[01:40] <Palintheus> ls
[01:40] <Palintheus> grr
[01:40] <gcleric> rrrraaawww!
[13:56] <pitti> hello
[13:56] <emgent> heya pitti
[13:56] <emgent> @schedule Rome
[13:56] <ubotu> Schedule for Europe/Rome: 01 Feb 21:00: MOTU | 13 Feb 23:30: Forum Council | 20 Feb 02:00: TriLoCo-Midwest
[13:57]  * mvo waves
[13:57]  * Hobbsee waves to pitti and mvo
[13:57]  * Hobbsee hides from any lightning bolts
[13:57]  * Hobbsee keeps her watering can handy, for putting out any more spot fires
[13:58] <pedro_> hello
[13:59] <pitti> hey
[13:59] <seb128> hey
[13:59] <MacSlow> greetings
[13:59] <Riddell> hi
[13:59] <pitti> hm, no Ted yet?
[14:00] <Riddell> he has been known to need a text
[14:00] <MacSlow> looks like it
[14:00]  * pitti smses
[14:01] <MacSlow> ah fast :)
[14:01] <Riddell> that was fast
[14:01] <MacSlow> my sms lways take ages
[14:01] <pitti> hey tedg
[14:02] <tedg> Morning guys.
[14:02] <MacSlow> hi
[14:02] <pitti> tedg: so, sms is moot then :)
[14:02] <pitti> so, everyone settled back home after the sprint? :)
[14:02] <tedg> Oh, were you guys going to SMS me?  I actually can't get txt messages.
[14:02]  * pitti does a group hug
[14:02] <pitti> tedg: I did already; oh, good to know
[14:03] <tedg> They charge for $0.10 for messages that you receive, and then spammers get your number....  annoying.
[14:03] <kwwii> pitti: just as a note, I no longer have to attend the meeting if there is nothing for me (but you couldn't know that I guess)
[14:03] <mvo> they charge you for stuff you receive?!?
[14:03] <pitti> kwwii: I remember; well, so do you have something to discuss or need any help with your specs?
[14:03] <tedg> mvo, in the US, we invented greedy capitalism ;)
[14:03] <kwwii> pitti: nope, not really, but I'll hang around anyway :-)
[14:03] <pitti> kwwii: https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+specs has three specs for you which are all not even approved; I take it they are all defered?
[14:04] <kwwii> pitti: nope, it is more a matter that scott has not approved them
[14:04] <kwwii> the scope of them changed from "change everything" to "change a little" so there is not a lot of work involved
[14:04] <pitti> kwwii: ok; so as long as you don't block on finding something to blacksmith packging for you, that's fine
[14:05] <kwwii> right
[14:05] <pitti> so, the only two agenda items that I collected from the reports are my own :)
[14:05] <pitti>  * jockey testing (nvidia, ati, usability) (pitti)
[14:05] <pitti>  * app-install-data-commercial
[14:05] <pitti> anything else from anyone?
[14:05] <MacSlow> I just have a general question...
