[12:16] <AndyP> somerville32: persia said it was important to wipe debian/changelog because the upstream one was never released
[12:40] <joejaxx> Good Evening All
[12:57] <Fujitsu> Morning everyone.
[12:58] <Nafallo> morning Fujitsu 
[12:58] <geser> Hi Fujitsu
[12:59] <Fujitsu> Hi Nafallo, geser.
[01:11] <LaserJock> morning Fujitsu 
[01:11] <Fujitsu> Hi LaserJock.
[01:13] <Fujitsu> *is it?
[01:13] <LaserJock> hmm, is -changes dead? I hadn't really thought about it
[01:13] <Fujitsu> -changes died along with changelog-closes-bugs after the last LP rollout.
[01:14] <LaserJock> I'm 100% mutt now so email has been weird
[01:14] <LaserJock> I decided I didn't like IMAP
[01:15] <Fujitsu> Libraries are meant to change their soname when they drop symbols or similar, aren't they?
[01:17] <geser> if public symbols are dropped then the so-version should be changed
[01:17] <Fujitsu> Right. But libgconfmm didn't, so now everything depending on it is dead.
[01:18] <geser> :(
[01:19] <Fujitsu> What is the best thing to do? Bump the so version and rebuild everything, or just rebuild everything?
[01:22] <geser> rebuilding would fix it for now but partial upgrades were still broken, so the correct solution would be to bump the so version and rebuild
[01:23] <Fujitsu> Thought so.
[01:23] <Fujitsu> LaserJock can fix it with his newfound superpowers!
[01:23] <Fujitsu> Nyahah.
[01:25] <geser> Hi persia
[01:25] <persia> Hi geser
[01:25] <Fujitsu> Hi persia.
[01:25] <persia> hi Fujitsu
[01:26] <TheMuso> Hey folks.
[01:27] <Fujitsu> Hi TheMuso.
[01:27] <persia> Hi TheMuso
[01:27] <TheMuso> Hey persia.
[01:27] <TheMuso> You guys may be interested in knowing that I have set up a shared apt cache for all my sbuild instances.
[01:28] <Fujitsu> How're you doing it? Bind something over /var/cache/apt/archive?
[01:28] <TheMuso> Well its an NFS share, so just mounting it directly as NFS.
[01:28] <TheMuso> it seems to be working fine.
[01:29] <Fujitsu> Ah.
[01:30] <TheMuso> This is because I have sbuild set up on three boxes.
[01:30] <persia> Nifty.
[01:30] <TheMuso> And have a download quota
[01:33] <minghua> TheMuso: what is the advantage of your solution over apt-proxy?
[01:35] <TheMuso> minghua: I don't have to have custom sources.list files for all the sbuild/LVM instances I have.
[01:35] <TheMuso> And its a lot more trivial to set up IMO.
[01:35] <minghua> TheMuso: good point on custom repos
[01:36] <minghua> triviality depends on what you already have, I suppose
[01:37] <TheMuso> Yeah.
[01:43] <TheMuso> c
[01:43] <TheMuso> ugh
[02:03] <persia> If debian/copyright is autogenerated by debian/rules, may it be removed in debian/rules clean:?  I'd think that this would result in no debian/copyright from apt-get source packagename and would therefore be bad, but wanted to check before complaining.
[02:05] <minghua> if there is a debian/copyright.in, I don't see any problem removing debian/copyright in clean
[02:07] <persia> minghua: For this package, there's a debian/copyright-files/ which contains some portions of the copyright, and a shell script to collect the remainder from various places in the source code.
[02:15] <AndyP> that sounds weird
[02:16] <LongPointyStick> that's...special
[02:16] <persia> AndyP: Yep.  That's why I want other opinions :)
[02:23] <persia> Well, I guess I'll go with the principal of minimal changes then (and not accept deletion of debian/copyright as a undocumented change in a debdiff).
[02:42] <TheMuso> cd /usr/include/
[02:43] <TheMuso> gah wrong terminal
[03:06] <persia> bluefoxicy: Were the issues reported with 28 mentioned at the bottom of the comment thread for bug 119254 resolved?  While KVM needs work, I'm not sure a sync will be better.
[03:06] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 119254 in kvm "Fails to create KVM context on linux-image-2.6.22-6" [Undecided,In progress]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/119254
[03:10] <ScottK> Fujitsu: changelog-closes-bugs was working again for me ~20 hours ago.
[03:11] <bluefoxicy> persia:  what issues?
[03:11] <bluefoxicy> black screen, I'm not sure what guest OS
[03:11] <bluefoxicy> I know with KVM24 I loaded operating systems and with 16 I load absolutely nothing
[03:11] <bluefoxicy> KVM16 is slower than straight emulation by a billion times ;)
[03:11] <bluefoxicy> and hangs barely into run.
[03:12] <bluefoxicy> KVM16 reminds me of bochs actually <.<
[03:12] <bluefoxicy> persia:  but maybe a direct sync isn't the answer
[03:15] <Fujitsu> ScottK: They broke at the same time, but they're not both fixed.
[03:16] <ScottK> Fujitsu: OK.  Just thought I'd mention that one of them was fixed.  I'd rather have had them fix "Triaged" bugs not showing up in standard searches.
[03:17] <StevenK> Fujitsu: Desktop on a triangle?
[03:20] <StevenK> /dev/mapper/system-mirror 60G   60G   40K 100% /srv/mirror
[03:20] <StevenK> Humm.
[03:20] <persia> bluefoxicy: That's about it: 16 is definitely bad, and 28 (or similar) likely better.  I'm just tempted to mark bug 121940 as invalid, as I'm not sure it will fix the various problems, and based on the KVM changelog, needs coordination with the kernel team.
[03:20] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 121940 in kvm "KVM newest version request" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/121940
[03:20] <StevenK> I think the time has come for me to stop mirroring edgy.
[03:57] <TheMuso> 1/aw Away
[04:31] <Fujitsu> ScottK: Yeah, that pretty much makes Triaged useless for now.
[04:31] <Fujitsu> StevenK: Or octagonal prism, or whatever.
[04:31] <Fujitsu> (my SSH session timed out and I didn't notice, hence the slow responses)
[04:37] <Fujitsu> Hm, why's desktop-effects our problem now?
[04:45] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Are you referring to the compiz demotion?
[04:46] <ajmitch> Fujitsu: because it's redundant
[04:46] <Fujitsu> ScottK: compiz itself seems to remain in main.
[04:46] <ajmitch> see system->preferences->appearance
[04:47] <ScottK> Oh.  I thought I saw some reference to it being demoted and the new merged bling would be in main.
[04:47] <ajmitch> th new merged bling is in main
[04:48] <ajmitch> compiz-compcomm-plugins-main | 0.0.0+git20070612-0ubuntu1 | http://nz.archive.ubuntu.com gutsy/universe Packages
[04:48] <ajmitch> that part is yet to be moved
[04:48] <ajmitch> hence the -main suffix :)
[04:50] <Fujitsu> compiz-fusion-plugins-* it is now.
[04:51] <ajmitch> yay
[04:52] <ajmitch> the virtual package not provided by anything?
[04:55] <Fujitsu> william@irranat:~/MOTUing$ dpkg -L compiz-fusion-plugins-main | wc -l
[04:55] <Fujitsu> 73
[04:55] <Fujitsu> Looks fairly real to me.
[04:57] <Fujitsu> Can anyone make sense of bug #120152?
[04:57] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 120152 in archivemail ""Permission Denied" when archiving from /var/mail directory" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/120152
[04:59] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Nice how he attaches a new copy of the program as a "patch"
[04:59] <Fujitsu> That's what I thought.
[04:59] <Fujitsu> It might have been easier to work out what the heck he was talking about if there was a patch/
[05:03] <ScottK> Fujitsu: I can guess what he might mean, but that sounds reasonable.
[05:04] <Fujitsu> What's he saying? That the user running archivemail can't read root's mailbox? That sounds like a correct behaviour.
[05:04] <ajmitch> No candidate version found for compiz-fusion-plugins-main
[05:05] <ScottK> Fujitsu: I think he's saying if a root user runs archivemail it changes the permissions so the regular user can't read it anymore.
[05:05] <StevenK> ajmitch: How laggy is nz.archive? It's even on my local mirror.
[05:05] <Fujitsu> Ahh.
[05:06] <ScottK> StevenK: Probably slowed by the snow.
[05:06] <ajmitch> StevenK: it's a little odd, since I'm pulling from both nz.a.u.c & a.u.c
[05:07] <Fujitsu> That's probably why I've got the new compiz-fusion crack!
[05:07] <ajmitch> lucky you!
[05:07] <Fujitsu> Does this mean we can kill off beryl soon?
[05:07] <ajmitch> please
[05:08] <Fujitsu> Oh yay, let's request that a Tcl/Tk application use GNOME file dialogs.
[05:12] <Burgundavia> we could just kill tcl/tk
[05:25] <Fujitsu> ScottK: Already done.
[05:25] <Fujitsu> Marked High, not Critical, for some stupid reason.
[05:26] <Fujitsu> Bug #121636
[05:26] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 121636 in malone "when a bug is marked as triaged it disappears" [High,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/121636
[05:26] <ScottK> Fujitsu: I just hit send.  I'll dupe mine to that one.
[05:33] <Fujitsu> It's quite ironic, considering what Triaged is meant to be used for.
[05:38] <ScottK> Fujitsu: I suspect it's symptomatic of the FUBAR nature of that entire set of changes.  Whoever designed (I use the word losely) it had one very narrow perspective on the work flow and got very little detailed input.  After all, once a bug is "Triaged" triagers don't need to see it anymore because they are done.
[05:38] <ScottK> Not that I'm bitter or anything.
[05:39] <ScottK> I guess that should be loosely and not losely...
[05:46] <Burgundavia> ScottK: that person would be Henrik, I think
[05:48] <ScottK> Burgundavia: The impression I had was he heard about it at the last minute, but I don't know, nor do I really care.  It's symptomatic of the problems in close source proprietary development processes.
[05:48] <ScottK> Whoever messed up, it isn't really their fault.  It's a fundamental process issue.
[05:48] <Burgundavia> I agree
[05:48] <ScottK> You can't develop something useful to the community in isolation from the community.
[05:49] <Burgundavia> raise it at the next Tech Board
[05:50] <ScottK> Burgundavia: There's really no point.  The will open source LP when/if Canonical wants to.  Ubuntu's use of proprietary tools is a significant negative in my book, but not one (yet) that outweighs Ubuntu's advantages.
[05:50] <ScottK> Oops
[05:50] <ScottK> The/They
[05:50] <Burgundavia> ScottK: you can raise the issue of process and suggest some solutions, however
[05:51] <ScottK> Burgundavia: The only real solution is to open up LP and they're very clear that's not in the cards.
[05:52] <ScottK> As long as it's developed in a back room we'll just get told to ignore the man behind the curtain.
[05:52] <Burgundavia> given the operating constraints, you can fix certain things
[05:52] <ScottK> Except we already have stuff like an official MOTU-LP liaison and he wasn't consulted.
[05:53] <Fujitsu> I used to not be, then I got a lot of important people annoyed.
[05:54] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 119469 in firefox-launchpad-plugin "all of the previous bugs, plus malformed line 40" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/119469
[05:55] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Just mark it Triaged.  That'll take care of it.
[05:55] <Fujitsu> Yeah, true.
[05:56] <Fujitsu> And why is gutsy-changes still screwed? How'd they manage to break changelog-closes-bugs? {sync,backport}-source? Aren't they meant to have some tests?
[05:56] <ScottK> Burgundavia: Given the operating constraints there's very little that can be done to fix things on this side of the interface.  LP is a black box we can't see into.  It's really up to them.  If I thought there was something I could do that would make a difference, I'd be glad to go to the tech board, I just don't see the point.
[05:57] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Trust them.  They know what they are doing (no need to open source this project yet).
[05:57] <Fujitsu> ScottK: I think this is how a lot of people feel, but you're the only one who is particularly vocal about it at the moment. Good to see somebody has taken on my old task!
[06:07] <ScottK> Burgundavia: Or to put it differently, if someone wants me to invest my time in making a proprietary program better, I have a consulting rate for that.
[06:12] <joejaxx> ScottK: you do not think of Launchpad as a service?
[06:12] <joejaxx> :P
[06:13] <ScottK> joejaxx: No.  I think of it as a critical part of the toolchain of the Linux distribution I use.
[06:14] <joejaxx> interesting
[06:17] <ScottK> Building free software on a proprietary toolset is not a point of comfort for me.
[06:17] <ScottK> It's why I use DaD instead of MoM for merges even though the later is more mature.
[06:32] <Burgundavia> joejaxx: I believe LP should be Free. period
[06:32] <ScottK> Personally, I've yet to see any arguments for keeping it proprietary that make sense to me.
[06:33] <Burgundavia> Ubuntu is "just a service"
[06:34] <Fujitsu> I'm sure most here know my opinion on the subject.
[06:35] <ScottK> In that case, I should just quit working on making their service better.
[06:35] <Flannel> ScottK: did you see the comment from sabdfl about his reasonings?
[06:36] <Fujitsu> The problem is that Ubuntu has benefits that outweigh the downside (ie. non-free infrastructure). It's a really neat trap.
[06:36] <ScottK> Flannel: I've seen comments that are going into the LP FAQ - probably the same.  They don't make sense to me.
[06:36] <ScottK> +1 for what Fujitsu said.
[06:36] <Flannel> ScottK: the ones about anti-balkanization?
[06:37] <nixternal> alcohol and hacking do not mix!
[06:37] <ScottK> Yep.  
[06:37] <ScottK> to both of you.
[06:37] <ScottK> nixternal: That doesn't help your MOTU application any.
[06:37] <Fujitsu> ScottK: Hahahah.
[06:37] <Fujitsu> !nixternal
[06:37] <ubotu> Oh no!  The pointy-clicky Vista lover has arrived!  He's rumoured to be giving out free money, too!
[06:38] <nixternal> well, where do I begin...Debian packaging talk, GPL talk, Ubuntu talk....and lots of home brewed and micro brewed beer..BarCamp is some good stuff
[06:38] <Flannel> ScottK: what about the centralization argument doesn't make sense?
[06:38] <ScottK> Flannel: If he's worried about lots of things called Launchpad running around, he can stop that with trademark.  I see no difference if an upstream that we link to runs Bugzilla or another isntance of LP.
[06:38] <Burgundavia> Flannel: the argument is bullsh*t
[06:39] <ScottK> isntance/instance
[06:39] <Flannel> ScottK: He's not worried about thename, he's arguing that if you have LOTS of LPs, you lose the benefit of integration.
[06:39] <Fujitsu> The argument is a little valid. They don't want anybody running Bugzilla or their own LP. They want everyone to use *their* LP.
[06:40] <ScottK> Flannel: So.  If there is benifit in integration, people will run on Canonical's instance of LP.  If he's wrong, they won't.  No need to make it proprietary if the benifit is real.
[06:40] <nixternal> gotta remember, Sourceforge is not proprietary/non-free now as well...so LP isn't alone which I find odd
[06:40] <nixternal> s/not/now
[06:40] <Fujitsu> Very true.
[06:40] <Fujitsu> s/benifit/benefit/g
[06:41] <Flannel> ScottK: his argument is that it needs to achive critical mass for the benefits to be apparent.  Beofre that point, people won't want to hassle with the centralization, even if in the long run it's more cost effective
[06:41] <Fujitsu> He won't achieve critical mass with it non-free.
[06:41] <Fujitsu> Not a chance.
[06:41] <nixternal> code.google.com (Chris DiLoser) says the reason they created code.google.com is not to replace Sourceforge but to have a free system that is similar...yet Google never made it free
[06:41] <ScottK> Flannel: As long as it's proprietary, there is a 0% chance of me hosting a project on it.
[06:42] <nixternal> I was talking to Ben Sussman today about it
[06:43] <ScottK> Flannel: Since I package my stuff for Ubuntu, I can see actual benifit to being in the same infrastructure and using the tools, but the proprietariness is to big a negative.
[06:43] <Flannel> ScottK: I see where you're coming from.  I don't think I have an opinion on it personally.  I was just wondering what your POV was.
[06:43] <Fujitsu> nixternal: Well, that's similar to LP, but Canonical isn't quite as evil.
[06:44] <nixternal> "yet?"
[06:44] <nixternal> ;)
[06:44] <Fujitsu> That was implied.
[06:44] <ScottK> Right.
[06:44] <nixternal> hehe
[06:44] <nixternal> well, all day I heard that "Ubuntu is going to sign a deal as well, but they will sugar coat it"
[06:44] <ScottK> I've already decided that my business is to important to accept the business risk of using proprietary tools.
