[00:07] <ScottK> LaserJock: I'd prefer people wait, but there's certainly no rule requiring it.  You playing martyr doesn't change that.
[00:09] <LaserJock> ScottK: "martyr"? I'm simply saying that the most common case is "go for it" so people should rather "lock" the ones they want rather than slowing everybody else up
[00:10] <ScottK> OK.  I think it's a question of balance and not hard and fast rules.
[00:12] <pochu> you could also look if the last uploader did a trivial upload (e.g. "no changes rebuild for foo->bar transition") or he's been maintain the package for a long time
[00:13] <ScottK> That'd be my approach.  Go grab dkim-milter as an example and tell me who you think is probably the one to merge it.
[00:14] <LaserJock> sure
[00:14] <LaserJock> but for people who don't know a lot of history it's easiest to have the people who care about packages lock them
[00:14] <LaserJock> rather than assume all packages are locked
[00:16] <pochu> mok0: cjwatson uploaded it with urgency=critical, which I think means it will migrate to testing in 1 day (not sure though)
[00:18] <YokoZar> So now that this SRU has been verified, what happens next? https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/wine/+bug/224042
[00:18] <LaserJock> YokoZar: pitti will move it to -updates when he gets a chance
[00:19] <LaserJock> he's usually pretty quick
[00:19] <YokoZar> LaserJock: Thanks
[00:22] <jdong> LaserJock: hope he's not too quick ;-)
[00:22] <ScottK> pochu: It still needs to build on all supported archs first.
[00:23] <ScottK> LaserJock: We'd need a way to leave persistent comments on MoM/DaD for unlocked by default to be feasible, but I can see that.
[00:25] <LaserJock> ScottK: or at the beginning of each release go through and lock the ones you want
[00:25] <LaserJock> not sure how many you'd have but it may be pretty easy to do
[00:26] <LaserJock> I would honestly guess we wouldn't have more than say 30-40 "locked" packages out of the 800+ we've got to do
[00:30] <ScottK> Except they don't show up until they need merge, so packages can reappear at any time.
[00:31] <ScottK> IIRC I had about 20.   ~15 were syncs and I knew it already.  I think 2 I would have locked and there were a few I didn't care about.
[00:32] <ScottK> Anyone looking at the ~15 there were syncs would have been wasting their time.
[00:32] <LaserJock> sure
[00:33] <LaserJock> maybe we just need a wiki page :-)
[00:34] <ajmitch> LaserJock: behave
[00:34] <LaserJock> hmm, or maybe we should set Maintainer in that case?
[00:37] <ScottK> Generally with a package that's been touched in the last cycle, someone is at least marginally more aware of it's state than joe random MOTU.  We ought to take advantage of that without unneccesarily blocking people's work.
[00:38] <ScottK> From the set I had sitting there when Intrepid opened, it's have been a real waste for someone else to spend time figuring out the ones I already knew were syncs, didn't need a merge.
[00:39] <LaserJock> ScottK: ok, so then why wouldn't you have sync bugs filed for those?
[00:48] <ScottK> LaserJock: I did about the time the repos opened, but not everyone manages to get things done so quick.
[00:50] <LaserJock> I see
[00:52] <LaserJock> bottom line I guess, people shouldn't just be  blindly merging/uploading
[00:53] <LaserJock> as persia pointed out in his email, we should be looking at what other bugs may be fixed when merging
[00:53] <LaserJock> and as you said, if somebody has been consistently merging a package it's wise to at least talk to them about it to get pointers or see if they're going to do the merge
[02:23] <bddebian> Heya gang
[02:25] <RAOF> Hi bddebian.  Updated your ssh keys yet (grumble).
[02:25] <bddebian> Nope
[02:25] <ScottK> For me SSH was just the start of it.
[02:25] <ScottK> Had to redo the TLS certs for all my mail servers too.
[02:25] <ScottK> Then there's the DKIM key for signing.
[02:25] <ScottK> That was plenty for one day.
[02:31] <RAOF> At least I only need to find all the various boxen with my ssh key on them.
[02:31] <RAOF> Thinking of which...
[02:36] <LaserJock> about the only things I had to do where Alioth and Savannah
[02:36] <LaserJock> and Launchpad
[02:37] <RAOF> I think I've got copies of my public key on a bunch of random boxes around the intertubes.  I'm not sure if they're still up, or used, or whatever.
[02:37] <RAOF> Also, Alioth & LP.
[02:38] <RAOF> And my home server.  cody-somerville - if you want access to the amd64 buildbox, you'll need to update your LP ssh key :)
[02:41] <bddebian> Oh crap, alioth.. Grr
[02:42] <RAOF> Yup.  You no longer have a public key on alioth, most likely.
[02:42] <RAOF> And they're not accepting new ones for the moment, I understand.
[02:46] <bddebian> Is there a wiki page or anything up just to make sure I don't forget to do something?
[02:47] <ajmitch> just run around like mad & panic
[02:47]  * bddebian runs around the room flailing his arms..
[02:47] <RAOF> ajmitch: That's a plan with legs!
[02:47] <ajmitch> http://wiki.debian.org/SSLkeys is the only wiki page I know of
[02:56] <andrew___> This will either be a newbieish or very deep question: to what degree is the job of a MOTU about developing code, to what degree is it about managing code (merging/patching/etc.)?
[02:56] <bddebian> Depends on your involvement
[02:56] <ScottK> andrew___: Mostly the latter, but you can get as much of the former as you want.
[02:57] <bddebian> I don't know anything and I used to be an MOTU :)
[02:57] <andrew___> I'm trying to get a feel for which sorts of questions/suggestions go where.
[02:59] <andrew___> E.g. my posts to ubuntu-devel-discuss seem to get a better reception when they're management-related, which argues more towards it being a forum for improving things that already exist.
[03:00] <cheatr> andrew___: Anyone is able to develop code. You don't need to be a motu. MOTUs mainly do packageing related tasks. That is where the name comes from: Masters of the Universe. They are in charge of managing all of the packages in the universe repository.
[03:03] <andrew___> (I don't mean the above as a complaint, btw - all forums have specialisms, it's just a matter of knowing where to pipe stuff to)
[03:07] <bbyever> did DaD move?
[03:17] <LaserJock> bbyever: it's supposed to be merged with MoM
[03:17] <bbyever> ﻿LaserJock: ah ok, cool
[03:19] <Adri2000> byoteki: but it's supposed to work until the merge is actually done
[03:19] <Adri2000> I don't know why it currently doesn't
[03:19] <cheatr> LaserJock: Is this merge permanent?
[03:19] <LaserJock> cheatr: yes
[03:19] <LaserJock> we only want 1 merge tool
[03:20] <Adri2000> sorry byoteki. I meant bbyever ^
[03:22] <Adri2000> bbyever: I noticed the server admin of the problem, so it should work again in a few hours
[03:22] <bbyever> ﻿Adri2000: ok
[03:53] <tbielawa> evening all
[04:46] <Amaranth> hmm
[04:47] <Amaranth> is anyone packaging moonlight?
[04:47] <ajmitch> check with debian
[04:47] <jdong> Amaranth: I heard it's non-DFSG because it only works at night with atmospheric restrictions
[04:48] <Amaranth> I honestly have no idea how to search debbugs for ITPs
[04:49] <ScottK> Amaranth: You look in the wnpp package.
[04:50] <Amaranth> guess there is no ITP
[04:50] <RAOF> Amaranth: Go!
[04:50] <Amaranth> I was thinking about it
[04:50] <RAOF> Amaranth: Hit #debian-mono.  I'm sure someone will be interested.
[04:50] <Amaranth> also, if i packaged click-and-run would I get stabbed? :)
[04:52] <ScottK> Amaranth: Given PPAs, gdebi, envy-ng, and the like, I think it's a detail.
[04:52] <Amaranth> eh?
[04:53] <jdong> Amaranth: nah, real men package an automatic debian/control dependency stripper.
[04:53] <ScottK> I'm not sure we're at all opposed to people running any random crack on their systems anymore.
[04:53] <ajmitch> someone should package portage then
[04:53] <ScottK> Don't mind me.  I'm particularly bitter tonight.
[04:54] <Amaranth> I didn't notice ;)
[04:55]  * ajmitch didn't notice any change from any other day
[05:10] <ScottK> Just wait until you read the MOTU ML.  Then you might.
[05:11] <ajmitch> nah, I've been reading the bugsquad list this afternoon, I understand the frustration there
[05:15] <ScottK> Ah.  The thread where they say "we'll mark all over your workflow bugs and we don't care what it affects because it's to difficult for us to notice they're different"?
[05:15] <ajmitch> and where the wiki edit with useful info was deleted because it hadn't been agreed upon at UDS yet
[05:16] <ScottK> Despite the fact that bdmurray had agreed to it.
[05:16] <ScottK> Because we all know that there's no available technology to let us work together on figuring stuff out except in face to face meeting.
[05:17] <ajmitch> reading that does provide some more background to your recent -motu mail
[05:17] <ScottK> Yeah.  I suppose it would.
[05:18] <ScottK> I guess we get to find out if asking them to think before marking on bugs is better or worse in terms of frustrating new contributors than MOTUs getting grumpy with them and giving them no sympathy.
[05:20] <ajmitch> this is where we need to be able to automatically add <blink> tags with bold red text
[05:26] <tbielawa> heh heh

[05:27] <dabaR> an essential part of any user interface...
[05:27] <tbielawa> lol
[05:40]  * LaserJock just catches up to the world, aka ubuntu-bugsquad threads
[05:42] <ajmitch> fun reading?
