[02:49] <mrooney> how does nominating for releases work? for something like bug 226992 which is fix committed in Ubuntu and released upstream, that would be great to have fixed in Hardy as an LTS. how can I tell what the plans are for it, and should I nominate it?
[02:58] <persia> mrooney: First, check the SRU requirements: if it qualifies, you can nominate it.  For this bug, I'd also encourage discussion with the Accessibility team, to ensure that they believe it can be addressed without breaking anything.  More generally, it's a good idea to make sure you have a developer lined up (maybe yourself) to create the required minimal patch before nominating, as nominated bugs without patches are less likely to be approved fo
[02:58] <persia> r SRU.
[03:14] <mrooney> persia: okay so when you refer to a patch, you mean a patch against the current Hardy version for example, if nominating for Hardy?
[03:18] <persia> mrooney: Precisely.  The minimal patch described in the SRU documentation.
[03:18] <mrooney> okay thanks
[09:09] <Iulian> Good morning.
[09:10] <inevaexisted> lulian: Good morning
[09:24] <savvas_> is it just me or is the system > administration > software sources > updates > checking/unchecking hardy-security not working?
[09:26] <Hobbsee> savvas: as in, you can't click it?
[09:27] <savvas> i click it
[09:27] <savvas> the revert button is not greyed out anymore
[09:28] <savvas> but the "check" doesn't appear in the checkbox
[09:28] <savvas> software-properties-gtk: Installed: 0.63ubuntu1
[09:29] <savvas> Now I cleared the /etc/apt/sources.list and recreated it by running software-properties-gtk again, and the hardy-security still is problematic, the check doesn't appear in checkbox
[09:29] <Hobbsee> wfm.
[09:30] <Hobbsee> strange.
[09:30] <savvas> should i file a bug?
[09:30] <Hobbsee> only if someone else can reproduce it
[09:31] <savvas> can you give it a try?
[09:31] <Hobbsee> i did.  wfm.
[09:31] <savvas> work for you?
[09:31] <savvas> oh
[09:31] <savvas> :(
[09:32] <Hobbsee> yes
[09:32] <Hobbsee> although i think i saw something on the forums about it, with intrepid
[09:32] <savvas> no, it's hardy :)
[09:33] <savvas> let me purge it and try again
[09:33] <inevaexisted> savvas is this intrepid?
[09:33] <Hobbsee> [18:32] <savvas> no, it's hardy :)
[09:33] <Hobbsee> 2 lines up?
[09:34] <inevaexisted> sorry my bad
[09:34] <inevaexisted> works for me too
[09:35] <savvas> hm..
[09:36] <savvas> how do i clear the settings for automatic updating?
[09:36] <savvas> cron ?
[09:40] <savvas> if i purge apt too, i still have dpkg i guess
[09:58] <savvas> uh this is weird
[09:59] <savvas> the security line appears in third party software
[10:01] <savvas> yep
[10:01] <savvas> deb http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ hardy-security universe main multiverse restricted
[10:07] <savvas> hm.. found a bug about it
[10:07] <savvas> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/software-properties/+bug/244093
[10:39] <joumetal> Does backtrace in bug 184547 look ok?
[11:10] <afflux> morning
[11:17] <joumetal> morning afflux
[20:12] <calc> Venkatraman.S are you here?
[20:12] <calc> why are you closing upstream bugs in LP as invalid after citing the upstream bug reference?
[20:13] <ogra> calc, oh, you didnt talk about startup time above, now i get it :)
[20:13] <ogra> err, wrong channel :)
[20:13]  * ogra referred to -devel
[20:13] <calc> bdmurray: Venkatraman.S is on the bug team i guess? since he is able to mark bugs as invalid?
[20:16]  * calc is going to have to watch after his bugs a lot more closely with people apparently randomly marking bugs as invalid
[20:20] <hggdh> calc, which bug was this?
[20:23] <calc> i already fixed it back and then deleted it from bugmail
[20:23] <calc> one of them was about a hebrew export bug showing up as arabic
[20:24] <hggdh> oh, this is the one that has a loong thread on devel-discuss and devel, I guess
[20:24] <calc> actually i think i know how to find the bug again
[20:24] <calc> iirc that one wasn't marked invalid it was the other one i looked at before it
[20:25] <calc>   217517
[20:25] <calc> 244353
[20:26] <calc> 217517 was one of the ones marked as invalid after he marked the upstream report for it
[20:26] <calc> only problem was upstream report was closed as worksforme for 1.1
[20:26] <calc> even if it was closed as worksforme then that would just indicate we have the bug in our version
[20:26] <calc> and the bug was reported for 2.4
[20:27] <hggdh> ok
[20:27] <hggdh> bug 217517
[20:27] <calc> i need a webdav share to determine where the problem is for that one, but it definitely isn't invalidated by a ~ 4 year old worksforme ;-)
[20:28] <hggdh> calc, I agree
[20:28] <hggdh> but you do not need to blast off at the commenter ;-)
[20:28] <calc> that was the second invalidated bug report that he quoted upstream bug reports to close as invalid (that i saw in a row)
[20:28] <hggdh> bug 244353
[20:29] <calc> i haven't gone throught the rest of them yet
[20:29] <calc> and i have ~ 70 new bug mail since yesterday, not sure if they are all from him
[20:29] <hggdh> it may well be the commenter thought this would be the SOP
[20:29] <hggdh> calc, ah, OK, now I have joined the dots... sorry
[20:30] <hggdh> you take care of ooo, right?
