[04:25] <sorush20> why dosen't ubuntu sell webhosting? 
[04:27] <Nafallo> does Debian?
[04:27] <Kamion> sorush20: (a) do you mean Canonical rather than Ubuntu? (b) not really our business model, we already use just about all the bandwidth we can at release time :)
[04:31] <sorush20> Kamion: well Canonical I don't know what they do except provided support for the software , 2)what do you mean ubuntu are they not the same? Well cononical could buy extra bandwidth and sell it off cheaper.. making sure that the customers know that since they are not using their bandwith , it would be used as downloads for ubuntu iso's etc.. 
[04:31] <sorush20> Nafallo: does debia? 
[04:32] <Nafallo> no, they doesn't. debian is a linuxdistro, not a webhotel :-).
[04:32] <Nafallo> same as ubuntu :-)
[04:33] <Kamion> quite frankly, you're better off with a dedicated web hosting service instead of trying to persuade Canonical to do it on top of the zillion other things we're currently doing ...
[04:34] <sorush20> Kamion: what zillion other things are you doing? how many customers do you have? 
[04:34] <Kamion> no, Canonical and Ubuntu are not the same. Canonical started Ubuntu and still provides a big chunk of the development work, but there are many other folks involved now.
[04:35] <Kamion> Developing Ubuntu, for a start. Developing Launchpad. Supporting paying customers (I don't have the figures). Promotion in developing countries. Etc.
[04:40] <sorush20> so you could make something like tripod but with out adverts so that people could pay for hosting without adverts and would have to agree to have no support just irc and foums, ? 
[04:41] <ogra> nope. we couldnt
[04:41] <ogra> simply because there is no spare manpower for such stuff
[04:42] <Kamion> we'd have to employ extra sysadmins, buy more datacentre space (I believe our current datacentre is completely full), hire people to run that service, etc. I very much doubt it will happen. People should go to web hosting companies for web hosting, not free software development companies. :)
[04:43] <sorush20> you don't need man power make it interactive and self sustanied.. 
[04:43] <Kamion> why are you so keen on trying to persuade us?
[04:43] <Kamion> (and yes, actually, you *do* need manpower)
[04:43] <ogra> absolutely
[04:43] <Kamion> services don't run themselves
[04:43] <Mithrandir> you need to change disks, fans, replace stuff which breaks, tend to breakins, etc.
[04:44] <sorush20> well if you were a sysadmin you would say that wouldn;t you cause that would me more work
[04:44] <Kamion> I'm not a sysadmin
[04:45] <sorush20> I would be much happier to pay ubuntu or what ever you wana call it for hosting since it going to contribute
[04:45] <Kamion> doing this would be more likely to detract from our normal functions, I think, so I'd ask that you don't
[04:45] <sorush20> so howmany customer do you have right now who have paid you ? 
[04:45] <Kamion> as I say, I genuinely don't have the figures.
[04:46] <Nafallo> sorush20: get a cheap webhotel somewhere else and send the Ubuntu Foundation what you spare then? :-)
[04:46] <Nafallo> :-)
[04:48] <thom> sorush20: i don't see why you'd want a linux distro to distract itself by doing something that's so far off the rest of its core competencies
[04:52] <ogra> thom !!
[04:52] <ogra> bah, gone
[05:01] <Kamion> the only kind of hosting I believe is on the agenda is the supermirror, i.e. mirroring people's revision control branches for them
[05:01] <Kamion> that's very specialised though and I don't think it's what you're asking about
[11:01] <kjcole> Showtime?
[11:01] <LaserJock> should be
[11:02] <mdke> yeah, who is around?
[11:02] <mdke> <-- Matthew East
[11:03] <mdke> cool
[11:03] <mdke> ah hey jeffsch 
[11:03] <mdke> let's kick off with your item :)
[11:04] <jeffsch> ok
[11:04] <mdke> agenda is here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DocumentationTeam/MeetingAgenda
[11:04] <mdke> jeffsch, do you want to go ahead and outline your proposal?
[11:04] <jeffsch> C is locale for ANSI C programs
[11:05] <jeffsch> doc processing tools don't always understand the C locale
[11:05] <jeffsch> we should use the "en" locale as our default
[11:05] <bustacap> I think the "C" locale extends beyond ANSI C programs..
[11:05] <jeffsch> yeah, into GNOME docs
[11:05] <bustacap> Solaris CDE uses "C" everywhere for it's desktop icons, etc..
[11:06] <mdke> jeffsch, what are the advantages/disadvantages?
[11:06] <bustacap> "C" is the old school version of default..
