[02:09] <sistpoty> hi
[02:09] <ajmitch> hi
[02:09] <geser> Hi
[02:09] <ajmitch> not many here today
[02:09] <TheMuso> eeek
[02:10] <TheMuso> Got so wrapped up in my own work.
[02:10] <sistpoty> sorry for being late
[02:10] <TheMuso> I haven't missed anything I hope
[02:10] <ajmitch> TheMuso: iff we have something to talk about
[02:10] <ajmitch> sistpoty: you were first to speak up ;)
[02:10] <geser> TheMuso: you only missed some people saying hi
[02:10] <TheMuso> heh right.
[02:10] <sistpoty> ajmitch: but I'm drunk already, so I don't count ;)
[02:10] <superm1> hasn't even started yet :)
[02:11] <TheMuso> Well, my offer for minutes/announcements stands.
[02:11] <ajmitch> haha
[02:11] <sistpoty> (nvidia stuff gave me the rest, couldn't do this w.o. booze *g*)
[02:12] <TheMuso> heh
[02:12] <ajmitch> agenda page just has motu sru process
[02:13] <TheMuso> Who added it?
[02:13] <ajmitch> no info
[02:14] <TheMuso> So I can now see.
[02:14] <ajmitch> ah, blame superm1
[02:14] <TheMuso> Well no point talking about it if there aren't many here, as it does affect a lot of us, and if the original person who proposed it can't explain it, well theres no point...
[02:14] <superm1> well i'm here
[02:14] <sistpoty> ok, subsection two: motu-sru still needed: being (still) a member, this was abandoned quite some time ago.
[02:14] <superm1> just lots of latency
[02:15] <sistpoty> so motu-sru is neither needed, nor should be assigned/subscribed any bugs to
[02:15] <TheMuso> I personally think we need more MOTUs at the meeting before this goes under the knife again.
[02:16] <superm1> well the big thing i wanted to discuss with it was the role of archive admins
[02:16] <geser> is there still some documentation left refering to motu-sru?
[02:16] <superm1> becuase they have no idea what needs to be done
[02:17] <sistpoty> superm1: do you think SRU's have got out of control?
[02:17] <sistpoty> (as I'm not knowing anything about how much, nor how SRUs are done nowadays)
[02:18] <superm1> sistpoty, not that they got out of control, but i had to file one for mythtv for edgy and feisty just last week
[02:18] <superm1> and ended up having lots of troubles
[02:18] <superm1> because people i discussed it with were confused by the process
[02:18] <superm1> both Ridell and seb128 weren't positive about their role
[02:19] <sistpoty> ok, knowing still knowing about the discussion around the new policy, maybe I should explain:
[02:20] <sistpoty> since SRUs came with some delay (from -sru and from -archive) for hitting -proposed and later -updates, we decided to lower the barrier to -proposed
[02:21] <sistpoty> also we decided that any motu could upload directly to -proposed (which -archive should intervene only if the version number was flawed, because removing from -proposed wasn't implemented in LP yet)
[02:22] <superm1> so then they really have no say other than version number
[02:22] <superm1> and its up to a MOTU to decide if it should really be going into -proposed
[02:22] <sistpoty> yes. to keep the barrier to -proposed as simple as possible
[02:23] <geser> yes, they should only check if the version is sane to be copied later to -updates
[02:23] <sistpoty> however to get a package into -updates, the testing (as still described in the SRU page iirc) needs to be done.
[02:23] <superm1> now its not clear whether the acks need to be MOTUs, or just general users testing -proposed count too then
[02:23] <sistpoty> any ack countes
[02:24] <sistpoty> -e
[02:24] <superm1> okay that makes it a lot easier
[02:24] <superm1> the min 7 day barrier to -updates, that's off the latest upload, or if there was a small fix to a proposed update, from the first upload
[02:24] <ajmitch> getting that many motus to ack was too hard
[02:25] <superm1> yea that's what i was realizing
[02:25] <sistpoty> superm1: off the latest upload. Because this period is meant that the exact packages to end up in -updates later should get tested
[02:26] <superm1> okay.
[02:27] <sistpoty> however, the archive team will still do a sanity check for the proposed->updates migration (they did this anyways w. or w.o. -sru in the past). So finally they can decide on wether an update is fit for -updates or not
[02:27] <superm1> now when its copied to -updates, can archive admins knock the ~proposed1 off an upload version number, or should it be the exact version number intended for -updates later?
[02:28] <sistpoty> that's a good question, since syncing a package from one pocket to another is possible now. anyone got a clue?
[02:29] <ajmitch> I think it's meant to have the version without ~proposed1
[02:29] <ajmitch> but I may be wrong
[02:29] <ajmitch> since that wouldn't allow multiple testing uploads
[02:29] <sistpoty> ajmitch: but that would affect the upload to -proposed already?
[02:30] <superm1> keescook had thought that perhaps appending a .1 like security updates would be a safer way to go
[02:30] <superm1> that way more updates can be popped in
[02:30] <geser> you upload to -proposed with the version which will end in -updates
[02:30] <superm1> without needing to add stuff like ~proposedX
[02:31] <geser> exactly, -0ubuntu1.1 as version and uploaded to -proposed
[02:31] <sistpoty> might this clash with possible security update versions?
[02:32] <geser> shouldn't further security updates base on the -updates packages?
[02:32] <sistpoty> not necessarily
[02:32] <superm1> and assuminingly the SRU would be based off security updates if they are out?
[02:32] <geser> it wouldn't be good if bugs come back because of a security issue
[02:34] <geser> IMHO a package uploaded to -security or -updates should have all the previous changes from -security or -updates
[02:34] <sistpoty> hm.. likewise it might be bad if a security update would fix also (lesser important) stuff and thus have a higher risk to break stuff
[02:35] <geser> isn't -updates activated by default, so people already have fixes
[02:36] <sistpoty> not for universe (is security for universe enabled by default?)
[02:36] <sistpoty> at least iirc
[02:36] <geser> it would be bad to prepare a new SRU for every security update because the changes from -updates got lost
[02:36] <sistpoty> right
[02:37] <sistpoty> how about holding this particular item back and waiting for a clarification from the security team?
[02:37] <superm1> well it would be bad too though if you have to decide between a new feature or issue in the SRU or a security resolution in the security update
[02:37] <nixternal> oi!
[02:37] <ajmitch> nixternal!
[02:37] <sistpoty> hey nixternal
[02:37] <nixternal> wasabi you funky MOTUs
[02:38] <nixternal> oh, dholbacks first day on the job and he is hiding :p
[02:38] <nixternal> hehe
[02:39] <superm1> sistpoty yea i think thats a good idea
[02:39] <sistpoty> however, back to business
[02:39] <superm1> we can bring that discussion on to -devel mailing list probably
[02:39] <sistpoty> ok, anyone who wants to mail pitti/keescook for a clarification and report back to the motu ml?
[02:39] <sistpoty> superm1: or that
[02:39] <sistpoty> superm1: would you tackle that?
[02:40] <superm1> sistpoty sure, i'll shoot a mail out tomorrow for it
[02:40] <sistpoty> great, thanks!
[02:40] <sistpoty> ok, what else of the SRU policy needs discussion?
[02:41] <superm1> well the motu-sru team
[02:41] <superm1> do we need them still?
