[00:16] <directhex> jtimberman, how long's it been in NEW?
[00:17] <jtimberman> Couple days, but they have an estimated 1 month backlog before it will be in Sid.
[00:17] <jtimberman> Trying to get Chef and dependencies in Karmic. :/
[00:18] <jtimberman> (And also in Debian while we're at it)
[00:47] <jtimberman> so i unarchived the merb package, since its in NEW but not in an APT repo, and fixing the findings from REVU, but it still complains about the maintainer field. I used the value specified in the Ubuntu packaging policy manual.
[00:47] <Laney> there's an update-maintainer script in ubuntu-dev-tools to do it for you
[00:59] <jtimberman> oh
[01:01] <jtimberman> It sets it to 'Ubuntu developers' not the MOTU team.
[01:11] <jtimberman> Laney: i'm packaging for Universe, shouldn't it be set to the MOTU team, not Ubuntu Developers?
[01:12] <Laney> it's in anticipation of archivereorg
[01:12] <Laney> u-d-d is good
[01:12] <Laney> goodnight
[01:14] <Ampelbein> jtimberman: see https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2009-May/028213.html for the maintainerfield setting, along with https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ArchiveReorganisation
[01:15] <jtimberman> thanks Ampelbein
[01:19] <jtimberman> i take it the policy will be updated to reflect that then? :)
[01:19] <jtimberman> (at some point, not immediately)
[01:20] <Ampelbein> jtimberman: i guess so, otherwise it would not make sense ;-)
[01:20] <jtimberman> hehe :)
[01:20] <jtimberman> no worries, thanks for the pointer.
[02:48] <Hilikus> how do i add a PPA repo to the sources list inside my pbuilder?
[02:48] <Hilikus> or it will use the same sources as the systemL?
[02:50] <nellery> Hilikus: use sudo pbuilder login
[02:50] <Hilikus> i was trying to avoid that
[02:50] <nellery> then you can edit the sources.list from there
[02:50] <Hilikus> is there no switch or somethnig?
[02:53] <nellery> Hilikus: I think you can use --othermirror if my memory serves
[02:53] <nellery> see the manpage
[02:54] <Hilikus> i did, but the thing is, how do i add the public key?
[03:01] <maxb> Either don't, and just ignore the warnings, or sudo pbuilder login --save-after-login and make changes inside the chroot same as you would on a real system
[04:11] <jedc> Hi, i'm trying to learn how to package software and I am a little confused about the rules file. If the software I am packaging is already built what do i need to change in the rules file since I dont need to compile it?
[04:12] <hggdh> jedc, you will need to rebuild it under the rules. No binary-only packages...
[04:16] <jedc> ah i see, but it gets compiled when it get made into a package?
[04:18] <hggdh> it will be built yes. You can use debuild -b, or a pbuilder
[04:19] <porthose> jedc, I would suggest finding a package similar to the one you are trying to package and use it as an example :)
[04:20] <jedc> hmm, good idea, i will see if i can find one that is similiar
[05:20] <therm> Hello everybody out ther
[05:20] <therm> e
[05:21] <therm> I yesterday build my packages for karmic in my ppa and was wondering where they package eclipse-common-nls is for karmic?
[05:21] <therm> it exists for jaunty
[05:22] <therm> does somebody know about this?
[05:32] <fabrice_sp> therm, it has been deleted from Ubutnu: "It's too old, upstream released 3.5 but eclipse package in Debian is not updated"
[05:33] <fabrice_sp> well, really, it got deleted from Debian
[05:34] <therm> fabrice_sp: lol, and now I will have to package it myself right?
[05:35] <fabrice_sp> therm, you can upgrade the package, yes. I'm doing something similar for a package that didn't got updated since a long time in Debian, to have the latest version
[05:35] <therm> fabrice_sp: thx for the information
[05:35] <fabrice_sp> yw
[05:37] <YokoZar> Hmm, I'm trying to update ia32-libs and it keeps bombing with "Unable to find a source package for qt4-x11" -- what's weird is that apt-get source qt4-x11 seems to work just fine
[05:39] <therm> fabrice_sp: but how will I be able to get this to ubuntu or debian?
[05:40] <fabrice_sp> therm, for Ubuntu, open a bug report, and attach the diff.gz file of your packaging
[05:41] <therm> fabrice_sp: thx
[05:41] <fabrice_sp> for debian, I don't know.
