[02:22] Does launchpad API support filing bugs? [02:32] ypwong: The createBug method at https://api.launchpad.net/+apidoc/devel.html#bugs [02:33] wgrant, nice! thanks. [02:45] https://code.launchpad.net/~vcs-imports/cherokee/master that was turned off because it had submodules, no I believe it no longer does. [02:58] DalekSec: There are still submodules in that repository's history, and due to the nature of git we need to be able to replicate the entire history in bzr. [02:58] So it's still not possible to import it. [03:12] hi, wanting to be made a manager of our http://launchpad.net/~vinux and looking for a link I can pass on to themuso so it can be done quick :D [03:13] https://launchpad.net/~vinux/+member/fudge [03:16] wgrant: thank you yso kindly [04:08] wgrant: hi, could you transfer the openstack-ci-admins team owner for us? https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/241991 [04:08] wgrant: the current owner had his laptop stolen, so we're a little worried about credentials [04:09] wgrant: thanks [04:10] jeblair: Oh, I just replied on the ticket asking if Monty could do that. [04:10] Let me see what I can do. [04:11] jeblair: He still owns ~openstack-admins, which is surely just as big a problem. [04:12] wgrant: oh yes that's true. i missed that. [04:12] wgrant: does that need a human owner? or can it be self-owned? [04:13] It needs a human owner (or at least an owner that it doesn't own), so there's always someone we can blame and/or who can recover everything if the team admins go evil. [04:13] wgrant: then can we also change that to me (corvus) [04:14] wgrant: should i add that to the question? [04:14] Please do, just so we have a paper trail. [04:15] jeblair: Is there someone else around to confirm these changes, just so I have some reassurance that you aren't someone who has stolen jeblair's laptop and is kicking poor Monty out? :) [04:16] I can confirm jeblair is on jeblair's laptop, since I pointed him at you in the first place. [04:16] If that helps. [04:19] Damn, now StevenK's laptop has been stolen too. [04:19] OK, will get the changes made [04:19] Hahaha [04:20] ~openstack-ci-admins will be owned by ~openstack-admins, and ~openstack-admins by ~corvus [04:20] wgrant: thanks! [04:20] wgrant: I did consider cornering a certain ~admins member here at LCA, but decided against it [04:22] StevenK: hax [04:22] DarrenS: Hahaha [04:23] all aboard the duckbus [04:30] hi that's done [04:31] jeblair, StevenK ^^ [04:31] Thanks DarrenS [04:31] NP vale laptop [04:31] Heh [09:08] aloha [13:46] cprov, hi, you should join #launchpad-dev too :) [13:47] mpt: hi there! done. [13:53] mpt: ello [14:04] Hello … czajkowski === jamesh__ is now known as jamesh === Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk === Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha [19:40] hi! anybody to help on apparently successful ppa upload followed by nothing? [19:53] dmXE: if you got no e-mail it wasn't successful. you probably either signed it with the wrong gpg key, or don't have your gpg added to your lp account [19:54] but this was not the first time. I have uploaded successfully many times using the same key [19:58] then you should get an e-mail about the package either being accepted or rejected in the ppa [19:59] but I did not [20:03] then either the key wasn't validated, the e-mail just hasn't got to you yet because it's being slow for some reason, or you've overlooked it or it's in a spam folder or something [20:03] i don't know of anything else that could be the issue you claim to be seeing [20:06] the last time i tried was one week ago. [20:06] thank you anyway [20:11] dmXE: you can always try and reupload. [20:12] I am trying now [20:15] dobey: we could always blame cosmic rays for random things like this, if there's no logical explanantion, those cosmic rays always mess with things in weird ways [20:15] ;) [20:28] dmXE: What's your username? [20:28] (on Launchpad) [20:29] dmXE: Or the package name you were trying to upload [20:29] username: dmxe [20:30] package name: lifeograph [20:31] ppa:dmxe/ppa [20:35] 2014-01-10 20:16:18 INFO Failed to parse changes file '/srv/launchpad.net/ppa-queue/incoming/upload-ftp-20140110-201612-028225/~dmxe/ppa/ubuntu/lifeograph_1.0.0-1~ppa1~saucy_source.changes': GPG verification of /srv/launchpad.net/ppa-queue/incoming/upload-ftp-201 [20:35] 40110-201612-028225/~dmxe/ppa/ubuntu/lifeograph_1.0.0-1~ppa1~saucy_source.changes failed: Verification failed 3 times: ["(7, 153, u'Key expired')", "(7, 153, u'Key expired')", "(7, 153, u'Key expired')"] [20:35] dmXE: make sure your GPG key isn't "expired", that