[06:21] <alo21> cyphermox, hi, xcan I ask a thing?
[11:31] <alo21> hi all
[11:32] <alo21> when I run 'grab-merge blueman', the script downloads the wrond debian traball
[11:32] <alo21> have to download all manually?
[11:58] <alo21> #ubuntu-web
[11:59] <alo21> I have to report a bug related to https://merges.ubuntu.com/
[12:00] <alo21> where should I write?
[13:09] <Rhonda> May I upload for bug 1074845 already, or shall I wait for some ACK from the sru team?4
[13:56] <jtaylor> Rhonda: just upload, sru will acc (or nack) the upload in the queue
[14:05] <Rhonda> Ah, great.
[14:12] <jtaylor> Rhonda: it needs to be fixed in raring first
[14:13] <jtaylor> it probably is according to the changelog, but you should mark the bug fix released so sru knows
[14:15] <alo21> can someone help me, please?
[14:18] <alo21> grab-manager donwloads the wrong tarball
[14:19] <alo21> because there are the wrong file here https://merges.ubuntu.com/b/blueman/
[14:19] <alo21> what should I do?
[14:29] <Rhonda> jtaylor: According to Zhenech it is already fixed in raring?
[14:29] <jtaylor> Rhonda: the changelog implies it, but the bug not
[14:30] <jtaylor> alo21: what doe grab-merges load?
[14:30] <Rhonda> Thanks for the hint, set to "Fix released"
[14:31] <alo21> jtaylor: all the package which are there
[14:31] <alo21> packages*
[14:31] <jtaylor> all?
[14:32] <alo21> jtaylor: not just the first three. In fact they should be at version 1.23-1 (http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/b/blueman/current/changelog), and not 1.22~bzr707-1
[14:44] <jtaylor> alo21: that may be the merge base
[14:46] <jtaylor> alo21: yes its working correctly
[14:46] <jtaylor> alo21: for a merge you need three things, the base and the two branches
[14:49] <alo21> jtaylor: oh.. I've never noticed it, even if I have done a merge yet. I thought that there was a mistake just because someone wrote a comment in mom
[14:50] <alo21> jtaylor: thank you very much for you time, and I'm really sorry
[15:18] <alo21> jtaylor: can I ask you a thing?
[15:21] <alo21> arand: can I ask you a thing?
[15:22] <jtaylor> alo21: yes?
[15:23] <alo21> jtaylor: I have a patch which was applied in the old ubuntu package
[15:23] <alo21> now I would like to merge the package with the new one (from debian)
[15:25] <alo21> the bedian version has a loto fo change and the ptch cannot be applied correctly, because the line number are different
[15:25] <alo21> jtaylor: have to edit the patch to be applied correctly on the new version?
[15:25] <jtaylor> yes
[15:26] <jtaylor> using bzr or some version control usually helps
[15:26] <jtaylor> vcs have lots of tools to do merging
[15:43] <alo21> jtaylor: I don't understand why the merge does not reuards all the files
[15:44] <jtaylor> ?
[15:46] <alo21> jtaylor: there are a lot of fils where are shown the difference between debian and ubuntu (e.g. "<<<<<<< blueman-1.23-0ubuntu3 (ubuntu)" ... ">>>>>>> blueman-1.23-1 (debian)")
[15:46] <alo21> files*
[15:46] <jtaylor> that is is not unlikely in these cases
[15:47] <jtaylor> the debian and ubuntu packages can be completely different
[15:47] <jtaylor> its not a good situation and should be resolved
[15:47] <jtaylor> preferably by being mire similar to debian
[15:47] <jtaylor> but that depends on who did the ubuntu changes
[15:49] <alo21> jtaylor: when I try to build the package, I got this error "dpkg-source: info: you can integrate the local changes with dpkg-source --commit dpkg-source: error: aborting due to unexpected upstream changes, see /tmp/blueman_1.23-1ubuntu1.diff.O67jQ"
[15:49] <alo21> and this is the file http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/1385498/
[15:50] <jtaylor> if that is the merge diff that does not look like a good package to learn merging with
[15:51] <jtaylor> the dpkg-source error basically means you have changed something directly without a patch
[15:51] <jtaylor> put the change in a patch to fix it
[15:51] <jtaylor> if its a valid change
[15:52] <alo21> I have changed just the changelog, and there are two old patches
[15:52] <mitya57> looks like the version number in d/changelog doesn't match the tarball version...
[15:53] <mitya57> and also you haven't resolved all conflicts
[15:53] <mitya57> +<<<<<<< blueman-1.23-0ubuntu3 (ubuntu)
[15:53] <alo21> mitya57: in which file?
[15:54] <mitya57> configure
[15:54] <mitya57> lines 41–50 of the diff
[15:54] <jtaylor> alo21: if you really want to do it it might be better to take the debian package and patch in from ubuntu what is worth keeping
[15:55]  * jtaylor didn'T actually look at the package yet
[15:55] <mitya57> I personally use this workflow:
[15:56] <mitya57>   bzr branch debianlp:packagename
[15:56] <mitya57>   cd packagename
[15:56] <mitya57>   bzr merge ubuntu:packagename
[15:56] <mitya57> and then resolving the conflicts (if any)
[15:57] <alo21> mitya57: does this another way to make a merge (without grab-merge)?
[15:59] <jtaylor> yes, it has the advantage that you have the vcs merging tools available
[15:59] <mitya57> alo21: yes, I think it's called "udd-merging"
[15:59] <mitya57> http://developer.ubuntu.com/packaging/html/udd-merging.html (though that page will be deleted tomorrow)
[16:00] <mitya57> sorry, not that one, that will be kept :)
[16:01] <alo21> mitya57: I've done what you told me, and there are 53 conflicts
[16:02] <mitya57> let me look
[16:02] <jtaylor> as mentioned this might really be a too hard package
[16:02] <jtaylor> and the simple cherry picking approach may be more feasable
[16:02] <jtaylor> afk a while
[16:03] <alo21> mitya57: should I resolve that conflicts by my hand?
[16:05] <mitya57> alo21: looks like orig tarballs are different :(
[16:05] <mitya57> 1b54374c694e800d6280c9aabce12c9a vs f0bee59589f4c23e35bf08c2ef8acaef
[16:06] <mitya57> ubuntu's looks better
[16:07] <mitya57> I would suggest you to manually pick changes from debian
[16:12] <alo21> mitya57: what do you mean manyally?
[16:12] <alo21> manually*
[16:13] <mitya57> ah, that has already been done: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/blueman/1.23-0ubuntu2
[16:13] <mitya57> think that that package is up-to-date with debian :)
[16:15] <mitya57> the only thing that ubuntu packaging is missing is:
[16:15] <mitya57> * Added dependency for gnome-icon-theme (Closes: #631838)
[16:15] <mitya57> debian bug 631838
[16:16] <alo21> mitya57: mm... but manually, you mean find all the conflicts and edit them with gedit. Right?
[16:17] <mitya57> alo21: no I don't mean that
[16:17] <mitya57> the package is already in good shape, you shouldn't do any merges
[16:18] <mitya57> but you may want to add gnome-icon-theme to Depends: field in d/control
[16:19] <alo21> mitya57: if just 2 bugs were fixed, why there are different orig?
[16:20] <mitya57> alo21: I don't know that, either upstream changed their tarball or debian used the wrong one
[16:21] <mitya57> I have to leave now, sorry...
[21:10] <TheMuso> alo21: Just ask your question, you need not ask me whether you can ask.