[14:06] <pitti> just shoot :)
[14:06] <Seveas> *pang*
[14:06]  * pitti rubs his ears
[14:06] <MacSlow> regarding how to proceed, if patches I sent upstream (to bugzilla) are left un-applied... thus not landing in our .debs when we (you) grab them from upstream
[14:07] <seb128> whenever you ask for it
[14:07] <pitti> MacSlow: I think we should always apply our own patches immediately and upload them, so that lots of people can test them
[14:07] <mvo> MacSlow: just ping someone of the people doing the packaging and they include them
[14:07] <seb128> I can do an upload with those patch or sponsor you
[14:07] <pitti> we should always immediately send patches upstream, but not block on them to apply and release
[14:07] <seb128> pitti: not always, for the rhythmbox changes I was waiting because upstream had comments, etc
[14:08] <MacSlow> initially I always incorporated them into patches found in <package>/debian/patches... but we want to keep the delta as small aspossible and be nicer with upstream and contribute more directly
[14:08] <pitti> right, of course; if you are actually working *with* upstream on the patch
[14:08] <seb128> MacSlow: usually apply to the package when you think it's ready and attach it upstream as soon as possible so we benefit from their comments, etc
[14:08] <MacSlow> pitti, well in all case I refer too I am directly working with upstream
[14:08] <pitti> MacSlow: IMHO, as soon as seb and you are confident that it works, get it uploaded
[14:09] <seb128> what pitti said
[14:09] <MacSlow> seb128, pitti: ok
[14:09] <pitti> MacSlow: it doesn't hurt if we drop our patch two weeks later and adopt a differnet solution upstream, as long as we are before FF and all that
[14:10] <MacSlow> seb128, e.g. the "browser-by-default" for rb works and sticks to conventions found in other rb-plugins regarding gconf-key places
[14:10] <seb128> MacSlow: I'm happy to upload this one
[14:10] <seb128> let's discuss it on #ubuntu-desktop
[14:10] <MacSlow> mvo, same goes for the action-menu patch for libwnck
[14:10] <pitti> oh, right; if you patch something that changes the user's conf, then we need to be more careful of course
[14:10] <MacSlow> seb128, after the meeting?!
[14:10] <seb128> MacSlow: yes
[14:11] <MacSlow> pitti, in case of the "browser-by-default" it just add stuff not change any existing key
[14:11] <MacSlow> ok... this issue is clarified for me then
[14:12] <pitti> so, unfortunately at the sprint there weren't a lot of people/hw with Ati/Nvidia cards; I would appreciate if you could test jockey a bit (new version just uploaded) and give me some feedback whether it works for you and which hw you have
[14:12] <pitti> I'm particualrly interested in fglrx, nvidia, and WinModems (sl-modem-daemon)
[14:12] <MacSlow> pitti, hm.... ok I can update my desktop/nvidia-box to hardy
[14:12] <pitti> bcm43xx will be re-added in some days
[14:13] <pitti> MacSlow: if it helps, I can provide gutsy packages, too
[14:13] <MacSlow> pitti, does the restricted-driver stuff already cover nvidia 169.09?
[14:13] <pitti> (it's just a different Recommends:, they should actually install fine on gutsy
[14:13] <pitti> MacSlow: yes, it should; we ship the necessary glue files in linux-restricted-modules itself, not jockey
[14:13] <MacSlow> ok
[14:14] <pitti> mpt: how much can we bother you about UI reviews already?
[14:14] <pitti> mpt: jockey doesn't look terribly different from r-m, but it did change a bit, and I'd appreciate getting some complaints :)
[14:15] <mpt> pitti, my current allocation is 2 days/week on Ubuntu, though I think sabdfl would like to reduce that
[14:15] <mpt> by all means e-mail me, or even better, assign a bug to me if appropriate
[14:15] <pitti> so, if we have something to review for you, is it ok to just mail you or do we need to ask the LP guys for 'stealing' you?
[14:15] <pitti> mpt: alright, sounds good; thanks
[14:16] <mvo> pitti: I can give you feedback after the meeting on ati r500
[14:16] <pitti> thanks
[14:17] <pitti> so, unless anyone else wants to ask/discuss something, shall we quickly run through the specs?
[14:17] <mpt> pitti, or even e-mail ubuntu-desktop@ or ubuntu-devel@, because it'll be educational for the comments to be public
[14:17] <mvo> pitti: what is this item about app-install-data-commercial?
[14:17] <pitti> mpt: ah, sounds good
[14:18] <pitti> mvo: I wanted to handle that after the meeting actually
[14:18] <pitti> mvo: just wondering if there is anything written about it somewhere?
