[00:02] ScottK, How soon should I have it finished? ie. Are you looking for someone to do it right now? [00:03] Sooner the better. [00:03] * ScottK just noticed the security advisory for Debian being released. [00:05] link? [00:05] somerville32: debian-security-announce@lists.debian.org [00:05] Er, http://www.debian.org/security/ [00:09] somerville32: http://www.debian.org/security/2008/dsa-1464 [00:09] Kmos, 404 [00:10] somerville32: not yet there.. [00:10] only 1463 [00:11] somerville32: http://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/debian-security-announce-2008/msg00022.html [00:11] Yea, I already found that, thanks [00:11] :) [00:18] is urgency always low? [00:18] Like, whats the point of it? :P [00:18] <\sh> ScottK, claws-mail 3.2.0 works like a charm... [00:23] <\sh> somerville32, debian needs it...security updates e.g. have a higher priority and the buildds and archives are working differently...+ [00:24] <\sh> somerville32, #debian-security@oftc (or white when he's here) can elaborate on it... [00:26] Ok, test building for Gutsy [00:30] Should I file a bug for each release or just one big bug? [00:39] keescook, ping :P [00:52] ScottK, ^^ [00:57] \sh, ping [00:58] <\sh> emgent, hi...saw your updates :) checking later today...:) [00:58] cool ;) [00:58] \sh, thanks^2 [00:58] <\sh> I'm sitting here with a buddy and trying to flash a freecom fsg-3 appliace with linux :) [00:58] heehhe ok ;) [01:02] How does one compile a package with debug symbols? With "CFLAGS = -g -O0" ? === santiago-php is now known as santiago-ve [01:06] DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nostrip,debug [01:07] crimsun: thanks [01:14] somerville32: One big bug [01:14] bug #183389 [01:14] Launchpad bug 183389 in syslog-ng "[SECURITY] CVE-2007-6437 prone to denial of service attack" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/183389 [01:15] I had to reconfigure my gutsy pbuilder so I'm just doing the test build now [01:15] I have a debdiff for Gutsy [01:15] somerville32: Tasks for Gutsy/Feisty approved. Does this not apply to the Dapper/Edgy versions? [01:16] The CVE does not say it affects 1.x [01:16] But I intend to look [01:16] OK. [01:24] ScottK, Feisty doesn't appear approved [01:25] Is now. [01:33] ScottK, Should I have the bug # in changelog? Is Launchpad smart enough to close the correct task? [01:34] somerville32: Yes it is and you should. [01:35] ScottK, Should I update the maintainer field if there were no previous ubuntu changes? [01:35] somerville32: In Feisty/Gutsy yes. For earlier releases no. [01:41] Argh. advi still hasn't lost its libungif dependency. [01:42] Lets see if it was rebuilt too soon... [01:42] ScottK, According to Debian's security announcement, 1.x isn't affected [01:42] "The old stable distribution (sarge) is not affected." [01:42] ScottK, However, the version in dapper and edgy is newer than Sarge [01:43] Heya gang [01:44] Hiya bddebian [01:46] Hi somerville32 [01:48] ScottK, Dapper is not vulnerable it appears [01:49] somerville32: OK. Nominate it for Edgy and I'll approve then. [01:49] ScottK, already did [01:50] * ScottK hits refresh (again) [01:50] somerville32: Approved [01:52] For a no-changes rebuild you just add (or bump) the build number, right? [01:53] Aye [01:54] Cool. I'll just fix advi then. It seems the last rebuild was too soon to actually do the libungif -> libgif transition. A rebuild in my sbuilder fixes it. [01:58] \sh: you're kidding - he's doing that again is he? [01:58] after he promised about a month ago, that he wouldn't? [01:59] Hobbsee: what? [01:59] Hobbsee: And we all know what that's worth. [01:59] LaserJock: Kmos messing with MOTU's sync request bugs after having been told specifically to leave them alone. [01:59] that's what I thought [01:59] he did 3 of mine last night [02:00] ScottK: it says that daniel is wrong, and that kmos is incapable of contributing. [02:01] Agreed. [02:01] ScottK: then again, it's already been proven that he remembers things for under an hour. [02:01] or can't reapply concepts, using actual thought. either way. [02:01] what surprises me is how he's actually reasonably competent with picking up stuff that didn't build. [02:01] although I wouldn't say it's that annoying to have him set wishlist I does create uneeded bugmail [02:01] as in, launchpad bugs. [02:02] LaserJock: i've had him revert my changes to bugs. that's not annoying - that's incorrect [02:02] What was his rationale for