[03:49] <mpt> hrmm
[03:49] <mpt> Anyone know the command for printing info about the selected window?
[03:49] <mpt> what class it has, what its dimensions are, what process owns it, etc
[04:13] <LaserJock> mpt: xprop?
[04:18] <mpt> LaserJock, great, thanks
[04:18] <LaserJock> I've had to look that up myself. I just remember that it starts with an x ;-)
[08:27] <Madpilot> Burgundavia, https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-meta/+bug/37836
[08:28] <Burgundavia> Madpilot: why is that against ubuntu-meta?
[08:28] <Madpilot> hmm...it was supposed to be against ubuntu-desktop, because I couldn't find the name of the clock's package...
[08:31] <Madpilot> I'll switch it to gnome-panel
[08:31] <Burgundavia> already done so
[08:32] <robitaille> just wait next year when all the old OSes out there will pick the wrong day of the month to switch time...
[08:33] <robitaille> at least BC  will be the same than the US
[08:33] <rob> hi 
[08:34] <Madpilot> robitaille, yeah, that'll be fun. Or the poor Aussies right now, who had the time-change delayed by the Commonwealth Games, to the confusion of many computers...
[08:35] <rob> that was pretty bad.. lots of people got caught out
[08:35] <robitaille> personally I against the twice-yearly switch; let's pick one system, and stick with it all year round
[08:36] <rob> I live in a sane state that does just that
[08:36] <rob> hey if something was put together using sarma would you guys be intrested?
[08:36] <Burgundavia> rob: sarma would be cool to play with
[08:37] <Burgundavia> can sarma be merged with that docudo?
[08:37] <rob> its been stale for about 6 months now, but I finally got around to downloading it and setting up an apache server locally
[08:37] <Burgundavia> stale since soc
[08:37] <rob> I'm not all that failure with docudo
[08:38] <rob> yeah, I spoke to Danilo who mentioned that
[08:38] <rob> do you have a link to docudo?
[08:39] <Burgundavia> http://www.checkandshare.com/blog/?p=42
[08:39] <rob> just found that one :)
[08:39] <rob> I'll take a look at that one too (didn't know it existed)
[08:39] <Burgundavia> just started
[08:40] <Burgundavia> sort of wiki like, but has some features we want, such as being able to call a doc official
[08:40] <rob> I'll try to set something up for you guys to play with on a server somewhere once I know more and get something working
[08:40] <rob> ah docudo uses svn.. very cool (I was thinking about incorporating it)
[08:43] <Burgundavia> docudo would solve our "svn is only in one place bug", mostly
[08:43] <mdke> NOTABUG?
[08:49] <Burgundavia> mdke: ?
[08:50] <mdke> perhaps I just don't understand the bug, but what is wrong with svn being in one place?
[08:51] <Burgundavia> mdke: nothing
[08:53] <mdke> oh
[08:54] <Burgundavia> mdke: I mentioned that docudo solves the issue of having a centralized svn, by allowing easier editing access, both for new people and old
[08:55] <rob> mdke, it interfaces directly with svn
[08:55] <Burgundavia> the only issue that docudo doesn't solve is that of offline access, which could be fixed by changing the backend to bzr, which would be transparent to most editors
[08:55] <mdke> but if the problem is that svn is centralised, there are a bunch of decentralised version control systems around
[08:55] <mdke> including one based on svn
[08:56] <mdke> but I don't think that's the problem, I think we need a centralised system, personally
[08:57] <mdke> Madpilot, ping?
[08:57] <Madpilot> mdke, hi
[08:57] <mdke> hiya, just looking at the DG action
[08:58] <mdke> I'm not sure deb files and rpm files belong in the apt section, perhaps we should make another section
[08:58] <mdke> installing deb files isn't really a "command line installation" necessarily
[08:59] <Burgundavia> we can split the .deb stuff into command line and non-command line
[08:59] <Burgundavia> I just wanted to keep all the command line stuff safely firewalled in a section so labelled
[08:59] <mdke> we haven't done that elsewhere in the guide though
[08:59] <mdke> hmm
[09:00] <Burgundavia> where we can avoid it, we do
[09:00] <mdke> yes, but we don't firewall it
[09:00] <Madpilot> I'm inclined to leave the .deb stuff there, gdebi doesn't really need a section to itself, does it?
