| [00:26] <simplew> glebihan: hi | |
| [00:27] <simplew> glebihan: do you how is possible to see the package version/release that was deleted in launchpad? | |
| === jamesh_ is now known as jamesh | |
| === Mission-Critical is now known as MissionCritical | |
| === jam1 is now known as jam | |
| === Sweetsha1k is now known as Sweetsharl | |
| === Sweetsharl is now known as Sweetshark | |
| [11:28] <didrocks> hey | |
| [11:30] <didrocks> czajkowski: I'm getting a lot of fail to upload recently on ~unity-team/staging ppa. Did anything change? The fail to upload seems to happen because there is another more recent version waiting to build. However, it's the case for a year now that we have this high rate of upload and I never noticed that it was failing to upload because of it before. | |
| [11:30] <mitya57> hi, can anybody please change lp:nose to point to lp:~mitya57/nose/trunk? | |
| [11:31] <mitya57> (upstream moved development from bitbucket to github, so the current branch is out-of-date). | |
| [11:34] <wgrant> didrocks: Nothing's changed there in several years | |
| [11:35] <didrocks> wgrant: ok, I'm a little bit confused by the fact the upload is rejected though. We do have another source waiting to build, but what happens if it fails? We could have a more recent version published | |
| [11:36] <wgrant> mitya57: Done, thanks for letting us know | |
| [11:36] <didrocks> wgrant: maybe I just start to notice because our uploader (after a local build) is faster nowdays | |
| [11:36] <mitya57> wgrant, thanks | |
| [11:37] <wgrant> didrocks: Superseded builds have their uploads rejected for ancient, complicated, and messy reasons. It isn't usually a problem because the time between uploads is almost always greater than the build time, except when someone uploads a quick fix, in which case you usually don't want to be publishing the old one anyway | |
| [11:39] <didrocks> wgrant: right, but for continous integration, every commit is published on a ppa, so the number of builds can be high. I'm just surprised I didn't turn into it that much until recently (and the development is lower than what it was) | |
| [11:39] <didrocks> but ok, if nothing changed in your side, that's all I wanted to ensure :) | |
| [11:39] <wgrant> Ah, so that's why our build queues are so huge :) | |
| [11:39] <wgrant> But yeah, nothing's changed on our end | |
| [11:40] <didrocks> wgrant: thanks! I think I'll just filter those emails | |
| [11:42] <wgrant> It's not ideal, but it's a bit difficult and probably not worth it right now to make LP cope | |
| [11:42] <wgrant> So filtering may indeed be best for now | |
| [11:43] <os_> hi | |
| [11:43] <os_> i am planing to make a dict dictionary | |
| [11:44] <os_> and i wonder if launchpad primt dictionary databases to be hosted | |
| [11:47] <os_> amy ideas pls ? | |
| [11:50] <czajkowski> os_: what do you mean? | |
| [11:50] <os_> i am planing to make a "dict" database | |
| [11:51] <os_> czajkowski: it is dictionary database | |
| [11:51] <czajkowski> ah | |
| [11:52] <os_> i want to host the database (it is not programming project) in launchpad | |
| [11:52] <czajkowski> not sure let me go and ask | |
| [11:52] <czajkowski> wgrant: any ideas | |
| === matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch | |
| === matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara | |
| === Quintasan_ is now known as Quintasan | |
| === yofel_ is now known as yofel | |
| === matsubara is now known as matsubara-brb | |
| === matsubara-brb is now known as matsubara | |
| [20:30] <mapreri> I've just add a new gpg key to my launchpad account, and today was release the new CoC. I'm looking for resignin (also with the new key) the CoC, but at https://launchpad.net/~mapreri/+codesofconduct I don't find any links that allow this. So, what have I to do? Or what do you suggest to do? | |
| [20:34] <maxb> mapreri: The last CoC that I can see was released in 2005 | |
