jhobbsdo prerequisite branches work with git? I can't seem to make them work14:49
dobeyjhobbs: i don't understand the uestion. you mean for merge proposals?14:57
cjwatsonjhobbs: yes15:00
jhobbsok, i'll try some more, must be doing something wrong15:01
knomehey, could some admin look at https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/270038 ? cheers16:19
mark06help please, I need to clone this branch but can't http://vpaste.net/DWYwJ16:47
dobeymark06: you'll have to get the source package for that some other way17:07
dobeymark06: using pull-lp-source is generally the recommended way to get source packages17:07
=== UbuntPkgSx is now known as UbuntuPkgingSuck
=== UbuntuPkgingSuck is now known as UbuntuPkgingSuxx
mark06dobey: using http worked21:19
dobeymark06: not really. you got old data21:20
mark06I wanted to keep the application up-to-date but ubuntu packaging is annoying21:20
mark06dobey: huh?21:21
dobeythe bzr branch for the packaging in ubuntu is out of date due to the issue you asked about21:21
dobeythe imported bzr branches for ubuntu source packages have had lots of import issues; you should use pull-lp-source to get the actual source from the archive21:21
mark06I noticed that, I don't see 0ubuntu3.2 there, well it's all really annoying21:22
dobeylife is annoying. get used to it :)21:22
dobeypackaging stuff for ubuntu is not really that hard though21:22
mark06it is, period21:24
mark06but this is not the place to complain how much it sucks21:24
dobeyno it is not21:24
mark06it is21:24
mark06see my branch21:24
mark06in arch it would be *one single file*, the PKGBUILD21:25
mark06arch packaging is way better21:25
mark06sorry for complaining21:25
mark06my branch is outdated and I can't figure out a way to update it to both latest pidgin++ and the ubuntu patches21:26
mark06I wasted a few hours today so I guess I'll give up21:27
mark06best solution is maybe creating a real pidgin++ package instead of pidgin + pidgin++ patches + ubuntu patches21:28
dobeyi have no idea why you are trying to create a fork-that-isnt-really-one of pidgin; but i can certainly say that such a choice does make otherwise simple tasks more difficult, and thus is the core of the complaints you constantly make in here21:32
mark06I'm talking about the packaging21:32
mark06technically my current pidgin++ package name is "pidgin" with patches (mine and ubuntu's)21:34
mark06I guess it should be an independent package named "pidgin++" but I'm super lazy to read http://packaging.ubuntu.com/html, specially after the hours I spent with this :(21:35
mark06I would also need to change my source code etc... so best solution for now is removing the ubuntu section from http://pidgin.renatosilva.me, unfortunately :(21:37
dobeyand why don't you work with the upstream pidgin developers to just improve pidgin instead of forking it?21:40
mark06I tried in the beginning, see the bugs I fixed for discussions21:41
mark06they often spend more time in bug tracker than it would take to write the actual patches21:43
dobeyyeah, no thanks. if you're too lazy to read packaging documentation and do things right, i'm certainly too lazy to perform an anthropological survey of your development activities in relation to upstreams21:44
mark06there's plenty of bugs like this they love to find reasons not to fix https://developer.pidgin.im/ticket/1534721:44
mark06dobey: there's no research to do, the patches are freely available to anyone decide to like or not, they can merge them anytime too21:45
mark06well, sorry for the ranting  and thanks anyway21:48
=== heroux_ is now known as heroux

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!