[11:06] <Mithrandir> I'm semi-around, but not part of the docteam.  Tollef Fog Heen
[11:06] <mdke> evening robotgeek, we're just on the first agenda item
[11:06] <jeffsch> advantage is having en for use in processing tools
[11:07] <Mithrandir> C doesn't give you UTF8 support, for instance.
[11:07] <jeffsch> xsltproc doesn't know C locale, but will use en as fallover
[11:07] <mdke> don't our processing tools use en anyway?
[11:07] <mdke> as fallback?
[11:07] <jeffsch> other tools choke on C locale
[11:08] <bustacap> is there a way to move to it all to "en" and symlink C -> en ?
[11:08] <jeffsch> mdke: yeah, that's what those warnings are when building docs
[11:08] <bustacap> that's the standard practice..
[11:08] <bustacap> that should cover both basis..
[11:08] <jeffsch> svn can't do symlinks, iirc
[11:08] <bustacap> haha yeah..
[11:08] <mdke> so the disadvantages?
[11:08] <bustacap> I was talking about when it is installed..
[11:09] <kjcole> Are there any advantages to "C" (assuming one has control over the whole universe of docs -- i.e. not worrying about what Solaris or anyone else does)?
[11:09] <Mithrandir> kjcole: it's a fallback which any language will fall back to if their normal language/locale isn't available.
[11:10] <mdke> if we move to en, do we lose that fallback?
[11:10] <jeffsch> a C program uses the C locale until it calls setlocale()
[11:10] <jeffsch> mdke: no
[11:10] <mdke> ok, so any disadvantages you know?
[11:10] <jeffsch> yeah, the transition from one to the other
[11:11] <mdke> shoot
[11:11] <mdke> what does it take?
[11:11] <jeffsch> mostly just changing C to en everywhere it occurs
[11:11] <Mithrandir> it seems slightly unclear to me what exactly do you mean by moving from C to en.  Do you mean changing the default language code of the English documentation from C to en or something else?
[11:11] <jeffsch> including in the omf files
[11:11] <Mithrandir> (like, changing the LANG setting in the build environment)
[11:12] <jeffsch> Mithrandir: changing <book lang="C">
[11:12] <jeffsch> to <book lang="en">
[11:12] <Mithrandir> so the former, then.
[11:12] <jeffsch> yeah
[11:13] <robotgeek> a bash script can do that?
[11:13] <mdke> and the place the docs are installed would have to change too?
[11:13] <jeffsch> yeah, anything in a C folder would be in an en folder
[11:14] <Mithrandir> you'd have to make sure that "en" would be fallen back to if localised docs weren't available.
[11:14] <bustacap> what are the processing tools that are disadvantaged by the current setup?
[11:15] <jeffsch> xsltproc shows a warning that it does not understand C, and is using en instead
[11:15] <jeffsch> the last time i used java tools, (about a year ago) they choked on C locale
[11:15] <LaserJock> I have <!ENTITY language "en"> and <book lang="&language;"> in the packaging guide. Is that not C then? 
[11:15] <jeffsch> &language resolves to C in global.ent
[11:16] <LaserJock> so why is <!ENTITY language "en"> there?
[11:16] <jeffsch> dunno
[11:16] <LaserJock> I just stole it from the server guide I think
[11:16] <mdke> jeffsch, how long do you estimate the transition would take, and do you envisage doing it before dapper?
[11:17] <jeffsch> it took me about an hour to test it on desktop guide and server guide on my wc
[11:17] <jeffsch> included changing and building, and fixing places i forgot
[11:17] <mdke> did you build a package and test?
[11:18] <jeffsch> no
[11:18] <mdke> would there be likely to be any problems?
[11:18] <jeffsch> scrollkeeper omf files would need to be changed
[11:18] <mdke> yes, and debian/install
[11:18] <mdke> Mithrandir, any idea if this would produce bugs? can we go ahead and do it safely pre-dapper you think?
[11:19] <mdke> dholbach, your opinion too would be awesome, if you are around
[11:19] <jeffsch> it should be similar to adding anyother locale such as fr
[11:19] <Mithrandir> mdke: I don't know scrollkeeper well enough.  Try it on a localised install and see what blows up?
[11:19] <mdke> ok
[11:20] <mdke> for me, it sounds fine, if jeffsch can test it a little bit and commit, no problems here
[11:20] <bustacap> the "C" fallback should be the main thing to test
[11:20] <mdke> yeah
[11:21] <jeffsch> ok, i'll commit some stuff in the next day or so... i'll keep the images in the C folder though to keep the bandwith impact lower
[11:21] <mdke> svn mv shouldn't impact on bandwidth i don't think
[11:22] <mdke> jeffsch, could you try a package before committing?