[02:41] <ajmitch> no, and it's been gone for awhile
[02:42] <superm1> k easy enough.  Now when its ready to go to -updates, should we just ping an archive admin, or more specifically what would that process be then?
[02:43] <geser> when you have the needed testing done, add a commen stating it and subscribe u-a
[02:43] <superm1> ok.
[02:43] <geser> and add the verfication-done tag (or similar)
[02:44] <superm1> well i think thats it then for the SRU process, everything I found on it to be confused is resolved here
[02:44] <TheMuso> Ok... SO what has been changed/clarrified
[02:45] <sistpoty> no more -sru team, upload only to -proposed, testing as in wiki, after testing done add tag and subscribe -archive again (no more uploading). anything else?
[02:45] <superm1> 1) no more motu-sru team
[02:45] <sistpoty> sorry ;)
[02:46] <superm1> 2) archive admins don't check *anything* more than version when going to -proposed
[02:46] <superm1> 3) subscribe -archive, and then they can do more throughout checks
[02:46] <superm1> 4) version numbers shouldn't have ~proposed1, but we still need to check about conflicting security updates
[02:46] <superm1> 5) any person can comment that "works for them" not just motu
[02:47] <TheMuso> And I am guessing someone will update wiki docs?
[02:47] <superm1> 6) +1's have to be from latest upload, and the 7 day ticker starts over
[02:47] <superm1> TheMuso, if you send this out in minutes, i can update the wiki tomorrow when i get home
[02:47] <TheMuso> superm1: Ok.
[02:47] <sistpoty> thanks a lot superm1!
[02:47] <ajmitch> nixternal: too technical for us
[02:47] <nixternal> lol
[02:47] <ajmitch> great, any further business?
[02:47] <nixternal> #startmeeting
[02:47] <MootBot> Meeting started at 00:38. The chair is nixternal.
[02:47] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC] , [IDEA] , [ACTION] , [AGREED] , [LINK] , [VOTE] 
[02:48] <ajmitch> Q&A/hug days?
[02:48] <TheMuso> Yeah. What can we do to get more people to metings.
[02:48] <nixternal> #endmeeting
[02:48] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 00:38.
[02:48] <nixternal> how hard is that?
[02:48] <ajmitch> TheMuso: I would have thought that more people from .au would have been awake
[02:48] <TheMuso> ajmitch: They are, but people don't always sit on the comp first thing in the morning. :)
[02:48] <TheMuso> Mind you, it is wet in this part of Au.
[02:48] <sistpoty> nixternal: for someone who is not enlighted, it's like asking ubotu aboute UVFE and then in plain text again ;)
[02:49] <ajmitch> it started at 10am for you! that's not first thing :)
[02:49] <nixternal> lol
[02:49] <TheMuso> Fujitsu: Well how soon should the second reminder be?
[02:49] <TheMuso> ...or maybe a third is needed.
[02:50] <Fujitsu> It was 5 days after the announcement this time. It should probably at least be closer to the day than announcement.
[02:50] <TheMuso> ok.
[02:50] <Fujitsu> But I've no idea how far before it should actually be.
[02:51] <TheMuso> but its been at various times in the pats, yet we still don't get a lot of regular attendees to the meetings.
[02:51] <ajmitch> noone cares enough
[02:51] <TheMuso> ajmitch: How can we change that?
[02:51] <ajmitch> probably because we often don't have much to talk about
[02:52] <superm1> maybe we should give out karma to those that show up :)
[02:52] <sistpoty> maybe explicitely invite hopefuls as well?
[02:52] <TheMuso> I dunno... But I wonder if we can't still do something to get more people here...
[02:52] <TheMuso> sistpoty: Thats what I was thinking.
[02:53] <sistpoty> and maybe have new hopefuls introduce themselves during meeting time, to make them feeling more rooted in the motu world
[02:53] <sistpoty> (which of course might take precious discussion time=
[02:53] <geser> TheMuso: is the time ok for those in .au/.nz or should it be moved further into the .au day?
[02:53] <TheMuso> But if we have little to talk about...
[02:54] <TheMuso> geser: I can't comment on that, as I'm usually always here on Sat mornings anyway.
[02:54] <TheMuso> So I am somewhat different from the norm.
[02:54] <sistpoty> TheMuso: right, I wanted to quote precious actually, but fingers were faster than brain
[02:54] <TheMuso> heh
[02:54] <geser> my impression is that meetings on 12:00 UTC are more visited than those at 0:00 UTC
[02:55] <TheMuso> geser: Right.
[02:55] <geser> would perhaps an other time rotation scheme work better?
[02:56] <TheMuso> geser: Thats the thing. This scheme works for those who attend, which means its always at similar times.
[02:56] <sistpoty> what's the current scheme? +/- 12?
[02:56] <TheMuso> With more people attending, we can get a wider view of what suits people.
[02:56] <TheMuso> sistpoty: Yes, on Fridays.
[02:56] <TheMuso> WHich I wonder if people would rather it be another day.
[02:56] <geser> sistpoty: yes, 12 UTC and 0 UTC
[02:57] <sistpoty> maybe a rotation based on +/(-) 8 would be better? not too sure though
[02:58] <geser> sistpoty: 12UTC +/- 8 or 0 UTC +/- 8?
[02:58] <TheMuso> Well as I said, we need others to attend, otherwise the usuals get to set the time to something that suits them.
[02:58] <sistpoty> geser: no preference really. was just a stupid idea
[02:59] <TheMuso> Does anybody think a topic on the ml about this is worth trying?
[02:59] <TheMuso> I'd be happy to post it.
[02:59] <sistpoty> TheMuso: not too sure if conclusions will result from it, but I'd definitely think its worth trying.
[03:00] <geser> let's try it, it can't get much worser with attendings
[03:00] <TheMuso> Ok, will do that later today.
[03:01] <TheMuso> So, I guess we get onto our fixed topics...
[03:01] <TheMuso> Unless anybody else has something to say/other business...
[03:01] <DktrKranz> could I ask you something about sru process?
[03:02] <sistpoty> DktrKranz: sure, just go ahead
[03:02] <geser> DktrKranz: ask
[03:02] <DktrKranz> thanks
[03:02] <DktrKranz> how sponsors manage sru requests? sometimes it's hard to verify them
[03:03] <DktrKranz> either they don't have requisites to verify or simply they don't have a specific version
[03:03] <DktrKranz> sometimes a request lies in the queue for a long time, proably because of that
[03:04] <DktrKranz> is there any plan/discussion to improve the process?
[03:05] <sistpoty> hm... to anyone who sponsors packages, where do you think is the difficulty in sponsoring SRUs and how could this be improved?
[03:05] <sistpoty> damn, from MC I'm so used to ask questions *g*
[03:05] <ajmitch> you do it so well ;)
[03:05] <sistpoty> thx
[03:06] <ajmitch> thought of a career in journalism? :)
[03:06] <sistpoty> not really, I'm quite good at coding unfortunately ;)
[03:07] <sistpoty> hm... how long is the sponsoring queue nowadays actually?
[03:07] <geser> I wouldn't be confident to sponsor a SRU I couldn't check or where I'm not sure if the patch is correct (when I can't check it)
[03:07] <TheMuso> I still think a lot of MOTUs are uncomfortable with SRUs, and I'm not affraid to admit I'm one of them.
