[00:50] <LaserJock> who do we talk to about wiki spam?
[08:09] <mdke> LaserJock: you get the account disabled in #launchpad
[08:10] <Madpilot> spammers?
[08:11] <mdke> Madpilot: right
[08:12] <Madpilot> fun
[12:05] <Lhademmor> Hi all, I've just created a patch for bug 185892 , but since I still consider myself a newcomer, could someone please comment on it? :)
[12:05] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 185892 in ubuntu-docs "instructions how to paste commands incorrect" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/185892
[20:41] <mdke> evening all
[20:42] <LaserJock> hi mdke
[21:04] <nixternal> old school documentors reunite!
[21:05]  * LaserJock ^5s nixternal 
[21:05] <nixternal> wasabi LaserJock and mdke!?!
[21:05] <LaserJock> ouch, think I trhew out my shoulder
[21:05] <nixternal> haha
[21:05] <nixternal> bum
[21:05]  * LaserJock runs for the Bengay
[21:06] <nixternal> come on, icey hot is way better
[21:13] <jjesse> afternoon all
[21:18] <LaserJock> jjesse: wow, you must have offended nixternal :-)
[21:19] <jjesse> LaserJock: i thought it was you
[21:19] <LaserJock> oh, that could be
[21:19] <LaserJock> must've been the Bengay vs Icey Hot comment :-)
[21:52] <mdke> whoops, sorry. Hi LaserJock, nixternal
[21:52] <mdke> hi jjesse too
[21:52] <jjesse> hello mdke
[21:52] <LaserJock> mdke: so lifeless suggested starting from scratch for Intrepid?
[21:53] <mdke> yes
[21:53] <mdke> I've created the branches now, and pushed them to launchpad
[21:53] <mdke> it takes like 2 minutes to get one from scratch
[21:53] <mdke> :)
[21:55] <LaserJock> nice!
[21:55] <LaserJock> and they are the newer format?
[21:56] <mdke> LaserJock: yes
[21:57] <mdke> LaserJock: which means you can't download them into a shared repo with the old format... but I'm hoping to upgrade all the branches shortly
[21:57] <jjesse> i branched my own intrepid last night :)
[21:58] <mdke> jjesse: from the launchpad one?
[21:58] <jjesse> mdke: yeah did a bzr branch to get it locally and then i'll push to the shared branch
[22:00] <mdke> cool
[22:00] <mdke> everything work ok?
[22:00] <LaserJock> mdke: the old branche could go into a shared repo anyway, from what I understnd
[22:00] <jjesse> mdke: yeah they did
[22:00] <jjesse> it was super quick i didn't know what to do ;)
[22:00] <mdke> LaserJock: the non-intrepid branches are all the same format, so they can go into a shared repo with that format
[22:01] <mdke> LaserJock: the new one is a different format, so it can only go into shared repos with the new format
[22:01] <LaserJock> mdke: but I was told that their format wasn't supported by shared repos
[22:01] <mdke> LaserJock: which format?
[22:01] <mdke> old or new?
[22:01] <LaserJock> bah, I can't remember it exactly
[22:01] <LaserJock> old
[22:01] <LaserJock> dir-state-something
[22:02] <mdke> sure they can. I've had one since we started using bzr
[22:02] <LaserJock> huh
[22:02] <LaserJock> ok, #bzr told me I had to convert them before I could use them in a shared repo
[22:02] <mdke> maybe you mean that Launchpad doesn't support shared repos on the server-side?
[22:02] <LaserJock> no
[22:02] <mdke> well, that is definitely wrong :)
[22:03] <LaserJock> ok then
[22:03] <LaserJock> no biggie, other than I spent like 1.5hrs converting branches the other day to get a shared repo :/
[22:04] <mdke> LaserJock: the shared repo instructions have been on our wiki page since we started
[22:04] <mdke> but anyway, there is value in converting your branches :)
[22:05] <mdke> you get the new format
[22:05] <LaserJock> yeah
[22:05] <mdke> so you upgraded with bzr upgrade?