[11:22] <jeffsch> i was thinking having the two side by side for testing
[11:22] <mdke> ah
[11:22] <jeffsch> i would have to learn packaging, so it would take another day or so, if i find the time 
[11:22] <Mithrandir> if you move stuff, move it properly and don't care about bandwidth impact.
[11:23] <jeffsch> ok
[11:23] <mdke> jeffsch, just look in debian/install and change the values, it's pretty obvious
[11:23] <Mithrandir> this might need to be fixed by somebody who comes along in a year or two and the bandwidth you save today will then just cause headaches then.
[11:23] <jeffsch> yeah
[11:24] <mdke> ok cool
[11:24] <mdke> any more on this item?
[11:25] <jeffsch> nope. i'll test and commit and see what happens
[11:25] <mdke> great
[11:25] <mdke> next item is the rearranging of the desktopguide meeting
[11:26] <jeffsch> hopefully by monday
[11:26] <mdke> i was hoping for a meeting on the desktopguide by those who are likely to contribute
[11:27] <mdke> Madpilot isn't here right now
[11:27] <mdke> perhaps we can coordinate a quick meeting via the mailing list?
[11:27] <bustacap> I am looking at filling in a few of the TODO sections..
[11:27] <robotgeek> does it count for the Kubuntu too, right?
[11:27] <mdke> robotgeek, sure
[11:28] <robotgeek> oaky, if the rest of the ppl aren't here, it may be best to do this by mailing list/launchpad poll
[11:28] <bustacap> yep
[11:28] <mdke> last item then, I think
[11:28] <robotgeek> scratch the poll, it's only going to be 5 ppl or so :)
[11:28] <mdke> over to you bustacap 
[11:29] <bustacap> mdke, I am not too sure if there are many UDSF folk in the room..
[11:29] <robotgeek> manicka ping
[11:29] <bustacap> it was a little short notice..
[11:29] <mdke> was there something you wanted to raise anyhow?
[11:29] <bustacap> yeah sure..
[11:30] <bustacap> at the 'next' meeting, we talk with some senior members of UDSF and talk about getting new help documents included into the offical docs rather than being posted in the forums..
[11:31] <bustacap> new HowTo can be originally created into the Wiki
[11:31] <bustacap> and new FAQs could be inserted into the starter guide..
[11:31] <bustacap> the HowTos should be the easier of the two..
[11:32] <bustacap> leaving the forum as a pure helpdesk service
[11:32] <bustacap> which it is good at
[11:32] <mdke> ok that is quite a complicated discussion. You'll need to include the forum administrators
[11:32] <bustacap> yeah..
[11:32] <bustacap> most of the UDSF team are the forum admins, but yes we do need them as well..
[11:32] <LaserJock> do the UDSF guys want to do that?
[11:32] <mdke> bustacap, no the admins are different
[11:33] <bustacap> LaserJock, they are all for copying existing docs into the wiki (or somebody else copying)
[11:33] <bustacap> but I am talking about new docs..
[11:34] <bustacap> the existing docs would take a long time..
[11:34] <mdke> LaserJock, i think it will be a long road. The first road is trying to convince the wiki and UDSF to merge, let alone get them to scrap the howto section in the forum
[11:34] <mdke> but it would be great to have the wiki and forums complementing each other
[11:34] <LaserJock> that's what I'm talking about. I didn't get the impression that they were closing the UDSF or anything
[11:34] <mdke> no, indeed
[11:35] <bustacap> the wiki is already filled with great info, I feel that there could be already great amounts of unneccessary duplication
[11:35] <Burgwork> USDF is mostly a lost cause
[11:35] <LaserJock> It sounded more like the doc team was welcome to take there info
[11:35] <Burgwork> we need to publicize the wiki more
[11:35] <bustacap> I agree on the need to promote the wiki much more in the forums
[11:35] <robotgeek> +1 
[11:36] <bustacap> that's where my main point is stemming from - there is very little mention of the wikis in forum posts from the "helpdesk teams"
[11:36] <bustacap> the guys who answer the most questions..
[11:36] <robotgeek> bustacap: i think azz on the forums mentioned that
[11:36] <mdke> there is a "how to post to the wiki" guide as a sticky in the howto section
[11:37] <bustacap> FYI, an invite was sent out to have the UDSF guys in attendance for this meeting..
[11:37] <Burgwork> I spoke to them extensively after the last CC meeting
[11:37] <bustacap> what was the outcome Burgwork?
