[17:07] <LaserJock> anybody here for Edubuntu?
[17:31] <sbalneav> Boo
[17:33] <LaserJock> #startmeeting
[17:33] <MootBot> Meeting started at 11:33. The chair is LaserJock.
[17:33] <MootBot> Commands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]
[17:33] <LaserJock> just in case we need to remember something
[17:33] <LaserJock> ok, so let's do status report real quick
[17:33] <LaserJock> I'm gonna try to send out a "State of the Release" email today with more detail
[17:34] <LaserJock> * yesterday mvo got the changes for Add/Remove that we wanted for the app bundle spec
[17:34] <LaserJock> this means that our "app bundles" will always sort at the top of the list in Add/Remove
[17:35] <LaserJock> we also have inital metapackages for the bundles done
[17:35] <LaserJock> you can bzr branch lp:~ubuntu-core-dev/ubuntu-seeds/edubuntu.jaunty/ to get the seeds
[17:36] <LaserJock> the files should be fairly self-explanitory
[17:36] <LaserJock> I've also done some tweaking of the desktop seeds
[17:37] <LaserJock> so we have desktop-gome (for edubuntu-desktop) and desktop-kde (for edubuntu-desktop-kde)
[17:37] <LaserJock> sortly I'll transiton those to dep on the app bundles
[17:37] <LaserJock> *shortly
[17:38] <LaserJock> so edubuntu-desktop, for instance, will be app bundles + misc gnome'ish tools
[17:38] <LaserJock> and edubuntu-desktop-kde will be app bundles + mis kde'ish tools
[17:38] <LaserJock> so the app bundles (preschool, primary, secondary, tertiary) become the core
[17:39] <LaserJock> make sense?
[17:39] <highvoltage> yep
[17:39] <sbalneav> Yes
[17:40] <highvoltage> getting it via bzr now to get more familiar with them fwiw
[17:40] <LaserJock> what we need to do is finalize the app bundles
[17:40] <LaserJock> I just took a quick stab on figuring out what package would be appropriate
[17:40] <LaserJock> but I'm not a "real" educator so I'd like feedback there
[17:41] <LaserJock> next thing is the Universe app bundles
[17:41] <highvoltage> LaserJock: are those lists up on a wiki page somewhere?
[17:41] <LaserJock> highvoltage: nope
[17:41] <LaserJock> highvoltage: RichEd had a spreadsheet with a bunch of apps cateogrized by level
[17:42] <LaserJock> it's attached to the app bundle spec
[17:42] <LaserJock> *but* it's outdated, I think it's based on Hardy
[17:42] <highvoltage> hmm, it would be nice to have it on the wiki for educators to see. I don't think we can expect them to bzr it out for feedback
[17:42] <LaserJock> for the Main ones that's not a problem, we know what's in there
[17:42] <highvoltage> LaserJock: I'm looking at it now, don't you think ktuberling can also go into preschool?
[17:43] <LaserJock> highvoltage: I sent the info to the mailing list
[17:43] <LaserJock> highvoltage: nobody responded
[17:43] <LaserJock> I can try a wiki page to see if that'll help
[17:43] <highvoltage> LaserJock: sorry, I must have missed it through everything. I can put it up on the wiki too?
[17:43] <LaserJock> the bigger issue is the Universe app bundles
[17:44] <LaserJock> highvoltage: go for it
[17:44] <LaserJock> I need 1) a good naming scheme and 2) a list of Universe apps we think are important for educators
[17:44] <LaserJock> for 1) I've been really thrashing around with this but haven't really fell in love with anything
[17:44] <highvoltage> os that ship-addon?
[17:45] <highvoltage> oh, it's not
[17:45] <LaserJock> highvoltage: hmm?
[17:45] <LaserJock> ship-addon is what goes on the Ubuntu Education Cd
[17:45] <LaserJock> so far the biggest support has been for ubuntu-edu-*-extras
[17:46] <LaserJock> to be consistent with the Main app bundles (which are ubuntu-edu-*) and to show that we consider these useful extras but not our core apps
[17:47] <LaserJock> one thing I wanted to be sure of is to make it future-proof regarding the Archive Reogranization
[17:47] <highvoltage> future-proof in terms of naming I assume?
[17:47] <LaserJock> yeah
[17:48] <highvoltage> that's a toughie
[17:48] <LaserJock> well, if the universe/main split goes away
[17:49] <LaserJock> I'm guessing we'll want to have a core and extras set of packages still
[17:49] <highvoltage> ok, so the difference between those 'universe' apps and the ones that are currently shipped is that the universe ones won't be shipped
[17:50] <LaserJock> and won't be "fully supported by Canonical and the Edubuntu community"
[17:50] <highvoltage> so how about something like edubuntu-nonshipped-primary or something that implies that it's not shipped on the disc?
[17:50] <highvoltage> that's a lot to try and imply in the length of a package name :)
[17:50] <highvoltage> (but I understand the need for it)
[17:50] <LaserJock> well, we do have package descriptions
[17:50] <highvoltage> right
[17:51] <LaserJock> I liked either ubuntu-edu-*-extras
[17:51] <LaserJock> or edubuntu-*
[17:52] <LaserJock> edubuntu-* get's us into trouble because there's confusion as to what is edubuntu and what is ubuntu-edu
[17:52] <LaserJock> btw, we've removed debian-edu from Jaunty
[17:52] <LaserJock> so we won't have the "education" namespace clutter
[17:54] <highvoltage> ok
[17:54] <LaserJock> so what are your opinions?