disengaging from the agreement? [02:03] somerville32: didn't follow the listed process, apaparetnly - (confirmed vs triaged) [02:03] oh goody, he's even got a written warning in here. and still he chooses to ignore it. [02:03] LaserJock: BTW, someone else pointed me to the Golden Pony. Thanks! :-) Too funny. [02:03] bddebian: ;-) [02:04] But what was his rationale for disengaging from the agreement he made? Why did he decide to do something that he promised not to? [02:04] somerville32: I don't think he would agree that he's done anything wrong [02:04] somerville32: i'm not sure. he never says. he still appears to remember, just not apply the concepts that he's been taught. [02:05] LaserJock: This is just the way it goes with him. [02:05] <\sh> Hobbsee, when you mean that he confirmed and wishlisted all my sync bugs, so yes...and I never ever confirmed, wishlisted etc. my sync req in the past [02:05] Has anyone said to him: Here, do you see here where you said in writing that you wouldn't do this. See over here? This is where you just did it. Why did you do that? [02:05] somerville32: i suspect he's really eager, and wants to do good, without actually caring if his work is right or not. He's also said that he doesn't feel he should get everything right, as he's not trying to go for MOTU [02:05] somerville32: good luck. try when he comes on [02:05] The key thing is he's been told not to do stuff without checking during this evaluation period and he's routinely flouted that instruction. [02:06] somerville32: Again, and again, and again. [02:06] \sh: er, you need to confirm bugs - -archive ignores unconfirmed bugs, due to people's incompetence with requestsync. [02:06] What does he say? "Oops, I forgot?" [02:06] somerville32: he doesn't answer. [02:06] usually [02:06] somerville32: as soon as he hits a hard question, he doesn't answer. [02:06] somerville32: That or, "I thought because X (usually irrelevant fact) it was different. [02:06] oh yes, i had my own ammo to add to that page, too [02:06] Then when you corner him, it's as Hobbsee says [02:07] yes, I was about to point out that confirmed+wishlist is the right state (AIUI) if you want -archive to act on it... [02:07] <\sh> Hobbsee, ok...I dojn't use requestsync tool...and that I have to confirm those bugs, i didn't even know, because the other stuff was synced automatically by archive admin..but nevertheless...I think i have to confirm them but not others who didn't test the sync at all [02:07] <\sh> brb [02:08] So kmos went around and changed sync bugs from confirmed to triaged? [02:08] slangasek: wishlist. bah humbug [02:08] somerville32: triaged back to confirmed. [02:08] Hobbsee: well - ok, I don't look at the severity either :-) [02:08] he just set mine as wishlist [02:08] * bddebian files some "wishlist" bugs [02:08] (but in principle, sync requests are wishlist bugs) [02:09] slangasek: oh of course. [02:09] slangasek: The point for Kmos is he's been specifically told on multiple occasions to leave sync bugs alone and he fails to list. [02:09] So, he didn't actually do anything wrong technically besides violate his agreement? [02:09] list/listen [02:09] somerville32: The wishlist stuff is not wrong, but un-needed. [02:09] He did ask for a sync that FTBFS and he never tested. [02:10] ScottK: I understand; I haven't even looked at the details of the current "parole" so I won't comment on that further [02:10] slangasek: No problem. [02:10] * bddebian dances around the room [02:10] Has anyone checked to see if kmos had asked? [02:10] * ScottK hides his eye [02:10] eye/eyes [02:11] * Hobbsee adds ammo [02:11] somerville32: He's several dozen times past his last chance from me. He defended his untested FTBFS sync today by saying he'd discussed it with the Debian maintainer who told him it would be fine. [02:11] somerville32: there's plenty of stuff he's done outright wrong. see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Council/KmosReport [02:12] * bddebian checks to see if he has a page [02:12] BTW, I haven't been looking for it myself (trying to avoid it actually), but he's unavoidable. [02:12] evening [02:12] ScottK: this comes from someone who believes that all ubuntu changes can automatically be dropped, due to it having a new debian maintainer. [02:12] bddebian: Debian has your page ;-) [02:12] ScottK: Haha, not shit eh? [02:12] Hobbsee: Of course, I forget. [02:13] s/not/no/ [02:13] <\sh> back [02:13] in any