[02:03] <nhandler> Any ideas why padre is failing to build in my PPA (http://launchpadlibrarian.net/30258686/buildlog_ubuntu-karmic-i386.padre_0.42-1~ppa1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz). It says that libalien-wxwidgets-perl (>= 0.39) is not available, even though version 0.42+dfsg-1 is in karmic
[02:30] <zul_> anyone seen ajmitch?
[03:25] <goatbar_> Is there an official field that can be used in the control file that gives the source URLs for download?
[03:30] <micahg> for uscan?
[03:31] <micahg> goatbar_: ^^^
[03:34] <goatbar_> micahg: not sure what uscan is, but we are trying to figure out a reasonable way to automate pulling the source so we don't have to checking the original tar with debian tree while we are working on these
[03:34] <micahg> check out the debian/watch file
[03:35] <goatbar_> ok... in the debian trees or ubuntu?
[03:35] <micahg> in the source of the package for ubuntu, there is a debian folder which controls the package
[03:35] <micahg> in that folder you can set a watch file and point it to download updated tarballs for you
[03:36] <goatbar_> gotchya.  thanks
[03:36] <micahg> is that what you're looking for?
[03:36] <goatbar_> trying to remember how to get there
[03:36] <goatbar_> what's the url?
[03:36] <micahg> for what?
[03:38] <goatbar_> I tried "apt-get source watch" and it didn't pull the deb info
[03:38] <micahg> no
[03:38] <micahg> for whatever package you have, you have a debian folder
[03:38] <micahg> and you can add a watch file
[03:38] <micahg> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Howtos/DebianWatch
[03:39] <micahg> in the same directory as the control file
[03:39] <goatbar_> okay?  I thought you were meaning that I should pul the source debian for the "watch" package
[03:39] <micahg> no, sorry for the confusion
[03:40] <micahg> is it clear now?
[03:40] <goatbar_> ah... yes.  Thanks!
[03:40] <micahg> great! :)
[03:41] <goatbar_> the packaging for fink on mac uses debs, but does packaging very differently, so I'm working on trying not to think in the fink packaging style.  uscan looks like what I want
[04:50] <fabrice_sp> Hi. Some archive admin here? I'd like to have packages in bugs #412352 and #412347 sync ASAP, as there is still something like 10 packages behind those 2 (a lot of java package in Debian are using maven-repo-helper now).
[05:20] <TheMuso> /c/c
[07:10] <dholbach> good morning
[07:10] <fabrice_sp> good morning dholbach !
[07:14] <dholbach> hey fabrice_sp
[07:14] <dholbach> hi mok0
[07:20] <Hobbsee> hi dholbach!
[07:22] <dholbach> hi Hobbsee
[07:23] <\sh> moins
[07:38] <stochastic> does anyone know if sharedmimeinfo gets updated automatically in Karmic?  or what the proper way to get it refreshed in cdbs is if it doesn't?
[07:41] <dholbach> persia`: are you going to re-run that session? ara just asked about the logs
[08:00] <stochastic> does any motu with a spare minute and a kind heart want to REVU one of these: 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
[08:26] <alkisg> Good morning. If a package "P" recommends package "R", is there any bug/way that a user may install "P" and not have "R" automatically installed? (assuming that R doesn't conflict with any other package in the system)
[08:26] <ScottK> Yes
[08:26] <alkisg> When does that happen?
[08:31] <ScottK> You can turn installing recommends off is one way
[08:33] <directhex> --without-recommends
[08:34] <alkisg> Ah ok, but in a default installation (e.g. from within ubuiqity or d-i) that won't happen, right?
[08:34] <directhex> but Recommends are for "you really probably want this but it isn't vital" situations. perhaps you should use a Suggests if the requirement isn't that strong?
[08:34] <alkisg> No no it is that strong, we want package "R" to be installed but give the option to the user to remove it later on
[08:35] <directhex> the default was switched a release or two ago to recommends-by-default. certainly d-i will do it
[08:35] <Hobbsee> you can remove it later on, with no problem
[08:35] <directhex> but if the recommends isn't available from the install media, it'll be skipped
[08:35] <alkisg> Thanks a lot to all of you, that was what I was looking for :)
[08:45] <artfwo> (
[08:45] <artfwo> oops, sorry
[09:40] <wsuthomas> I want to get involved
[09:40] <slytherin> wsuthomas: read the topic of channel.