[20:30] <calc> generally for OOo you can't determine if a bug is invalid from what an upstream report says since we have > 500 patches to it
[20:30] <calc> hggdh: yes
[20:30] <calc> often times bugs are caused by our other patches :-\
[20:31] <calc> but generally he is doing good work :)
[20:31] <calc> i should email him about the fact he can't rely on upstream reports to mark bugs as invalid
[20:31] <hggdh> I understand
[20:31] <thekorn> calc, you might be intrested in bug 224012 too,
[20:31] <hggdh> I wonder... do we have a "DebuggingOpenOffice" wiki page?
[20:32] <thekorn> also marked as invalid by him because of a comment in an upstream bug
[20:33] <hggdh> OK. Let me try to find more about Venk...
[20:33] <thekorn> he is blizzard on irc
[20:33] <calc> ok
[20:33] <thekorn> +z
[20:33] <thekorn> blizzardz
[20:33] <calc> he seems to be very helpful in general, i sent him an email to clarify not to close bugs due to upstream reports
[20:34] <calc> thekorn: ok i reopened it :)
[20:35] <hggdh> calc, s/he is new on bugsquad, and I think s/he is just confused on what to do
[20:37] <calc> i certainly don't want to scare him off, just need to make it clear what to do with the bugs so it doesn't create more work and/or get lost in the cracks :)
[20:37] <hggdh> I hear you
[20:37] <hggdh> calc, may I ask you a loaded question?
[20:37] <calc> the email i wrote to him is a lot nicer than what was in the bug report :)
[20:37] <calc> hggdh: ok
[20:38] <hggdh> would you be willing to help create a "DebuggingOpenOffice" wiki page?
[20:38] <calc> http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/25767/
[20:38] <calc> hggdh: sure
[20:39] <thekorn> calc, good job :)
[20:39] <calc> hggdh: to get things sent upstream properly is a bit of work
[20:39] <bdmurray> One has been started
[20:39] <thekorn> hi bdmurray
[20:39] <calc> it involves having ubuntu and upstream versions installed at the same time
[20:39] <bdmurray> calc: anybody can mark bugs as invalid
[20:39] <calc> i normally do it via a vm
[20:39] <bdmurray> thekorn: hello
[20:39] <calc> bdmurray: oh, yuck
[20:40] <hggdh> calc, please have a look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingOpenOffice?highlight=%28debugging%29 (thanks bdmurray)
[20:40] <hggdh> BTW, hi bdmurray
[20:40] <bdmurray> hggdh: hi to you too!
[20:41] <hggdh> calc, the email was quite nice -- thank you for your comprehension
[20:41] <hggdh> damm! s/comprehension/understanding/
[20:42] <calc> yea it needs to be expanded for how to forward since we shouldn't forward unless we know it is an upstream issue
[20:42]  * calc will update that bit right now
[20:48] <calc> saving changes now
[20:49] <calc> ok i added a bit about the sources of where a bug can come from, also that ooo now uses launchpad-integration, and a note telling people not to forward bugs unless they reproduce them on upstream version directly
[20:53] <hggdh> thank you, calc
[21:11] <charlie-tca> Hello. I am trying to help with a bug#220780, correcting the Hebrew translations. Two people asked where this can be done.
[21:12] <charlie-tca> Can I mark this for Rosetta or at least put a note in that it should be the translation team?
[21:13] <james_w> charlie-tca: you can subscribe "ubuntu-l10n-<country-code>"
[21:14] <bdmurray> james_w: there was an e-mail thread about that right?
[21:14] <james_w> or language code I guess, I'm not sure how exactly they are organised.
[21:14] <james_w> bdmurray: yep
[21:15] <charlie-tca> That will give the bug the ready to work status?
[22:37] <charlie-tca> Now that I got the bug confirmed, do I need to request it be triaged?
[22:41] <hggdh> bug 220780
[22:42] <hggdh> charlie-tca, please wait a sec -- let me look at the bug
[23:04] <hggdh> charlie-tca, marked as triaged
[23:05] <charlie-tca> hggdh: Thank you
[23:05] <hggdh> charlie-tca, Ofir added a question there
[23:06] <charlie-tca> hggdh: I see that. I have to go put the answers in that I can find. It seems he must be a member of https://translations.launchpad.net/+groups/ubuntu-translators
[23:06] <charlie-tca> then download ubuntu-docs and fix it
[23:07] <hggdh> yes, he states so. Unfortunately, I cannot answer any of the questions, since I do not do translations (and, to boot, my Hebrew is very much limited to a few phrases nowadays :-(
[23:08] <charlie-tca> I don't translate either, but I have been looking for answers for a couple hours
[23:09] <hggdh> I remember a few days/weeks ago there was a good discussion on translation bugs, let me see if I find something
[23:10] <bdmurray> hggdh: it was to the bugsquad on Jun 1st
[23:10] <hggdh> there's https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuHebrewTranslators?highlight=%28hebrew%29
[23:12] <charlie-tca> I read that too, but members of the Hebrew localization team are not automatically picked up on the other team. Only members of the
[23:13] <charlie-tca> ubuntu-translator team can make corrections to the docs after they have been put into use.
[23:15] <charlie-tca> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/TranslatingUbuntu seems to be relevant
[23:17] <bdmurray> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/2008-June/000936.html
[23:27] <hggdh> charlie-tca, see bdmurray's link above (and thank you, bdmurray)
[23:31] <charlie-tca> Okay, thanks to both of you.