Monday, 2022-06-13

*** kylel1 is now known as kylel07:10
lkclghostmansd[m], apparently you put the RFP into the wrong category (the one submitted on 2022jun10)11:18
lkclNLnet had to manually check the project code, hunting on the bugtracker, to get it right11:18
lkcli have no idea what they're talking about because they don't send me copies of the RFPs, only a "notification" which contains a date timestamp and the project code... which in this case was wrong.11:25
ghostmansd[m]lkcl, but I haven't submitted any RFPs on Jun 1012:26
ghostmansd[m]The most recent I had submitted is on Jun 812:27
ghostmansd[m]That one was indeed 2019-10-046. But it was in the same category as the previous ones which were approved.12:37
ghostmansd[m]Considering that this was the third or fourth RFP for the child task of 550, and others were accepted, I assumed everything is OK. I'll simply return to sending a y RFP again, if it was indeed my fault.12:39
ghostmansd[m]If it was me, I'm sorry for any inconvenience it might have caused.12:40
lkclghostmansd[m], the chain is:14:42
lkcland 150 (the Project) is 2019-10-032 not 2019-10-04614:42
ghostmansd[m]Ok, got it. So it was wrong from the very beginning. 833, 844 and 834 were all submitted as 2019-10-046. I think I only sent 833 to you, but all these were the same, except for sum and task id.14:46
ghostmansd[m]Anyway, I'll send the further RFPs templates to you, excluding address and banking. I admit that's my fault. I guess the next to be sent is 847, I'll prepare RFP today and send to you.14:48
ghostmansd[m]Again, my apologies.14:48
ghostmansd[m]I think I took 032 from some previous RFP.14:49
lkclyes have to watch that14:50
lkclno don't re-submit the RFPs14:50
lkclNLnet have already corrected it14:50
lkclok what i've done is, i've changed the dropdown name to include the NLnet project code15:00
octaviuswhen do you make the decision to add the name of the payee in square brackets for the TOML format? Because at first I saw you write user=AMOUNT, then [user]\namount = AMOUNT15:12
ghostmansd[m]lkcl, adding the drop-down code is perfect!15:45
ghostmansd[m]As for other changes, I'm really lost now, I don't understand the changes and relationship for 550 et al.15:45
ghostmansd[m]emails on this are useless and even harmful, I guess15:49
ghostmansd[m]lkcl, I've just sent RFP template for 847 to your gmail17:59
programmerjakeoctavius: whenever you like or need more than just the amount field: `name = 12345` is shorthand for `[name]\namount = 12345` or `name = {amount = 12345}`18:05
programmerjake(last 2 are same in toml format, they both allow adding `paid` and `submitted` fields, unlike the shorthand)18:05
ghostmansdAhem, I didn't pay attention that in 847 we made a new script, not modified ppc64-gdb-gcc... Shouldn't we drop that one?18:05
ghostmansdI think we should either: a) migrate gcc and its prerequisites to some script like gcc-install; 2) create some script called toolchain-install and have all the stuff there18:10
octaviusThanks programmerjake!18:23
ghostmansd[m]lkcl, I've updated 660, 656, 657, 712 so that they finally appear as paid. I inserted November 1 as "paid date", since I don't even recall when these were paid. Since dumb asses from Wise deactivated my account, I cannot even see when I received the payment.20:08
ghostmansd[m]I don't get why 845 and 849 appear as "completed but not yet paid".20:12
programmerjakehmm, maybe a bug in the budget-sync program...20:14
ghostmansd[m]Perhaps yes. Initially they were with budget and in "confirmed" state. I tried moving them to "in progress". The result is the same: completed but not yet paid.20:16
ghostmansd[m]Perhaps the fact they have budget?...20:17
programmerjakeah, yeah, it counts you being in the payee list as it being completed for you...maybe that should change20:24
lkclghostmansd[m], btw unless absolutely everyone has submitted RFPs, generally it's kiinda not ok to close the bugreport as "FIXED" because it disappears from searches unless you go explicitly to "advanced"20:46
lkclgood to have the "paid=" date if you've actually been paid. i have a shed-ton of those to do, sigh20:48
ghostmansd[m]lkcl, what'd be the right way? Simply putting "paid" and this is it?20:57
ghostmansd[m]I've been mostly dealing with the output mdwm file ghostmansd.mdwn, checking how to affect the state so that it corresponds to the state "completed".20:58
programmerjakebudget-sync will show bugs that are resolved fixed for all those people in the payee list...imho setting it to resolved should be done, and then people should look at the budget-sync output markdown for themselves20:58
programmerjakedone only if everyone's work for that bug is complete, of course21:00
ghostmansd[m]I think I set these to "resolved fixed", let me check.21:04
programmerjakefor budget-sync, any resolved setting is equivalent21:13
ghostmansd[m]Yeah these are "resolved fixed". What should be the state?21:13
programmerjakeimho resolved fixed is fine if everyone's tasks for those bugs are done, because budget-sync will keep track of them for you. lkcl apparently disagrees however21:15
programmerjakeimho all those bugs you posted look fine to me, i didn't read all the comments however so idk if all of everyone's tasks were completed21:19
Veera[m]ghostmansd[m]: Hi, Regarding Bug #84721:20
ghostmansd[m]I'm here Veera[m]21:38
ghostmansd[m]Not for a long though, it's almost midnight where I reside :-)21:39
Veera[m]ghostmansd[m]: just running 'ldconfig' resolves the issue! I will adjust the script so that it works by default21:46
Veera[m]...checked by running the script in new chroot21:47
ghostmansd[m]Ok, that's what I mean by my latest comment :-)22:01

Generated by 2.17.1 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!