[05:42] <therm> fabrice_sp: for me it is important that my packages run with ubuntu, but I would be nice to have to give it back to debian
[05:43] <fabrice_sp> TheMuso, given the timeframe you have for Karmic, I would say make it for Ubuntu, and try Debian after
[05:44] <fabrice_sp> TheMuso, sorry. Bad tab completion
[05:44] <fabrice_sp> therm, ^
[05:44] <YokoZar> ah hah, I see why... for some reason qtcore4 is version -0ubuntu2  while its source package is version -0ubuntu3
[05:45] <YokoZar> Is that due to a build failure?
[05:45] <fabrice_sp> YokoZar, yes
[05:46] <therm> fabrice_sp: thanks a lot, I will try to do so
[05:46] <fabrice_sp> YokoZar, in this case, the package has been uplaoded 3 hours ago, so it's not yet built
[05:46] <fabrice_sp> therm, yw
[05:47] <YokoZar> fabrice_sp: Oh, didn't realize the new source package would be moved into the archive before the binary was built
[05:48] <fabrice_sp> YokoZar, the binary are built from the source, so first source, then, if the package builds fine, binary. :-)
[05:48] <fabrice_sp> that's why it's better to look for source package is the package FTBFS :-)
[05:49] <ScottK> YokoZar: I was curious if you are generally interested in R?
[05:51] <YokoZar> ScottK: Yeah I'm big on that stuff I'm helping the RevoR guys get their stuff into Ubuntu
[05:52] <ScottK> YokoZar: OK.  I know mok0 is interested in R also.
[05:52]  * ScottK likes the idea of Ubuntu being a great R platform, but doesn't currenlty use it.
[05:52] <YokoZar> ScottK: do you have an interest or were you just syncing packages then? ;)
[05:53] <ScottK> Since Debian has such an active R effort from upstream, it seems a shame not to have it good in Ubuntu too.
[05:53] <ScottK> If someone else will mind after it, I don't mind a bit.
[05:55] <YokoZar> The debian maintainer for all these R stuff is more interested in them creeping into Ubuntu I believe
[05:56] <ScottK> He is.
[05:56] <ScottK> He was at the last UDS.  Did you see his plenary presentation?
[06:03] <YokoZar> ScottK: Yeah, I was at his session as well (I think I was one of two Ubuntu devs there...I assume the other was mok0)
[06:04] <ScottK> No, he didn't make it to UDS
[06:52] <dholbach> good morning
[06:55] <porthose> good morning dholbach :)
[06:56] <dholbach> hi porthose
[09:49] <wizztjh> hiii
[09:50] <wizztjh> i need to find a mentor in UBUNTU!!!
[09:50] <wizztjh> anyone can help me , haha
[09:50] <wizztjh> i need to find a mentor in UBUNTU!!!
[09:53] <dholbach> wizztjh: easy! repeating your request isn't going to make it any quicker
[09:53] <RAOF> wizztjh: What specifically do you need?  Also, all-caps & repetition doesn't look very friendly.
[09:53] <dholbach> wizztjh: did you check out https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/GettingStarted and read the pages linked from it already?
[09:54] <dholbach> wizztjh: I suggest you mail the motu mentoring reception and while you wait check out those links and start playing with the tools as explained in the packaging guide to get some more idea...........
[09:54] <dholbach> oh well
[09:54] <Laney> wow
[09:55] <sebner> troll
[10:59] <slytherin> what is with freenode these days? Or is the netsplit seen only on ubuntu channels?
[11:30] <directhex> slytherin, freenode's been *good* lately!
[11:31] <slytherin> Am I the only one who sees soo many quit messages then?
[11:33] <artfwo> I see them as well, but that's been always happening in the east :)
[11:38] <Daviey> If you fork the debian packaging for use in another similar, but different package.. what should you do about debian/copyright?
[11:45] <Laney> keep the original debian/ copyright entries and add yourself after
[11:47] <Daviey> Laney: so the "This package was created by.."  It won't cause problems if that person is unrelated to it?
[11:48] <Laney> Daviey: If it's a new package I'd write a DEP5 copyright file anyway
[11:49] <Daviey> well i guess i could do a DEP5 one, and mention in the abstract that it is based on the package XXX by YYY ?
