/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2012/10/25/#launchpad.txt

=== benji___ is now known as benji
baltix-mantasHi launchpad developers08:23
baltix-mantasIs there any workaround for bug #602579 ?08:23
ubot5Launchpad bug 602579 in Launchpad itself "Add checkbox '[X] Strip translations and changelogs from packages' on the +edit page for the PPA" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/60257908:23
wgrantbaltix-mantas: Sure, you can have your own version of pkgbinarymangler which whitelists your own PPAs08:25
wgrantgrep for oem-archive in the pkgbinarymangler source08:25
baltix-mantasI found check for oem-archive in /usr/bin/pkgstripfiles :08:27
baltix-mantasif grep -q '/oem-archive' ${PKGBINARYMANGLER_APT_CONF_DIR:-/etc/apt}/sources.list; then             echo "INFO: Running pkgstripfiles for OEM PPA build"08:27
wgrantRight08:28
wgrantpkgbinarymangler is just a normal package, so you can have a custom one in your PPA08:28
baltix-mantaswgrant: I've created PPA, named oem-archive, see http://ppa.launchpad.net/~baltix/+archive/oem-archive08:28
baltix-mantaswgrant: but this doesn't help :(08:28
wgrantbaltix-mantas: I think if you try again it will work08:31
wgrantbaltix-mantas: Since the PPA indices don't exist on ppa.launchpad.net until a binary is published, Launchpad won't include the PPA in sources.list until there are binaries.08:31
baltix-mantaswgrant: cool08:31
wgrantSo the first build won't have had 'oem-archive' anywhere in sources.list08:31
baltix-mantaswgrant: thanks for help, I will try again :)08:32
wgrantGreat, I don't see why it shouldn't work08:32
wgrant(although I suggest you patch pkgbinarymangler, rather than using the oem-archive name hack!)08:32
baltix-mantaswgrant: I like to use official hacks ;)08:33
baltix-mantasif they works08:33
wgrantHeh08:33
baltix-mantaswgrant: thank you very much for hint, I will try now, bye08:34
mantas-baltixPlease enable more amd64 builders - currently only 10 builders active and Queue is 500 jobs (22 hours), see https://launchpad.net/builders09:11
mantas-baltixWhile some amd64 builders are disabled, eg. https://launchpad.net/builders/akhlut and some others are idle.09:12
mantas-baltixwgrant: could you enable more amd64 builders - currently only 10 builders active and Queue is 500 jobs (22 hours), while i386 queue is only 57 minutes, see https://launchpad.net/builders09:25
wgrantI'll see what I can do.09:25
mantas-baltixwgrant: thanks, maybe you can enable https://launchpad.net/builders/akhlut or something :)09:30
wgrantIt's a bit brokne09:32
yaizahi! is is possible to rename a branch? Something like; lp:~ybailen/canonical-openerp/employee-registry-payroll -> lp:~ybailen/canonical-openerp/canonical-payroll12:05
yaizaI tried to do that clicking the "Change branch details"12:05
yaizabut then I got this error: "Private branches are not allowed for target Canonical OpenERP."12:06
yaizaand If I choose Personal as Target Branch I get this one "Only private teams may have personal private branches."12:06
czajkowskiwgrant: ^^12:11
czajkowskiyaiza: unsure about renaming branches, I dont think you can12:17
czajkowskimost copy over to a new branch with the right name12:17
mgzrename does work, it's just privacy being fun.12:17
czajkowskimgz: fun :)12:17
mgza fallback to `bzr branch lp:a lp:b` (ideally done within the datacenter) does work.12:18
baltix-mantaswgrant: Hi again, thanks for tip about retrying to build in oem-archive PPA, it seems this helps :)12:41
baltix-mantasMaybe someone can increase priority of my builds - I need to release new Baltix distribution version with fixed packages today, but must wait several hours, especially with amd64, see https://launchpad.net/~baltix/+archive/oem-archive/+build/3928929  https://launchpad.net/~baltix/+archive/oem-archive/+build/392827712:49
czajkowskibaltix-mantas: as wgrant said it's a bit broken today and you can see from our topic we do have some issues.12:55
=== Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha
baltix-mantasczajkowski: I'm asking about increasing priority of 2 my build - one time someone here helped me in this situation - launchpad admins can manually increase priority of some builds, right?12:56
czajkowskibaltix-mantas: there is no need to keep changing the description of the bug please.12:57
sinzuiyaiza, first change the branch to Proprietary, which is what the project says it requires the branch to be, then do the rename.13:09
* yaiza tries13:09
baltix-mantassinzui: maybe you can increase priority of these buids: https://launchpad.net/~baltix/+archive/oem-archive/+build/3928929  https://launchpad.net/~baltix/+archive/oem-archive/+build/392827713:10
baltix-mantasIt's "Build score", right?13:11
TheLordOfTimeerm...13:11
TheLordOfTimewhoops sorry, that msg was targetted elsewhere13:11
sinzuibaltix-mantas, I don't have permission to do that. The policy for changing scores changed last month anyway.13:11
* TheLordOfTime hates laptops13:11
czajkowskibaltix-mantas: I did tell you already we're having some stuff going on at present13:12
baltix-mantasczajkowski: I did'nt understand you previously :)13:13
czajkowskibaltix-mantas: ah well you could have said and I'd have made it clearer for you :)13:13
yaizait's taking some time to be changed to Propietary, still processing13:15
baltix-mantasczajkowski: it seems your engish is too good for me ;) I'm not native english speaker, I started to learn english only in university ;)13:26
czajkowskibaltix-mantas: no worries, here to help.13:27
baltix-mantasczajkowski: maybe you know aproximatly when problems in builders will be fixed or at least this my build will start: https://launchpad.net/~baltix/+archive/oem-archive/+build/392892913:30
