[00:50] <balloons> you want another build? sure
[00:50] <balloons> flexiondotorg, ^^
[00:53] <balloons> flexiondotorg, I added it. you should be able to setup the rest and add a build I believe
[01:54] <sethj> When powering up Testdrive to help test beta 1 I noticed it doesn't list Ubuntu MATE in the preferences. Should I file a bug about that?
[01:54] <sethj> Is Testdrive even recommended/used anymore?
[01:56] <ianorlin> I am not sure I mainly have found just zsyncing easier and had some bugs last time I treid to use testdrive
[01:56] <ianorlin> it seemed to support virtualbox better than kvm
[02:05] <sethj> ianorlin, hm, I guess I could try zsyncing them. I always just used VB anyway so I didn't find its integration into Testdrive to be an issue. Hopefully I'll be able to test on my spare partition soon.
[02:06] <sethj> I used Testdrive because it was convenient, but might as well do it the hard way :p
[04:18] <sethj> hmm, would something crashing *after* the install (on first boot) fail the testcase or pass with with a non critical bug?
[05:55] <pitti> Good morning
[05:56] <pitti> dobey: you can also put your branch pretty much anywhere (github, gitorious, people.canonical.com), or even easier, just attach git format-patch to  a bug report
[05:56] <pitti> the latter is easiest
[15:07] <brendand> elopio, lots of things seem broken today
[15:09] <elopio> brendand: there is a branch for each one.
[15:10] <brendand> elopio, yeah it's just depressing
[15:10] <elopio> brendand: today, it's the price we are paying for not using upstream code.
[15:11] <brendand> elopio, btw the bug fgimenez mentioned, it's already reported and fixed in testtools
[15:11] <brendand> elopio, but testtools still hasn't been updated in debian
[15:11] <brendand> for almost six months
[15:12] <elopio> ok.
[15:12] <elopio> should we prepare an updated debian package and give it to them?  Or do the skip earlier in our code?
[15:12] <brendand> elopio, or move the check out of the setup
[15:13] <brendand> oh wait
[15:14] <brendand> fgimenez, do file a bug actually, against the sanity test suite
[15:14] <brendand> fgimenez, i'll take a look
[15:14] <brendand> elopio, i don't see any branch about the uninstall test failing
[15:15] <brendand> elopio, i get 'autopilot.exceptions.StateNotFoundError: Object not found with name 'PreviewActionButton' and properties {'objectName': 'buttonconfirm_click'}.' consistently
[15:15] <elopio> brendand: is that running the install branch?
[15:15] <brendand> elopio, yes
[15:15] <elopio> I've just fixed it. The branch is not ready for review.
[15:16] <elopio> it was a mistake I did yesterday.
[15:20] <brendand> elopio, does your system settings branch fix 'AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'MainWindow''
[15:20] <elopio> brendand: yes.
[15:21] <fgimenez> brendand: ok, you should be able to reproduce it in the test_sim_pin test without sim inserted
[15:21] <brendand> fgimenez, ok
[15:28] <elopio> rhuddie: our policy is one card per branch.
[15:28] <elopio> so you can make a card for your avatar branch, and put it in the review column.
[15:29] <elopio>  you also can ping renato to get it landed.
[15:30] <rhuddie> elopio, ah, i see. thanks. I have some helpers to add yet, but also wanted to get the .deb file from jenkins
[15:34] <elopio> rhuddie: got it. Is there a way to split that card in more pieces? I'm not sure what to do in the evening.
[15:34] <rhuddie> elopio, for that branch, do you think it best to just get that single change landed and then add helpers to the sanity-tests branch? or try and get the helpers in with that MP?
[15:35] <elopio> rhuddie: the helpers need the test peers. Is that easy to do?
[15:35] <rhuddie> elopio, hmmm, i'm not sure about that yet
[15:35] <elopio> I saw some of your branches in progress for that, I don't know how close are they to land.
[15:35] <rhuddie> elopio, well they are quite old now
[15:36] <elopio> rhuddie: yes, but they don't need a lot of updates.