case, there's not much point discussing kmos as it's just a general downer [02:13] wow. [02:13] somerville32: asked what? [02:13] LaserJock: yes. now, where's that report? [02:13] Hobbsee, for approval regarding the wishlist thing. [02:13] somerville32: no, of course not. [02:14] <\sh> slangasek, well, it's ok when we need to confirm the sync reqs, but please if I testbuild and make functional test with the stuff, noone else should work on the files bugs [02:14] that would require actually obeying his agreement. [02:14] slangasek: You may care to know that bugging developers and archive admins to do stuff (like he was doing to you yesterday) is also on his forbidden list. [02:15] <\sh> script fixed...no need that others have to confirm ;) [02:16] Hobbsee: 3 -'s is a bit much === DelayLama is now known as DreamThief [02:16] ScottK: hum, he's not been doing a very good job of adhering to that then :/ [02:16] slangasek: No. === kitterma is now known as ScottK2 [02:16] LaserJock: was meaning one from each of us. [02:16] LaserJock: seeing as he's done it to all of us [02:17] yes, but they are minor infractions [02:17] LaserJock: He's the death of a thousand cuts. [02:17] sure, and that should show on the page [02:17] lemme guess Kmos right? [02:17] but it doesn't help to get overly upset about minor things [02:18] they should be noted but it's nothing to cry over [02:18] zul: correct, everyone's favourite topic [02:18] zul: yeah. who else is that incompetent? [02:18] ajmitch: heh [02:18] oh yay, there's actually a correct bug in here [02:18] Hobbsee: I am, that's why I left [02:18] ajmitch, you left because of kmos? [02:18] ajmitch: smart move [02:19] somerville32: no, just general atmosphere around here [02:19] :-( [02:19] That stinks [02:19] I agree [02:19] Probably because of me :-) [02:20] I don't find it _that_ bad but I have a different perspective [02:20] Yes, #d-devel is sooo much nicer :-) [02:20] But I wonder how I can help improve the atmosphere personally :) [02:20] ajmitch: it should be better when people who don't follow what they agree to actually leave. [02:20] #debian-devel is mostly ari and helix spouting crap [02:20] play WoW [02:20] at least, that's what i'm hoping [02:21] StevenK: Yep [02:21] * ScottK2 finds there is a direct correlation between Kmos presence/activity and the level of negativity on the channel. [02:21] * somerville32 tosses lavender about the room. [02:21] * ScottK2 sneezes. [02:21] * bddebian sneezes [02:21] lol [02:21] hah, jinx [02:21] Hobbsee: right, which is why when I felt like I'd be lynched for the slightest mistakes, I decided that I didn't really have much more to contribute [02:21] bddebian: You are old and slow. [02:21] I know :( [02:21] ajmitch: you have to make a fair few before you even start getting lynched. [02:21] ajmitch: most people don't actually check all of a person's changes - only if they notice them to be wrong. [02:22] ScottK2, btw, I've finished the security stuff :) [02:22] I make shitloads of mistakes and I haven't gotten lynched yet. At least not that I know of.. [02:23] ScottK2: I can't honestly say I've seen that correlation, but I admit I'm not as active as I used to be [02:23] In fact I made the mistake of trying to help Debian... [02:23] * bddebian hides [02:23] :D [02:23] it's actually kinda more unsettling to see people go after somebody else, even if it's warranted [02:23] somerville32: Great. Ping keescook Bug #183389 [02:23] Launchpad bug 183389 in syslog-ng "[SECURITY] CVE-2007-6437 prone to denial of service attack" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/183389 [02:23] uhm [02:23] we should be able to deal with things in a better way, IMHO [02:24] LaserJock, I agree. [02:24] I think we should all be happy :) [02:24] LaserJock: yeah. kickboxing. [02:24] I'm sure that whoever gets onto the MC in the next few weeks will make everything wonderful [02:24] In general, I agree, but Kmos has done too much damage. [02:24] * \sh 's happy... [02:24] \sh: :-) [02:24] \sh, lol [02:25] * bddebian is frustrated [02:25] <\sh> I just managed to break a freecom fsg-3 NAS [02:25] bddebian: woot! REVU masta! [02:26] * Hobbsee notes that no other business, school, workplace, or community would probably do this. [02:27] <\sh> ajmitch, well, I don't think it has a lot to do with the MC...it's more: well, if I confirm a bug, I actually tested it and agree that it's needed to be fixed...but if I didn't test what's in the