[06:45] <nixternal> and I got bitchy with a few people who were making those statements while using "windows"
[06:46] <nixternal> people bringing Microsoft products to an open source party/event...well they need to swim with the fishies :)
[06:46] <nixternal> then again, they could get online, network manager was once again hosing me with gutsy
[06:46] <ScottK> That's what you get for running Gutsy.
[06:46] <nixternal> yup
[06:49] <Burgundavia> nixternal: where were you?
[06:50] <ScottK> Burgundavia: Vista users group.
[06:50] <nixternal> BarCamp Chicago
[06:50] <imbrandon> i just run windows 3.11 and forget about it all
[06:50] <nixternal> hahahaha
[06:50] <nixternal> stop lying, you dos lover!
[06:51] <Burgundavia> ahh, interesting
[06:51] <Burgundavia> so people figure Ubuntu is going to sign a deal, eh?
[06:51] <Burgundavia> I think, even if Mark wanted to, he cannot, due to the optics
[06:51] <nixternal> most of them Google employees
[06:51] <nixternal> which I called all but 1 idiots
[06:51] <ScottK> optics?
[06:51] <nixternal> Ben Sussman is cool, the rest are morons
[06:52] <nixternal> I am like you guys use Ubuntu, call it Goobuntu or some garbage, make all kinds of changes, yet don't share them...
[06:52] <imbrandon> nixternal, i've seen it, the only changes they make are artwork
[06:52] <nixternal> I seen it tonight...quite more than artwork
[06:52] <imbrandon> pre-dapper they had some ltsp kernel patches
[06:52] <nixternal> Ben uses it on his IBM lappy
[06:53] <imbrandon> then thats Ben's customizations, i have personaly b ooted to it from a pxe boot to my lappy at googleplex, the default boot is only artwork changes
[06:54] <nixternal> it was what he had on a CD...he showed some cook SVN stuff him and a few others have done there as well
[06:54] <nixternal> s/cook/cool
[06:54] <nixternal> heh
[06:54] <nixternal> Chicago homebrewed beer
[06:55] <imbrandon> http://images.imbrandon.com/lolcats/lolcatsdotcomib5v9oe8urvsgmh0.jpg
[06:55] <imbrandon> bwhahaha
[06:55] <nixternal> hahah, that is great
[06:55] <imbrandon> nix if it was on a CD its far from "official" goobuntu, goobuntu is ONLY pxeboot or install from pxeboot
[06:55] <nixternal> 12 of 21 is better
[06:55] <nixternal> ahhh, he was talking about pxeboot
[06:56] <imbrandon> he probably just rolled a goobuntu branded custom cd, not hard but not what most of them run anyhow
[06:58] <nixternal> he runs Kubuntu mainly, but was showing off some of the stuff Google Chicago is working on..the SVN stuff was the coolest
[06:58] <imbrandon> :)
[06:58] <Fujitsu> What did they do with it?
[06:58] <Burgundavia> what sort of SVN stuff?
[06:58] <nixternal> hell, the top 3 SVN devs all work Google Chicago now
[06:58] <imbrandon> lol j/k
[06:58] <nixternal> imbrandon: just use PCLinuxOS :)
[06:58] <imbrandon> hahah
[06:58] <imbrandon> no way
[06:58] <Fujitsu> No, just use warty.
[06:59] <nixternal> dude, it is the perfect LivePr0nCD
[06:59] <imbrandon> thats art not pr0n, i mean real pr0n
[07:00] <nixternal> localized history stuff, some of the good things from other projects like Monotone, Mercurial, Git, Darcs and such
[07:00] <nixternal> we have a picture of the SVN god with a Bazaar dev :)
[07:01] <RAOF> What, so svn might not suck at merging sometime?
[07:01] <nixternal> RAOF: exactly a point he talked about
[07:01] <nixternal> he even said the best right now is Mercurial
[07:02] <Fujitsu> Impossible. Sucky merging is an inherent SVN thing... it just wouldn't be SVN without it.
[07:02] <nixternal> hehe, true, we wouldn't know what to do if it didn't suck
[07:02] <nixternal> all these years of learning how to hack your way around the suckiness
[07:03] <RAOF> I've tried to merge precisely one svn branch, and it was a nightmare
[07:03] <nixternal> I got lucky once, with an SVN merge that is
[07:03] <RAOF> Because I had foolishly moved files around, no knowing that SVN would chuck a screaming hissy fit.
[07:04] <nixternal> oh ya
[07:04] <nixternal> or even delete them with rm -rf and have it go "wft did it go"
[07:04] <imbrandon> wtf did it go, classic
[07:05] <RAOF> So, my svn merging is now done with bzr-svn, which works :)
[07:06] <Fujitsu> bzr's merging it good.
[07:06] <Fujitsu> Well, anything is good compared to Subversion.
[07:06] <RAOF> Indeed.  Manually applying diffs is good, compared to svn.
[07:06] <Fujitsu> That's what I do.
[07:07] <RAOF> That's what I ended up doing, yeah.
[07:08] <RAOF> So, on further inspection, I think the mplayer-use-compiz patch needs reworking before it is in any way acceptable to upstream.
[07:09] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Hard to have much of an argument when we all pretty much agree.
[07:09] <Fujitsu> True.
[07:09] <nixternal> Fujitsu: it seems to always die out, because we end up saying the same thing...for 2 years they have been planning on open sourcing it when it was "finished"
[07:09] <Fujitsu> Right. And then we just wait. And wait.
[07:09] <nixternal> only thing I have seen take 2+ years to finish was Windows
[07:09] <Fujitsu> And wait.
[07:09] <Fujitsu> nixternal: Heheh.
[07:10] <nixternal> registering a project is easier in code.google.com and sourceforge than LP is...LP has a bunch of confusing mumbo jumbo
[07:10] <Fujitsu> Hah, the CC won't have any power over that.
[07:10] <ScottK> Fujitsu: You didn't start it this time.
[07:10] <nixternal> ScottK: I think Corey has hounded them enough on the aspect...you can guarantee that one!
[07:11] <Burgundavia> wah?
[07:11] <ScottK> Fujitsu: No, no one outside Canonical does, but I think it's important that sabdfl continue to hear that the community (at least us anyway) haven't rolled over and gotten happy with the situation.
[07:11] <Burgundavia> I had an interesting argument with jono and Riched while in Sevilla
[07:12] <Burgundavia> about 10 of us went out for dinner and for about half the meal, only the three of us were talking
[07:12] <Fujitsu> I'm sure there are a few of Canonical people watching us in here.
[07:12] <Fujitsu> s/ of//
[07:12] <nixternal> I would have loved to have been there for that one..it seems the Canonical people have no problem defending the actions
[07:12] <Fujitsu> Speaking of jono, I haven't seem him around much lately.
[07:12] <nixternal> I just read his blog, said he is in California for FooCamp
[07:13] <joejaxx> Hello All
[07:13] <Burgundavia> I raised the issue of LP going away like bitkeeper did
[07:13] <joejaxx> hello jussi01 
[07:13] <nixternal> hehe, bitkeeper rocked
[07:13] <Burgundavia> and was told to not worry and that I shoudl "just trust Mark":
[07:13] <Fujitsu> Burgundavia: How'd that go?
[07:13] <Fujitsu> Gaaaaah.
[07:13] <Fujitsu> Trusting Mark doesn't last for more than a couple of years.
[07:14] <nixternal> funny thing though, everyone at the even tonight think Mark is the next great thing for open source and free software
[07:14] <Fujitsu> He probably is.
[07:14] <nixternal> s/even/event
[07:15] <nixternal> the FSF guys even said that...the FSF guys said that RMS is just to extreme and has been preaching the same thing on a lot of dead ears for 20 years now
[07:16] <jussi01> hi joejaxx
[07:16] <AndyP> i've been wondering how canonical is going to make money from launchpad
[07:16] <Burgundavia> I raised the issue that Mark does get bored
[07:17] <Burgundavia> and was "is there any sign of that?'
[07:17] <Burgundavia> ?"
[07:17] <Fujitsu> AndyP: Sell the service to the hordes of distributions that are clamouring to use it.
[07:17] <Burgundavia> basically I was patronized by Jono and Riched and it pissed me off
[07:17] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: Aw...
[07:18] <joejaxx> LaserJock: we should create a summarizer script for you :P
[07:18] <AndyP> the plan seems to be: keep LP closed source -> get everyone using launchpad -> ??? -> profit!
[07:18] <Fujitsu> Word's AutoSummarise!
[07:18] <joejaxx> autmatically detects certain keywords
[07:18] <Fujitsu> AndyP: Right. He's obviously a /. fan.
[07:18] <joejaxx> Fujitsu: :P
[07:18] <Burgundavia> I think they are thinking of running LP ala Collab.net style
[07:18] <Burgundavia> for internal dev teams
[07:18] <ScottK> LaserJock: Is Bug #121636 on your MOTUs are really annoyed with this LP bug list?
[07:18] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 121636 in malone "when a bug is marked as triaged it disappears" [High,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/121636
[07:19] <LaserJock> ScottK: no
[07:19] <Fujitsu> Burgundavia: Collab.net? I know not of it.
[07:19] <Burgundavia> hosted svn basically
[07:19] <ScottK> LaserJock: Please add it.  It makes Triaged mostly useless at this point.
[07:19] <joejaxx> Fujitsu: it is what the oOo project uses
[07:19] <Burgundavia> read Michael Meeks for about how crap it is
[07:19] <Fujitsu> ScottK: More than mostly!
[07:20] <ScottK> Fujitsu: I just said mostly because of the cases where we WANT the bugs to disappear.
[07:20] <LaserJock> ScottK: I know, I got rid of a bug using it ;-)
[07:20] <Fujitsu> Heheh, like that one I mentioned earlier.
[07:20] <ScottK> Exactly.
[07:20] <Fujitsu> Won't Fix is convenient too.
[07:20] <AndyP> i think i read somewhere that there was a plan to form a business model around the big-picture data that can be mined from LP, but i might be wrong
[07:20] <Fujitsu> AndyP: I've never seen a reference to that, and I've looked hard.
[07:21] <ScottK> AndyP: Dunno.  Don't care.  As long as it's a black proprietary box, I feel no responsiblity to do anything other than bitch and moan.
[07:21] <joejaxx> LaserJock: haha :P
[07:21] <Fujitsu> +1 ScottK
[07:21] <LaserJock> I couldn't care less if it was opensourced
[07:22] <Burgundavia> LaserJock: yes you do
[07:22] <Burgundavia> crap woudl be fixed faster
[07:22] <LaserJock> no it wouldn't
[07:22] <Burgundavia> it would things like release management
[07:22] <Burgundavia> would have, rather
[07:22] <nixternal> ya, like 2.5 years ago a bug was created to add support for tracking berlios.de bugs, and ummmmm it is still confirmed/wishlist
[07:22] <ScottK> LaserJock: Developments wouldn't get dumped on us out of no where.
[07:23] <Burgundavia> although joey has done amazing work
[07:23] <Fujitsu> nixternal: I suppose there are no projects that are in main that need it.
[07:23] <nixternal> well, the bcm43xx garbage is
[07:23] <Burgundavia> OSS is not a panacea, but managed correctly, it would LP a better place
[07:23] <jussi01> wow, you guys really know how to gripe.... :P
[07:23] <ScottK> LaserJock: I don't particularly care about the source myself, but if the development process were more open, we'd all be better off.
[07:23] <joejaxx> jussi01: lol
[07:23] <Fujitsu> jussi01: We're very experienced.
[07:23] <nixternal> of course we do, we practice hard
[07:23] <LaserJock> I've seen a whole lot of crappy OSS projects
[07:23] <jussi01> hehe
[07:24] <Burgundavia> jussi01: most of us have been doing this for at least a year, closing in on three for some of us
[07:24] <nixternal> this is a once a week discussion almost now
[07:24] <nixternal> 2 for me
[07:24] <Burgundavia> LaserJock: crappy projects are caused by crappy management
[07:24] <Burgundavia> pure and simple
[07:24] <ScottK> LaserJock: Sure.  Not saying open source is a panacea, but that LP would be better than it is now.
[07:24] <LaserJock> sure
[07:24] <Burgundavia> LP had major issues until joey came along
[07:24] <LaserJock> you don't know that though
[07:24] <Fujitsu> LP has better management now that Joey has the wheel.
[07:24] <jussi01> heheh, look like i walked in at the wrong time...
[07:24] <ScottK> Fujitsu: If this is better management, I feel for you that've been around here a while.
[07:24] <LaserJock> as you say, it is management, IMO, more than openness that's the problem
[07:25] <Burgundavia> but management only solves part of the problem
[07:25] <ScottK> LaserJock: But the community can help if the management is more open.
[07:25] <LaserJock> it's *the* big problem for me
[07:25] <Burgundavia> now development is at least more consistent
[07:25] <LaserJock> ScottK: what community?
[07:25] <LaserJock> who's going to jump on the LP train?
[07:25] <Burgundavia> all teh bloody python lovers we have
[07:25] <ScottK> LaserJock: Those of us interested in using it.
[07:25] <nixternal> Burgundavia: hahahhaa
[07:25] <Burgundavia> everybody who wants to fix it
[07:25] <LaserJock> do you think they could?
[07:26] <Burgundavia> LaserJock: stupidity is not a good argument to us
[07:26] <Burgundavia> use, rather
[07:26] <ScottK> LaserJock: As an example, the idiotic idea to only let -devs set in progress lasted one day once it was in the light.
[07:26] <LaserJock> I seriously wonder if there would be very many people interested in it
[07:26] <Burgundavia> "your are all too stupid to work on our shiny app"
[07:26] <LaserJock> Burgundavia: that's not what I'm saying
[07:26] <Burgundavia> LaserJock: every single Ubuntu dev and user is, by the very definition, interested in LP development
[07:26] <LaserJock> I'm saying that it being open doesn't mean all of a sudden everybody starts fixing bugs
[07:26] <Fujitsu> If LP is open, more projects are likely to use it.
[07:27] <Burgundavia> no, no it doesn't
[07:27] <Fujitsu> By having more projects, there's a wider development community.
[07:27] <LaserJock> I would do the same thing I'm doing now
[07:27] <Burgundavia> if it is open, maybe we can get GNOME or Debian using it
[07:27] <LaserJock> filing bugs
[07:27] <Burgundavia> perhaps KDE
[07:27] <ScottK> LaserJock: No, not necessarily fixing more bugs, but maybe LP devs stop doing stupid stuff because they don't understand the community.
[07:27] <Burgundavia> none of them are going to use a closed source app to track bugs
[07:27] <LaserJock> ScottK: I don't see how that would change with it being opensourced
[07:27] <Burgundavia> http://wiki.python.org/moin/CallForTrackers
[07:27] <LaserJock> Burgundavia: that's a fair point
[07:28] <Fujitsu> Burgundavia: That's a good page.
[07:28] <LaserJock> I can see adoption being hurt by it being open sourced
[07:28] <Burgundavia> one of the reasons python does not LP for a bug tracker is because IT IS CLOSED SOURCE
[07:28] <Fujitsu> Oh.
[07:28] <Fujitsu> That's a new version.
[07:28] <LaserJock> sorry s/open/closed/
[07:28] <ScottK> LaserJock: If it's open and the development is open, more of us will be able to see what they are planning and maybe save them the trouble of inflicting something stupidon us.
[07:28] <Burgundavia> GNOME translators would love to use Rosetta, but it is closed source
[07:28] <LaserJock> ScottK: I'm not sure that that is really the case
[07:28] <Fujitsu> Rosetta seems to be great.
[07:29] <LaserJock> we already can see the bugs, we at least have little snippets of the specs
[07:29] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: We could see the bloody specs.
[07:29] <Burgundavia> if you look at most of the people using LP, they are already existing Ubuntu devs or users
[07:29] <Burgundavia> Jokosher, by example
[07:29] <LaserJock> I agree that they should open up the wiki for at least sanatized versions
[07:29] <LaserJock> and many within LP agree
[07:29] <ScottK> LaserJock: Where's the spec that said they were going to make it so only -devs could mark in progress?
[07:29] <LaserJock> ScottK: it's on the wiki
[07:29] <Burgundavia> which wiki?
[07:29] <LaserJock> the Ubuntu wiki
[07:30] <ScottK> LaserJock: Where?
[07:30] <LaserJock> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugWorkflow
[07:30] <Burgundavia> there are a million good reasons either way
[07:30] <LaserJock> apparently that wiki page is slightly outdated, but it has what you're looking for
[07:31] <Burgundavia> at the end of the day, the question that needs to be asked is: "Is Launchpad being closed source good for Ubuntu?"
