[06:37] <Mikek123> Okay I give up. How do I add release notes?
[06:42] <lifeless> well, you make a release...
[09:48] <candrea> Hi all! I'd like to link bug #762482 to the corresponding upstream bug (on github), but when I go to +choose-affected-product, insert the URL, and click "Add to bugreport", I get this message: "There is 1 error" without any explaination
[09:48] <candrea> the upstream bug is https://github.com/nose-devs/nose/issues/401
[10:08] <czajkowski> candrea: https://help.launchpad.net/Bugs/InterBugTracking  github isn't one of the supported upstream bug trackers
[10:09] <candrea> czajkowski: mh, thanks... the error message I was getting was a bit too vague
[13:22] <pmatulis> given that i was the creator of a bug and i also subscribed a team of which i am a member.  if i later remove my direct subscription will i still be subscribed (via the team)?
[13:23] <wgrant> pmatulis: You're wondering if you'll still have access to a private bug?
[13:23] <pmatulis> wgrant: ok, i can try to load the url can't i?  :)
[13:24] <wgrant> pmatulis: The team subscription will still let you see the bug, so you can unsubscribe yourself.
[13:24] <pmatulis> wgrant: i did that.  but will i still receive bugmail?
[13:25] <wgrant> pmatulis: Unless the team has a contact address configured instead, yes.
[13:25] <pmatulis> wgrant: thank you for your answer
[13:26] <wgrant> pmatulis: If you don't want bugmail you can use the mute button.
[13:28] <pmatulis> wgrant: ah ok
[15:22] <charles> Is there anyone who can help me with milestone permission errors? I'm looking to release some new indicators, but it looks like don't have permissions to create new milestones. For example <https://launchpad.net/indicator-session/12.10/+addmilestone> gives me a permission error and lp-project-upload gives me a 'newMilestone' error.
[16:24] <george_e> Can anyone figure out what went wrong here: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/109836897/buildlog.txt.gz
[16:25] <dobey> charles: hrmm, maybe bug #launchpad-ops as you do appear to be in the right team for that.
[16:25] <dobey> george_e: BzrCommandError: Invalid deb-version: {debupstream}-0~20120709~quantal1: Could not parse version: {debupstream}-0~20120709~quantal1
[16:25] <george_e> How come that's triggering an error?
[16:26] <george_e> That's supposed to be a valid substitution variable.
[16:26] <dobey> george_e: what is the version in your debian/changelog?
[16:26] <george_e> 0.2
[16:28] <mgz> is recipe version 0.4 working on builders these days? in the past 0.3 was the limit
[16:28] <mgz> something is inhibiting the expansion of {debupstream} at any rate.
[16:28] <george_e> I just switched to 0.4...
[16:28] <george_e> I needed to use {revdate}.
[16:29] <george_e> Is there something similar in 0.3 I can use instead?
[16:29] <mgz> george_e: so, the answer might be that 0.4 still doesn't work.
[16:29]  * mgz pokes jelmer for more
[18:18] <mlankhorst> why are there 24 i386 builders for ppa and only 14 amd64 ones? seems a bit unbalanced..
[18:22] <mlankhorst> And it's really frustrating when you're behind in line waiting on all the firefox, thunderbird, and chromium and libreoffice daily builds to clear because they all have to be done at the same time for all releases instead of sequentially
[19:26] <maxb> mlankhorst: Packages which are not architecture specific build only on the i386 builders, so the disparity isn't completely silly
[19:27] <maxb> Though 24/14 seems possibly a bit over-skewed
[20:45] <luzido> hi, where can i read help about add a comment to a bug-report?
[21:08] <mlankhorst> maxb: yeah the problem is that there's a huge difference between when my amd64 job is done and when i386 one is, usually the latter gets done right away while the former takes ages
[21:09] <dobey> luzido: what do you mean? if you are logged in, and have permissions to view a bug, you can add a comment to it. the text entry field should be displayed at the bottom of the comments.
[21:09] <dobey> mlankhorst: conversely, i very often see amd64 builds finishing before my i386 builds
[21:10] <lifeless> mlankhorst: we rebalance from time to time; arch all things only build on i386, so even if all other things were equal, there is more demand for i386.
[21:10] <maxb> Indeed, it varies
[21:10] <luzido> dobey: i recheck
[21:11] <maxb> If architecture skew is an issue (like it is for the Mercurial PPAs I manage) you can solve it by building in one PPA and copying completed builds to another
[21:11] <dobey> lifeless: it would be nice if arch all things could build on any available arch
[21:12] <lifeless> dobey: patches appreciated
[21:12] <lifeless> dobey: (in all seriousness, everyone would like that)
[21:12] <luzido> dobey: strange after reloading the page i can see the input-field now
[21:12] <dobey> yeah, i know. :)