[09:01] <mdke> separating it from dpkg -i wouldn't work, i don't think
[09:03] <Burgundavia> why not?
[09:03] <mdke> Burgundavia, because it does exactly the same thing, and is only one line long
[09:03] <mdke> i think two different sections about installing a deb file would be overkill
[09:03] <Burgundavia> we could have a little section about downloading .debs, why it is bad and then how to instlal them
[09:04] <Burgundavia> by that same logic, why do we talk about apt-get in the desktop guide?
[09:05] <mdke> Burgundavia, that's hardly the same logic, managing programs is a much more complicated and important task, and lots of users prefer apt-get to other alternatives
[09:05] <mdke> how about a section entitled "installing single files" or something better worded, and including the deb and rpm sections in that
[09:05] <Burgundavia> help is not about why people prefer
[09:06] <Burgundavia> if you prefer apt-get, you likely already know enough that you are not going to look at the desktkop guide
[09:07] <mdke> I don't agree. the entire popularity of ubuntuguide.org was based on using command line expressions that people could pick up from that guide, even where they didn't know it already
[09:07] <Madpilot> It would be simple enough to add another section to the Add Apps chapter, stick the gdebi/dpkg/alien stuff there, and return apt-get to a chapter by itself...
[09:07] <mdke> Madpilot, do you like that solution?
[09:07] <Burgundavia> mdke: ubuntuguide.org is a different audience then the desktopguide
[09:07] <mdke> Burgundavia, again, I disagree.
[09:07] <Madpilot> mdke, I don't mind it...
[09:08] <rob> oh, btw mdke regarding your email about About Ubuntu the other day, I'm pretty sure some of that stuff I wrote.. its up to you if you want to include my name anywhere though
[09:08] <mdke> Madpilot, do you prefer another solution?
[09:08] <Madpilot> Burgundavia, ubuntuguide.org is exactly our target audience, I'd have thought
[09:08] <mdke> yes it is
[09:08] <mdke> rob, thanks
[09:08] <Burgundavia> ahhh...
[09:08] <Burgundavia> never mind, lets release with what we have and have this discuss for dapper+!
[09:09] <Madpilot> mdke, I can't offhand think of a better way to sort it out; I think the gdebi/dpkg stuff should stay in the UDG
[09:09] <mdke> me too
[09:09] <mdke> cool, unless we think of a better solution, I'll do that today at some stage
[09:09] <mdke> rob, I'll definitely include you, of course
[09:09] <rob> :) thanks mdke 
[09:09] <Madpilot> I'll do it now, mdke 
[09:09] <mdke> rob, any idea if anyone else is missing?
[09:10] <rob> some of that stuff came from the user guide, not sure who wrote it though
[09:11] <mdke> I wrote quite a lot of those sections
[09:11] <rob> you might be ok then
[09:11] <mdke> and it's been changed enough since then to not worry too much, I guess
[09:14] <Burgundavia> mdke: have ever read Paul Graham's piece about hard problems?
[09:14] <mdke> Burgundavia, i don't think so
[09:15] <Burgundavia> basically, he said "ask yourself 'what is the hardest problem in my field' and 'why am I not working on it?'
[09:16] <Burgundavia> to me, the hardest problem in our field is not the target audience of ubuntuguide, it is grandma
[09:16] <mdke> ok.
[09:16] <Burgundavia> that is where I want the desktop guide to be targeted at
[09:16] <mdke> to me, both those audiences can be and are accomodated in the desktop guide
[09:16] <mdke> i don't like the phrase "target audience"
[09:16] <Burgundavia> heh
[09:16] <mdke> especially without any research
[09:17] <Burgundavia> if you don't identify who are writing for, then how the hell can even begin to think about how to meet their needs?