[07:31] <Fujitsu> And the answer is a resounding no.
[07:31] <LaserJock> look, I think LP being opensourced would be a cool thing, no doubt
[07:31] <LaserJock> but I'm not going to get all upset over it
[07:31] <LaserJock> because at the end of the day, I'm not convinced it would change anything for me
[07:32] <LaserJock> I think it would be good from a philosophical standpoint, "Ubuntu should be developed on an open source infrastructure"
[07:32] <Fujitsu> I've seen people say they won't get involved with Ubuntu because of LP.
[07:32] <LaserJock> sure
[07:32] <LaserJock> and I see that point
[07:32] <LaserJock> I *don't* see "If LP was open sourced then it would be so much better"
[07:33] <Burgundavia> I think the process around its development would be better
[07:33] <LaserJock> sure
[07:33] <Burgundavia> which, in time, will produce a better app
[07:33] <LaserJock> well, maybe
[07:33] <ScottK> LaserJock: In the end, if Canonical believes in Open Source, then the default ought to be it's Free unless there is a strong reason not to and I have yet to see a sensible strong reason not to.
[07:33] <Fujitsu> We'd have more developers. More people who actually matter could help with it.
[07:33] <LaserJock> I agree to some degree
[07:33] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: I don't think you would
[07:33] <joejaxx> has then been a spec to talk about this at a UDS
[07:33] <joejaxx> ?
[07:33] <nixternal> $$$$ is a strong reason if you are Canonical I am sure
[07:33] <ScottK> It's pretty well established that open source development produces better software.
[07:34] <LaserJock> I think it would be hard to gain as much developer power as what Canonical is pumping into it now
[07:34] <Fujitsu> joejaxx: I don't think they'd allow it.
[07:34] <ScottK> nixternal: I don't even see that.
[07:34] <joejaxx> Fujitsu: oh?
[07:34] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: oh come on
[07:34] <Flannel> Well, if LP was open source, it would probably be navigatable again.
[07:34] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: It's hard to say.
[07:34] <LaserJock> Mark and several other Canonical people have talked about it before
[07:34] <LaserJock> it's not a dirty little secret that they censor
[07:35] <LaserJock> Flannel: I doubt it
[07:35] <nixternal> ya, I listened in on some of the LP talks at UDS via voip
[07:35] <ScottK> LaserJock: talked about what?
[07:35] <LaserJock> LP being closed source and why it isn't
[07:35] <ScottK> LaserJock: None of which makes much sense to me.  Maybe they get it and I don't.
[07:35] <Flannel> LaserJock: Eh, it was usable before the rewrite.  Now it's just impossible for anyone to find anything unless they know where it is already.
[07:36] <joejaxx> LaserJock: so they would not allow a UDS session on it? to discuss its current standing?
[07:36] <Fujitsu> Particularly Soyuz navigation absolutely sucks.
[07:36] <LaserJock> Flannel: and I don't think that would change if it was suddenly open sourced
[07:36] <LaserJock> joejaxx: I don't see why they wouldn't
[07:36] <LaserJock> geeze, it's not a big deal
[07:36] <Fujitsu> What discussion is there? "We're not doing it in the foreseeable future. BoF dismissed."
[07:36] <ScottK> LaserJock: It's not a big deal to YOU.
[07:36] <joejaxx> Fujitsu: no
[07:37] <joejaxx> come on
[07:37] <joejaxx> i doubt they would do that
[07:37] <LaserJock> if the developer community is interested, then let's send a letter to Mark asking for an explanation
[07:37] <joejaxx> it would be interesting to bring up all these things you all have said
[07:37] <joejaxx> in here
[07:37] <LaserJock> it's not a big deal, really
[07:37] <ScottK> joejaxx: They would have slides and it would take longer, but it would amount to that.
[07:37] <Fujitsu> joejaxx: True.
[07:37] <joejaxx> particularly the python/gnome/kde
[07:37] <joejaxx> and present it to them
[07:37] <joejaxx> that is what i am talking about
[07:38] <ScottK> LaserJock: I'm not really interested in a defense of proprietary infrastructure.  I want free software.  An explanation is really no help at all.
[07:38] <LaserJock> fine
[07:38] <LaserJock> but you can encourage Mark to timeline it or whatever you want
[07:38] <Burgundavia> a timeline would be snazzy
[07:38] <ScottK> LaserJock: From my perspective this last go round dumped a lot of cr@p on us and it would have been worse if we hadn't started screaming.  
[07:39] <LaserJock> I'm just saying, address it if you want, you don't have to sit here complain all the time
[07:39] <Fujitsu> Back to the discussion of about 10 months ago.
[07:39] <joejaxx> i really think there should be a uds session about it if people really feel that strongly about it, present cases and facts and see what is said in response
[07:39] <Burgundavia> LaserJock: I have raised it with Mark several times as well
[07:39] <LaserJock> this is one of the most open communities I know, surely it's not that hard
[07:39] <ScottK> LaserJock: If there were more community involvement, it'd have been better.  Since it's proprietary, it's up to them.
[07:39] <LaserJock> sure
[07:39] <LaserJock> this isn't Debian
[07:39] <LaserJock> we have a corporate sponsor
[07:39] <joejaxx> i doubt they would turn down a spec that 100 people are subscribed to :P
[07:39] <LaserJock> gotta take the good with the bad
[07:39] <Fujitsu> Their version of community discussion is a UDS BoF that isn't publicised.
[07:40] <LaserJock> I say having full time developers is the good
[07:40] <ScottK> LaserJock: Yes, take the good with the bad, but it doesn't mean we have to like it.
[07:40] <LaserJock> not having complete control over development infrastructre is the bad
[07:40] <LaserJock> ScottK: I'm not saying you have to
[07:40] <LaserJock> but I think we have some constructive things we can do perhaps
[07:41] <LaserJock> this last "status" thing was a storm in a teapot
[07:41] <LaserJock> it really didn't need to be as big of a deal as it ended up being
[07:41] <ScottK> LaserJock: As long as the LP methology is an oh by the way e-mail to devel-discuss, it's hard to know what to do.
[07:41] <Fujitsu> It shows enormous flaws in LP's development process.
[07:41] <ScottK> Fujitsu: +1
[07:41] <Fujitsu> What ScottK said.
[07:42] <Fujitsu> Brb
[07:42] <LaserJock> well, geeze, we do that sort of stuff all the time
[07:42] <LaserJock> granted on a smaller scale
[07:42] <LaserJock> but "Oops, btw, I broke the kernel today"
[07:42] <joejaxx> LaserJock: :P
[07:42] <LaserJock> sometimes crap happens
[07:42] <LaserJock> I agree that we need better communication
[07:42] <ScottK> LaserJock: How often does it happen on a released Ubuntu version?
[07:43] <ScottK> LaserJock: WE don't need better communication, they do.
[07:43] <LaserJock> and I'll come right out and say it that I'm fairly disappointed that Revell hasn't been on top of these things
[07:43] <LaserJock> but gosh, we've got lots of communication problems
[07:44] <LaserJock> I guess I just don't let it bother me all that much
[07:44] <LaserJock> I can see why people get upset
[07:44] <ScottK> Sure, everyone has communication problems, but as long as LP is proprietary, the responsibility can only lie in one place.
[07:44] <LaserJock> I'm fine with that
[07:44] <LaserJock> you may not
[07:44] <ScottK> LaserJock: What is the antecedant of 'that'
[07:45] <LaserJock> I'm fine with it being their problem
[07:45] <LaserJock> although I don't think your statement is strickly true
[07:45] <Fujitsu> We break things in development releases (except for X.org in Dapper, but that was really bad).
[07:46] <LaserJock> I've often talked with LP devs and they really wanted to know what their users (us) thought and needed
[07:46] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: and they realize that this status thing was a "really bad"
[07:46] <Fujitsu> They do? Good.
[07:46] <LaserJock> and it wasn't that bad either
[07:46] <ScottK> Yes, good.  First I've heard of it.
[07:46] <LaserJock> they make all kinds of changes all the time
[07:47] <ScottK> It was a lot less bad then it might have been because they didn't fully deploy it.
[07:47] <LaserJock> it sucks documentation wise and they should have given us some heads-up time
[07:48] <LaserJock> hmm
[07:48] <Fujitsu> It was announced to a non-developer list of part of their userbase. The announcement was misleading, and the changes deserved a lot more warning.
[07:48] <ScottK> And it didn't actually work correctly either (link translations and failing to include all open statuses in searches)
[07:48] <ScottK> It appeared to have had very little testing.
[07:48] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: sure, heno was a little confused
[07:48] <LaserJock> they are doing monthly rollouts, I doubt it gets all *that* much testing anyway
[07:48] <Fujitsu> As heno's the one who should know about that stuff (other then Mr. Revell), that's even worse.
[07:49] <ScottK> That's a problem.
[07:49] <Fujitsu> They used to have weekly rollouts.
[07:49] <Fujitsu> Nothing had broken too badly in a while.
[07:49] <Fujitsu> Their review process is still similar, AFAIK.
[07:49] <LaserJock> gosh, you guys act as if no other software ever has bugs or mishaps or bad features
[07:49] <LaserJock> we deal with this stuff all the time
[07:50] <LaserJock> just because it's proprietary doesn't mean we need to treat it all that differently
[07:50] <ScottK> LaserJock: Yes.  Absolutely it does.
[07:50] <LaserJock> especially since many of the devs come from an open source community
[07:50] <LaserJock> ScottK: I think that's crap, but whatever
[07:50] <ScottK> LaserJock: As long as it's proprietary, the community has no responsibility for it.
[07:50] <Fujitsu> It's proprietary, the open source community depends on it, and we have to trust the proprietary devs.
[07:50] <LaserJock> so what?
[07:50] <LaserJock> honestly, geeze
[07:51] <LaserJock> you guys have never had to rely on anythin proprietary in your lives?
[07:51] <ScottK> It's a question of where the responsibility lies.
[07:51] <LaserJock> so?
[07:51] <LaserJock> I see problems, I file bugs, bug hopefully get fixed
[07:51] <Fujitsu> joejaxx: That's a few months away yet.
[07:51] <joejaxx> Fujitsu: yes but i can still wish
[07:51] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: ... or they sit around for a year or two.
[07:52] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: and we don't have bugs like that?
[07:52] <LaserJock> I mean, I really don't see any difference here
[07:52] <Fujitsu> With F/LOSS, you can scratch your own itch, so to speak.
[07:52] <LaserJock> sure
[07:52] <ScottK> LaserJock: WIth most apps, if I don't like the new features, I can run the old version.  Not so with LP.
[07:52] <Fujitsu> That too.
[07:52] <LaserJock> do you get to do that with Google?
[07:53] <LaserJock> with Yahoo?
[07:53] <LaserJock> with Amazon?
[07:53] <Fujitsu> I don't want to be forced to run Vista the second it's released.
[07:53] <LaserJock> it's a service guys
[07:53] <Flannel> LaserJock: yes.  You simply don't shop at Amazon.
[07:53] <LaserJock> we use them everyday
[07:53] <joejaxx> not to disrupt the current discussion but does anyone know what the "later" mileston is?
[07:53] <joejaxx> on lp?
[07:53] <LaserJock> I think it is obsolete
[07:53] <ScottK> No, but if Google get's things wrong enough, I can use Yahoo.
[07:53] <joejaxx> LaserJock: oh ok
[07:54] <Fujitsu> joejaxx: Used to be for stuff that should be done before release, but not a milsetone in particular, AFAIK.
[07:54] <joejaxx> ah ok
[07:54] <joejaxx> just wondering thanks
[07:54] <joejaxx> :)
[07:54] <LaserJock> I mean, I totally understand that opensourced LP would be better
[07:54] <LaserJock> but I'm not going to get an ulcer over it not being
[07:54] <ScottK> LaserJock: For some other distro, it's a service that distro has chosen to use.  For Ubuntu it's a critical part of our tool chain.
[07:54] <LaserJock> and I *have* to trust Mark and Canonical enough to use it
[07:55] <LaserJock> part of being an Ubuntu developer right now is dealing with issues with Canonical
[07:55] <LaserJock> it's the nature of the beast
[07:55] <ScottK> LaserJock: Sure.  I'm here now aren't I.
[07:55] <Fujitsu> It's mostly manageable.
[07:55] <Fujitsu> There are some conflicts, but it's pretty OK.
[07:55] <LaserJock> so if we don't like it we can say so, and work towards getting a better situation
[07:55] <ScottK> But as I said at the beginning, the proprietary toolset is a negative aspect of an overall positive picture.
[07:56] <crimsun> do you mean "part of being an Ubuntu developer right now is accepting issues beyond your control"?
[07:56] <LaserJock> I can see where people would think that
[07:56] <ScottK> LaserJock: I just don't see what can be done on our end to make the situation better.
[07:56] <LaserJock> I personally don't care, and that's justme
[07:56] <AndyP> ScottK: write a better LP clone :)
[07:56] <ScottK> Hi crimsun.  How'd househunting go?
[07:56] <LaserJock> well, for one thing it doesn't help to just complain about it being closed source, therefor it sucks
[07:57] <LaserJock> the LP devs really want to make LP better
[07:57] <crimsun> ScottK: not bad, I've settled on Columbia given the N-S commute
[07:57] <LaserJock> but they need actionable material
[07:57] <LaserJock> I've been trying to work on that some
[07:57] <ScottK> LaserJock: It doesn't suck because of the fact that it's closed source, it's just harder to make it better/more widely used because it is.
[07:57] <joejaxx> well one thing is if this is a sprint at the next UDS
[07:57] <LaserJock> ScottK: agreed
[07:57] <joejaxx> i think our discussions will be alot more productive
[07:58] <ScottK> crimsun: It's a nice area.  If you're headed into DC, it's about the best direction to head in from.
[07:58] <LaserJock> I don't think a UDS BOF would be helpful at all
[07:58] <LaserJock> I think it would be a disaster
[07:58] <joejaxx> LaserJock: really?
[07:58] <joejaxx> :(
[07:58] <LaserJock> yes, really
[07:58] <Fujitsu> UDS BoFs worked well for the status changes
[07:58] <ScottK> heh
[07:58] <joejaxx> why? :\
[07:58] <LaserJock> people would just yell at each other and nothing would get done
[07:58] <LaserJock> this is a Canonical policy issue
[07:58] <joejaxx> well people need to learn to act civil :P
[07:58] <ScottK> joejaxx: Keep in mind the level of passion here and remember this is only one side of the discussion. 
[07:58] <LaserJock> that has community consequences
[07:58] <Fujitsu> I can see a lot of yelling and not much else, like LaserJock.
[07:59] <ScottK> It would get load.
[07:59] <joejaxx> true :\
[07:59] <LaserJock> what we would need is a unified community statement
[07:59] <LaserJock> heck, MOTU could go on strike or something if it truely came to it
[07:59] <LaserJock> but us grumbling amongst each other does nothing much to help the situation, IMO
[07:59] <Fujitsu> Nyeh, Canonical doesn't need us that much.
[08:00] <ScottK> AndyP: I don't feel a need to replace LP (now), but I would like it to support our processes rather than attempt to drive them.
[08:00] <joejaxx> Fujitsu: yes they do
[08:00] <joejaxx> lol
[08:00] <joejaxx> if universe halted there would be a problem
[08:00] <joejaxx> universe/multiverse*
[08:00] <AndyP> ScottK: yeah, bit drastic isn't it... i was half joking 
[08:00] <LaserJock> ScottK: honestly though, the status stuff was oiginally designed to do that
[08:01] <crimsun> joejaxx: only to an extent.  There are plenty of people who will compile their own debs and post URLs to them.
[08:01] <joejaxx> crimsun: ah that is true
[08:01] <LaserJock> the issue is not so much specific to LP though
[08:01] <joejaxx> but it has been there for quite some while
[08:01] <Flannel> LaserJock: I hardly think a strike is appropriate.  You hurt the users more than anything else.  Once theyre gone (even if the strike only lasts a day) the fallout will remain.
[08:01] <joejaxx> so it is a convenience now
[08:01] <ScottK> LaserJock: I believer that was the goal, just not how it was going to end up.
[08:01] <crimsun> Ubuntu as a distro most definitely does not need MOTU.
[08:02] <crimsun> it helps immensely to have diligent MOTU, but it's not a matter of life or death.
[08:02] <LaserJock> we (the volunteer community) have a lot of interfaces with Canonical and at those interfaces friction can happen
[08:02] <joejaxx> crimsun: because most of the stuff is in main (ie maintained by u-c-d) ?
[08:02] <Fujitsu> The main stuff that users use is, unsurprisingly, in main.
