[03:24] <vk5foss> asac: you 'bout?
[07:47] <jtv> Morning everyone
[09:20] <fta> armin76, http://jldugger.livejournal.com/19151.html
[09:23]  * armin76 yawns
[09:24] <fta> switch
[10:19] <gnomefreak> yay lots of OO.o-3.0 updates :)
[10:34] <gnomefreak> asac: when i run autoconf2.13 no matter what dir im in it tells me it cant read changelog
[10:34] <gnomefreak> using dpatch
[10:36] <asac> gnomefreak: autoconf2.13 doesnt read changelog at all ;)
[10:36] <gnomefreak> i know hence the problem
[10:36] <fta2> hi
[10:37] <gnomefreak> i run dpatch-edit-patch it puts me in tmp/* and no matter where i go gives me same error
[10:39] <gnomefreak> i ran it both ways with patch name and without i get same thing, when im in tmp/* im supposed to run it in mozilla dir. but i cant cd into mozilla dir.
[10:48] <gnomefreak> asac: fta2 here are commands and dir listed something isnt right here for some reason i cant enter mozilla dir. to run autoconf
[10:48] <gnomefreak> http://pastebin.mozilla.org/544534 link <<
[10:49] <fta2> what do you have inside ubuntu-0.x/ ?
[10:50] <gnomefreak> same issue if i run it in mozilla dir. for some reason dpatch is removing build-area all to gether
[10:50] <gnomefreak> fta2: debian
[10:50] <fta2> do a ls -l after line 73
[10:50] <fta2> no tarball?
[10:51] <gnomefreak> total 4
[10:51] <gnomefreak> drwxr-xr-x 6 gnomefreak gnomefreak 4096 Sep 26 09:36 debian
[10:51] <gnomefreak> fta2: its in tarballs dir
[10:51] <fta2> then you forgot to merge, is that from a branch?
[10:51] <gnomefreak> fta2: debian is yes
[10:51] <fta2> bzr bd --merge
[10:51] <fta2> then go to build-area and edit your patch
[10:52] <gnomefreak> k ill try
[10:52] <fta2> asac, did you have a look at my QT page?
[10:53] <gnomefreak> i dont want it to build yet :(
[10:53] <gnomefreak> i guess it has to
[10:54] <fta2> doesn't matter, interrupt it
[10:54] <fta2> just after the patches are applied
[10:54] <fta2> so if it's an embedded tarball, it will be already unpacked
[11:02] <gnomefreak> fta2: http://pastebin.mozilla.org/544553
[11:02] <gnomefreak> i should not get that error at all
[11:03] <fta2> run it two levels above
[11:03] <asac> fta2: qt?
[11:03] <fta2> it is looking for the debian dir, not mozilla
[11:04] <gnomefreak> ah
[11:04] <fta2> asac, Sep 28 20:34:51 <fta>   asac, i've experimented a bit with the QT support in 3.1. I've drafted my ideas on the wiki: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/QT  please let me know what you think
[11:04] <fta2> ok, lunch time, cu
[11:05]  * gnomefreak thought mozilla was working on porting QT
[11:05] <fta2> read 1st :)
[11:05] <gnomefreak> waiting for it
[11:05] <fta2> it didn't do the port myself, i'm not crazy enough
[11:07] <gnomefreak> we cant just add ...-qt to control i guess
[11:10] <gnomefreak> running dpatch-edit-patch in ~/lightning-sunbird-builds/work/build-area/lightning-sunb
[11:10] <gnomefreak> ird-0.9~cvs20080922t0147+nobinonly
[11:10] <gnomefreak> removes mozilla dir
[11:17] <gnomefreak> ah its not using a patch system i misread .patch for .dpatch
[11:20] <gnomefreak> it is using quilt but i dont rememmber quilt using series file
[11:31] <asac> fta2: why do we need a new source package for ffox 3.1?
[11:38] <gnomefreak> ok fuck sunbird for now i have to fix a patch or 2 and cant do it now, ill be back later i have to clean carpets
[11:38] <fta2> asac, how do you do a build-dep of xul-qt vs xul-gtk then?