[03:08] <Fujitsu> I've done several SRUs, but only where I have been involved from the start
[03:08] <geser> I don't know how many MOTUs changed already to gutsy which makes SRU checking a little bit harder
[03:10] <TheMuso> Mind you, once the SRU stuff discussed earlier is documented, I'll be more enclined to help with them.
[03:12] <sistpoty> do you think a separate SRU-sponsoring team would help?
[03:13] <TheMuso> sistpoty: No, I just think we really need to ensure we are all comfortable with the procedure.
[03:13] <TheMuso> I certainly am willing to help once I know what I'm doing.
[03:14] <sistpoty> right, good point
[03:16] <sistpoty> actually I was thinking of transferring responsibility to contributors. This means a SRU-sponsorship team would only need to look at diffs and give thumbs up/down. However if s.th. goes wrong the team would need to make sure that it will fire up an update ASAP. But I guess that's nothing but what motu-sru was for MOTUs in the past
[03:16] <sistpoty> (or rather should have been ;)
[03:17] <sistpoty> but TheMuso's point still stands
[03:17] <Fujitsu> I think SRUs need to have a MOTU associated, as there is some kind of reliability implicit in MOTUship. MOTUs aren't likely to vanish, whereas contributors regularly do.
[03:17] <TheMuso> sistpoty IMO anybody can look at a diff and say yay or nay. Its the procedure that people aren't easy with.
[03:18] <TheMuso> Thats why we are so quick to do gutsy work, as there is almost never any red tape.
[03:19] <TheMuso> Thats how I see it anyway.
[03:19] <sistpoty> right, so let's hope that communicating how the process works will get improvement. We can still discuss it if it doesn't, agreed? ;)
[03:19] <TheMuso> Agreed.
[03:20] <superm1> and now that i understand the process correctly, i'll be glad to work with other contributors that want to get an SRU through
[03:20] <TheMuso> Yeah, I'l;l be the same once I can digest a doc. :)
[03:23] <TheMuso> So... Shall we move onto deciding times for next meeting etc?
[03:24] <sistpoty> yes, please
[03:24] <TheMuso> I'll let others decide, as I can generally make them
[03:26] <TheMuso> Don't chime in all at once... :)
[03:26] <TheMuso> Two weeks from now?
[03:26] <geser> sounds good
[03:26] <TheMuso> 12:00 UTC?
[03:27] <TheMuso> Fujitsu: I'll attempt to do better with the announcements.
[03:28] <Fujitsu> TheMuso: I should have remembered anyway, but that would be good, thanks.
[03:29] <TheMuso> anybody else speak up now, or twill be set in stone...
[03:31] <TheMuso> Fujitsu: Yep, sounds good.
[03:31] <TheMuso> do universe hug days even happen?
[03:31] <Fujitsu> Unfortunately not, it seems.
[03:31] <TheMuso> Well, I say we leave it TBA.
[03:32] <TheMuso> revu is off till next cycle.
[03:32] <TheMuso> Did dholbach end up holding any more Q&A sessions?
[03:32] <TheMuso> Or anybody else?
[03:33] <superm1> well there is a MOTU/LP PPA session that will be going on soon
[03:33] <superm1> that should be mentioned
[03:33] <superm1> as soon as the date is determined
[03:33] <TheMuso> superm1: Will do. Do we have a date/time for that?
[03:33] <TheMuso> ah ok
[03:35] <TheMuso> Alrighty... I think we can say this meeting is closed...
[03:36] <Fujitsu> Closed/disintegrated, but yes.
[03:36] <sistpoty> thanks everyone!
[03:36] <superm1> indeed glad to settle $things, night all
[03:37] <TheMuso> Minutes will hopefully be in the next 24/48 hours.
[03:37] <Fujitsu> Thanks TheMuso.
[03:37] <TheMuso> np
[03:38] <DktrKranz> thanks for the answers, see you :)
[06:18] <Balkhog> @now
[06:18] <ubotu> Current time in Etc/UTC: September 08 2007, 04:18:52 - Next meeting: Xubuntu Developers in 12 hours 41 minutes
[04:43] <elfreiant>  c quan on ligne
[04:43] <elfreiant>  ???? svp
[05:08] <Meyvn> @schedule
[05:08] <ubotu> Schedule for Etc/UTC: 08 Sep 17:00: Xubuntu Developers | 10 Sep 19:00: Screencast Team | 11 Sep 15:00: Server Team meeting | 11 Sep 19:00: Technical Board | 12 Sep 20:00: Edubuntu | 18 Sep 15:00: Kernel Team
[06:04] <mr_pouit> @schedule Paris
[06:04] <ubotu> Schedule for Europe/Paris: 08 Sep 19:00: Xubuntu Developers | 10 Sep 21:00: Screencast Team | 11 Sep 17:00: Server Team meeting | 11 Sep 21:00: Technical Board | 12 Sep 22:00: Edubuntu | 18 Sep 17:00: Kernel Team
[06:49] <somerville32> Heya
[06:53] <janimo> somerville32: hey
[06:54] <janimo> jeromeg: hi
[06:54] <jeromeg> hello
[06:55] <janimo> jeromeg: nice work on bug triaging
[06:55] <jeromeg> janimo : no problem :)
[06:56] <jeromeg> janimo: don't forget to thank mr_pouit for all uploads fixing the bugs ;)
[06:57] <janimo> jeromeg: I have talked to  him several times alreday. but I meet you for the first time :)
[06:57] <jeromeg> pleasure
[06:57] <jeromeg> i won't be so involved in the next few months
[06:58] <jeromeg> school...
[07:00] <somerville32> Once I get things sorted out with my life, I'll be as active as I was pre-hospital.
[07:01] <janimo> ok shall we start?
[07:01] <janimo> is anyone besides Cody and Jerome here for the xubuntu meeting?
[07:04] <Balkhog> @now
[07:04] <ubotu> Current time in Etc/UTC: September 08 2007, 17:04:06 - Current meeting: Xubuntu Developers
[07:04] <jeromeg> janimo : I might have to go in a few minutes
[07:04] <janimo> somerville32, jeromeg: I guess we'll talk among ourselves
[07:04] <janimo> jeromeg: nooone here regarding teh website
[07:04] <jeromeg> may I sumerize what I have to say ?
[07:04] <janimo> jeromeg: please do
[07:04] <jeromeg> ok
[07:05] <jeromeg> I think that during this release a good improvement has been made, long standing bugs have been fixed
[07:05] <jeromeg> for example the non translated session quit dialog
[07:06] <jeromeg> I've noticed with mr_pouit that xfce upstream is very reactive
[07:06] <jeromeg> particuraly the thunar dev
[07:06] <jeromeg> often solving crasher bugs in one day
[07:06] <janimo> jeromeg: reactive? you mean you had good collaboration during gutsy with them?