[10:01] <slytherin> juli__: Uploaded cobertura, waiting in the NEW queue - https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/karmic/+queue
[10:04] <artfwo> by the way, what happens to the package after it's uploaded to the NEW queue? is it documented anywhere?
[10:10] <slytherin> artfwo: Packages in new queue are reviewed by archive admins. When they are approved they are uploaded to build servers and get built.
[10:11] <slytherin> This is about source packages.
[10:11] <slytherin> Binary packages in new queue when approved by archive admins get copied to archive pool.
[10:12] <artfwo> so it's a matter of 2 steps
[10:14] <artfwo> every binary and source package is reviewed then including updates?
[10:14] <juli__> slytherin, thank you! for uploading cobertura and  commenting in my application
[10:14] <slytherin> welcome. :-)
[10:15] <directhex> artfwo, every source package is reviewed at first upload, and again only when the binary package list changes
[10:15] <slytherin> artfwo: every 'new' source and binary package.
[10:15] <directhex> artfwo, intermediate uploads which don't change the binary manifest are not re-checked
[10:16] <artfwo> understood it, thanks
[11:38] <slytherin> TheMuso: any idea if powerpc buildd has different default compiler flags than others? I am wondering about this in gdb FTBFS - cc1: warnings being treated as errors
[11:56] <j^> so how does the review process on revu work? uploaded a package and its just sitting there.
[11:56] <j^> can i get anyone a beer to have a look at http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/oggvideotools
[12:02] <siretart`> j^: done. How to get my beer? ;-)
[12:03] <POX> "standards version should be 3.7.2"?
[12:04] <POX> 3.8.2?
[12:04] <j^> siretart, in berlin at any point?
[12:05] <james_w> except for the LGPL files
[12:05] <POX> j^: s/Description: "Ogg Video Tools" is a /Description: /
[12:06] <POX> s/jaunty/UNRELEASED/
[12:06] <siretart`> POX: yes, indeed
[12:06] <siretart`> j^: nope. i'm from Erlangen/Nuernberg :-)
[12:07] <j^> UNRELEASED would be for the changelog?
[12:07] <POX> yes
[12:07] <siretart`> POX: why?
[12:07] <Laney> i don't think that matters for revu
[12:07] <Laney> j^: doesn't mention copyright of the packaging
[12:07] <siretart`> for revu, please don't. the packages should be in a state that a reviewer can just debsign the source package and upload it
[12:07] <POX> siretart`: because it provides a lot of confusion (when you f.e. want to Depend on it in other package)
[12:08] <siretart`> POX: what confusion would that bring?
[12:08] <POX> let me dig for a bug report...
[12:08] <Laney> also please point to the versioned gpl in common-licenses
[12:08] <siretart`> how about maintaining them in a PPA to get the dependencies sorted out and then copy it to revu in the right order
[12:09] <POX> siretart`: http://bugs.debian.org/386354
[12:10] <j^> siretart, not coming down there anytime soon, but if you ever come to berlin, let me know.
[12:11] <siretart`> POX: TBH, I think having UNRELEASED changelog entries causes more confusion than it solves, but obviously YMMV
[12:11] <slytherin> POX: changelog entry should be for current development release.
[12:13] <POX> if package was uploaded to Debian/Ubuntu - distribution field should point to the distribution it was uploaded to ("distribution" as in unstable, jaunty, etc.), if it was never uploaded, it should be marked as UNRELEASED or removed from the changelog, IMHO
[12:15] <POX> debian/changelog should help other maintainers as well, not only the package maintainer
[12:16] <slytherin> POX: That is fine when you are maintaining the packaging bits in some VCS. revu is not VCS. And if package uploader puts 'unreleased' then he sponsorer will have to modify changelog entry before upload, which is not ideal.
[12:16] <Laney> he's talking about previous changelog entries
[12:16] <POX> Laney: thanks
[12:16] <Laney> makes sense to me
[12:16] <slytherin> Oh, sorry. I thought he was talking about latest one. Mu mistake. :-(
[12:26] <j^> what if previous versions where in a ppa build for the version mentioned?
[12:27] <slytherin> j^: ppa is not official repository
[12:27] <j^> yes, but you have to use the version to get it build for that ubuntu release
[12:29] <slytherin> how does that matter? If the package was only in PPA previously, you should not keep multiple changelog entries at all. COmbine then into one.
