[02:01] <DrunkenDwarf> Hi all. Launchpad PPAs, theyre all public, but are they part of a searchable repository, or do you need to give out links for them to be used?
[02:03] <dobey> they have to be added individually
[02:03] <DrunkenDwarf> right. so if i dont give out the address of my ppa for people to add, it'll not get found otherwise
[02:05] <dobey> well it may show up in search results on launchpad
[02:05] <dobey> but there isn't a thing in software-center which lists all PPAs available on launchpad for people to add to their machines
[18:20] <slackner> hiho. someone here who could bump our repository quota maybe? https://launchpad.net/~wine/+archive/ubuntu/wine-builds
[18:22] <cjwatson> slackner: done
[18:22] <slackner> cjwatson: nice, thx :)
[21:16] <renatosilva> please fix bug 383804
[21:18] <dobey> [Low,Triaged]
[21:19] <dobey> patches welcome :)
[21:20] <dobey> a better error message would be nice, but if the branches stacked on the branch you're trying to delete, are not owned by you, then there isn't much you can do about it either. you can however, rename the branch to foo-deadbeef instead of trunk or whatever, as well
[21:28] <renatosilva> because there isn't much (anything) I can do, is that I asked for a bug fix :)
[21:29] <Mc-> that is a thing you can do :p
[21:29] <dobey> launchpad is open source :)
[21:29] <renatosilva> these stacked branches (dependencies on someone's branch)  are really ugly
[21:29] <dobey> no they aren't
[21:30] <dobey> wasting disk space by copying everything to every random branch everyone creates, is ugly
[21:30] <renatosilva> Mc-: the workaround is asking the branch owner to delete his branch first, so you can delete yours
[21:31] <Mc-> I^was not talking about workarounds ^^
[21:31] <dobey> renatosilva: that's not a workaround
[21:31] <dobey> renatosilva: even if that bug is fixed, you will still have to do that
[21:31] <renatosilva> dobey: so what was the github approach? they do not seem to be wasting disk space
[21:31] <dobey> how do you know?
[21:32] <dobey> do you manage their private storage facilities?
[21:32]  * renatosilva sighs
[21:32]  * renatosilva misses the good guys that used to be here
[21:32] <dobey> yes, when you fork a repo on github, it copies the entire repo
[21:33] <dobey> github doesn't do branching.
[21:33] <dobey> well, branches are internal to the repo
[21:33] <dobey> that's how git works
[21:33] <renatosilva> Mc-: about what then? :)
[21:34] <Mc-> about the bugfix
[21:35] <dobey> if you want the bug fixed soon, your options are 1) fix it yourself and submit the patch, 2) contract someone else to fix it
[21:35] <dobey> it's very low priority
[21:35] <dobey> so very unlikely that anyone working on launchpad is going to fix it anytime soon, when there are much more important things being worked on
[21:36] <dobey> if someone other than you has stacked something onto a branch you wish to delete, then the simplest "workaround" is to just rename the branch to branch-abandoned, and set its status to abandoned
[21:44] <dobey> sigh indeed.
[22:45] <cjwatson> please could you be a bit less hostile to people turning up here?  it does not actually help.
[22:45] <dobey> hostile?
[22:45] <cjwatson> you are coming across as extremely hostile.
[22:47] <dobey> i give up
[22:47] <cjwatson> "do you manage their private storage facilities?"  just snippy, no need for it at all.
[22:49] <cjwatson> and the consequences of stacked branches really are pretty ugly - it doesn't help us to be defensive
[22:49] <cjwatson> yes, there's a good reason for them in the first place, but even so
[22:49] <wgrant> (and we avoided the user-visible downsides in the Git implementation)
[22:50] <dobey> i wasn't being defensive. i was just stating the reason. and yes, i agree the consequences can be ugly.
[23:02] <mwhudson> is there something in ubuntu-archive-tools that i can use to make a no-change rebuild of a package in a ppa?