[05:44] <tritium> LaserJock: I see a lot of rejections to the -science team.  Are you disbanding it?
[05:45] <LaserJock> tritium: no, just chasing away people I've never heard of or talked to
[05:45] <LaserJock> people just randomly hit the join button
[05:45] <LaserJock> ajmitch: "fun" isn't exactly the word for it
[05:45] <tritium> LaserJock: ok :)
[05:46] <tbielawa> LaserJock: dpatch.make for the win
[05:46] <LaserJock> ajmitch: I can't think of a good word for it at the moment, mixture of sheer rage and dishearting sadness
[05:46] <LaserJock> tbielawa: yeah!
[05:47] <LaserJock> tbielawa: btw, did you notice you had some ubuntuwire directory in your source?
[05:47] <tbielawa> whawhawha?
[05:47] <tbielawa> that's poor attention to details on my end.
[05:49] <tbielawa> I'll be moving from now until the weekend. I hope to have a nice cleaned up copy of bibus ready for review by saturday
[05:49] <LaserJock> ok, I'll email you
[05:50] <LaserJock> I ended up going to my grandfather's over the weekend and my entire day yesterday was proctoring and grading final exams
[05:50] <tbielawa> eack
[05:51] <ajmitch> you poor fellow
[05:53]  * ScottK had a job as a programming assignments grader for an intro computer science class when he was at university.
[05:53] <ScottK> Before the end of the semester I was so sick of it, I subcontracted the work to one of my apartment mates who needed the money more than I did.
[05:54] <tbielawa> ScottK: resourceful!
[05:54] <LaserJock> heh
[05:54] <LaserJock> no programming here
[05:54] <LaserJock> just 10 pages of short-answer Chemistry
[05:55] <tbielawa> I've been system administrator @ work. a fun role :)
[05:55] <tbielawa> Found a potential bug in the new release of network-console
[05:56] <tbielawa> SSHing into a preseeded d-i environment one is presented with a menu: 1) start the installation 2) start an expert installation 3) drop to shell
[05:56] <tbielawa> at this point in the install the install is alredy going, we just want to drop to shells. dropped to a shell causes the connection to drop
[05:57] <tbielawa> option 1 makes your already running installs brain explode. but the key element here is that when you choose to drop to a shell fromt he expert install menu __it works__ unlike choosing to do it directly
[05:57]  * ScottK avoids the temptation to write back to a Debian ML complaining about Ubuntu not sending them a patch with the observation I'd rather they hadn't sent their openssl patch to us.
[05:58] <LaserJock> haha
[05:58] <tbielawa> =-o
[05:59] <LaserJock> it's very unfortunate that it was because of a debian change
[06:01] <rockstar> ScottK, I knew there would be complaining on that list.
[06:03] <ScottK> Which one?
[06:03] <ScottK> rockstar: ^^^^
[06:04] <rockstar> Debian security
[06:04] <ajmitch> A lot of frustrated people around
[06:05] <rockstar> ajmitch, yea, understandably.  I'm quite frustrated at Debian for making a change in order to shut valgrind up.
[06:05] <rockstar> I love Debian, but this stuff makes me feel quite sheepish.
[06:05] <AstralJava> Like people don't need to refresh their memory on how to generate ssh keys anyway. :D
[06:06] <ajmitch> the 'shutting valgrind up' bit was made so that it was easier to debug programs having issues with openssl, I believe
[06:07] <ajmitch> the patch was even discussed upstream before going into debian
[06:08] <ScottK> Although that discussion seemed to me that it could have easily been misread about doing that just for debugging, not for production.
[06:08] <ScottK> The frustration about a patch was on a Debian Python list.
[06:08] <ajmitch> most things do end up getting misread at some point
[06:09] <jdong> *NOT TO DEFEND DEBIAN ON THE SSH THING*: I think OpenSSH folks are also to blame.
[06:09] <jdong> they really set up a landmine in the code without documentation
[06:09] <ScottK> jdong: openssh != openssl
[06:09] <jdong> ScottK: sorry, yes, that's what I meant
[06:09] <jdong> this is really the first time I've heard of intentionally using uninitialized buffers.... and something that anomalous IMO deserves comments
[06:10] <ScottK> Agreed.  Plenty of blame to go around.
[06:10]  * ScottK heads off for bed.
[06:10] <tbielawa> See ya ScottK
[06:14] <ajmitch> rockstar: btw, how'd you enjoy what little you saw of NZ? :)
[06:15] <rockstar> ajmitch, well, I didn't see a lot.
[06:15] <rockstar> I did enjoy it.  My wife would like me to take her at some point.
[06:15] <ajmitch> just an overcast city & the inside of the sprint room?
[06:16] <rockstar> jdong, yes, they did discuss it upstream, and I understand that value of shutting valgrind up.  I'm just concerned that often, Debian goes out on its own, sometimes causing rifts in communities.
[06:17] <ajmitch> the same concerns are raised about Ubuntu
[06:17] <jdong> rockstar: I agree in this case the deviation from upstream is in poor taste.
[06:18] <rockstar> jdong, yea, but there's also the whole Iceweasel thing.  They've become so "elite" that often it seems to cause more problems than it helps.
[06:18] <dholbach> good morning
[06:20] <ajmitch> hey dholbach
[06:21] <dholbach> heya ajmitch
[06:24] <ajmitch> how are you?
[06:24] <dholbach> just waking up, but I'm good - thanks
[06:25] <dholbach> ajmitch: how's life?
[06:25] <ajmitch> it's alright
[06:27] <ScottK> rockstar: Given DFSG and Mozilla corp's Trademark policy, Iceweasel was inevitable.
[06:28] <rockstar> ScottK, well, yes, inevitable maybe.  But it alienated a lot of people.
[06:29] <ScottK> I guess I completely see Debian's side on that one.  "Here, have some free code, but you can't change it." really rubs me wrong.
[06:30] <rockstar> ScottK, I think it was a case of two stubborn sets of ideals.
[06:30] <ScottK> I guess I don't get that.
[06:31] <ScottK> Canonical manages to have a derivative friendly Trademark policy.  I don't see why Mozilla Corp couldn't also.
[06:31] <ScottK> Our OOO still says Sun on the splash screen.
[06:31] <ScottK> Lots of other entities manage just fine.
[06:32] <ScottK> I see it as Mozilla Corp being uniquely unfriendly.
[06:59] <\sh> moins
[08:36] <dholbach> geser: thanks for the perl rebuilds - I sponsored them
[08:36] <dholbach> and sistpoty fixed the libxfont issue - intrepid should be more fun soon again :)
[09:48] <sistpoty|work> hi folks
[09:49] <geser> Hi sistpoty|work
[09:49] <sistpoty|work> hi geser
[09:52] <fdoving> kees: any clue if i can disable the openssl-vulnkey check anywhere? - is it in the openssl config somewhere?
[09:55] <fdoving> kees: or rather, i need to downgrade openvpn and remove openssl-blacklist in order to make openvpn work. openssl-vulnkey says my key isn't blacklisted, but magically when starting openvpn it errors out and claims openvpn-vulnkey says its blacklisted.
[09:58] <slangasek> fdoving: each of the -vulnkey tools handles particular file formats; openssl-vulnkey probably doesn't parse your openvpn key file correctly to be able to detect that it's vulnerable?
[09:59] <kees> fdoving: hrm, that's not good.  :P  which version do you have installed?
[10:00] <proppy> oy
[10:23] <emgent> morning
[12:08] <whs> How to fix source: native-package-with-dash-version?
[12:11] <geser> use a proper .orig.tar.gz
[12:57] <Laibsch> http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?package=gourmet
[12:57] <Laibsch> if anybody cares to take a look
[12:59] <Laibsch> I also have a question
[12:59] <Laibsch> ﻿Let's say version 1 of a package installs /etc/file, the name in version two is changed to /etc/file.something
[13:00] <Laibsch>  /etc/file is not removed when updating the package from version 1 to 2
[13:00] <Laibsch> What was I doing wrong?  This question has nothing to do with gourmet
[13:00] <broonie> You need to manually handle conffile moves.
[13:03] <AnAnt> Hello, can one upload packages with new features for 8.04.1 ?
[13:03] <AnAnt> or is it just for bug fixes ?
[13:04] <Laibsch> broonie: You are also on/in ubuntu?
[13:05] <Laibsch> AnAnt: You need an SRU exception
[13:05] <Laibsch> google for that
[13:05] <broonie> Laibsch: Not really.
[13:05] <Laibsch> broonie: can't get your hands full enough, I guess ;-)
[13:07] <slytherin> Laibsch: I think you will have to handle removing old config file in prerm.
[13:07] <Laibsch> I think I found a good source
[13:07] <Laibsch> http://wiki.debian.org/DpkgConffileHandling
[13:07] <broonie> Ideally if it's the same file you should be moving any configuration the user did into the new configuration file.
[13:07] <Laibsch> which suggests preinst
[13:35] <Laibsch> I have three packages being built from the same source.  I want to push a change in one of them.  Is it possible to exclude the others from the debuild run?
[13:35] <ScottK> Laibsch: No.
[13:35] <slytherin> Laibsch: don't think so
[13:35] <Laibsch> OK, thanks
[13:35] <broonie> If you've got a separate makefile target for each package you can invoke debian/rules directly
[13:36] <broonie> but that's not the common case.
[13:36] <Laibsch> not the case here
[13:36] <Laibsch> :-(
[13:42] <ScottK> Does the ssl-cert update just regenerate snakeoil or does it hit other certs too?