error there indicates the key had an expiration date and that is now passed [20:35] so the key is invalid [20:35] (in which case, time to create a new key) [20:36] my key was going to expire a few months ago but i extended its duration [20:36] dmXE: Of your two keys registered in Launchpad, one apparently expired on 2011-08-31, and the other on 2013-11-06 [20:37] dmXE: if you extended it you then have to upload the changes to the key to the keyservers [20:37] dmXE: Did you upload it to keyserver.ubuntu.com with the extended duration before the expiry date? [20:37] dmXE: It might not accept it now ... [20:37] ^ that [20:37] * TheLordOfTime was ninja'd [20:37] no i didn't upload [20:37] dmXE: When I downloaded it from keyserver.ubuntu.com just now, I saw an expiry of 2013-11-06 [20:37] dmXE: Then Launchpad can't possibly know about the updated expiry [20:37] dmXE: I suspect you'll need a new key now [20:38] ok. thank you very much [20:38] i will create a new key, import it to launchpad and try again [20:39] You can always try uploading the extended-duration key just in case [20:39] Although it would seem like a bit of a hole in the expiry system if you could do that [20:40] is it sufficient to use Sync and publish keys... function of Passwords and Keys program for this purpose? [20:40] I don't know, I don't use that [20:41] cjwatson: I'd say they should try and push the key anyways, if it accepts it, then security bug against `sks` or whatever the keyserver backend is [20:41] because that'd seem like a hugely bad thing [20:41] TheLordOfTime: Well, depending on what the stated security model of expiry dates actually is [20:41] Which I have not checked [20:41] true. [20:41] dmXE: that should work, yes. [20:42] Ok I did that and am reuploading [20:42] https://help.launchpad.net/YourAccount/ImportingYourPGPKey does indeed point to "Sync and Publish Keys" [20:43] dmXE: ok, that worked as far as it went, but now you have a proper rejection [20:44] dmXE: which FWIW can be fixed by building the source package with the -sa option, since this is the first upload of this .orig.tar.gz (apparently) [20:44] yes. so sync worked it seems [20:44] apparently so [20:44] * cjwatson -> away [20:44] othat is great [20:54] It is accepted now. thank you everybody. [20:56] just a small question: why doesn't launchpad send an email about the problems such as this one to the user? wouldn't it be helpful? [20:59] becasue it can't validate that you are who you say you are [21:12] it looks to me like it's worth the risk. but maybe i am wrong. anyway... thank you for your time. bye... [22:07] how long does it normally take for the launchpad PPAs to pick up a new upload? [22:07] from near instant to 5 minutes or something? [22:08] somewhere between 0 and infinity [22:18] TheLordOfTime: A minute or two. [22:18] dobey: heh [22:19] wgrant: that's what i thought, thanks. [22:41] is there a way to cancel dep-wait'd builds in PPAs? [22:42] because I've got some that're depwait'd and they'll FTBFS because of a third-party nginx module and I have to talk to the third-party module devs to see if they can fix it [22:42] TheLordOfTime: You can retry them manually and then cancel them [22:42] wgrant: no way to do that en masse or with an API call is there? [22:43] i'd rather not have to do it for 6 separate pages :/ [22:43] You could use an API call, but surely it's not that terrible to click through six pages. [22:44] wgrant: on a netbook it is [22:45] small screen, no external mouse, crap touchpad >.> [22:45] wgrant: meh, i've cancelled them, but that should be an option, IMO, for dep-wait builds, to just force-cancel it without first telling it to retry *shrugs* [22:47] Heello all .. I have a bit of a dilemma and not sure what the right what should eb done next. Is this the right place to ask about bzr + launchpad? [22:48] KI7MT: Sure [22:48] Ok .. kinda of a long story. [22:49] Last night I pushed an MP (merge proposal) to launchpad for ubuntu-doc, that got merged as was well .. except I'd made a blunder or two and had to fixe it, so I sent aother wiht the fixes. [22:50] After send the second one up, which is still awaiting merge, I fixed another bug [22:51] and I sent that up, after bzr commit --fixes lp:1234567 -m "Mindor text fix" [22:51] I then used bzr bundle > new-bug-fix.txt [22:52] And there's the problem, it pulled for whatever reason, parts of my second MP along wiht the minor bug fix, and I dont know whay or how to fix that. [22:52] Hm, why were you using 'bzr bundle'? [22:53] You don't need a bundle to use merge proposals. [22:53] wgrant, Normally, I would not, but