[12:30] <j^> ok
[12:30] <j^> i was using the same changelog for the ppa and now revu but can use a combined one for revu
[12:37] <jcfp> j^: some more: incorrect version in changelog ...-ubuntu3 (probably want -0ubuntu1), homepage field missing from control, copyright for the your own work (the packaging) isn't specified, several files are not gpl2+ (lgpl, bsd-like) but missing from copyright, man pages for each executable?
[12:41] <j^> man pages are worked on upstream, so next version will have them, copyright issues also discussed with author.
[12:43] <jcfp> there's several files that are properly licensed but not mentioned in debian/copyright
[12:49] <dholbach> Packaging Training Session "On-Call Review" with cjwatson, seb128, james_w and me in 12m in #ubuntu-classroom
[12:50] <james_w> multi-ping!
[12:53] <directhex> oh wow, that's an all-star team
[12:55] <TheMuso> slytherin: not sure. Probably looking at the build logs of packages on different arches may help.
[13:06] <dutchie> how long does it take an upload to show up on revu?
[13:07] <Laney> not long
[13:08] <dutchie> that's useful
[13:09] <artfwo> I recall it's around 3 minutes
[13:10] <dutchie> ok, it's been about 5.
[13:10] <dutchie> I'll give it a bit longer
[13:13] <nicolasvw> Hello, does a universe package versioned xxbuild1 get auto-synced from debian or does one have to file a sync request for it?
[13:13] <Laney> either, depending on the release cycle
[13:13] <directhex> nicolasvw, yes, it gets auto synced. when we're not past debian import freeze
[13:14] <Laney> place in the^
[13:14] <dutchie> could an admin have a look to see if my package has appeared on revu?
[13:14]  * Laney giggles at the classroom session
[13:14] <dutchie> it's not showing up on the web interface
[13:14] <Laney> RainCT: ^ can you help?
[13:16] <nicolasvw> directhex, thankx
[13:17] <RainCT> Laney, dutchie: Sure, which package is it?
[13:17] <dutchie> suvat
[13:17] <dutchie> http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/suvat
[13:17] <dutchie> I just uploaded 0.2-0ubuntu1
[13:18] <RainCT> 2009-08-13 14:03:02 - suvat_0.2-0ubuntu1_source.changes: Incorrect signature, moving to rejected.
[13:18] <dutchie> how is it incorrect?
[13:18] <RainCT> dutchie: Have you logged in on REVU before uploading the package?
[13:19] <dutchie> no, should I have?
[13:19] <RainCT> dutchie: Yes, you need to log in at least once so that REVU takes your GPG key from Launchpad
[13:19] <dutchie> ah, ok
[13:23] <dutchie> ok, it's uploaded
[13:23] <dutchie> thanks for your help
[13:28] <RainCT> no problem
[15:00] <slytherin> RainCT: perhaps the package on wiki needs update to mention the new GPG import workflow.
[15:16] <RainCT> slytherin: yeah, feel free to clean it up ;)
[15:22] <mhall119|work> morning
[15:22] <mhall119|work> what is the process for getting packages into Universe?
[15:27] <siretart`> mhall119|work: first step is looking at the links in the topic :-)
[15:27] <fosser_josh> can anybody help in developing deb packaging
[15:28] <mhall119|work> siretart`: oh, sorry, the name list made it scroll up out of sight
[15:28] <wildnfree_> Hello, I am new to this irc channel. I am looking for help in becoming a MOTU developer. I am one of the developers on the OpenShot Non-Linear Video Editor for Linux. I am developing the documentation package, including the Gnome Help files.
[15:35] <wildnfree_> I am looking for a mentor to help me build up skills in producing the .deb packages fo OpenShot.
[15:43] <bddebian> heya gang
[15:43] <slytherin> RainCT: Done
[15:44] <slytherin> wildnfree_: have you read the links referred in the topic.
[15:44] <RainCT> slytherin: thanks :)
[15:48] <wildnfree_> Hello Slytherin. Yes I've read the links. I am registered on Launchpad, and I have signed the Ubuntu Code of Conduct.
[15:48] <slytherin> Did you look into the packaging guide?
[15:48] <wildnfree_> I have also read lots of the pages on the Ubuntu community site, but the information in those just sends me round in circles.
[15:49] <wildnfree_> I have been gradually learning the packaging guide, and have created one .deb package.
[15:49] <slytherin> wildnfree_: So if you have questions then fire away.
[15:51] <wildnfree_> How do I get a mentor to help me improve my packaging? And how do I actually apply for membership of MOTU?