[08:02] <joejaxx> yeah
[08:02] <LaserJock> communication is a key aspect here
[08:03] <LaserJock> Canonical could really use better communication with the volunteer community
[08:03] <Fujitsu> Ubuntu would operate without universe, and could even just grab stuff unmodified from Debian. MOTU aren't really necessary in the scheme of things.
[08:03] <DarkSun88> Hi all
[08:03] <Fujitsu> They definitely could.
[08:03] <Fujitsu> Hi DarkSun88. Welcome to the warzone.
[08:03] <LaserJock> Canonical is probably one of the better Linux companies around, but it could still use a lot more
[08:03] <DarkSun88> Fujitsu: :D
[08:03] <LaserJock> The thing with this spec is, the LP devs did discuss it with the community
[08:03] <LaserJock> in a BOF in Sevilla
[08:04] <LaserJock> so for them they got the "user" feedback they needed to procede
[08:04] <Fujitsu> That wasn't publicised.
[08:04] <LaserJock> that's an issue
[08:04] <Fujitsu> I only discovered it when trawling through Malone specs a week ago.
[08:04] <LaserJock> I feel like we do a bad job of giving out the results of the UDSs
[08:04] <Fujitsu> bug-workflow doesn't to me say "let's rewrite all the statuses and permissions!"
[08:05] <Fujitsu> So I didn't think much of it until I read it recently.
[08:05] <LaserJock> sure
[08:05] <LaserJock> but lots of things are done that way presently
[08:05] <ScottK> As I understand it, they had a discussion of a PART of the changes, at UDS, not all of them.
[08:05] <crimsun> UDS specifically aren't for the community; they're for Canonical employees paid to work on Ubuntu.
[08:05] <LaserJock> I don't know a 10th of what's going on after a UDS
[08:06] <LaserJock> in fact, as I said earlier, I talked with kiko, BjornT, and mdz about statuses earlier in the week
[08:06] <LaserJock> and I got blindsided with these changes
[08:06] <LaserJock> so obviously it didn't get out properly
[08:06] <Fujitsu> Not good.
[08:07] <LaserJock> but I think that's more of a communication issue, rather than "LP is closed source so it's evil"
[08:07] <LaserJock> I honestly think we can get much further by completely avoiding the proprietary issue
[08:07] <AndyP> openness and communication are linked quite strongly
[08:07] <LaserJock> because I feel that that isn't *the* issue
[08:08] <Fujitsu> That part is due to communication, but the whole bug status thing would have been avoided if their development process was more open.
[08:08] <LaserJock> *the* issue is a lack of communication, which can happen anywhere
[08:08] <Fujitsu> elkbuntu: Right, that's one problem.
[08:08] <poningru> where is jono
[08:08] <elkbuntu> Fujitsu, and one that would add to the communication barriers
[08:08] <poningru> been reading scroll back
[08:08] <elkbuntu> poningru, probably on a plane somewhere
[08:08] <ScottK> LaserJock: I agree that communication is the issue, not (primarily) the close nature of it, but the fact that it's closed put the onus on them to do all the communicating.
[08:08] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: LPs development process is about as open as Ubuntu's, roughly
[08:08] <poningru> def needs jono in here to answer these questions
[08:08] <LaserJock> ScottK: no it doesn't
[08:09] <ScottK> elkbuntu: Why does it matter if the upstream bug tracker is another LP or a bugzilla?
[08:09] <LaserJock> ScottK: it makes it more difficult, for sure
[08:09] <Fujitsu> jono is the Ubuntu community manager. I think this is more Matt Revell's domain.
[08:09] <ScottK> LaserJock: It's either a community project or it's not.
[08:09] <poningru> Fujitsu: the reason being I think this is more a lack of communication between community and canonical
[08:09] <Fujitsu> ScottK: It does matter, in that LP could probably be taught to communicate with another LP very easily :P
[08:10] <LaserJock> ScottK: I don't think it matters so much
[08:10] <elkbuntu> ScottK, it's already a challenge keeping them all in touch, without complicating it even further
[08:10] <poningru> Fujitsu: and I see this problem not only in the motu||LP devel communication
[08:10] <poningru> I also see it in marketing
[08:10] <LaserJock> I think it's hard to really tell what is a "community project" and what isn't
[08:10] <poningru> where we have no fracking idea who the marketing person is at canonical
[08:10] <LaserJock> you can see LP bugs
[08:10] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Right, so opening up LP and spreading them would make things better than a monolithic proprietary LP that others won't use.
[08:10] <LaserJock> you can see LP specs (there should be enough to get an idea of what's going on)
[08:11] <Fujitsu> ScottK: Right. They can communicate, and the world lives in peace and harmony forever. Aw.
[08:11] <crimsun> LaserJock: what's difficult?
[08:11] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: A lot of them have a description of one line.
[08:11] <poningru> anyway Burgundavia going to sleep got a bit done as far as thursday goes will upload it tomorrow
[08:11] <LaserJock> crimsun: communication to a proprietary app development team
[08:11] <poningru> nn
[08:11] <Fujitsu> poningru: Night.
[08:12] <ScottK> LaserJock: Look at the fraction of Ubuntu core-devs that are not Canonical employees and then do the same caluculation for LP.  I think you'll find it very different.
[08:12] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: they *should* have enough to get an idea
[08:12] <LaserJock> ScottK: but what does that matter?
[08:12] <LaserJock> I mean, what does that prove
[08:12] <ScottK> You said LP development and Ubuntu development were equally open.
[08:12] <LaserJock> roughly
[08:12] <ScottK> They aren't.  LP development is limited to Canonical devs.
[08:12] <ScottK> OK roughly.
[08:13] <LaserJock> and core Ubuntu development is roughly limited to Canonical
[08:13] <Fujitsu> I know LP had one community dev for a short period a long time ago.
[08:13] <LaserJock> they define priorities
[08:13] <LaserJock> they pay the key people and tell them what to work on
[08:13] <LaserJock> they do a lot of stuff behind our backs
[08:13] <ScottK> Right, but they still can't tell you what to work on.
[08:13] <Fujitsu> Whereas they do with LP. We can't work on anything.
[08:13] <LaserJock> well, LP devs aren't doing that either
[08:13] <ScottK> If you want to make package X do Y and upload it, it's there.  
[08:14] <LaserJock> there isn't anything to work on ;-)
[08:14] <ScottK> Yes, because it's closed source
[08:14] <LaserJock> ScottK: well, only to a certain extent
[08:14] <ScottK> Agreed.
[08:14] <LaserJock> the archive admins are Canonical
[08:14] <Fujitsu> That's mostly because LP is deficient.
[08:14] <LaserJock> they *could* stop volunteer devs if they wanted to
[08:14] <Fujitsu> There's no UI.
[08:14] <ScottK> Sure.  They've got the ultimate veto power.
[08:15] <LaserJock> anyway, this is a little sidebar
[08:15] <ScottK> OK.
[08:15] <LaserJock> my point was that Ubuntu isn't completely open either
[08:15] <ScottK> Sure.  What is.
[08:15] <LaserJock> it's a part of having a distro that is sponsored by a company
[08:16] <ScottK> Even Debian isn't completely open.  It just has it's closed aspects worked a different way.
[08:16] <ScottK> Agreed.
[08:16] <crimsun> what I'm reading is that LP changes could have been better disclosed to its potential clients.
[08:16] <LaserJock> I'd love to see us use a free and open source infrastrucure tool
[08:16] <LaserJock> crimsun: exactly
[08:16] <LaserJock> and tbh, I'm not convinced the "big idea" of LP is going to work
[08:17] <ScottK> And they could have been less brain dead too (the changes).
[08:17] <LaserJock> but I don't control what we use and I like LP just fine and I think the LP devs do a good job
[08:17] <LaserJock> so even though I'm not particularly fond of the way LP is developed some days, I work *with* LP devs to make it better
[08:18] <LaserJock> because I don't think it's just going to "go away"
[08:18] <ScottK> LP is generally fine these days (although personally I don't particularly like the new UI).  I just wish they wouldn't do stuff that makes it worse.
[08:18] <LaserJock> with something like 1/2 to 2/3 of his company into LP I can't imagine Mark will just let it go
[08:18] <ScottK> I wouldn't expect them to let it go.
[08:18] <LaserJock> ScottK: sure, and much of that can be corrected
[08:19] <ScottK> LaserJock: Yes, but why are we doing that after the fact.  
[08:19] <LaserJock> some things are tough to change because of the way it's written
[08:19] <LaserJock> ScottK: cause they goofed, they didn't test enough, they didn't get enough user feedback
[08:19] <LaserJock> stuff that happens to us all the time
[08:19] <LaserJock> think of all the silly SRUs we have to do
[08:20] <ScottK> I'd say that they got all the user feedback they asked for.
[08:20] <LaserJock> well, they though they had enough
[08:20] <LaserJock> they got, I think, several of the big players in Ubuntu to be ok with their changes
[08:20] <ScottK> Or at least the fraction of the changes they discussed.
[08:21] <AndyP> they should encourage user feedback at every stage... as you said, that wiki page went out of date (why?)
[08:21] <LaserJock> because it changed at the Sevilla BOF I think
[08:21] <LaserJock> or something roughly like that
[08:22] <ScottK> LaserJock: My understanding from someone who was there was that not all of the proposed changes (the limits on status changes in particular) were discussed at UDS.
[08:22] <LaserJock> that's possible
[08:22] <LaserJock> often times they don't think it's going to be a big deal and then it is
[08:22] <Fujitsu> ScottK: I have talked to someone who said similar.
[08:22] <LaserJock> stuff like this happens
[08:23] <LaserJock> I think we *can* help them do better
[08:23] <ScottK> It seems disingenuous to me to discuss part of a spec at UDS and then respond to complaints about the stuff not discussed with "But we discussed the spec at UDS:.
[08:23] <LaserJock> well, there's a lot more too it
[08:24] <LaserJock> LP devs see distro employees as just as good as asking us
[08:24] <LaserJock> they don't always get a proper sampling of feedback
[08:25] <ScottK> LaserJock: I'm sure there is, but this is where it being proprietary hurts again.  As long as it's a proprietary app, my give a darn factor for how hard it is for them is very low.
[08:25] <ScottK> By deciding to make LP proprietary, Canonical has really made it their problem.
[08:26] <LaserJock> I guess
[08:26] <LaserJock> I've talked to these guys
[08:26] <LaserJock> and know how much they are interested in helping us
[08:26] <elkbuntu> this discussion isnt really going to solve anything...
[08:26] <LaserJock> obviously, LP being proprietary makes it harder
[08:26] <LaserJock> but I guess Mark has weighed the pros and cons
[08:27] <joejaxx> hello elkbuntu :)
[08:27] <LaserJock> and decided that for now at least it remains unreleased
[08:27] <LaserJock> elkbuntu: I think it's useful
[08:27] <ScottK> elkbuntu: I agree, but LaserJock is the MOTU rep to LP, so I think it's important for him to be stuffed full of the community opinion on this.
[08:27] <LaserJock> yes
[08:27] <LaserJock> I've talked to kiko once about the status thing already
[08:27] <ScottK> LaserJock: Useful yes, but for who?  It doesn't help me any.
[08:27] <ScottK> and?
[08:28] <LaserJock> well, I don't think he was all that happy about it
[08:28] <ScottK> Who is kiko?
[08:28] <Fujitsu> One of the LP bergods.
[08:28] <elkbuntu> ScottK, in terms of it's probably better with more LP people in the discussion
[08:28] <Fujitsu> Almost on top, I think.
[08:29] <LaserJock> Christian Reis
[08:29] <ScottK> Henrick (who was fronting the mailing list discussion) seemed unable to really get that we had people who were devs that fixed bugs.
[08:29] <ScottK> LaserJock: Doesn't help me any.
[08:29] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Thanks.
[08:29] <LaserJock> ScottK: as Fujitsu said, one of the top admins in the LP world
[08:29] <Fujitsu> ScottK: weren't devs, you mean? I got that too.
[08:29] <LaserJock> kiko is my primarly technical contact
[08:29] <ScottK> Fujitsu: Yes.  Weren't devs.
[08:29] <Fujitsu> I'm not sure how SteveA relates to him.
[08:30] <LaserJock> I think they're kinda at the same level
[08:30] <LaserJock> but oversee different aspects perhaps
[08:30] <LaserJock> or SteveA might be his immediate boss, I'm not sure
[08:30] <LaserJock> I'd love to see an organizational chart
[08:30] <Fujitsu> Anyhow, kiko is very very close to the top of all things LP.
[08:30] <Fujitsu> Yeah, it'd be interesting.
[08:30] <LaserJock> kiko is my primary LP technical contact
[08:31] <ScottK> OK.  What kind of not happy?
[08:31] <LaserJock> he *came* to me asking for a MOTU liason
[08:31] <joejaxx> how many people work on LP?
[08:31] <LaserJock> joejaxx: roughly 50 I think
[08:31] <Fujitsu> 35
[08:31] <ScottK> LaserJock: I guess the kindest thing I can say is how to use the liaison is still a work in progress then.
[08:31] <Fujitsu> (developers, that is)
[08:31] <AndyP> https://launchpad.net/~launchpad/+members
[08:32] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: right
[08:32] <joejaxx> AndyP: ah good thinking i never thought about that
[08:32] <Fujitsu> That was my reference, AndyP.
[08:32] <LaserJock> ScottK: I agree
[08:32] <LaserJock> there's a lot that goes one though
[08:32] <LaserJock> I honestly feel like I at least should have been given a heads up
[08:32] <LaserJock> to pass on to MOTU
[08:32] <ScottK> Alternatively, it's all just window dressing because they are going to do what they are going to to.
[08:32] <LaserJock> especially since I talked with the LP devs about the statuses at Sevilla
[08:33] <LaserJock> I doubt it
[08:33] <ScottK> Would you ask them to bump the Triaged bugs disappear bug to Critical.
[08:33] <LaserJock> I just got an email from kiko asking me to use the motu tag more
[08:33] <ScottK> LaserJock: I doubt it too, but at this point either theory fits the data.
[08:33] <Fujitsu> That should be trivial to fix, and Triaged is useless without it.
[08:34] <LaserJock> right now I've got about 8 bugs that I've asked to get fixed that have been
[08:34] <Fujitsu> Afternoon, Hobbsee.
[08:34] <LaserJock> it's sometimes slow work, no doubt
[08:34] <LaserJock> but they *do* work on them
[08:35] <AndyP> well, presumably they only work 9-5 on weekdays :)
[08:35] <LaserJock> heh, they work a fair amount
[08:35] <LaserJock> I think they do more than 40hrs/week
[08:35] <LaserJock> in general
[08:36] <LaserJock> from what I can see, Rosetta is taking a lot of resources
[08:36] <Hobbsee> hi Fujitsu 
[08:36] <crimsun> well, I always give them the benefit of the doubt; development is a painstaking problem, and I'm on both ends
[08:37] <crimsun> clients nearly always have a different idea of "critical" from developers
[08:37] <ScottK> Hello Hobbsee.
[08:37] <Hobbsee> hi ScottK, crimsun, LaserJock, AndyP 
[08:37] <crimsun> hi Hobbsee 
[08:37] <AndyP> hello Hobbsee 
[08:37] <LaserJock> hi Hobbsee 
[08:38] <Hobbsee> :)
[08:38] <crimsun> (plus I'm not an employee, nor have I purchased a support contract, so I'm a nobody.  I just don't bother.)
[08:38] <LaserJock> look, I'll try to talk to kiko and perhaps joey and matthew revell this next week
[08:38] <AndyP> here's an idea... get LP devs to do some MOTU work or bug triage for a training week :)
[08:38] <LaserJock> and see if we can hash out some communication and SOS plans
[08:39] <AndyP> put them in our shoes
[08:39] <ScottK> Hobbsee: You've been missing all the fun.  We've been on a collective LP rant for over 3 hours now.
[08:39] <Fujitsu> This is the longest one to date, I think.
[08:39] <LaserJock> AndyP: and we get to develop LP for a week? :-)
[08:39] <Hobbsee> ScottK: oh woot.  i need to file some critical bugs on it, too
[08:39] <Fujitsu> Makes for a fun afternoon.
[08:39] <ScottK> LP Bug #1 - Launchpad not open source.
[08:39] <AndyP> LaserJock: no, i'll stick with ubuntu stuff i think, much more fun
[08:40] <LaserJock> so here's my ideas, see if you guys agree:
[08:40] <ScottK> OK
[08:40] <Hobbsee> oh right, it got filed.  https://launchpad.net/bugs/121636
[08:40] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 121636 in malone "when a bug is marked as triaged it disappears" [High,Confirmed]  
[08:40] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: Ah yes, that one.
