[08:00] <Laney> le morning
[08:01] <highvoltage> salut
[08:06] <Laney> ah, guten bonjour
[09:07] <chrisccoulson> good morning
[09:57] <Laney> hey chrisccoulson
[14:26] <mitya57> jbicha_: you are hero (I mean your panel fixes) :)
[14:40] <mfisch> anyone seen seb this morning?
[14:40] <Laney> holidays
[14:40] <Laney> maybe someone else can help
[14:44] <jbicha_> mitya57: do you have git.gnome.org commit rights?
[14:45] <mitya57> jbicha_: no
[14:48] <jbicha_> mitya57: it's easier to get than for Ubuntu
[14:50] <mitya57> jbicha_: maybe you can also commit a patch from gnome bug 689610?
[14:50] <mitya57> jbicha_: I don't think I'm active gnome contributor, only 3 or 4 patches in total...
[14:50] <ubot2> Gnome bug 689610 in Panel "All panels on one screen when using separate x screens" [Normal,Unconfirmed] http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=689610
[14:51] <mfisch> Laney: robert merged a change from me for simple-scan last night to update saucy
[14:51] <mfisch> Laney: but it never was dput, we thought that LP was doing that automagically
[14:51] <Laney> link?
[14:52] <mfisch> looking
[14:52] <Laney> I don't think that simple-scan has anything fancy like that at all
[14:53] <mfisch> I think it was assumed that UDD did the magic for us
[14:53] <mfisch> sounds like perhaps a manual dput is needed
[14:53] <Laney> definitely is
[14:53] <mfisch> Laney: got it, thanks
[14:54] <mfisch> Robert is out, having a new kid, can someone dput it?
[14:54] <Laney> where is it?
[14:54] <mfisch> top of tree: https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-branches/ubuntu/saucy/simple-scan/saucy
[14:55] <mfisch> robert merged it, but we were going to ask seb about why it didnt dput this morning
[14:55] <Laney> I'm kind of surprised he has that confusion because he does the same kind of releasing with lightdm
[14:55] <Laney> oh well
[14:55] <Laney> I see it --- looking
[14:58] <Laney> mfisch: failed
[14:58] <mitya57> jbicha_: thanks!
[14:58] <Laney> checking for SIMPLE_SCAN... no
[14:58] <Laney> …
[14:58] <Laney> No package 'sqlite3' found
[14:59] <mfisch> hmm, let me try again
[15:01] <Laney> yeah, make sure to diff configure.ac between releases
[15:01] <Laney> there's a glib version bump in there too
[15:03] <mfisch> okay, I see it, I'll fix this afternoon
[15:12] <mfisch> Laney: I have it fixed, I'll send an MP shortly
[15:18] <mfisch> Laney: https://code.launchpad.net/~mfisch/ubuntu/saucy/simple-scan/fix-3.8.0-deps/+merge/164751
[15:18] <Laney> ta
[15:42] <ritz__> ChrisTownsend hi, wrt https://bugs.launchpad.net/compiz/+bug/763148
[15:42] <ubot2> Ubuntu bug 763148 in Compiz 0.9.9 "Adding/Removing an external monitor causes open windows to move to another workspace" [Medium,Triaged]
[15:43] <ritz__> which is preferable , bzr branch, or debdiff
[15:43] <ritz__> of I am to propose SRU for precise
[15:53] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: Hey, thanks for the patch.  However, I have already committed a fix to compiz for Precise and have nominated compiz for the Precise SRU.
[15:54] <ritz__> ChrisTownsend sweet, thanks. where do I see this ?http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru.html ?
[15:57] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: Well, as far as I can tell, the next compiz SRU hasn't been packaged up yet, but let me check to make absolutely certain.
[15:59] <ritz__> ChrisTownsend  hmm, thank you
[16:01] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: Ok, the unity-team SRU PPA has it built on April 11, but it does not include this fix since it was merged after that date.  I'll check around to see what the status is on this.
[16:01] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: FYI, https://launchpad.net/~unity-team/+archive/sru/+packages
[16:02] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: But it has not been uploaded to the queue yet, so maybe we can get this in still.
[16:02] <ritz__> hmm, this would be nice .
[16:02] <ritz__> ChrisTownsend  thanks a ton .
[16:02] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: No problem, and yes, it is a good fix:)  Thanks for your patch too!
[16:06] <ritz__> ChrisTownsend  Do I need to  mark an SRU against precise and subscribe ubuntu-sponsor  ?
[16:08] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: I nominated the package for Precise, so the SRU team *should* see that.  I'm trying to check on another channel what the status is.
[16:09] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: I'll work on getting it straightened out one way to other.
[16:09] <ChrisTownsend> Err, one way or the other
[16:10] <ritz__> ChrisTownsend++  :) , thanks a ton to you and sil2100++
[16:11] <sil2100> ritz__, ChrisTownsend: I'm bookmarking this bug, so I'll keep an eye on it, check tomorrow and give you guys a sign back
[16:11] <ChrisTownsend> ritz__: You're quite welcome.  Thanks for pinging me:)
[16:12] <ChrisTownsend> sil2100: Cool, thanks!
