[08:46] <adeuring> good morning
[11:13] <czajkowski> wallyworld: you about?
[14:04] <wallyworld> czajkowski: hi, just got back from an awesome concert - saw The Living End
[14:07] <deryck> Morning, all.
[14:07] <rick_h_> morning
[14:08] <czajkowski> wallyworld: oh excellent
[14:08] <wallyworld> can i help with anything?
[14:11] <czajkowski> it's ok now think sinzui is online and was just curious about a bug
[14:11] <czajkowski> sinzui: morning https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/1056788
[14:11] <_mup_> Bug #1056788: Can't list members of private team that I own <Launchpad itself:New> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/1056788 >
[14:11] <czajkowski> any thoughts on this.
[14:12] <sinzui> no yet
[14:20] <sinzui> czajkowski, The admin of the team is not a member of many of the private sub teams. The LP is raising forbidden. This is a corner case that was mostly likely caused by  team membership changes -- you cannot add the sub team unless you could see it from the start. We need to fix to ensure no team spys on another team.
[14:22] <czajkowski> ah ok intersting
[14:23] <czajkowski> *interesting
[14:23] <czajkowski> was looking at different teams and members tryig to work it out :/
[14:23] <czajkowski> sinzui: also re the other bug Inleft a comment on, know it's not qa'd but was adding the oops and page so afterwards I can just check it was all working, sorry :)
[14:26] <sinzui> czajkowski, I did qa the bug: https://qastaging.launchpad.net/~locoteams and https://qastaging.launchpad.net/~launchpad-users both load
[14:27] <czajkowski> great
[14:33] <deryck> adeuring, rick_h_, jcsackett -- I'm coming for standup.  Hangout loading troubles.
[15:14] <czajkowski> sinzui: how do we feel about the Waqf General Public License?
[15:16] <sinzui> czajkowski, it discriminates. We accepted one because the project was dual-licenses as simple GPL
[15:17] <czajkowski> nods
[15:17] <czajkowski> sinzui: https://launchpad.net/elkirtassemaktaba  project in question
[15:19] <sinzui> czajkowski, it is GPLed to so we would accept it. This was the debian discussion that re-enforced my belief that these project must be dual licensed: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/07/msg00019.html
[15:20] <czajkowski> oh
[15:21] <czajkowski> sinzui: speaking of debian -https://support.one.ubuntu.com//Ticket/Display.html?id=25941  and https://support.one.ubuntu.com//Ticket/Display.html?id=25970  what do you do in cases like this ?
[15:23] <sinzui> we have a bug for this.
[15:24] <sinzui> Lp should not imply it can happen. We know a team cannot be merged with a user
[15:24] <sinzui> czajkowski, this is bug 681367
[15:24] <_mup_> Bug #681367: Do let users try to merge teams into people <lp-registry> <merge-deactivate> <Launchpad itself:Triaged> < https://launchpad.net/bugs/681367 >
[15:25] <sinzui> Lp wont let it happen, it should not have implied it could happen, it should not have let the user try to get the team
[15:25] <czajkowski> nods
[15:26] <czajkowski> so should the title be do not let users try to merge teams into people?
[15:27] <sinzui> oh, yes, "do not" I just fixed it
[15:27] <czajkowski> ack
[15:27] <czajkowski> have had users trying to do all srts of merges this weekend into other peoples accounts
[15:28] <czajkowski> :s
[17:01] <rick_h_> deryck: I need to add the product property to the Product object. It needs to make its ways into the LP.cache.context dump of data. I'm thinking this should go on IProductLimitedView. Does that make sense?
[17:01] <rick_h_> Then it should show up for private projects, but not for public viewing/people without access to the product
[17:01] <rick_h_> not that they should see the page anyway...
[17:02] <deryck> rick_h_, reading... thinking....
[17:06] <deryck> rick_h_, that sounds generally right to me, but you might want to run it by adeuring for a second opinion.
[17:06] <rick_h_> ok, will do
[17:09] <adeuring> rick_h_: I don't get the property: Product.product?
[17:11] <rick_h_> adeuring: Product.private
[17:11] <rick_h_> sorry, typo there
[17:11] <rick_h_> adeuring: so looking at something like https://pastebin.canonical.com/79610/
[17:12] <adeuring> rick_h_: yes, I would even think that we could make the property private public, after all, it has less information than information_type, from which it is derived
[17:12] <rick_h_> adeuring: yea, that's kind of why I was asking. It seems there's a couple places it 'could' go and wondered where the best place was
[17:13] <rick_h_> but useCanView was the only property on IProductPublic so seems not a place to stick most things
[17:13] <rick_h_> but I guess these two kind of fit together so makes some sense (private and useCanView)
[17:14] <adeuring> rick_h_: yes, the point is that information_type is defined elsewhere, canÄt remember exactly the location...
[17:15] <rick_h_> it's in the model only
[17:15] <rick_h_> it's not exposed at the interface level I can tell
[17:16] <adeuring> ricit's defined in app.interfaces.IIformationType, and this is a base class of IProduct
[17:16] <rick_h_> ah, missed that
[17:17] <rick_h_> ok, so maybe I should add this to that interface?
[17:17] <adeuring> rick_h_: well, check where IInformationType is used ;)
[17:17] <adeuring> but generally, yes
[17:18] <adeuring> rick_h_: if you want a full overview on all properties and permissions, look at lib/lp/registry/tests/test_product.py expected_get_permissions
[17:18] <rick_h_> yea, I was copying this from the branch implementation
[17:18] <rick_h_> so it'd be used there, bugs I'd imagine.
[17:19] <adeuring> rick_h_: actually, private is already defined teher
[17:20] <rick_h_> adeuring: in IInformationType? /me isn't seein git
[17:21] <adeuring> rick_h_: I have no idea where it is defined at present -- but the securtiy checker knows about it ;)
[17:21] <rick_h_> adeuring: heh, well I see it on productset, and I think I added it there
[17:21] <rick_h_> for the icon stuff a while ago
[17:22] <rick_h_> but not on product itself, and it's not exposed to LP.cache which I think is interface @expose based
[17:23]  * adeuring tries fond the definition....
[17:25] <adeuring> rick_h_: lp.app.interfaces.launchpad: IPrivacy -> IInformationType -> IProduct
[17:26] <rick_h_> adeuring: ah ok...so it's there but not exported.
[17:26] <rick_h_> adeuring: ok thanks. this makes sense. I saw one place that mentioned it was redefined in the comment for it
[17:26] <rick_h_> that must be why
[18:48] <adeuring> benji: could you please review this MP: https://code.launchpad.net/~adeuring/launchpad/bug-1071589/+merge/137659 ?
[18:49] <benji> adeuring: sure
[18:49] <adeuring> thanks!
[19:00] <sinzui> benji, do you have time to review https://code.launchpad.net/~sinzui/launchpad/revision-karma-1/+merge/137660
[19:00] <benji> sinzui: sure
[19:03] <adeuring> benji: thanks for the review!
[19:03] <benji> adeuring: my pleasure
[19:27] <Masklinn> is there any support for service hooks in launchpad? Or any kind of "push" notification other than email?
[19:29] <sinzui> Masklinn, no.
[19:29] <sinzui> Masklinn, several groups have written API scripts that poll and then make the necessary notifications
[19:30] <Masklinn> sinzui, I guess that's what I'll have to do as well.