that'w hat the ubuntu-docs directions said to do, as there's only like 6 folks that are commiters. [22:54] I'd check the history on that wiki page; that instruction is probably more than 5 years old. [22:54] ubuntu-docs just uses Launchpad merge proposals nowadays, AFAIK. [22:55] Here's the link, it's a short page: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DocumentationTeam/SystemDocumentation/Submitting [22:55] "Another way it to make a merge proposal using Launchpad: " [22:55] I'd use that method :) [22:56] wgrant, Yeah, Im not going to use the bundle again for sure. Quesiton , can I have more that one MP on LP for the same repo? [22:56] *more than one .. . [22:56] KI7MT: You can only have one active MP between any one pair of branches. [22:57] But that should be fine, since the old is merged now, right? [22:57] So you can create a new MP, since the old one is no longer active. [22:57] Ok, so until they merge my second MP .. I can't send a second. What about working more fixes locally, how does that affect my local version> [22:58] sri my KB is seriously not workign well at all here, sri abt the typo's [22:59] Hm, what are these new fixes? [22:59] Are they fixes for problems that are blocking the previous merge proposal from being merged? [23:00] Or are they unrelated fixes? [23:00] In the latter case, you'd normally create a separate branch for them. [23:00] And then propose that. [23:01] well, the first and second MP's were on the same set of files, the bug fix using bzr bundle, was totally unrelated. [23:01] Right, totally unrelated usually means it should be a separate branch. [23:02] No point conflating the two unrelated fixes. [23:02] wgrant, Well let me take that back then, the files I was working on / fixing were unrealted, but still part of the ubuntu-docs system docs. [23:03] Sure [23:03] But the changes aren't related, apart from being on the same project. [23:03] The bug fix was on Synaptic documentation, and the MP's were on the Online Accounts applicaiton. [23:03] So it's simpler to review them separately. [23:03] So it should be a separate MP, so a separate branch. [23:04] So you suggest, if I have a MP pending, pull the branch again, seperate location, and work fixes that way ? [23:04] Right. Normally people have one branch per fix. [23:05] Oh, ok I didn't know that .. [23:05] Ok thank you that clears up the whole, and make it easy really. [23:05] https://code.launchpad.net/~wgrant/launchpad/+branches?field.lifecycle=ALL for example [23:05] *whole deal [23:06] ok, so for each item,. module, widget, fix, you pull and use a seperate branch. [23:07] but then push that fix as an MP [23:09] SO one last question, you said I can only have one MP per papair, but I can have many pairs in my local repo ? [23:09] *per pair [23:11] wgrant, Thank you, I think I got it now. [23:13] wgrant: to confirm: package-1.2.3-1~precise0.1 > package-1.2.3-1~precise0 in a PPA, right? [23:13] i.e. the system won't yell at me for an older version? [23:13] s/for/about/ [23:13] ... nevermind, question answered on my own [23:13] * TheLordOfTime facedesks [23:14] TheLordOfTime: It is [23:14] You can use dpkg --compare-versions to check [23:14] $ dpkg --compare-versions 1.2.3-1~precise0.1 gt 1.2.3-1~precise0 && echo yes || echo no [23:14] yes [23:14] wgrant: yeah, i had already uploaded it but it was slow to complain is all [23:14] s/complain/respond "accepted"/ [23:14] * TheLordOfTime blames cosmic rays [23:15] wgrant: similarly, 1.2.3-1 is greater than 1.2.3-1~precise0.1, right? I remember reading that ~something will basically say "this is before that actual version number" [23:15] s/say/be interpreted as/ [23:15] Right, '~' is less than '' [23:20] wgrant: what's the underlying mechanism to determine that, by the way? [23:20] probably not the best thing to be poking around about that, but i'm curious :P [23:20] TheLordOfTime: I don't understand the question. [23:20] wgrant: how does the system determine '~' is less than '', and 0.1 is greater than 0 and such? [23:21] * TheLordOfTime failed to word the question right at first, and apologizes [23:22] There is code in dpkg to implement the ordering defined by http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Version [23:23] "The lexical comparison is a comparison of ASCII values modified so that all the letters sort earlier than all the non-letters and so that a tilde sorts before anything, even the end of a part." [23:23] ahh that answers part of that. :) [23:23] wgrant: thanks for the link. :) [23:27] :) [23:44] wgrant: in other news i fixed the FTBFS >.> i had to disable a module >.>