[00:14] <NCommander> directhex, you can't dput to OBS, right?
[00:14] <directhex> AFAIK. they have their own tool, called osc
[00:15] <directhex> which needs mono. hey, we've come full circle! ^_^
[00:29] <NCommander> directhex,its kinda weird
[00:29]  * NCommander is talking with the OBS Debian guy
[00:29] <directhex> NCommander, i know it's weird ^_^
[00:29] <directhex> NCommander, i've spoken with him before. they had a critical bug with build-depends-indep previously
[00:29] <NCommander> They sorta reinvented the wheel
[00:29] <NCommander> They modified the RPM build system to run dpkg-buildpackage vs. rpmbuild
[00:30] <NCommander> Crazy hack
[00:30] <NCommander> directhex, what do you think of OBS overall however?
[00:31] <Tetracomm> Hello.
[00:31] <Tetracomm> Can someone recommend some automatic tools for creating .deb packages that will make it much easier to make them?
[00:32] <directhex> NCommander, building packages for more than just ubuntu: awesome (launchpad sucks in that it can't be used for debian collab)
[00:32] <directhex> NCommander, workflow: like ass. a big ass
[00:32] <NCommander> directhex, well, maybe we can fix that
[00:36] <savvas> Tetracomm: such as launchpad PPA ?
[00:36] <directhex> savvas, i think he wants checkinstall
[00:36] <directhex> or whatever it's called
[00:37] <Tetracomm> I want something to create decent .deb packages.
[00:37] <Tetracomm> I hear that Checkinstall created packages are not accepted into the repositories.
[00:37] <savvas> for decent deb packages you need to know the debian and ubuntu packaging policies :)
[00:37] <savvas> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide
[00:38]  * Hobbsee quietly chokes on the idea that checkinstalled packages would be acceptable for hte repos.
[00:38] <Tetracomm> Hobbsee: Tell me more.
[00:38] <Hobbsee> Tetracomm: it's only very good at simple packages, and guesses all the deps (sometimes getting it wrong)
[00:38] <Hobbsee> only really works on the local system well, too
[00:39] <savvas> Tetracomm: https://launchpad.net/people/+me/+archive/ https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA
[00:39] <savvas> You can build your packages in a personal package archive, but you have to know how to make them first
[00:39] <Tetracomm> Hobbsee: What if I tell it the dependencies when it asks?
[00:40] <savvas> the best way is to play around with deb source packages :)
[00:40] <Tetracomm> Ok.
[00:40] <Hobbsee> Tetracomm: it doesn't ask, iirc.
[00:40] <Hobbsee> but yes, listen to savvas
[00:41] <Tetracomm> Hobbsee: It asked me the last time.
[00:41] <savvas> Tetracomm: which program is it?
[00:41] <Hobbsee> hmmm.  maybe i've remembered wrong, then.
[00:42] <nhandler> Hobbsee: We really should create a wiki page that explains why checkinstall should not be used to create packages for the repositories. This is a very common question, and it would be much easier to just refer people to a wiki page than to re-explain it each time
[00:42] <Hobbsee> nhandler: that's true.
[00:42] <Hobbsee> nhandler: i'd be surprised if there isn't one already though
[00:42] <Tetracomm> savvas: It was Megatunix, but I will try to package Laoe now
[00:42] <Tetracomm> .
[00:42] <nhandler> Hobbsee: I personally haven't seen one before. I'll see what google turns up
[00:43] <savvas> Tetracomm: link please?
[00:43] <Tetracomm> To Laoe?
[00:43] <savvas> http://www.oli4.ch/laoe/ ?
[00:44] <Tetracomm> Yes.
[00:45] <nhandler> Hobbsee: This (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CheckInstall) was the only page I could find on {help,wiki}.ubuntu.com. It doesn't even mention why checkinstall is evil
[00:45] <Tetracomm> oops]
[00:45] <Tetracomm> nvm laoe
[00:45] <NCommander> hey Hobbsee
[00:45] <Hobbsee> hey NCommander!
[00:45] <Hobbsee> !checkinstall
[00:46] <Hobbsee> hmmm.   that used to have more warning in it, i though
[00:46] <Hobbsee> t
[00:46] <Tetracomm> The package creation process is too complicated. :(
[00:48] <savvas> Tetracomm: That's why we use humans to make and maintain them. :)
[00:48] <savvas> Tetracomm: you just want to make this software available as a .deb package for others or to learn how to package?
[00:49] <Tetracomm> To make it available to others.
[00:50] <Tetracomm> Although it would be nice to learn how to package, it is too complicated.
[00:52] <Tetracomm> and i'm going to package Zinf eventually
[00:53] <Tetracomm> as well as Cmus
[00:53] <savvas> Tetracomm: file a bug at https://bugs.launchpad.net/getdeb.net and use "Create Package: LAoE" in the subject *or* (I'm not sure) file a bug for ubuntu https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+filebug and ask for packaging (tag: needs-packaging)
[00:54] <Tetracomm> I did that for Megatunix months ago and it is taking forever.
[00:54] <Tetracomm> and I want to contribute
[00:54] <savvas> I don't see a bug for megatunix in getdeb.net
[00:55] <Tetracomm> I don't think it was getdeb.net
[00:55] <savvas> Then try on getdeb.net :)
[00:56] <Tetracomm> I want to contribute.
[00:56] <savvas> When they make the package, you can grab the source from http://archive.getdeb.net/getdeb/ and study it
[00:56] <Tetracomm> Err.
[00:56] <savvas> ah well then, good luck :)
[00:57] <Tetracomm> What is the main problem with checkinstall?
[00:58] <savvas> I think it's too simple and too my-machine-specific
[00:59] <Tetracomm> I'll try out the new one and see how it works on the live cds.
[00:59] <savvas> Tetracomm: are you using 32-bit ubuntu?
[01:00] <Tetracomm> Yes.
[01:00] <savvas> use your built package on a 64-bit ubuntu made with checkinstall
[01:00] <Tetracomm> 8.10.
[01:00] <savvas> I mean, try to install it, I think it won't work
[01:00] <Tetracomm> Ok.
[01:01] <savvas> A second reason would be that I believe checkinstall can't make source packages (correct me if I'm wrong)
[01:02] <Tetracomm> Ok.
[01:02] <savvas> and source packages are used for easier updates and maintenance, also easier building for various architectures
[01:03] <Tetracomm> Ok.
[01:23] <directhex> does LP have a "blocked by" mechanism on bugs?
[01:24] <Hobbsee> no
[01:24] <Hobbsee> only for blueprints
[01:25] <directhex> damn. I'll just add it in the bug text.
[01:25] <directhex> good god, a feature bugzilla has which is useful :o
[01:39] <james_w> what's the fix for when a package uses docbook and it attempts to contact the OASIS website to download the dtd?
[01:39] <james_w> You can use a local dtd, but I thought there was a better way of doing this than patching the DOCTYPE in each document
[01:39] <james_w> has anyone done it before?
[01:40] <savvas> use proxy to link it back to your machine? heh :)
[01:41] <NCommander> hey Hobbsee
[01:41] <Hobbsee> hey NCommander
[01:41] <savvas> don't ask me how though, just brainstorming :p
[01:46] <james_w> nellery: hi, are you around?
[01:49] <persia> nixternal, NCommander for simple build environments, something like debomatic or falcon might be easier than using some of the available more complex infrastructures.
[01:50] <nixternal> ooh I forgot about falcon
[01:50] <NCommander> persia, debomatic doesn't have NEW queue
[01:50] <NCommander> I dunno about falcon
[01:51] <NCommander> persia, so OpenSuSE Build System actually pretty cool
[01:51]  * NCommander thinks in many ways it works better than PPAs, and in other ways, its epic suck
[01:52] <nellery> james_w: hi
[01:53] <james_w> hi nellery, how are you?
[01:53] <persia> NCommander, as I said "for simple build environments" :)
[01:54] <nellery> james_w: I'm alright, you?
[01:54] <NCommander> persia, reprepro is my favorite
[01:54] <james_w> nellery: good thanks
[01:54] <james_w> nellery: I'm looking at your new debdiff
[01:55] <james_w> nellery: thanks for working on it. I'm wondering why you added inetutils-inetd to the dependencies this time?
[01:56] <nellery> james_w: that package depends on update-inetd
[01:56] <nellery> did I get it wrong?
[01:57] <james_w> nellery: packages shouldn't depend directly on update-inetd, they should depend on inet-superserver and expect that that package provides update-inetd
[01:57] <james_w> as these packages already depend on inet-superserver I don't think you need to add anything
[01:57] <nellery> james_w: so that change should just be removed?
[01:57] <james_w> I believe so
[01:58] <james_w> my other question is why these packages depend on netkit?
[01:59] <nellery> james_w: do you mean netbase?
[01:59] <james_w> yeah, sorry
[02:00] <nellery> james_w: it doesn't appear that this was documented in the changelog
[02:00] <james_w> yep
[02:01] <nellery> james_w: is there any way to figure out where this change was made?
[02:03] <james_w> you can examine all the old packages
[02:03] <james_w> or try and work it out
[02:04] <james_w> it's not too important, but if we don't find out then we are kind of stuck with it
[02:05] <nellery> james_w: I think I've found the change
[02:05] <nellery> bug 123782
[02:06] <nellery> which would be in 0.7.2.dfsg.1-10ubuntu2
[02:06] <james_w> netbase was added before that apparently
[02:07] <james_w> or it might have been in an old version of the Debian package, and then not removed by Ubuntu when Debian removed it
[02:09] <nellery> james_w: it doesn't appear to be mentioned in the Debian changelog either
[02:14] <nellery> james_w: about bug 298496, should i remove the dependency on libxi-dev, or wait?
[02:14] <james_w> I'm not sure
[02:14] <james_w> I hit the same problem with another package yesterday, but I think it's a bug in XTest
[02:15] <james_w> I haven't yet checked for bug reports
[02:15] <persia> A new libxi-dev has been uploaded that includes the required Xinput.h
[02:16] <persia> (unless this is a different problem with libxi-dev)
[02:16] <james_w> I'm not sure that's the same bug
[02:18] <persia> Hmm.  Test date is the 18th, and https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/jaunty-changes/2008-November/000827.html is the 19th.
[02:19] <persia> It was reported in -devel recently that upstream was moving the file around.  Mind you, it might also be the way XTest works.
[02:22] <james_w> nellery: I've got to sleep now, I'll review any debdiffs in the morning. Thanks for perservering.
[02:22] <nellery> james_w: alright, and thanks a lot for your help
[02:22] <ScottK> wgrant: Did you file a "If I wanted to be contacted I would have published a way to contact me" bug on LP yet?
[04:07] <ScottK> jono: There's a flip side to the hall of fame.  People that get left out, can feel demotivated.
[04:07]  * Hobbsee smashinates akregator into the middle of next millenium.
[04:08] <ScottK> Trouble?