baltix-mantasThere is a message "will start in 1 hour", but this message doesn't change for about a hour :(13:31
czajkowskibaltix-mantas: the builder issue is an ongoing issue at present13:31
yaizasinzui, which is the difference between Private and Proprietary?13:35
sinzuiyaiza, private means contain personal information, like a your phone number. Proprietary means the data is owned by an organisation and it cannot be disclosed to non-organisational people13:36
sinzuiyaiza, canonical's project are transitioning everything to Proprietary to make it clear who owns the data13:37
baltix-mantasI'm afraid, that after 2 hours I still see the same info: "Start in 1 hour" :(13:38
yaizasinzui, ok, then I guess we will need to move this one to proprietary: https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-isd-hackers/canonical-openerp/employee-registry13:38
sinzuiyaiza, maybe more https://launchpad.net/canonical-openerp/+sharing says your project should only contain Proprietary branches13:40
sinzuiYou only need to do those that people are working with I think13:40
yaizasinzui, then if I create a new branch now in that project it will be created as proprietary by default but I have to move existing ones, is this right?13:55
sinzuiyaiza, not, move, just change the Information Type shown in the branch's privacy portlet13:57
yaizasinzui, yes, sorry, that's what I meant13:57
sinzuiyaiza, I might have a script that walks all the active branches in a project and changes their Information type to Proprietary.13:58
yaizasinzui, don't worry, we can do that manually, we don't have many, but is it normal that it takes so much time to change their Information type?13:59
sinzuiyaiza, branches are stacked on each other. Changing the base branch requires checking everything that is stacked on it. It is slow for large projects.14:00
=== matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch
=== matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara
maxbSo.... lpia. I uploaded a hardy package, and it's nominally queued to build on lpia, but there are no lpia builders. I don't particularly care about lpia, but I would prefer it didn't register as "needs building" forever. Any suggestions? :-)17:55
lifelesswgrant: ^ ;)17:56
cjwatsonmaxb: I'll give you a builder for a bit.17:56
maxbcjwatson: no need, the build will probably fail anyway17:57
maxbI am just looking for hints on what people currently do if they bother to still update hardy17:57
cjwatson106 jobs.  Heh.17:57
cjwatsonWe give lpia a builder or two every so often.17:57
cjwatsonDon't really want to give it too many since the other queues are rather long.17:58
cjwatson(At the moment)17:58
maxbI wonder if declaring my package "Architecture: i386 amd64" will do something useful17:58
maxbI've deleted my package with the pending lpia build in the interest of not tying up resources with something that is likely to FTBFS18:00
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
cjwatsonmaxb: It should do.18:04
mikalHi. I have done a project.searchTasks() to get a list of bug_tasks. I can see how to get to the bug from a task, but I can't see how to access the activity collection for each bug. Does anyone have an example of that laying around?22:33
cjwatsonmikal: If you have a bug in the 'bug' variable, bug.activity is a collection of activity entries22:36
cjwatsone.g. in lp-shell: bug = lp.bugs[1000000]; bug.activity[0].message -> 'added bug'22:37
cjwatsonthe general thing to know is that for anything where the apidoc says foo_collection_link, you can access .foo in Python and you'll get a collection (which behaves more or less like an iterable)22:38
mikalOk, so len works for .activty, but .activity[0] doesn't exist (list index out of range).22:41
mikalDitto .activity[1]22:41
lifelesswhat about 'for thing in bug.activity: print thing' ?22:44
mikalThat iterates zero things22:44
lifelesswin'22:44
lifeless(not really)22:44
mikalThe code is:22:45
mikalbugs = proj.searchTasks(modified_since=since)22:45
mikalfor b in bugs:22:45
mikal    print b.title22:45
mikal    print len(b.bug.activity)22:45
mikal    print b.bug.activity[1].message22:45
mikallen here is 1622:45
mikalBut I get the "list index out of range" for the last line22:45
cjwatsonWFM with proj == lp.projects["ubuntu-archive-tools"]22:47
mikalThis is with project "nova" and the bug title is "Bug #1062277 in OpenStack Compute (nova): "092_add_instance_system_metadata migration fails when upgrading""22:47
ubot5Launchpad bug 1062277 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "092_add_instance_system_metadata migration fails when upgrading" [Critical,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/106227722:47
cjwatsonAlthough rings a very very faint bell somewhere22:48
cjwatsonI can get lp.bugs[1062277].activity[1] just fine22:48
mikalprint launchpad.bugs[1062277].activity[1]22:50
mikalGives me the same error22:50
mikalWould this be an anonymous login thing or something?22:50
cjwatsonAh - yes22:51
mikalOh look, now it works22:52
cjwatsonIBugActivity seems to have no particular security defined for it anywhere I can see, which I think means it defaults to ViewByLoggedInUser22:53
cjwatsonSo yeah, you'd have to be logged in to see it22:54
cjwatsonmikal: bug 99107922:55
ubot5Launchpad bug 991079 in Launchpad itself "Anonymous API requests are not shown any bug activity" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/99107922:55
mikalHuh, cool22:56
mikalThanks for your help22:56
mikalNow to work out how to use an activity object22:56

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!