[15:51] <slytherin> wildnfree_: If you have already prepared a package, the first step would be to upload to revu so that it gets reviewed and improved.
[15:52] <slytherin> wildnfree_: MOTU membership takes more time. As you have to work on more than one packages, get involved in community, help others etc.
[15:53] <wildnfree_> The package at present is just a test package to learn to package the manual. What is <revu>?
[15:54] <slytherin> wildnfree_: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Packages/REVU and http://revu.ubuntuwire.com
[15:57] <wildnfree_> slytherin: I have been involved in the Linux community since 1996 when I started using Debian. I used to offer advice and support on the old LBC list in Britain.
[15:58] <wildnfree_> I have been providing support to users on the OpenShot (alpha) project as well.
[15:58] <slytherin> nice
[15:58] <slytherin> is the movie editor Free?
[16:00] <wildnfree_> Yes! Gnu Public Licence! And the films I am editing and compositing with OpenShot, are being published under a Creative Commons licence.
[16:00] <slytherin> looks lot like pitivi to me. :-)
[16:01] <slytherin> wildnfree_: if you want to get it included in next Ubuntu release you must hurry, the feature freeze is on 27th August.
[16:02] <wildnfree_> slytherin: we won't have it ready for Karmic. OpenShot is alpha, and about to become beta. We need help in packaging first
[16:03] <slytherin> wildnfree_: As I said, post your package on revu and get it reviewed.
[16:05] <wildnfree_> slytherin: I am first looking for a mentor to get the packages into  suitable condition to submit to revu.
[16:06] <slytherin> wildnfree_: you don't need to. revu is place for review. Just upload.
[16:06] <slytherin> wildnfree_: or are you saying that your package is not in condition to upload to revu?
[16:07] <wildnfree_> slytherin: Not in a condition yet to upload to revu
[16:08] <slytherin> wildnfree_: Considering that feature freeze is close, it is hard to find a mentor for personal interaction. Still, may be others will be able to help you
[16:08] <slytherin> Got to go now.
[16:33] <pochu> does apport now also offer you to get a backtrace locally, instead of submitting the coredump to launchpad?
[16:42] <pochu> looks like it still can't
[16:43] <james_w> pochu: you can do it yourself with apport-retrace, but it's not part of usual apport flow
[16:44] <pochu> james_w: not in the UI yet though, right? I recall there was a bug report about that, but I can't find it now...
[16:46] <james_w> pochu: that's as I understand it
[17:30] <hyperair> hmm for some reason, banshee's and liferea's notification area icons no longer have black backgrounds
[17:30] <hyperair> O_o
[17:30] <hyperair> i wonder what happned
[17:43] <pochu> hyperair: for liferea it's fixed in 1.7
[17:43] <pochu> but not on jaunty
[17:43] <pochu> it only happens if you select 'display the number of unread items in the tray icon' in the preferences, maybe you unselected that?
[17:43] <hyperair> pochu: i know. i'm still usnig liferea 1.6 and suddenly my black background disappeared
[17:44] <hyperair> nono i didn't change anything
[17:44] <hyperair> all of a sudden, i noticed banshee didn't have a black background anymore
[17:44] <hyperair> so i restarted liferea
[17:44] <hyperair> and voila, no more black background
[17:44] <hyperair> O_o
[17:44] <pochu> ok, lucky you ;)
[17:44] <hyperair> yeah O_o
[17:44] <hyperair> i wonder if it'll stick when i reboot
[18:08] <chrisccoulson> is there any specific reason that meta-gnome2 is marked "no need to sync" on merges.ubuntu.com? Is it just that theres not much point in putting the effort in to do that, or is there another reason?
[18:10] <apachelogger> RainCT: ping
[18:33] <fabrice_sp> Wouah! Archive admins are subscribed to 160 bugs report! Is it a normal volume?
[18:34] <geser> fabrice_sp: I assume because of the pending alpha release, sync requests aren't processed at the moment to not disturb it
[18:39] <fabrice_sp> oh, makes sense
[18:51] <nicolasvw> when setting Build-Deps to default-jdk instead of openjdk-6-jdk, what should the JAVA_HOME variable in rules be set to?