[04:09]  * ScottK guesses he better start insiting that all uploads he sponsors are have all the proper paperwork filled out in LP so he can get 'credit' for sponsoring.
[04:09] <ScottK> Much like '5 a day', I suspect the hall of fame will not generally motivate the behavior we actually want.
[04:10] <Hobbsee> ScottK: it dropped my planet.u.c feed again
[04:10] <persia> ScottK, Given the wide variety of experimentation with sponsoring, especially in light of widely publicised plans to demonstrate alternate defaults for a possible change, you'd do a lot better to support alternate models.
[04:11] <ScottK> persia: I've had less than 8 hours sleep in the last two days.  You'll need to be clearer.
[04:12] <Hobbsee> ScottK: ah, so i *wasn't* the only one who didn't understand that.  Good.
[04:12]  * Hobbsee notes that it sounds a lot like making Ubuntu more like a school yard.
[04:12] <persia> ScottK, There's been a lot of talk about things like switching to bzr for packaging.  You'd probably get a fair bit of support from that crowd if you support alternate sponsoring workflows.
[04:13] <persia> ScottK, That said, I've not inspected the hall-of-fame code.  Perhaps it uses .changes files to identify sponsoring, rather than bugs.
[04:13] <ScottK> persia: I see.  If I support that workflow, sure, but I tend to do a fair amount of "pastebin me the debdiff" or mail me the patch.
[04:13] <persia> ScottK, See, the point is to get the community of people who use any sort of alternate workflow to make sure that it's using -changes parsing rather than bug review.
[04:14] <ScottK> persia: True.  I haven't either, but given the terminonolgy used it seems likely it's tied to LP bugs.
[04:14] <ScottK> Ah.  I see.
[04:14] <persia> You may disagree with the bzr crowd about their workflow, but you support their right to have alternate workflows.
[04:14] <ScottK> persia: Absolutely.
[04:14] <persia> Further, by doing this, they may more support your right to have alternate workflows.
[04:14] <Hobbsee> Yay for pointing out people who do well, but I hate to think how some people's egos (or whatever other terms should be used there) are going to hurt when they don't get a mention.
[04:14] <ScottK> persia: I also like how individual source packages get described as 'projects'.
[04:16] <persia> ScottK, There are several issues.  Pointing them out is probably best in mail.  I'm just encouraging you to start from a direction where there is already a current of support.
[04:17] <ScottK> Hobbsee: Well all it does is point out quantity.  This may or may not equate to 'well'.  At least one person on the bug triagers list commonly marks bugs "Invalid" with the comment "Already reported", but doesn't bother to dupe them or answer when the reporter asks for a pointer to the bug.
[04:17]  * persia plans to ignore HoF completely, as 5-a-day.  Neither seems to serve a useful purpose, but I strongly support people building tools to better review activity or find issues in Ubuntu.
[04:19] <ScottK> persia: I support that too.  I just wish the effort that's gone into HoF or 5-a-day would have been used for such tools.
[04:20] <persia> ScottK, I see those as attempts at such tools.  That I don't find them useful is a different issue.
[04:21] <persia> Similar to gaspa's fairly pretty NBS monitor.  It's not widely used because most of the NBS crowd didn't find it useful, but it was worth doing to try to better understand the problem.
[04:21] <ScottK> persia: They are attempts at motivational tools.
[04:21] <persia> Ah.  I see them as less than ideal "review activity" tools.
[04:22] <persia> Any motivational tool which causes individuals to compete doesn't seem ideal to me.  If they are indeed intended as motivational tools, I think they support entirely the wrong behaviour.
[04:22] <ScottK> Ironically some of these tools can have unintended consequences.  I have an LP karma ceiling I use to monitor myself and make sure I'm not spending to much time on bugs.
[04:22] <ScottK> persia: Agreed.
[04:23] <jono> ScottK, the vast majority of the community won't appear on the  HoF so I don't think there is a risk of much demotivation
[04:23] <ScottK> jono: That's exactly why it's demotivating.
[04:23] <jono> ScottK, ?
[04:24] <jono> so you expect that the majority of the community will appear in a bunch of top 10 lists?
[04:24] <jono> I disagree
[04:24] <ScottK> jono: HoF appears to be a list of the top people doing the work that's important to Ubuntu.
[04:24] <jono> yes
[04:24] <ScottK> jono: There's virtually no chance I could appear on such a list.  Ergo the work I'm doing, must not be important.
[04:25] <jono> ScottK, oh come on
[04:25] <jono> ScottK, you may feel that way, but I doubt others will
[04:25] <ScottK> jono: Perhaps.
[04:26] <ScottK> jono: How does it calculate sponsorship?
[04:26] <jono> speak to Daniel about the details
[04:26] <ScottK> OK.
[04:45] <Hobbsee> ScottK: I think it's just an excuse for people to be put on different levels in the Ubuntu community.  It makes people less equal, and is divisive.  The more people care about it, the more divisive it becomes.  I don't see why Ubuntu, which has a great appeal as not being a discriminatory project, and doesn't tend to have cliches, keeps moving forward in implementing this kind of thing.  Good on them, though, for improving on 5-a-day, and
[04:45] <Hobbsee> making it count more than just bugs!
[04:46] <NCommander> +1 Hobbsee
[04:46] <jono> heh
[04:47] <ScottK> Well if I wanted to rank high on 5 a day, it's easy enough to do so.  It wouldn't make the distro better though.
[04:47] <nellery> how often is the "Featured Contributors" part supposed to change?
[04:47] <jono> nellery, no fixed amount, I would hope at least once a month
[04:48] <persia> I like the idea of "Featured Contributors", but would have preferred it on the fridge, where I'm already looking for stuff.
[04:48] <ScottK> jono: I seriously think focusing on listing how many of something (like bug comments) is going to encourage people to churn through large volumes of crap.  It's not what we need.
[04:48]  * Hobbsee notes the golden pony awards had similar problems, towards the end.
[04:49] <jono> ScottK, where are bug comments the metric?
[04:49] <jono> you mean sponsors?
[04:50] <ScottK> jono: It's also in 5 a day and top karma.
[04:50] <jono> I think you guys are taking the Hall Of Fame a little too seriously
[04:50] <jono> we were counting metrics for 5-a-day and the Ubuntu community did not melt
[04:50] <jono> we are merely showcasing top ranking contributors - it really does help enthuse people
[04:50] <jono> maybe not you, but others
[04:50] <Hobbsee> jono: the counting metrics, as such, isn't the problem.  it's then what you *do* with that information.
[04:51] <jono> Hobbsee, we put it on a website, called the Hall Of Fame :)
[04:51] <jono> by producing the Hall Of Fame we have not removed anything from the community
[04:51] <Hobbsee> jono: so all those, along with all the horsemen are famous, and other people are mere mortals.
[04:51] <jono> if people don't like it, don't look at it
[04:51] <jono> Hobbsee, crap
[04:51] <persia> jono, Actually, 5-a-day did a lot to decrease the value of many bug comments, and was a significant factor in the division of "triagers" and "developers" which had previously been more of a continuum.
[04:52] <persia> Didn't "melt" anything, and has been a useful tool to get new people involved, but came at a cost.
[04:52] <Hobbsee> persia: ++. I saw a *particularly* good one in the last week.
[04:52] <jono> persia, I disagree
[04:52] <persia> jono, Fair.
[04:52] <jono> I disagree that 5-a-day has been detrimental to bug quality
[04:52] <Hobbsee> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/219944 - first comment.
[04:52] <jono> but it has brought more focus on bugs
[04:52] <ScottK> jono: I think something certainly has.  I'm not sure I know what.
[04:53] <persia> jono, Well, we get a lot more activity.  We get less deep thought.  I'm not sure how that balances out.
[04:53] <Hobbsee> whether that's bringing in new people, and not training them up enough, or something else is...
[04:53] <jono> ScottK, very possibly, but many things affect out community, from new initiatives like the HoF, to blog entries, to the availability of resources, to negative energy
[04:53] <jono> Hobbsee, don't be a troll
[04:53] <jono> if you have something constructive to suggest, say it, but don't troll
[04:54] <ScottK> jono: She's not.  You're just not very open to honest feedback.
[04:54] <Hobbsee> jono: not trolling.  Explain how that bug is *possibly* helpful.
[04:54] <Hobbsee> s/bug/response/
[04:54] <jono> ScottK, I am open, but accusing us of not training people up sounds like trolling
[04:54] <jono> maybe I misinterpreting her comments
[04:54] <persia> jono, The accusation is not to you.
[04:54] <jono> ScottK, and as for not liking feedback, I have always been open to feedback
[04:55] <jono> ScottK, is there an example of when I have  not been open to feedback?
[04:55] <Hobbsee> jono: well, then, if they *are* being trained, then why do they give bug answers like that?  That got a comment, and marked invalid, before it got brought up in -bugs.
[04:55] <persia> jono, It's that bug triagers aren't being as carefully trained as in the past.  That's something for which a *lot* of people share the burden, including all participants in this conversation.
[04:55] <jono> Hobbsee, there are  lots of bad comments in community, irrespective of training
[04:55] <jono> persia, I agree
[04:55] <Hobbsee> jono: so you're just attributing it to "the community occasionally is shit"
[04:56] <persia> To me, 5-a-day appears to have led to more bug comments, and to fewer questions in #ubuntu-bugs about how things work.
[04:56] <jono> Hobbsee, what do you think?
[04:56] <Hobbsee> persia: and it seems to me that questions in -bugs, particularly during the au day, aren't being answered.
[04:56] <persia> It also appears to have decreased the number of people who are working on the bugs who care about fixing them.  They appear to care more about getting the bug into the right commented shape.
[04:56] <Hobbsee> persia: ++
[04:56] <persia> Hobbsee, Well, you and I should do more about that.
[04:56] <ScottK> jono: Calling people trying to give you feedback trolls is not an example of openness IMO.
[04:57] <jono> ScottK, it appeared like trolling to me
[04:57] <jono> if not, I apologise
[04:57] <jono> and when people do troll, I will call them out
[04:57] <ScottK> jono: No one here is trolling, we just feel very differently than you on some points.
[04:57] <Hobbsee> jono: well, I think there has to be a reason for it, and I think that trying to attribute it to "the community makes bad comments sometimes" is pathetic.
[04:57] <jono> I have to be honest though, with you ScottK and Hobbsee there is always such a lot of negative energy
[04:57] <Hobbsee> jono: i was not intending to troll.
[04:58] <jono> Hobbsee, then I apologise
[04:58] <Hobbsee> jono: maybe you look in the wrong places, then.
[04:58] <ScottK> jono: When was the last time you heard anything negative from me?
[04:58] <ScottK> jono: Go look at my posts on planet and find a negative one.
[04:58] <Hobbsee> jono: apology accepted.  Please do not always assume that i'm trolling when I disagree with you.