[14:18] <pitti> mvo: Gerry wants us to add a new package to it, and I wasn't sure which information we need and where to put it
[14:18] <pitti> mvo: but I think we can do that afterwards
[14:19] <mvo> pitti: ok
[14:19] <pitti> so, https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+specs -- we have three weeks to go :)
[14:19] <mvo> pitti: this should all be handed over to the ISV department
[14:19] <pitti> Riddell, your's seem to be in good shape
[14:19] <pitti> mvo: I'd prefer that, too
[14:20] <Riddell> pitti: yes, they're both making good progress
[14:20] <pitti> for my own ones, partition-management lags behind; if someone happens to be bored and interested, I always appreciate help :)
[14:20] <pitti> but I think I can get the most important bits into FF (partition renaming and fsck on boot)
[14:20] <pitti> mvo: networkless-installation-fixes seems to be behind?
[14:21] <mvo> pitti: yes, its behind, I had hoped to work on it this week, but the plague struck
[14:21] <pitti> argh sprint plague argh
[14:21] <mvo> pitti: I still think it can be done in the remainaing time
[14:21] <pitti> mvo: but it's not blocked for something external or other people?
[14:22] <mvo> pitti: no
[14:22] <pitti> (this isn't supposed to be a "you suck" list, but rather a "who needs help from whom" :) )
[14:22] <pitti> mvo: packaging-tools-usability isn't even approved yet; does that need some review from people like mpt, or jsut blocked on Scott?
[14:23] <mvo> pitti: the open issue is that we should have a way to show the support status of the packages
[14:23] <mvo> pitti: now this is not easy as some packages are support for 3y some for 5y etc
[14:24] <pitti> ooh, I agree; this creates too  much confusion and false expectations
[14:24] <mvo> pitti: but there is currently no list (to my knowledge)
[14:24] <mvo> unless this list is available, this particular bit can not be implemented
[14:24] <pitti> mvo: can't we use some germinate trick for that?
[14:24] <pitti> i. e. everything that's in the server seed is 5 years, rest is 3?
[14:25] <pitti> mvo: I also fell that we should point out universe/multiverse bits harder
[14:25] <mvo> if that is the official policy, then yes
[14:25] <mvo> pitti: point out harder in what way?
[14:25] <pitti> it's very hard to tell ATM which unsupported packages you have installed and thus could bite you (security, support, and updates)
[14:25] <pitti> mvo: I'm not sure how to point it out TBH
[14:26] <pitti> I just know that nowadays people regard unvierse packages as pretty much "Ubuntu"
[14:26] <pitti> and loudly complain/blog/shout if we don't put a new microversion of $my_favourite_universe_pet_packge into universe-updates every other month
[14:27] <pitti> (or keep clamav up to date, etc.)
[14:27] <mvo> right
[14:27] <pitti> mvo: 3/5 years> can you talk to Colin about that?
[14:27] <pitti> I think germinate can help us here
[14:27] <Riddell> mvo: mind that some packages are also 18 months only
[14:28] <mvo> that is because we give people the expectation that universe is pretty well supported by enabling it by default for example
[14:28] <pitti> ^ right
[14:29] <mvo> pitti: yes, please make that a action item
[14:29] <pitti> Riddell: ah, like packages in the Kubuntu seeds?
[14:29] <mvo> pitti: I will talk to him about it
[14:29] <pitti> mvo: done
[14:29] <pitti> thanks
[14:29] <Riddell> pitti: mm
[14:29] <mvo> pitti: or stuff in main but not "desktop"
[14:29] <pitti> any other bright ideas about that universe presentatino problem?
[14:30] <pitti> mvo: we should make update-manager increasingly more whining about installing universe the older a release gets :-P
[14:30] <pitti> "Best before: see backside" or so
[14:31] <mvo> what can people expect from universe? is there [ ] no support [ ] some support [ ] full support
[14:31] <mvo> for security updates?
[14:31] <pitti> some security support
[14:31] <pitti> and some updates for popular packages
[14:31] <Riddell> unrealiable support
[14:31] <mvo> so only for very critical ones?