[09:17] <mdke> because it's important to write in a language which all can understand
[09:17] <Burgundavia> it is more than just language
[09:17] <mdke> if grandma speaks english, and ubuntuguide readers speak english, they should both be able to understand the document
[09:17] <Burgundavia> it is also some basic assumptions
[09:18] <Burgundavia> he
[09:18] <Burgundavia> h
[09:18] <mdke> while we're on the subject though, there are hardly any grandmas who use Ubuntu, and lots of ubuntuguide.org readers
[09:18] <mdke> i can say that without any research
[09:19] <Burgundavia> yep
[09:19] <Burgundavia> hence ubuntuguide is not a hard problem
[09:19] <rob> did ubuntuguide ever get updated for dapper?
[09:19] <robitaille> hence the docs are not the real problem, but getting new users into Ubuntu is
[09:19] <Burgundavia> didn't even get updated for breezy
[09:19] <Burgundavia> yes, once you have them...
[09:20] <mdke> robitaille, exactly
[09:20] <robitaille> agree, but that's the 2nd hard problem....
[09:20] <mdke> Burgundavia, you need one before the other
[09:21] <mdke> if you release a bunch of docs which are targetted at your grandmother, and there are no users like that, the users are gonna think you're crazy
[09:21] <Burgundavia> hmm. I disagree
[09:21] <mdke> not that you aren't...
[09:21] <mdke> :)
[09:21] <Burgundavia> lol
[09:21] <Burgundavia> got to keep all you sane people off balance
[09:21] <robitaille> we probably need both:  get the users in, but at the moment they are in, you want the docs to be there for them
[09:22] <mdke> absolutely
[09:22] <robitaille> great docs on their first Ubuntu day is crucial for the long-time acceptance of this new computer thinggy
[09:22] <Burgundavia> well, soon SILC will have a whole bunch of test subjects using Ubuntu
[09:22] <mdke> anyway for now, it's important that the desktop guide has the widest audience possible
[09:22] <Madpilot> Which file includes the admon tags?
[09:22] <Madpilot> which xinclude, I mean
[09:22] <mdke> and that for me means being inclusive, not exclusive
[09:23] <mdke> Madpilot, you mean the conventions section? it's in preface i think
[09:24] <mdke> yeah preface.xml
[09:24] <Madpilot> in which directory?
[09:24] <mdke> common/C
[09:25] <Madpilot> thanks
[09:29] <mdke> Burgundavia, if you have a mo, can you chip in with your views on the yelp TOC question on the ML? I'd like to know what you (and everyone else) think
[09:31] <Madpilot> Committed revision 2714.
[09:31] <Madpilot>  - with dpkg/gdebi changes - thoughts?
[09:31] <Burgundavia> mdke: can do
[09:31] <Burgundavia> mdke: hadn't commented because I saw nothing I didn't like
[09:36] <mdke> cool, thanks
[09:36] <mdke> Madpilot, will check later on, got to run to work
[09:36] <mdke> bye all
[09:37] <Madpilot> np - later
[10:19] <mdke> Madpilot, looks good
[10:19] <Madpilot> mdke, glad you like it
[10:23] <mdke> thanks for doing that
[10:24] <Madpilot> no problem
[10:55] <mdke> Burgundavia, thanks for that reply. I think we should do it too
[11:10] <mdke> Madpilot, "other available documentation" is good, but i wonder if it would cause confusion with the link underneath entitled "Other Documentation"
[11:11] <mdke> bhuvan, ping
[11:11] <Madpilot> mdke, hmm, can we change that "Other Documentation" link to something more informative?
[11:12] <mdke> Madpilot, we might be able to. "Miscellaneous"?
[11:12] <Madpilot> "Misc." is nearly as bad as "Other Docs."
[11:13] <mdke> Madpilot, i'm open to ideas :)
[11:13] <mdke> so is upstream, probably
[11:14] <mdke> but I think that that categories defies any better definition
[11:14] <Madpilot> yeah
[11:15] <Madpilot> "Other System Docs"? 