[22:05] <LaserJock> well, I haven't used bzr much with the doc team
[22:06] <LaserJock> unfortunately edubuntu-docs is ... slow going
[22:06] <LaserJock> no
[22:06] <LaserJock> what I did was create a shared repo
[22:06] <LaserJock> then I branched my local branch into it
[22:06] <LaserJock> which did the conversion
[22:06] <mdke> ah, that's what I did too
[22:07] <mdke> I've been a bit worried about trying the upgrade on our lp branches, in case something breaks
[22:07] <LaserJock> it seems from hanging out in #bzr that upgrading formats should be pretty safe
[22:08] <LaserJock> but to be honest, I don't like how bzr keeps changing
[22:08] <LaserJock> it makes me feel like git is safer and more friendly :-)
[22:08] <mdke> it's a bit odd, yeah
[22:09] <LaserJock> it seems like I'm always in a "corner case" or something
[22:10] <mdke> what really has been a pita for us has been the bzr-svn import
[22:10] <mdke> because bzr-svn forces you to use a non-default format
[22:10] <mdke> due to something to do with how svn works, dunno what
[22:10] <LaserJock> yep
[22:10] <LaserJock> I wish they would have done a bit more work with us on that
[22:11] <mdke> I don't think there is a way around it
[22:11] <LaserJock> well, converting it to a good format would have helped
[22:12] <mdke> the new format didn't exist at the time
[22:12] <mdke> ours *was* the good format, I think
[22:12] <LaserJock> but there was a standard "old" for mat
[22:12] <LaserJock> well, #bzr told me that it was an experimental format
[22:13] <mdke> right, which couldn't be used because we used bzr-svn to import the repo
[22:13] <LaserJock> sure
[22:13] <LaserJock> but we could have had it converted
[22:13] <mdke> apparently not
[22:13] <LaserJock> from the bzr-svn import format to a standard knit format
[22:13] <mdke> you can't convert in that direction, apparently
[22:13] <LaserJock> well
[22:14] <LaserJock> to me that's why this stuff is less than ideal
[22:14] <LaserJock> but oh well, that's water under the bridge
[22:15] <LaserJock> with fresh branches we could do this "student branchs" thing
[22:15] <LaserJock> without it being a big ordeal
[22:16] <mdke> well, I still have the same concerns about that
[22:16] <mdke> single branches, sure, but a team branch, little bit more cautious
[22:16] <LaserJock> sure sure
[22:16] <LaserJock> that's what I meant
[22:16] <mdke> if a student undertakes a biggish project, a separate branch would work
[22:16] <LaserJock> I just couldn't imagine students pushing these hug branches around for a patch
[22:16] <LaserJock> *huge
[22:17]  * mdke nods
[22:17] <mdke> a patch is much easier
[22:18] <LaserJock> I still don't get the distributed VCS stuff, tbh
[22:18] <LaserJock> I like being able to work offline
[22:18] <LaserJock> but it still seems like sending a patch to a list is the way to go
[22:18] <LaserJock> as opposed to merging branches all the time
[22:19] <mdke> I think for bigger things, I can see how it would work
[22:19] <mdke> but for small things, no
[22:21] <LaserJock> mdke: oh dude, while you are here :-)
[22:21] <LaserJock> mdke: I would like to have the LTSP information that was in the Edubuntu Handbook transferred to ubuntu-intrepid
[22:22] <LaserJock> I'm not so sure it would fit in very well with TBH
[22:23] <LaserJock> we could trying to make it suitable or we could do a LTSP Guide
[22:23] <LaserJock> do you have an opinion?
[22:23] <mdke> LaserJock: I don't think the average desktop user will use that material, so I wonder if it wouldn't work better as a separate package?
[22:24] <LaserJock> I was gonna say we could put it in the Server Guide
[22:24] <LaserJock> but that's not right either
[22:24] <mdke> LaserJock: or move it to the wiki, it really depends on when it is used
[22:24] <LaserJock> well, we will probably have a online version on edubuntu.org
[22:24] <mdke> what's wrong with it in edubuntu?