[04:58] <jono> Hobbsee, ok
[04:59] <jono> ScottK, I am talking in general - there seems a greater than often sense of criticism and negative energy
[04:59] <Hobbsee> persia: I would have thought that those at canonical should, if they're the ones pushing people into working on bugs, too.
[04:59] <Hobbsee> persia: Often the community members are doing other things, and can't always be relied upon to help.
[04:59] <jono> Hobbsee, I believe there are reasons for bad bugs, and I am not suggesting that its just "the way it is" - I was asking earlier what you felt could be the cause
[05:00] <ScottK> jono: Things don't get improved by not talking about problems.
[05:00] <jono> I would love to see what you guys think so we could investigate
[05:00] <ScottK> jono: I already told you.  You already told me I was wrong.
[05:00] <Hobbsee> I note though, there has been some good success on getting the needs-packaging bugs in a more sane state.  The discussions between various members of the MOTU, and the bugsquad, seem have been profitable.
[05:00] <persia> Hobbsee, See, I don't think it's Canonical's responsibility.  The more that such an attitude spreads, the less Ubuntu is itself.  I like Ubuntu.  I want to keep it.  That means that I, as a member of Ubuntu, need to do things.  I think everyone should feel that way.
[05:00] <jono> ScottK, agreed - but firstly problems need specific criticism and suggestions for improvements, and secondly, there needs to be a balance - celebrating what we do have and not just focusing on the bad
[05:01] <Hobbsee> People tend to actually check now if the package exists in debian, before marking it as confirmed & wishlist.
[05:01] <ScottK> jono: Yes.  And as I pointed out I've recently been blogging on planet and actively trying to celebrate good stuff.
[05:01] <jono> ScottK, in which case, kudos
[05:02] <Hobbsee> persia: I agree with you - but I think that people, or groups, that encourage large amounts of contributions in a particular area ensure that they contribute the resources to ensure that area continues to work well, after they've brought more people into it.
[05:02] <persia> jono, And on that note, while such initiatives are interesting, it might be better to work with various people to define them in the first place, as opposed to introducing such tools that might get criticism.  Building things privately and introducing them as official isn't very Ubuntu.
[05:02] <Hobbsee> persia: whether that be canonical, or another company that invests in ubuntu, or a new team, or whatever.
[05:02] <jono> persia, I don't think we acted unofficially, we just built a tool and released it
[05:02] <Hobbsee> hrm, there should be a 'should' in the above, too.
[05:03] <jono> persia, people do that in the community all the time too
[05:03] <persia> jono, That's precisely my complaint.  I'd prefer that you had acted unofficially :)
[05:03] <jono> heh
[05:03] <ScottK> jono: I think he has a good point.
[05:03] <persia> jono, It's announcing something as official without having worked with the affected teams in an open manner that bothers me.
[05:03] <jmarsden> Comment from a relative newcomer on HoF: I like the "Latest X" part of HoF, it celebrates new people coming on board and becoming more deeply involved.  No so sure about celebrating who is busiest or top 5-a-day or top Lp Karma... Maybe as well as a "featured contributor" there could be a "featured newcomer"  -- interview someone who just became a MOTU/DEveloper/whatever, and find out how they did it, what they liked
[05:03] <jmarsden>  about the process, etc.
[05:03] <persia> Most people who build tools say something like "I put together this.  What do people think?  Is it useful?
[05:04] <jono> persia, where do you draw the line - does every project need to consult extensively while being developed?
[05:04] <jono> I agree in openness, and I cherish and encourage it, but sometimes in the interests of expediency, its a case of just getting it out there and then soliciting feedback and improving
[05:05] <persia> jono, No, just anything that's being introduced as "official".  Ubuntu is a very open project.  Very strongly based on consensus.  Anything that is introduced without consensus should, to me, be introduced as a candidate to build consensus, rather than something official.
[05:05] <jono> I have been clear that I am seeking feedback for improvements
[05:05] <jono> persia, I disagrewe
[05:05] <jono> disagree, rather
[05:05] <persia> I'm *much* happier with the Harvest introduction than with the HoF introduction.  That was presented early, and discussed, and then became more official.
[05:05] <persia> jono, With what specifically.
[05:05] <jono> should each package have to be voted on to become official and in the archive?
[05:05] <persia> Do you believe Ubuntu isn't open?
[05:05] <persia> jono, Yes.  We do that.
[05:05] <Hobbsee> persia: in jono's defence, i'm not sure how you'd cover the entire ubuntu pool of contributors, to askthem for feedback, easily, apart from blogging about it.
[05:06] <jono> I am talking about packages from ubuntu developers
[05:06] <persia> jono, so am I.
[05:06] <jono> an ubuntu developer just uploads
[05:06] <Hobbsee> persia: harvest is just developers, and there are lists to contact them.  HoF is everything.
[05:06] <jono> surely they need to seek concensus
[05:06] <persia> jono, *every* package local in Ubuntu has been reviewed by at least two Ubuntu developers, and usually three or four.
[05:06] <jono> persia, what about updates
[05:06] <persia> jono, There doesn't exist a single Ubuntu-only package that doesn't have peer review.
[05:07] <jono> if something is uploaded, it becomes officially, those packages are not checked
[05:07] <persia> jono, Updates are different.  See, I'm saying that something new should be reviewed.  Once it's there, fixing it is only sensible.
[05:07] <Hobbsee> jono: how is that relevant,sorry?
[05:07] <jono> what about bug fixes?
[05:07] <jono> persia, I disagree - I think its reasonable to put out new ideas and then have people review afterwards
[05:08] <persia> jono, I agree with that.  I am only saying that such things should be presented as ideas, and not announced as "official".
[05:08] <jono> I think for core governance we need review as part of the process, but websites can be put out there
[05:08] <jono> persia, well if it appears on ubuntu.com, it could be percieved as official
[05:08] <Hobbsee> jono: are you trying to say that "releasing a major community thing" is somehow on par with "uploading a bug fix, or new version of a package", and thus, it's easier to JFDI than solicit opinions from people, so that it gets done?
[05:08] <jono> but then that makes any content on the wiki official
[05:08] <Hobbsee> or have i missed the relevance?
[05:09] <jono> Hobbsee, what I am saying is that the HoF was an idea between Daniel and I, and we did
[05:09] <jono> it
[05:09] <persia> jono, Right.  Most other sites appear somewhere else first.  This was true for the ISO tracker.  It was true for harvest.  It was even true to some degree for 5-a-day
[05:09] <jono> we don't have a lot of time as it is, and if we would have had to seek concensus and spend time on it, it would have never been a justifiable chunk of time
[05:09] <jono> as such, we threw it out there and requested feedback after the fact
[05:10] <persia> jono, So you're saying that because you have access to the ubuntu.com domain, you shouldn't have to bother asking others for input before making something official?
[05:10] <ScottK> jono: That's not really a very Ubuntu attitude IMO.  "Didn't have time to work with anyone, so just did it".
[05:11] <Hobbsee> persia: who would he ask for input, though?
[05:11] <persia> Hobbsee, readers of his blog would work for me.
[05:11] <jono> it was  not a case of didnt have time so just did it anyway, it was a case of having an idea, developing it and releasing it
[05:11] <Hobbsee> persia: while it does show some *very* interesting reasoning behind some of the horsemen decisions, i think this one would have been ahrder.
[05:11] <jono> I am sorry if that does not fit with you expectations, but thats what happened
[05:11] <persia> jono, Do you understand the source of the complaint?
[05:11] <jono> if there is significant objection to the HoF then we will revoke it - so far, there has been none
[05:12] <jono> persia, I can see the reasoning, but as I said earlier, I respectfully disagree
[05:12] <persia> jono, Yes, but you've yet to identify with what you specifically disagree.
[05:12] <ScottK> jono: I guess we're nobody then.
[05:12] <jono> all communities will at times develop first and ask for feedback later, and while I think that for the purposes of governance and community growth that is not a bad idea, for periphery elements such as the HoF it is not such a big deal
[05:12] <jono> ScottK, your words
[05:13] <persia> jono, Is the perception that foo.ubuntu.com should be perceived as official something with which you disagree?
[05:13] <Hobbsee> ScottK: no, it just means that anyone should be able to put forward an idea, implement it, release it, and stick it on ubuntu.com without actually asking the other communities for input.
[05:13] <jono> persia, I disagree that everything needs concensus before it becomes official
[05:13] <jono> this is my opinion, not necessarily the opinion of the Ubuntu project
[05:13] <persia> jono, That's *how* we do things.  It's precisely contrary to the basis of my understanding of the opinion of the Ubuntu project.
[05:13] <jono> I agree that most of *.ubuntu.com is official
[05:13] <ScottK> jono: You said there has been no objection to HoF so far.  I guess I don't know how else to characterize this conversation.
[05:14] <Hobbsee> ScottK: which, incidently, means that stuff such as the RCbugs, etc, should be very easy to get on ubuntu.com, in future :)
[05:14] <jono> ScottK, sorry, no issues outside of this discussion
[05:14] <persia> I don't have much opposition to HoF in and of itself, but I do have strong opposition to the idea that it doesn't take consensus in the Ubuntu project to make an official change.
[05:14] <persia> jono, So in that light, why does ubuntuwire exist?
[05:15] <jono> persia, the word "official" is a complex one, and I suspect difficult to define in concensus
[05:15] <persia> jono, It was specifically rejected as offical, although the tools are very useful to many.
[05:15] <persia> jono, So it is the perception that foo.ubuntu.com represents the Ubuntu project with which you disagree?
[05:15] <jono> persia, I think I have been clear
[05:16] <jono> I believe that most of ubuntu.com and sub-sites are deemed official
[05:16] <jono> yes
[05:16] <jono> but some content is not, such as the wiki
[05:16] <jono> parts of the wiki are official, parts are not
[05:16] <jono> sorry, I don't have time to debate this right now
[05:16] <jono> I don't mean to blow you off, but it is 9.15pm here and I supposed to be washing dishes
[05:17] <jono> if you guys want to discuss this via email, drop me a line
[05:17] <jono> and I am happy to recieve any and all feedback about the HoF, and for us to discuss it
[05:18] <Hobbsee> jono: As for the earlier question.  Here's the answer:  "Currently, I think it's a lack of training, and more of an emphasis on getting the bugs in the right states, rather than actually fixing them, like persia said.  Like being encouraged to ask if people can reproduce the problem, rather than being trained to report things upstream, if they're relevant, and to at least try to debug it a bit (such as "does the package exist in debian" for
[05:18] <Hobbsee> needs-packaging bugs)".  Please respond to me by email, when you have more time.
[05:19] <bain> what is the procedure to get a package transported to debian once we have it in ubuntu?
[05:20] <bain> i am currently trying to get a package in jaunty, and iulian is helping me with it, however i would like to get a heads up on above
[05:21] <jono> Hobbsee, I agree that training is a big issue, do you have any thoughts on how we can fix it?