[07:06] <mr_pouit> hi (sorry for being late)
[07:06] <janimo> hi Lionel
[07:06] <jeromeg> janimo: yep very good I think
[07:06] <janimo> jeromeg: good
[07:07] <jeromeg> we have been solving crashing bugs in thunar, panel
[07:07] <jeromeg> very quickly
[07:07] <jeromeg> compared with gnome dev for example
[07:07] <janimo> how is  the number of new bugs vs the closed ones
[07:07] <jeromeg> well I think we have closed a lot
[07:07] <janimo> jeromeg: what example can you give of a gnome dev
[07:07] <janimo> jeromeg: that you compare with
[07:07] <jeromeg> nautilus for example
[07:08] <jeromeg> they don't even answer
[07:08] <mr_pouit> no so many new bugs
[07:08] <mr_pouit> *not
[07:08] <jeromeg> second point, but I think it will change now with automatic apport
[07:08] <janimo> probbaly they have a lot of duplicate bug they're among the top apps in gnome bugzilla
[07:08] <mr_pouit> but I am afraid that's because there are very few testers :/
[07:08] <jeromeg> there are a lot of non reported bugs
[07:09] <jeromeg> yep that's what I was going to tell
[07:09] <jeromeg> just one example : it took 4 tribes release to notice that panels were crashing when you removed one
[07:09] <janimo> are there any fixes in what will be upstream xfce4 4.2.2 that are important to us?
[07:10] <janimo> jeromeg: indeed we have very poor and uncoordonated testiong
[07:10] <jeromeg> janimo : I must say that a lot of "bug" are resulting of the ton of patches we have
[07:10] <janimo> jeromeg: for instance?
[07:10] <jeromeg> we diverge too much from upstream
[07:11] <jeromeg> janimo : for example the mounting features of exo-mount/gnome-mount
[07:11] <mr_pouit> janimo: the most important (xfwm4 & panel bugs with gtk 2.11.6) are already in the packages
[07:11] <jeromeg> it's a pain in the ass to report bugs to upstream concerning this
[07:11] <janimo> jeromeg: that will stay that way until exo is as good as gnome mount for us
[07:11] <jeromeg> we never now if it's our fault or upstream's
[07:12] <janimo> jeromeg: well bugs which arespecific to us should not be reported
[07:12] <janimo> but this is the same situataion with gnome ubuntu
[07:12] <janimo> we have very little patches actually
[07:12] <jeromeg> janimo: yep but you have to notice it before ;)
[07:12] <janimo> jeromeg: do you know any other cases were bugs are caused by our patches?
[07:12] <jeromeg> janimo : yes but our patches involve a quite big change
[07:13] <jeromeg> janimo : for example the dialog of quitting session
[07:13] <jeromeg> was our problem
[07:13] <jeromeg> but worked like a charm upstream
[07:13] <janimo> jeromeg: what bug does it cause? (I think I knew one but forgot it)
[07:13] <jeromeg> janimo : translation; but mr_pouit  fixed it
[07:13] <jeromeg> i got to go now sorry
[07:14] <janimo> jeromeg: I wouln;d call missing trasnaltion a serios bug
[07:14] <janimo> jeromeg: so 'ton of patches
[07:14] <janimo> causng many bugs is a bit of a strecth don't you think :) ?
[07:15] <jeromeg> yep maybe I exagerated
[07:15] <janimo> jeromeg: whe you considr that that patch allows swicth user hibernate suspend and better UI in that dialog
[07:15] <jeromeg> :)
[07:15] <jeromeg> just before leaving the other point I wanted to give my opinion on
[07:15] <janimo> similarly gnome-mount is there so we can easily mount non removable drivers and crypted partitions
[07:15] <jeromeg> and it's linked to what you are saying
[07:16] <jeromeg> I think that we are moving away from xubuntu
[07:16] <jeromeg> more and more gnome apps/gnome libs are integrated
[07:16] <jeromeg> I don't see the point of shipping xubuntu with all ubuntu apps
[07:17] <jeromeg> maybe it's better now
[07:17] <jeromeg> but it doesn't help in the inprovement of xfce in general
[07:17] <janimo> jeromeg: not all ubuntu apps but some which make xubuntu easier to use withjout causing it to be too bloated
[07:17] <jeromeg> janimo : yep but every release  more and more are coming
[07:18] <jeromeg> for example, was it really essential to ship gnome-screensaver
[07:18] <jeromeg> ?
[07:18] <janimo> jeromeg: currenlty cd burnig and archiving are broken for newbie users on xubuntu
[07:18] <janimo> jeromeg: why do you say that? 'more and more are coming'?
[07:18] <mr_pouit> the main issue for me is using gnome apps when good xfce apps exist... ok for xfburn, it's broken, but for file-roller?
[07:18] <janimo> each change is judged on its own, let's not forsee what is not in the future :)
[07:19] <jeromeg> janimo : on xubuntu-devel mailing list we can see that I think
[07:19] <janimo> mr_pouit: you said you're not usng xarchiver
[07:19] <janimo> it is set to defayult here
[07:19] <janimo> and I have been annoyed by it a few times
[07:19] <jeromeg> i think we should help upstream fixing bugs, forward them the bugs
[07:19] <mr_pouit> janimo: yeah, but squeeze seems to be what we seek
[07:19] <janimo> it's UI (not the looks) but the behaviour sucks
[07:19] <janimo> mr_pouit: squeeze is not even beta
[07:20] <janimo> we cannot use things which are not released
[07:20] <jeromeg> ok got to go
[07:20] <jeromeg> just said what i wanted to
[07:20] <janimo> file-roller is mature has a good ui (DnD, navigating archive contents, open with app) regular release and repsonsive maintainer
[07:20] <jeromeg> keep up with the good work
[07:20] <janimo> jeromeg: ok, thak you for coming
[07:21] <jeromeg> and remember we are xubuntu with an X ;)
[07:21] <mr_pouit> http://squeeze.xfce.org/ <<< why is it called 'release'?
[07:21] <jeromeg> ciao
[07:21] <mr_pouit> I don't speak of ristretto which is in pre-alpha state :P
[07:21] <janimo> mr_pouit: anything can be called a release :)
[07:22] <janimo> I am pretty sure that (since it was not touched since april) is not finished
[07:22] <janimo> mr_pouit: have you tested squeeze?
[07:22] <mr_pouit> yeah
[07:22] <mr_pouit> no issue
[07:22] <janimo> I just know its author started it with preformance in mind
[07:22] <janimo> mr_pouit: better that xarchiver?
[07:23] <Balkhog> I see
[07:23] <mr_pouit> I prefer, but that's only my opinion
[07:23] <somerville32> I thought Xarchiver was a part of the Xfce4 family.
[07:23] <janimo> somerville32: that is an informal status and has little bearing n the quality of an app
[07:24] <mr_pouit> xarchiver is sort of dm-independent
[07:24] <janimo> mr_pouit: well you should have packaged it bu now :) I thiught squeeze is unmaintained or abandoned
[07:24] <janimo> mr_pouit: why what does squeeze depend on?
[07:24] <mr_pouit> janimo: it's in my ppa, but it's too late for gutsy
[07:24] <janimo> mr_pouit: any disadvantage you see in squeeze?