[08:40] <Fujitsu> Nice job on their part to manage to stuff that up.
[08:40] <ScottK> Hobbsee: I already asked LaserJock to add it to his MOTU really annoyed list.
[08:40] <Hobbsee> i marked a bug as critical and triaged - made me go "so, uh, where on earth is that bug i just marked as critical, for herd 2?"
[08:41] <LaserJock> 1. We need an SOS plan. That is to say, if they do something or something critical happens we (MOTU) need a way to get a fix ASAP
[08:41] <calc> i'm pretty sure disappearing triaged bugs issue will be fixed pretty fast ;)
[08:41] <ScottK> calc: But you work for Canonical, so you'd say that.
[08:41] <Fujitsu> calc: It's waiting for the next rollout.
[08:41] <Fujitsu> ScottK: Exactly what I thought too.
[08:41] <Fujitsu> So, it's a month away.
[08:41] <LaserJock> 2. We need to know relevent LP changes at least a week? before a rollout
[08:41] <calc> ScottK: that kind of bug affects everyone including employees though
[08:42] <calc> Fujitsu: what?
[08:42] <LaserJock> 3. Have a number of LP beta-testers that can test MOTU-critical activites before rollout
[08:42] <Hobbsee> ScottK: i'm not sure that canonical has a blanket 'you must say only positive things about canonical' rule
[08:42] <calc> Fujitsu: they don't rollout faster when they break critical stuff?
[08:42] <Fujitsu> calc: Unless it's Critical, it's not a candidate for cherrypicking.
[08:42] <Fujitsu> It's obviously not important enough.
[08:42] <ScottK> Hobbsee: I was actually kidding.  He's new enough not to have been fully brainwashed yet.
[08:42] <calc> Fujitsu: ah ok apparently this bug is already critical though
[08:42] <Hobbsee> mmm...brainwashing.
[08:42] <calc> Fujitsu: oh nm its high
[08:42] <Hobbsee> ScottK: where'd you get your bitterness from?
[08:43] <AndyP> it's not critical, it's "High"
[08:43] <ScottK> 3+ hours of whining about LP
[08:43] <Fujitsu> AndyP: Exactly.
[08:43] <ScottK> That and it's almost 3AM here.  I have no idea why I didn't just go to bed.
[08:44] <LaserJock> so what do people think about my points?
[08:44] <Hobbsee> heh
[08:44] <Hobbsee> LaserJock: being that ubuntu isnt the only group in launchpad, i'm not sure they care terribly much
[08:44] <crimsun> (3) needs a clearly delineated set of "activities" with precise test cases
[08:44] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: Point 3 was done this time. Staging was accessible to everyone... for about 24 hours before the change entered production.
[08:44] <ScottK> LaserJock: I think 2 and 3 go together.  If there were MOTUs involved in testing, they could seek community opinions if stuff seemed odd to them.
[08:45] <LaserJock> well, I split them as in
[08:45] <LaserJock> we get a list of LP changes
[08:45] <LaserJock> then we have a number of MOTUs that can go through and test
[08:45] <LaserJock> I guess I'm thinking like doing Release Candidate .iso testing
[08:45] <crimsun> I would strongly advise against that approach
[08:46] <LaserJock> ok :-)
[08:46] <ScottK> They key is getting the list early enough so that if we come back and say, "OMG, no - that will kill us", they don't say, "Sorry, too late."
[08:46] <LaserJock> well, we do have the milestones
[08:46] <LaserJock> now
[08:46] <Fujitsu> crimsun: What issues do you see?
[08:47] <crimsun> instead, we should delineate our critical use cases detailing what our typical procedure is and what the expected result is
[08:47] <Hobbsee> calc: which request, sorry?
[08:47] <calc> Hobbsee: to get that stupid LP bug fixed ASAP ;)
[08:47] <LaserJock> crimsun: so like on a wiki page or something that they can use?
[08:47] <crimsun> we definitely do not want LP rollout blocking on MOTU
[08:47] <Hobbsee> ah right
[08:47] <crimsun> LaserJock: yes
[08:47] <Hobbsee> calc: it's blocking ubuntu-release
[08:47] <Hobbsee> so, as far as i'm concerned, it's critical.
[08:47] <Hobbsee> maybe i'm biased, as i'm part of ubuntu-release
[08:48] <LaserJock> well, I wasn't really seeing it as blocking them
[08:48] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: It's not blocking them. It's just making their job easier :P
[08:48] <LaserJock> but giving them some time to fix critical stuff before rollout
[08:48] <calc> Hobbsee: well i think ubuntu is a high enough customer of LP to get something like that fixed quickly if it blocks ubuntu for stuff... but we'll see
[08:48] <crimsun> LaserJock: if we can add to the regression suite, it's much better than having to ping-pong us
[08:48] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: where them == ubuntu-release?  sure, but it's not actually getting the bugs fixed, it's losing them.
[08:48] <Hobbsee> calc: i would think so.  i only noticed it last night when doing some RMing
[08:49] <LaserJock> crimsun: good point
[08:49] <calc> luckily i haven't triaged any OOo bugs in the past couple days
[08:49] <calc> so the tag wasn't there to cause me problems
[08:49] <LaserJock> crimsun: I'm not sure what all we'd give them but it sounds reasonable
[08:50] <crimsun> well, our hangup seems to be sponsoring, so we outline our typical sponsorship protocol
[08:50] <LaserJock> yeah
[08:50] <crimsun> a secondary one is SRU, but that could be tied to main as well
[08:50] <LaserJock> sometimes when I've talked with LP devs about how we often us LP they are a bit surprised
[08:50] <LaserJock> they should really know what our typical workflow is
[08:50] <LaserJock> how we are using LP
[08:50] <crimsun> like I said, most of us are just peons.  It's you high exposure deity folk that they see.
[08:51] <LaserJock> I've tried to do a little informally
[08:51] <Fujitsu> It's the distro team that they see.
[08:51] <LaserJock> crimsun: we're all peons ;-)
[08:51] <crimsun> Fujitsu: yes, the "paying clients" of sorts.
[08:51] <LaserJock> well
[08:51] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: they do listen to non-canonical people.  sometimes.
[08:51] <Hobbsee> at least some people within canonical do
[08:51] <LaserJock> I think they are also fairly interested in MOTU as well
[08:52] <Hobbsee> but you have to be careful in what you say :P
[08:52] <LaserJock> because I think MOTU are probably closer to what their real clients would be
[08:53] <LaserJock> well, Joey gets them using the milestones better I think it will help
[08:53] <LaserJock> I just checked the 1.1.6 milestone and I don't see anything about the status thing
[08:53] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: It's the second of the two specs.
[08:53] <LaserJock> hmm?
[08:53] <LaserJock> where are you looking?
[08:54] <LaserJock> oh freaking heck
[08:54] <Fujitsu> On malone.
[08:54] <LaserJock> they have the specs split up by product/project
[08:54] <Fujitsu> There's no unified LP project milestone page.
[08:54] <LaserJock> s/specs/milestones/
[08:55] <Fujitsu> It makes sense.
[08:55] <LaserJock> I was looking only at the Launchpad milestone
[08:55] <Fujitsu> But the launchpad-project project group should really list them all.
[08:55] <LaserJock> yes
[08:55] <LaserJock> that's what it does for bugs
[08:56] <Fujitsu> I guess that would make too much sense, though.
[08:56] <LaserJock> so we got 1 good spec and 1 not-so-good spec out of malone
[08:56] <LaserJock> ;-)
[08:56] <Fujitsu> Yes.
[08:56] <LaserJock> I *was* around for the MOTU permissions spec
[08:56] <LaserJock> s/spec/BOF?
[08:56] <Fujitsu> The first was very quick in the implementation. It only took like 2 months from when it was proposed a couple of days before UDS. I was surprised.
[08:58] <ScottK> Hobbsee: I did file bugs with the Postfix changes you uploaded yesterday with Debian today.
[08:58] <Hobbsee> ScottK: cool
[08:58] <LaserJock> btw, I've got 15 "motu" bugs in LP right now
[08:58] <LaserJock> I did have like 4 or 5, so hopefully they'll keep busy
[08:59] <LaserJock> I've got to get to bed, so let me wrap up a little here
[08:59] <Hobbsee> LaserJock: who will you poke over them?
[08:59] <Fujitsu> Well, it seems to have died out after about 3.5 hours. Not a bad effort.
[08:59] <Fujitsu> Night, LaserJock.
[08:59] <ScottK> Good night LaserJock
[09:00] <LaserJock> Hobbsee: "motu" is an official LP dev tag, kiko "appoints" resources and prioritizes them for me
[09:00] <LaserJock> I think the discussion is useful
[09:00] <Hobbsee> LaserJock: right.  so kiko
[09:00] <LaserJock> LP *is* proprietary and so we do need to take any advantage they offer us to move our priorities along
[09:01] <LaserJock> I can't opensource it
[09:01] <LaserJock> I'd love to see progress there, but for now I'm not worrying about it so much
[09:01] <ScottK> Understand.  It just limits what we can do.
[09:01] <LaserJock> what I *can* do is pass along to LP devs our need for better communication
[09:01] <LaserJock> ScottK: agreed
[09:02] <LaserJock> and try to work on getting us the best situation we can
[09:02] <Fujitsu> Hobbsee: The verb is affect, not effect!
[09:02] <crimsun> ok, so to accomplish that, we should draw up aforementioned protocol, no?
[09:02] <LaserJock> so what I'm getting from this status mess is that we/me need a way to SOS LP
[09:02] <crimsun> (sponsorship, SRU among them)
[09:02] <Fujitsu> If we're going to get anywhere, we should.
[09:03] <LaserJock> and to give them realistic example workflows, etc. as crimsun has said
[09:03] <LaserJock> give them a list of things we have to have working to do our work
[09:03] <Hobbsee> Fujitsu: i often get the two confused, as they both apply in different situations
[09:04] <LaserJock> one thing I'm interested in is if I could mark that "Triaged" bug as Critical
[09:04] <LaserJock> even if they downgrade it it would be interesting ;-)
[09:04] <ScottK> Go for it.
[09:04] <LaserJock> I'm tempted
[09:04] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: And mark it as Triaged, as it has enough info to be fixed.
[09:05] <LaserJock> but I don't want to piss anybody off just now
[09:05] <ScottK> What're they going to do, cut your pay?
[09:05] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: lol
[09:05] <Fujitsu> LaserJock: Are you actually able to change the importance?
[09:05] <LaserJock> Fujitsu: I belive so
[09:05] <ScottK> Everyone say it together... Go LaserJock
[09:06] <LaserJock> I could move it to Critical and then back to High to give them a little ping
[09:06] <Fujitsu> That might work.
[09:06] <ScottK> Just mark it critical and leave it.
[09:06] <Fujitsu> ScottK: kiko will eat him.
[09:06] <ScottK> Why, it's data loss and it's impacting Tribe 2 release.  I'd say it qualifies.
[09:07] <Fujitsu> kiko is the only one allowed to appoint bugs for cherrypicking.
[09:07] <Hobbsee> there are workarounds, of course
[09:07] <Hobbsee> if anyone's got serious wishes to work on LP, they can probably get access to the code, btw.
[09:07] <Fujitsu> Workarounds are the LP way.
[09:08] <Hobbsee> if they're known within the community, etc.
[09:08] <Hobbsee> (under a NDA)
[09:08] <Fujitsu> Yay, NDAs.
[09:09] <Hobbsee> well, yeah.
[09:10] <AndyP> NDAs are very chic, even kernel driver devs are wearing them these days
[09:10] <Fujitsu> I have a number for different companies for work, but they all have good reasons to keep their data secret.
[09:10] <Hobbsee> LaserJock: i'd imagine the wiki page was written by kiko, pre-sevilla.
[09:11] <Hobbsee> LaserJock: where he found out that the workflow was different to what he thought
[09:11] <crimsun> f login --save-after-login
[09:11] <crimsun> argh
[09:11] <Fujitsu> I agree with crimsun.
[09:12] <ScottK> It's easy enough to see who worked on it. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BugWorkflow?action=info
[09:13] <LaserJock> lol, I did it ;-)
[09:13] <AndyP> :)
[09:14] <LaserJock> ok, there you guys go
[09:14] <LaserJock> if my head rolls, it's all your fault ;-)
[09:14] <ScottK> LaserJock: If they didn't want you to push that button, they shouldn't have given you the power.
[09:15] <LaserJock> well, I'm not sure how many of them know I have it ;-)
[09:15] <LaserJock> I don't want to ruin a good thing, hehe
[09:15] <LaserJock> I *was* getting some private emails, but we got that worked out
[09:15] <LaserJock> private bugmails that is
[09:16] <ScottK> Good night everyone.  It's been an interesting evening.
[09:16] <Fujitsu> Night, ScottK.
[09:16] <LaserJock> I'm out too
[09:16] <LaserJock> thanks ScottK and Fujitsu 
[09:16] <LaserJock> and crimsun and everybody else
[09:16] <LaserJock> it's been fruitful
[09:16] <ScottK> No problem.
[09:16] <AndyP> g'night ScottK and LaserJock 
[09:16] <LaserJock> hopefully I can get something done this next week
[09:16] <Fujitsu> Night LaserJock
[09:16] <Fujitsu> It has been.
[09:16] <ScottK> Being persistent and argumentative are two of my strong points.
[09:16] <Hobbsee> LaserJock: you werent supposed to admit to that :P
[09:16] <Hobbsee> night LaserJock 
[09:19] <AndyP> well i'm glad that wasn't brought up at a motu meeting, the minutes would have been huge
[09:20] <Fujitsu> AndyP: Heheh.
[09:20] <Fujitsu> Close to 4 hours.
[09:21] <Hobbsee> haha
[09:21] <Hobbsee> still not sure how much was acheieved, without matt revell here.
[09:21] <Fujitsu> It would have been nice to have him and perhaps kiko here.
[09:22] <Hobbsee> true.  but it's sunday
[09:22] <Fujitsu> Well, yes.
[09:23] <TheMuso> What have I just missed/
[09:23] <Fujitsu> Over 1000 lines of LP ranting.
[09:23] <Hobbsee> TheMuso: a long rant about launchpad
[09:23] <jussi01> lol
[09:24] <RAOF> Over a breathtaking 4 hour stint :)
[09:24] <jussi01> long? dont you mean ginormous?
[09:24] <TheMuso> heh
[09:24] <TheMuso> Ok, sounds like I haven't missed much then.
[09:24] <jussi01> hehe
[09:24] <RAOF> Surely this is the perfect time to whip out "gargantuan" :)
[09:24] <jussi01> lol RAOF
[09:27] <TheMuso> haha
[09:28] <Fujitsu> TheMuso: It there was a bit of useful stuff in there. Not enough to be worth going through the logs, though.
[09:29] <Fujitsu> Where'd that `It' come from?
[09:30] <RAOF> It is, isn't it.
[09:30] <RAOF> The big question is: do you also find it useful?
[09:31] <crimsun> Screen 0: not direct rendering capable.
[09:31] <crimsun> no.  I don't find it useful.
[09:31] <Fujitsu> The translucency changing can be, if you want to check something behind.
[09:31] <Fujitsu> The writing on the screen in fire... well, I'm sure I don't need to go over the reasons for that being useful.
[09:31] <RAOF> Heh.
[09:32] <AndyP> the marketing folks find it very useful
[09:32] <RAOF> I'm learning to love "close windows in scale with RMB"
[09:33] <Fujitsu> I can't seem to get that working.
[09:33] <RAOF> AndyP: Yeah, I can imagine.  It is extremely shiny
[09:33] <RAOF> Fujitsu: It's the "scale addons" plugin, it might not be enabled by default?
[09:34] <Fujitsu> RAOF: Noted, but I have that turned on.
[09:34] <Fujitsu> TheMuso: It already does that. Super+scroll works well.
[09:37] <TheMuso> Fujitsu: Well better integration with accessibility technologies
[09:37] <RAOF> Fujitsu: Oh, sorry, it's middle-mouse-button to close windows in scale.  RMB should zoom them to the centre.
[09:38] <RAOF> If neither of these work, bug amaranth :)
[09:44] <AndyP> would be funny to have 3D penguins waddling all over your cube
[09:45] <TheMuso> IMO compiz by default is a bad idea. Waste of resources.
[09:45] <RAOF> What resources?
[09:45] <RAOF> Developer resources?
[09:45] <Treenaks> the scarce gpu resources!
[09:45] <TheMuso> graphics/memory resources?
[09:45] <AndyP> RAOF: basically it animates penguins floating down and landing on your windows and waddling around... pure gimmick
[09:45] <Treenaks> wait..