[05:21] <persia> bain, Check the BTS for an RFP or ITP.  If it exists, work with that bug.  If it doesn't exist, file an ITP, prepare a debian revision, and upload to Debian.  If you can't upload to Debian, put it on mentors.debian.net, and ask debian-mentors@lists.debian.org for upload.  You'll need to commit to maintenance.
[05:22] <persia> jono, It's mostly a train the trainers thing, and reward the right activities.  Long ago, bug days involved lots of developers, and were focused on closing bugs.  These days they are more about reviewing new bugs, or pushing stuff upstream.
[05:22] <bain> persia, thanks
[05:22] <persia> bain, Note that there's no requirement for a package to be in Ubnutu to use that procedure.  It's worth starting in parallel.
[05:24] <bain> persia, right my thoughts exactly, i was just worried about debian process being too long, so i started with Ubuntu.
[05:24] <Hobbsee> jono: a few.  But most of them will probably be unpopular.
[05:25] <RAOF> bain: I haven't found Debian to be a terrible pain, partially because much of the work has been in a fairly small team (pkg-cli-{libs,apps})
[05:25] <persia> bain, In both cases, it depends on how many developers feel like sponsoring stuff, and either is extended by issues with the packaging.  Either can be quick, or long, and which is faster is a hard question to answer at any time.  Debian is usually perceived as better though.
[05:26] <persia> Hobbsee, You registered a retaining-developers spec.  Perhaps you have time to put together a bug-to-fix-workflow-improvement one?
[05:26] <Hobbsee> jono: perhaps not *that* unpopular.  But will still require people sitting down and admitting there's an issue, and open to suggestions and collaboration on how to fix it - then actually doing the work in fixing it.  This would involve updating things like documentation based on the progress that has been made, emailing everyone saying "this is just a reminder on how it should be done.  here's the crash course", then making sure people are
[05:26] <Hobbsee> around to actually help out, and people watching to make sure others *are* giving out the revised, now correct, information.
[05:27] <persia> Especially with the growing popularity of PPAs, we aren't seeing as many patches as patches, and the old procedures aren't throwing a very wide net.
[05:27] <bain> RAOF, well i am not talking about community/debian side delays per say, ubuntu just felt faster for various things including getting to understand packaging and finding documentation
[05:28] <Hobbsee> jono: If people are unwilling to do the last couple of parts, then the entire thing is null and void.  So the first question is...are people (including canonical members, as they're the team pushing lots of people into bugs) willing to?
[05:28] <Hobbsee> persia: that's a point.
[05:28] <bain> But i am convinced debian process is worth starting early now that i am slightly more comfortable with packaging, thanks you people
[05:28] <Hobbsee> persia: (willing to help out?)
[05:29] <Hobbsee> persia: I guess there would be a lot of current themes between them.
[05:29] <persia> Hobbsee, In a distracted fashion.  I've a stack of stuff to do in the next couple days, including sending an announcement about my fast approaching inability to access the network for a couple weeks.
[05:29] <Hobbsee> persia: well, i've got 3 exams in the next 2 weeks, so i'm not around much either.  Will think on it.
[05:30] <persia> Maybe just a hallway discussion then, or perhaps it could be raised as a topic for someone to grab in the next QA meeting
[05:30]  * persia wishes this had come up yesterday, as that would have been better timing
[05:30] <Hobbsee> persia: Are they convinced it's actually an issue?
[05:31] <persia> Dunno.  I haven't seen it discussed in a couple months.
[05:31] <persia> There was a hallway discussion about it in Prague, with a number of interested parties.
[05:31] <Hobbsee> If heno and such don't see it as an issue, then raising it, to try and get it fixed, is a waste of time and energy.
[05:31] <Hobbsee> was heno there?
[05:32] <persia> heno had some interest in Prague towards improving the fix ratio, but that may not translate into action items without further discussion.
[05:32] <Hobbsee> the fix ratio.  Right, hmmm...
[05:33] <persia> On the other hand, such a discussion could already be planned.  I haven't seen too many of the QA track specs on LP yet.
[05:33]  * bain is away: "work"
[05:33]  * ScottK is away: "sleep"
[05:33]  * Hobbsee is here: "studying"
[05:34] <persia> Hobbsee, Right.  The problem is that there exist fixes to bugs that aren't in the repos.  There are likely a wide number of opinions about the solution.
[05:34] <persia> It's that discussion that's likely worthwhile to have, and put together a list of candidate solutions and easy action items to try towards improving the situation.
[05:35] <ScottK> Darn.  Just remembered....
[05:35] <Hobbsee> persia: oh, right.  I thought the current discussion was that people were 'triaging' things the wrong way, and needed to be trained how to do it right, and be more useful
[05:35]  * ScottK is away: "cleaning the kitchen - then sleeping"
[05:36] <Hobbsee> this sounds like facebook onto irc...
[05:37] <persia> Hobbsee, I perceive that to be one element of the larger issue.  Adjusting triage training to focus on getting bugs to Fix Released would help with the fix ratio.
[05:37] <persia> On the other hand, that focuses on the actual problem, rather than on what we perceive to be one of the causes.
[05:37] <jono> sorry Hobbsee, had to step away
[05:37] <jono> Hobbsee, I agree, training is where we need to focus our efforts
[05:37] <Hobbsee> persia: er, define "that" please?
[05:38] <persia> I don't have enough specicic complaints with the current documentation to think "Fix the documentation and practices" is a useful session.
[05:38] <jono> and I also believe that we need to focus on fixing bugs as opposed to just triaging
[05:38] <jono> Hobbsee, do you feel that more education is the solution?
[05:38] <persia> Hobbsee, rephrased: discussing the fix ratio focuses on the actual problem...
[05:40] <Hobbsee> persia: well, if the documentation is right, the focus then switches to "so, how do we get this into people's heads, including current contributors who don't know of the changes, and probably haven't read the wiki in ages, and wouldn't even know where to *start* reading for finding out *just* the changes, and don't have time to read the entire thing"
[05:40] <Hobbsee> persia: ah, right.
[05:40] <Hobbsee> persia: (I just didn't want to assume that the documentation was perfect, when i've not read all of it recently, so gave it the benefit of the doubt)
[05:41] <Hobbsee> jono: yes, for existing people as well.
[05:41] <persia> Right.  It's looking at the whole picture, and identifying what bits need help (documentation, practices, #ubuntu-bugs staffing, etc.).
[05:41] <jono> Hobbsee, where do you feel we need to focus the most education on? is it packaging skills or knowledge of upstream code?
[05:42] <jono> or some altogether different area?
[05:42] <persia> I'd focus on understanding troubleshooting techniques.
[05:42] <Hobbsee> persia: I see it as a huge problem that this stuff keeps changing, but there's no equivalent of what ubuntu-devel-announce@ is supposed to be (and somewhat fails at - it's going to be in my other spec), where people can get a quick guide on the changes of culture and practices, without having to read the entire wiki.
[05:42] <Hobbsee> persia: which means a whole bunch of people are triaging according to info they learnt a few years ago.
[05:42] <persia> I'd also focus on better ways to help identify bugfixes to developers, and practices including testing patches from upstream or other sources to verify a given patch works.
[05:43] <Hobbsee> (which is *probably* why a lot of established people abuse the bug statuses at times, i'd expect!)
[05:43] <persia> Hobbsee, Hrm.  That's an interesting point.
[05:43] <Hobbsee> persia: I, at least, run mostly on triaging information that I learned back in 2005.
[05:43] <persia> I've also seen a number of long-term people surprised by new tools.  Organising that better would help.
[05:43] <Hobbsee> and that was KDE stuff.
[05:44] <Hobbsee> so, that was basically stuff I learned in bugzilla (KDE and firefox), and translated to here by a common-sense approach.
[05:44] <Hobbsee> I don't think i'm alone in that.
[05:44] <jono> Hobbsee, persia and ScottK, would you be willing to send me an email with which areas you feel like we need more developer education
[05:45] <jono> I would love to have something in my inbox I can work from
[05:45] <Hobbsee> while it means I get most of the stuff right, i'm fully aware that there are some weird and wonderful policies, which mean people do things that I don't think make sense, but just ignore
[05:45] <jono> I have been thinking a lot about developer education too recently
[05:45] <persia> jono, Honestly, I'm not going to get to such an email until after UDS.  My apologies.
[05:45] <Hobbsee> jono: i don't thinkit's packaging as such.  it's about thinking what needs to be done, what's most helpful to do, and how to go about doing that.
[05:45] <jono> persia, no problem
[05:45] <persia> jono, And it's not just developer education.  It's developers, triagers, etc.
[05:46] <jono> persia, I mean developers in the general sense - triagers, packagers, programmers etc
[05:46] <jono> Hobbsee, you mean how work is divided between contributors?
[05:46] <persia> Let's extend that to new community entrants with interest in the code as well.
[05:46] <jono> sure
[05:47] <persia> jono, Would you be able to organise a UDS session to cover some of this, and maybe help break it down into actionable items on which we can all work?
[05:47] <persia> Dunno if it's really QA track or Community track, but either would probably work.
[05:47] <jono> persia, this is part of the reason I am keen to recieve what you feel are areas of needed focus
[05:48]  * persia will try to put together a bullet list in the next bit, but apologises in advance for the lack of depth to such an email.
[05:48] <Hobbsee> jono: no - but focussing on things like "how can i make this bug get fixed fastest?"  "i test this bug, i see if the issue is still here, unless someone else can confirm it, then I file it upstream, and can see these general hints on ettiquite on filing bugs upstream.  If I think it's something critical for release, I do the appropriate procedures (which change all too often, but are starting to make more sense!)"
[05:48] <jono> persia, summaries would be fantastic, thank you
[05:49] <Hobbsee> jono: not "how can i touch this bug, and get 5-a-day-cred for it, and move onto the next one, so I can beat the stats?"
[05:50] <jono> Hobbsee, these are two separate issues I believe - on one hand you are talking about best practise and on the other hand you are talking about stopping people gaming the system
[05:50] <jono> both are worthwhile areas of focus
[05:50] <Hobbsee> jono: Well, if people are following the best practice, then the 'system' of 5-a-day becomes less important.
[05:51] <persia> Gaming the system is only meaningful when there is competitive scoring.  In the absence of such competition, there's no motivation for gaming.
[05:51] <Hobbsee> jono: what might be interesting, instead, is if 5-a-day took a longer approach, and tracked how people got bugs through to fix-released, or to filed-upstream
[05:51] <Hobbsee> persia: exactly.
