayland-daily, but uploaded version has different contents. See more information about this error in https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/UploadErrors."
[17:57] <Darxus> I... don't think I can bump the version, with a merge, when the changelog is changing every time?
[17:59] <Darxus> Oh, hmm, that's... one of my own versions.  Maybe that's just not a problem.
[18:01] <maxb> Right, if it's necessary that you be able to rebuild a recipe multiple times per day, you either need to diligently work the revno of *every* branch involved into the version, or use something like {time} in the version
[18:01] <Darxus> Yeah, no need to do it every day.  Thanks.
[18:02] <Darxus> I was thinking it was conflicting with... the version of the debian package I based it on or something.
[18:02]  * maxb eyes that gtk+3.0 failure with some surprise
[18:05] <maxb> oh well, let's retry it and see what happens
[18:05] <Darxus> Thanks.
[18:14] <Darxus> bzr: ERROR: bzrlib.errors.InvalidHttpResponse: Invalid http response for https://xmlrpc.launchpad.net/bazaar/: Unable to handle http code 502: Bad Gateway
[18:14] <Darxus> - https://launchpadlibrarian.net/118259426/buildlog.txt.gz
[18:14] <Darxus> :/
[18:16] <maxb> Sounds like a transient failure
[18:20] <Darxus> Agreed, I requested another build.
[18:29] <Darxus> Yeah, didn't get the same error a second time.  (Needed to fix the stuff I was merging.)
[18:36] <Darxus> Hmm, this isn't working.  I'm trying to create a branch that, when merged, just removes " --fail-missing" from a line.  Can I do that?  I tried just branching the existing branch, making the modification, and then merging my new branch on top of the existing branch.  Which is complaining about conflicts.
[18:40] <Darxus> "Any lines that are indented by two spaces, and are directly below your nest line, will act on the nested branch."  "Error parsing recipe:4:3: Not allowed to indent unless after a 'nest' line"
[18:40] <Darxus> ...
[18:41] <Darxus> Ah, "unless"... well, it's a nest-part line.
[18:50] <Darxus> Any idea what I'm missing?  https://code.launchpad.net/~darxus/+recipe/weston-daily-test  packaging-fix is just supposed to remove " --fail-missing", and is causing conflicts.
[19:10] <apw> i am wondering if PPAs retry depwait build failures automatically, anyone know?
[19:22] <TheLordOfTime> they should
[19:22] <TheLordOfTime> eventually
[19:24] <apw> cool thanks
[21:57] <wgrant> apw: They do. Hourly, same as the primary archive.
[21:57] <wgrant> And they consider inter-PPA and PPA->primary dependencies properly and everything, as you'd expect.
[22:08] <apw> wgrant, and there we are it has jumped back into the queue.  thanks for the background
[23:45] <jfcaron> Is there a way to get a permanent URL to the latest version of a file within someone's repository?
[23:45] <jfcaron> I want to regularly retrieve the latest file, but the machine where I want to do this does not have bzr, so I've been using wget with a copy+pasted URL from a browser.
[23:46] <jfcaron> There must be a better way.
[23:46] <wgrant> jfcaron: What's the URL you're wgetting?
[23:46] <jfcaron> "http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jfcaron/+junk/TRIUMFBeamTest/download/jfcaron%40phas.ubc.ca-20121003230855-8v8vggnp5gvk09u8/standard_analysis.c-20120918023544-aoznsq63nx9e3ft3-1/standard_analysis.C"
[23:46] <jfcaron> But it gets dynamically regenerated every time I push.
[23:47] <wgrant> Sounds like you grabbed that from a revision view
[23:47] <wgrant> Replace the revision ID (the path segment starting with jfcaron) with "head:"
[23:47] <wgrant> The current file view (the Files tab) always uses head: URLs
[23:48] <jfcaron> I get resource not found when I try: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jfcaron/+junk/TRIUMFBeamTest/download/head:/standard_analysis/standard_analysis.C
[23:48] <wgrant> You changed the /standard_analysis.c-20120918023544-aoznsq63nx9e3ft3-1/ segment too
[23:48] <jfcaron> But replacing the "download" part with "view" allows me to view the file.
[23:48] <jfcaron> Oh, yes I did.
[23:48] <wgrant> That's a file ID, which needs to be preserved
[23:49] <jfcaron> Will that part change between revisions?
[23:49] <wgrant> It uniquely identifies a file throughout its history, not a specific version
[23:49] <jfcaron> So if I go to: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jfcaron/+junk/TRIUMFBeamTest/view/head:/standard_analysis/standard_analysis.C and click on "download file", that is a permanent URL?
[23:49] <wgrant> It only changes if the file is renamed, basically.
[23:49] <wgrant> Right, that's permanent, though it will track renames.
[23:50] <wgrant> eg. if I rename standard_analysis.C to foo.C, and rename something else to standard_analysis.C, that URL will now actually give the content of foo.C
[23:50] <jfcaron> Ah ok.  I thought that the part with the date string was related to revisions, but now that I look carefully, 2012-09-18 is when I first versioned the file.
[23:51] <jfcaron> This means I can write a little script that automatically downloads the latest version.  Thanks wgrant.
[23:51] <wgrant> Yep
[23:51] <wgrant> The file ID is generated when you first add a file, and is used to track history on that file across renames etc.
[23:51] <wgrant> It's rarely seen outside that sort of URL.
[23:52] <jfcaron> I guess using just the actual filename in the URL is convenient for viewing, but not so good for tracking in case you rename the file.