| [20:35] <czajkowski> maxb: version 2.0 was release earlier on today | |
| [20:35] <czajkowski> https://launchpad.net/codeofconduct/2.0 | |
| [20:36] <maxb> lp is lying to me then | |
| [20:36] <maxb> "The current version is 2.0, released 2005-04-12" | |
| [20:36] <mapreri> czajkowski: I've just see those page is outdated... http://fridge.ubuntu.com/2012/11/19/coc-version-2-0-has-been-released/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=coc-version-2-0-has-been-released | |
| [20:37] <mapreri> the last release was today | |
| [20:48] <czajkowski> sinzui: why does the CoC say latest version is 2.0 released 2005-04-12 ? | |
| [20:48] <czajkowski> was that when version 1 was released? | |
| [20:48] <sinzui> czajkowski, Lp does not really support CoC versioning | |
| [20:49] <sinzui> There might gs a hack, but since it is not in the db, Lp really does not know | |
| [20:49] * sinzui looks for hack | |
| [20:49] <mapreri> sinzui: are you a lp developer? | |
| [20:50] <mapreri> czajkowski: in 2005-04-12 was released the 10. | |
| [20:50] <mapreri> 1.0.1 * | |
| [20:50] <sinzui> czajkowski, CodeOfConductConf can be changed to use the current data...changing invalidates all previous CoC signings | |
| [20:51] <sinzui> mapreri, I am a Lp developer | |
| [20:53] <mapreri> sinzui: imho make a sense invalidate all previous coc signings... but i think this is not a shared opinion :P | |
| [20:54] <sinzui> czajkowski, The choice are to invalidate everyone's signing, rewrite the code to avoid showing the dates in the UI, add a hack to the conf to have another date. Maybe there is a third option to implement agreements and checkboxes (no file signing) | |
| [20:54] <czajkowski> sinzui: would you like the CC to give you a definate answer | |
| [20:54] <czajkowski> I can't speak for sabdfl or the others on what way it would be done | |
| [20:54] <sinzui> czajkowski, This is a question and an implementation for the Ubuntu community... | |
| [20:54] <czajkowski> sinzui: which is the CC in this case to make the call | |
| [20:55] <czajkowski> let me go and talk to them | |
| [20:55] <sinzui> you are seeing dholbach changes | |
| [20:55] <czajkowski> yup | |
| [20:55] <czajkowski> that's what we;ve been working on for the last 6+ months | |
| [23:34] <bobweaver> Hello there I am trying to upload a package and I am not reciving any emails about a fail. But when I ran dput ppa:myppa/myrepo this.sources.changes . Everything uploaded. You can view the package and also the upload out put ect located here. | |
| [23:34] <bobweaver> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~josephjamesmills/ubuntutv/mockup-ppa-branch/files/head:/Unity-2d/ | |
| [23:35] <bigjools> did you sign the upload? | |
| [23:36] <bigjools> https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+faq/227 | |
| [23:38] <bobweaver> with gpg ? | |
| [23:38] <bobweaver> Oo at faq page thansk | |
| [23:39] <bobweaver> No I def have uploaded and signed key to Ubuntu server | |
| [23:39] <bobweaver> I will try on this computer that is also signed and sent to Ubuntu server | |
| [23:40] <bigjools> you may have another problem in the package that causes the upload processing software to crash, in which case you need someone to look at the logs | |
| [23:41] <wgrant> That key is not on the keyserver | |
| [23:41] <bobweaver> Oo | |
| [23:41] <wgrant> You have 6 gpg keys associated with your Launchpad account (probably a little excessive), but the one you used to sign that .changes file is not one of them | |
| [23:42] <bobweaver> er thanks wgrant yeah one or two where for virtual and one or two are on partitions that I use not so often . Thanks for looking into that. | |
| [23:43] * bobweaver feels silly | |
| [23:44] <wgrant> You'd generally only have one key active at a time | |
| [23:48] <bobweaver> Oh I see what you are saying you can do that on your account | |
| [23:49] <bobweaver> thanks wgrant | |