[05:52] <jono> Hobbsee, that depends - the success of 5-a-day is in making bugs feels manageable, but there still needs to be a strong emphasis on quality - and if 5-a-day (or anything else) comprimises quality, we need to be able to resolve that
[05:52] <jono> Hobbsee, thats a great idea
[05:52] <jono> Hobbsee, but it should be focused on triaging imo
[05:52] <Hobbsee> I think that sort of thing would help a *lot* with this
[05:53] <jono> 5-a-day I believe is really a strong idea for encouraging triaging
[05:53] <Hobbsee> but that does require what I said above - that everyone knows how to go about doing that in the best way, that the best ways are documented and followable, and that someone checks for hte first while that people are actually doing what they're supposed to do.
[05:53] <Hobbsee> 5-a-day is a good concept, if it's focussed on acheiving the right goals.
[05:54] <Hobbsee> jono: so, make it be for bugs that get filed upstream, and make sure that people fully understand what htey should, and should not, file upstream.
[05:55] <jono> even with the best documentation and best practice, I suspect we will still have people who game the system
[05:55] <jono> which is why I think it could be valuable to discuss how we can improve the system with regards to quality
[05:55] <Hobbsee> jono: well, that depends then on what gets officially chosen to focus on.
[05:55] <jono> anywhoo, I best run
[05:55] <jono> thanks for the feedback
[05:55] <Hobbsee> have negative points for those who get triaged wrongly, or something.
[05:56] <jono> Hobbsee, I was thinking about that too
[05:56] <jono> possibly a moderation system for comments
[05:56] <jono> anyway, best run
[05:56] <jono> take care folks
[05:56] <Hobbsee> jono: book a session at UDS about it, please.
[05:56] <jono> Hobbsee, will see what I can do
[05:56] <Hobbsee> (if you haven't already)
[06:14] <dholbach> good morning
[06:17] <fcestrada> dholbach: Good Night
[06:18] <dholbach> night fcestrada
[06:19] <Hobbsee> persia: thankyou
[06:19] <persia> Hobbsee, Please expand on that.  It's **really* minimal, but what I could produce quickly.
[07:00] <iulian> bain: Commented
[07:00] <slytherin> bain: you from India. :-)
[07:01] <bain> slytherin, yes
[07:01] <bain> iulian, am at work will take a look when i am back home
[07:02] <iulian> It's sometimes confusing when you have "Advocate this upload" on REVU when you're not a dev.
[07:02] <iulian> Can someone fix that please?
[07:02] <iulian> bain: Sure
[07:02] <slytherin> iulian: contact NCommander or rainct
[07:03] <persia> iulian, If you have the button, one of the REVU Admins granted you advocation.
[07:03] <persia> slytherin, That's really not the answer to every REVU question :)
[07:03] <iulian> persia: Eh? Wait a moment.
[07:04] <NCommander> persia, no, the right answer is contact RainCT
[07:04]  * NCommander fixes iulian's account
[07:04] <iulian> persia: I cannot advocate. I only have the button present.
[07:04] <iulian> NCommander: Thanks.
[07:04] <persia> iulian, Ah, that's extra odd.
[07:04] <iulian> Indeed
[07:04] <persia> NCommander, it's an account-specific issue?
[07:04] <slytherin> persia: No. But I also have that checkbox. And there is no reason why I should have it. So I guess revu is not really checking the permissions.
[07:05] <persia> NCommander, How can a user get that button if they don't have reviewer permission?  Alternately, if they have reviewer permission, why can't they advocate?
[07:05] <slytherin> at least while displaying the ui elements
[07:05] <persia> slytherin, Ah, that probably needs a bug then.
[07:05] <NCommander> persia, I think RainCT was a little overliberal on giving review permissions
[07:05] <persia> https://launchpad.net/revu/+bugs
[07:05] <slytherin> UUS have review permissions, right?
[07:05] <NCommander> iulian, what's your LP account name?
[07:05] <slytherin> UUC I mean
[07:06] <iulian> NCommander: iulian
[07:06] <NCommander> Nope
[07:06] <persia> NCommander, Well, there are a fair number of people not MOTU who have reviewer rights for one reason or another, but the button should only appear for those that have such a right.
[07:06] <NCommander> MOTU or greater
[07:06] <persia> slytherin, Not as a class, no.
[07:06]  * iulian agrees
[07:06] <NCommander> persia, reviewer right means they have the advocate button :-)
[07:06] <NCommander> and can archive
[07:06] <persia> NCommander, Right.  What slytherin and iulian are reporting is that they have an advocate button and it doesn't work.
[07:07] <iulian> Can I also archive uploads? Yaay! supapowers!
[07:07] <persia> If they are both reviewers, that's a different issue.
[07:07] <NCommander> RainCT been busy
[07:07]  * persia is doubtful of granting non-MOTU reviewer access, but has seen it have value in the past for certain people
[07:07] <NCommander> He's added new permission levels
[07:07] <NCommander> persia, strictly speaking, I had reviewer status on REVU long before I was UUC :-)
[07:07] <slytherin> Please help me here. What do you mean by 'Reviewer'. I can add comment, is that 'Reviewing'?
[07:08] <iulian> slytherin: I suppose the only difference is that you can archive uploads, not sure though.
[07:08] <NCommander> slytherin, reviewer status means you can archive packages (any package), and Advocate an upload
[07:08] <NCommander> You shouldn't be able to see the "Advocate This Upload" button
[07:09] <slytherin> NCommander: Ok. You mean the checkbox, right?
[07:09] <NCommander> yeah
[07:09] <persia> iulian, Advocation, rejection, and archiving are the permissions associated with "reviewer"
[07:09] <slytherin> NCommander: Ok. Then I am seeing it. Which is a bug then.
[07:09] <Koon> good morning guys
[07:10] <NCommander> It looks like RainCT split out Admin to Admin and Moderator
[07:10] <slytherin> Koon: Good morning. After long time.
[07:10] <NCommander> Moderator can Nuke
[07:10] <NCommander> Admin can change privilleges
[07:10] <persia> Right.  Comes from moving a proper Nuke to the UI.
[07:10] <Koon> slytherin: I've been back for a few days already :)
[07:11] <slytherin> Koon: Really? I didn't see you here or in #ubuntu-java. :-)
[07:11] <Koon> tss
[07:12] <slytherin> Koon: I hope you are planning to start soon on maven work. :-)
[07:12] <Koon> slytherin: in fact someone is working on it
[07:13] <Koon> I'll talk about that at the java meeting.
[07:13] <slytherin> Koon: ok, we can discuss this in today's meeting.
[07:13] <NCommander> wtf is restricted O_o;
[07:15] <persia> NCommander, Cannot upload. Cannot comment.  Only to be used in extreme situations.
[07:15] <NCommander> ever used?
[07:16] <persia> I don't think we've had a need yet, thankfully.
[07:16] <persia> I'm glad it's there, in case it is needed, but hope never to use it.
[09:46] <Laibsch> good morning
[09:46] <Laibsch> anybody willing to commit the debdiffs I prepared for bug 221010 to -proposed
[09:46] <Laibsch> same thing for bug 227547
[13:39] <laga> directhex: i bet you love morten kjeldgaard's argument ;)
[13:42] <slytherin> laga: +1 :-D
[13:43] <directhex> laga, i'm taking the higher road, and not using any of the pithy comments i could use
[13:43] <persia> Let's just let that lie.  It's not a constructive mail, but it's also not constructive to complain about it.
[13:43] <laga> it's hilarious :)
[13:43] <slytherin> persia: we are not complaining, we are just teasing directhex. :-)
[13:47] <slytherin> Hobbsee's reply was spot on.
[13:48] <laga> yes
[13:51] <directhex> i'm used to it. i've been named as an enemy of freedom by boycott-novell twice already
[13:52] <slytherin> directhex: you might as well make hat trick for your work on mono packaging. :-)
[13:52] <directhex> slytherin, i strongly suspect i will. i've been wondering how to score my hat-trick on this
[13:53] <slytherin> directhex: I wonder if the mono work will make enough free space to put JRE on CD. :-D
[13:53] <slytherin> geser: there? need to discuss libjdic-java merge.
[13:54] <handschuh> slytherin: remember uiflite-package? the upstream author refused to make it a separate package
[13:54] <slytherin> handschuh: yes, you told me.
[13:54] <directhex> slytherin, the whole jre? i suspect not
[13:55] <directhex> slytherin, which apps demand java? or just the plugin?
[13:55] <slytherin> directhex: while there is no plan currently, I hope the OpenJDK JRE can be split in small packages.
[13:55] <slytherin> directhex: even plugin will need JRE.
[13:55] <handschuh> slytherin: ok, just wanted to be sure :-)
[13:56] <directhex> slytherin, i know, but the problem with the plugin is applets need to expect that every single class will be installed - if you have a more mono-like java stack, then desktop apps could depend on partial javas which are smaller
[13:58] <slytherin> directhex: that is what I thought. I hope someday we will have it ...
[13:59] <directhex> slytherin, and for desktop apps, i suspect anything which looks clearly non-native will work against you when negotiating with the desktop team. gtk# apps are indistinguishable frmo gtk+ apps, other than the whole .exe and .dll thing
[14:01] <slytherin> directhex: java has GTK look and feel and it looks nearly native.
[14:01] <directhex> slytherin, how nearly? it sucked a few years ago
[14:01] <james_w> anyone know what a ">&" shell redirection is intended to achieve?
[14:02] <directhex> james_w, in isolation?
[14:02] <james_w> it seems to work like "&>" in bash/zsh, but fails in dash
[14:02] <james_w> directhex: "cmd >& /dev/null"
[14:02] <directhex> it's a bashism. non-posix afaik
[14:02] <directhex> we patch an instance of that in something. can't remember what, but i remember patching it
[14:03] <slytherin> directhex: let me find the bug about making that look and feel default. I have a screenshot attached there.
[14:03] <james_w> yeah, just wondered if I was converting it to something with the same meaning
[14:04] <JonReagan> I got a lintian bug issue... looks like the version number for my app has a dash, which in a native file does not work...  but if I go into the synaptic package manager, I noticed that most have the (e.g 1.4-0ubuntu1) number pattern
[14:04] <JonReagan> is there something wrong? :-/
[14:05] <slytherin> JonReagan: what version are you using?
[14:05] <JonReagan> version?
[14:05] <Hobbsee> number
[14:05] <JonReagan> oh, mine is 1.4 of openproj
[14:06] <Hobbsee> which doesn't contain a -, yes?
[14:06] <directhex> JonReagan, okay, so what version package are you trying to make?
[14:06] <JonReagan> yup, no dashes
[14:06] <Hobbsee> you can use 1.4-0ubuntu1 as the version?
[14:06] <JonReagan> that's what I used
[14:06] <JonReagan> but lintian has a problem with that ;)
[14:06] <JonReagan> which is where I am confused
[14:07] <Hobbsee> what's the exact lintian error?
[14:07] <JonReagan> eh, hold on I'll grab the link
[14:07] <JonReagan> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/revu1-incoming/openproj-0811200421/lintian
[14:07] <persia> JonReagan, Most likely it's an issue with your orig.tar.gz
[14:08] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: are you intending it to be native?