[19:08] <logari81> please take a look at the following package http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=6621
[19:08] <logari81> it is pretty complicated for my experience level, hence any comments are welcome
[19:13] <logari81> and some notices on the revu site itself:
[19:13] <logari81> A. the link http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/getfem%2B%2B doesn't work.... I suppose the ++ signs in the package's name trigger the problem
[19:13] <logari81> B. The Details and Description fields here http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=6621 correspond to the last binary package of the multi-binary source package (it'd be more intuitive to consider the first binary)
[19:16] <fabrice_sp> logari81, in the copyright file, the url is not changed
[19:17] <fabrice_sp> also, the version should be -0ubuntu1
[19:19] <fabrice_sp> I think your libgmm-dev.install is not complete (no lib installed?)
[19:23] <fabrice_sp> files in superlu are copyrighted to xerox (1994). Reflect that in your copyright file. And check all the source files to be sure that the copyright file reflect everything
[19:24]  * fabrice_sp feels alone....
[19:25]  * ScottK gives fabrice_sp a good hard slap in the head so he feels some companionship.
[19:26] <ximion> Hello! Could someone please review my smile package? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/smile
[19:27] <fabrice_sp> ScottK, this is not the kind of companionship I was expecting :-)
[19:27] <ximion> And how do I remove the ubuntu-main-sponsors from the related bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/298706 ? I added them by accident.
[19:27] <ScottK> ;-)
[19:27] <ScottK> ximion: You don't.  I'll do it
[19:27] <ximion> ScottK: Sorry :-(
[19:27] <ScottK> No problem
[19:28] <ximion> ScottK: But companionship for me ;-)
[19:29] <stochastic> can someone please look at http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/xwax it's been sitting with one advocation for a month now and feature freeze is immanent
[19:32] <fabrice_sp> ximion, building your package  right now
[19:33] <ximion> fabrice_sp: Oh, Thank you!
[19:35] <logari81> fabrice_sp: thank you for your time,
[19:35] <logari81> A. version will be corrected,
[19:35] <logari81> B. I think libgmm-dev has only headers so lib is not needed (the actually problem with libgmm is that it already exists in the repos as standalone)
[19:35] <logari81> C. I ll try to figure out all the copyright parts (how did you find out so quickly about the xerox part?)
[19:35] <fabrice_sp> logari81, I used the 'legal' link in revu
[19:36] <fabrice_sp> you can also use checklicense (I think)
[19:37] <fabrice_sp> ximion: seems good.
[19:37] <logari81> ok, are there any remarks about the names of the binaries? I ve removed the "++" so that package names correspond to the library name.
[19:38] <ScottK> fabrice_sp: licensecheck
[19:39] <fabrice_sp> ScottK, you hit me too hard on the head. I became dyslexic ! :-)
[19:39] <fabrice_sp> logari81, ^^
[19:40]  * ScottK whacks fabrice_sp again to put it back the right way
[19:40]  * fabrice_sp begins to write in French! 
[19:40] <ximion> fabrice_sp: You'll find the GPLv2 at
[19:42] <fabrice_sp> ximion, what do you mean?
[19:42]  * fabrice_sp is building getfem++
[19:44] <fabrice_sp> logari81, your pacakge FTBFS in karmic
[19:44] <fabrice_sp> did you used pbuilder to build it?
[19:45] <ximion> fabrice_sp: ScottK told you to make a license-check... Some others already complained there would be no license shipped with the source code. (But they did not look in the BIB_ManSlide/Help dir)
[19:45] <ScottK> As long as the full license text is somewhere in the tarball it's OK.
[19:45] <fabrice_sp> ohh: license-check was for logari81
[19:46] <ScottK> If it's in an odd place, mentioning that in debian/copyright doesn't hurt
[19:48] <ximion> ok
[19:48] <ximion> ScottK: How do I get a sponsor for this? Simply wait if someone wants to sponsor this package?
[19:49] <ScottK> Pretty much.  Mention it here now and then too
[19:50] <logari81> fabrice_sp: I have built it in my ppa https://launchpad.net/~logari81/+archive/ppa
[19:50] <fabrice_sp> What is the equivalent of xdg-icon-resource install --novendor --context mimetypes --size 192 %{_datadir}/pixmaps/aqsis-doc.png application-x-slx in the debhelper world? I added dh_icons in my rules file, but nothing is generated in preinst
[19:51] <fabrice_sp> logari81, for Jaunty, not for KArmic
[19:51] <logari81> fabrice_sp: but for jaunty
[19:51] <fabrice_sp> :-)
[19:51] <logari81> yep ok I ll upload it for karmic too
[19:52] <fabrice_sp> ok
[19:56] <fabrice_sp> I'll explain it in another way: I have a package in Jaunty that install a mime file and some desktop file to associate that file type to programs and icons. The problem is that the icon mentioned in desktop file are not associated to the extension. Ddh_icons does not solve the problem. Any ideas?