[11:15] <Madpilot> nearly as vague as 'Misc'...
[11:15] <mdke> yeah, I don't think that adds anything
[11:16] <mdke> i think we may have to leave it as it is, and try and distinguish in the title
[11:17] <Madpilot> yeah, that's a really random mix of docs behind "Other Documentation"...
[11:20] <mdke> ok, I'm gonna grep through our docs and remove "Ubuntu Linux" and replace it with "Ubuntu"
[11:22] <Madpilot> good - should have been done ages ago
[11:22] <mdke> the server guide is particularly culpable
[11:38] <mdke> Madpilot, so any ideas about an alternative title for "Other Documentation", or the general title? why don't you like the word "categories"? 
[11:40] <Madpilot> There's nothing wrong with the word, I just thought "Other available documentation:" was clear enough without 'categories'
[11:41] <mdke> so you don't think it will introduce confusion with the link?
[11:42] <Madpilot> it might
[11:42] <Madpilot> how about "Other documentation categories:"?
[11:44] <mdke> yes, I think I'd prefer that
[11:51] <Madpilot> night all
[12:04] <mdke> bhuvan, can we remove synaptic from the server guide? same reasons as gnome-app-install
[12:41] <mdke> bhuvan, also, can we remove the wireless section? it's not server related
[12:49] <mdke> bhuvan, i've committed some things, lemme know what you think. It's basically proof reading, and removal of those sections
[02:04] <janimo> hey, I am trying to add the xubuntu guide to the xubuntu-doc package
[02:04] <janimo> wanted to make sure that
[02:05] <janimo> the things needed to build it are supposed to be xubutu libs and common directories
[02:05] <janimo> common/C/preface.xml references gnome-panel.xml which is in ubuntu 
[02:06] <janimo> are the docs aiming to be organized in modular bits or is it assumed that the whole svn checkout is needed to build either part?
[02:07] <janimo> s/gnome-panel/gnome-menus/
[02:15] <mdke> hi janimo 
[02:16] <mdke> you don't need the whole of trunk for xubuntu
[02:16] <mdke> let me take a look at common/C/preface.xml, if that needs another file from the ubuntu section, it's a bug
[02:17] <mdke> janimo, ah, do you mean this line: <!ENTITY % gnome-menus-C SYSTEM "../../ubuntu/libs/gnome-menus-C.ent">
[02:17] <mdke> we can take that out completely, I think
[02:19] <mdke> yes, /me does so
[02:20] <mdke> janimo, ok, so all you need is xubuntu/, libs/, build/  and common/, I think
[02:27] <janimo> mdke, thanks :)
[03:07] <bhuvan> mdke: ping
[03:08] <mdke> bhuvan, pong
[03:08] <bhuvan> mdke: i'm ok with your changes. It is perfect
[03:08] <mdke> bhuvan, good. How was your talk?
[03:08] <bhuvan> it's scheduled on apr 09
[03:09] <bhuvan> tomorrow i'd be giving a moke-up session at our office!
[03:09] <mdke> cool
[03:09] <mdke> it looks good
[03:09] <bhuvan> oh ok, thanks
[03:09] <mdke> howto should be two words, though
[03:09] <jsgotangco> bhuvan, are you in india at the moment?
[03:09] <bhuvan> mdke: ok
[03:09] <bhuvan> jsgotangco: yes
[03:09] <jsgotangco> bhuvan, are you anywhere near hyderabad?
[03:10] <bhuvan> jsgotangco: in chennai. it is 600kms far away from hyderabad ?
[03:10] <jsgotangco> i have no idea i'll be in hyderabad in a few weeks
[03:10] <bhuvan> oh glad to hear
[03:10] <jsgotangco> 600kms that is far
[03:17] <mdke> bhuvan, the other thing I've done is to replace "Ubuntu Linux" with "Ubuntu", you might wanna do that in your talk too
[03:18] <bhuvan> yeah, i noticed; i'll replace
[04:12] <mdke> ompaul, are you paul o'malley?