bugreport I shouldn't put my hands on it [02:28] absolutely; if a bug isn't confirmed and you think it should be but haven't verified yourself, the most you ought to do is check with the submitter about whether it was overlooked... [02:29] <\sh> anyways, it's not nice to talk about a person when this person is not there, so we should end here and follow up this discussion during the day when kmos is awake... [02:30] \sh: But then Hobbsee isn't awake to participate :P [02:31] <\sh> somerville32, right, damn timezones :( [02:31] \sh: [02:31] * somerville32 proposes we all get together for brunch sometime to discuss the issue. Say, my house? [02:31] \sh: not really so much point discussing with him here anyway. he suddenly always happens to have lunch on, or have to go out, when anything complicated comes up. [02:31] it's very, very convenient. [02:32] JFTR, I've not said anything about him here that I haven't already said to him directly. [02:32] This is publicly logged channel anyhow. I wonder if he reads what we say about him when he is sleeping. [02:32] * somerville32 ponders. [02:33] <\sh> ok ladies and gentlemen it's 3:32 UTC+1 here and I need to sleep a bit before my wife will wake up :) [02:33] <\sh> so cu in a couple of hours... [02:33] * somerville32 waves. [02:33] Gnight \sh [02:33] <\sh> ScottK, claws-mail works and sync req filed (confirmed it actually;)) [02:34] ScottK, Do you have any suggestions on how we can improve the atmosphere for that we don't lose more contributors like we did with ajmitch? [02:34] s/for/so [02:34] somerville32: he doesn't. [02:34] somerville32: therefore he can claim ignorance. [02:34] somerville32: Yeah. Our leadership shouldn't bury their heads in the sand while someone causes hate and discontent in the hope that it will just go away. [02:35] somerville32: which means he doesn't have to respond to mail, as he repeatedly claims he hasn't seen it / is too busy / etc [02:35] somerville32: when suggested that he does less, and spends more time to get higher quality on the stuff that he is doing, he doesn't really respond, or gives a non-answer. [02:36] <\sh> somerville32, /ignore and filtering mail is helping sometimes...and if this doesn't help, a tie-up could also do some favours, when he is doing the merges/syncs/fixes all by himself ;) [02:36] lol [02:37] <\sh> but this will a bad day for universe [02:37] <\sh> anyways..now good night :) === \sh is now known as \sh_away [02:37] Maybe we could have some community events or something to help build team skills and a tight sense of friendship :) [02:37] During Gutsy there were times when 3 or 4 MOTUs were working full time to nullify the bad stuff he was throwing at the sponsorship queue. [02:37] <_MMA_> ScottK: I also feel from watching hear, reading ML posts and talking to a good many people in Boston that there is no real system setup to manage situations like this. [02:38] <_MMA_> *here [02:38] _MMA_: Agreed. This is the first time it's come up. [02:38] well, there's really nothing we *can* do in this case [02:38] it's a bit messy [02:38] ugh, we're STILL talking about Kmos ? [02:38] and frankly I just think we should move on, let the MC deal with it and get something done [02:38] '/me goes to do something else for a while [02:38] \sh_away: you can't actually ignore and filter mail when he's actively breaking the archive. [02:39] * ScottK is actually working on stuff while doing this, FYI. [02:39] somerville32: i suspect the problem would go away if the team felt that those who decided not to obey rules actually got something odne about them. [02:40] <_MMA_> LaserJock: I think the "leadership" ScottK mentions is the MC and nothings being done. [02:40] _MMA_: umm ... a lot is being done [02:40] but as far as having something to really take action with we're basically powerless [02:40] _MMA_: Been done. [02:40] There's at least hope. now. [02:41] <_MMA_> Ok. "Our leadership shouldn't bury their heads in the sand" Doesnt really elude to something being done. :P [02:42] <_MMA_> But sure, I trust ya. :) [02:42] and I don't think that's a very accurate assessment either [02:42] LaserJock: Nothing got done for months. [02:43] ScottK: and that proves "leadership burying their heads in the sand"? I think not [02:43] LaserJock: All I got were requests to give him time long after it was clear it was hopeless. [02:43] LaserJock: Nothing would be being done now if I hadn't quit listening to those requests. [02:44] but