[11:45] <asac> fta2: why is firefox build depending on qt/gtk peculiarities?
[11:45] <asac> fta2: my quess is that a ffox buil against -gtk _should_ work against -qt
[12:47] <fta2> well, i didn't try that yet.
[12:47] <fta2> i will
[12:47] <fta2> but not today
[16:37] <jcastro> asac: do you guys have a specific person that looks after thunderbird or is it a general team effort?
[16:44] <asac_> reconnect
[16:45] <asac_> 17:37 < jcastro> asac: do you guys have a specific person that looks after thunderbird or is it a  general team effort?
[16:45] <asac_> 17:42 < asac> jcastro: anything specific?
[16:51] <jcastro> asac: yeah just a few questions - which is the preferred source name, thunderbird or mozilla-thunderbird?
[16:51] <jcastro> we have 2
[16:52] <asac_> jcastro: mozilla-thunderbird is the _old_ one
[16:52] <asac_> thunderbird the new one
[16:52] <jcastro> ok
[16:52] <asac_> and thunderbird-3.0 will be tbitrd 3.0
[16:52] <asac_> in the end it will be like firefox
[16:52] <jcastro> k
[16:53] <jcastro> are you guys making an effort to open upstream tasks as you triage?
[16:55] <asac_> jcastro: the answer is obvious isnt it ;)
[16:55] <jcastro> well, I meant "from now on" :p
[16:56] <wikz> fta2: why is NSS_DYNAMIC_SOFTOKN set to 0 using the patch .is it something to do because we don't build it as static but as shared ?
[16:56] <wikz> asac:
[16:57] <asac> jcastro: personally, i cannot really commit that. we dont have the resources to properly triage all bugs - as sad as it is. we would need support from QA here.
[16:57] <jcastro> asac: *nod*
[16:57] <asac> jcastro: so what we do is to try to spot serious bugs
[16:57] <asac> and work on those
[16:58] <asac> jcastro: if firefox would be split in multiple packages
[16:58] <asac> that would be better
[16:58] <asac> launchpad is just not usable anymore for that package
[16:58] <asac> i mean, i see a bug ... then i get another mail about a dupe and i cannot find the other bug anymore
[16:59] <jcastro> I suspect it's the same thing with the kernel team
[17:00] <asac> jcastro: so on top of lack of time we are also struck by the fact that launchpad isnt really good at doing large packages with lots of bugs
[17:00] <asac> jcastro: yeah. i think linux probabyl gets even more bugs
[17:01] <jcastro> ok so really, the lack of upstreamable tasks is just a symptom of a larger problem, is what you're trying to say?
[17:01] <asac> but the bugs can be much easier isolated ... like bug in driver X, Y, Z .... so it might be even easier for new folks to help
[17:01] <asac> jcastro: there are multiple things:
[17:01] <asac> 1. too many bugs
[17:02] <asac> 2. too many low severity bugs or wishlist bugs
[17:02] <asac> 3. too many unreproducible bugs
[17:02] <asac> (this is a *serious* issue ... most bugs are just not reproducible and without that you cannot forward)
[17:04] <asac> 4. hard upstream bug process
[17:05] <asac> jcastro: and maybe as a higher reason: too high noise for anyone
[17:07] <asac> jcastro: we might be able to streamline the community better
[17:08] <asac> but then someone has to take the lead on it ... e.g. constrantly blog how to triage firefox bugs et al ... and so on
[17:08] <jcastro> yeah
[17:14] <asac> jcastro: i just picked a random bug: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/200344
[17:15] <jcastro> I see
[17:17] <asac> jcastro: though this is certainly one of the bugs with the higher likelyhood to get to something when properly triaged
[17:18] <asac> jcastro: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mozillateam-bugs/2008-September/thread.html
[17:19] <asac> ok that month had the eula bug ;)
[17:19] <asac> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-mozillateam-bugs/2008-August/thread.html
[17:20] <asac> so 2.5k - 3k mails a month
[17:21] <asac> _all_ on mostly the same package ... not like gnome or other componentized software projects where each package buglist can mostly be seen on 1-3 bug pages
[17:21] <jcastro> nod