[04:13] <mdke> course you are.
[04:13] <ompaul> hehe
[04:13] <mdke> ompaul, do you see bug 27906 on an up to date system?
[04:13] <ompaul> up to date 5.10 it exists
[04:13] <mdke> upgraded?
[04:13] <mdke> jeez
[04:13] <ompaul> I added kubuntu late laste week
[04:13] <mdke> what version kubuntu-docs do you have?
[04:13] <ompaul> no fresh install and all updates 
[04:14] <ompaul> lets find oout
[04:14] <mdke> dpkg -l kubuntu-docs
[04:14] <ompaul>  Installed: 5.10-0.6.1
[04:15] <ompaul> apt-cache policy kubuntu-docs
[04:15] <ompaul> :-))))
[04:15] <mdke> hmm
[04:15] <mdke> and what's the bug exactly?
[04:17] <mdke> ls /usr/share/ubuntu-artwork/home
[04:21] <mdke> ompaul, ^
[04:21] <ompaul> firefox-index.html  index.html
[04:22] <mdke> and the bug is?
[04:22] <ompaul> its not pointing to there 
[04:22] <ompaul> hmm
[04:22] <ompaul> fire up a willing browser responding with a roar 
[04:24] <ompaul> okay I repointed FF to packages.ubuntu.com - it still exists for epiphany
[04:24] <ompaul> /usr/share/ubuntu-artwork/home/index.html
[04:24] <ompaul> it claims does not exist
[04:25] <ompaul> now when I put on kubuntu it made the web page blank and gave me a dialogue on firefox which required mouse use so I changed it to point to packages.ubuntu.com
[04:26] <ompaul> lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root    34 2006-02-20 20:37 index.html -> /etc/alternatives/firefox-homepage
[04:26] <mdke> ok, keep following that
[04:26] <ompaul> I wonder if that has anything do t with the problem
[04:26] <mdke> ls -l /etc/alternatives/firefox-homepage
[04:26] <ompaul> lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root 59 2006-03-19 21:11 /etc/alternatives/firefox-homepage -> /usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en/kubuntu/about-kubuntu/index.html
[04:27] <mdke> keep going
[04:27] <ompaul> ls: /usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en/kubuntu/about-kubuntu/index.html: No such file or directory
[04:27] <ompaul> lets look over there
[04:27] <mdke> good idea
[04:28] <ompaul> mind a 4 line spam?
[04:28] <mdke> nope
[04:28] <ompaul> well its 6 :-)
[04:28] <ompaul> ompaul@dhcppc0:/usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en$ ls -al ku*
[04:28] <ompaul> total 44
[04:28] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x   2 root root  4096 2006-03-19 21:10 .
[04:28] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x  66 root root  4096 2006-03-23 09:29 ..
[04:28] <ompaul> lrwxrwxrwx   1 root root     9 2006-03-19 21:10 common -> ../common
[04:28] <ompaul> -rw-r--r--   1 root root  4872 2005-10-05 20:18 index.cache.bz2
[04:28] <ompaul> -rw-r--r--   1 root root  8422 2005-10-05 14:11 index.docbook
[04:28] <ompaul> -rw-r--r--   1 root root 15170 2005-10-05 14:11 kuser.png
[04:28] <ompaul> ompaul@dhcppc0:/usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en$
[04:29] <ompaul> there is no kbuntu 
[04:29] <ompaul> kubuntu even
[04:29] <mdke> huh
[04:29] <ompaul> /usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en/khelpcenter/kubuntu/about-kubuntu/C/index.html
[04:30] <ompaul> look at the previous path, I could only cd as far as en
[04:30] <ompaul> hang on a sec pastebin
[04:31] <ompaul> http://paste.ubuntu-nl.org/11378  nick buggy
[04:32] <ompaul> lines 63 64 65 tell a story
[04:32] <ompaul> in  /usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en/kubuntu/about-kubuntu/index.html
[04:32] <ompaul> there is no kubuntu directory
[04:32] <mdke> yes
[04:32] <mdke> do ls /usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en/khelpcenter
[04:33] <mgalvin> mdke: you gonna be around for a while?