[17:54] <highvoltage> about edubuntu and ubuntu-edu confusion...
[17:55] <highvoltage> I'm confused
[17:55] <LaserJock> :-)
[17:55] <highvoltage> how does edubuntu-* cause trouble? is it supposed to be ubuntu-edu-*?
[17:55] <LaserJock> the app bundles in main are called ubuntu-edu-*
[17:55] <LaserJock> but they're the core of what we'd call Edubuntu
[17:56] <highvoltage> ah, that must be new in jaunty then
[17:56] <LaserJock> if we then add in packages that are called edubuntu-*, but are the community-supported "extras" it's confusing
[17:56] <LaserJock> yes, it is
[17:56] <highvoltage> quite honestly I think the way that it's all branded is really terribly confusing
[17:57] <LaserJock> I know, but we've tried to minimze that
[17:57] <LaserJock> Canonical wants "Ubuntu Education" so that's what we're doing
[17:58] <LaserJock> the only way to make it less confusing is to ditch "Edubuntu" altogether, which would have pretty consquences, IMO
[17:58] <LaserJock> *pretty big
[17:58] <highvoltage> yep
[17:59] <LaserJock> so does ubuntu-edu-*-extras sound OK?
[17:59] <LaserJock> do you think it's misleading at all?
[18:00] <LaserJock> should we just ditch the concept altogether and find a different way to get educators to Universe software?
[18:00] <highvoltage> it's probably as good as you'll get it
[18:01] <highvoltage> LaserJock: it's probably a good start. if someone doesn't like it or they want to make suggestions they should be encouraged to file bugs
[18:01] <highvoltage> that way it will at least improve from release to release
[18:02] <LaserJock> right
[18:02] <LaserJock> I just don't want to create a set of package that we then rename/remove in a release or two
[18:03] <highvoltage> hmm
[18:03] <LaserJock> a big problem for us already is how constantly we're changing
[18:03] <LaserJock> users have no idea what "Edubuntu" is
[18:04] <LaserJock> heck , we don't even know what it is :-)
[18:05] <highvoltage> I guess that's why we want RichEd here too
[18:06] <LaserJock> for the rest of Jaunty
[18:06] <LaserJock> we have bugs
[18:06] <LaserJock> we need to fix them :-)
[18:06] <sbalneav> Workin' on Sabayon now.
[18:07] <sbalneav> Could we classify the top 10 bugs we'd like to fix?  So I can have a target?
[18:08] <LaserJock> I was wanting to do an Edubuntu Hug Day
[18:08] <LaserJock> which would would do something like that
[18:08] <LaserJock> have target bugs rather than just "heah, fix these 200+ bugs"
[18:08] <LaserJock> thanks to moquist we have moodle 1.9.4 in Jaunty
[18:09] <highvoltage> \o/
[18:09] <LaserJock> it still needs some work but it fixes 24 CVEs, 20 Debian bugs, and 7 Ubuntu bugs
[18:09] <LaserJock> huge improvement
[18:09] <sbalneav> I took the day off to work on some bugs, but I'd be up for another bug day
[18:09] <LaserJock> we can work today
[18:10] <LaserJock> and then at the end of today get a list for the next bug day that I'll announce the heck out of
[18:10] <LaserJock> sbalneav: sound OK?
[18:14] <LaserJock> ok, before we go morgs sent me a Sugar Team status update:
[18:14] <LaserJock> * All the platform components have been updated to the Sugar
[18:14] <LaserJock> FeatureFreeze versions before the Jaunty Feature Freeze. However, they
[18:14] <LaserJock> are now out of date. The Sugar final 0.84.0 release is on Tuesday 3
[18:14] <LaserJock> March and I'll submit bug reports to upload that then. I've logged
[18:14] <LaserJock> bugs for an intermediate release, but I have a problem building the
[18:14] <LaserJock> main sugar component successfully - a problem installing the gconf
[18:14] <LaserJock> schemas.
[18:14] <LaserJock> * The abiword libabiword bug is still open - I haven't had time to
[18:14] <LaserJock> address the latest criticism on my patch.
[18:14] <LaserJock> * The remaining components which are really out of date are
[18:14] <LaserJock> activities, on which nothing else depends. I'll file bug reports
[18:14] <LaserJock> asking for FFEs to get them uploaded once the platform is up to date.
[18:14] <LaserJock> sorry for the paste spam there
[18:14] <sbalneav> OK
[18:15] <LaserJock> so they still need to get libabiword worked out
[18:16] <LaserJock> ok, well, any other issues?
[18:17] <LaserJock> like I said before, I'll be sending out an email with more detail on what things need to get done before release
[18:17] <LaserJock> as you guys now, I'm about out of *buntu-time for Jaunty so I'll be pointing out what items I'll take care of
[18:17] <LaserJock> and the rest will have to depend on people stepping up a little to make sure things get done
[18:19] <LaserJock> going once ..
[18:19] <LaserJock> going twice ..
[18:20] <LaserJock> ok, we're done
[18:20] <LaserJock> #endmeeting
[18:20] <MootBot> Meeting finished at 12:20.
[18:20] <LaserJock> back over the wall to #edubuntu