[00:07] Hello [00:08] I have a question about Bazaar [00:08] hi jearl [00:08] Jeej, even [00:09] hi mwhudson [00:10] Jeej: just ask your question [00:11] ah, well, i have just setup bazaar. I thoughed, i don't have to work in the bazaar dir, so i try it in the dir i want to use [00:11] oh, and i use windows [00:12] there is a windows installer for bazaar i think [00:12] (i do not use windows, however) [00:13] i found the Bazaar in five minuets document, but, now am i here: http://doc.bazaar-vcs.org/latest/en/mini-tutorial/index.html#making-changes-to-your-files when i do bzr diff, it doesn't so anything [00:13] yep, windows installer :-) [00:14] So, i did bzr diff file.ex, but it gives an error: bzr: ERROR: Path(s) are not versioned: file.ex [00:14] but i have made some changes [00:15] Jeej: You need to have used 'bzr add' on the files, so that Bazaar knows that it should be versioning those files. [00:15] I have done that [00:15] Jeej, how about bzr commit? [00:15] also done [00:16] Jeej: What does 'bzr ls --versioned' in that directory show? [00:17] Nothing :-/ [00:17] What about 'bzr status'? [00:17] unknown: all the files in the dir [00:18] Jeej: And what does 'bzr log' show? [00:18] Odd_Bloke: morning [00:18] thumper: o/ [00:18] can i paste it here? [00:19] Jeej: A pastebin would be better. [00:19] http://pastebin.com/d4d713741 [00:19] :-) [00:19] :D [00:19] OK, the evidence suggests that you didn't do a 'bzr add' before your first 'bzr commit'. [00:20] I have done that, it gave me a list of all the files in the dir [00:20] Well, bzr clearly doesn't know anything about them any more. :/ [00:21] Would it perhapse help when i do it now? [00:21] Well, try it and paste the output somewhere., [00:23] http://pastebin.com/dc6c1d85 [00:24] Jeej: And what does 'bzr status' show now? [00:24] still nothing [00:24] Jeej, well, are you trying to use file.ex [00:24] instead of an actual file name? [00:24] file.ex is an example name :) [00:24] Nope, i didn't want to give you the name [00:25] Jeej, ah, right [00:25] well [00:25] try changing a file now [00:25] But, later i though, it doesn't matter :-P [00:25] and running bzr diff [00:25] * Odd_Bloke is heading to bed. [00:25] Night all! [00:25] oh, bye [00:25] night Odd_Bloke [00:26] Woei (hehe, Dutch), it works [00:26] Jeej, :) [00:27] well, thank you :-D === AnMaster_ is now known as AnMaster [00:30] i am also going to sleep [00:30] byebye [00:47] about to review abentley's PreviewTree patch now [00:48] igc: cool [00:48] abentley: I'm doing that first because it's the oldest [00:49] is there something higher priority of yours you want done today? [00:49] either before or after that one? [00:50] Well, for that one, spiv reviewed it, but didn't actually vote. [00:50] He had some objections to the testing which I said I'd fix. [00:50] just noticed that [00:51] abentley: should I wait and do the fetch ones instead then? [00:51] That would be good. [00:51] np === RAOF_ is now known as RAOF [01:32] lifeless: ping [01:36] pong [01:38] I had to tweak Repository.add_revision to munge sha1s all the time. It was only doing it when an inventory was supplied. [01:38] When I did that, I broke bundle tests. [01:39] on "/home/abentley/bzr/fetch1to2/bzrlib/bundle/bundle_data.py", line 274 [01:39] I think that makes the api border stronger and is likely to prevent accidents; otoh perhaps asserting that the sha1 is correct when an inventory is not supplied would alter to current uses that interact badly [01:39] Should I just remove this verification? [01:39] s/alter/alert [01:41] I think the verification is bogus, because its asserting that the storage in the target repository format is identical to the storage in the source, but thats only the case when the model&serialisers match [01:41] Well, I think if we're going to alter sha1s in add_revision, we should expect it to happen whether or not an inventory is supplied. [01:42] But I have no way of knowing what the source serializer was for formats 0.8 and 0.9 [01:42] So I can't make that test conditional on the serializer. [01:42] abentley: I'm completely cool with your change to add_revision; I was just making an observation that we'd catch current 'culprits' by erroring rather than just altering, when the sha1's are different [01:43] . [01:45] * igc dentist [01:45] Hmm. [01:45] (I'll finish reviewing poolie's and jml's LockTimeout patch when I get back) [01:46] abentley: I have no recommendation about whether altering or alerting is better. [01:46] I think I'll take altering. [01:46] k [01:46] so, in the bundle_data.py test, I think that has to go. [01:47] because we don't