[07:25] <mr_pouit> some weeks (or months?) ago, its author told us that he didn't consider it as stable/usable
[07:26] <mr_pouit> when we were speaking of xarchiver on the ML
[07:26] <janimo> I guess we have to trust him then
[07:26] <mr_pouit> yeah
[07:26] <janimo> I'd really like us to start having stabe and mature apps in default
[07:26] <janimo> we have always been a bit edgy
[07:26] <janimo> because xfce is for more knowledgable poeople
[07:26] <janimo> but I do not thyingk that is a very good idea
[07:26] <janimo> anymore
[07:27] <janimo> easy to use and stable and fast
[07:27] <janimo> on a 256M machine ubuntu si crawling
[07:27] <janimo> but xubuntu is not friendly enough
[07:28] <janimo> so many ousers in that category are just mixing them anyway
[07:28] <janimo> besides, with file-roller the performance and memory consumtion arguments brought up by Giuseppe are irrelevant:
[07:29] <janimo> if xarchiver is better because it uses 40M instead of 120M
[07:29] <janimo> in that case the 600K extra mem of libgnome depsa does not matter
[07:29] <mr_pouit> which program does still depend on libgnome in xubuntu?
[07:30] <janimo> so, the only thing I have with squeeze it seems inactivem, and it upstream told us it's not ready that's it
[07:30] <janimo> otherwise I;d have nothing against putting itin gutsy now
[07:30] <janimo> I always added new apps to xubuntu even in the last weeks since wse cannot break ubuntu/kubuntu so we are sort of unoficially allowed
[07:31] <janimo> especially since all those changed improved things :)
[07:31] <mr_pouit> (the upstream author is developing ristretto at the moment, I guess that's why squeeze is inactive now)
[07:31] <janimo> mr_pouit: currently gnome-screensaver but that will go away when my libgnomekbd patch in upstream gets in the archve
[07:31] <janimo> mr_pouit: oh, same author
[07:31] <janimo> ok
[07:31] <mr_pouit> I thought gnome-screensaver was already patched
[07:31] <janimo> so a good reaso not to use shiny new apps, they may jost stop being developed
[07:32] <janimo> mr_pouit: g-s-s itslef yes,but it depends on libgnomekbd
[07:32] <janimo> which is not yet
[07:32] <janimo> but noone notices since thoselibs are already on the CD since edgy
[07:32] <mr_pouit> ok
[07:32] <janimo> we need them for a11y in the xubuntu live CD
[07:33] <mr_pouit> is g-s-s started by default now?
[07:33] <janimo> so CD space has not been an issue (only on the alternate)
[07:33] <janimo> mr_pouit: if it isn;t it's abug
[07:33] <janimo> I changed xfce40utils a hwile ago to start it in preference to x-s-s
[07:33] <mr_pouit> yeah, I saw the changelog
[07:34] <janimo> this way we get better integration with g-power-manager for thse who istall that
[07:34] <janimo> mr_pouit: it starts on my laptop by default so at least in one case it works :)
[07:34] <mr_pouit> here it still launch x-s-s :/
[07:34] <janimo> mr_pouit: as fgor gnonme deps I keep sending patches to upstream, but they are sloow to apply them
[07:35] <mr_pouit> janimo: yeah, I saw this for nm-applet
[07:35] <janimo> mr_pouit: xinitrc is a configfile it may not have been touched by the update?
[07:35] <janimo> mr_pouit: and gucharmap and the rest of the patches as wel were applied weeks afetr I filed them
[07:35] <janimo> it kind of sucks but at least they apply them evebntually
[07:36] <janimo> file-roller was an exception, the maintainer applied patches usually within 2 days
[07:36] <janimo> I got rid of some gnhome api's
[07:36] <janimo> but some are still left
[07:37] <janimo> it's less work anyway that starting things from scrath
[07:37] <janimo> and I wish people would understand that having fun is not always compatible with happy users
[07:38] <janimo> mr_pouit: so on teh archiver front what do you say about switching to file-roller for beta?
[07:38] <janimo> oh, and the majority of apps in xubuntu will only be in recommeneded
[07:38] <janimo> so anyone cand switch them out or remove them
[07:38] <mr_pouit> yeah, I saw
[07:38] <janimo> this will cause less trouble for those who are more advanced and want sepcific apps
[07:39] <mr_pouit> I don't like file-roller very much... what are we gonna do when a stable squeeze is release?
[07:40] <janimo> mr_pouit: we'll see then
[07:40] <janimo> squeeze or ristretto or xarchiver
[07:40] <janimo> waiting for another six month hoping is not a good
[07:40] <janimo> idea
[07:40] <janimo> xarhiver was put early in dapper because we had no tool at all
[07:40] <janimo> and in the hope it will quickly imporve
[07:40] <janimo> well it is more or less the same as a year ago
[07:41] <janimo> one advantage of the gnome apps (and gnome vs xfce) is the schedule
[07:41] <janimo> you know how to plan in advance
[07:41] <janimo> and not get hurried decision just before release candidate
[07:41] <mr_pouit> the point I don't like with all this is that we aren't going to create an integrated xfce desktop... only the xfce core with gnome apps picked up here and there
[07:42] <janimo> mr_pouit: I do not like ngome deps, to be very clear.that's why I keep making those boring and thankless patches :)
[07:42] <janimo> but I prefer a good UI and default apps which I am not ashamed of
[07:42] <janimo> mr_pouit: havig a core xfce desktop is not the goal of xubuntu
[07:43] <janimo> it is juts the best desktpo that is both friendly and not heavy
[07:43] <janimo> but the apps which are non core are not as good quality as xfce core
[07:43] <mr_pouit> yeah
[07:43] <janimo> so it doesnot make sense to cary them just because their names start with x or xf
[07:44] <janimo> users do not care whether its' gnome xfce ubuntu
[07:44] <janimo> newbies I mean
[07:44] <mr_pouit> so we'll gain the 'friendly', but somewhat lose the 'light' and 'integrated' sides
[07:44] <janimo> they want osmehting to work as they are used tyo in wndows
[07:44] <janimo> or else they will say linux sucks and wait another year
[07:45] <janimo> mr_pouit: yes, although I'd like to make clear that only gaion friendly when it is an essential feature
[07:45] <mr_pouit> yes
[07:45] <janimo> so we will not put fspot instead of gqview vene though it is 10 times friendlier :)
[07:45] <janimo> and there's the separate issue of always running and occasioanl apps
[07:45] <janimo> brasero or file-roller you start once do somehting and close
[07:46] <janimo> so you only lose memory explicitely
[07:46] <janimo> soince both handel large amounts of data their code memory is less relevant
[07:46] <janimo> OTOH getting things by default in the panel or systray is another issue
[07:46] <janimo> we added trash when it was available
[07:47] <janimo> it was a firendly feature but ate anothe 3-4 M as any gtk app does
[07:47] <janimo> this cycle the places menu: it is a stanslone plugin so it too consumes a few megs
[07:47] <janimo> and so on
[07:47] <janimo> printer applet ditto
[07:47] <janimo> lucklily all thise can be disabled and are not in the hard depends of the desktop
[07:47] <somerville32> IS the trash plugin external or internal?
[07:48] <janimo> somerville32: extrenal
[07:48] <janimo> that's why it takes up extra ram
[07:48] <janimo> update-notifier is the most requested app we do not have
[07:48] <somerville32> Personally I just install the ubuntu package
[07:48] <mr_pouit> Toadstool was working on it
[07:48] <janimo> that if we add it, again will take up !3m
[07:49] <janimo> mr_pouit: even if he gets rid of libgnome
[07:49] <janimo> it will take up 3 megs instead of 4
[07:49] <janimo> for example
[07:49] <janimo> the numbers are not exact I got different measures as different time so they are not to be 100% trusted
[07:49] <janimo> network manager ditto
[07:50] <janimo> it would be nice to have easy wifi out of the box
[07:50] <somerville32> Why aren't developers using the ability to make their plugins internal? I thought that was recommended to cut down on unnecessary memory consumption.
