[00:21] <NikTh> How much time is needed for the change of the preferred contact address to take effect ?
[00:36] <wgrant> NikTh: I'm not sure. @ubuntu.com email aliases aren't managed by Launchpad; they're maintained by a Canonical IS script that just looks at Launchpad users and their preferred addresses. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuEmail is the documentation.
[00:38] <NikTh> wgrant: Thanks for the answer. What is matters most ? The preferred address in login.ubuntu.com or the preferred contact address in launchpad ? I guess the latest, but I need a second opinion.
[00:38] <wgrant> NikTh: The latter.
[00:41] <NikTh> wgrant: Is it necessary to open a question in "launchpad.answers" for the delay or I must wait for 24 hours at least ? What is your opinion ? Right now I have a delay of 4 hours almost.
[00:43] <NikTh> I have changed the preferred contact address, but some messages still coming in old address. Especially messages from mailing lists where I'm a subscriber with the @ubuntu.com alias.
[00:44] <benonsoftware> I just want to quickly add that I've been waiting a few days for my alias to change too. :)
[00:44] <NikTh> benonsoftware: Thank you for the info.
[00:45] <NikTh> So, the most appropriate will be to wait 24 up to 48 hours before I open a question for "Launchpad itself".
[00:46] <wgrant> NikTh: Hm, did some document say to open a question?
[00:46] <wgrant> Again, this isn't Launchpad functionality.
[00:47] <wgrant> It's a script managed by Canonical's IS team that happens to scrape data from Launchpad.
[00:47] <wgrant> The wiki page I linked suggests to email rt@ubuntu.com.
[00:47] <wgrant> The Launchpad team can't assist with this.
[00:49] <NikTh> wgrant: The wiki page you linked , I didn't read it ,yet. Sorry. I'm going for reading, right now. Thanks.
[00:50] <wgrant> NikTh: Oh, you've only waited four hours so far?
[00:50] <wgrant> AFAIK the script only runs daily at the very most.
[00:50] <wgrant> But some changes can take much longer to happen automatically.
[00:50] <wgrant> Four hours is nothing :)
[00:52] <NikTh> wgrant: Thanks for the help.
[08:39] <arun> wgrant: hello bro are u there?
[08:43] <arun_> wgrant: are u there brother??
[10:27] <arun_> hello guys
[10:41] <arun_> wgrant: are u there brother?
[20:16] <shadeslayer_> hi, could someone explain https://code.launchpad.net/~netrunner-os/+archive/build-patch/+recipebuild/585780
[20:16] <shadeslayer_> the version in the PPA doesn't have an epoch
[20:16] <shadeslayer_> but the one that it's trying to upload should have one
[21:31] <maxb> shadeslayer_: epochs are kind of weird - they count when it comes to evaluating version numbers, but don't show up in filenames everywhere you might expect them to
[21:31] <shadeslayer_> yeah
[21:31] <shadeslayer_> which is just weird
[21:31] <shadeslayer_> I bumped it to 0ubuntu1.1
[21:31] <shadeslayer_> since I needed the epoch
[21:31] <maxb> I think it's likely an intentional decision in order to work better with un-epoched .orig.tar.gz files
[21:32] <maxb> Though clearly that looks a little on the pointless side when dealing with a native-format package
[21:35] <maxb> I think the general design idea is that versions should be unique even when ignoring the epoch, and the epoch is only there to force ordering comparisons to behave differently
[21:52] <shadeslayer_> Got it :)
[21:55] <lifeless> the epoch is there to fix mistakes, thats all