[09:45] <crimsun> Treenaks: do either model=3stack or model=5stack work?
[09:46] <jussi01> !info xpenguins
[09:46] <ubotu> xpenguins: little penguins walk on your windows. In component universe, is optional. Version 2.2-4 (feisty), package size 218 kB, installed size 1316 kB
[09:46] <Treenaks> crimsun: for what?
[09:46] <crimsun> Treenaks: for said laptop.  I've been asked to query you regarding that change.
[09:46] <crimsun> (audio)
[09:46] <Treenaks> crimsun: Oh you mean the intel-hda thing?
[09:46] <crimsun> yes.
[09:46] <RAOF> TheMuso: But the graphics resources are currently going to waste almost all the time :)
[09:46] <Treenaks> that's not a laptop :)
[09:47] <crimsun> Treenaks: ok, but the question remains.
[09:47] <RAOF> Like RAM, it's only a waste if you don't use it :)
[09:47] <TheMuso> RAOF: What about keeping power usage down?
[09:47] <crimsun> precisely.
[09:47] <crimsun> I disable DRI according to linuxpowertop.org's recommendations.
[09:48] <RAOF> TheMuso: Ok, that is an issue.
[09:48] <RAOF> However, I personally don't see much of a difference in power consumption metacity/compiz
[09:48] <Treenaks> crimsun: 3stack works
[09:49] <crimsun> Treenaks: and the latter (5stack)?
[09:49] <Treenaks> crimsun: so does 5stack
[09:49] <crimsun> ok, do you have a spdif?
[09:50] <Treenaks> no
[09:50] <crimsun> what's your physical jack layout?
[09:52] <Treenaks> crimsun: a stereo jack + mic jack on the front panel.. and some stuff at the back panel
[09:52] <Treenaks> crimsun: (line out/line in/mic I think, switchable to surround output)
[09:53] <crimsun> ok, 3stack
[09:53] <Treenaks> (maybe an extra jack on the back panel for LFE or Center, but I can't see the machine atm)
[09:53] <crimsun> argh
[09:53] <crimsun> ok, please let me know when you can see it.
[09:53] <Treenaks> OK, that'll be tomorrow then, sorry
[09:53] <crimsun> np
[09:58] <Treenaks> crimsun: I've found the user's manual PDF at dell.com
[09:58] <Treenaks> crimsun: front panel: headphone/mic; back panel: 5 sound connectors
[09:59] <DktrKranz> could you please have a look at http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?upid=5709?
[09:59] <crimsun> Treenaks: ok, then 5stack.  I'll fix it upstream, thanks.
[09:59] <Treenaks> crimsun: (this is a Dell Dimension 9150, for future reference)
[10:00] <RAOF> TheMuso: It can.  You're after "compizconfig-settings-manager", I believe
[10:00] <crimsun> Treenaks: ok.  (Model's unimportant but SSID is important.)
[10:00] <RAOF> TheMuso: If you run it, you'll see why it's not the default interface :)
[10:00] <Treenaks> crimsun: where do I find that? :)
[10:00] <crimsun> Treenaks: lspci -nv|grep 0403 -A1
[10:00] <TheMuso> RAOF: Right.
[10:00] <Treenaks> 00:1b.0 0403: 8086:27d8 (rev 01) Subsystem: 1028:01d1
[10:01] <crimsun> right, 0x102801d1
[10:02] <Treenaks> RAOF: ccsm "crashes" (apport pops up; program continues to run in "broken" state) all the time for me, and can't set half of the settings
[10:02] <RAOF> Treenaks: Ah, yes.  Fixed in git.
[10:03] <Treenaks> great :)
[10:03] <RAOF> (In case anyone wonders, it's very important to actually maintain references to your objects if you want them to hang around)
[10:04] <Treenaks> RAOF: that, or strangle the garbage collector ;)
[10:04] <TheMuso> So does anybody know how the compiz/beryl merge is going?
[10:04] <RAOF> It's done.
[10:04] <TheMuso> Wow that was quick.
[10:04] <RAOF> And has been done for ages, apart from stupid politics.
[10:04] <Treenaks> what's it called now? :)
[10:04] <TheMuso> Whats the name of it now?
[10:04] <AndyP> compiz fusion
[10:05] <AndyP> bit of a blah name
[10:05] <TheMuso> meh
[10:05] <RAOF> At least it's not "coral"
[10:06] <Treenaks> Berpiz
[10:06] <AndyP> with all the distros calling it desktop effects, i would've thought they'd go somewhere like DFX
[10:07] <RAOF> You don't know that particular community, obviously :)
[10:08] <AndyP> i've never been all that interested, mainly because my graphics hardware sucks... or drivers suck :)
[10:09] <Treenaks> I finally "fixed" my driver problem yesterday
[10:09] <Treenaks> (bug 20283)
[10:09] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 20283 in xserver-xorg-video-ati "[X700]  Really bad sync on HP NW8240" [Medium,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/20283
[10:09] <RAOF> All of my driver bugs get worked around with XGL.
[10:09] <Treenaks> running some register dump tool after logging in resolves the problem, yay workarounds ;)
[10:09] <Treenaks> RAOF: I like my RANDR
[10:10] <RAOF> I like my resume-from-suspend :)
[10:10] <Treenaks> RAOF: sounds like Bugfixing Time!
[10:10] <Fujitsu> I like my resume-from-suspend and RandR.
[10:10] <RAOF> Treenaks: Say hello to binary blob!
[10:10] <Treenaks> RAOF: say hello to radeon :)
[10:11] <RAOF> ...nvidia will continue to suck.  But suck less than fglrx.
[10:12] <Treenaks> RAOF: yes, that's why I'm so glad the radeon driver now works for my card (instead of fglrx)
[10:12] <Treenaks> TheMuso: hardware, or drivers?
[10:13] <TheMuso> Treenaks: Sorry, drivers.
[10:13] <Fujitsu> fglrx is really great. Starting a second X server on our main desktop causes the kernel to hang.
[10:13] <Treenaks> TheMuso: because afaik, they're working on it, just severely understaffed
[10:13] <TheMuso> Thanks to ATI not even releasing specs for cards that have open source driver support.
[10:13] <TheMuso> Well I only have ATI hardware that is not supported by the binary drivers.
[10:14] <TheMuso> i.e one mobility 7500, and 9200.
[10:14] <TheMuso> Sorry, two 9200s.
[10:14] <Treenaks> TheMuso: they're now doing nvidia/renouveau-like dumps on r500 cards
[10:14] <Treenaks> TheMuso: using a tool called "revenge"
[10:14] <Fujitsu> Hahah.
[10:14] <TheMuso> Nice.
[10:14] <RAOF> :)
[10:14] <Treenaks> tirdc.livejournal.com :)
[10:14] <TheMuso> Well I don't think any of mine are R500 card
[10:14] <TheMuso> cards
[10:15] <TheMuso> anyways, bbl.
[10:15] <TheMuso> Dinner.
[10:15] <Treenaks> 9200 is r300, I think, 7500 is most likely r200
[10:15] <RAOF> My partner's 9000 mobility works nicely out of the box.
[10:16] <Treenaks> so does my 9600 mobility :)
[10:16] <Treenaks> It's just the FireGL V5000 Mobility that's broken :)
[11:00] <guardian> hello
[11:00] <guardian> anyone here knows if alsa 1.0.14 packages will be made available for feisty ? main repositories ? or do i have to enable backports ? or do i have to build from source ?
[11:01] <Hobbsee> crimsun: ^
[11:01] <Hobbsee> crimsun: wont be in -updates
[11:01] <Hobbsee> er, guardian, it wont be in -updates
[11:02] <ajmitch> poor daniel
[11:02] <guardian> Hobbsee: so i better try to build it from source than wait ?
[11:02] <Hobbsee> might be smart
[11:03] <Hobbsee> may possibly be in backports - but unlikely
[11:03] <Fujitsu> Unlikely.
[11:04] <guardian> what decides if something goes into backports or not ?
[11:06] <Hobbsee> a) if it builds, b) if it works c) if it breaks for people
[11:06] <Hobbsee> and alsa is a fiddly beast, and tends to break
[11:08] <guardian> ok i see, well gonna try to build from source then, this is the only way i can have my emu1212m working so it's worth the hassle
[11:08] <crimsun> alsa-driver cannot be backported without backporting -lib as well.
[11:09] <crimsun> your emu1212m likely won't work even with 1.0.14
[11:09] <guardian> it's reported to work though
[11:09] <crimsun> _some_ older models do
[11:09] <Hobbsee> guardian: FYI - crimsun is the alsagod.
[11:09] <guardian> Hobbsee: i don't argue people's knowledge :)
[11:09] <Hobbsee> :)
[11:09] <crimsun> and asking to backport alsa-driver currently would be silly; it hasn't even entered gutsy yet
[11:10] <guardian> ok, well i was not aware of that 
[11:10] <crimsun> (officially: waiting on 1.0.14 to enter sid, which is blocked on i18n processing)
[11:10] <StevenK> crimsun: And unofficially? :-P
[11:11] <crimsun> StevenK: killing the udev rule completely and letting kmix or mixer_applet2/pulseaudio handle the state restoration
[11:11] <crimsun> err, missing "testing ..."
[11:13] <crimsun> guardian: plenty of people use 1.0.14 just fine with Ubuntu 7.04.  You're responsible for any breakage, however. :-)
[11:13] <guardian> sure
[11:13] <guardian> but since i never built alsa from source, i prefered looking for .debs :)
[11:14] <crimsun> it doesn't really matter.  You'd be overwriting most of /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/kernel/sound/
[12:17] <Kmos> Hobbsee: hi :)
[12:17] <Kmos> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libapt-pkg-perl/+bug/121924
[12:17] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 121924 in libapt-pkg-perl "Please sync libapt-pkg-perl 0.1.21 from Debian unstable" [Undecided,Incomplete]  
[12:17] <Hobbsee> hiya
[12:18] <Kmos> so, i need to change sync to merge ?
[12:18] <Kmos> :)
[12:18] <Kmos> but there is ubuntu patches ?
[12:22] <Hobbsee> Kmos: it may be a sync, it may be a merge.   you need to check
[12:25] <Kmos> Hobbsee: i don't see nothing on ubuntu changelog
[12:25] <Kmos> that indicates to be a merge
[12:27] <Hobbsee> Kmos: then you need to say why each of the changes arent needed.
[12:27] <geser> http://patches.ubuntu.com/liba/libapt-pkg-perl/libapt-pkg-perl_0.1.20ubuntu5.patch
[12:27] <Hobbsee> Kmos: ie, "the only changes are rebuilds, and build deps x,y,z, which are included in debian" if they actually are
[12:28] <Kmos> +Build-Depends: perl (>= 5.8.0-6), debhelper (>> 3.0.18), libapt-pkg-dev (>= 0.7.0)
[12:28] <geser> the only change is a version bump for libapt-pkg-dev
[12:31] <Kmos> yeah
[12:31] <Kmos> so maybe isn't needed a merge
[12:32] <geser> as the last upload was done on Jun 19th bumping the build-depends, I'd at least ask mvo about his opinion on this
[12:33] <geser> besides such a simple merge is done quick
[12:33] <Hobbsee> depends what the lowest versoin of apt is in gutsy
[12:33] <Hobbsee> er,sorry  libapt-pkg-dev
[12:33] <geser> libapt-pkg-dev | 0.7.2ubuntu2 |
[12:34] <geser> I guess the bumped b-d was only needed to make sure that is was build with the recent apt
[12:34] <Hobbsee> and if that's the same, or higher, than what the debian build dep of it is
[12:34] <Hobbsee> yeah
[12:35] <geser> the b-d is still libapt-pkg-dev (>= 0.6.40.1) in the debian package
[12:41] <Kmos> i'll subscribe mvo to the bug
[01:20] <StevenK> # Accepted alsa-driver 1.0.14-1 (source all) Jordi Mallach
[01:20] <StevenK> Hrm. I thought crimsun was waiting for that.
[01:24] <jerome_> hello all
[01:24] <jerome_> I need some help with one package i've submitted to revu
[01:24] <jerome_> http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?upid=5712
[01:25] <jerome_> I don't manage to get rid of the linda warning
[01:25] <jerome_> I've added a python-soya.links file in debian/ to create a symlink
[01:26] <jerome_> and added a rule to the debian/rules file to delete the file 
[01:26] <jerome_> but as you can see it doesn't work
[01:26] <jerome_> anyone could help me ?
[01:26] <persia> jerome_: Does the version of python-soya currently distributed in the archive generate that linda warning?
[01:26] <jerome_> i will try
[01:27] <jerome_> yes and another warning that i don't have
[01:29] <persia> jerome_: Great!  Someone else might still be able to help you resolve this, but if you are only asking for REVU of a package update (please make this more clear in your comments), and there are some bugs you cannot fix in a package, it may still be uploaded.  If you cannot solve it, you might want to open a bug against the package, reporting the issue.
[01:30] <jerome_> persia : ok
[01:32] <persia> jerome_: Also, as previously mentioned, please attach the diff of the debian directory to bug 117840, to make it easy to review the packaging changes vs. the upstream changes, and add a link from this bug to a REVU upload for the package.
[01:32] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 117840 in soya "Wishlist: Update python-soya package" [Wishlist,In progress]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/117840
[01:33] <jerome_> persia : ok I will do that
[01:35] <persia> jerome_: Just to explain: the reason you want to do this is that most packages on REVU are new packages, and the upload policies for new packages are *much* more restrictive than the upload policies on package updates.  If a sponsor knows it is a package update, your work will likely be included more easily.
[01:36] <jerome_> persia : good to know :)
[01:37] <jerome_> persia : to do a diff of the two debian folders, is this ok :
[01:37] <jerome_> diff ./soya-0.12/debian/ ./soya-0.13.1/debian/
[01:37] <StevenK> jerome_: There's a tool for this, called debdiff
[01:37] <StevenK> jerome_: debdiff <old dsc> <new dsc>
[01:38] <persia> jerome_: Better would be `diff -urN ./soya-0.12/debian/ ./soya-0.13.1/debian/`
[01:38] <jerome_> persia : ok
[01:38] <tsmithe> anyone able to review the ubuntustudio-* packages on revu?
[01:38] <persia> StevenK: Using debdiff for package upstream updates requires use of filterdiff to clean up later, which I find hard to explain :(
[01:39] <persia> tsmithe: I'll take a look.  Did wired get an update as well?
[01:39] <tsmithe> no not yet
[01:39] <tsmithe> it's tricky....
[01:39] <persia> tsmithe: OK.  ubuntustudio-* only it is then.
[01:39] <tsmithe> thanks a lot
[01:41] <tsmithe> persia, re the licence of -sounds, if the packaging is good, i would still like to give it a shot in the archive and let the admins decide re licence. is that feasible?
[01:43] <jerome_> persia : ok done
[01:43] <persia> tsmithe: Yes, but it can be time consuming.  You might ask here (or in #ubuntu-devel if nobody steps forward) if someone knows if that license is OK first.  Here you'll get good advice, and in -devel, you might get an actual archive admin.
[01:43] <tsmithe> cool - i'll do that
[01:46] <persia> jerome_: Thanks.  The comments look much better.  Could you please upload the diff to the bug report?  The pastebin servers regularly purge old posts, and it may be gone before someone looks closely (I'm not a good person to review python packaging).
[01:47] <jerome_> persia : ok no problem
[01:49] <jerome_> done
[01:54] <persia> jerome_: Now, you'll want to request sponsorship as described in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Contributing (near the bottom of "Preparing New Revisions"), and someone should look at it within the next couple days.
[01:56] <jerome_> persia : well scott kitterman already had a first look
[01:58] <persia> jerome_: True, but it doesn't look like it was uploaded.  At this point, you'll want to get another look (perhaps from the same person) in order to get it uploaded (or more comments on why it should not be uploaded yet).
[01:58] <jerome_> persia: ok i'm reading everything
[02:03] <tsmithe> ragh stupid connection
[02:40] <persia> Does anyone have an opinion (or a link to a precedent) on mixing CC-SA and GPL?  I know CC-BY variants are not GPL compatible, but I'm not finding an opinion on only -SA from my initial search.
[02:45] <polopolo> hello, does someone know how I can add on a .deb join a group
[02:47] <polopolo> nobody?
[02:47] <shawarma> polopolo: What do you mean?
[02:48] <polopolo> I want to package virtualbox, but I don know how I can someone join a group
[02:48] <shawarma> polopolo: What do you mean by "join a group"? What kind of group?