[07:50] <janimo> that too consumes
[07:50] <janimo> somerville32: internal plugins have the disadvantage that 1) if they crash the whole panel crashes
[07:51] <janimo> 2) when their UI is in use the other panel UI is blocked
[07:51] <janimo> so if you pop up a context menu on an internal panel plugin the rest of the panel (clock, sys monitors) will not update
[07:51] <janimo> so they had their reasons for making plugins external
[07:52] <somerville32> What happened to threading?
[07:52] <janimo> I was thinking that making soem of the externals into internal would be good for memory but it may not be good for other
[07:52] <janimo> somerville32: I think you can only have one thread that does UI
[07:53] <janimo> somerville32: but yes this should be simpler and more effective (I have plans but usually nothing comes out of them)
[07:53] <janimo> so back to gnome apps
[07:53] <janimo> what do we do for gutsy?
[07:54] <janimo> increase the default mem consumption of the default desktop?
[07:54] <janimo> on the liveCD we alreay need 256 if I am not mistaken
[07:54] <janimo> if we are past 128 or even 196 anyway we may as well use the extra till 256 if we do not shoot over it
[07:55] <janimo> that would really be creepy for xubuntu
[07:55] <somerville32> I had to go buy ancient ram just so that I could continue to run Xubuntu
[07:58] <janimo> somerville32: how much?
[07:58] <janimo> ram I mean
[07:58] <somerville32> I'm at 256mb
[07:58] <somerville32> I was at 128mb
[07:59] <janimo> needd for liveCD or installed as well?
[07:59] <somerville32> For LiveCd...
[07:59] <janimo> aha
[07:59] <somerville32> on.
[07:59] <somerville32> *no.
[07:59] <somerville32> This is for running it
[08:00] <janimo> I don;t know how it managed to work in 128 for dapper
[08:00] <somerville32> I installed dapper with 256mb
[08:00] <janimo> teh ubuntu base system was smaller too back then
[08:00] <mr_pouit> janimo: about g-s-s, xfce4-mcs-plugins needs to be patched imo: #define SCREENSAVER_EXE "xscreensaver-demo", we should replace it with gnome-screensaver-preferences maybe?
[08:00] <janimo> mr_pouit: so do you have a strong opinion agains file-roller?
[08:01] <janimo> mr_pouit: good catch, we have to
[08:01] <mr_pouit> janimo: strong, no, I'am not very enthusiastic, that's all
[08:01] <vinze> Hey
[08:01] <janimo> mr_pouit: I am not enthusiastic either
[08:02] <janimo> I just think that its advantages outweigh the fact that is uses libgnome
[08:02] <janimo> and I plan to drop that for gnome 2.22
[08:02] <janimo> what about brasero? this has much more and weired deps
[08:03] <janimo> gstreamer is already in with pidgin AFAIK
[08:03] <janimo> and firefox 3.0 is using libgnome :(
[08:03] <vinze> Really?
[08:03] <vinze> As in: the multi-platform Firefox?
[08:03] <janimo> yes, for session management
[08:03] <vinze> Wow...
[08:04] <janimo> vinze: as the messy multiplatform firefox
[08:04] <vinze> Yeah, true
[08:04] <janimo> well platform means OS/ARCH not desktop enviroments
[08:04] <vinze> Yeah of course
[08:07] <somerville32> Ok
[08:09] <janimo> any thoughts on the gnome apps issue, cody, vincent?
[08:09] <vinze> I'm in favour of adding them
[08:09] <vinze> Well, some of them only, obviously ;-)
[08:09] <janimo> since polls proved to be a failure (expect we sa w update notifier is most requested)
[08:10] <janimo> we could add some for beta and see the reactions
[08:10] <janimo> how it changes liveCD usability, and whether teh comment will be mostly posotive or negative
[08:11] <janimo> we have time after beta tpo reconsider or undo some of the changes if they prove unpopular or buggy
[08:11] <somerville32> Does our current testing process just involve making sure it loads/installs or are there post-install tests utilized by the testers.
[08:11] <somerville32> I know I started to develop some before Jim took over
[08:11] <janimo> somerville32: I know nothing about our test porcess
[08:11] <vinze> Would be interesting, but perhaps it's a bit late in the process to change it again after the beta...
[08:12] <janimo> vinze: well the changes will be 'drop' and have nothing (brasero, n-m, upadte notifier)
[08:12] <janimo> so it;s not code change that is intrusive
[08:12] <janimo> they do these kind of reversion all the time
[08:12] <janimo> in ubuntu
[08:12] <vinze> OK, then I'd say: go for it :P
[08:12] <janimo> that's why it;'s a beta to see if it is worth havuing
[08:13] <vinze> There was this interesting comment on a Dutch site
[08:13] <janimo> although I'd like to wait till we have the n-m patch to drop gnome deps accepted
[08:13] <vinze> Wait, I'll translate it...
[08:13] <somerville32> update-notifier is just a background process that checks to see if upgrades are available and then uses the notification-daemon (which we already ship) to notify the user, right?
[08:13] <janimo> or else we cannot say that we want it in xubuntu if it;s already there
[08:13] <janimo> somerville32: u-n is a systray app in C and gnome libs
[08:14] <janimo> it does more that notifications
[08:14] <janimo> starts upadtemanager, restarts the session and maybe other things too
[08:16] <somerville32> I think u-n is something we can do for sure for Hardy
[08:16] <somerville32> Without the gnome apps
[08:16] <mr_pouit> yeah
[08:16] <janimo> somerville32: I hope we do it now for gutsy
[08:16] <janimo> somerville32: and not a reimplementation is what you mean I hope
[08:17] <vinze> Here is that Dutch comment:
[08:17] <vinze> "The question of whether Xfce ought to aim at speed or features is an easy one to me: features. The reason why is that Xfce is profiling itself as a Desktop Environment. That means it should come with worthy applications. Seeing that Xfce also uses GTK it's not unlogical that the discussion gets going about using Gnome applications.
[08:17] <vinze> Furthermore, Xfce should realize that the definition of "old computer" is changing. Here, too, time doesn't stop. Of course there are still people on a PIII with little memory, but I think that the PIV can now be seen as basic computer. Those are now about 5 years old and are perfectly capable of running Gnome or KDE. Xfce should not be a problem at all."
[08:18] <janimo> vinze: thanks for translating
[08:18] <vinze> np
[08:18] <janimo> there are still old computers
[08:18] <janimo> thse which were running xubuntu last year are not magically getting upgraded
[08:18] <vinze> Yeah I think we could go a bit older, but some people have really extreme systems
[08:18] <janimo> but we should consider usabiliy (not necessarily feature)
[08:19] <somerville32> I think it would be a good idea to set hard targets for performance
[08:19] <janimo> I do not mind if we don;t have all the features of gnome
[08:19] <vinze> somerville32, yeah, I agree
[08:19] <janimo> but the ones we have I expect to work well
[08:19] <somerville32> I agree.