[13:43] <ScottK> Oops.  Wrong channel.  Maybe someone here knows anyway ...
[14:06] <Laibsch> I believe just commenting out the Package: stanza for the other packages I want to leave out works fine
[14:06] <Laibsch> Rather quiet REVU day, though, isn't it?
[14:31] <bddebian> Heya gang
[14:31] <geser> Hi bddebian
[14:31] <sistpoty|work> hi bddebian
[14:32] <emgent> heya people
[14:32] <emgent> tseliot: ping
[14:33] <tseliot> ﻿emgent: hi
[14:34] <bddebian> Hi geser, sistpoty|work, emgent, tseliot... :)
[14:34] <tseliot> ﻿bddebian: hi ;)
[14:34] <emgent> bddebian: o/
[14:36] <Laney> Anyone have a merge free for the taking?
[14:39] <james_w> Laney: you could take bidentd, but it's pretty boring.
[14:40] <james_w> it would just be checking the Debian package builds and works and then sync it I expect.
[14:41] <Laney> james_w: I'll have a look, cheers
[15:11] <Laibsch> I have a strange problem where debuild tells me that there is no space left on the device (the process continues)
[15:11] <Laibsch> df -h says there is plenty of space
[15:11] <Laibsch> http://oss.leggewie.org/oe/deb/openembedded_0.1-10_i386.build
[15:13] <ScottK> At a guess it's the 'cannot write' part that's relevant and you're trying to write somewhere you don't have permission.
[15:13] <ScottK> I suspect that's just as well as it's likely something different is happening than you expected.
[15:16] <norsetto> seems like somebody had the great idea to mass-create needs-packaging bugs for all lp hosted projects
[15:18] <ScottK> norsetto: Lovely.
[15:22] <jderemer> Is there a way to add a menu item, via file (NOT gui) where the other help buttons are under system?
[15:25] <Laibsch> ScottK: but the problem starts with "tar: usr/local/arm/2.95.3/bin/arm-linux-size: Wrote only 2560 of 10240 bytes"
[15:25] <Laibsch> which indeed suggests something being full and overflowing
[15:25] <ScottK> True.
[15:26] <ScottK> So far whenever I've hit that error it's been actually full, so I don't know what to tell you.
[15:26]  * ogra wonders if Laibsch uses a tmpfs or so 
[15:26] <ogra> that would mean you ran out of ram :)
[15:27]  * ScottK just deleted 5GB of leftovers today to make more room.
[15:27] <norsetto> scottk: and there is already somebody busy filing them all as wishlist ... so much so for bug traging
[15:27] <ScottK> Is it the same person?
[15:28] <norsetto> ScottK: no
[15:28] <norsetto> ScottK: I'm curious to see if he will at least spot all the duplicates
[15:28] <ScottK> Glad to know that we've got all the important bugs triaged so people have time to concentrate on fluff like that.
[15:29] <Hobbsee> ScottK: start yelling at the bugsquad again: )
[15:29] <norsetto> scottk: have you ever been working on a bug that was triaged properly? I don't think I ever stumbled against a bug that was triaged at all to say the truth
[15:29] <Hobbsee> the fact that they keep hitting them means that they seem to be looking for them, though.
[15:30] <ScottK> Hobbsee: These haven't intruded on my mailbox, so it's a waste of time, but it doesn't actually affect me.
[15:30] <Hobbsee> ScottK: who's doing the wishlist changing?
[15:30] <sebner> cya folks
[15:30] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Dunno.  Ask norsetto.
[15:30] <Hobbsee> norsetto: ^
[15:31] <jderemer> anyone got any idea on the menu list question?
[15:31] <ScottK> norsetto: I have, but it's been rare.
[15:31] <Laibsch> ogra: I thought I did, but I don't.  Seems like I have tmpfs only on the laptop.  / is very small some 500MB, everything partitioned out. 150MB to 200MB free on the root partition.
[15:31] <ScottK> jderemer: The answer to your question is yes.  I've no idea how.
[15:31] <Laibsch> even if that filled up it would take a few seconds
[15:31] <Laibsch> I saw no decrease in available space on the root partition
[15:32] <Laibsch> which hosts /tmp
[15:32] <norsetto> Hobbsee: sebastian rode
[15:32] <jderemer> thanks
[15:36] <ScottK> persia: RE the ubuntu-bugs thing.  It does not appear to me that there is currently a basis for fruitful discussion.
[15:37] <Hobbsee> ScottK: with a bit of luck, they'll find one at UDS, agree on the same sorts of things that we did, then come bakc and implement it.
[15:38] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Unfortunately, I'm going to UDS, so I'll likely get sucked into it.  Since it's already apparently decided we're using LP wrong, I don't know what there is to discuss.
[15:38] <Hobbsee> ScottK: how to use it correctly?  :)
[15:38] <ScottK> In this case I guess not at all.
[15:38]  * sistpoty|work is to blame for inventing the wrong usage of LP (remember the merge web tool I once wrote? *g*)
[15:39] <Hobbsee> ScottK: if you can poke them into actually coming up with a solution that actually works, rather than sidesteppign the entire issue by "it shouldnt' be here", and it gets implemented, then that's probably a good result.
[15:39] <ScottK> While generally I support that idea, since soyuz is kind of integral to the workflow I don't know how we avoid it.
[15:40] <ScottK> Hobbsee: I'd rather just slap people who mess up until someone in ubuntu-bugs decides that maybe they should pay attention.  Going and discussing seems to get nowhere.
[15:40] <sistpoty|work> e.g. sync requests imho really belong into bugs. Instead, there should be a button "sync blabla (x.y) from ..." which a motu can hit :)
[15:40] <sistpoty|work> (don't belong)
[15:41] <persia> jderemer: re: menu file: last I looked, you'd need to modify the gnome-menus code.
[15:41] <persia> ScottK: You may be correct.  Optimistically, physical proximity may be assistive.
[15:41] <ScottK> persia: That or the opposite.  We'll see.
[15:41] <persia> On the other hand, I don't consider that sufficient reason to completely give up on the value of a bugtracker
[15:41] <cprov> sistpoty|work: right, who ever said that the solution using bugs is optimal or definitive ?
[15:42] <Hobbsee> ScottK: i've poked bdmurray about it
[15:42] <ScottK> persia: No, but unless two parties are willing to have a reasonable discussion there's no point.
[15:42] <Hobbsee> ScottK: you can force them into a reasonable discussion.
[15:42] <persia> ScottK: True.
[15:42] <Hobbsee> ScottK: bar the door, don't let them out until they've actually come up with a solution.  or similar.
[15:42] <ScottK> Hobbsee: He'll just get over-ruled again.  We've established that his agreeing to stuff doesn't mean anything.
[15:42] <sistpoty|work> cprov: right, but I guess it's the best we have right now ;)
[15:43] <ScottK> Hobbsee: No.  You can't force someone into a reasonable discussion.
[15:43] <persia> ScottK: Don't take everything as binding precedent.  Some is, but much is significantly more flexible than it may appear
[15:43] <Hobbsee> ScottK: i'm using the angle that with the members of the bugsquad doing that are just wasting their time.
[15:43] <ScottK> persia: We went and had a nice discussion with bdmurray about it and had an agreement.  That's been unilaterally thrown out.
[15:44] <Hobbsee> ScottK: hopefully that will change their minds
[15:44] <cprov> sistpoty|work: exactly, even being bad, it's best you have. There will progress in this area already in 2.0, so raise your hand in UDS to participate of the discussions.
[15:44] <Hobbsee> after all, their work being ignored / overwritten is the best demotivator there is...
[15:44] <persia> ScottK: Sure.  That doesn't mean that it will necessarily happen again, nor that it won't, only that it happened once.
[15:44] <sistpoty|work> cprov: cool... any ETA yet? (and sorry, won't be there at UDS)
[15:44] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Fair enough.  I'm using the angle that my CoC complaint angst will cost them more contributors than having to understand what a bug is about before the mark on it.
[15:45] <cprov> sistpoty|work: https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/soyuz/+spec/sync-workflows
[15:45] <persia> cprov: I suspect a large part of the frustration is that the existing practice (since Breezy) has been suddenly rejected because a discussion was added to the agenda, rather than with any opinions as to whether the outcome of the discussion has value.
[15:45] <ScottK> persia: Perhaps, but I feel like we are cleraly the wronged party here and so it's really not up to me to try and improve the situation.
[15:46] <ScottK> persia: No.  It's that we had the discussion.  We had an agreement and it was unilaterally tossed out.
[15:46] <cprov> persia: how do you mean, who did reject it ?
[15:46] <persia> ScottK: I vehemently disagree with that.  The wronged party has the largest incentive to improve the situation, and so if you are wronged, you ought participate in a solution that causes you to no longer be wronged.
[15:47] <ScottK> persia: If you step on my foot, I don't want you to do it again, but I think before I consider you might be worth discussing it with, you ought to apologize and take the first move.
[15:47] <Hobbsee> persia: assuming, of course, the participants are willing, and don't go "well, you shouldn't use launchpad for these types of bugs, so screw you, use these bugtracker rules, and redo your workflow"
[15:48] <andrew_sayers> ScottK: OTOH, if you get in my way and bump into me, I might feel that I'm not responsible for any foot-treading caused.
[15:48] <persia> ScottK: I think you invite unhappiness with that philosophy, but can understand it.  If you step on my foot, I'll pointedly apologize for having had the poor taste to put my foot under yours.  If you do it again, I'll likely be more pointed, and less apologetic.
