[01:43] <mspencer> What exactly is the difference between the bug statuses "Fix Committed" and Fix Released"? In the statuses' descriptions, does "release" refer to releases as in milestones and releases or what?
[01:49] <mwhudson> mspencer: it is somewhat up to the project
[01:50] <mwhudson> mspencer: but generally i think of "fix released" as meaning that the fix is available to users via the usual route they get the software
[01:50] <mwhudson> mspencer: so for ubuntu specifically it means "available in the archive"
[01:52] <mspencer> mwhudson: Okay. Should I use "Fix committed" when I've pushed the code to series' branch, and "Fix released" when I release the download file containing the fix?
[01:52] <mwhudson> mspencer: yeah, that's the idea
[01:53] <mspencer> mwhudson: Okay, thanks for your help.
[01:53] <mwhudson> np
[01:56] <mspencer> Can I use the work on a bug fix in the main branch, upload it using 'bzr commit --fixes lp:<bug>' and continue using that branch for other work? Or do I need a separate branch for the bug fix?
[01:57] <mspencer> TYPO 'Can I use the work on a bug' should be 'Can I work on a bug'
[01:57] <cjohnston> mspencer: yes you can continue using it, just make sure that on any future merge proposals you mark the preceeding branch
[01:58] <mspencer> cjohnston: what do you mean about the merge proposals?
[01:59] <mspencer> I'm somewhat new to launchpad so I'm not that familiar with it yet. If it matters, I'm the project's owner and main developer.
[02:00] <cjohnston> mspencer: are you wanting to just work off of trunk, or are people reviewing your code?
[02:01] <mspencer> cjohnston: Nobody is reviewing my code. I'm the project's owner and am working on developing new features and am about to fix the first bug in the code.
[02:02] <cjohnston> then its up to you how you want to work.. you could branch lp:whatever, work work work, bzr commit -m "whatever" --fixes lp:1234, bzr push lp:whatever, then work more
[02:05] <mspencer> cjohnston: But I can continue doing my main development in the same branch that I used to commit the fix using --fixes? If I use the same branch for the fix as I normally use, what is the point of showing a branch in the bug report?
[02:06] <cjohnston> mspencer: you can, or you could push it as lp:~yournick/project/some-name
[02:07] <cjohnston> but then you need to merge lp:~yournick/project/some-name into trunk
[02:07] <mspencer> cjohnston: what would be the point of using a separate branch?
[02:08] <cjohnston> for the --fixes lp:1234
[02:10] <mspencer> cjohnston: But won't --fixes work for the main branch too?
[02:12] <cjohnston> you asked what is the point of showing a brnach in the bug report when I said to use the main branch
[02:13] <mspencer> cjohnston: Oh, that's what you meant. I thought you were referring to using a separate branch.
[02:14] <cjohnston> nope
[02:15] <mspencer> cjohnston: So  what did you mean by "you can, or you could push it as lp:~yournick/project/some-name"?
[02:16] <cjohnston> ok... so the main branch, lets call it lp:whatever
[02:16] <cjohnston> so to fix the bug, you could bzr branch lp:whatever, work work work, bzr commit -m "Fix" --fixes lp:1234
[02:17] <cjohnston> then you could push that to lp:~yournick/whatever/some-name (some name being a name you give the new branch)
[02:17] <cjohnston> then you would create a merge proposal for this second branch to merge into lp:whatever
[02:26] <mspencer> cjohnston: why wouldn't I push to the default branch? It doesn't make sense to use a separate branch for simple fixes, for example, typos.
[02:27] <cjohnston> mspencer: when your working with a group, it is common to have someone else review every change... when your by yourself, its up to you
[02:32] <mspencer> cjohnston: Okay, thanks for all your help!
[02:32] <cjohnston> np
[13:48] <arielweil> mrevell: question for you on DL numbers for a project where the download was recently removed.  Is there a way for admins to see the download tally leading up to the download coming down (being removed)?
[13:48] <mrevell> czajkowski, Can you help arielweil?
[13:49] <arielweil> mrevell: thanks
[13:49] <czajkowski> hmm
[13:50] <czajkowski> arielweil: what project?
[13:51] <arielweil> czajkowski: akiban-persistit
[13:52] <czajkowski> arielweil: ahh this project
[13:53] <czajkowski> arielweil: so you want to know if it was downloaded from LP ??