[15:36] <elopio> not much has changed.
[15:36] <rhuddie> i did the merge from trunk, which seemed ok
[15:36] <elopio> rhuddie: I would say, make the helpers in sanity. If we have time at the end, make an MP for the address book with as many of them as possible.
[15:37] <rhuddie> yes. i think we should be able to get the object name landed easily, but if we start doing the helpers it could take much longer
[15:38] <elopio> rhuddie: yes, I agree.
[15:39] <rhuddie> elopio, should I wait for jenkins results before getting another review?
[15:39] <elopio> rhuddie: no need. There's no way jenkins can fail with that.
[15:39] <rhuddie> :)
[15:40] <elopio> rhuddie: you probably have to update the copyright year there.
[15:40] <elopio> you know? just because I can't go to bed if I don't leave a needs fixing :)
[15:42] <elopio> fgimenez: I want to learn c++ from scratch. Any recommendations?
[15:44] <fgimenez> elopio: buf, perhaps i'm not the indicated person to give you directions on this :)
[15:44] <rhuddie> elopio, updated copyright
[15:45] <elopio> fgimenez: I suppose I'm confused. For some reason, I thought you were a c++ hacker.
[15:45] <elopio> to many emails going on this days.
[15:47] <fgimenez> elopio: i've worked with it but there's a lot for me to learn
[15:50] <elopio> I suppose this coude be good: http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-096-introduction-to-c-january-iap-2011/lecture-notes/
[17:31] <rhuddie> elopio, I keep getting this error when running the add contact test: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/10411508/
[17:32] <rhuddie> it seems like it should work, so not sure if you have any ideas?
[17:33] <elopio> rhuddie: did you remove the Address book helpers from sanity?
[17:33] <rhuddie> elopio, no
[17:33] <elopio> rhuddie: you should use now the ones upstream. There's an address_book_app.AddressBookApp
[17:34] <rhuddie> elopio, yes. i tried using that in the call to get_proxy_object_for_existing_process(), but it gave the same result
[17:35] <rhuddie> i feel like i must be missing something
[17:36] <elopio> rhuddie: if you didn't remove the one from helpers, it might be in the object registry.
[17:37] <balloons> elopio, so html5 and scopes. Are we comfortable yet in recommending things for testing? Presumably selenium and phantomjs
[17:37] <elopio> oh, no, crap.
[17:37] <elopio> the webbrowser typo got into trunk.
[17:37] <elopio> that's the problem.
[17:38] <rhuddie> elopio, oh!
[17:38] <elopio> balloons: for scope testing, pete is working on a tool to test them without ui.
[17:38] <elopio> for html5, autopilot + selenium + oxide.
[17:38] <brendand> elopio, did it?
[17:41] <elopio> I wonder how the tests pass.
[17:43] <balloons> elopio, ack, ty
[17:43] <balloons> elopio, ohh, for the 'tool' is there source or a name?
[17:44] <elopio> rhuddie: can you try with this?
[17:44] <elopio> https://code.launchpad.net/~canonical-platform-qa/address-book-app/fix_app_proxy/+merge/250969
[17:44] <elopio> balloons: I haven't seen it yet.
[17:46] <rhuddie> elopio, with ubuntu-sanity-tests? how do i make it install that version on the device?
[17:46] <elopio> rhuddie: I would make the device rw.
[17:46] <elopio> install this and unity8-autopilot
[17:47] <elopio> adb push the ubuntu_sanity_directory your are using.
[17:47] <elopio> and autopilot3 run from phablet-shell
[19:55] <balloons> bdmurray, do you indeed intend to backport apport-noui to trusty?
[20:09] <balloons> nvm I see it's already there, awesome
[20:28] <bdmurray> balloons: its there but it doesn't work well
[20:28] <balloons> bdmurray, so what are the tweaks you describe then? Do they eliminate all prompts?