[15:48] <ScottK> cprov: Hobbsee and I discussed having bugsquad not mark up workflow bugs because it's disruptive and a waste of time with bdmurray and had an agreement about it.  Henrik unilaterally reverted Hobbsee's wiki changes.
[15:48] <andrew_sayers> ScottK: Would they agree that you're the wronged party?
[15:48] <ScottK> andrew_sayers: I don't really care.
[15:49] <persia> cprov: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/2008-May/000861.html
[15:49] <cprov> ScottK: uhh, I'm not qualified enough to discuss this, then ;)
[15:50] <andrew_sayers> ScottK: Yeah, I know that feeling :s
[15:50] <persia> (alternate view at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/HowToTriage?action=diff&rev2=50&rev1=49)
[15:51] <ScottK> persia: In this case I think we got our foot stepped on (workflow bugs marked up), went and politely discussed how to avoid the problem, had an agreement, and then were told that really it was our fault for having our foot there.
[15:52] <ScottK> persia: So I'm not going start a discussion that starts with is our use of LP for workflow legitimate.  It is and have been for years.
[15:52] <ScottK> persia: It's an old negotiating trick and I'm not going to fall for it.
[15:52] <ScottK> They need to recognize our right to exist before we can have a meaningful dialogue.
[15:53] <ScottK> ... to use a slightly different metaphor.
[15:53] <persia> ScottK: I think the analogy is strained, but to stretch it further, I think if it's a good place for our foot to be, that ought be explained.  On the other hand, It's a philosphical thing: I can't change your opinion about how to react, but I won't agree that it's appropriate for me to take no action at UDS towards a model that works for all.
[15:53]  * StevenK waves
[15:53] <dholbach> ScottK: I really don't think that Henrik "you shouldn't do this" - I think he tried to express the view of a bugsquad member "oh, this doesn't really look like a bug report to me"
[15:53] <dholbach> ScottK: it will be good to discuss this at UDS in person
[15:53] <persia> dholbach: Sure, but we've been using those since Breezy...
[15:53] <ScottK> dholbach: Unorthodox has a dictionary meaning.
[15:53] <StevenK> Speaking of UDS, I'm on my way.
[15:54] <ScottK> dholbach: I don't see a basis for discussion.
[15:54] <persia> StevenK: Have a good flight
[15:54] <dholbach> persia: I know and I'm not saying "let's stop using bugs for it"
[15:54] <StevenK> persia: Just got off a 7:30h flight to Singapore.
[15:54] <persia> StevenK: How many hops do you have?
[15:55] <dholbach> persia: but if there is a way to make things more obvious (like getting bug statuses and other stuff in sync or whatever else needs doing) it will be good to discuss it and think of a way
[15:55] <StevenK> Singapore -> Frankfurt, Frankfurt -> Prague
[15:55] <persia> OOh.  Singaport->Frankfurt is one of the extra-fuel flights :)
[15:56] <persia> dholbach: Surely.  I expect this falls back to the discussion in November about appropriate use of bug stati.  Further, I think that this is a topic of interest to all people who interact with bugs, and very much feel that developers are just as important as any other bug users: perhaps in large part because most bugs ought eventually result in developer action.
[15:57] <andrew_sayers> ScottK: It sounds like your real argument is about proper procedure for resolving problems, not this problem in particular.
[15:57] <dholbach> persia: Right
[15:57] <ScottK> But apparently only so long as it doesnt' inconvenience bug squad.
[15:57]  * Hobbsee notes that legit bugs turn into workflow bugs as soon as they get a patch attached to them.
[15:58] <andrew_sayers> ScottK: that you need to work out a way of discussing problems where agreements stick
[15:58] <persia> ScottK: In the view of some members of bugsquad.  Consider this an opportunity for education.
[15:58] <andrew_sayers> Until you've got that, there's certainly no basis for discussion on this particular problem.
[15:58] <persia> Hobbsee: I'd argue that all bugs turn into workflow bugs at some point if they are being fixed.
[15:59] <ScottK> andrew_sayers: Until some members of the community are willing to be collaborative, I think there's no point.  I've tried.  I give up.
[15:59] <persia> andrew_sayers: Well, yes, and no.  Generally we've that, but as a primarily meritocratic community, there is dissension, and it may appear very vocally until it is resolved.
[16:00]  * ScottK is wondering how hard it would be to write a script to monitor the relevant wiki page and autmatically restore the stuff if it gets reverted.
[16:00] <persia> ScottK: There are surely better solutions, but it's a relatively trivial script with editmoin
[16:01] <sistpoty|work> hey dholbach... thanks for sponsoring libxfont :)
[16:01] <dholbach> sistpoty|work: thanks a lot for fixing it - with your work and geser's perl-rebuilds intrepid became MUCH MORE FUN! :)
[16:02] <sistpoty|work> dholbach: heh, I guess I'll finish my dist-upgrade tonight then :)
[16:02] <Laney> sistpoty|work: Yeah, nice work on the fix!
[16:02] <dholbach> sistpoty|work: do you have an idea why this happens?
[16:02] <dholbach> sistpoty|work: or rather why the fix is necessary?
[16:03] <sistpoty|work> dholbach: kind of... some program of x (or library) is linking against libxfont1 and defines its own version of a function defined in libxfont1. with -Bsymbolic-functions, this will resolve to the version from libxfont1 and not to the own defined version
[16:03] <sistpoty|work> dholbach: at least that's my guess of what's going on
[16:05] <dholbach> sistpoty|work: ugh.... why "its own version"?
[16:06] <sistpoty|work> dholbach: well, let's say you have extern void foo(void) in libxfont1 and *also* defined in a program linking against it. then -Bsymbolic-function will make a difference imho
[16:06] <Hobbsee> ScottK: you'd do better to write an autolart, and to change back any conditions which are wrong on workflow bugs.
[16:06] <dholbach> sistpoty|work: alright, I see
[16:06] <sistpoty|work> dholbach: it would still be interesting to see *what* is getting overridden, and if it's done on purpose or is a bug in the first place
[16:06] <dholbach> sistpoty|work: exactly
[16:07] <dholbach> sistpoty|work: I'll leave that for Bryce and others more clueful - right now I'm just happy not having to hold libxfont1 :)
[16:08] <dholbach> more clueful than me.... :)
[16:08] <sistpoty|work> dholbach: yeah, so do I (as my knowledge of X is quite limited *g*)
[16:08] <dholbach> thanks for the fix :)
[16:09] <andrew_sayers> Is there any accepted way of requesting that someone reverted an edit explain why they did it?
[16:09] <\sh> Hobbsee, let us just install a RequestTracker for Workflow Bugs ,->...it's easier to maintain then LP and can be simple controlled by email ;)
[16:09] <sistpoty|work> dholbach: you're welcome ;)
[16:10] <ScottK> andrew_sayers: He did say why he did it.  He thinks there shouldn't be workflow bugs.
[16:10] <ScottK> \sh: That'd be great except when it needs to touch soyuz.
[16:11] <andrew_sayers> And that's policy, not just one person that didn't get the memo?
[16:12] <\sh> ScottK, it's just for maintaining: "Merging: foo-0.9.6-bar.crap" -> Status: New -> Prio: 1 -> send eMail: "Status: InProgress I'm working on it" tasks-
[16:12] <\sh> ScottK, when MoM would push those things into RT, we could even priotize highly needed merges
[16:15] <Hobbsee> \sh: woot!
[16:15] <Hobbsee> ScottK: one of the bugsquad guys is going to mass invalidate them.
[16:19] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Mass invalidate which?
[16:19] <Hobbsee> ScottK: the needs packaging bugs, whcih just contain the LP url for each of the projects.
[16:19] <ScottK> andrew_sayers: The individual in question is Canonical's head of Ubuntu QA, so he's more equal than others.
[16:19] <ScottK> Hobbsee:
[16:20] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Ah.  Thanks.
[16:20] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Is the individual in question going to get hit with a cluebat too?
[16:20] <Hobbsee> ScottK: dunno.  he clearly didn't read the part about checking for dupes, so isn't likely to read complaining email either
[16:21] <Hobbsee> ScottK: but having his bugs mass-closed should be obvious enough.
[16:22] <ScottK> Besides, if it's a bugsquad person they can do whatever they want because it's to complex to actually ask them to make a useful contribution.
[16:22] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Of course events here in the last year have caused me to completely redefine my concept of 'obvious enough'.  I'm really not sure.
[16:22] <andrew_sayers> ScottK: ah, okay.  Point taken :)
[16:23] <Hobbsee> haha
[16:23] <Hobbsee> yes, well.
[16:29] <\sh> Canonicals Head Of Ubuntu QA?
[16:30] <ScottK> Or some similar title.
[16:30] <ScottK> Henrik Nilsen Omma
[16:31] <\sh> Ah
[16:33] <ScottK> \sh: The same expert triager who got us this piece of PR: http://www.oreillynet.com/linux/blog/2007/12/ubuntu_linux_users_bugs_1.html
[16:34] <ScottK> SRU for that has since been done no thanks to "QA".
[16:37] <\sh> ScottK, well, I see that only in this post are many "bugs" regarding Ubuntu/Debian relationship...so I don't comment on it...it's just feeding trolls
[16:38] <bddebian> Who is Cypherbios these days?
[16:39]  * \sh needs some nicotine...and waiting for esx to finish up with ubutnu server install
[16:46] <ScottK> \sh: No.  No need to comment now.  It's history.  I just don't experience him as a great value added in the process (I'm sure he does great stuff, I just don't run into it).