know enough data about the origin, we can't determine what it should look like [01:47] Cool. It's only validating one field of the stored revision, which is a bit whack anyhow. [01:47] yeah, as the comment said [01:48] hersonls: hi [01:48] So if we were to stop exposing Revision.inventory_sha1, what would we replace it with? [01:48] poolie: hi [01:48] hello lifeless, abentley [01:49] poolie: hi [01:49] was planning on doing slackbuild for bazaar 1.4rc, which feel about that? [01:50] for users-tests [01:50] what do you mean by "for users-tests" [01:50] abentley: revision.validate() or repository.validate_revision(revid) [01:50] do you mean so that users can test it? [01:50] lifeless: Would we store new data in the repo? [01:51] abentley: I think we could in future but we could investigate whether the api would work now [01:51] poolie: yeah [01:52] sure, that sounds good [01:52] :) [01:52] lifeless: So we could actually stop exposing the attribute now, and just always ensure it matched its source repo. [01:53] It would be easier doing it on Repository, because it wouldn't require the revision to know its source repository. (and it may not have one) [01:55] abentley: exactly [01:59] poolie: Sorry BB refused your vote. Not sure why yet. [02:10] abentley: i'm not sure precisely which email address i am registered with [02:10] could you tell it to accept both @sourcefrog.net and @canonical? [02:11] You've got a bunch: Submitter(id=u'Martin Pool '), Submitter(id=u'Martin Pool '), Submitter(id=u'"Martin Pool" ') [02:11] But it looks like you don't have "Martin Pool" in quotation marks yet. [02:11] Fixing that now. [02:11] heh [02:20] abentley: perhaps you should extract the email address and match that? [02:21] Maybe, but email addresses aren't always unique. [02:25] poolie: I've just re-enqueued your vote. [02:28] poolie: Well, it failed, but for a legitimate reason now. [02:28] heh, what was that? [02:29] You didn't reply to the original request. [02:29] oh, replying to a reply won't do? [02:29] Not at present. [02:29] I'm trying to decide whether to use the References header, or actually record all the mail threads. [02:30] so [02:30] I like the current behaviour [02:30] because I can reply to a thread with a new patch [02:30] and there is no ambiguity [02:30] sure, that's an important case, but i think in this case there is no ambiguity about what i was reviewing either [02:31] abentley: well, at least now i know. [02:31] It's not very elegant, but maybe a "bb:review-of:" command for a down-thread review? [02:31] spiv, at that point i think i'd just use the web ui... [02:31] poolie: There would be ambiguity if it was a long thread and I used only the references header. [02:31] Yeah, that's true. [02:32] Because the thread could have two different merge requests. [02:32] abentley: i guess i'd try using References and objecting if it's ambiguous [02:32] i suppose if you record all the messages you would be able to determine which is the closest one [02:32] Right. [02:33] Unless someone actually managed to reply to two different messages at once, which RFC2822 permits :-) [02:37] lifeless: I [02:37] I'm not sure how changing the behavior would interfere with your use case. [02:38] Perhaps you think the supersed marker is based on mail headers? It's actually based on graph ancestry. [02:38] i think an actual ambiguity of that type would be rare, to put it mildly [02:38] were you asking me? i didn't think that. [02:39] No, I was asking lifeless. [02:49] jamesh: thanks for diagnosing the bzrtools ppa problem, i'll look at it now === mwhudson_ is now known as mwhudson [03:13] abentley: well I was saying that without having the full graph it would be ambiguous; anyhow, you've done nice things with bb to date; I trust that any change you make will still be nice [03:17] lifeless: I agree that voting would be ambiguous if I used the References header. But creating new merge requests is never ambiguous. [03:18] abentley: right, thats what I meant :P [03:18] I wasn't meaning that new requests would be ambigous [03:18] but that they could cause voting ambiguity [03:30] Ah, I misunderstood. [03:47] This is probably a pretty stupid question, but if I want to peruse a file's version history from my own (Python) program, there are public APIs for that, right? [03:49] yes [04:03] oh, good-- thank you. are they supplied with bzr, or do I have to install them specially? [04:04] marnanel: the public API is provided by the bzrlib Python package, which the bzr command line executable is built on top of [04:04] so if you have bzr installed, you have bzrlib [04:20] jamesh: awesome! thank you [04:21] jamesh: I figured it was something like that, but I thought it couldn't hurt to ask [04:43] Oh BundleBuggy, where art thou dear BundleBuggy? [05:01] abentley: bb seems hung again :-( [05:04] igc: Just seems slow to me. [05:04] abentley: ok - thanks for checking [05:26] One of the things that we've been doing to improve the perceived responsiveness of Bazaar is to improve the feedback in progress bars. [05:26] One place that I've noted that bzr still seems a bit wedged is when downloading monster larger packs. [05:27] I can tell from the system monitor that the network connection is maxed out, and looking at the file size one can see the file growing, so I knew full well it was doing something, but > 5 minutes with no change in the feedback given to the user seems a bit long. [05:28] Would it be wrong to give a wget style indication of the amount of data to be transferred and/or percent done (in bytes, rather than "0/2") ? [05:28] and is such a thing even possible? [05:29] (presumably if http:// as the transport it would be, I would have thought it would be with bzr:// too, but I'm not sure on which internals are relevant) [05:31] i'm sure i've seen such things talked about [05:33] mwhudson: yeah. I wasn't sure if anything specifically on that had been done during the 1.4 cycle. [05:33] i don't think so [05:33] if so, then I wouldn't have worried further about it, otherwise, when I start telling people about this repository I'll have to warn them in big letters not to freak out that it's taking so long with apparently no feedback. [07:12] AfC: I believe it is specifically a defect in the smart server stream handling [07:12] AfC: pack downloads do show a progress bar [07:12] AfC: I'm not aware of anyone actively working on the bug, but I pretty sure there is a bug open. [07:13] lifeless: ... "pack downloads"; it did have a progress bar; it's just that "0/2" for ~ 300 seconds isn't terribly illuminating, that's all [07:14] AfC: what url [07:16] lifeless: http://www.gnome.org/~afcowie/bzr/gtk+/trunk/ [07:22] spiv: ^ can you tell if there is a smart server at that url ? [07:22] spiv: (I can, but it should be easier) [07:23] lifeless: (I certainly didn't put one there, but I can ask Olav if necessary; I don't think he did anything fancy) [07:24] (and, netstat on that server doesn't report anything on 4155) [07:24] AfC: we tunnel over http [07:25] lifeless: judging from -Dhpss logging, no. [07:25] lifeless: only if someone has configured mod_python etc to do so, right? [07:25] Or mod_wsgi or whatever, yeah. [07:25] spiv: 'it should be easier' :P [07:25] spiv: yeah [07:25] lifeless: agreed. :) [07:26] lifeless: anyway, there's no getting around the fact that that pack is ~180 MB (at least, not until shallow branches); I'm just angling at the first impression factor, that's all. [07:27] AfC: oh yeah [07:27] AfC: I think I know the problem; [07:27] Huh, I just got a bzr: ERROR: Pack '346df6b9e93adebf6a24a2231b3eda8d' already exists in when pushing [07:28] With current bzr.dev -- which apparently has the "Avoid pack name collisions when fetching all revisions" fix. [07:28] AfC: vila has the details, but I'm pretty sure there is a issue where http doesn't stream data to python [07:28] spiv: that fix is not needed for push/pull code paths; only for library api user. [07:29] AfC: so you end up with the 180 MB downloading between two lines of python code [07:29] lifeless: yippee! [07:30] That calls for a chocolate biscuit. [07:30] lifeless, AfC: I''ll have to check, but from memory, if you're using pycurl you get a bit less feedback (which, I realize, in your context, could mean *far* less feedback ;-) [07:30] lifeless: one thing I was going to ask you about | suggest was that it's pretty common for people to deliberately or accidentally interrupt such a large transfer [07:31] vila: I'm using... um, you mean, one isn't supposed to "use" curl? [07:31] and anyway, poolie filled a bug about using a progress bar at transport level and fixing *that* should give better feedback (with the some caveat for pycurl) [07:32] AfC: We have two http implementations: one based on pycurl, the other based on the python urllib2 module [07:32] pycurl is the default if installed [07:32] lifeless: so while ordinarily reducing round trips, etc is a goal we strive for, resumeability & robustness are also important [07:33] AfC: well, its robust today while not being resumable [07:33] lifeless: maybe an upper limit on pack size would be a good idea, ie, if I had to do 180 1 MB transfers, and am interrupted half way thought, resuming from there is a bit more palatable