you didn't email ubuntu-motu or motu-council for a long time [02:44] it was basically dealt with by informal means [02:44] which does not say anything for leadership burying their heads [02:44] Well there were no formal means and via informal means I was asked not to do anything. [02:44] I was told it would all be fine. [02:45] formal means would be emailing -motu [02:45] at the very least [02:45] LaserJock: no, it was a "we know we need to do something about this, we just don't know what to do yet, or don't want to" [02:45] and being unhappy with the results of 1 or 2 people emailed in private is a fair cry from leadership burying their heads [02:46] LaserJock: What person in leadership here did anything about him except when forced? [02:46] Hobbsee: but that is not ignoring the issue. It's perfectly legitimate for the MC to say we don't know what to do yet. [02:46] ScottK: good question, I have *no* idea [02:46] I have no idea who you talked to [02:46] Ok, time to stop talking about kmos :) [02:47] LaserJock: until they keep saying that, and don't try to find a solution. [02:47] somerville32: Let's talk about you now ;-) [02:47] because you don't like their solution [02:47] Ok! [02:47] How do you guys think I'm doing MOTU-wise? :) [02:47] LaserJock: it was decided that he needed to go at UDS. it was another 2 full months later when it was also decided that he needed to go, but no progress was made as to how. i call that them burying their heads in the sand. [02:47] LaserJock: They had no solution until I filed a complaint and it couldn't be avoided any longer. [02:48] * ScottK isn't the MOTU warden and shouldn't have been forced to deal with it. [02:48] no [02:48] LaserJock: at least now we have a rather damning report, but because it's got some +'s on it, it'll probably be shown as "he does some good stuff. lets keep him, and keep monitoring" [02:48] but the point of MC is to not play police either [02:48] LaserJock: why not? [02:49] because that is not their charter [02:49] it is a mediation charter [02:49] If someone is being disruptive, who's responsible? [02:49] that means people have to bring complaints [02:49] if it's the only people that can kick people out for disobeying rules, then they automatically *have* to take up those reponsibilities. [02:49] ScottK: apparently, the MC is only there to mediate, and if that doesn't work, no one. [02:49] clearly the disruptive person is responsible [02:50] Hobbsee: the CC is above the MC [02:50] LaserJock: That's clear now. It's also clear that no matter what one has done, the MC will give additional chances, so there's no point in being slow to complain. [02:50] ScottK: that's ridiculous [02:50] establishing rule off of a *single* case is retarded [02:50] LaserJock: which shoves it back to the MC, yes. [02:50] LaserJock: It's the obvious consequence of the way this has been handled [02:50] LaserJock: we tried that one. [02:50] LaserJock: actually, it goes back to jono, who sends it back to daniel, who sends it to the MC. [02:51] ok, so we should work on things, I have no doubt [02:51] LaserJock: When this was brought up, I tried to say it was a bad situation to make rules based on and the MC decided different. [02:51] but the MC is not daniel [02:51] and the CC is not jono [02:52] and if you don't bring complaints to the team I don't think you can claim that they are ignoring the issue [02:52] I wasn't aware that there was a problem until shortly before ScottKs email [02:52] LaserJock: There's no way they couldn't have known. [02:53] and I don't think I'm *that* out of touch that there was a lot of things going on without my knowing [02:54] LaserJock: do you do the sponsorship queue? [02:54] we always have people who make mistakes, and we should be tolerant in as much as we can while still retaining standards [02:54] Hobbsee: yes, some, not as much anymore [02:56] LaserJock: it's just where people deliberately go and ignore the standards where the problem comes. [02:56] there is no doubt that something needs to be done, and that things could have been addressed better [02:56] but we've never had this problem [02:57] and I think it's better for us to have a positive attitude and look at what we can be doing to make Universe and Ubuntu a better place [02:58] Gah, I gotta stop doing this Debian shit. I just tried to build a revu package in my sid pbuilder.. :-( [02:58] LaserJock, +1 [02:59] * Hobbsee will have a more positive