[13:55] <arielweil> czajkowski: actually it was downloaded quite a bit, but when our interim release manager pulled the downloads last week he didn't record the download tallies
[13:56] <czajkowski> we dont keep records like that
[13:56] <arielweil> czajkowski: I assumed that, but thanks for verifying
[13:56] <czajkowski> Np
[15:50] <dobey> can anyone tell me what is going on with https://launchpadlibrarian.net/125618746/buildlog.txt.gz exactly? it's failing to create the pristine tarball, and if those are md5sums, it seems to be expecting, and getting, the wrong ones
[15:51] <hrw> hello
[15:52] <czajkowski> dobey: sinzui might be able to help there
[15:52] <czajkowski> hrw: hi
[15:52] <dobey> but running dailydeb with that recipe works fine (after I replace the {debversion} with the version it should automatically get replaced with)
[15:53] <sinzui> yuck. I have no experience with this
[15:53]  * sinzui thinks
[15:54] <sinzui> dobey, with recipe?
[15:55] <hrw> Is there a sense in reporting bugs against blueprints part of launchpad?
[15:55] <czajkowski> hrw: can you explain?
[15:55] <czajkowski> what do you mean ?
[15:56] <dobey> sinzui: yes https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntuone-hackers/+recipe/client-beta
[15:56] <hrw> czajkowski: I do not like to report bugs just to see them rot. and (after using blueprints for 2.5y) I have a feeling that it is a part of launchpad when nearly no changes happen.
[15:56] <sinzui> dobey, I am going into a meeting, for about 30 minutes. I will continue to look at this issue
[15:57] <dobey> sinzui: ok, thanks
[15:57] <czajkowski> hrw: blueprints are used differently
[15:57] <hrw> Bug #916043 got solved 11 months ago. but there is no 'last changed' info on blueprints list anyway
[15:58] <hrw> Bug #195743 is over 4 years old
[15:58] <dobey> hrw: reporting a bug means it might get fixed. not reporting it means it may never get fixed
[16:00] <hrw> Bug #126522
[16:03] <czajkowski> hrw: right so bugs get triaged critical high low
[16:03] <czajkowski> currently we're working on critical bugs and going from there
[16:03] <hrw> Bug #1089455 will probably get lower then wishlist even
[16:04] <czajkowski> hrw: we dont use the tag wishlist in LP triaging
[16:06] <czajkowski> hrw: you already filed that bug before so have marked it a duplicate to your first bug
[16:07] <hrw> ops
[16:10] <hrw> anyway I hope that one day it will get better
[16:10] <czajkowski> ah if only lifeless_ were here to see I now search for old bugs before I triage them :)
[16:10] <czajkowski> hrw: patchs welcome :)
[16:10] <czajkowski> *patches
[16:11] <czajkowski> hrw: just currently we have only one squad on maintenace with 3 people and critical bugs are high priority
[16:13] <hrw> czajkowski: understood
[16:17] <sinzui> dobey, I am still in a meeting, but it just occurred to me that I had trouble with debversion with one of my recipes. I switched to debupstream, are they the same in the case for your recipe?
[16:19] <dobey> sinzui: no. this issue isn't debversion on launchpad. that's only a local problem. i need debversion though, because these receipes are just rebuilding what's in current ubuntu development series, on older versions of ubuntu
[16:19]  * sinzui nods
[16:19] <dobey> sinzui: and debversion is working fine on launchpad for a bunch of other recipes i have. this is a different issue with the tarball building
[16:38] <dobey> lunch, bbiab
[16:57] <hrw> have a nice day
[17:05] <sinzui> dobey, I cannot find any questions or bugs about the recipe issue in launchpad or bzr-builder. maybe someone involved with bzr-builder knows the answer: https://answers.launchpad.net/bzr-builder
[17:50] <dobey> sinzui: hmm, ok
[19:53] <lifeless_> czajkowski: heh, hi :)
[20:28] <shnatsel> dobey: Hello! Following up on our yesterdays discussion of Qt source build failures, your suggested workaround fixed it, and recipes now fail on binary stage (huge progress!). I've filed bug 1089615 about the failures, since I could reproduce that with 2 different branches.
[20:28] <shnatsel> dobey: Thanks again for your help!
[20:33] <dobey> sure
[21:15] <czajkowski> lifeless: tis the small things in life that make me happy :) how's the little one ?
[21:19] <lifeless> fantastic; she is running now
[21:19] <czajkowski> oh wow
[21:20] <czajkowski> lifeless: time to put things up out of her reach so
[21:20] <lifeless> :)
[21:21] <ScottK> That or duct tape.
[21:22] <ScottK> (says the tired father of three)
[21:48] <shnatsel> dobey: I was actually wrong: switching quilt to native doesn't makes LP not apply patches AT ALL. This fixes source build, but screws up binary build.