[04:33] <mdke> mgalvin, we can make an appointment :)
[04:33] <mdke> what's up?
[04:34] <ompaul> mdke, it exists there http://paste.ubuntu-nl.org/11379
[04:35] <ompaul> ompaul@dhcppc0:/usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en/khelpcenter/kubuntu$ ls -al
[04:35] <ompaul> total 24
[04:35] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x  6 root root 4096 2006-03-19 21:10 .
[04:35] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x  8 root root 4096 2006-03-19 21:10 ..
[04:35] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x  3 root root 4096 2006-03-19 21:10 about-kubuntu
[04:35] <mgalvin> mdke: :)... was just talking with Jane... i wanted to get with you to discuss that stuff a bit, i gotta run to a quick work meeting, be back in like 20 min
[04:35] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x  6 root root 4096 2006-03-19 21:10 images
[04:35] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x  3 root root 4096 2006-03-19 21:10 kquickguide
[04:35] <ompaul> drwxr-xr-x  3 root root 4096 2006-03-19 21:10 krelease-notes
[04:35] <ompaul> ompaul@dhcppc0:/usr/share/doc/kde/HTML/en/khelpcenter/kubuntu$
[04:35] <mdke> mgalvin, ok, i just mailed about it, apparently the flash intro isn't happening for dapper now
[04:35] <mdke> ompaul, that's what I wanted, thanks. Damn that's a stupid bug
[04:36] <ompaul> mdke, its a dead bug
[04:36] <ompaul> (or it is now :)
[04:36] <mdke> i dunno, it might be more serious
[04:36] <ompaul> well it might tie into the bug I stuck in last night
[04:36] <ompaul> let me get it for you
[04:38] <jjesse> isn't that an old problme? the wrong link for the home page of firefox? 
[04:38] <ompaul> Bug 37699
[04:38] <mdke> jjesse, yes, it looks like there is a stupid error in the latest package we did
[04:39] <jjesse> d'oh :)
[04:39] <ompaul> that might have something 
[04:39] <ompaul> mdke, its not a doc team think but damn its ugly and it impacts what one sees
[04:39] <mdke> no, I think that's unrelated
[04:39] <ompaul> s/think/thing
[04:40] <jjesse> i never noticed because i don't use firefox
[04:41] <ompaul> jjesse, lets put it this way I found a way to make a 12 million pound computer run out of spool space in less than 20 minutes :) 
[04:42] <ompaul> I should not be let near computers :)
[04:42] <ompaul> that value was 5 years ago or there abouts
[04:43] <ompaul> most likely you could do what was done with it on linux with 2 high end p4/AMD PCs and a couple of terrabytes of raid
[04:43] <ompaul> but someone had the budget
[04:49] <mdke> ompaul, ok, thanks for your help
[04:52] <ompaul> mdke, its all one club :-)
[04:54] <ompaul> mdke, is there a doc anywhere that says Group A own this which has those parts List Z? 
[04:54] <mdke> ??
[04:55] <ompaul> is there a document anywhere that says "Team A"  owns this which consists of these "List Z"? 
[04:55] <mdke> what do you mean by "this"?
[04:56] <mdke> packages?
[04:56] <ompaul> this might be ubuntu-base kubuntu-desktop or their components - yes packages
[04:56] <ompaul> I rewrote that 5 times before you said packages :)
[04:57] <mdke> i suppose looking at the "Maintainer" tag in apt-cache show packagename might be what you're looking for, but I'm still not sure I understand
[04:59] <ompaul> okay if I step back from the question, launchpad when I wanted to define a bug I find it difficult to point a finger to the correct location
[04:59] <ompaul> so I guess
[04:59] <mdke> sometimes it isn't easy to figure out what package a bug belongs to. You just have to do your best, and hope it will get reassigned, if it's wrong
[05:01] <ompaul> perhaps, I will think about it and agree with you in an hour and four minutes :)
[05:01] <mdke> ok...