[16:15] <mfisch> Laney: thanks for the merge
[16:15] <Laney> mfisch: any time
[16:39] <sil2100> kenvandine: can you help me with something?
[16:40] <kenvandine> sil2100, sure
[16:40] <sil2100> kenvandine: since I have a strange problem that I don't know how to deal with in cu2d...
[16:40] <sil2100> kenvandine: as you know, we merged in 100scopes to lp:unity and moved all the scopes to head (but that's unrelated really)
[16:41] <sil2100> kenvandine: and the problem I have is:
[16:43] <sil2100> kenvandine: I had to modify the changelog, and for unknown reasons now, every time the unity stack is re-run, it's not using the latest unity when the changelog entry that's there is less than what's in the daily-build-next PPA (which is normal, as the version number is increased every day but the version in the changelog is updated only when an actual release is happening)
[16:44] <sil2100> kenvandine: I'll paste you the link to the actual job that I have in mind
[16:44] <kenvandine> ok
[16:45] <sil2100> kenvandine: so, it says there:
[16:45] <sil2100> 2013-05-20 16:23:18,713 INFO A version in the ppa (7.0.0daily13.05.20ubuntu.unity.next-0ubuntu1) is higher than the proposed version in bzr (7.0.0daily13.05.19ubuntu.unity.next-0ubuntu1) (previous tests/builds failing?). Basing on that one.
[16:46] <sil2100> So, if I understand correctly, in this case it's not using the lp:unity version, but the one that's in the PPA?
[16:47] <sil2100> It's so complicated...
[16:47] <kenvandine> hehe
[16:47] <kenvandine> well
[16:47] <sil2100> Why isn't it taking the lp:unity one and just modify the changelog? Since what changelog entry should be in lp:unity for it to work every time?
[16:47] <kenvandine> i think the problem is lp:unity version with the daily release magic isn't greater than what was published
[16:47] <kenvandine> probably because check failed?
[16:47] <kenvandine> so it didn't merge the branch back
[16:48] <kenvandine> what version is in lp:unity?
[16:48] <sil2100> Yes, but it's failing every time since a few weeks ;p
[16:48] <sil2100> 7.0.0daily13.05.19ubuntu.unity.next-0ubuntu1 is in lp:unity
[16:48] <sil2100> But it's UNRELEASED
[16:50] <kenvandine> sil2100, not really sure there... i would think cu2d would be changing that to 05.20
[16:51] <kenvandine> sil2100, oh... is lp:unity unchanged ?
[16:51] <sil2100> hm, I think there were some changes
[16:51] <sil2100> But it's been so long since last cu2d made any changes to lp:unity
[16:52] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity/trunk
[16:52] <sil2100> Since if you look here, it's been really long since the release made any release commits ;/
[16:53]  * sil2100 is rebuilding the unity stack right now if anything
[16:56] <kenvandine> so i wonder if it's because of the synthetic use of daily build versioning... i seem to recall the wiki saying unreleased versions should be like 7.0.0~-ubuntu0
[16:56] <kenvandine> and it gets replaced
[16:56] <kenvandine> but that is lower than the daily release version
[16:56] <sil2100> But I remember just doing a simple dch
[16:56] <kenvandine> and i guess only used for new versions
[16:56] <sil2100> That was changing from 0ubuntu1 to 0ubuntu2
[16:56] <kenvandine> yeah
[16:59] <kenvandine> prepare has finished for 7.0.0daily13.05.20.1ubuntu.unity.next-0ubuntu1
[17:00] <sil2100> kenvandine: when is jenkins commiting the release commits to trunks?
[17:01] <kenvandine> i think after publish
[17:01] <sil2100> cyphermox: regarding the autopilot-autopilot tests, is there a treshold set for the number of failures?
[17:01] <sil2100> kenvandine: oh, ok
[17:02] <sil2100> kenvandine: anyway, you think everything is badly broken, or is the stack running correctly? Since I don't know right now ;p
[17:03] <kenvandine> not sure
[17:03] <kenvandine> maybe it's just because it has been so long since publish?
[17:03] <sil2100> Maybe...
[17:04] <kenvandine> what failed with the error message you referenced earlier?
 2013-05-20 16:23:18,713 INFO A version in the ppa (7.0.0daily13.05.20ubuntu.unity.next-0ubuntu1) is higher than the proposed version in bzr (7.0.0daily13.05.19ubuntu.unity.next-0ubuntu1) (previous tests/builds failing?). Basing on that one
[17:04] <kenvandine> was that check?
[17:04] <kenvandine> perpare?
[17:04] <sil2100> Well, it didn't fail, it was in prepare for unity
[17:04] <kenvandine> humm
[17:04] <kenvandine> well it still updated the version in the ppa
[17:04] <kenvandine> so maybe all is good