[08:19] <vinze> janimo, exactly
[08:19] <janimo> hence am pro file-roller but against nautilus with all its nice vfs features
[08:20] <vinze> file-roller is really slow though
[08:20] <janimo> whatever we have it should not surpise or disappoint the user
[08:20] <vinze> But Nautilus especially is a no-go IMHO
[08:20] <janimo> and xfbunr and xarchiver have bith done that
[08:20] <janimo> vinze: yes, I was jut making a comparison
[08:20] <janimo> obviously we do not put nautius in
[08:20] <vinze> To be honest, I haven't really heard many complaints about xarchiver except from you Jani
[08:21] <janimo> vinze: do you know others using xubuntu/xarchiver?
 janimo: I have patched xfce4-mcs-plugin to launch g-ss, it works fine, except the help button (I guess it tries to start gnome-help). </offtopic>
[08:21] <janimo> besides myself I heard complaint from a person who used my computer (windows user)
[08:21] <janimo> was baffled why she cannot open the files inside the archyive
[08:21] <vinze> janimo, no but I do listen quite a lot to Xubuntu users
[08:22] <vinze> But I have indeed not heard from users of whom I know are used to other archivers
[08:22] <janimo> mr_pouit: right it tries to laucnh it (it should pop up an error dialog)
[08:22] <janimo> vinze: they have to be novice users
[08:22] <janimo> as with ubuntu our target is novice users
[08:22] <janimo> but whoi happen to have underpowered (by todays standards) machines
[08:23] <vinze> OK, then I think it would be OK to switch it for now, but we should definitely reconsider it when a new version arrives (for the then-next release of Xubuntu)
[08:23] <vinze> But I'm glad that we actually have a target
[08:23] <vinze> If our target is "novice users" we should definitely be adding the Gnome-libs for unsatisfactory apps
[08:23] <janimo> vinze: we should always consider alternatives and pick the best (according various criteria)
[08:23] <vinze> janimo, ok
[08:24] <janimo> expert users can install xubuntu and then tweak it as they wish
[08:24] <janimo> that has always been true
[08:24] <janimo> the reason we dod not say novice users so far is beacuse of lack of features
[08:24] <janimo> but those are slowly arriving (places menu, printing)
[08:24] <vinze> Yeah but I think Xubuntu has now matured to a level where we come quite close
[08:25] <janimo> indeed
[08:25] <janimo> I think adding gnome apps if they do not noticably degrade performance is ok
[08:25] <vinze> I realized it just this afternoon when I was notified of updates, I would click "Install" and after a while I got the notification that I had to reboot my computer (at the time I wished)
[08:25] <janimo> xfec core and abi+gnuneric are fixed
[08:25] <janimo> but all else is fair game I say
[08:26] <vinze> I agree
[08:26] <janimo> vinze: so you do use update-notifier right?
[08:26] <vinze> Yeah
[08:27] <vinze> But I've added quite some Gnome and even Qt libs because I like experimenting with apps
[08:27] <vinze> But update-notifier is always the first thing I add
[08:28] <janimo> ok, anything else do discuss
[08:28] <janimo> ?
[08:29] <vinze> Oh that was it already... :S
[08:29] <mr_pouit> some things still to do
[08:29] <mr_pouit> the 'About Xfce' menu icon
[08:29] <mr_pouit> iirc, that's the only one missing
[08:30] <vinze> Did Jmak finalize his AA-icon already?
[08:30] <mr_pouit> yes
[08:30] <vinze> Cool
[08:30] <vinze> xfce4-taskmanager doesn't have an icon with me, is that fixed already?
[08:30] <janimo> mr_pouit: oh yes the hel picon
[08:31] <mr_pouit> vinze: xfce4-taskmanager has been replaced with gnome-system-monitor
[08:31] <janimo> mr_pouit: we talked on the list but the thread dies: what about help on the desktop?
[08:31] <vinze> Oh yeah, that's true
[08:31] <janimo> we have the icons in the desktop menu
[08:32] <janimo> what do you think of a launcher woth xfhelp4 and a nice icon in the top panel just as in ubuntu?
[08:32] <janimo> it laucnhes the browser with the xubuntu page
[08:33] <vinze> janimo, On the panel or on the desktop?
[08:33] <janimo> panel
[08:33] <vinze> Panel would be fine IMO
[08:33] <janimo> vinze: we keep the desktop clean
[08:33] <vinze> Yeah that's one of the most appreciated points across reviews ;)
[08:34] <mr_pouit> ok, let's add it then
[08:35] <mr_pouit> something else about desktop layout: why do we use 2 panels?
[08:36] <janimo> mr_pouit: :)
[08:36] <janimo> mr_pouit: that's what upstream uses and ubuntu as well
[08:36] <janimo> we have quite a few apps and laucnhers
[08:36] <janimo> and they would be crowded on one panel
[08:37] <janimo> this way all 4 corners of the screen which are fats to access with the mouse are useful
[08:37] <somerville32> Alright, I have to run but it was nice chatting with you all again. Hopefully things will be a bit more settled for me during the next release cycle and I'll be able to assist with packaging again.
[08:37] <mr_pouit> I thought upstream used only one panel
[08:37] <janimo> s/fats/fast/
[08:37] <vinze> By somerville32
[08:37] <janimo> mr_pouit: hmm. oh, you're right
[08:37] <janimo> mr_pouit: one panel at the middle bottom
[08:37] <janimo> using xubuntu for so long I forgot how the default looked like :)
[08:37] <vinze> mr_pouit, janimo, I think it also brings a clear separation between status-display-stuff (bottom panel) and action buttons (top panel)
[08:37] <janimo> ok, so then it's only ubuntu copying
[08:37] <vinze> janimo, same here ;-)
[08:38] <janimo> anyway Jasper said upstream layout is historical and said the xubuntu one is ok
[08:38] <vinze> Yeah it was modelled after Mac OS's one I believe
[08:39] <janimo> I am not sure what it was modeled after but I trust them on being usable by novices
[08:40] <mr_pouit> there is also this proposition: http://www.xfce.org/images/about/screenshots/4.4-1.png
[08:40] <vinze> I don't really see the use of having a non-full-width panel...
[08:41] <vinze> Windows won't occupy that space, and it's easy to click so it would be a shame not to use it
[08:41] <mr_pouit> I use a single non-full-width panel, but with the auto-hide function
[08:41] <mr_pouit> but that's probably to complicated for novice users
[08:41] <vinze> But auto-hide is very confusing for new users I think
[08:41] <vinze> ;-)
[08:42] <janimo> exaclty
[08:42] <janimo> we aim for ease of use
[08:42] <vinze> WTF?
[08:42] <janimo> advanced users will fill up their panels anyway with all kinds of plugins and rearrange them vertically or whatever
[08:42] <vinze> I just started downloading Tribe 5 and it's already at 42%!
[08:44] <vinze> 53%...
[08:44] <mr_pouit> ok, another question: is tango icon theme ok?
[08:45] <mr_pouit> jmak proposed to use NuoveXT2
[08:45] <janimo> mr_pouit: I don't know what that looks like
[08:45] <vinze> Are there any screenshots anywhere?
[08:45] <janimo> is it packaged?
