[01:08] <shadeslayer> wgrant: just so that I get this right, there's no webui for git repos just yet right
[01:09] <cjwatson> shadeslayer: There is certainly a web UI, although some bits aren't hooked up quite correctly yet.  What piece do you think is missing?
[01:09] <wgrant> shadeslayer: It depends on what you mean by that. There's always been UI for the repos themselves, but there wasn't always a way to find them.
[01:09] <shadeslayer> I just pushed a repo to lp:~shashlik/packaging
[01:09] <wgrant> (and some of the ways to find them won't be on prod until next week)
[01:09] <shadeslayer> but I'm not sure where the webui for viewing it is
[01:09] <wgrant> shadeslayer: That's the packaging project.
[01:09] <wgrant> Did you really mean that?
[01:09] <shadeslayer> oh
[01:10] <shadeslayer> no xD
[01:10] <wgrant> The LP project model hasn't changed; this isnt' GitHub.
[01:10] <wgrant> If you want a project repo, push to lp:~person-or-team/project
[01:10] <cjwatson> You can see it by going to https://code.launchpad.net/~shashlik/packaging and selecting "View Git repositories", but as wgrant says you pushed it to the wrong place.
[01:10] <wgrant> If you want a personal repo, push to lp:~person-or-team/+git/some-personal-name
[01:11] <wgrant> (and there are also package repos, which are a little more complicated as we don't know exactly how they should work yet)
[01:11] <cjwatson> Fortunately you can delete repositories now ;-)
[01:11] <shadeslayer> wait, so if I want to push to ~shashlik/shashlik/packaging, where does one push
[01:11] <shadeslayer> cjwatson: yeah deleted :)
[01:11] <cjwatson> https://code.launchpad.net/~shashlik/packaging/+git/packaging has the link
[01:11] <wgrant> shadeslayer: What does that mean?
[01:12] <shadeslayer> wgrant: ~shashlik team, shashlik project, repo called packaging
[01:12] <wgrant> You want a separate repo named 'packaging' inside the shashlik project?
[01:12] <shadeslayer> ( same as bzr )
[01:12] <shadeslayer> wgrant: yep
[01:12] <wgrant> That's lp:~shashlik/shashlik/+git/packaging
[01:12] <shadeslayer> I see
[01:12] <wgrant> (since lp:~shashlik/shashlik/packaging would be a bzr branch)
[01:12] <cjwatson> It's fundamentally not the same as bzr, though
[01:12] <wgrant> That too.
[01:12] <shadeslayer> I see, thanks for explaining that, it wasn't clear enough from the docs
[01:12] <cjwatson> Because branches can (and often should) be colocated within a single repository
[01:13] <cjwatson> For most projects the right thing is just to have a single repository called lp:shashlik
[01:13] <cjwatson> And then branches within that
[01:13] <wgrant> lp:~owner/project is what we expect 99.9% of contributors to use, and the only official repo will almost always be lp:project
[01:13] <wgrant> The named repos exist for cases where privacy is required, and because the Ubuntu kernel team is weird and has dozens of repos for no good reason.
[01:13] <cjwatson> You'd only use a separate repository if you're doing something somewhat odd, like your packaging branch sharing no history with upstream.
[01:14] <wgrant> You probably just want a separate branch in the same repo.
[01:14] <cjwatson> (Even in the no history case, there's nothing to say it has to be a separate repo; e.g. pristine-tar)
[01:15] <shadeslayer> wgrant: yeah, I'm used to the github workflow
[01:16] <wgrant> shadeslayer: You have a separate packaging repo on GitHub?
[01:16] <wgrant> That's pretty weird, since you can't have more than one fork of a repo per user/org on GitHub.
[01:16] <shadeslayer> wgrant: no, I was trying to figure out how to host the packaging on Launchpad, the sources are on github though
[01:17] <shadeslayer> that is true, however, one would expect to use branches in that case?
[01:17] <wgrant> (that is, on GitHub you only have the equivalent of lp:~shashlik/shashlik, no lp:~shashlik/shashlik/+git/foo)
[01:17] <shadeslayer> multiple forks of the same project under one team/user sounds a bit .. off to me
[01:17] <wgrant> Yes, which is why we are discouraging them :)
[01:17] <shadeslayer> ( that's what branches are for, I assumed )
[01:17] <shadeslayer> right :)
[01:17] <wgrant> They're necessary for eg. security fixes.
[01:17] <wgrant> Or if you need separate tag namespaces.
[01:17] <wgrant> Or things like that.
[01:18] <cjwatson> Embargoed security fixes, that is :)
[01:18] <wgrant> But packaging should probably just be a branch.
[01:18] <cjwatson> Since we're only doing privacy at the repository level, not at the branch level
[01:18] <wgrant> (or a whole lot of branches in refs/heads/ubuntu/SERIES, for example)
[01:20] <cjwatson> I expect we'll end up with a bunch of packaging repositories in the lp:ubuntu/+source/SOURCE namespaces and friends once those work, so lp:~slashlik/ubuntu/+source/shashlik would also be valid.  The main reason for that is completely different access control, though.
[23:32] <shadeslayer> hi
[23:33] <shadeslayer> in my build it seems like something's going wrong here : ERROR: ld.so: object 'libfakeroot-sysv.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded (cannot open shared object file): ignored.
[23:33] <shadeslayer> https://launchpadlibrarian.net/208967130/buildlog_ubuntu-vivid-i386.shashlik_0.2%2Bgit20150613.0347%2B15.04-0_BUILDING.txt.gz
[23:34] <cjwatson> If I were you I would consider the possibility that that was a red herring given that it occurred several times before without apparent immediate failure, and that it says "ignored"
[23:35] <cjwatson> But I must to bed rather than trying to decipher Java build failures :-)
[23:35] <shadeslayer> ah :)
[23:35] <shadeslayer> cjwatson: night :)