[16:50] <encompass> anyone looking for another project ot package?  We are REALLY in need of someone for http://launchpad.net/memaker it has been packaged before, and I don't think it would take much effort from there.  I can help change the program to fit your needs to.
[16:54] <ScottK> encompass: Since it's written in Python you might want to see someone from the Debian Python Application Packaging Team in #debian-python on OFTC.
[16:54] <ScottK> They might want it in Debian and we'd get it automatically from there.
[16:57] <LaserJock> \sh: do you really not use LP to check for existing bugs in a package?
[16:57]  * sistpoty|work heads home now... cya
[16:57] <ScottK> LaserJock: I read him to say he preferred a two step workflow: 1.  Merge.  2. Bugfix.  As long as he does 2, it gets you there by and large.
[16:58] <LaserJock> sure
[16:58] <encompass> ScottK: ok I can try there too I suppose.
[16:59] <LaserJock> I just don't understand, "
[16:59] <LaserJock> As long there is no real way to automate checking for bugreports in a
[16:59] <LaserJock> package
[16:59] <LaserJock> "
[17:00] <LaserJock> and I don't understand why filing a merge bug if you're gonna take a while is a bad thing
[17:01] <LaserJock> since contributors already need to file bugs it seems like the easiest way to go
[17:03] <ScottK> LaserJock: Why do you need to understand more than a number of volunteers would find mandating of such a workflow troublesome.  Insisting people do it your way is a good way to get them to volunteer their efforts elsewhere.
[17:03] <LaserJock> ScottK: likewise
[17:04] <ScottK> I'm asking for guidelines and common sense.
[17:04] <LaserJock> I'm just trying to understand why people are doing things they way they are
[17:04] <LaserJock> as am I
[17:04] <ScottK> OK.  It sounded to me like you want a rule about MOTUs have to file a merge bug.
[17:05] <LaserJock> I would call that a guideline and common sense
[17:05] <LaserJock> but clearly we have different merging workflows going on
[17:05] <LaserJock> I didn't think there was that much difference until this thread
[17:05] <ScottK> For a package that I'm familiar with it probably takes me about as long to write the bug as it would to do the merge (less the waiting for it to build).
[17:06] <LaserJock> oh for sure
[17:06] <LaserJock> I'm only saying for bug where it's gonna take some time and you don't want a collision
[17:06] <LaserJock> hence the "common sense" part
[17:06] <ScottK> So it's a lot of trouble to go to for something that can be handled with a little paying attention to what's going on in the package.
[17:07] <LaserJock> I don't understand "trouble" there
[17:07] <LaserJock> and, to borrow a phrase, it's an orthodox way to do it
[17:07] <ScottK> If someone wants to look at a merge/sync, I'm pretty sure libetepan is a sync, but you'd need to look at rebuilding the rdepends too.
[17:08] <ScottK> LaserJock: No.  It's not.  It's never been a rule that developers had to file bugs.
[17:08] <LaserJock> we've *always* used bugs for process workflows
[17:08] <ScottK> Generically, yes, but specifically not for that.
[17:08] <LaserJock> yes
[17:08] <LaserJock> we did it through dapper
[17:08] <LaserJock> and contributors *still* have to do it
[17:08] <ScottK> OK.  So not for the last two years.
[17:08] <LaserJock> so only MOTUs haven't
[17:09] <LaserJock> so I don't think it's anything unheard of to file a merge bug to "lock"
[17:09] <ScottK> Yes, but not unheard of and orthodoxy are different things.
[17:10] <LaserJock> well
[17:10] <LaserJock> orthodoxy in the sense that we us process bugs
[17:10] <LaserJock> almost everything we do is through a bug report
[17:11] <LaserJock> it doesn't seem like a stretch to use it for merges as well
[17:11] <mok0> LaserJock: I agree
[17:11] <pochu> I'm all for requiring people to block things in MoM when it has comment support as DaD has. I'm all against requiring people to report bugs. I agree with ScottK in that that will cause directly or indirectly less contributions
[17:11] <ScottK> I think we need to use bugs for stuff that needs to get to the archive admins to process on soyuz.
[17:12] <LaserJock> ScottK: why should we limit it to that?
[17:12] <ScottK> This is not applicable for merges.
[17:12] <LaserJock> we use bugs for everything
[17:12] <mok0> pochu: but it could happen at a push of a button in MoM
[17:12] <ScottK> I'm saying it's needed for that.
[17:12] <pochu> mok0: but what's the benefit of that?
[17:12] <ScottK> I'm saying that's stuff we can't do another way.  Not that that's all we should do.
[17:12] <LaserJock> ScottK: right, but I consider a merge to be a packaging bug so it just seems logical that you would find a report on it
[17:12] <LaserJock> if people don't see it that way then we can discuss that
[17:13] <LaserJock> I'm just trying to find the source of the different workflows here
[17:13] <mok0> pochu: the benefit is that the workflow gets documented and people can see that the merge is being worked on. A lot of users (not developers) follow whats going on at LP
[17:13] <LaserJock> pochu: why would it cause less contributions?
[17:13] <ScottK> It takes about 1% the time to make a comment on DaD as it does to file a bug.
[17:13] <LaserJock> pffft
[17:13] <LaserJock> that's not true
[17:13] <ScottK> LaserJock: Because you're going to add rules to 'make' us do stuff we don't want to do.
[17:13] <LaserJock> it can take the same if not less time
[17:14] <LaserJock> Sc\
[17:14] <LaserJock> ScottK: we have all kinds of rules
[17:14] <mok0> ScottK: It can be done automatically
[17:14] <ScottK> On DaD I click, type, hit enter on a page I'm already on.
[17:14] <ScottK> LaserJock: Yes.  We have lots of rules.  The rules we have should not be more than we need.
[17:14] <mok0> ScottK: exactly, and all it takes is a script to take your name and create a bug at LP
[17:14] <LaserJock> ScottK: we can do something like file-merge <pkgname>
[17:14] <LaserJock> ScottK: sure
[17:15] <LaserJock> ScottK: I'm not trying to *add* rules
[17:15] <LaserJock> I'm trying to find the best workflow for people so we're on the same page
[17:15] <ScottK> I don't understand how making a rule I have to file a bug is not adding a rule.
[17:15] <LaserJock> because we already have merge rules
[17:15] <ScottK> I don't think there is one best workflow that's best for everyone.
[17:15] <LaserJock> we're just clarifying the workflow
[17:15] <ScottK> But not merge rules that say I have to file a bug.
[17:16] <LaserJock> so you have a problem because you don't like the workflow
[17:16] <LaserJock> that's *not* "oh poor us, don't add more rules"
[17:16] <mok0> All that's asked for is that it gets documented at LP that someone is doing the work
[17:16] <LaserJock> we're trying to figure out how to get things done
[17:16] <LucidFox> Blimey, apparently bug #230350 is so big that even LP times out
[17:17] <mok0> It can be done by software
[17:17] <LaserJock> I realize that there are different workflows, the point that I'm trying to get across is that we should figure out how to make the different workflows work well
[17:17] <ScottK> mok0: Yes, but then I have to find the bug number and add it to my changelog (or hunt it down and manually close it later), so it's not just filing the bug that's more work.
[17:18] <mok0> ScottK: You get it in the email
[17:18] <ScottK> OK, so then I have to wait for LP to get around to mailing it.
[17:18] <ScottK> It all adds up to more work for very little benifit.
[17:18] <mok0> ScottK: yes, but are you that fast :-)
[17:18] <ScottK> Sometimes.
[17:19] <LaserJock> I totally agree that if it's a fast merge there's no need for a bug
[17:19] <ScottK> So now define fast merge and what's the threshold where I get yelled at for not filing a bug?
[17:19] <LaserJock> but if you're want to exclude people from working on something I think the best way is with a bug
[17:20] <LaserJock> oh, generally I'd say if you're gonna get to it within and hour or two
[17:20] <LaserJock> maybe a day if people aren't going fast
[17:20] <ogra> oh sigh, cant people write proper scripts before they use LP ....
[17:20]  * ogra mutters about bug #230350
[17:21] <ScottK> ogra: I'm going to go unsubscribe myself from the one package that got me that one before the deluge arrives.
[17:21] <ogra> i dont think even half of the packages eve exist in debian grmlbl
[17:21] <ScottK> Heh.
[17:21] <ScottK> He's not even here to kvetch at.
[17:21] <ogra> well, its a nice attempt
[17:21] <ogra> but he should add more checks to not spam people
[17:22] <LaserJock> what is it? I'm getting timeouts
[17:22] <juliank> Question: Is it possible to sync a package as an SRU, provided the resulting binary package is absolutely the same? (Especially for Python scripts)
[17:22] <ScottK> LaserJock: It's one bug for all packages that don't have an original maintainer.
[17:22] <ogra> a script moaning about missing Maintainer field changes while having -ubuntu versions
[17:22] <LaserJock> bah, nvm, I just got the emails
[17:23] <ScottK> juliank: No.  Sync it to the development release and then we'd do an upload to -proposed identical except for debian/changelog.
[17:24] <LaserJock> it'd be nice if we has some sort of dicussion on that beforehand :/
[17:25] <ScottK> LaserJock: It's also be REALLY nice if status changes on a bug only went to people subscribed for the relevant package and not to everybody.
[17:25] <mok0> ScottK, LaserJock, what is your opinion on the idea that some packages can have an real-person maintainer?
[17:25] <ScottK> mok0: They can.  There is no prohibition.
[17:25] <nxvl> i will take mi plane in 8 hours
[17:25] <nxvl> i'm so exited!