[11:38] <Burgwork> we agreed to disagree about goals and left it at that
[11:38] <kjcole> I haven't spent much time in the forums.  Any sense of the audience percentage that understands the "living" nature of the wikis?
[11:38] <Burgwork> kjcole, most are probably not even aware of the wiki
[11:38] <mdke> bustacap, there is a bug link at the top
[11:38] <mdke> bug/big
[11:39] <kjcole> Burgwork, I meant the concept, not any specific wiki.
[11:39] <mdke> bustacap/burgwork
[11:39] <Burgwork> mdke, links to not make awareness
[11:39] <mdke> Burgwork, no, unless people click. But sometimes they do
[11:39] <Burgwork> kjcole, first they have to aware it exists, and then we can start thinking about having them  edit it
[11:40] <bustacap> I spoke to manicka at length last night as well Burgwork, but I think there needs to be a set meeting with fair numbers of the ubuntu-doc team, the forum admins and the UDSF team instead of 1-on-3 conversations..
[11:40] <rob> sorry, what is UDSF?
[11:40] <mdke> bustacap, ok you can take the lead on organising it
[11:40] <mdke> rob, the gwos wiki
[11:40] <rob> ah 
[11:41] <bustacap> mdke, yes, they have a wiki link to make the forums blend in with the rest of the official ubuntu pages..
[11:41] <kjcole> The few topics that I've looked at in the forum often end up being umpteen screens worth of corrections and updates to "good" answers (along with lots of little "Thank you. It worked." responses.)
[11:41] <kjcole> They'd really benefit from being wiki'd.
[11:41] <bustacap> kjcole, I like seeing 'thank you' and 'it worked' in forums when I am searching for a solution
[11:42] <bustacap> yes, wikis for documentation - forums for help
[11:42] <mdke> i like those wiki pages that say "discuss this guide [forumlink here] "
[11:42] <bustacap> mdke ++
[11:42] <kjcole> bustacap, yeah, it's nice.  I wasn't saying get rid of that.
[11:43] <bustacap> that should be used more often in the more important wiki pages
[11:43] <bustacap> I will look at trying to organise a meeting between the three interested parties in the near future..
[11:43] <mdke> ok to draw some conclusions, bustacap, you're going to organise a meeting?
[11:43] <mdke> cool
[11:43] <bustacap> I don't know who to contact for the forum administrators
[11:44] <mdke> bustacap, you can find them on the forum
[11:44] <bustacap> I mean the active senior admins..
[11:44] <mdke> there is a list
[11:44] <robotgeek> could we have a wiki article discussion section on the forums?
[11:45] <bustacap> "View Forum Leaders"
[11:45] <mdke> some kinda of automatic thing would be nice, in the future
[11:45] <bustacap> hah, must have missed that link last night..
[11:45] <Burgwork> I worry about splitting the forums up too much
[11:46] <LaserJock> one thing that somewhat bugs me (and maybe it's understandable) is that some of the forum admin/mods put UDSF in there signatures but not the Ubuntu wiki
[11:47] <LaserJock> I just seems to me that there isn't that much support for the Ubuntu wiki from within the forums and I don't understand why
[11:47] <robotgeek> LaserJock: the explanation to that apparently is that they know the answer on UDSF, but not in the Ubuntu wiki
[11:47] <LaserJock> robotgeek: but those are just general advertisements basically
[11:47] <mdke> there are some social barriers that we can eventually hope to break down
[11:47] <bustacap> Burgwork, what do you mean by splitting up?
[11:48] <Burgwork> bustacap, having many small forums is bad and balkanizes where people look for help
[11:48] <mdke> yeah, a "wiki article" section wouldn't work I don't think
[11:48] <bustacap> yes, there seems to be a breakaway from the official community, which is bad, we don't want to become another RedHat..
[11:49] <Burgwork> there are a number of issues with the forums divide and this is just one manifestation
[11:49] <mdke> absolutely
[11:49] <bustacap> sure
[11:49] <mdke> I don't think we can solve it, but meetings can't hurt
[11:50] <bustacap> yes, mdke, just making some progress and airing any issues with all major players present together in the same room should be a good start
[11:50] <robotgeek> we don't really need a section, i guess. Wiki:WikiWord or something referencing back to the wiki would work
[11:50] <mdke> ok, I'm off to bed now
[11:50] <bustacap> sweet, thanks mdke 
[11:50] <robotgeek> later mdke 
[11:51] <mdke> before I go, Burgwork and me and henrik have worked on the BetterWikiDocs spec, please feel free to have a look and comment
[11:52] <robotgeek> it is very nice, aesthetically :)
[11:53] <mdke> ok -> bed
[11:54] <robotgeek> alrite, later all