[14:08] <JonReagan> ah
[14:08] <JonReagan> well, that's a good question
[14:08] <JonReagan> the original source could be built for a number of systems
[14:08] <Hobbsee> is it ubuntu-only?
[14:08] <Hobbsee> if not, then it shouldn't be native.
[14:08] <JonReagan> but with some customization, it was built for debian/ubuntu
[14:08] <slytherin> directhex: https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openjdk-6/+bug/183139
[14:09] <Hobbsee> the idea is usually for non-native packages, except in extreme circumstances.
[14:09] <Hobbsee> such as ubuntu-wallpapers or something
[14:09] <JonReagan> ah
[14:09] <JonReagan> so, in that case is there something I need to do to fix it... because I really have no idea :)  It's my first package... i'm a bit of a noob
[14:10] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: you need to rename the tarball.  See what lintian said:
[14:10] <Hobbsee> N:   Native source packages are sometimes created by accident. In most
[14:10] <Hobbsee> N:   cases the reason is the location of the original source tarball.
[14:10] <Hobbsee> N:   dpkg-source searches for this in
[14:10] <Hobbsee> N:   ../package_upstream-version.orig.tar.gz.
[14:11] <Hobbsee> don't repack it, just rename it
[14:11] <JonReagan> so I need to rename my tarball to .orig.tar.gz
[14:11] <JonReagan> as the file extension?
[14:11] <Hobbsee> yes
[14:11] <Hobbsee> and change the - to a _
[14:11] <JonReagan> ah... I see
[14:12] <JonReagan> thank you so much! :)
[14:12] <Hobbsee> then you can rebuild the source, and you'll get a new file
[14:12] <Hobbsee> you're welcome!
[14:12] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: er, note, the file you rename should be the pristine one from upstream, not the one you've gone and modified when you built your native package
[14:13] <JonReagan> oh ok,... I'll be sure to do that
[14:14] <JonReagan> well, I gotta run folks.. thanks for the help!
[14:18] <directhex> slytherin, looks close enough that only obsessive mac users would notice
[14:18] <slytherin> :-)
[14:50] <bddebian> Heya gang
[14:51] <nhandler> Hey bddebian!
[14:51] <bddebian> Hello nhandler
[14:54] <iulian> Hi bddebian.
[14:55] <bddebian> Hi iulian
[15:03] <geser> slytherin: Hi, you pinged me about a merge?
[15:03] <geser> Hi bddebian!
[15:04] <slytherin> geser: yes, I did.
[15:04] <bddebian> Hey geser
[15:04] <slytherin> can you please take a look at last 2 changelog entries for libjdic-java and tell me which is the preferred way?
[15:05] <slytherin> both changes achive same thing.
[15:14] <geser> slytherin: good question, I believe I had a good reason to change it again. Both uploads were done to fix a FTBFS, so pick a solution which works for both builds (arch+indep and arch-only)
[15:15] <slytherin> geser: Debian package has moved to openjdk. I think I will use 'set JAVA_HOME' solution so I use same java for both binary-arch as well as binary-indep.
[15:15] <slytherin> geser: apart from that I need to make few changes and probably patch Makefile for our xulrunner paths.
[15:18] <geser> slytherin: check first if the change is still needed, some FTBFS resolve themselves
[15:19] <slytherin> geser: yes it is needed. I tried compiling yesterday.
[15:20] <geser> ok
[15:49] <bain> iulian: did all the fixes you asked for :D what do you want me to do later today? :D
[15:51] <iulian> bain: Yea, I saw, great. I will have a final look at it later on.
[15:52] <iulian> bain: Is it late there already in India?
[15:52] <bain> iulian: nope its only 9:30 pm i'll check back in about an hours time
[15:53] <iulian> OK
[15:55] <james_w> wow, a flood of MOTU applications recently
[15:55] <sebner> iulian: WoW, application today and already one +1. I'm waiting since 2 weeks without a +1. dholbach is really a fanboy of yours :P
[15:55] <sebner> james_w: yes, isn't it
[15:55]  * james_w wants to send the application for some people if they won't do it themselves :-)
[15:56] <sebner> james_w: either the MC will kill you or I since my application will be forgotten then :P
[15:56] <james_w> heh :-)
[15:58] <sebner> james_w: but a fresh wave with young blood would be nice, wouldn't it? :)
[15:58]  * liw isn't applying for MOTU (today)
[15:59] <Laney> dput windows_vista.changes
[15:59] <Laney> (LP: #1)
[15:59] <Laney> That's my goal.
[16:00] <geser> sebner: I try to review applications as a FIFO queue not as a LIFO one :)
[16:01] <sebner> geser: heh, no stress. it was more of a joke. I waited now 2 weeks, so some days won't kill me :)
[16:01] <sebner> liw: tomorrow?
[16:02]  * slytherin pushes vista_like_slow_network_copy.changes to Laney's machine. :-P
[16:04] <james_w> dput Laney kill3r-v1rus.changes
[16:05] <slytherin> DktrKranz: that is nice phrase - giving back to "Mama". :_)
[16:05] <slytherin> :-)
[16:06] <Laney> :(
[16:08] <dholbach> james_w: hm?
[16:08] <james_w> dholbach: eh?
[16:08] <dholbach> kill3r-v1rus?
[16:09] <james_w> dholbach: killer virus to own Laney's machine
[16:09] <dholbach> james_w: I'm not sure that's CoC compliant, my friend
[16:09] <james_w> sorry
[16:09]  * dholbach spanks james_w in a CoC-friendly way
[16:10]  * james_w is spanked
[16:12] <james_w> sorry Laney
[16:13] <Laney> haha
[16:13] <Laney> I deserved it
[16:15] <jdong> am I the only one  to feel the native 64-bit Flashplugin still segfaults obscenely?
[16:15] <directhex> jdong, it does
[16:15] <directhex> jdong, but less than nspluginwrapper, IME
[16:16] <directhex> i.e. thedailyshow.com can be viewed if you're lucky, rather than not at all
[16:16] <radix> the nice thing about nspluginwrapper is that it generally doesn't take down the entire browser
[16:16] <jdong> directhex: some sites still consistently cause 100% segfaults
[16:16] <jdong> directhex: while nspluginwrapper it tended to be a random option
[16:16] <radix> does the new 64bit flashplugin crash the entire browser?
[16:16] <jdong> radix: yup
[16:16] <jdong> SIGSEGV in firefox itself
[16:16] <radix> dang
[16:16] <jdong> apport has a field day
[16:17] <jdong> and eventauully comes up with ??? (????????) in libflashplayer.so
[16:17] <jdong> yay!
[16:17] <jdong> for now I'm STILL running a nasty 32-bit schroot for the browser.
[16:18]  * directhex has a "swiftfox" tarball in /opt on his hardy machines
[16:18] <jdong> *cringe*.
[16:19] <jdong> I can't believe you people use those things
[16:19] <radix> I have been reasonably happy with nspr since hardy
[16:19] <directhex> it was more reliable than an upstream tarball
[16:19] <directhex> which was less stress than a chroot
[16:19] <radix> I mean, not *really* happy, but enough that I'm not doing chroots or 32bit firefox or whatever
[16:20] <jdong> directhex: "Please also note that the licensing restrictions were put in place to safeguard Swiftfox users against the possibility of obtaining tainted versions from anyone who may wish to maliciously alter the binary and redistribute it." from upstream's site.
[16:20] <jdong> that statement of ignorance makes me cringe at trusting binaries from the vendor.
[16:20] <directhex> jdong, eh? i should read moar
[16:20] <jdong> directhex: http://getswiftfox.com/source.htm
[16:20] <jdong> directhex: it's binary-only licensed so that means it CAN'T BE TAMPERED WITH!!11
[16:21] <jdong> it's not possible to attach malicious executable code to binaries. Nope. Can't be done.
[16:21] <directhex> all over a 152 line diff?
[16:22] <directhex> at any rate, for whatever reason, the upstream binary builds crash much moar for me than swiftfox does. but only on some computers. it's all a bit sucky, really
[16:22] <jdong> directhex: that diff is a joke
[16:22] <jdong> directhex: it is IMO *CLEARLY* not swiftfox's complete set of changes
[16:22] <jdong> I see two changes to *.js that are simple options in about:config
[16:22] <jdong> that can't even begin to explain the changes in swiftfox.
[16:22] <directhex> i await a browser which manages to not suck
[16:23] <jdong> +pref("network.http.pipelining.maxrequests" , 8);
[16:23] <jdong> jeez.
[17:03] <eMerzh> if someone want to review my package (http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=sqliteman)
[18:02] <bain> iulian: cosmetic typos fixed (spaces after ':' ) and the empty directories are squashed (were not getting cleaned added to qmake stuff)
[18:02] <bain> iulian: whats the next step?
[18:11] <iulian> bain: The next step is to find a motu to review and advocate your package, if they don't find any other issues of course.
[18:12] <bain> iulian: ok thanks for your help so far... i gather that you have applied to be a motu yourself ;-)
[18:13] <iulian> Indeed
[18:13] <iulian> Well, I'm going outside for a half an hour or so, don't feel so good.
[18:14] <bain> ok
[18:14]  * bain goes on motu hunting
[18:31] <ia> hello, everybody. correct me, if i wrong - if for installing from tarball should do ./autogen.sh && ./configure && make && make install (instead traditional ./configure && make && make install), then within debianization such tarball i should add in debian/rules file in section "build" before ./configure --prefix=/usr line "./autogen.sh", right?
[18:35] <persia> ia, Whether to run something like ./autogen first is more about whether ./configure exists from the tarball.
[18:36] <persia> Also, there's two different philosophies to answer your question:
[18:36] <persia> Some people like to run autogen at packaging time, so they run autogen manually, and then use ./configure in debian/rules.
[18:36] <persia> Others run autogen on the buildds.
[18:37] <persia> The advantage of the first model is that you can know the contents of ./configure, etc. when the build happens, and make sure autogen ran correctly.
[18:37] <persia> The advantage of the second model is that you don't have to think about it (but you may get extra build failures).
[18:38] <persia> The disadvantage of the first model is that you need to do this regularly, and you may end up reuploading the package just to re-autogen if there is some issue.
[18:38] <persia> The disadvantage of the second model is that if the toolchain changes between your source upload and your build, the build may do something completely unexpected.
[18:40] <ia> persia: i've got it. thanks for information :-)
[18:41] <persia> ia, No problem.  Thanks for asking.
[19:00] <stefanlsd> persia: hi!
[19:01] <persia> stefanlsd, Hi!
[19:01] <stefanlsd> persia: Just wanted to say have a fun time away - and can i have your merges :)
[19:02]  * persia thought there was only one left, and looks again
[19:02] <stefanlsd> actually, looks like matchbox-window-manager only for now anyway
[19:03] <persia> Hrm.  Wonder why lash didn't sync yet
[19:03] <persia> stefanlsd, Take a quick look at that.  If you don't run away screaming, and you want to try to do it in the next 48 hours, you can have it.