[20:30] <bdmurray> balloons: yes by the following
[20:30] <bdmurray>   * debian/apport-noui.upstart: remove early exit (LP: #1235436)
[20:30] <bdmurray>   * debian/apport-noui.dirs: create /var/lib/apport (LP: #1235436)
[20:30] <bdmurray>   * data/whoopsie-upload-all: backport vivid version of it
[20:30] <bdmurray>   * apport-noui: make the package installation automatically enable
[20:30] <bdmurray>     autosubmission, and update the package description accordingly.
[20:30] <bdmurray>     LP: #1351137.
[20:31] <balloons> ahh some additional bugs
[20:31] <bdmurray> balloons: then the whoopsie change just makes it so that the OOPS ID gets logged
[20:31] <balloons> right, so you only pulled bug 1084979
[20:32] <balloons> I think eliminating all prompts especially on the LTS would be very welcome
[20:32] <balloons> we don't gain any favors by exposing LTS users to it
[20:33] <bdmurray> The apport-noui change requires people to manually install that package and sends all crashes without prompting to errors.
[20:33] <bdmurray> I don't know how large the audience is for that.
[20:44] <dobey> whee, so i am hitting more interesting annoyances in autopilot :-/
[20:47] <veebers> dobey: what are you experiencing?
[20:48] <dobey> veebers: well, apparently self.launch_test_application() calls "which" for each argument. and it always inserts "-testability" as the second argument on the command line, regardless what the first item is
[20:49] <dobey> so ["which", ""] fails, and then replacing the "" with "sh" fails because it tries to do ["/bin/sh", "-testability", "/usr/bin/qmlscene", ...]
[20:50] <veebers> dobey: right, so launch_app is designed to launch applications in which to introspect (and thus returns a proxy object)
[20:50] <dobey>             "ubuntu-app-test" if use_mir else "",
[20:50] <dobey> trying to do that
[20:50] <dobey> because we have to do ubuntu-app-test qmlscene foo to run it under mir
[20:51] <veebers> dobey: you should use UpstartApplicationLauncher if you want to launch something using ual
[20:52] <dobey> veebers: no i can't
[20:52] <veebers> dobey: that's wrapped in TestCase.launch_upstart_application
[20:52] <dobey> veebers: this isn't an actual application
[20:52] <dobey> so ubuntu-app-launch won't work
[20:53] <dobey> otherwise, i'd just use self.launch_click_package() and it'd work and i wouldn't have had to override it to do what i need to do :)
[20:53] <veebers> dobey: ah I see sorry, I read "UbuntuAppLaunch.start_application_test" in the source and saw 'test' and 'ubuntuapp..'
[20:54] <dobey> in what source?
[20:54] <veebers> dobey: autopilot
[20:54] <dobey> oh
[20:54] <dobey> yeah, that would be fine if this was a normal app
[20:54] <dobey> but it's not
[20:54] <dobey> it's a trusted session thing
[20:55] <veebers> dobey: what's ubuntu-app-test?
[20:56] <dobey> veebers: it is a tool that will hopefully be available in vivid soon, to be able to launch a trusted session for special things like we are, under mir, so we can run our autopilot tests on a device/emulator
[20:57] <veebers> dobey: I wonder if perhaps there needs to be a feature added to autopilot to handly loading applications in this manner
[20:57] <balloons> dobey, nice!
[20:58]  * balloons worries about fragmentation of autopilot launching apps
[20:58] <dobey> veebers: well, i guess using ubuntu-app-test would be that feature, but for now i'm happy to get it working just in my test
[20:58] <dobey> veebers: for now, i think we're the only app that really needs this for autopilot, so our tests is at least a good place to hash out how it should work :)
[20:59] <veebers> dobey: ack :-)
[21:01] <veebers> dobey: so, if it's not being run under mir wouldn't the application be qmlscene (in this example) and not "" or "sh"?
[21:02] <dobey> veebers: we need qmlscene in both cases
[21:02] <dobey> veebers: but i only need to prefix the command with ubuntu-app-test if we're running under mir
[21:02] <flexiondotorg> Evening.
[21:02] <flexiondotorg> elfy, You about?