[02:48] <gnomefreak> polopolo: you dont need to join a group to build a package
[02:49] <polopolo> gnomefreak: I need to work the program good
[02:49] <polopolo> and no errors
[02:49] <polopolo> wait
[02:49] <RainCT> polopolo: VirtualBox is already packaged
[02:50] <polopolo> on ubuntu?
[02:50] <gnomefreak> yes
[02:50] <polopolo> I want package the OSE on ubuntu
[02:50] <gnomefreak> !info virtualbox
[02:50] <polopolo> and it's not avalible
[02:50] <ubotu> Package virtualbox does not exist in feisty, feisty-seveas
[02:50] <gnomefreak> !info virtualbox gutsy
[02:50] <RainCT> I have it on Feisty
[02:50] <ubotu> Package virtualbox does not exist in gutsy
[02:50] <gnomefreak> i swore we had it
[02:50] <polopolo> http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads
[02:51] <jerome_> it's from the repo of virtualbox
[02:51] <polopolo> the PUEL is avalible
[02:51] <polopolo> the OSE not
[02:51] <polopolo> and I want upload the OSE on debian unstable and ubuntu
[02:51] <StevenK> I seriously doubt it would get accepted.
[02:52] <polopolo> but can someone explain how to join a group with package
[02:53] <RAOF> You don't.  First, you package (possibly with help from here).  Then, you put the source on REVU (and possibly mentors.debian.net, but that's debian).  Then you try and get someone to tell you what's wrong with it.
[02:54] <RAOF> Repeat, until there's nothing wrong with the package, and a MOTU can upload the package into Universe (or a sponsor can upload into Debian)
[02:54] <RainCT> he means have the user where it is installed joining the VirtualBox group
[02:55] <RAOF> Aaaah.  That makes more sense :)
[02:55] <RainCT> when I installed it it created a 'vboxusers' group and added me to it
[02:55] <persia> Blech.  Offering source as GPL, trademarking the name, and posting notice that the name cannot be used for modified versions is just annoying.
[02:56] <RAOF> Is that even gpl compatible?
[02:57] <polopolo> RAOF: there is a GPL vesrion
[02:57] <RainCT> persia: well, Ubuntu does that too, in minor grade
[02:57] <persia> RAOF: Yes.  I don't think it's GPLv3 compatible, but that's one of the things that annoys some people about GPLv3.
[02:57] <RAOF> Fair enough.  I'm not very sure about those edges :)
[02:57] <polopolo> oh, virtualbox OSE is GPL V2
[02:57] <polopolo> based
[02:57] <RAOF> Still.  Annoying, yes.
[02:58] <polopolo> So no need (or not allowed) to upload it to ubuntu or debian?
[02:58] <persia> RainCT: Yes, but I think the situation is different for a distribution vs. a software package.
[02:58] <Hobbsee> yay, virtualbox!
[02:59] <polopolo> But I wtill don know how to add the user to the virtualbox group on the computer
[02:59] <RainCT> I don't see the difference. if it wouldn't everybody could make a different version of it and say it's VirtualBox, when in fact _it is a modified version of VirtualBox_
[02:59] <polopolo> And if I can upload it to ubuntu
[03:00] <RAOF> RainCT: Part of the thing is: what constitutes a modified version?  Can we patch it to fix bugs?  To change behaviour to make it integrate better?
[03:00] <polopolo> Nobody has the answer?
[03:00] <persia> RAOF: On a completely different note, are you still working on 119254?  If so, you might have the background to properly redirect bug 121940 (I'm not sure if it should be dup'd or rejected (and am someone annoyed that neither "wontfix" nor "invalid" really apply).
[03:00] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 121940 in kvm "KVM newest version request" [Undecided,New]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/121940
[03:01] <RAOF> persia: I am, but have been somewhat delayed by marking.
[03:01] <Hobbsee> yay, marking.
[03:01] <RAOF> Oh, hells yes.
[03:01] <Hobbsee> RAOF: do my exam tomorrow.  thankyou.
[03:01] <persia> RainCT: Most of the packages distributed in Debian or Ubuntu have at least small modifications to make them work better for us.  If we had to change all the names of all the software packages in the process, it would be very difficult for users to understand.
[03:02] <polopolo> Ok, nobody has the answer, fine :(
[03:02] <persia> RAOF: No worries: I just thought from your comments that 28 might need a little work before the sync (and don't have the hardware to evaluate it properly).
[03:03] <polopolo> :'(
[03:03] <RainCT> ah, yes, if it also applies to patches and such small stuff then yes, it's annoying
[03:03] <RAOF> polopolo: The answer to your question?  Check out the kvm package; that creates a "kvm" group
[03:04] <polopolo> *slick*
[03:04] <persia> RainCT: For a distribution, it's less bad: the branding is mostly just branding, so someone could copy all of Ubuntu, and maintain bug fixes to it without needing to rename things (users would still see "Ubuntu" in many places).
[03:05] <RAOF> persia: No, it should be a straight sync + add epoch.  I need to (manually) check the ubuntu changes to the kvm-16 package, although I don't think there are any, bar the epoch.
[03:05] <RainCT> yes, Ubuntu allows to call it "Ubuntu Remix" iirc
[03:06] <persia> RAOF: Doesn't it also require coordination with an updated kernel?
[03:06] <polopolo> creating a virtualbox package is difficault *slick*
[03:06] <RainCT> (off-topic: do you know of any program that allows you to minimize other programs to the notification bar?)
[03:06] <RAOF> Nope.  kvm-28 works nicely with our current kernel.
[03:07] <persia> polopolo: Please note that by packaging virtualbox OSE, you are generating modified source, for which you may not be able to use the virtualbox name.
[03:07] <polopolo> bigger *slick*
[03:07] <RAOF> !!! Really?
[03:07] <RainCT> does it allow names derived from virtualbox?
[03:08] <ubotu> Sorry, I don't know anything about really? - try searching on http://bots.ubuntulinux.nl/factoids.cgi
[03:08] <polopolo> I think a gonna jumping
[03:09] <persia> I'm not sure what is allowed.  The statement is only "if you choose to ship custom binaries and/or source code revisions of the product, InnoTek reserves the right to deny use of the trademark VirtualBox", which isn't very promising.
[03:10] <RAOF> I suggest the name IceBox :P
[03:10] <polopolo> We talk about GPL2.0 right?
[03:10] <persia> polopolo: http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Licensing_FAQ
[03:10] <RainCT> for me this sounds like "you are allowed but if we don't like it we can ask you to rename it"
[03:10] <polopolo> I package virtualbox OSE and that is based on GPL2.0
[03:11] <RainCT> I'd try mailing InnoTek to be sure of that, and in the case they say 'no' use a derivated name
[03:11] <Q-FUNK> who would know about ACPI regressions in Feisty (compared to Edgy) and their workarounds?
[03:11] <polopolo> even with GPL2.0?
[03:12] <polopolo> can't belive it
[03:12] <persia> RainCT: Perhaps.  It could also mean "You are welcome to use this code for other purposes, but we don't want to support any virtualbox binaries we didn't build, so you can't call them virtualbox".
[03:12] <persia> polopolo: Trademark law and Copyright law are different.
[03:13] <polopolo> SO virtualbox OSE is not based on http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/GPL
[03:13] <polopolo> but http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/VirtualBox_PUEL ?
[03:14] <RainCT> polopolo: it's dual licensed
[03:14] <RainCT> you can redistribute the GPL version but no the PUEL one
[03:14] <polopolo> @#@#$@, I stop with package that
[03:14] <persia> polopolo: Being granted a license to use, modify, and distribute software under the GPL allows certain exceptions to Copyright law, but doesn't affect Trademark law.
[03:14] <polopolo> e-mail me the answer when the e-mail comes
[03:14] <zorglu_> q. what is the issue with shipping the PUEL ?
[03:15] <polopolo> I gonna package further with gverse
[03:18] <RainCT> polopolo: who has mailed them?
[03:18] <polopolo> But now I know why firefox now named iceweasel :D
[03:18] <polopolo> you, or not?
[03:18] <RainCT> no, should I?
[03:18] <RainCT> zorglu_:  The Personal Use and Evaluation License allows you to download the VirtualBox binaries for personal and academic use and for evaluation, but it does not give you the right to redistribute these binaries.
[03:19] <zorglu_> RainCT: ok, this is indeed very clear :)
[03:19] <polopolo> [15:11]  <RainCT> I'd try mailing InnoTek to be sure of that, and in the case they say 'no' use a derivated name
[03:19] <RainCT> that was a suggestion
[03:19] <polopolo> ah
[03:20] <RainCT> but if no problem doing so if you want
[03:20] <polopolo> you all say that virtualbox OSE uses things with PUEL inside?
[03:20] <RainCT> eh?
[03:21] <zorglu_> RainCT: just in case, virtualbox people are on irc and have been very nice everytime i talked to them. so maybe chatting with them could help
[03:21] <persia> polopolo: No.  Virtualbox OSE is indeed completely GPLv2.  It's just that the name "virtualbox" is trademarked, and there isn't a clear grant of trademark for redistribution.
[03:21] <polopolo> ooooooh
[03:21] <persia> umm...  clear grant of license on the trademark for redistribution.
[03:21] <polopolo> now I really understand it really
[03:23] <zorglu_> virtualbox channel with some people from inotek, #vbox
[03:23] <RainCT> I'm on #vbox-dev
[03:24] <zorglu_> cool then
[03:24] <RainCT> found a InnoTek employer there
[03:24] <persia> employer?  employee?
[03:24] <polopolo> I join
[03:24] <zorglu_> innotek provides good sw to opensource, lets treat them as nicely as possible :)
[03:25] <RainCT> (*employee, sorry)
[03:29] <RainCT> but the OSE is only allowed for Open Source projects, or?
[03:31] <polopolo> I think not, it's only liniced with GPLV2.0, more not
[03:32] <RainCT> oops sorry, I've said nothing :P
[03:33] <polopolo> :D
[03:33] <RainCT> lapse, that was another program :P
[03:36] <persia> RainCT: I think that restricting a GPL version of dual-licensed software to use within open source projects is a violation of the GPL.  It would be another violation for a closed source project to actually distribute anything based on the GPL version of something else under a license not compatible with the GPL, but there's no reason it couldn't be used internally by some organisation.
[03:37] <polopolo> RainCT: so no make virtualbox?
[03:37] <jussi01> hello everyone
[03:37] <persia> Hi jussi01
[03:37] <polopolo> jussi01: hello
[03:37] <RainCT> polopolo: he said it's ok but he would prefer it they provide the package, or?
[03:38] <shawarma> persia: The copyright holder of GPL software is free to release the exact same software under a more restrictive license.
[03:38] <jussi01> qq, if a program is no longer being developed can it be accepted into the repos?
[03:38] <jussi01> ie. http://qjoypad.sourceforge.net/
[03:38] <jussi01> hi persia polopolo
[03:38] <persia> shawarma: Absolutely, I just don't think that the copyright holder can restrict the use of the GPL version by either field of endeavour or by eventual end use (except requiring GPL compatible redistribution).
[03:39] <persia> jussi01: It's possible, but not encouraged (there needs to be a good reason, such as several active projects that depend on it, etc.).
[03:39] <shawarma> persia: No, that wouldn't make any sense. You can't say it violates the GPL, though. They've just added an exception to the GPL.
[03:40] <persia> shawarma: I'm confused.  I thought exceptions to the GPL could only be used to grant more rights to the licensee, not to further restrict granted rights.
[03:41] <jussi01> persia: thank you. 
[03:41] <Hobbsee> polopolo: even better if they want to do it themselves
[03:41] <polopolo> No problem for me, as I say, I go further with package gverse
[03:42] <persia> jussi01: In this case, I'd like to recommend gizmod, which has an active upstream, and a candidate on REVU.  There's no GUI for it, but there is a nice python interface for configuration.
[03:42] <Hobbsee> gizmod is being worked on by pricechild
[03:43] <shawarma> persia: The GPL is just a license. If it's your software, you decide which license to release it under.
[03:43] <PriceChild> persia, its in the queue, not just candidate on revu?
[03:44] <persia> PriceChild: Yep, but most people can't download from the NEW queue, so it's not an ideal place to look for things :)
[03:44] <PriceChild> ahh hehe gotcha
[03:45] <polopolo> ok next question: must I set confirmed on my name on bug #117772
[03:45] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 117772 in Ubuntu "[needs-packaging]  gVerse" [Wishlist,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/117772
[03:45] <persia> shawarma: I agree with that: I just didn't think one could call a license "GPL" if it was more restrictive due to the FSF licensing arrangements.
[03:45] <persia> polopolo: I'd recommend "In Progress", if you're working on it.
[03:45] <RAOF> Hey, where can I get the debian source to kvm-16-1?
[03:46] <RainCT> RAOF: http://packages.debian.org
[03:46] <RAOF> It's an old version (current is kvm-28-4)
[03:46] <polopolo> persia: ok
[03:47] <Hobbsee> bug #111735
[03:47] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 111735 in svnmailer "Notifier: svnmailer.util.URLDecorator" [Undecided,Fix released]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/111735
[03:47] <persia> RAOF: http://snapshot.debian.net/ is usually helpful, but in this case, I suggest reverting http://patches.ubuntu.com/k/kvm/kvm_1:16-1ubuntu2.patch from the Ubuntu source.
[03:52] <RAOF> Man, that's a big patch.
[03:52] <polopolo> and what gonna happen if the package in revu is approved but importfreeze is begon on gutsy?
[03:52] <RAOF> Oh, because it's against kvm-28
[03:53] <persia> tsmithe: Are you strongly committed to native packages for the ubuntustudio packages?
[03:53] <tsmithe> well, i think it makes sense... don't you think?
[03:53] <persia> RAOF: Hunt around patches.ubuntu.com: there might be an easier patch (I remember something about modular patches, but don't have a link).
[03:54] <RAOF> Oh, crap.  There wasn't a kvm-16 package.  The most recent one before that was kvm-14.  We then packaged 2 new upstream versions.
[03:54] <persia> tsmithe: I don't like native packages, so I'm biased.  I'm especially wondering about ubuntustudio-sounds, as there appears to be an active upstream for the original source package (and I don't know how much it's been modified).
[03:55] <persia> RAOF: In that case, you'd do best to contact the last uploader - perhaps they can provide useful advice.
[03:56] <tsmithe> persia, i'm pretty ubuntustudio-sounds is a total rewrite of the upstream package: all that's the same is the sound files themselves
[03:56] <RAOF> persia: Right.  Well, that's not getting done before I go to sleep :)
[03:56] <bluefoxicy> damnit.
[03:57] <RAOF> bluefoxicy: Hanging out for your kernel-virtual-machine to work?
[03:57] <RAOF> :)
[03:57] <bluefoxicy> RAOF:  Desktop effects.
[03:57] <RAOF> Oh, yeah.
[03:57] <bluefoxicy> Enabling under my account makes the window title bars vanish
[03:57] <bluefoxicy> If I create a fresh user account and go enable desktop effects there, works perfectly.
[03:58] <RAOF> Awesome, stale config.
[03:58] <bluefoxicy> what do I delete
[03:58] <bluefoxicy> I tried deleting ~/.compizconfig
[03:58] <RAOF> Alternatively, it's possible that you've built some compiz plugins before?
[03:58] <bluefoxicy> no, I just reinstalled feisty 5 minutes ago.
[03:58] <RAOF> Hm.
[03:58] <bluefoxicy> and compiz has never worked
[03:58] <RAOF> It'd be in gconf.
[03:58] <RAOF> gconftool2 --recursive-unset /apps/compiz might do it
[03:59] <StevenK> Twitch. --recursive-unset
[03:59] <StevenK> Even the option sounds evil
[03:59] <RAOF> rm -r sounds better?
[03:59] <StevenK> Can't pipe that into gconf? :-P
[03:59] <tsmithe> rargh.... bzr seems to have crapped up on me again
[03:59] <bluefoxicy> RAOF:  thanks.
[03:59] <RAOF> rm -r .gconf2, I believe :P
[04:00] <bluefoxicy> RAOF:  There should be an "Attempt to fix errors" button that does that ;)
[04:00] <tsmithe> this is insanity gone mad
[04:00] <RainCT> should a debdiff for the patch in bug #68620 be made?
[04:00] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 68620 in gnome-system-monitor "gnome-system-monitor shows squashed key in resources graphs" [Low,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/68620
[04:00] <persia> tsmithe: I've just looked at upstream Borealis, and it doesn't seem to have any packaging.  How is this different from packaging other upstreams (aside from branding)?
[04:00] <RAOF> bluefoxicy: I believe the phrase is "patches welcome"
[04:00] <bluefoxicy> RAOF:  ;)
[04:01] <RAOF> bluefoxicy: Also, that's a pretty crazy "attempt to fix errors" action.  I'm not sure I'd apply such a patch, were I in a position to do so.