[19:04] <stefanlsd> matchbox-window-manager? ok. will look at it
[19:04] <persia> Bother.  Lash needs manual effort.
[19:04]  * persia will deal with lash now
[19:06] <stefanlsd> persia: see what you mean bout matchbox. heh.
[19:07] <persia> stefanlsd, Yeah.  It's special.  I'm TIL, but I didn't do most of that, and haven't quite figured it out.
[19:08] <persia> I might end up looking for help on it myself, so I'm just not sure it's one that is good unless you're really a user.
[19:09] <sebner> persia for holidays \o/
[19:09] <persia> Maybe.  It's on my list of stuff I'd like to do before I go, but it's not at the top, and it's something I can put on my laptop for later.
[19:10] <persia> On the other hand, the point is to get outdoors and away from the computer, so I'm not sure how effective I'll be
[19:10] <stefanlsd> persia: it wouldnt really change much, as the merge is a -2 to -3 and the debian change was just a man page?
[19:11] <stefanlsd> persia: noo, dont do any work while youre away
[19:11] <persia> stefanlsd, Hrm.  Good point.  I've been so worried about trying to understand the Ubuntu mess I hadn't really investigated the Debian change.  Thanks for the hint.
[19:16] <persia> stefanlsd, Hrm.  Different upstream versions with different ways of producing tarballs.
[19:20] <stefanlsd> persia: why is that?
[19:20] <persia> stefanlsd, Because the two packagers had different ideas?
[19:22] <persia> stefanlsd, Looking through upstream SVN, there's a heap of changes between 20080701 and 20080918.  I think I will be doing it on-and-off on holiday.
[19:23] <stefanlsd> persia: mm. oki  :)
[19:26]  * persia dislikes tarball-in-tarball harder
[19:26] <stefanlsd> persia: seems strange that so much stuff was merged in. (although i cant really say as I dont even know what Meemo is).
[19:27] <persia> Maemo is the system used on the Nokia tablets.  That team did some interesting work to help improve the experience on that form-factor.  That got adopted for Ubuntu MID.
[19:28] <persia> But since Maemo hasn't gotten everything upstream yet, and we're pulling sideways, and Debian is pulling true, it's a bit confused.
[19:28] <persia> So a proper merge is against the new upstream, updated Debian, updated Maemo, and Ubuntu variation.
[19:28] <persia> Otherwise it would have already been done :)
[19:29] <stefanlsd> yeah. does ubuntu-mobile still exist?
[19:30] <persia> As a team, yes.  As a flavour, no.
[19:30]  * directhex wonders how update the maemo-mono packages are
[19:30] <directhex> ;)
[19:30] <persia> directhex, Dunno.  Feel like finding out, and creating the necessary bits to make Mono first-class on MID?
[19:31] <persia> stefanlsd, Essentially, the Mobile Team first worked on something that everyone is currently calling "Mobile Internet Devices", and "Mobile" means mobile phone to most people, so it was renamed to Ubuntu MID.
[19:32] <stefanlsd> persia: for this merge, why not just assume things are still ok (should be) why look at svn upstream?
[19:32] <persia> Then the Mobile Team started working on something that everyone calls "Ultra-Mobile Personal Computers", and "Mobile" still means mobile phone to most people, so it was renamed to Ubuntu UMPC.
[19:33] <directhex> looks like it hasn't seen any love for a while
[19:33] <persia> stefanlsd, Because Ubuntu has an svn snapshot from 20080701 and Debian has an svn snapshot from 20080918, and it's easier to look at SVN revision history than try to read the diff between those.
[19:33] <directhex> tek-nik-ly though, the question is over the UI for things, right? because lpia packages are built - even on my backport PPA
[19:35] <stefanlsd> persia: where do you see that they were built from different snapshots?  wouldnt they be on matchbox-window-manager_1.2.orig.tar.gz ?
[19:37] <persia> Oh.  I've been looking at matchbox-keyboard
[19:37]  * persia is excited at the concept that this nightmare might belong to someone else
[19:37] <stefanlsd> hehe
[19:38] <stefanlsd> you def do need a holiday :)
[19:42] <joaopinto> where can I check the watch file format ?
[19:43] <joaopinto> does uscan depend on file listing available on http/ftp server ?
[19:44] <persia> joaopinto, man uscan.
[19:45] <persia> It has two modes.  In the first mode, it does depend on that.  In the second mode, it can screen-scrape http sites.
[19:49] <stefanlsd> how can we let other people know that we have some spare time to assist with syncs & merges?
[19:49] <persia> stefanlsd, Sorry.  Distracted.  Yes, feel free to grab matchbox-window-manager.
[19:50] <stefanlsd> persia: np. will prep a merge.
[19:51] <ScottK> stefanlsd: Feel free to take spambayes too.
[19:51] <persia> stefanlsd, Extra points if you file a bug in the BTS with the code changes (no changelog) of http://launchpadlibrarian.net/17645376/matchbox-window-manager_1.2-2ubuntu1_1.2-2ubuntu2.diff.gz for me along with an explanation as to why this is useful.
[19:51] <persia> stefanlsd, And the way to say you are available is to ask here.  People will give you work :)
[19:52] <joaopinto> the download url is http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download/amoebax-0.2.1.tar.bz2
[19:52] <joaopinto> my rule is http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download/amoebax-(.*)\.tar\.bz2
[19:52] <joaopinto> uscan is trying to fetch http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download/
[19:53] <joaopinto> what's wrong ?
[19:53] <persia> Right, but http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download/ doesn't work.  You'll  need to use the three argument form, and screen-scrape ttp://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/
[19:53] <stefanlsd> persia: mm. was wondering if there could be a better system of working out if some people no longer have time to do there merges and not online or around to say so?
[19:54] <stefanlsd> ScottK: will have a look at it
[19:54] <persia> stefanlsd, Perhaps, but if you've extra time, and are just looking for something to do, UEHS is generally unclaimed.  Just update someting from there.
[19:54] <joaopinto> persia, I don't see anything about "screen-scrape" on the uscan man page
[19:55] <persia> This is a variant HTTP format which allows direct specification of
[19:55] <persia> Look for that string.  It's near there.
[19:56] <stefanlsd> UEHS into debian i presume?
[19:56] <persia> Or for a longer explanation, look for "There are two possibilities for the syntax of an HTTP  watchfile" and read the paragraphs below.
[19:57] <persia> stefanlsd, UEHS into Ubuntu.  For stuff not in Debian, if you're up for maintaining it, doing an ITP is encouraged.
[19:57] <persia> For stuff already in Debian, providing a debdiff for bugfixes, etc. to the BTS for the QA team is appreciated, including debdiffs for new upstream versions.
[19:57] <persia> (not raw debdiff, but the relevant changes to bring the packaging up-to-date)
[19:58] <stefanlsd> persia: ok. cool
[20:02]  * RainCT sights after seeing a text called "HACKERS" in his English schoolbook :P
[20:03] <joaopinto> http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download.html    amoebax-([\d\.]*).tar.bz2
[20:03] <joaopinto> shouldn't it fetch the page and then scan for links to amoebax-([\d\.]*).tar.bz2 ?
[20:04] <persia> yes, but since the string is http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download/amoebax-0.2.1.tar.bz2, it doesn't find it.
[20:04] <persia> You need to provide some more guidance for the last bit.
[20:04] <joaopinto> but the download page is not a component of the download url, how to I handle that ?
[20:04] <mikeowens> kees: hey are you busy?
[20:06] <joaopinto> persia, can you provide me a working rule ?
[20:07] <persia> joaopinto, Not without a bunch of testing.
[20:07] <RainCT> joaopinto: if you're pointing to a file with a link, you've to write the full link URL and not just the filename
[20:07] <persia> Could someone else please help joaopinto with the watch file?
[20:07] <kees> mikeowens: a little, but what's up?
[20:07] <RainCT> joaopinto: so I guess it would be:   http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download.html http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download/amoebax-([\d\.]*).tar.bz2
[20:07] <joaopinto> RainCT, the full url does not work either, there is no directory listing, the download link needs to be obtained from a download page
[20:08] <RainCT> joaopinto: see above :)
[20:08] <mikeowens> kees: just wanted to let you know that all the changes have been made to bogosec and it's uploaded to revu. whenever you get a chance, would you mind taking another look at it?
[20:08] <joaopinto> RainCT, does not work either
[20:08] <kees> mikeowens: sure! thanks :)
[20:09] <mikeowens> kees: thanks back
[20:11] <handschuh> maybe  http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download.html http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download/amoebax-([\d\.]*)tar.bz2 works ..
[20:11] <joaopinto> handschuh, did not
[20:12] <RainCT> wait! :P
[20:13] <RainCT> joaopinto: I always do the same mistake... :P   This works:     http://www.emma-soft.com/games/amoebax/download.html download/amoebax-(.*)\.tar\.bz2
[20:13] <RainCT> joaopinto, handschuh: you have to use the string which is in «href=".."», in the source code
[20:14] <joaopinto> RainCT, thanks :)
[20:16] <joaopinto> where can I check an example get orig source for a release tarball ?
[20:16] <persia> !tarball
[20:16] <persia> Darn.
[20:17] <persia> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Examples/ChangingTheOrigTarball
[20:17] <joaopinto> thanks
[20:27] <stefanlsd> persia: the diff ensures that matchbox-window-manager satisfies the meta package x-window-manager and sets up an alternative - didnt put it in the bug - #300435
[20:30] <RainCT> btw, am I the only one for whom Rhythmbox's lyrics plugin doesn't work (ie, it shows the lyrics for a completely unrelated song to the one currently playing)?
[20:34] <persia> stefanlsd, Hrm?  What does "didn't put it in the bug" mean?
[20:35] <stefanlsd> persia: didnt put the explanation for extra points
[20:35] <persia> stefanlsd, Ah, so I still need to file the bug in the BTS?
[20:37] <stefanlsd> persia: no, will provide debian with that diff and explanation
[20:38] <persia> stefanlsd, The Maemo patch is already in the BTS, so it's just the x-window-manager patch that needs to go.
[20:38] <persia> And thank you for taking care of this.
[20:38]  * persia will upload soon, but needs breakfast first
[20:38] <persia> bug #300435
[20:38] <stefanlsd> persia: yup. noticed. np.
[20:42]  * RainCT answers himself: yeah, there's a LP bug about it :P
[20:43] <stefanlsd> RainCT: when i went to a disco in germany, its so funny to hear the music they listen too.  - its all the songs they can sing along too!
[20:44] <stefanlsd> (in english typically)
[20:55] <joaopinto> there must be an error on the https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Examples/ChangingTheOrigTarball first get-orig-source example
[20:55] <joaopinto> it creates a link to the wrong level
[20:56] <joaopinto> the get-orig-source rule is expected to be executed from the source root dir ?