than re-transferring 100MB [07:34] (or, of course, resuing partial downloads) [07:34] AfC: the size of source pack doesn't influce resumability [07:34] / "continuing" / whaver [07:34] AfC: its all about data insertion [07:34] a single insertion is atomic [07:34] well, right now it's about downloading a 180MB file [07:34] a single insertion must meet topological ordering across the entire set being downloaded [07:35] poolie: ping, can *you* access to lp bug #183705 ? [07:35] Bug 183705 on http://launchpad.net/bugs/183705 is private [07:36] (and all the usual patterns of download management that go with it, yeay `wget -c`) [07:36] poolie: and tell me if there is something I can do about it ? [07:37] vila: ah, ok, so using pycurl is the preference. Good, that's the way things land here. [07:38] AfC: hehe, *my* preference is to use urllib2 :) But that doesn't verify ssl certificates otherwise that will be the default :) [07:38] vila: [ah, I was wondering what the difference was] [07:39] vila: fixed [07:40] AfC: uhm, packs are not downloaded as a binary blob, desired hunks from it are grabbed with a readv [07:43] lifeless: thanks, I'd be interested in the explanation of why I couldn't access it and why I could *now* access it though :) [07:44] AfC: I appreciate the point that resuming is nice; but its simply not up there compared to the current performance issues we have. [07:44] AfC: and as its not dealing with static content, wget -c and other download managers like torrents are not good examples to draw from [07:44] lifeless: interesting [07:45] lifeless: so, speculating, if you know you need the entire content of pack, wouldn't it be cheaper to just fire off a thread and bring that back in, lock stock and barrel? [07:46] but other than that, very interesting indeed. [07:46] AfC: we don't know if we need the entire content of a given pack a priori - ever [07:46] really? [07:46] weird. [07:46] we have to read the inventories from a revision X to know the text keys we want [07:46] not weird; its a DAG of data [07:47] lifeless: yeah yeah, but I thought you had an index of inventory to which pack contained the text you needed [07:47] and vice versa [07:47] we have indices for accessing named data keys [07:47] (the reverse indicating "yes, we need all of it") [07:48] and the file and revision graphs are cached in the index [07:50] New bug: #183705 in bzr "authentication.conf doesnt provide sftp login password" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/183705 [07:51] vila: it was embargoed [07:51] vila: so that only subscribers could look at it, and had only the security contact and filer as subscribers able to access it [07:54] AfC: over the smart protocol we can order data so that we can perform multiple small insertions if we want to [07:54] lifeless: So I'd say there is a workflow bug there since no-one answered it for 4 months :-/ I better understand codeslinger angryness (I'd call that mitigating circumstance :) [07:55] AfC: but over http doing that will give us many roundtrips [07:55] AfC: (more than just whatever fraction of 180MB we decide to split the download size into) [07:56] because of the need to maintain the local consistency at any insertion point [08:06] vila/lifeless: perhaps the security team should be a team, so that such bugs can be looked at by more than just poolie (the bzr security contact) [08:06] you'd want a restricted or moderated team, of course [08:09] makes sense to me [08:09] I'd use the bzr team myself [08:09] for real security vulnerabilities, does it make sense to expose them to that many people by default? [08:10] you can always expand the subscriber list of a bug, but it is harder to put secrets back in the box [08:13] jamesh: I have a simple view on trust. [08:15] lifeless: it isn't just you that matters though. [08:16] If I find a serious security bug in Bazaar, I might be a bit hesitant to use Launchpad and disclose it to that many people. [08:18] jamesh: well, make it a private team with hidden membership [08:18] jamesh: then you can't tell [08:18] except that we don't allow that ... [08:18] jamesh: just saying [08:25] bah [08:25] bzr: ERROR: Connection error: Couldn't resolve host 'bazaar-vcs.org' (-2, 'Name or service not known') [08:25] transient error [08:25] nothing else barfs on it :( [08:34] night all [08:44] Hi, I'm attempting to convert an svn repository with multiple branches to bazaar. and I have a few questions. === mr-rus1 is now known as mr-russ [08:44] does each branch become a separate bzr branch? [08:45] how to svn tags fit into bzr and the possible branches? eg branch 1.1 with tag 