[05:02] <ompaul> I have to convince myself there is no better way :)
[06:35] <trappist> the boss is working from home today, so I can get away with spending a little time on docs ;)  what's in need of proofreading?
[06:36] <Burgwork> trappist, anything and everything, but I think the packaging guide and hte server guide need more work
[06:37] <mdke> yeah
[06:37] <trappist> I'm all over the server guide - I dunno what parts of the packaging guide are ready for review, and which are being worked on
[06:37] <trappist> there's a page somewhere for that :)  I'll assume it's up to date
[06:37] <mdke> i did some playing around with the package management section of the server guide today, you can start after that
[06:38] <trappist> on the serverguide, I want to focus on fixing up the apache2 section before doing any more proofreading.  I think that's pretty critical.
[06:39] <LaserJock> trappist: have at sections marked as "Awaiting Review" at http://doc.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/status/pg-report.html
[06:39] <trappist> LaserJock: ossum
[06:40] <mdke> trappist, yeah, apache is critical, looks like you already made a good start on it
[06:40] <trappist> yeah I'm afraid to see how much more there is, but that felt like a good start
[06:47] <mdke> trappist, the server guide in general is quite basic, so no need to cover _every_ apache configuration option, unless you want to :)
[06:47] <trappist> I know almost exactly enough about apache to keep it at its current level of detail, so that's what I'm aiming for
[06:48] <mdke> cool
[08:00] <mdke> jjesse, you need some special tools to build pdfs, I'm afraid
[08:01] <mdke> and pdfs are included in the "make website" thing
[08:01] <mdke> oh, trappist ^^
[08:05] <Burgwork> mdke, is that the non-free crap?
[08:11] <mdke> it's non-free, anyway
[08:11] <LaserJock> but very cool 
[08:17] <mdke> yeah, pretty cool
[08:45] <trappist> LaserJock: you're sure about "any" vs. "all" for the Architecture on a package?  I can't find any docs on it, but it seems like "any" would be arch-independent and "all" would mean we're building binaries for each supported arch.
[08:46] <trappist> does seem to be right.  I would have made it the other way :)
[08:46] <LaserJock> trappist: let me check, I get them confused sometimes
[08:47] <LaserJock> all is arch-independent and any is for all arches
[08:47] <LaserJock> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-controlfields.html#s-f-Architecture
[08:47] <trappist> cool.  your doc is right then, but I think somebody screwed that up way back when - the nomenclature is counterintuitive, at least to me.
[08:48] <LaserJock> well, it has confused quite a few MOTUs at times ;-)
[08:48] <LaserJock> I think the logic goes something like:
[08:49] <LaserJock> "all" package will work on all arches without rebuilding
[08:49] <LaserJock> "any" packages are able to be built on any arch
[08:50] <trappist> that hurts my head
[08:50] <LaserJock> but I think I would have done something like "indp" instead of "all"
[08:51] <LaserJock> lol, welcome to packaging :-)
[08:52] <trappist> yeah that would have been more transparent
[08:53] <LaserJock> I think the concept of arch-dependent and arch-independent is much clearer than any and all
[08:53] <trappist> yeah, since that's what any and all is supposed to mean
[08:55] <LaserJock> but alas, the great Debian gods in the sky didn't see fit to make it so
[08:55] <LaserJock> and we must submit ourselves to the Great Law of the Debian Policy ;-)
[08:57] <trappist> I've always wondered, but have been afraid to ask anybody who might know, whether we want to stay a debian spinoff or eventually go out on our own like mandrake from redhat.
[08:59] <LaserJock> I think that would depend very greatly on the amount of manpower we have
[08:59] <Burgwork> trappist, sticking with debian is quite important
[08:59] <LaserJock> right now we have nowhere near the man power needed for that
[08:59] <Burgwork> regardless of manpower, hiving off like that is not politically acceptable
[09:00] <LaserJock> well, yes there is that too :-)
[09:01] <trappist> we don't have all the same policies as debian, and it's not too hard to imagine that that could lead to increasingly divergent packages and configurations that would eventually make it mutually beneficial for us to become more of a fork
[09:01] <crimsun> it's actually quite difficult to imagine that.