action once seeing that the MC is serious about getting rid of people who deliberately do not follow the proceedures required of them, of which they've agreed to. [03:00] I really don't understand your statement [03:00] 1) the MC has never shown itself to *not* take issues seriously [03:00] 2) we can't kick people out of something they aren't in [03:01] Kmos has no official standing so we can't really do anything but say we'd rather he not contribute [03:01] LaserJock: We can ask Launchpad to remove his ability to do Ubuntu related things. [03:01] Can we take kmos discussion to another channel, maybe #ubuntu-kmos_is_the_end_of_the_world or something? :) [03:01] we could do that, although I'm not sure the MC can do that [03:02] ScottK: they say "let the CC handle that. sounds like a person issue" [03:02] LaserJock: locking of LP account on ubuntu stuff would be enough [03:02] i think [03:03] Hobbsee: Exactly. I've been told (by Jono) that MC has authority for that. [03:03] somerville32: lol, have you registered it? I wanna be an op with supercowpowers! [03:03] :D [03:04] Hobbsee: and that is basically what the MC has said they are willing to do [03:04] LaserJock: This is why I've said I'm hopeful action will finally be taken. [03:04] LaserJock: they are now, yes. [03:04] so it would seem to me that the MC has acted fairly well with the issue [03:05] the issue was raised by ScottK [03:05] there was discussion [03:05] a reasonable plan set forth [03:05] and a nice wiki page to track things [03:05] seems like quite a bit of action to me [03:05] * ScottK thought the entire trial period was a waste of time and effort. [03:06] LaserJock: I count it action once he's stopped from making trouble. The rest is just paperwork. [03:06] that seems odd to me [03:07] it should be all about transparency [03:07] LaserJock: just the amount of time that it took to actually get the action done. [03:07] about having reasons and evidence for people [03:07] Hobbsee: and that wasn't the fault of the MC [03:07] no? [03:07] no [03:07] I think there's been plenty of transparency about all the trouble he's caused. I think it was sufficient, without further warning, for him to be booted. [03:07] show me where the MC was asked about the issue and they did nothing? [03:07] the MC had to decide what it wanted to do about the issue - how is it not then their fault for taking so long to come up with a plan? [03:07] When does the current probation period end? [03:08] somerville32: "mid jan" [03:08] somerville32: apparently they're doing a report at the moment. [03:08] We're mid January now [03:08] So the pain should be over soon [03:08] somerville32: however, it was worded as "give it 2 weeks, and we'll see", rather than "give ti 2 weeks, and we'll make a decision" [03:08] Hobbsee: so long? it took 20 days to hear evidence and get the plan in place, that's not that long [03:10] Gawd, I so wanna do urbanterror but I can't deal with a 300Mb data package :( [03:11] LaserJock: the objection is surely between the "started creating trouble, and hearing complaints" and "concocted a plan" [03:11] LaserJock: I was told it would be taken care of after UDS. Nothing happened, so I filed a complaint to force action. I realize that was all in private, so in some respects doesn't count, but I don't count the time from my request, I count it from UDS. [03:12] ScottK: right, but I do think it matters [03:12] Which gets back to my earlier comment I made about having learned the lesson that trying to work things out without formal complaints. [03:12] even UDS it was still 2 months before they collected evidence, afaik [03:12] well, this is an unusual case [03:12] which is how he got so far in the first place, yes === bigon is now known as bigon` [03:14] ScottK: well, I was told at UDS Mt. View that we'd have a new TB in 2 weeks and we still don't [03:14] we have a lot of issues [03:14] LaserJock: that's a process failure too, surely. [03:14] of course it is [03:14] but I think MC-bashing is not helpful [03:15] especially when there was nothing sent to the list [03:15] I agree it's frustrating [03:15] * somerville32 wonders how this discussion is helpful at all. It is just rehashing the numerous bitch sessions we've already had. [03:15] Yeah, let's bitch about something else :-) [03:15] somerville32: hmm, I always find it helpful :-) [03:16] LaserJock, I agree it is nice to get it out but it is taxing on other people who don't care. [03:16] yes, that's