[21:02] <dobey> veebers: autopilot seems to be making some assumptions about what the arguments are though, rather than actually examining them and doing the right thing
[21:03] <elfy> flexiondotorg: ish
[21:03] <flexiondotorg> elfy, So, I've "signed" off one image so far.
[21:03] <flexiondotorg> elfy, I have a somewhat annoying bug in Beta 1. Not a show stopper and only affects i386 so far.
[21:03] <veebers> dobey: perhaps I dont' understand properly, under mir: self.launch_test_application('ubuntu_app_test', ['qmlscene', 'other args'])
[21:04] <flexiondotorg> elfy, Is it OK to process with known issues?
[21:04] <veebers> and not under mir: self.launch_test_application('qmlscene', ['other args'])
[21:04] <flexiondotorg> I see most other flavours have way more bugs than the Ubuntu MATE guys have encountered.
[21:04] <elfy> flexiondotorg: we intend to release with a big known issue if it doesn't get fixed in time
[21:04] <flexiondotorg> elfy, Cool.
[21:04] <elfy> just make sure your release notes detail anything you think your audience will need to know
[21:04] <flexiondotorg> Any idea what time tomorrow the Beta 1 will be released?
[21:04] <flexiondotorg> elfy, Working on those now.
[21:05] <dobey> veebers: i don't think that's right
[21:05] <elfy> flexiondotorg: excellent
[21:05] <elfy> flexiondotorg: when laney is happy and I've chased people for stuff :)
[21:05] <dobey> veebers: i guess i'll just have to have an if and make the call twice, once with ubuntu-app-test, and once without, rather than doing it in-line
[21:06] <flexiondotorg> Rough idea of what time?
[21:06] <dobey> veebers: but i'm still worried that autopilot will add the -testability in the wrong place in that case
[21:06] <elfy> flexiondotorg: well - both of us are using a proper timezone where for 6 months of the year UTC=the clock :)
[21:06] <elfy> same one as you I think :p
[21:07] <veebers> dobey: hmm, I think if you add '-testability' explicitly as an argument it shouldn't add it
[21:07] <elfy> flexiondotorg: early evening I would guess
[21:07] <veebers> so this (untested) might work: self.launch_test_application('ubuntu_app_test', ['qmlscene', '-testability', 'other args'])
[21:07] <dobey> veebers: hmm, i'll try that
[21:07] <veebers> dobey: let me know how it goes, we might end up filing some bugs :-)
[21:08] <dobey> yeah, hopefully adt-run will go fast this time
[21:09] <veebers> dobey: also, might be of use, if you supply app_type (as in, app_type='qt') it will use the qt testability env settings without trying to figure it out itself
[21:13] <flexiondotorg> elfy, PowerPC baby. It works 😃
[21:13] <elfy> lol
[21:53] <sbeattie> jibel, pitti: hey, looking at the apparmor entry for http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses.html, I see the systemd adt run failed. Looking at https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/vivid-adt-systemd/lastBuild/? it seems the i386 run failed due to archive problems/test setup failure. Is there any way that test can be rerun?
[22:07] <dobey> veebers: adding "-testability" by hand helped, but can't default to "sh" because of course it tries to read qmlscene as a shell script then which fails. so had to refactor a little and use an if, calling launch_test_application() in two different ways
[22:09] <veebers> dobey: ah ok, so it's currently working for you? (albeit the codes not as elegant as you would like?)
[22:10] <dobey> veebers: well i don't know if it "works" yet on the mir case, but i think i have it working ok for the qemu/x11 case (running again right now to verify)
[22:11] <veebers> dobey: ah ok, understood
[22:11] <dobey> but i think it works, yes :)
[22:11] <dobey> and hopefully we will be able to get ted's fix landed in vivid soon, so i can verify it works under mir as well
[22:17] <veebers> dobey: sweet, keep me in the loop as I'm interested in anyway that autopilot can be improved
[22:17] <dobey> veebers: don't worry, i'm good at complaining :D
[22:17] <veebers> ^_^
[22:29] <dobey> veebers: so ('foo', ['qmlscene', 'foo', ...]) doesn't work because it tries to parse the list as a string
[22:29] <dobey> whee