Comment 3 for bug 509370

08:49 < lifeless> noodles775: the key thing I'd want to see is the ppa: url
08:49 < lifeless> noodles775: which is perhaps what you mean by 'actual PPA name'
08:49 < lifeless> noodles775: the problem being that many many people have a PPA called 'releases' :)
08:50 < noodles775> lifeless: by 'actual PPA name' I mean the IArchive.name property which is what is used in the URL. Including the complete URL has a few issues, the main being that the user *doesn't* have access to view the URL.
08:51 < noodles775> (and won't even when they are subscribed - they can download software, but not see the details of uploads etc.
08:52 < lifeless> noodles775: I don't understand the issue: the URL is what they add to add-apt-repository etc - its the unique key for the thing.
08:52 < lifeless> noodles775: I don't know what IArchive.name property /means/
08:52 < noodles775> lifeless: ah, the apt url - right, I thought you meant the LP url.
08:52 < lifeless> noodles775: but here is my test: If I can be confused because someone else has a similarly named PPA, then the bug won't be fixed.
08:53 < wgrant> The URL, or ppa:wgrant/ppa?
8:56 < noodles775> wgrant: right - As long as owner / ppa name is there it's sufficient to uniquely identify it. Currently the email includes the name, but not the owner (instead displaying info about the person who subscribed you, which won't always be the same)
08:57 < lifeless> wgrant: so, ppa:wgrant/ppa, and https://launchpad.net/~wgrant/+archive/ppa - either would be fine for me
08:57 < noodles775> Neither of those are actually accessible, but yes, the unique info is contained there.
08:57 < lifeless> and I don't want to pin noodles775 down to doing something that doesn't make sense, which is why I'm trying to keep it high level - that both the owner and url element, not the visible description, need to be visible.
08:58 < lifeless> noodles775: great, I shall be happy then
08:58 < noodles775> Yep, that's great. Thanks.