true [03:16] and if I were a new contributor and I just walked into the channel I would bolt [03:16] I'm personally disappointed too with the number of process failures but I'm wondering what we can do to actually accomplish something. Unfortunately, the powers that be don't read these backlogs to see whats up. [03:17] * pochu doesn't care about the conversation whatever you talk about :P [03:17] somerville32: what powers that be? *we* are the powers that be [03:17] * bddebian has no power [03:17] bddebian: of course you do, more than most and don't forget it [03:18] ;p [03:18] heh [03:18] LaserJock: we have no power in view of the CC. we only have power to whinge when it breaks. [03:18] look, the level of power we have within our OS is fairly unprecedented for a project this size [03:18] tru dat [03:19] we are a volunteer army of people who care about Ubuntu [03:19] Speak for yourself ;-P [03:19] we give software to thousands and thousands of people [03:19] I just care about my karma ;-P [03:19] and we can determine our future through our actions, our votes, and our words [03:19] bddebian: lol, I want karma for uploads :) [03:20] LaserJock, +1 [03:20] I probably have no karma anymore :( [03:20] bddebian: you have negative karma! [03:20] Heh, probably [03:20] Karma is still messed up [03:20] Create a spec or two and you get about a thousand karma [03:21] Do a hards day work on bugs and you'll get maybe a hundred or two [03:21] somerville32: yes, Marks says that will make people work on underutilized parts of LP [03:21] *Mark [03:21] Plus, most of my karma from last year is gone [03:21] So I have 2k from non-ubuntu stuff now since I did a binge on my Sapidlib proejct [03:22] Although overall, I've contributed way more to Ubuntu [03:22] Karma has 365 days of life, and every day it loses 1/365 of its value. [03:22] err, 1/365 of the total value [03:22] lol@guesses [03:22] * somerville32 tickles lifeless [03:24] Well, I'm hungry. How about we order in? [03:24] * pochu is off to bed, g'night [03:29] so whats the naming policy for packages when you skip over an existing debian release...for example, gutsy release at 0.1-1ubuntu1, debian release at 0.2-1 and latest upstream is 0.3, what would my hardy version # be if I want to package 0.3?? [03:30] 0.3-0ubuntu1 [03:30] aye [03:30] thx [03:33] what time will the motu school kick off? [03:33] jdong: has upstream complained about you being able to distribute 0.3 of supertux? [03:34] oh, they've changed what htey want again. nvm. [03:38] Hobbsee: no, but their wiki "suggests" vendors to ship the 0.3.x stuff in a separate package, which we already do. [03:39] and I really wish they'd stop changing distribution sites so that watchfiles would actually serve a purpose :D [03:39] Heya jdong [03:39] jdong: hehe :) [03:39] jdong: last time i got in trouble for packaging the new version, because they'd retroactively put up a "please don't put this into distros" sign. [03:39] Hobbsee: haha [03:39] i kid you not :) [03:40] Hobbsee: well we've got supertux-stable now, and I just modified the two so that they can be installed side-by-side today, so I don't see any way upstream can yell at us :) [03:40] (famous last words) [03:40] :) [03:40] yeah well [03:40] * ScottK remembers. [03:40] Hobbsee: mostly because my little sister wanted to play new supertux today ;-) [03:40] haha :) [03:41] Hobbsee: she knows how to say debuild now... and she's 9. [03:41] scary. [03:41] taught her how to use prevu yet? [03:41] hahaha no :) [03:41] I should though [03:45] jdong, wow. supertux's data is huge! [03:45] DarkMageZ: the thing is 5x bigger since 0.3.x [03:45] DarkMageZ: seems to mostly be ogg soundtracks though [03:46] yeah. i'm grabbing 0.3.1d from hardy [03:46] yay, more music ? [03:46] yeah, the tracks are slightly less repetitive at a first glance. === _czessi is now known as Czessi [04:35] Any MOTUs here willing to take a look at http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?package=photoml? This package has been through a number of revisions - technical issues were taken care of a while back, and the recent upload addresses some copyright statement problems. === bigon` is now known as bigon === boomer` is now known as boomer [05:11] * ScottK is reviewing qtsmbstatus [05:14] that sounds... vertical. [05:16] What does horizontal sound like? :-) [05:18] slangasek: Looks like it might be a new way to tickle even more bugs out of samba. [05:19]