[22:24] <LaserJock> it's not in Edubuntu anymore
[22:25] <LaserJock> LTSP is a part of Ubuntu
[22:25] <LaserJock> so it would be more logical to have it in Ubuntu
[22:26] <mdke> ah, I'm a bit hampered by not knowing what LTSP is
[22:26] <LaserJock> I guess a separate packages might work, though I'd probably want to build it out of ubuntu-docs rather than edubuntu-docs
[22:26] <mdke> I thought edubuntu was built on it
[22:26] <LaserJock> it is
[22:26] <LaserJock> but Edubuntu is now an addon CD
[22:26] <LaserJock> LTSP is server stuff
[22:26] <LaserJock> that is now in the Ubuntu Alternate CD
[22:27] <LaserJock> so that's why it's all confusing
[22:27] <LaserJock> it's mostly used by Edubuntu users at this point, but it's not edubuntu-specific
[22:28] <LaserJock> I guess we could ditch it altogether :/
[22:28] <LaserJock> it's been an almost 2 year project though, I hate to just get rid of it
[22:29]  * mdke head swims
[22:29] <LaserJock> sorry
[22:29] <mdke> let's keep it around and decide what to do with it
[22:29] <mdke> but I don't think I can help much with that decision ;)
[22:30]  * mdke is busy smashing up the ubuntu-intrepid layout
[22:30] <LaserJock> well, I just wonder if you'd be opposed to having another "Guide" in ubuntu-docs
[22:30] <mdke> LaserJock: no, not in principle, at all
[22:30] <LaserJock> k
[22:31] <LaserJock> mdke: do you want me to smash edubuntu-docs after you're done?
[22:31] <mdke> it's quite fun...
[22:31] <mdke> but I won't be done fixing it for a while :)
[22:32] <LaserJock> I wondered if we could use prefixes for stuff in the common areas that are derivative-specfic
[22:32] <mdke> you mean derivative specific individual files?
[22:33] <LaserJock> yep
[22:33] <mdke> they should definitely have unique names
[22:34] <LaserJock> the only thing I might have a conflict with is maybe gnome-menus-C.ent from libs/
[22:35] <mdke> but isn't it good to be able to merge the bits you want and keep the bits you don't separate?
[22:35] <LaserJock> actually nope
[22:35] <LaserJock> I have edubuntu-menus-C.ent
[22:35] <LaserJock> how do you mean exactly?
[22:35] <LaserJock> I don't plan on doing any merging
[22:36] <LaserJock> let me think about this
[22:37] <LaserJock> I just don't see how this would work other than having all the contents of the derivatives in ubuntu-*
[22:37] <LaserJock> these are divergent branches I think
[22:38] <mdke> yay, revision 2 pushed up
[22:38] <LaserJock> so a merge would cause me to get anything else that had changed in ubuntu-*
[22:38] <mdke> I don't follow
[22:39] <LaserJock> how would I merge changes to libs/ into edubuntu-
[22:39] <LaserJock> I would have to merge each individual revision
[22:39] <LaserJock> and they would have to not touch anything but libs/
[22:40] <LaserJock> otherwise I'm going to get all the other stuff and the merge will fail
[22:41] <mdke> can't you merge from a specific location?
[22:41] <LaserJock> no
[22:41] <LaserJock> only a branch
[22:41] <mdke> really?
[22:41] <LaserJock> yep
[22:41] <mdke> i thought you could merge a specific file, I'm sure I've done that before
[22:41] <LaserJock> well hmm
[22:42] <mdke> well, you should be able to!
[22:42] <mdke> we will demand that it be implemented :)
[22:42] <LaserJock> I swear #bzr told me you couldn't but they eventually wanted to be able to do that
[22:42] <LaserJock> but now that I think about it, that seems a bit nuts
[22:42] <mdke> ah
[22:42] <mdke> let's try
[22:43] <mdke> man that sucks
[22:44] <LaserJock> didn't work?
[22:44] <LaserJock> does it tell you they are divergent branches?
[22:44] <mdke> "no common ancestor"
[22:45] <LaserJock> right
[22:45] <mdke> anyway, you can do it on the revision number
[22:45] <LaserJock> so like I said, we'd need to make sure that we only touch libs/ when we are making a change
[22:46] <LaserJock> and the derivates will need to do each revision individually
[22:46] <mdke> yes, but small commits are good anyway
[22:46] <LaserJock> wich isn't horrible, but not exactly trivial either
[22:49] <mdke> yes
[22:49] <mdke> but in the future...
[22:49] <mdke> we can try nesting a common branch in each of our derivative branches
[22:49] <mdke> and just updating that
[22:49] <mdke> the benefit of having this format
[22:50] <LaserJock> yeah
[22:50] <LaserJock> this way isn't too bad as long as everybody know about it
[22:50] <LaserJock> libs/ change rarely
[22:52] <mdke> yeah
[22:52] <mdke> ok, time for bed
[22:53] <mdke> nice to chat! cya
[22:53] <LaserJock> mdke: cya