[17:26] <mok0> ScottK: well, isn't that the solution for people who wish to claim maintainership of certain packages?
[17:26] <mok0> ScottK: contributors will know to stay away from those
[17:26] <ScottK> mok0: As I said in mail, I don't generally want that.
[17:27] <ScottK> Team maintainership has a lot of advantages.
[17:27] <mok0> ScottK: ... but it's difficult to have it both ways
[17:27] <LaserJock> mok0: not if you file bugs ;-)
[17:27] <mok0> LaserJock: but ScottK doesn't like that either
[17:28] <ScottK> mok0: Go look at the debian/changelog for dkim-milter and tell me if you need anything else to know if it'd be a good idea to discuss it with me before you change the package?
[17:28] <LaserJock> ScottK: I know, I've been trying to work on a solution with the LP guys
[17:28] <LaserJock> ScottK: frankly they're not really getting it, but I'm still working on it :-)
[17:29] <LaserJock> ScottK: I think they feel we shouldn't be filing such bugs in the first place
[17:29] <LaserJock> sort of along the lines of the bugsquad :-)
[17:30] <ScottK> LaserJock: Then they should design their system differently.
[17:30] <LaserJock> ScottK: apparently that is very difficult and these are only corner cases
[17:30] <ScottK> LaserJock: For some of the large ones I've done the ability for one bug to block another would have served better, but the LP devs have already decided we don't need that.
[17:30] <juliank> 2nd Question: dir2ogg and ndisgtk get only (small) bugfix releases in the 0.11 (dir2ogg) / 0.8 (ndisgtk) series. Is it possible to get "SRU micro version update exception" for them?
[17:31] <mok0> ScottK: I can see that you've been active merging that package since last summer
[17:31] <LaserJock> juliank: perhaps, it would be on a case-by-case basis
[17:31] <mok0> ScottK: I can also see jdong did the last upload
[17:32] <ScottK> mok0: That's because I was away from my gpg key and we were 4 hours from the Hardy repositories closing so I asked him to upload it.
[17:32] <mok0> ScottK: I don't see that you literally ask people not to touch it
[17:33] <ScottK> mok0: No.  I don't, but what do you think is sensible in such a case?
[17:33] <LaserJock> it makes sense if you're unsure to ask ScottK about it
[17:33] <mok0> LaserJock: that's evident to someone who's worked in the community for a while
[17:34] <LaserJock> yep
[17:34] <ScottK> As it happens, the patch I added just before release is the only important fix in the new upstream, so it's not worth bothering with a merge right now.
[17:34] <LaserJock> hence why people should be asking people who've been around for a while
[17:34] <ScottK> Also I found a bug in the package yesterday when regeneating my dkim keys due to the openssl fiasco.
[17:34] <mok0> But we've just created the contributor team to invite more people to do work in a structured environment
[17:35] <LaserJock> yep
[17:35] <ScottK> mok0: I think we created it do give recognition to people who are already doing so.
[17:35] <mok0> So it doesn't make sense to require that people know about a bunch of more-or-less unwritten rules
[17:35] <LaserJock> why not?
[17:35] <LaserJock> we should have to write down *everything*
[17:35] <LaserJock> it's just not practical
[17:36] <LaserJock> we expect if you're gonna be a part of the team you're going to interact with the team
[17:36] <LaserJock> as questions, etc.
[17:36] <LaserJock> *ask
[17:36] <mok0> LaserJock: No, which is why it is practical to have a workflow that implements logical structures that are easy to understand and follow
[17:36] <juliank> LaserJock: Especially since I develop dir2ogg and ndisgtk and don't want to duplicate the work.
[17:37] <LaserJock> juliank: have a look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates and if you'd like file a bug
[17:37] <LaserJock> mok0: sure
[17:38] <LaserJock> so saying things like  "if you're unsure of what to do, a good idea is to ask the last or most common Ubuntu uploader"
[17:38] <LaserJock> seems pretty sane
[17:39] <mok0> LaserJock: the current documentation says to sort of look around on IRC to see if you can maybe talk the the last uploader and perhaps see if it could eventually be possible that you maybe could try and get some help to perform a tentative merge....
[17:39] <LaserJock> as does "locking"  packages you're working on via MoM or, better IMO, a LP bug
[17:39] <mok0> :-)
[17:39] <LaserJock> well, at some point you've got to communicate with people
[17:40] <LaserJock> you can't really get around that in team maintanence
[17:40] <mok0> Well, with DaD, you have that little field where you can type a comment. So if things where centered around such a system, it could be a compromise
[17:40] <LaserJock> mok0: MoM will have that soon
[17:40] <LaserJock> that's what I meant
[17:41] <jdong>     - change from svn, don't accept to move files to the burn location
[17:41] <jdong>       otherwise they will simply be deleted
[17:41] <jdong> I laughed....
[17:41] <Pici> jdong: me too
[17:41] <mok0> LaserJock: ... I lean to the solution that the DaD little field is sent to LP along with other details of the merge, such as the person doing it.
[17:41] <LaserJock> hmm, I'm just not sure
[17:42] <LaserJock> I guess it stems from me not really using MoM
[17:42] <mok0> LaserJock: perhaps you could even get the new bug # back on the web page
[17:42] <LaserJock> I'd rather avoid MoM-centric processes
[17:42] <mok0> LaserJock: but it has to be something-centric
[17:42] <mok0> LaserJock: that
[17:43] <mok0> that's the whole idea... to make it clear to people what is being worked on
[17:43] <LaserJock> i.e. MoM is useful to get info from, but not really the place to "do" things
[17:43] <LaserJock> that's why I don't like the comment field thing so much, though many many people do so  that's cool
[17:43] <LaserJock> mok0: well, I would argue that it should be LP-centric because that's where our bugs are
[17:44] <mok0> LaserJock: But LP doesn't have a nice tool like MoM
[17:44] <LaserJock> what tool?
[17:45] <mok0> LaserJock: and I am saying that MoM should create the bug at LP, so you will have both
[17:45] <mok0> LaserJock: the tool that gives you the diffs and tentative merge
[17:45] <LaserJock> mok0: and what would happen if I just filed a bug in LP, would MoM pick it up?
[17:45] <LaserJock> mok0: I find those pretty suspect and don't regularly use them
[17:45] <ScottK> LaserJock: I'd argue that it shouldn't be any more LP centric that it needs to be because LP is slow and painful to use and is a proprietary tool that is arbitrarily changed by its developers for reasons that are at best obscure from an Ubuntu developer's perspective.
[17:46] <mok0> LaserJock: I don't know how MoM works behind the scences, but in principle, yes
[17:46] <LaserJock> mok0: well, since MoM can't do anything with bugs now it's hypothetical ;-)
[17:47] <mok0> ScottK: I tend to agree with you there, but the API and tools to query Malone's database is there
[17:47] <LaserJock> ScottK: but it is our bug tracker
[17:48] <momelod> greetings channel
[17:48] <LaserJock> so it sure makes sense to use it as much as we can for bug-related activity, IMO
[17:48] <momelod> is this the place for ubuntu support?
[17:48] <mok0> ScottK: ... and although the Launchpad web site is a mess to navigate, I acually like the bug tracking in Malone
[17:48] <LaserJock> momelod: you want #ubuntu
[17:49] <momelod> thanx LaserJock
[17:49] <norsetto> what was that ....!support ?
[17:49] <norsetto> !support
[17:49] <norsetto> oh yes ....
[17:50] <Laney> blueyed: Mind if I take the darcs merge?
[17:50] <blueyed> Laney: no, please do.
[17:50] <Laney> Thanks :)
[17:56] <mok0> Btw, the wiki documentation for contributing to ubuntu needs a good rework to incorporate the contributor team
[17:58] <ScottK> LaserJock: I think it makes sense to use LP where we have to or it's the best tool for the job.  If we have a better alternative (e.g. REVU) we should use it.
[18:00] <norsetto> scottk: when are you flying?
[18:00] <ScottK> I leave on Saturday evening and arrive Sunday evening.
[18:01] <norsetto> scottk: cool, I'll see you at the Hotel then. I should be there around 16:00 on Sunday afternoon
[18:02] <norsetto> ScottK: thats 4pm for the american time format challenged :-)
[18:03] <ScottK> norsetto: I was in the military.  I know how to add an subtract 12.  US military uses 24 hour clock and most of mine are set that way.
[18:03] <nxvl> i'll leave in 8 hours!
[18:03] <norsetto> ScottK: ok, next time I will mention zulu too
[18:03] <nxvl> i'm so exited!
[18:04] <nxvl> norsetto: btw, can you please find me some cheat, but reliable hotel on Rome for my bcakapacker trip?
[18:04] <nxvl> s/cheat/cheap
[18:04] <norsetto> nxvl: kind of difficult for me, I live here, I never had a need for an hotel ...
[18:05] <nxvl> mm
[18:05] <norsetto> nxvl: central location?
[18:05] <nxvl> that's what i thought
[18:05] <nxvl> norsetto: if possible yes
[18:05] <geser> norsetto: have you a spare room and want to earn some money? :)
[18:06] <norsetto> nxvl: because central and cheap are kind of not going very well together
[18:06] <nxvl> norsetto: there should be a lot of backapackers hotels out there i think
[18:06] <eddyMul> I'm packaging python-django from its SVN trunk. I have working packages for Hardy. I want to contribute my patches to debian (experimental). Can anyone give me guidance on the steps I should take? (or whether I should bother doing this at all...)