[11:49] <Laney> the important thing is just to keep the copyright and license of the original debian directory
[11:50] <Daviey> it's not as if there is actualy much there.. but now i've seen it - even if i write the packaging from scratch, i'm still tainted :)
[11:50] <Laney> I don't know that you need to mention that in copyright
[11:50] <Laney> I'd be tempted to put it in the changelog entry though
[11:51] <Laney> * Initial release, packaging modified from xxx source package
[11:52] <Daviey> sounds sane
[11:53] <Daviey> What Standards Version does DEP-5 become valid?
[11:57] <Laney> it's still a proposal now
[11:59] <james_w> if the packaging declares a license then you have to abide by it obviously
[11:59] <james_w> e.g. if it is GPL then you have to make yours GPL
[12:00] <Laney> indeed
[13:00] <ximion> Has someone enough time to recheck the smile package at revu? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/smile
[13:00] <ximion> I think it's ready now.
[13:07] <j^_> hi, what would be a good way to get a package into universe, so far its only in a ppa
[13:08] <artfwo> j^_, have you read https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages ?
[13:26] <krisives> I made a backport of a package from Karmic to Jaunty, what can I do to get that into the repo?
[13:26] <krisives> It fixes a bug that many people are irritated with :D
[13:28] <nhandler> krisives: Take a look at https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports
[13:28] <krisives> Thanks
[13:29] <nhandler> You are welcome krisives
[13:29] <krisives> Is there a way to get a list of backported packages?
[13:32] <nhandler> krisives: What are you trying to do? Check if certain applications have already been backported? If so, I prefer to do 'rmadison PACKAGE', and check if it is in foo-backports
[13:34] <krisives> I made a backport for nautilus-open-terminal, which had a very irritating bug with SFTP in Jaunty. This was fixed in Karmic, and I simply built the backport
[13:34] <krisives> http://67.43.13.30/~kives/wp/2009/08/nautilus-open-terminal-backport-for-jaunty/
[13:34] <krisives> Hehe, don't make fun of me :(
[13:34] <krisives> I'm just trying to help
[13:45] <garyvdm> Hi - Usan seems to be using a cached copy of the ?watch page". How can I get it to refresh
[13:45] <garyvdm> *uscan
[13:52] <hyperair> get rid of your caching proxy and retry
[13:52] <hyperair> uscan does no caching
[13:59] <slytherin> krisives: just search for package on packages.ubuntu.com
[13:59] <krisives> slytherin: I've already seen that the package isn't backported yet
[14:00] <slytherin> garyvdm: you can use uscan --verbose to get more details.
[14:02] <Laney> and --debug for even more
[14:24] <foolano> hi guys, it would be lovely if some of you could check the package I've uploaded to revu http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/libtext-dhcpleases-perl thanks ;)
[14:47] <slytherin> directhex: what is the status of ikvm from the point of view of this bug - http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=269062
[14:49] <directhex> slytherin, it's still pretty useless for gui apps... and i don't know how compatible the command-line args are...
[14:49] <directhex> i think it's an interesting idea which would frighten upstream! :)
[14:50] <slytherin> directhex: if it is good for command line apps then it should have 'Provides: java2-runtime-headless'.
[14:51] <directhex> i would hesitate to use the words "good for"
[14:52] <directhex> it seems to work in my very basic checks, but i feel uneasy about anyone relying on it as "real" java
[14:57] <slytherin> directhex: is it active upstream? I mean do developers expect bug report?
[14:57] <directhex> yes, upstream is active
[14:59] <slytherin> then I guess it is good to let users know that it can work as jre and they can file bugs against it. :-)
[15:01] <directhex> what alternatives do i need to provide?
[15:01] <directhex> and which command-line apps do you suggest testing?
[15:02] <slytherin> directhex: java2-runtime-headless, java5-runtime-headless (if it is compatible), java6-runtime-headless (if it is compatible)
[15:02] <slytherin> directhex: bsh is what comes to mind immediately.
[15:07] <directhex> root@osc-bigmac:/usr/share/mkgmap# ikvm -jar mkgmap.jar --version
[15:07] <directhex> svn
[15:07] <directhex> well that one seems to work
[15:09] <slytherin> bsh has at least started. :-)
[15:09] <slytherin> And hello world has worked. :-P
[15:10] <directhex> karmic?
[15:10] <slytherin> jaunty
[15:10] <directhex> it's much improved in karmic. feel like trying a backport for testing?
