[09:01] <Burgundavia> hey mdke_
[09:24] <mdke_> channel has been quiet lately
[09:30] <pygi> mdke_, well ...
[09:36] <mdke_> pygi: hmm?
[09:36] <pygi> mdke_, just responding to constatation it's quiet :)
[09:37] <Liz> hey..someone removed me off the moderators list 
[09:37] <Liz> oops
[09:37] <Liz-bedtime> oh well
[09:37] <Liz-bedtime> nite 
[09:37] <mdke_> Liz-bedtime: yeah, sorry - were you still doing it?
[09:38] <mdke_> we had quite a few volunteers
[09:38] <rob> hiya
[09:39] <rob> mdke_:  so is there anything stopping anyone from forking the documentation under just one license?
[09:39] <mdke_> rob: no, I don't think so
[09:40] <rob> so, in that case can't the doc team just choose one license and go with that, without obtaining copyright holder approval?
[09:40] <mdke_> yes, I think you are right.
[09:40] <rob> problem solved then :)
[09:41] <mdke_> I think we have copyright holder approval anyway
[09:41] <mdke_> but yeah, problem solved
[09:41] <rob> cool, well as I said on the list, go for it
[09:42] <rob> was a license actually decided by consensus at a past meeting already?
[09:43] <mdke_> yes
[09:44] <rob> nice
[09:48] <Burgundavia> we are not changing license, merely dropping one
[09:48] <Burgundavia> that requires approval going forward, but not going back
[09:50] <Madpilot> So the Dapper & Edgy stuff will still be dual; the Feisty docs will be only ccbysa?
[09:51] <rob> Burgundavia: why, does everyone else need approval to use our docs if they just want to pick one licence?
[09:51] <Burgundavia> no
[09:52] <rob> so why does the doc team?
[09:52] <Burgundavia> I am saying that if, we, as a team agree to drop the one license, it should be a team decision
[09:52] <joachim-n> you guys dropping gfdl?
[09:52] <rob> oh, ok, yes I agree on that at least :)
[09:52] <Burgundavia> hwoever, we don't need to ask anybody for relicensing
[09:52] <Burgundavia> joachim-n: considering it
[09:52] <joachim-n> heh. so is the gnome docs team :)
[09:53] <Burgundavia> I read that
[09:53] <rob> heh, gnu project dropping a gnu license in favor of a third party one
[09:54] <mdke_> the dual licensing wasn't doing us any good
[09:54] <rob> that has to tell you something at least
[09:54] <mdke_> and now we can use other cc-by-sa material
[09:54] <rob> is the gnome docs team going to use the same CC license?
[09:55] <mdke_> we don't know
[09:55] <joachim-n> the gnome docs team is pondering a new license
[09:55] <joachim-n> not sure why shaun doesn't want a CC license
[09:55] <rob> completely new?
[09:55] <mdke_> you're going to write your own?
[09:55] <mdke_> crazy
[09:56] <joachim-n> I don't entirely know what the plan is :)
[09:56] <Madpilot> NIH syndrome?
[09:57] <joachim-n> I'm going to shut up before I start rumours :(
[09:57] <joachim-n> all I really know is what's here: http://live.gnome.org/ProjectMallard
[09:57] <joachim-n> and a recent heated discussion on our list between Shaun and some lackey from GNU
[09:58] <mdke_> yes, I read that
[09:58] <mdke_> that guy is crazy :)
[06:59] <Liz-bedtime> mdke_: yeah i was, but its all good. 
[07:30] <mdke_> Liz: I'll add you back, the more the merry
[07:31] <Burgwork> mdke_: we just got Liz back?
[07:31] <Burgwork> yay!
[07:32] <mdke_> I removed her without realising she was still doing moderation work
[07:32] <Liz>  :D
[07:32] <Liz> its no biggie
[07:32] <Liz> im glad we have alot more volunteers now 
[07:32] <Liz> neway..work
[07:32] <mdke_> what's your email address?
[07:33] <Liz_work> teatamira@gmail.com
[07:33] <mdke_> thx
[07:33] <Liz_work> no worries
[07:33] <Liz_work> bye now
[09:30] <Ubugtu> New bug: #70958 in ubuntu-docs "missing /usr/share/gnome/help/libs/generic.ent" [Undecided,Unconfirmed]  http://launchpad.net/bugs/70958
[11:18] <jrib> hi, what's the difference between wiki.ubuntu.com and help.ubuntu.com/community?  https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Kernel/Compile has a broken link to KernelGitGuide, because KernelGitGuide is still in the wiki
[11:19] <LaserJock> jrib: help.ubuntu.com/community houses the help documentation
[11:20] <LaserJock> it used to reside on wiki.ubuntu.com along with developer pages, etc.
[11:20] <LaserJock> so it was moved
[11:22] <dsas> nixternal: shouldn't https://wiki.ubuntu.com/bzr be on h.u.c ? The fine line confuses me sometimes...
[11:22] <jrib> LaserJock:  so should KernelGitGuide be considered help and there was a mistake when the transfer to help.ubuntu was done or 0should I just relink to the wiki?
[11:22] <nixternal> dsas: if you think it is clean and ready go for it..i just did it a couple days of go and was using that as a staging page until it was good
[11:23] <dsas> nixternal: Ok, was just wondering when browsing RecentChanges a while ago and made a mental note to ask...
[11:23] <mdke_> jrib: KernelGitGuide might be considered development information, rather than documentation for users, I would suppose. I havne't looked at the page though. If you think that's right, you can just fix the link
[11:23] <nixternal> i will put that on my to do list, as i would like some extra input tweaks and what not
[11:24] <LaserJock> it does look more like developer documentation
[11:24] <LaserJock> I'd fix the link
[11:24] <nixternal> it will be fixed and deleted as soon as it is done ;)
[11:24] <jrib> LaserJock: well it's both imo, since the kernel guide recommends that method.  But I'll fix the link
[11:25] <nixternal> oh
[11:25] <nixternal> i thought you were talking about my garbage page ;)
[11:25] <dsas> nixternal: you and your garbage are your business :p
[11:26] <LaserJock> jrib: sure, but I think it makes more sense to shuffle people to the development wiki for that page then to shuffle the developers to the help wiki :-)
[11:26] <nixternal> hehe
[11:26] <nixternal> gee thanks dsas
[11:26] <jrib> LaserJock: haha, yes I will agree with taht one
[11:26] <nixternal> g'nite master obi want kin'mdke'obi
[11:26] <nixternal> s/want/wan