[08:45] <vinze> 62%... :P
[08:45] <janimo> I am ok with testing with alreday packaged artwork
[08:46] <janimo> otherwise it is probbaly too much work at this point
[08:46] <mr_pouit> http://www.gnome-look.org/content/show.php/nuoveXT+2?content=56625
[08:46] <mr_pouit> and unfortunately it's not packaged
[08:46] <janimo> I say go with what we have now
[08:46] <vinze> It does look very nice
[08:47] <janimo> tango icons look god
[08:47] <janimo> when that new one is packaged it can be evaluated
[08:47] <vinze> Yeah, true, and they're complete
[08:47] <janimo> but until then it's an 'expert' thing
[08:47] <vinze> Oh and they're not SVG I see
[08:49] <mr_pouit> and lots of dups
[08:49] <mr_pouit> *duplicates
[08:49] <mr_pouit> the author doesn't use any symlink
[08:50] <vinze> OK, so any more to discuss?
[08:51] <mr_pouit> it seems not
[08:53] <janimo> so what is the decision:
[08:53] <janimo> add file-roller to beta
[08:53] <vinze> +1
[08:53] <janimo> add update notifier to beta
[08:53] <mr_pouit> ok
[08:53] <vinze> +1
[08:53] <janimo> network manager?
[08:53] <vinze> +1
[08:53] <vinze> Oh wait
[08:53] <vinze> Emm...
[08:53] <janimo> with these two I'd like to get the libgnomes dropeed first
[08:53] <janimo> even if we want u-n in
[08:54] <vinze> Are you quite sure they *will* get dropped before Gutsy is released?
[08:54] <janimo> vinze: no Iam not
[08:54] <vinze> Hmm...
[08:54] <vinze> They would be really nice to have
[08:54] <mr_pouit> janimo: did asac reply?
[08:54] <janimo> mr_pouit: nope
[08:54] <mr_pouit> :/
[08:54] <janimo> pinged him on ircx as well but was not around
[08:57] <mr_pouit> I'll update x-d-s to add the help launcher to the panel
[08:58] <janimo> mr_pouit: ok, thanks
[08:58] <janimo> mr_pouit: we may need an icon, if there's none for xfhelp feel free to take the one form gnome (yelp) :)
[08:59] <mr_pouit> what is xfhelp4 supposed to launch?
[08:59] <mr_pouit> the xubuntu desktop guide or the xfce4 help?
[09:01] <janimo> xfbrowser4
[09:01] <janimo> it is very indirect :)
[09:01] <janimo> and that in turn laucnhes x-ww-browser I think
[09:01] <janimo> but am not sure
[09:01] <janimo> anyway you can just hardcode to x-www-browser command if xfhelp4 is too convoluted
[09:02] <janimo> so it does not take too much time laucnhing
[09:02] <janimo> or even firefox direcly but that will berak if poeple switch browsers and remove ff
[09:03] <mr_pouit> the xfce4 doc isn't available in lots of language
[09:03] <mr_pouit> +s
[09:03] <mr_pouit> the french one is still for xfce 4.2
[09:03] <mr_pouit> :/
[09:04] <mr_pouit> is this really a good idea?
[09:04] <janimo> mr_pouit: no, we should laucnh the xubuntu doc in firefox
[09:04] <janimo> teh xfce docs are indeed poor we may even want to hide them from the desktop menu
[09:04] <vinze> Yeah I'd do that
[09:04] <janimo> so the xubuntu desktop guide is what we want to show
[09:05] <mr_pouit> ok
[09:05] <mr_pouit> the desktop guide is launched by the 'Help' entry in the menu btw
[09:05] <janimo> right, we can keep that then
[09:05] <janimo> I thougt it was the xfce help
[09:08] <janimo> mr_pouit: what about brasero?
[09:08] <janimo> that is not as much for novices as an archiver
[09:08] <janimo> so probably not as high prio
[09:09] <janimo> but would be nice imo
[09:09] <mr_pouit> no new bug was reported since I uploaded the 0.6.1 bugfix release
[09:11] <janimo> mr_pouit: didi that close bugs in LP?
[09:12] <mr_pouit> no, because many people do not come back
[09:12] <mr_pouit> or they don't run gutsy, so they can't test
[09:13] <janimo> ok
[09:13] <janimo> do you think it should be in xubuntu default?
[09:13] <janimo> or rather do you think we shoukld have a cd burner?
[09:13] <janimo> becasue if we do we do not have other choice but brasero
[09:14] <mr_pouit> brasero is a good choice, it works fine
[09:15] <janimo> ok
[09:15] <janimo> so we add it
[09:15] <vinze> Brasero still is being developed?
[09:15] <janimo> vinze: yes
[09:16] <vinze> It looks good
[09:16] <janimo> it sure does
[09:16] <mr_pouit> the 7.0 release is under development
[09:16] <vinze> (Not that I have any experience with CD burning applications)
[09:16] <mr_pouit> with plugins support
[09:16] <vinze> But whoa, the dependencies...
[09:16] <janimo> I have used it recently although on ly for iso writing
[09:16] <janimo> I do not know how it's compilation window is working
[09:16] <janimo> indeed the depends are crazy
[09:17] <vinze> I've got this feeling that that Xubuntu+gnome apps will be a huge success... :P
[09:17] <mr_pouit> we can defer for hardy
[09:18] <janimo> mr_pouit: I do not think they'll drop the depends until then
[09:18] <janimo> mr_pouit: you think there will be another app?
[09:18] <mr_pouit> no ^^
[09:18] <janimo> that would be suboptimal anyway
[09:18] <janimo> the problem with gtk cd burners is that there are too many an non finished
[09:19] <mr_pouit> gnomebaker, graveman, xfburn...
[09:21] <mr_pouit> ok, I guess there is no more to discuss
[09:22] <vinze> Good night then :)
[09:22] <janimo> ok, good night
[09:22] <mr_pouit> good night
[09:22] <janimo> I'll write a summary to the list
[09:22] <mr_pouit> janimo: do you update the seeds?
[09:22] <vinze> Thanks
[09:23] <janimo> mr_pouit: yes with file-roller
[09:23] <janimo> mr_pouit:but brasero needs to be in main if we ship it
[09:23] <mr_pouit> yes
[09:23] <janimo> and with update notifier I'll wait a bit hoping it will be patched
[09:23] <janimo> let's see what Jeremie does
[09:24] <mr_pouit> ok
[09:24] <mr_pouit> and what are we going to do with xarchiver?
[09:25] <janimo> mr_pouit: put it in universe
[09:25] <janimo> and for hardy we'll look again at the archiver apps
[09:25] <mr_pouit> ok
[09:25] <janimo> but early in the ccyle
[09:25] <janimo> anyone care to write a MIR for brasero? :)
[09:26] <mr_pouit> let's ask on the list ;P
[09:26] <mr_pouit> that would be great if other people could participate
[09:26] <janimo> I agree :)
[09:27] <vinze> What's an MIR?
[09:27] <mr_pouit> main inclusion request
[09:27] <vinze> Oh :P
[09:29] <vinze> OK, I'm off, bye
[10:26] <sfair> Seveas: ping
[10:28] <Seveas> sfair, pang
[10:29] <sfair> Seveas: could you change my cloak, please?
[10:31] <Seveas> sfair, done
[10:32] <sfair> Seveas: thanks a lot