[15:11] <bddebian> Heya gang
[15:11] <iulian> Hi bddebian.
[15:11] <slytherin> directhex: do you have backport ready?
[15:12] <bddebian> Hi iulian
[15:12] <directhex> slytherin, nope! ought to be simple to do though. i'll look at it later
[15:12] <slytherin> directhex: wait, I can try in Debian (testing). I am leaving now for home. Will be back online in an hour.
[18:00] <james_w> Jazzva: " The source is licensed under GPL v3, as pointed out by the upstream author
[18:00] <james_w>  in the e-mail.
[18:00] <james_w> "
[18:00] <james_w> Jazzva: which email?
[18:01] <Jazzva> james_w: was that related to some extension?
[18:01] <james_w> yeah
[18:01] <james_w> bugmail
[18:01] <james_w> the one you uploaded the other day
[18:02] <Jazzva> james_w: let me check. I think the new version has a license file. Did I miss to remove that comment from some file?
[18:02] <james_w> err...debian/copyright
[18:02] <Jazzva> james_w: yeah, found it :)
[18:03] <james_w> Jazzva: accepting anyway, but there's no need to introduce doubt where there is none :-)
[18:03] <Jazzva> james_w: Sorry about that, I forgot about that notice. I'll edit that and push to bzr.
[18:03] <james_w> and if you need to reference an email in debian/copyright then include the email, don't just refer to the "the email" because we need the record
[18:03] <james_w> thanks
[18:04] <Jazzva> james_w: that's left from previous upstream version, when the license file was not present, and I completely forgot to remove it.
[18:04] <Jazzva> james_w: thanks for accepting, and telling me how to do it right :)
[18:05] <Jazzva> I'll fix debian/copyright now, so the notice will not be there in the next upload :)
[18:18] <james_w> artfwo: nice job on debian/copyright for scantailor
[18:19] <slytherin> james_w: what is specifically nice about it?
[18:19] <james_w> it's complete
[18:19] <james_w> :-)
[18:20] <slytherin> :-)
[18:22] <james_w> it was the first time in a while I didn't have to reject a package that had multiple licenses covering the included files
[18:23] <james_w> normally people just include the main one, and don't check for others
[18:23] <slytherin> Does anyone happen to have access to a sparc machine? I need to test a FTBFS fix. The fix will probably ready in an hour.
[18:27] <artfwo> ah
[18:27] <artfwo> it was complete back when you have first reviewed it james_w
[18:27] <crimsun> slytherin: NCommander or TheMuso may
[18:27] <artfwo> but the new upstream release included more works my other authors
[18:28] <james_w> artfwo: still, good job
[18:29] <artfwo> thanks, I hope it will make its way to the archive
[18:30] <artfwo> huh
[18:30] <artfwo> it has already?
[18:30] <james_w> yep
[18:30] <james_w> I just accepted it
[18:30] <artfwo> great!
[18:30] <artfwo> my first real ubuntu package ever!
[18:31] <artfwo> and I hope not the last
[18:32] <james_w> congratulations
[18:34] <artfwo> and it already fails to build on armel:(
[19:34] <fabrice_sp> Hi. I'm having some issue with mime types. if I manually run "update-desktop-database /usr/share/applications" and "update-mime-database /usr/share/mime", it works after installing my package, but in postinst, I only have the update-mime-database call. What am I missing in my rules files? and then
[19:34] <chrisccoulson> fabrice_sp - that's unnecessary on karmic
[19:34] <chrisccoulson> they should run automatically on package install via dpkg-triggers
[19:35] <fabrice_sp> chrisccoulson, and in Jaunty?
[19:35] <chrisccoulson> perhaps not in jaunty
[19:35] <fabrice_sp> I'm testing the package in Jaunty
[19:35] <chrisccoulson> in jaunty, i think you still need to call dh_desktop in debian/rules
[19:35] <fabrice_sp> I'll check in a karmic VM, then
[19:35] <chrisccoulson> but that is deprecated in karmic
[19:36] <fabrice_sp> that makes sense: i saw a lot of 'dh_desktop is deprecated', but that's for karmic, you're right! I'll try with dh_desktop in Jaunty. Thanks!
[19:37] <chrisccoulson> you're welcome:)
[19:38] <stochastic> chrisccoulson, so if dh_desktop is depreciated in Karmic, what takes its place?