[20:57] <joaopinto> and the source dir tarball is expected to be created sourceidr/.. right ?
[21:08] <RAOF> joaopinto: That sounds right.  Let me have a look.
[21:18] <RAOF> joaopinto: Ah, right.  The link from the first get-orig-source target is going to be broken, isn't it.
[21:19] <joaopinto> yes
[21:19] <joaopinto> Unless I did some typo on my copy&paste :P
[21:20] <persia> No, it's probably broken.  I didn't test carefully last time I edited, and likely made a mistake.
[21:21] <joaopinto> revu is a bit slow today
[21:21] <persia> The hosting sponsor is having network issues.
[21:21] <emma> handschuh: interesting mis-highlight :)
[21:21] <joaopinto> 1 minute and waiting to submit comment :\
[21:22] <joaopinto> I think it's dead
[22:09] <handschuh> emma: huh ?
[22:10] <emma> handschuh: your links had emma in it and highlighted me, not a big deal, just making a random remark :)
[22:11] <handschuh> emma: ah ok
[22:11] <eMerzh> if someone want to review my package (http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?package=sqliteman)..i'll be glad to correct it if there is errors :p
[22:46] <james_w> Hobbsee: have you seen the Debian developer news thing?
[22:47] <Hobbsee> james_w: no, why?
[22:47] <Hobbsee> james_w: what's happened now?
[22:48] <james_w> Hobbsee: oh, nothing
[22:48] <james_w> http://wiki.debian.org/DeveloperNews
[22:48] <persia> msg00017 ?
[22:48] <james_w> it's for collecting small items that don't really warrant a -devel-announce mail, but may be of interest to a large number of developers
[22:49] <Hobbsee> james_w: oh, neat!
[22:49] <james_w> they collect them up, and send them out to -devel-announce as one email periodically
[22:49] <james_w> what do you think of setting up the same thing?
[22:49] <james_w> you get the wiki page as an archive for free
[22:50] <ScottK-laptop> Sounds like a better use of time than a Hall of Fame.
[22:50]  * ScottK-laptop heads home.
[22:51] <james_w> Thanks Scott, very helpful
[22:56] <persia> james_w, Wouldn't it be better to encourage people to send stuff like that to the News Team?
[22:57] <james_w> this would be developer focused items
[22:57] <james_w> we can always pass along items that would be of interest to a wider audience
[22:59] <persia> I guess, but even for developer news, I'd think the News Team would have the best infrastructure and practices to handle it.
[22:59] <persia> I'd much rather work with existing practices and teams than create new ones.
[23:00] <persia> So perhaps have a developer volunteer to also work with the news team, have all submissions go there, and have the developer filter out a special developer-newsletter from that and some selected traffic on -devel to send to -devel-announce once a month or so.
[23:01] <persia> What appears interesting to other editors can also go to other fora.
[23:01] <persia> Saves anyone having to carefully remember to forward things on, or wonder which is the right forum for any interesting piece of news.
[23:05] <JonReagan> is there a meeting going on?
[23:07] <Hobbsee> no?
[23:07] <JonReagan> ah... good
[23:08] <JonReagan> hello again ;)  I just had a quick question about a package
[23:08] <JonReagan> the one I was working on earlier... it's a pain.
[23:09] <JonReagan> I still can't figure out how to raname the tarball... every time I try to pull a REVU upload, the changes file fails to recognize the renamed package
[23:10] <persia> You want to adjust your directory name, the original tarball name, and the name in the changelog.
[23:11] <Hobbsee> persia: um?
[23:11] <Hobbsee> persia: why the first and last?
[23:12] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: mv tarball.gz foo_1.4.orig.tar.gz?
[23:12] <persia> Hobbsee, Those are the three bits that have to match for a package to carry the right name, aren't they?
[23:12] <JonReagan> well, it's the revu... I tried to rename the finished tarball (created after running the dpkg-buildpackage command) to openproj_1.4.orig.tar.gz
[23:12] <JonReagan> then revu failed...
[23:12] <Hobbsee> persia: yes, but this is the wrong version (native not normal), rather than the wrong name as such :)
[23:13] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: why'd it fail?
[23:13] <JonReagan> well, from what I could tell, the name did not match up somewhere... the only problem is that I could not find where
[23:14] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: what was the error message?
[23:14]  * persia defers to Hobbsee, who apparently has more context.
[23:14] <JonReagan> I can't remember now
[23:14] <JonReagan> I'll run a quick command and see what I can get
[23:16] <JonReagan> "Can't open /home/jon/openproj_1.4-0ubuntu1.tar.gz"
[23:16] <ScottK> james_w: In case it wasn't clear, I think your suggestion is a good one.
[23:17] <JonReagan> that's the only error when I try to upload to revu
[23:17] <james_w> ScottK: yes, I understood.
[23:17] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: did you run 'debuild -sa -S' in the source directory first?
[23:18] <JonReagan> eh... no I didn't
[23:18] <Hobbsee> that'd be why you have the problem, then.
[23:18] <Hobbsee> try that :0
[23:18] <Hobbsee> * :)
[23:18] <JonReagan> thanks. I'll give it a shot
[23:20] <JonReagan> ah, this might be something.... I ran the command you wrote above (debuild -sa -S)
[23:21] <JonReagan> and it told me that the original source file (with the .orig.tar.gz) was not found
[23:21] <persia> JonReagan, That's the thing you want to download from upstream (or if you are upstream, prepare without the packaging bits).
[23:22] <JonReagan> ah, so just download the original from the site
[23:23] <JonReagan> so, I do not need to do anything to the original file than rename it... I can leave the source code folder that I used to upload to revu alone?
[23:25] <persia> JonReagan, Let's step back a bit.  Are you upstream?
[23:25] <JonReagan> eh, no... I don't think so
[23:25] <persia> OK.  Does upstream provide source in a tar.gz file?
[23:25] <JonReagan> ah, yes they do
[23:26] <JonReagan> downloading it right now as a matter of fact :)
[23:26] <persia> Great.  Download the upstream tar.gz file.  save a copy: this is precious.
[23:26] <persia> unpack, and do all your packaging.
[23:26] <JonReagan> k
[23:26] <persia> copy your precious copy to just under the unpack directory.
[23:27] <JonReagan> under?
[23:27] <persia> rename the copy of the precious copy to the package_version.orig.tar.gz format.
[23:27] <persia> one level less deep.
[23:27] <directhex> the upstream .tar.gz file should be renamed to the form foomin_1.0.orig.tar.gz where 1.0 is the upstream version, foomin is the app name
[23:27] <JonReagan> ahh, I see
[23:27] <persia> So if you're working in /home/jon/src/packaging/myapp-1.0, you want it in /home/job/src/packaging/
[23:28] <JonReagan> ah, ok
[23:28] <persia> Make sure your package base directory has the right name.
[23:28] <persia> Make sure all of debian/changelog, debian/control, debian/copyright, and debian/rules exist.
[23:28] <james_w> persia: please check I have accurately represented your proposal on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/News, and rewrite to remove any obvious bias that crept in.
[23:28] <persia> Make sure that debian/copyright has the correct package name and version
[23:29] <persia> run debuild -S -sa
[23:29] <JonReagan> k
[23:30] <JonReagan> thanks!
[23:30] <persia> james_w, Thank you very much for pandering to my habit of rambling on IRC and turning that into something tangible for me to edit.
[23:30] <JonReagan> when I upload this to REVU, this won't screw up and add a new entry, as if it's a totally different program will it?
[23:31] <persia> If it does, the new one is correct.  Ask someone to nuke the old one.
[23:31] <JonReagan> ah, k.  Thanks! :)
[23:31]  * persia suspects it won't
[23:40] <Hobbsee> persia: you don't have to change the package base directory name, do you?
[23:40] <Hobbsee> dpkg-source gets it right whenever you unpack
[23:41] <JonReagan> ah, downloaded... unpacked. and now renamed.
[23:42] <Hobbsee> (no harm in doing so, though)
[23:42] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: \o/
[23:42] <JonReagan> I have one copy of the source from upstream on my desktop, and one (the one I renamed in the directory below my working one)
[23:42] <persia> Hobbsee, For the contents of orig.tar.gz, I agree.  Can dpkg-source handle broken diff.gz as well?
[23:42] <JonReagan> which one should I extract from?
[23:43]  * persia wouldn't be surprised if it could, but that's a different thing
[23:43] <JonReagan> the one which has been renamed, or the original?
[23:44] <Hobbsee> persia: the diff.gz doesn't get it's name from the directory.
[23:45] <persia> Hobbsee, Oh, in that case, yeah.  Pointless, but not harmful.
[23:45] <persia> JonReagan, doesn't matter, if they are the same.
[23:45] <JonReagan> ah, k. thanks
[23:46] <Hobbsee> persia: (which is why stuff like a full bzr package of ubuntu-meta, etc, works - even though it exports as debian/<source tree>)
[23:47] <JonReagan> ah, good!  I still have the orig.tar.gz
[23:47] <persia> Hobbsee, Hrm.  I guess my habits of avoiding VCS and doing everything with piles of patches anyway are showing then.
[23:47] <JonReagan> but I still have to work out the version number issue, and apparently I have not set up my gpg key right... no secret key :P
[23:48] <Hobbsee> persia: *g*.  I only do it with a couple of packages
[23:48] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: ...no secret key?
[23:48] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: and what's wrong with the version number now?
[23:48] <JonReagan> well, lintian, over in revu, reports the error that the version number has a dash, and is not supposed to
[23:49] <JonReagan> the version is openproj (1.4-0ubuntu1)
[23:49] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: yes, but doesn't that refer to your old package, not the one you're doing now?
[23:50] <JonReagan> oh, that's a good question... I'll see if I can get my gpg key fixed, or force a sign, and will give it another shot
[23:51] <JonReagan> wow... that was a lot easier than I thought... I forced a key sign, and it worked! :)
[23:51] <Hobbsee> :)
[23:52] <JonReagan> and there it goes to REVU! :)
[23:52] <JonReagan> with the orig.tar.gz!
[23:53] <Hobbsee> \o/
[23:54] <JonReagan> thank you all so much!  It will take a while for this package to upload. so I am going to take a break, eat some dinner, and get back to it later.
[23:54] <Hobbsee> JonReagan: glad to help :)
[23:55] <persia> james_w, Have I mangled it too badly?
[23:57] <james_w> persia: I would think the wiki page would be a pointer to the mailing list?
[23:58] <james_w> persia: also, I think your "editorial review" is wrapping up my main objection to the proposal with other concerns.
[23:58] <persia> Ah, good point.  I'll fix that.
[23:59] <persia> Which is the main objection?
[23:59] <persia> (and yes, I rewrote to be a convincing argument, which does mean missing some bits)
[23:59] <james_w> that the current state only exists in the heads of those developers following the news list, rather than being clear from a wiki page