[14:31] <pitti> but none at all for 95% of packages
[14:31] <pitti> mvo: it's not directly related to severity; more to popularity
[14:31] <tedg> Can we say something like "community support"?
[14:32] <pitti> e. g. gstreamer codecs will get updates
[14:32] <MacSlow> mvo, pitti: isn't the ubuntu-logo infront of a package in synatpic enough indication of the support-state?
[14:32] <mvo> if we don't provide security support for 95% of universe, then that is certainly something we need to message very clearly
[14:32] <pitti> and some people now take care of clamav
[14:32] <pitti> MacSlow: indication, yes; but apparently not enough
[14:32] <pitti> tedg: well, that's even more fuzzy IMHO
[14:33] <pitti> mvo: do you think (for hardy+1) we could have update-notifier check our Ubuntu CVE database, and give a warning about unresolved stuff in universe packages?
[14:34] <mvo> pitti: yes, I think so
[14:34] <pitti> i. e. a notification for installed software, and a big fat warning when trying to install it
[14:35] <mvo> is there a universe-security team?
[14:35] <pitti> that won't help for serious bugs that are in the release, but it might help to keep people's feed a bit more dry
[14:35] <mvo> motu based?
[14:35] <pitti> mvo: yes, there is
[14:35] <pitti> mvo: but AFAIR our security team (Kees/Jamie) still do the complete tracking
[14:35] <pitti> and we have that tracking in machine readable format
[14:35] <mvo> but it can not keep up?
[14:36] <pitti> mvo: nope (can't/don't really want)
[14:36] <pitti> mvo: the very reason why we keep stuff in universe is that there is so much crack in it which is entirely unmaintainable for 3 or even 1.5 years
[14:37] <pitti> ok, let's move that to the ML, time is pressing
[14:37] <mvo> ok, mailinglist sounds good
[14:38] <pitti> mvo: can you CC: ubuntu-devel in your mail about determining support status?
[14:38] <pitti> MacSlow: hardy-desktop-effects-profiles and hardy-sparkle seem to need more time/attention
[14:39] <pitti> MacSlow: do you need help/should we kick one to hardy+1/will it likely land on time?
[14:39] <MacSlow> pitti, sparkle and shine are allowed to miss ff
[14:39] <MacSlow> pitti, the profiles stuff is a bit hard
[14:39] <pitti> ah, ok
[14:40] <MacSlow> pitti, I'm currently a bit unsure if keybuk said the profiles stuff can slip to hardy+1 or not
[14:40] <pitti> MacSlow: ok; TBH I'm not familiar with that, so if you think you won't get everything ready, can you please talk with Scott directly?
[14:41] <MacSlow> the sprint week was a bit hectic and I got some shift-arounds of things
[14:41] <MacSlow> pitti, sure
[14:41] <pitti> ok, thanks
[14:41] <pitti> hardy-hardware-detection is currently marked as 'not started', that's not quite true
[14:41] <pitti> the core bits are already done; I'll update it after the meeting
[14:42] <pitti> seb128: pppoeconf-gui looks untouched enough to not be something for hardy?
[14:42] <seb128> pitti: gnome-system-tools does pppoe now
[14:42] <pitti> oh,neat
[14:43] <seb128> pitti: so the spec is deprecated, or rather just it's limited to make sure than g-s-t work correctly
[14:43] <pitti> seb128: you think that's good enough for DSL users?
[14:43] <pitti> rockin'
[14:43] <seb128> yes
[14:43] <pitti> seb128: can you please update the status and whiteboard of it?
[14:43] <pitti> 'beta available' sounds appropriate then?
[14:43] <seb128> pitti: sure
[14:43] <seb128> yes
[14:43] <pitti> and talk to scott to get it approved?
[14:43] <seb128> ok
[14:44] <pitti> tedg: what's the status of screensaver-review?
[14:45] <tedg> I talked to Scott about it at the sprint, so I need to write up everything that he said.