[09:01] <crimsun> remember that out of 17000 packages, how many do we support directly in main?
[09:02] <Burgwork> around 3k I think
[09:02] <crimsun> which, at best, leaves 14k for us to pull from Debian
[09:03] <Burgwork> last I checked, about 10% of all the packages in ubuntu had a -XubuntuX version number
[09:03] <trappist> that does seem like a manageable number
[09:03] <LaserJock> and I imagine that number could drop if we were better about getting things upstream (and having them accepted of course)
[09:04] <crimsun> upstream Debian or upstream upstream?
[09:04] <LaserJock> both
[09:04] <crimsun> then we're still bound to Debian
[09:04] <LaserJock> like these .desktop files for instance
[09:04] <crimsun> (and really, that's the way it should be)
[09:05] <LaserJock> I'm just saying we could probably decrease our delta a bit
[09:05] <crimsun> no objections there at all
[09:06] <LaserJock> so in the end I think there isn't really any reason to fork from Debian
[09:06] <crimsun> we can't, really, if we expect anything to scale
[09:06] <trappist> there would be an insane amount of duplicated effort, to be sure
[09:06] <crimsun> I don't know about you, but I have 24 measley hours, and with our numbers, we can't maintain 14k packages all with deltas.
[09:07] <LaserJock> exactly my point
[09:08] <LaserJock> but in the end the policies aren't that much different
[09:08] <LaserJock> A good package in Debian will make a good package in Ubuntu. I't might need a tweak here or there for deps for example
[09:09] <LaserJock> but it seems like packages flow fairly easily both ways
[09:09] <trappist> I don't know where all the divergence in the cupsys package came from, but I'm very, very glad to see the recent changes there, which iirc are more in line with debian
[09:09] <trappist> <3 pitti
[09:10] <crimsun> trappist: that doesn't happen to be your changelog thread on u-d, does it?
[09:10] <trappist> yeah that's me
[09:11] <crimsun> sigh. It's not about attribution, though it's nice. It's about putting work into it. Besides, there's a bug reference in the changelog, and your name is attached to the bug report.
[09:12] <trappist> yeah, if somebody really wants to know, he can find out it was my patch.  but attribution is part of my motivation for putting the work in.
[09:12] <trappist> my motives are less than 100% selfless
[09:12] <trappist> but I don't think I'm asking for much
[10:15] <mdke> how about including a patch on the changelog, trappist :)
[10:26] <trappist> mdke: yeah there is that.  I've had some frustrations with debdiff where my diff *only* has the changelog delta.
[10:30] <mdke> i don't know much about it, I always do apt-get source ; cp source source-new ; changes ; diff -ur source-new source > my.patch
[10:30] <LaserJock> yikes
[10:30] <mdke> that way if I change the changelog, it comes out
[10:31] <LaserJock> debdiff all the way :-)
[10:31] <mdke> I've only ever done patches for ubuntu-docs and the occasional .desktop file though
[10:32] <LaserJock> trappist: a debdiff is the best way of getting your changelog in
[10:32] <LaserJock> trappist: because if it is good, then the sponsor doesn't have to touch it, just sign it and upload
[10:33] <trappist> LaserJock: yeah I always try that first.  but as I said sometimes it doesn't work out, and I'd rather get a patch uploaded than not
[10:34] <LaserJock> trappist: there must be something wrong with what you are doing. debdiff has worked every single time for me
[10:35] <LaserJock> I can help you next time if you want (and I'm around)
[10:36] <trappist> I'll try pinging you next time.  it seems pretty straightforward, though.  I edit some file under src/ and I edit the changelog.  I say debuild -S then debdiff this.dsc that.dsc and I get only the changelog changes.
[10:37] <LaserJock> hmm, editing files in src/ is generally not the best way to go, but it should come out in the .diff.gz
[10:37] <LaserJock> I'd have to take a look