[17:22] <asac> so: launchpad + high bug load + high bar to effectively triage bugs ... are the factors that make firefox-3.0 a bug mess ;)
[17:22] <asac> ok ;)
[17:22] <asac> hope thats enough
[17:23] <asac> wow in may we had 4500 bugmail ;)
[17:23] <asac> 4774
[17:24] <asac> i guess thats the month that killed all our efforts to keep on top firefox-3.0
[17:24] <jcastro> or, so in normal english, basically, you're drowning in bugs and the last thing you need is someone telling you to make the process longer. :)
[17:25] <asac> jcastro: yeah. ... at least when we dont want to cause pain on mozilla side
[17:26]  * jcastro nods
[17:26] <asac> jcastro: i could easily say for each incoming bug: please test with upstream build
[17:26] <asac> jcastro: and then tell him to forward upstream on his own ;)
[17:26] <asac> jcastro: or tell the community triagers to do that
[17:26] <asac> jcastro: but in the end they most likely will start posting the initial bug reporters description upstream
[17:27] <asac> and not following up in upstream tracker
[17:27] <jcastro> ok
[17:27] <asac> that doesnt make sense
[17:28] <asac> jcastro: actually i am not that concerned about not many bugs getting forwarded. i am concerned about the bug flood making it hard to spot the important bugs and gems and forward them
[17:53] <fta2> asac, so, what about bug 274187 now?
[17:53] <sebner> fta2: you know I like bleeding edge but what sense does it make to have 3.1 alpha in intrepid?
[17:55] <jcastro> asac: so do you think the firefox "project" should be like split up into other components? Or will that make it worse?
[18:00] <fta2> sebner, just read the first 2 comments on the bug
[18:01] <sebner> fta2: ok but it's still an alpha
[18:01] <fta2> sebner, beta 1 is expected soon
[18:01] <sebner> fta: ah, I see. so thumps up :D
[18:01] <fta2> and the package is ready and usable as it is
[18:02] <fta2> i'm working on the kde version too but that's not what i want to push now
[18:03] <sebner> fta2: I know that it is usable. I'm using your ppa version :P
[18:04] <fta2> i know, a lot of people are using my ppa apparently. would be nice to have some real stats from lp
[18:06]  * sebner is wondering if we have something like debian popcon in general for ubuntu
[18:07] <fta2> in a way, it's also a problem... i can't experiment as much as i want to and push everything i do/touch
[18:07] <sebner> fta2: sure but it's alpha software and a private PPA. f*ck them who complain when something is b0rken
[18:07] <fta2> i guess popcon doesn't make the difference between ppa and repo
[18:08] <fta2> i often see my ppa in blogs, in the forum, even in bugs
[18:09] <sebner> fta2: the software is cool and your packaging skills great. your fault :P
[18:10] <fta2> yahh
[18:10] <fta2> ok, going for a beer, friends waiting
[18:10] <fta2> cu
[18:35] <asac> jcastro: the project wont help ... we need that split on the package
[18:35] <asac> jcastro: let me think
[18:35] <asac> jcastro: i think we could do all triage in multiple upstream products
[18:35] <asac> but i doubt that that is feasible as we have to also maintain the package task status
[18:36] <asac> and projects in launchpad are quite heavy weight ... e.g. i cannot search for bugs in selected multiple projects
[18:38] <asac> jcastro: so yes, i like the idea, but no, i dont think that that helps ... the split helps but we get other burdens that will annihilate the win of the split
[22:19] <fta> cdbs is not very friendly when you want more than 1 build :(
[22:49] <fta> asac, http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=933429
[22:54] <asac> fta: at lesat not a problem due to this security update round
[22:56] <fta> hm
[22:57] <fta> http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/61642beb4c16fc1e5140ae96bceb5743ae0bab08   ???
[23:05] <asac> fta: not sure what that means
[23:10] <[reed]> fta: it was a screw-up
[23:11] <fta> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=412610#c20
[23:12] <fta> [reed], what is that UPDATE_PACKAGING_R5 tag for?
[23:13] <fta> or which project?
[23:13] <[reed]> build automation
[23:16] <fta> ok