[19:39] <chrisccoulson> stochastic - nothing
[19:39] <chrisccoulson> all it did was add a postinst hook to call update-mime-database
[19:39] <chrisccoulson> but that isn't needed anymore as update-mime-database happens via dpkg-triggers magic when you install any files in to /usr/share/applications
[19:57] <j^> if i uploaded a package to revu and it does not show up, how can i find out why this is happening?
[19:57] <j^> the package i uploaded is called oggvideotools
[19:59] <geser> did you only upload the source (..._source.changes)?
[20:00] <j^> yes only source, orig and diff, uploaded to a ppa before and that worked fine
[20:00] <geser> and I don't know if it still the case, but you might need to login to revu once before you upload your first package so it can get your gpg key from LP
[20:00] <j^> ah, that could be the issue
[20:00] <j^> if that is the case, should i just upload it again?
[20:00] <j^> am logged in non revu now
[20:01] <geser> you can at least try it (else you need to wait for a REVU admin who can look into the logs)
[20:02] <j^> after upload, does it take some time to show up?
[20:03] <geser> the cron job who processes the uploads runs every 3 min
[20:03]  * slytherin is glad that reportbug is finally working. :-)
[20:19] <stochastic> I must say I'm starting to get dismayed about contributing to Ubuntu, it's just a little over two weeks from feature freeze but the bugfixes I've added to launchpad and the packages I've added to revu are all just sitting helplessly awaiting motu's action
[20:20] <stochastic> I know you guys are busy, but isn't there a team that works through these contributions?  it seems like that's been absent this cycle.
[20:21] <geser> there is
[20:22] <geser> but like most other MOTUs they are doing it in there free time
[20:23] <joaopinto> and the problem is not specific to this cycle, REVU is getting behind for some time
[20:24] <stochastic> I understand that, after all, my contributions are done in my free time too
[20:24] <geser> stochastic: I see that you are talking about new packages on REVU
[20:25] <stochastic> it's not just REVU, the bugfixes that I've subscribed universe sponsors to have sat inactive for almost a month now
[20:25] <geser> have you a bug number handy?
[20:27] <stochastic> hold on, launchpad is being slow
[20:27] <slytherin> stochastic: feature freeze just means no new versions of the packages. It does not mean bug fixes can not be done.
[20:28] <stochastic> Bug #325004
[20:29] <geser> REVU was always very slow on processing packages and I'm not doing seldom reviews as I prefer to get the packages we already have fixed instead of adding new one that nobody will look after later
[20:30] <stochastic> Bug #148585
[20:31] <stochastic> geser, but major features of upstream software depend on new libraries like http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/slv2
[20:31] <stochastic> Ubuntu is going to become an outdated operating system if the new libraries and formats don't get incorporated into the repositories
[20:32]  * stochastic realizes he's ranting now
[20:35] <geser> stochastic: the choice is sometimes not easy. I prefer no packages at all so users now that they need to compile it themselves or use some hopefully PPA (I know that opinion may sound hard) that to offer unmaintained and probably outdated packages from universe (where nobody will look at bugs)
[20:36] <jtimberman> stochastic: Ah, but not everyone wants the most bleeding edge latest version of the software... I suppose thats what RHEL is for ;)
[20:36] <jtimberman> But in 15 years of using Linux, Ubuntu is a far cry ahead of the curve when it comes to including the latest releases of software, generally speaking.
[20:37] <slytherin> if you want more bleeding edge, try Debian experimental. :-)
[20:37] <jtimberman> or gentoo ;)
[20:38] <stochastic> Bug #325004 is a prime example that goes against both your arguments, that package has needed an update since hardy and the official website states "DON'T USE ANY VERSION OLDER THAN 0.8"
[20:38] <norsetto> stochastic, feel free to work on it
[20:39] <stochastic> norsetto, I've added my debdiff and it's awaiting upload, but it's sat inactive and I'm worried it won't make feature freeze
[20:39] <stochastic> ^^ sorry, my diff.gz
[20:41] <stochastic> Anyway, I didn't want to start a big confrontation, I'm simply expressing my slight dismay that all my attempted contributions to Karmic seem to be sitting stagnant in either launchpad or REVU
[20:41] <mzz> jtimberman: gentoo stable isn't all that recent for most software, and for gentoo unstable it varies wildly
[20:42] <jtimberman> mzz Indeed, my comment was intended t obe snarky ;)
[20:42] <mzz> (please keep jokes about "gentoo" and "stable" being a contradiction to yourself :P)
[20:42] <norsetto> stochastic, there are 160 packages in the sponsor's queue and I don't know how many in revu, and an handful of people looking at those
[20:43] <stochastic> norsetto, so you're saying that the MOTU team is too small for the amount of contributions it's receiving?