[14:45] <tedg> Then we need to come up with a critera for choosing screensavers, I'm trying to work with Debian on that.
[14:45] <pitti> tedg: so is 'drafting' reflecting the status correctly?
[14:46] <tedg> The current way is "Mark said so" -- we need something more robust :)
[14:46] <tedg> pitti: yes, that's a good status.
[14:46] <pitti> in this case it doesn't look very 'hardyable'?
[14:46] <pitti> oh, the 'Mark' approval overriding :)
[14:47] <tedg> I'm not sure, it is a pretty easy spec, mostly moving around screensavers from -data to -data-extras.
[14:47] <pitti> tedg: are you and TheMuso getting along with the remainign audio jumble pieces? please let me know if you need anything from me wrt. pulse
[14:47] <pitti> tedg: screensaver> oh, ok; it sounded a bit more complex
[14:48] <tedg> pitti: Yes, I haven't talked with TheMuso yet...  need to do that.
[14:48] <pitti> tedg: can you please talk to Mark and Scott to get this spec into shape? we should at least know what we need for hardy
[14:49] <tedg> pitti: Yes, right now it's mostly a "typing problem".  I plan on having it to Scott for Monday.
[14:50] <pitti> thanks
[14:50] <pitti> so, I think we are through
[14:50] <pitti> for review, my collected action items:
[14:50] <pitti> ACTION: mvo to talk to cjwatson about using germinate to determine length of package support (3/5 years, 18 months) and mailing u-devel@ about improving u-n to warn about universe packages with known security holes
[14:50] <pitti> ACTION: Seb to talk to Scott for updating pppoeconf-gui spec status for the feature provided by gnome-system-tools
[14:50] <pitti> ACTION: tedg to talk to Scott and Mark about screensaver-review; this is currently way too underdefined for getting it into hardy
[14:50] <seb128> pitti: thanks
[14:51] <pitti> anything else on your hearts and minds?
[14:51] <tedg> Nope.  Looks good.
[14:51] <pitti> I'll send the report to distro-team@ in some minutes then, and then stop impostering Scott
[14:51] <pitti> thanks everyone!
[14:52] <pitti> have a good day
[14:52] <Riddell> remember to start situps tomorrow!
[14:52] <pitti> right! everyone to attend!
[14:52] <cjwatson> mvo: I already have an action to do that germinate/server thing for Nick Barcet, BTW
[14:52] <pitti> the grown muscles in my arms already start to weaken :)
[14:52] <cjwatson> so I don't need another :-)
[14:52] <pitti> hey cjwatson; ah, good to know
[14:53] <mvo> cjwatson: heh :) ok
[14:54] <MacSlow> so long everybody
[14:54]  * pitti hugs the team
[14:54]  * mvo waves
[14:55] <mpt> impostering, eh
[14:58] <Riddell> impersonating
[15:02] <pitti> I guess that's what I meant, thanks
[16:08] <gaurish> when is the next meet?
[16:15] <pochu> @schedule
[16:15] <ubotu> Schedule for Etc/UTC: 01 Feb 20:00: MOTU | 13 Feb 22:30: Forum Council | 20 Feb 01:00: TriLoCo-Midwest
[16:16] <gaurish> @ubotu
[19:41] <arualavi> ahir al final amb lo del Vbimbo viag fer una cosa que suggereixen a https://wiki.ubuntu.com/IrcTeam/OperatorGuidelines
[19:41] <arualavi> sorry
[19:41] <arualavi> wrong channel :-/
[23:21] <emgent> @schedule Rome
[23:21] <emgent> @now
[23:21] <emgent> bot offline :(
[23:21] <Seveas> yeah
[23:21] <Seveas> sucky colo provider having routing problems for the umpteenth time
[23:22] <PriceChild> emgent, replacements are incoming
[23:22] <emgent> argh
[23:22] <emgent> ok thanks PriceChild :)