[18:06] <norsetto> geser: not if he is paying with US$ ;-)
[18:07] <nxvl> eddyMul: debian developers only care about their packages, not ubuntu ones, so what you need to do is separate your patches and send them as patches not as debdiff
[18:08] <nxvl> eddyMul: unless you repackage their packages
[18:08] <nxvl> norsetto: i'm going with euros
[18:08] <nxvl> :D
[18:08] <norsetto> nxvl: wise decision
[18:09] <nxvl> yup
[18:09] <eddyMul> nxvl: so, I guess I should start with trying to get it to build under "pbuilder --distribution experimental". You're saying I should not send them debdiff of my resulting debian-experimental package?
[18:10] <nxvl> when my sister went to europe, hes trip mates loose 250 US$ on change
[18:10] <norsetto> nxvl: I'm thinking hard but I can't recall anything, let me call my sister, she might know
[18:10] <nxvl> norsetto: there is no hurry, i will be on rome on 26 IIRC
[18:10]  * nxvl checks
[18:11] <nxvl> yup, 26 night
[18:17] <norsetto> nxvl: sorry, I just checked the only B&B I know of and that is not available anymore
[18:20] <\sh> re
[18:21] <nixternal> REVU! REVU! REVU! REVU! REVU! REVU! REVU!!!!!!!!
[18:21] <\sh> MERGE! MERGE! MERGE!
[18:21] <norsetto> nixternal: REVU for President?
[18:21] <nixternal> yes!
[18:21]  * norsetto notes down to vote REVU
[18:21] <nixternal> persia: thanks for the raw log....I forgot to reconnect my server last night so that is why I wasn't online earlier
[18:22] <\sh> strike...round about 10G traffic because of the new pics on the blog ;)
[18:23]  * norsetto always thought that REVU days were Mondays (so much so for not attending latest MOTU meetings)
[18:24] <\sh> looks like that I serve at least one iso per hour...round about 700MB tells my traffic report...nice
[18:34] <norsetto> geser: is it you that filed 230050?
[18:34] <nixternal> has Debian adopted the copyright format proposal from http://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/CopyrightFormat ?
[18:35] <ScottK> No, but some people are using it.
[18:35] <norsetto> geser: just curious to know what the problem is
[18:35] <ScottK> Debian Policy documents existing practice, it doesn't define what it should be.
[18:35] <nixternal> ya, I see that...hrmm
[18:35] <nixternal> ScottK: do you know if those using the new format will get denied by archive admins at all?
[18:37] <pochu> nixternal: they are aproved AFAIK
[18:37] <ScottK> As long as it has all the required elements, I'd expect not.
[18:37] <nixternal> groovy, thanks
[18:38] <pochu> nixternal: see http://packages.debian.org/unstable/source/libgtksourceviewmm, http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/libg/libgtksourceviewmm/libgtksourceviewmm_2.2.0-2/copyright
[18:38] <\sh> bug #230393 ....
[18:38] <pochu> nixternal: and all the GNOME c++ bindings have been ported to the new format
[18:39] <nixternal> groovy
[18:39]  * pochu learns the meaning of groovy :-)
[18:39] <pochu> groovy! ;)
[18:39] <nixternal> hehe
[18:40] <nixternal> my daughter hates it when I say it, she says "groovy isn't cool anymore, the new thing is "that's hot"".....I told her Paris Hilton is an idiot and I will never utter a word that she has
[18:40] <norsetto> nixternal: is cool still cool?
[18:41] <nixternal> I told her that everytime I hear her say "that's hot" I will ground her from one item for one month each time she says it :)
[18:41] <nixternal> ya, I think cool is still cool, if not, then I am getting way to old
[18:41] <norsetto> nixternal: cool
[18:43] <nixternal> hehe
[18:43] <CrippledCanary> any one please come with some advice on how to take bug #221973 and bug #224241 forward...
[18:43] <CrippledCanary> all the code is in there but it needs sposoring
[18:43] <CrippledCanary> sponsoring
[18:43] <ScottK> Fortunately we have a 5 year old to enforce language restrictions.  She always catches it when her older sisters slip up and then they get soap in their mouth.
[18:44] <nixternal> ScottK: ahh, I switched from soap to paprika...paprika is hated in our family, we don't even cook with it anymore :)
[18:44] <norsetto> CrippledCanary: u-u-s is already subscribed, so its just a question of time
[18:45] <ScottK> We were keeping score of language slip-ups for a while on the message board in the kitchen.  Once it became clear my wife was the clear loser, we stopped.
[18:45] <nixternal> lol
[18:46] <norsetto> What is a slip-up? When you mispell a word?
[18:46] <nixternal> when you swear
[18:46] <norsetto> ah
[18:47] <nixternal> I have a nephew that if you slip up in front of him, he will repeat it for the next month
[18:55] <geser> norsetto: no, I didn't file this bug. I'm not that insane.
[19:47] <LaserJock> ScottK: do you use Firefox or Konqueror?
[20:05] <nhaines> pochu: Thanks for the extensive and very helpful comments you made on my PyRoom package!
[20:06] <pochu> nhaines: np, let me know when you fix them and I'll review it again :)
[20:06] <pochu> or if you have any issue with them...
[20:06] <nhaines> My only question is about installing an AUTHORS file.  How should I acknowledge the project maintainers?
[20:08] <pochu> nhaines: they are credited in /usr/share/doc/$package/copyright
[20:09] <nhaines> Aha!
[20:11] <nhaines> I think when I had Homepage: in the source stanza I got debuild warnings.
[20:11] <nhaines> Oh!  I know.  What did you use to check the packaging for warnings and errors?  I'd like to do that myself and spare you the hassle.  ;)
[20:16] <norsetto> nhaines: that would be lintian
[20:20] <jderemer> I'm trying to submit a bug for ubuntu's yelp.  However, a .crash file doesnt get created by apport even though it is submitted.  They just mark it invalid if there was no .crash file...  Im not quite sure how to proceed.  any help?
[20:21]  * \sh thought for hardy it's switched off? or did pitti something new?
[20:21] <jderemer> i enabled it in /etc/default/apport
[20:21] <jderemer> and rebooted
[20:22] <\sh> jderemer: it's submittet to LP?
[20:22] <jderemer> yes
[20:22] <jderemer> but they just invalidate it... because theres no .crash file..
[20:22] <jderemer> :(
[20:22] <jderemer> thats why im confused
[20:22] <greg-g> jderemer: bug number?
[20:22] <jderemer> im trying to help...
[20:22] <\sh> jderemer: which bug no?
[20:22] <jderemer> 230439
[20:22] <greg-g> bug 230439
[20:24] <greg-g> jderemer: so there is no .crash file in /var/crash right?
[20:24] <jderemer> yep
[20:24] <jderemer> folder is completely empty
[20:24] <greg-g> then it is not invalid, I'll reopen it for you.
[20:24] <jderemer> thanks.
[20:25] <greg-g> no problem
[20:25] <\sh> bah...there is no need about a .crash file
[20:25] <\sh> greg-g: are you reopening it, if not, I'll reopen it with a nice message
[20:25] <greg-g> \sh: go for it, I was just trying to reproduce
[20:26] <greg-g> jderemer: can you give me a couple of concrete steps to help me reproduce this problem?
[20:27] <jderemer> sometimes when you go to another page, then use the back button to go back to the index page... it just crashes.
[20:27] <greg-g> jderemer: oh, and for future reference, #ubuntu-bugs is the place you want to go for help concerning bugs in Launchpad.
[20:27] <jderemer> sorry...
[20:27] <greg-g> jderemer: any specific pages that you are going back from
[20:27] <\sh> greg-g: well, I don't want to sound to harsh..because asking reporter to provide the steps to reproduce and "just because no .crash file is there, I'll invalid" is different
[20:27] <greg-g> no, no worries, the issue is being taken care of, just, you know, for future reference :)
[20:27] <jderemer> thanks for the information
[20:28] <jderemer> greg-g: any page
[20:28] <greg-g> \sh: right, they should have asked for steps to reproduce, they are in -bugs right now if you want to speak with them
[20:28] <greg-g> jderemer: ok, thanks
[20:30] <\sh> greg-g: TBH, I stop talking...it's most of the time the same problem again "ah, yeah, we don't know" "it's not in the docs"
[20:30] <\sh> greg-g: but..yes...moment
[20:35] <greg-g> \sh: now now, putting "bug triagers" in quotes isn't going to help
[20:36] <norsetto> the devs/bug-triagers war rages on ....
[20:36] <greg-g> bah, it needs to stop
[20:37] <\sh> norsetto: I don't want that
[20:37] <\sh> greg-g: I have my reasons
[20:37] <\sh> greg-g: it's not "the bug-triagers are not valuable"...really...please don't read it
[20:37] <\sh> like that
[20:38] <greg-g> ok
[20:38] <norsetto> greg-g: are you greg grossmeyer?
[20:38] <greg-g> with an i not a y, but yeah :)
[20:39] <\sh> greg-g: grossmeier with an I sounds german ;)
[20:39] <norsetto> greg_g: I saw the triage you did for gnomeradio, that was pretty good
[20:39] <greg-g> norsetto: thanks
[20:39] <norsetto> greg-g: nothing to thanks for, I should thank you
[20:40] <greg-g> I'm trying to get the maintainer to take control of the project in LP right now (yo uhave to create a new project in LP to create the upstream bug tracking links)
[20:40] <greg-g> \sh: the family is from germany, a couple generations back
[20:44] <\sh> greg-g: you see now what I mean...it's not worth the energy....