[20:43] <jtimberman> mzz: I rarely keep jokes about Gentoo to myself, but as that's well off topic, I'll refrain from further ;)
[20:44] <norsetto> stochastic, your package is number 27 on the queue, so, just be patient and it will be processed
[20:45] <james_w> hey norsetto!
[20:45] <james_w> how are you?
[20:45] <stochastic> norsetto, what about these packages awaiting REVU any likelyhood they'll make feature freeze: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/xwax       http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/a2jmidid      http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/xjadeo        http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/slv2        and it's not mine but I'd really like to see it get included: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/pyphat
[20:45] <norsetto> james_w, hi there
[20:45] <geser> stochastic: although there are around 100 MOTUs (incl. some core-dev) I don't know how many are currently really active and from those how many look at the sponsoring queue, probably too few :(
[20:46] <norsetto> james_w, pretty fine, and you?
[20:46] <james_w> good thanks
[20:46]  * slytherin nukes one bug from queue, it is already fixed.
[20:47]  * porthose waves at norsetto :) 
[20:47]  * norsetto waves his queue at porthose
[21:00] <hggdh> all, I was chatting with a Gnome bugmeister, and he told me gnome-volume-manager is completely orphaned upstream. Is it time to drop it from Universe?
[21:01] <chrisccoulson> yes, gnome-volume-manager is not worth keeping around now
[21:01] <chrisccoulson> james_w ^^^
[21:28]  * ScottK waves to norsetto too.
[21:28] <ScottK> Long time no chat.
[21:28] <norsetto> hi ScottK, whats up?
[21:28] <ScottK> Hey norsetto.  Keeping busy.  Trying to make a Kubuntu for netbooks this cycle.
[21:29] <norsetto> ScottK, ha, that should keep you busy :-)
[21:29] <ScottK> Yep.  Working pretty good right now.
[22:50] <goatbar> Is this a good place for beginners trying to create new ubuntu source packages?
[22:53] <crimsun> goatbar: sure, but some reading is expected
[22:55] <goatbar> we are working on it.  I've been a fink developer (deb for Mac OSX) for many years, but that abstracts away a lot of directly dealing with creating debs and I haven't created a source deb before
[22:56] <goatbar> the two of us have already submitted 2 bug reports for the documentation today
[23:01] <crimsun> excellent
[23:05] <goatbar> when building a source package as described in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/HandsOn, should the debian directory really be inside of the unpacked original source tree?
[23:05] <jtimberman> goatbar: yes
[23:06] <jtimberman> the debian directory stores all the packaging bits, and the source is untouched unless you create any patches (dpatch or quilt) for it.
[23:10] <goatbar> Thanks.  We are trying to figure out how to source control the debian directory for our own work.  Is there a standard way of doing this?
[23:11] <goatbar> if we have a bunch of packages that we are working with before they end up in ubuntu (assuming that they get approved down the road)
[23:12] <jtimberman> a lot of the various packaging teams have different ways to do that, i don't think its really standardized. i have all my packaging bits on a repository on github, and i pull them down and toss into the package's debian directory.
[23:13] <goatbar> that's basically what we thinking
[23:13] <jtimberman> I'm sure someone more experienced than I can answer with a better recommendation, I just started working on packaging for Debian/Ubuntu a couple weeks ago.
[23:55] <james_w> chrisccoulson: was that a request to remove it?
[23:56] <chrisccoulson> james_w - yes, but don't worry about it yet - it still has some rdepends that i'm going to look at
[23:56] <chrisccoulson> when I get a chance anyway ;)
[23:56] <james_w> chrisccoulson: cool, thanks
[23:56] <james_w> a bug report is better anyway, as it leaves a paper trail
[23:57] <chrisccoulson> james_w - yeah, I think hggdh is looking at that. most of the rdepends seem quite trivial except one of them
[23:57] <chrisccoulson> but it would definately be nice to remove it, as it really does more harm than good now