[19:59] <ximion> I developed a GNOME-AppInstall solution for KDE, which is completely based on PackageKit and Qt4. Now in Karmic+1 the new AppCenter should arrive. Where do I find information about this and how can I contact the AppCenter developers? (Because maybe I'll stop developing QAppInstall)
[19:59] <ximion> fabrice_sp: To assign a mime-type, a mime info is also required.
[20:00] <fabrice_sp> ximion, upstream install the mime file in the right place, and dh_desktop and dh_installmime is called
[20:01] <ximion> fabrice_sp: Look in /usr/share/mime for all available mime types.
[20:01] <fabrice_sp> do you ahve an example? It changed between jaunty and karmic, so it should be for jaunty
[20:01] <ximion> To notify the system about that the app can handle a file type, just add the line MimeType=application/x-ipk; to the .desktop-file.
[20:01] <ximion> (replace applications/x-ipk with the mime-definition)
[20:02] <ximion> dh_desktop is outdated.
[20:02] <fabrice_sp> hmm. I think the mime file if well installed, because if I double click on the file with the extension, the program is run
[20:02] <ximion> it does nothing at time (or am I wrong?)
[20:02] <fabrice_sp> it is outdatedi n Karmic, but still useful in Jaunty
[20:02] <fabrice_sp> in Karmic, it does not do anything, you're right
[20:03] <fabrice_sp> I'll check the desktop file, but upstream is telling me that it's working in Fedora
[20:05] <fabrice_sp> the desktop file is ok: MimeType=model/x-rib;model/x-rib-gzip;
[20:05] <fabrice_sp> ximion, thanks for trying :-)
[20:08] <ximion> fabrice_sp: I tried it here (Karmic): Everything works! Do the mime models exist?
[20:08] <ximion> You also may need to start a new desktop session to see the effect.
[20:13] <fabrice_sp> as it's for Jaunty, I'll check some package that installs mime file
[20:26] <RainCT> apachelogger: pong
[21:17] <stochastic> what's the process for becoming a MOTU?
[21:19] <directhex> make lots of contributions, write a personal statement, and add yourself to the CC agenda
[21:20] <pochu> s/CC/MC/
[21:21] <directhex> yeah, those guys
[21:21]  * directhex is too busy eating an ice lolly to be accurate
[21:22] <stochastic> how many contributions constitutes 'lots'  (roughly)
[21:23] <pochu> stochastic: your fellow developers will tell you when you're ready
[21:23] <stochastic> pochu, thanks
[21:23] <pochu> or when somebody assumes you're one when you're not, you should probably apply :)
[21:24] <stochastic> I don't suppose anyone might be willing to help me get 'lots' of contributions by revu-ing some of my packages?
[21:26] <directhex> i'll take a look, then
[21:26] <directhex> but i still need to finish tidying the house
[21:27] <stochastic> thanks directhex, take your pic from http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/xwax  http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/xjadeo  http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/a2jmidi  http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/slv2
[21:27]  * stochastic ducks out to do some dishes
[21:34] <apachelogger> RainCT: sent a memo :D
[21:36] <RainCT> apachelogger: err what?
[21:36] <apachelogger> RainCT: you didn't get a msg from memosrv?
[21:37] <RainCT> ah yes
[21:37] <apachelogger> :)
[21:39] <RainCT> apachelogger: okay, sure
[21:40]  * apachelogger buries RainCT in cookies \\o/
[21:41] <RainCT> :D
[21:43] <Jazzva> Is there any condensed way to add licenses to debian/copyright when a lot of files are licensed under MPL/GPL/LGPL and the only difference is in developers/contributors? Can I just mention them in section for upstream authors/contributors, and leave just one copy of license in the license section?
[21:44] <Laney> if each file has different copyright then you can't get around listing that
[21:45] <Jazzva> Tthanks for the answer
[21:45] <Jazzva> s/Tt/T/
[21:46] <stochastic> Jazzva, you might also be interested in this: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/
[21:46] <Jazzva> stochastic: thanks
[21:54] <RainCT> apachelogger: done, but Launchpad doesn't feel like letting spooky pull the changes :(
[22:01] <apachelogger> RainCT: spooky launchpad, no cookies for that beast :P
[23:56] <jtimberman> anyone able to look at some packages I have in REVU? http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/u/jtimberman