[20:44] <greg-g> \sh: yeah, I expected more from this situation, sorry :(
[20:45] <\sh> bug reports which are more valuable are getting ignored, and bug reports which are useless are begin investigated
[20:45] <LaserJock> for goodness sakes
[20:45] <LaserJock> why the heck do we even have apport if we're gonna close bugs people report with it
[20:50]  * greg-g grrs
[20:50]  * \sh drinks more beerö
[20:50] <\sh> really...
[20:59] <greg-g> jderemer: (not sure if you got my private message but...) if you need help later on, feel free to ask me
[21:25] <LaserJock> well, it's been great hanging with you all for the last couple years, such great friends. I think I better move along for a while at least. Good luck with Intrepid.
[21:26] <bddebian> ??????
[21:26] <greg-g> como?
[21:26] <nhaines> Huh?
[21:26] <ajmitch> LaserJock: ok, bye
[21:27] <LaserJock> bddebian: cya dude
[21:27] <laga> what's up? developers VS triagers?
[21:27] <bddebian> ....
[21:29] <greg-g> hey, we're not all bad! ;)
[21:29]  * greg-g is a triager
[21:29]  * mok0 cheers greg-g
[21:29] <laga> i was just wondering, i didn't follow the drama.
[21:29] <mok0> Drama? What? When? Where? :-P
[21:29] <greg-g> heh
[21:30] <laga> if there was any ;)
[21:32] <mok0> The discussion was about merging workflow
[21:32] <mok0> whether or not to always have a bug on LP
[21:48] <norsetto> ajmitch: wasn't that a bit rude?
[21:49] <jderemer> it was lots of fun :)
[21:50] <norsetto> jderemer: no, I don't find any fun in all this
[21:50] <jderemer> ... dude my head hurts
[21:50] <jderemer> :(
[21:50] <jderemer> it def wasnt fun at all
[21:51] <nhaines> Thanks for doing all the hard work for that bug, though!
[21:51] <jderemer> haha
[21:51] <jderemer> hey i tried
[21:51] <jderemer> and learned a lot
[21:51] <nhaines> It isn't fun, and that's why we all appreciate your efforts all the more!
[21:51] <jderemer> i want to thank you guys for your help :)
[21:52] <jderemer> what happened to laser though?
[21:53] <crimsun> "life."
[21:53] <jderemer> ah
[21:53] <crimsun> (he has been under some pressure with school, Ubuntu involvement, etc.)
[21:53] <jderemer> ahh
[21:53] <jderemer> wanted to make sure my drama fest didnt cause it
[21:53] <jderemer> ...
[21:53] <jderemer> would hate that
[21:54] <crimsun> no, it has been brewing for quite some time.  Your work isn't at all related.
[21:54] <jderemer> well im off work now
[21:54] <jderemer> somehow i got paid to do all that :)
[21:54] <jderemer> hah
[21:54] <norsetto> jderemer: <mafia hat on>we know who you are and where you live in any case<mafia hat off>
[21:54] <jderemer> oh noes!
[21:54] <jderemer> time to move to another country!
[21:55] <jderemer> bye guys
[21:55] <nhaines> haha
[22:10] <ajmitch> norsetto: hm?
[22:11] <norsetto> ajmitch: saying "ok, bye" certainly didn't reduce his blood pressure
[22:11] <ajmitch> norsetto: I was still talking to him after that, we've been chatting a bit lately :)
[22:11] <ajmitch> I'm fairly sure that he wouldn't have taken it in a bad way
[22:12] <norsetto> ajmitch: so, thats where he learned about drama ;-)
[22:14] <ajmitch> norsetto: wasn't me
[22:14]  * ajmitch is innocent again
[22:16] <proppy> ++
[22:20] <bobbo> is someone around to check the latest upload of 'torrentinfo' on REVU? (http://revu.tauware.de/details.py?package=torrentinfo)
[22:25] <norsetto> bobbo: just giving it a glance
[22:26] <bobbo> norsetto: thanks :)
[22:26] <norsetto> bobbo: is there anything interesting in README?
[22:27] <bobbo> norsetto: usage info, where to report bugs upstream, etc.
[22:27] <norsetto> bobbo: usage info would be the same stuff as in the man page I guess?
[22:27] <bobbo> norsetto: yes
[22:28] <norsetto> bobbo: do you think an end user needs to read this file?
[22:29] <bobbo> norsetto: they dont *need* to read it, but i think it could be useful to have around
[22:30] <bobbo> norsetto: no problem to remove it though :)
[22:31] <norsetto> bobbo: looks useless to me
[22:31] <norsetto> bobbo: did you test the watch file?
[22:31] <bobbo> norsetto: im not sure how to test the watch file
[22:31] <pochu> uscan --verbose from debian/..
[22:32] <norsetto> bobbo: well, it doesn't work. Just do an "uscan --verbose" at the top of the source tree
[22:32] <bobbo> woops, sorry
[22:33] <norsetto> bobbo: /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL points to the GPL-3 on hardy/intrepid
[22:34] <norsetto> bobbo: in copyright, there is an extra space after Upstream Authors: and Copyright:
[22:35] <norsetto> bobbo: lots of blank spaces in the man page too
[22:35] <norsetto> bobbo: in the man page, you miss some options in the synopsis
[22:37]  * bobbo is frantically fixing :)
[22:44] <norsetto> bobbo: the SECTION in your man page should really be 1
[22:44] <bobbo> norsetto: still trying to work out the watch file :/
[22:44] <norsetto> bobbo: take your time
[22:51] <norsetto> bobbo: section net? I would say utils
[22:51] <bobbo> norsetto: hehe, i spent *ages* toiling over the section when i first wrote debian/control
[22:52] <norsetto> bobbo: we all do :-)
[22:54] <norsetto> bobbo: to tell you the truth this is misc or even python after all (Debian would use python here "its a python script" ...)
[22:54] <GordonC> Hello
[23:00] <norsetto> bobbo: you should version cdbs to (>= 0.4.49)
[23:00] <norsetto> bobbo: is python-distutils.mk actually needed?
[23:01] <bobbo> norsetto: it runs setup.py which actually installs it, afaik
[23:02] <norsetto> bobbo: yes, its needed
[23:03] <bobbo> norsetto: got most of what you said done, still not quite getting the watch file though
[23:03] <norsetto> bobbo: let me finish and I'll check it out
[23:03] <bobbo> norsetto: ok, thanks :)
[23:05] <norsetto> bobbo: for the description, what about this (from README):
[23:05] <norsetto> TorrentInfo parses .torrent files and displays information about the torrent
[23:05] <norsetto> and the files that it references.
[23:11] <bobbo> norsetto: i have to go to bed (school in the morning :/) Could you help me sort out some more of it tomorrow?
[23:11] <norsetto> bobbo: sure
[23:12] <bobbo> norsetto: thanks for the help so far :)
[23:12] <bobbo> night
[23:12] <norsetto> bobbo: thanks to you, good night
[23:20] <nhaines> Frankly, I was a bit afraid of packaging, and figured I'd have a bit of an uphill struggle when I tried to get my package into Ubuntu.  I feel somehow that packaging documentation is lacking, but I know once you learn it it's pretty routine, so I was intimitated knowing I'd make a lot of simple mistakes.
[23:20] <nhaines> But seeing the responses on my package at REVU and in here, I'm really impressed with the kindness.
[23:22] <norsetto> mok0: looks like I was framed: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/mok0NewPackageSponsors
[23:23] <norsetto> nhaines: wait until we present the bill ...
[23:23] <nhaines> lol :)
[23:25] <mok0> norsetto: Oh, yes, I prepared that for my MOTU application...
[23:40] <norsetto> jazzva: I knew we forgot something ... the date in the man pages AARRGGHHH
[23:40] <Jazzva> norsetto: Damn... Should I submit a patch for it?
[23:40] <Jazzva> Or, can it wait next man page update?
[23:40] <norsetto> jazzva: no, but we better remember it next time :-)
[23:40] <Jazzva> (since it is a relatively small change)
[23:41] <Jazzva> Ok... I'll add it to my general to-do list :)
[23:42] <Jazzva> norsetto: BTW, since gecko-mediaplayer is uploaded, can I submit that SRU for Depends (firefox -> firefox-3.0 | firefox-2)?
[23:42] <norsetto> jazzva: sure, it was accepted for mozilla-mplayer, so there is no reason this should not be accepted for gecko-mediaplayer
[23:43] <Jazzva> norsetto: Great... I'll prepare a SRU bug report now... Fix is already done
[23:43] <norsetto> jazzva: great, thx ... have you talked with asac about it btw? If it makes sense to have it in the extensions team?
[23:46] <Jazzva> norsetto: Oh, I forgot that :). I talked with him and he said that mozilla-extensions-dev should be only for extension-maintaining. We can provide assistance with firefox and packaging if needed, but he thinks it would be good if it can stay in the MOTU realm. Or, it can be moved to mozillateam, if needed :).
[23:46] <Jazzva> (since extensions and plugins are different and stuff)
[23:46] <norsetto> Jazzva: ok, I understand
[23:47] <Jazzva> norsetto: BTW, do you need a co-maintainer for those two packages? I'd be glad to help out with them :).
[23:47] <norsetto> Jazzva: I'd be glad if you want to help
[23:49] <Jazzva> norsetto: Good... I'll assign myself on LP as a bug contact, if that's ok with you. I'll also check periodically if there are updates upstream (or sign up on a mailing list, if they have one)
[23:49] <norsetto> jazzva: sure, go on
[23:49] <Jazzva> Thanks :)
[23:49] <norsetto> Jazzva: thx to u
[23:50] <Jazzva> np :)
[23:54] <norsetto> g'night all