=== Mission-Critical is now known as MissionCritical
[07:28] <dpm> hi wgrant, is there a way we can remove old merge proposals from https://code.launchpad.net/developer-ubuntu-com/+activereviews? I don't seem to be able to edit https://code.launchpad.net/~mpt/developer-ubuntu-com/bug-861031/+merge/77395 in any way.
[07:29] <dpm> it's not applicable any more, but its status has been "Approved" forever and I cannot change
[07:31] <wgrant> dpm: The branch owner on either end can set it to rejected.
[07:31] <dpm> wgrant, yeah, but he no longer works for Canonical or is part of the Ubuntu community
[07:32] <dpm> oh, on either end
[07:34] <dpm> mpt, could you set the status of https://code.launchpad.net/~mpt/developer-ubuntu-com/bug-861031 to "Rejected"? It would help us cleaning it up from the +activereviews view on the developer site code reviews
[08:09] <mpt> dpm, no, I don’t seem to have permission to change the status (and I wouldn’t want to even if I could)
[08:09] <wgrant> It's an MP into an abandoned non-trunk branch.
[08:09] <wgrant> I think you'd probably want to.
[08:10] <wgrant> (or delete it entirely)
[08:12] <mpt> It was trunk at the time I submitted it! (though I remember thinking at the time that it was a dodgy project structure)
[08:13] <dpm> mpt, in that case, setting it to Merged should probably do. Is that correct, wgrant?
[08:13] <dpm> I mean the status of the branch, not the MP
[08:13] <wgrant> The branch and MP statuses are unrelated.
[08:13] <mpt> I think I’ll resubmit it against the current trunk. The current page has pretty much exactly the same problem I was trying to fix three years ago.
[08:13] <wgrant> I'd suggest deleting the MP; it doesn't make sense against a non-trunk.
[08:14] <dpm> mpt, we're moving to django, that won't apply anymore
[08:18] <mpt> Okay. But regardless, if you find yourself itching to change the status of a three-year-old MP against a branch that you don’t even own, this suggests the problem is with Launchpad :-)
[08:19] <mpt> Specifically, that “Active reviews” is an interesting collection for a branch (e.g. trunk), but not so interesting for a project as a whole
[08:19] <wgrant> Sure. But the problem comes up infrequently and I can't fix that tonight.
[08:20] <mpt> naturally
[08:21] <dpm> mpt, we can only agree, but beyond that, and the fact that all three of us have enough on our plates, it'd be good to see if we could set the branch to a status where it no longer appears in active reviews. I'm happy to review a new branch that's against the current django trunk afterwards
[08:23] <mpt> dpm, understood. As I say, I don’t seem to have permission to change the merge proposal, and as far as I know, changing the status of the branch wouldn’t change the merge proposal either. I wouldn’t want to delete the branch outright, because I’ll want to use it as a reference when I make the new one.
[08:23] <wgrant> mpt: I'd suggest deleting the MP.
[08:23] <wgrant> That you can certainly do.
[08:23] <mpt> Oh! I was looking at the wrong page
[08:24] <mpt> done
[08:24] <dpm> great, thanks mpt!
[08:46] <mpt> Reported bug 1402973
[08:46] <ubot5> bug 1402973 in Launchpad itself ""Active reviews" for a project forever includes proposals for unmarked abandoned branches" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1402973
[09:26] <apw> wgrant, i am looking at the +upcomingwork support in LP and wondering how that interacts with milestones without any dates, specifically i note that things against say precise-updates do not appear to show up; that has to be a bug right ?
[09:31] <wgrant> apw: IIRC it shows items for milestones in the next 90 days.
[09:32] <wgrant> It would be rather unmanageable if it showed all undated milestones too.
[09:33] <apw> wgrant, well, perhaps not if they were "unexpanded" for ones out further?
[09:33] <apw> wgrant, is there an unfiltered view as well?  as the other issue is if things are not done by the deadline, they just dissappear too
[09:34] <wgrant> apw: I don't believe so. IIRC Linaro implemented that view for their own purposes.
[09:35] <wgrant> I'm not quite sure why it's hardcoded, but that's unfortunately the way it is.
[09:35] <apw> damn, so nearly useful
=== s8321414_ is now known as s8321414
=== davmor2_ is now known as davmor2
=== debfx_ is now known as debfx
=== nickoe_ is now known as nickoe
[16:56] <legalize> I need some help deleting a bogus launchpad account, can anyone help me with that?
[17:01] <legalize> ugh, what a piece of crap
[17:01] <teward> legalize: probably posting a question against Launchpad Itself and getting help is a little more expedient
[17:01] <teward> i'm guessing people don't read the topics and see the "Support" section :p
[17:14] <dobey> how rude
[17:14] <teward> dobey: indeed!
[17:15] <teward> dobey: if everyone read the topics in a channel this world might be better.  *shrugs*
[17:15] <dobey> well even just ignoring the topic
[17:16] <dobey> rage-quitting isn't going to solve the problem
[17:16] <teward> true statement
[17:16] <dobey> i don't read the topic
[17:16] <dobey> they're usually way too long and a bunch of urls
[17:17] <dobey> they've become a description of where to go information elsewhere, and not a topic for the channel itself
[17:17] <teward> well, true, but in this case the topic links to answers.launchpad.net/launchpad so... *shrugs*
[17:17] <dobey> and i'm in way too many channels
[17:18] <dobey> teward: not in the ~160 chars that my irc client shows at the top of the screen
[17:18] <dobey> and this is the support irc channel for launchpad
[17:19] <dobey> so it's perfectly acceptable to ask support questions in it
[17:19] <teward> dobey: true, I ignore topics in most chanels as well :)
[17:19] <dobey> as you've done many times instead of posting quetions on answers.lp.net :)
[17:19] <teward> dobey: except ragequitting doesn't help, of course
[17:19] <teward> dobey: indeed!
[17:19] <teward> (although i have patience, and a lot of times my questions aren't admin-attention-required)
[17:21] <dobey> well, i don't know if his issue was or not either
[17:22] <dobey> it seemed like he was perhaps asking how to delete an account he had access to
[20:43] <sidi> teward, dobey you mean if Launchpad gave users a means to delete their account you wouldn't get those questions ;-)
[20:44] <teward> yes, but then we'd ahve the 'recover the account' problem if someone deleted their account or a mailicious hijacker did that
[20:44] <cjwatson> https://help.launchpad.net/YourAccount/Closing?action=show&redirect=DeactivatingYourAccount
[20:44] <cjwatson> er, indeed https://help.launchpad.net/YourAccount/Closing with less cruft
[20:45] <sidi> tbh if someone actively sabotages an account they can already do a lot of harm
[20:45] <cjwatson> but that's not actually quite what was asked
[20:45] <cjwatson> the original question appears (it's unclear) to be about deleting a different account
[20:50] <dobey> sidi: no, i'm sure we would
[20:51] <dobey> cjwatson: well, he just said "bogus" so it's not entirely clear to me what he was asking
[20:59] <cjwatson> dobey: Sure, it indeed wasn't clear, but sidi said "if Launchpad gave users a means to delete their account", and to most intents and purposes it does.
[20:59] <cjwatson> Anyway this is out of proportion to the actual support load caused; it's not a very common question here.
[20:59] <dobey> yes indeed
=== DaGardner_ is now known as DaGardner