1.1.2 [08:49] 1) yes [08:50] excellent, I'm beginning to understand this stuff. [09:20] * igc dinner [09:30] mr-russ: I recently did a conversion using svn2bzr quite successfully [09:30] mr-russ: it creates branches for trunk, stuff in branches/ and tags/ [09:30] (with appropriate relationships when copies occur) [09:31] I used a simple post-processing script to covert the branches in tags/ to bzr tags [09:35] Morning. [09:37] hello [09:59] jamesh: where would I get a post processing script that does svn tags -> bzr tags [10:01] mr-russ: http://people.ubuntu.com/~jamesh/add-tags.py [10:02] mr-russ: the first argument is the branch you want to apply tags to, and the second is the directory containing the tag branches [10:06] I"ve tried to get a copy of svn2bzr, but I'm confused about how to get a working one. [10:06] I downloaded your branch, but it doesn't seem to be working. [10:07] in what way? [10:09] trunk/svn2bzr file:///home/mr-russ/dev/home/svn/civian/ civian-bzr-all [10:09] what paste do we use? [10:09] mr-russ: svn2bzr tags a Subversion dump file as input [10:09] svn2bzr [options] [10:09] usage says svn-url [10:10] hmm. I'd recommend using svn2bzr from lp:~niemeyer/svn2bzr/trunk [10:11] it only works from dump files [10:11] how does one know which branch to choose? [10:12] mr-russ: you need to use the --scheme option to tell it how your repo is laid out [10:12] you probably want --scheme=trunk or --scheme=project [10:12] the first is for use if you have a single-project repo with toplevel /trunk, /branches and /tags directories [10:13] the second is for use if you have a multi-project repo with project1/trunk, projcect1/branches, project1/tags, project2/trunk, project2/branches, project2/tags, etc [10:14] it will then have enough information to tell if a tree copy is creating a new branch/tag [10:14] jamesh: I meant when downloading bzr branches from launchpad. svn2bzr didn't have an obvious download to run the conversion. [10:14] mr-russ: ah. niemeyer hasn't set his branch as the default one [10:14] if he had, then it'd be marked as the development focus and you could just do "bzr branch lp:svn2bzr" [10:15] I'll remind him to fix it :) [10:15] yeah, the trunk like is broken and very confusing when you link from the bazaar website. [10:15] thanks. it will help others I'm sure. [10:36] anyone knows if bzr-git usable ? [10:37] asabil: not really [10:37] asabil: it allows you to use bzr viz / bzr log on git repositories [10:37] I see [10:37] asabil: but that's it afaik [10:38] thanks for the information [11:09] hi. does bazaar leave a lot or randomly named files in ~ ? [11:10] it shouldn't do [11:10] what names are you seeing? [11:10] hm,. i see a lot of them, which started showing up areound the time i started using bazaar. wanted to make sure they werent related [11:11] all have 6 characters, seem random, like a hash of some form [11:12] like QIu2Xk [11:12] I doubt they are from bzr, I've not seen them. [11:13] Yeah, that doesn't sound like bzr. [11:13] k, thanks [11:13] I'd guess that something is using $HOME for $TMP [11:13] lsof might tell you what owns them if they are still open. [11:41] jml: hi! Does tribunal support subunit yet? [11:41] jelmer: soon! [11:42] New bug: #223585 in bzr "Bzr crashes with MemoryError during branch on OS X" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/223585 [11:42] I've just started trying out bzr-svn and made my first commit back to the svn repository. I've noticed that a number of properties (bzr:revision-info, etc.) are set on the parent branch directory in subversion. Are these required? I'm asking because the other developers on this project might not like loads of properties being set around the place. If that is the only property that will be set then it might not be such a problem. [11:45] semslie: yes, they're required - without them bzr wouldn't be able to do the right thing when you branch from svn [11:46] jelmer: At first I thought they were on all committed files, but it looks like they are only set on the branch directory, so it might not be such a problem [11:47] hopefully the extreme productivity boost from bzr will justify the extra info in trac :) [11:49] there is a trac option to hide certain properties === mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch [11:56] devilsadvocate: using gedit ? [11:56] asabil, no. kde / kate [11:56] devilsadvocate: check the settings for kate then [11:57] you will also get backup files if you use bzr revert [12:01] New bug: #223597 in bzr-loom ""record" is underdocumented" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/223597 [12:09] jelmer: thanks. That might help [12:16] New bug: #223601 in bzr-loom "up-thread: ERROR: Revision {('',)} not present" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/223601 [12:52] abentley: BB seems to be having issues (specifically with looking at a merge request, but the problem may be more general). [12:53] abentley: The problem is more general (I know that now the front page has loaded :p). === mrevell-lunch is now known as mrevell [13:03] hi, what's the current recommended way to send commit emails? [13:03] the server-side crontab script is buggy as hell [13:34] Bazaar refuses to take a folder in "bzr add foo" it says foo is ignored... yet its not in my .bzrignore list === mw|out is now known as mw [13:44] onno: Using 'bzr ignored' will give you a list of files and the patterns that they match to be ignored. [13:45] yeah but its not in there. I found out it is in the repo but won't put it in my project when I do bzr update [13:45] I updated my system from 7.10 to 8.04 ubuntu yesterday... Could this be the cause? [13:46] onno: Could you paste the command you're using and the output you get somewhere? [13:46] hello [13:46] bzr update [13:46] how can i have bzr automatically replace version/revision tags in a file? [13:47] project/nieuwsbrief/templatetags/ [13:47] I don't got any error messages [13:47] it simple not ther [13:49] I just did a new checkout all seems fine now [13:50] onno: OK, good. [13:51] Stavros: Do you mean in the same way CVS does with things in betweens $s? [13:51] still strange that I need to do this [13:51] Odd_Bloke: hmm, probably, i'm not sure about that [13:51] Stavros: Well, if so, it can't currently. [13:51] hmm [13:53] any idea why it's telling me that bzrlib doesn't match the bzr program? i'm on a mac [13:55] does anyone know where i can see my repo code on launchpad? i can't find it :/ [13:56] oh nm, browse code :/ [13:58] hmm, how come pushing to launchpad doesn't ask me for a password? [13:59] Stavros: SSH keys [13:59] Stavros: because you're using the ssh key you've specified to launchpad [14:00] ah, i didn't know it used the keys for login, thanks [14:01] another beginner bzr-svn question: I'm wanting to start using bazaar as transparently as possible with the other developers on my project. Right now I have a mirror checkout and a local branch of that which I've worked on. My changes are ready, so I've merged back to the mirror checkout and then I want to commit that back to the svn repo. Unfortunately this means that I think I will end up with the commit messages that were part of the fix in my local b [14:04] semslie: You got cut off after 'of the fix in my local'. [14:05] long question :) here's the rest: [14:05] "... fix in my local branch, and an extra message along the lines of 'merged changes', which isn't as transparent as I would like at the moment. Is there a way for my to just have just those commit messages involved in the fix committed?" [14:07] semslie: Well, if you merge into the integration branch, you will only get a single commit in the mainline. [14:08] If you only want commits related to the fix you've made, then that should really have been done in its own integration branch. [14:09] Ack, it's own _feature_ branch. [14:11] Odd_Bloke: So is it best to leave out the 'mirror checkout' in this case altogether? [14:13] isn't the bzr installer supposed to add a script to /usr/bin/bzr? [14:14] semslie: Well, the mirror checkout could double as your integration branch (i.e. you merge into that from your feature branch and then commit to SVN from there). [14:14] Stavros: Which bzr installer? [14:14] 1.4rc2 [14:14] the .tar one [14:15] hmm, actually it copies it to /usr/local/bin/bzr [14:15] which is not in my path, for some reason [14:15] this is odd [14:15] Odd_Bloke: cool, thats what I was going for. When I commit from the integration branch will it commit any merged changes as a single subversion commit? [14:15] nm, it works now that i restarted the shell [14:21] semslie: Yes, Subversion only sees the mainline commits. [14:22] Odd_Bloke: that makes total sense now. Thanks! [14:25] semslie: No worries. :) [14:31] this is out of topic, but does anyone know how i can strip all html from a document with beautifulsoup? [14:33] morning [14:35] jam: Morning. [14:41] hi! [14:42] Kbyte, are you a 1000 bytes or a 1024 bytes? [14:44] pekuja: I'm a 1024 bytes. :) [14:46] Damn, my boss want to buy ms team because bzr doesn't have a good frontend for windows. I'm so sad :( [14:47] Kbyte: Mark Hammond is working hard on getting that fixed (tortoisebzr) [14:47] Kbyte: Probably too late for you though [14:49]