[04:02] <RAOF> A better one would, of course, be to not crash on crazy config.
[04:02] <RAOF> But that goes against the compiz way of ABI incompatibilities and crazy configs.
[04:03] <tsmithe> persia, i'm not sure. at the moment, my dsl is down below dial-up speeds, so getting down that 15 meg tarball to compare is a bit difficult. however, the tarball i'm looking at is only about 4.1 meg, so i'm guessing there is a bit of difference somewhere
[04:03] <bluefoxicy> heh
[04:05] <persia> tsmithe: Quite a few of the sounds were dropped (causing the size reduction)  it just seems odd to me to have an upstream, but not use it.  This won't keep me from advocating (if appropriate), but doesn't match my understanding of regular practice.
[04:06] <tsmithe> ok. i'm sure there was a reason to it, but i have only recently adopted the package, and the original packager is a bit busy with real life things for me to get in touch quickly :)
[04:08] <persia> tsmithe: No worries - just something to investigate.  The last package I saw that had significant similar source (a fork) was rejected by the archive admins at first pass, so you'll want to marshall your arguments in advance.
[04:10] <tsmithe> righty
[04:16] <GamezBeCJ> Hello everyone ... My first time here ...
[04:16] <bluefoxicy> http://youtube.com/watch?v=xC5uEe5OzNQ this is way more impressive than what I'm getting now
[04:16] <persia> GamezBeCJ: Welcome!
[04:16] <superm1> Hi GamezBeCJ 
[04:33] <GamezBeCJ> Ubuntu Beryl video in youtube is very impressive !
[04:43] <_MMA_> bluefoxicy: Try: http://youtube.com/watch?v=E4Fbk52Mk1w HOWTO: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=481314&highlight=compiz+fusion My little screenshot: http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/7477/screenshotri7.png
[04:44] <bluefoxicy> ah
[04:46] <GamezBeCJ> I just installed ... it's beautiful ... 
[04:51] <bluefoxicy> lol.
[04:51] <bluefoxicy> switching metacity theme, crashing gnome-xchat
[04:53] <DarkMageZ> bluefoxicy, xchat is better :P
[05:05] <polopolo> I gonna race on windows xp, bye all :D
[05:58] <Kmos> crimsun: are you there?
[06:20] <ScottK> persia: In general, putting a statement about copyright of Debian packaging is recommended, but it's not yet "Policy"
[06:20] <persia> ScottK: No?  I thought it was.  Thanks.
[06:21] <ScottK> persia: It's not policy until it's published in an updated policy manual.
[06:21] <ScottK> persia: Of course the policy manual by definition lags since it codifies policy in use, it doesn' t drive it.
[06:22] <ScottK> Gotta run.
[06:44] <jussi01> hmmm...anyone use the medibuntu repos? they seem to be down for me...
[06:52] <Adri2000> jussi01: works for me. tell Sp4rKy if it doesn't work for you, he is responsible for medibuntu's servers.
[07:03] <jussi01> Sp4rKy: Im getting 404's on all the medibuntu repos from  http://medibuntu.sos-sts.com
[07:06] <mr_pouit> jussi01: please use medibuntu.org (see http://www.medibuntu.org/repository.php) ;)
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> hi
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> i have a problem with dput
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> dput -f svn/jeliza_2.3.2-0ubuntu1_source.changes
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> Upload package to host revu
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> Checking Signature on .changes
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> gpg: Signature made Sun Jun 24 17:15:04 2007 UTC using DSA key ID C619E867
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> gpg: Good signature from "Tobias Schulz <tobischulz@arcor.de>"
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> Good signature on svn/jeliza_2.3.2-0ubuntu1_source.changes.
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> Checking Signature on .dsc
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> gpg: Signature made Sun Jun 24 17:15:00 2007 UTC using DSA key ID C619E867
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> gpg: Good signature from "Tobias Schulz <tobischulz@arcor.de>"
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> Good signature on svn/jeliza_2.3.2-0ubuntu1.dsc.
[07:18] <tsmithe> uhoh
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> Package includes an .orig.tar.gz file although the debian revision suggests
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> that it might not be required. Multiple uploads of the .orig.tar.gz may be
[07:18] <tsmithe> !flood
[07:18] <ubotu> pastebin is a service to post large texts so you don't flood the channel. The Ubuntu pastebin is at http://paste.ubuntu-nl.org (make sure you give us the URL for your paste - see also the #ubuntu channel topic)
[07:18] <tobiasschul1> rejected by the upload queue management software.
[07:19] <tobiasschul1> Uploading to revu (via ftp to revu.tauware.de):
[07:19] <tobiasschul1>   jeliza_2.3.2-0ubuntu1.dsc:
[07:19] <tobiasschul1> Error '553 Could not create file.' during ftp transfer of jeliza_2.3.2-0ubuntu1.dsc
[07:19] <tobiasschul1> Note: This problem might be caused by files already existent on the server.
[07:19] <tobiasschul1>       For the official Debian upload queues, the dcut(1) utility can be used
[07:19] <tobiasschul1>       to remove stale files from unsuccessful uploads.
[07:19] <tobiasschul1> ok
[07:19] <man-di> tobiasschul1: DONT DO THIS PLEASE
[07:20] <tobiasschul1> http://paste.ubuntu-nl.org/27040/
[07:21] <tobiasschul1> i was uploading the file before, but my computer has crashed
[07:21] <tobiasschul1> what to do?
[07:22] <bluekuja> tobiasschul1, ping a REVU admin
[07:22] <bluekuja> and ask to have it removed
[07:22] <tobiasschul1> who is a revu admin? ^^
[07:23] <bluekuja> they seems to be away, persia you can fix it?
[09:02] <bmm> Any motu: ccbuild is looking for it's second advocate or comments to change it, please look at http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?upid=5685
[09:50] <bmm> Is anybody still online here? Does my IRC work? Persia are you online?
[09:51] <bmm> there is probably a meeting somewhere :-D
[09:52] <Baby> hi!
[09:52] <Baby> bmm: I read u
[09:52] <bmm> Ah, cool IRC is working then :-) Thanks, that's all I needed to know
[09:53] <Baby> :)
[09:54] <man-di> bmm: its sunday, on sunday its normally quiet here
[09:54] <man-di> more quiet then usual at least
[09:55] <bmm> Ah, then that's it. I just got back from a weekend away so I'm in for some packaging ;-)
[10:14] <icf7> Is the debian policy manual binding for Ubuntu too?
[10:15] <geser> yes
[10:16] <geser> there is no difference packagewise if you do a deb for Debian or Ubuntu
[10:19] <icf7> mmm ... https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/CommonPackagingMistakes/ChangingTheOrigTarball contains examples of uscan usage, and http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-debianrules specifies that get-orig-source can be called from every directory (".. leaves it in cwd")
[10:20] <icf7> how do these two specifications fit? Is there a good example on how to use uscan/implement get-orig-source?
[10:39] <ScottK> The MOTU Meeting for Friday does not appear to be on the schedule for #ubuntu-meeting.  persia, where you taking care of that?
[10:42] <crimsun> I've pinged -marketing to get it added to fridge.uc
[10:42] <ScottK> Cool.
[10:47] <Kmos> crimsun: bug 104848
[10:47] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 104848 in hwdb-client "Bad english translation on hwdb-client" [Undecided,Confirmed]  https://launchpad.net/bugs/104848
[10:47] <Kmos> check this out
[10:47] <crimsun> I'm busy ATM>
[10:47] <Kmos> ok
[10:58] <nixternal> added the MOTU meeting to the Fridge
[10:58] <crimsun> thanks.
[10:59] <nixternal> no problem. Thanks for the +1 by the way!
[11:00] <ScottK> nixternal: I guess the quality of your sucking up has improved.
[11:00] <nixternal> hahah
[11:00] <crimsun> oh crap, did I type '+' instead of '-'?  Damn, better amend that.
[11:00] <nixternal> figures ;p
[11:00] <coNP> - + - = + ?
[11:01] <crimsun> nixternal: do most (subjective) KDE 3 apps have a Close or Quit pushbutton?
[11:02] <crimsun> ScottK: ^ , too
[11:02] <nixternal> when you say subjective, you mean something like a small widget and not a full windowed app?
[11:02] <nixternal> err, s/widget/applet
[11:03] <crimsun> nixternal: no, "subjective" above means "in your sampling of KDE 3 apps"
[11:03] <crimsun> I'm not sure there is a quantifiable method of determining "most" for everyone.
[11:03] <nixternal> oh...that would be a no, file->exit (alt+q), and the big X up top
[11:04] <crimsun> nixternal: ok, and do you generally use alt+q or the window manager's Close?
[11:04] <nixternal> depends in if I am at the keyboard or not really, but mostly, the X does it for me, or alt+f4/q
[11:05] <crimsun> ok, so a Qt application generally would need to offer a File menu, too
[11:05] <nixternal> yes
[11:05] <crimsun> ok, thanks.
[11:05] <crimsun> I'll adjust my app
[11:05] <crimsun> currently I'm simplying relying on the window manager's Close
[11:05] <nixternal> crimsun: if it is just somethin small that allows something like an enable/disable option, then you don't need the filemenu
[11:06] <crimsun> however, consistency within the environment is very important
[11:06] <nixternal> a quit button and the X would be enough
[11:06] <crimsun> well, my concern is whether "most" KDE 3 apps even offer a Quit pushbutton
[11:06] <nixternal> there is/was a KDE GUI guide, but last I looked, it seemed a little outdated
[11:06] <nixternal> I am trying to think of one with a Quit button
[11:09] <crimsun> nixternal: http://www.trilug.org/~crimsun/Screenshot.png
[11:09] <crimsun> nixternal: top right, Qt3.  Bottom right, Qt4.
[11:13] <nixternal> crimsun: that is about perfect..I think maybe an "OK" button?
[11:13] <crimsun> nixternal: do most KDE 3 apps have an OK pushbutton?
[11:14] <nixternal> the configuration windows typically do
[11:14] <crimsun> ok, and this holds true in both KDE 3 and KDE 4?
[11:15] <crimsun> is the OK pushbutton always enabled/active?
[11:15] <nixternal> actually, in your case, since there is only one setting to apply, then maybe just an "OK" and a "Cancel"
[11:15] <nixternal> let me check with someone really quick
[11:15] <nixternal> OK is always enabled, y es
[11:15] <crimsun> err, I'd rather be consistent with the KDE X UI
[11:15] <crimsun> if most configuration dialogs have Apply and Ok, then I need both pushbuttons
[11:16] <crimsun> if most only have Ok and Cancel, then I need those
[11:16] <crimsun> etc.
[11:16] <crimsun> what I'm attempting to avoid is have this dialog do something completely different from, say, KMix dialog windows
[11:16] <nixternal> heh, config dialogs have "help", "defaults", "OK", "apply", and "cancel"
[11:17] <nixternal> but those dialogs have more than 1 view for configuration as well
[11:17] <icf7> crimsun: Apply is "do the action, but don't close the window"
[11:17] <crimsun> ok, "defaults" is not sensible in this case
[11:17] <crimsun> icf7: yes, that's its current semantics
[11:17] <crimsun> as implemented in displayqt[34] .py
[11:18] <ScottK> crimsun: It looks reasonable to me.  Agree with icf7.  If you are going to close the window as well as apply, I think it should say OK, not Apply.
[11:18] <crimsun> ScottK: I agree there, but I need to know if Ok _and_ Apply pushbuttons appear in _most_ windows
[11:19] <ScottK> crimsun: I'll look around a bit.
[11:19] <crimsun> I shouldn't need a Help action; the app should be so straightforward that Help would be superfluous
[11:20] <crimsun> IMO the app is straightforward, but what do I know?  I do this junk all the time. ;)
[11:20] <nixternal> crimsun: http://developer.kde.org/documentation/standards/kde/style/dialogs/simple.html
[11:20] <crimsun> Thus, a non-debugger's perspective is vital
[11:21] <nixternal> so you would offer them the selection, and then just an OK button
[11:21] <ScottK> crimsun: I just looked at several of the system settings type windows and they all had either Apply or OK depending on if they would close the window or not.
[11:21] <ScottK> crimsun: I don't think that there is any application too trivial for Help.
[11:22] <AndyP> the gnome sound prefs has a close button and making a selection applies the change immediately, but that's gnome
[11:22] <superm1> is there a way to make debconf think that a package isn't configured, so that next time another package gets installed, it is forced to run the postinst script again?
[11:22] <superm1> well i guess s/debconf/apt/
[11:23] <crimsun> AndyP: Toby's GTK+ 2 UI uses slightly different semantics.
[11:23] <crimsun> AndyP: His changes are active (written to ~/.asoundrc.asoundconf if appropriate) upon combobox change.
[11:23] <crimsun> I'm working with slightly different semantics, since I have to use Qt/KDE
[11:24] <crimsun> in this latter vein, I need at least an Apply which is only active upon combobox change
[11:24] <AndyP> understood
[11:24] <nixternal> crimsun: when you are done, I would like to see your code for this app, there is something similar I would like to do as well...did you use Python or C++?
[11:24] <crimsun> nixternal: launchpad.net/asoundconf-ui.
[11:24] <nixternal> rock on
[11:24] <crimsun> PyQt3 and PyQt4
[11:24] <nixternal> exactly what I wanted you to say
[11:24] <crimsun> my branch is ~motu/trunk
[11:24] <crimsun> Toby's is ~tsmithe/trunk
[11:25] <crimsun> ScottK: what do you feel a Help action would add?
[11:27] <ScottK> crimsun: I'm not sure exactly since I haven't been following the details, but even though it seems obvious, it ought to say something about what the program does and perhaps something about how one might decide what selection to make.
[11:27] <crimsun> there are ToolTips
[11:27] <crimsun> like "Apply"'s is "Commit change"
[11:28] <crimsun> but I'm not sure how to go about the latter suggestion of yours
[11:28] <ScottK> Up to you, but I don't think anything is too trivial for help.  
[11:28] <ScottK> I'm all about the theory, implementation is a detail left to you ;-)
[11:28] <crimsun> well, I'm all for Help; I'm just having a difficult time seeing how it actually clarifies anything
[11:29] <ScottK> Maybe for your initial release have a help stub asking people to e-mail you with questions they were expecting to find an answer to in the help.
[11:29] <crimsun> this is going to be even more fun when I try to fix GNOME's control-center mess
[11:30] <ScottK> Heh
[11:30] <crimsun> and it gets even _more_ fun when I have to explain that the change only takes effect for newly executed alsa apps
[11:30] <crimsun> bah, libglademm2.4 is still broken
[11:31] <crimsun> well, thanks for input, everyone
[11:53] <athena> what's the deal with package signing? whenever I build something, apt throws a gpg error
[11:54] <YannDinendal> hi
[11:54] <icf7> athena: Do you have a private key imported to gpg? Use a gpg frontend of your choice to verify it.
[11:54] <athena> icf7, yes, I do
[11:55] <athena> when I run dpkg-buildpackage, it even askes me for my password at the end
[11:55] <athena> but when I stick them in a local repository and try to apt-get them, apt says that they can't be authenticated
[11:55] <icf7> athena: This is fine.
[11:56] <icf7> athena: How should they? You must import the public ones first to authenticate them.
[11:56] <athena> how?
[11:56] <geser> that are two different signatures
[11:56] <athena> hmm?
[11:56] <geser> the signing at packaging building is used for uploading
[11:57] <athena> then how do I sign them so that they can be downloaded?
[11:57] <geser> the signature that apt checks is from the release file from the repository
[11:57] <geser> what do you use for your repository?
[11:58] <athena> uh, cp and vim
[11:58] <geser> and how do you generate the Packages file? with vim?
[11:58] <minghua> athena: http://wiki.debian.org/SecureApt
[11:58] <athena> dpkg-scanpackages/dpkg-scansources
[11:59] <minghua> and I don't think it's an error, just a warning, which you can ignore
[11:59] <athena> yes, but I'd need --force-yes, which is not good to use in scripts
[12:00] <geser> create a release file with e.g. apt-ftparchive
[12:00] <geser> a create a detached signature for it
[12:01] <geser> better would be to use a repository software which does it for you
[12:01] <athena> oh? is there anything light? 
[12:08] <RainCT> good night
[12:08] <minghua> apt-get(1) man page says there is an "--allow-unauthenticated" option
[12:08] <minghua> I've never used it, but it looks like what you wanted instead of "--force-yes"
[12:08] <TheMuso> Hey folks.
[12:08] <minghua> hello TheMuso
[12:13] <ScottK> Hello TheMuso