[00:37] <crimsun> thanks for all the hard work getting libjack0 rdepends done, folks!
[05:59] <ScottL> not trying to be picky but it would appear that hydrogen-0.9.4 didn't make it into lucid according to bug #495507
[05:59] <ScottL> i realise there was a lot going on just before the FF and of course I could have contact debian multimedia sooner
[06:00] <ScottL> but anyway, i'll be moving on to some testing in the next couple of days (and hopefully some community documentation again as well)
[06:00] <ScottL> cheers everyone
[20:42] <ScottL> can someone explain the difference between ISO's from http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/ubuntustudio/daily/   and one's found at  http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/build/ubuntustudio/all?
[20:42] <ScottL> when would you choose to download one in preference to the other?
[20:45] <crimsun> huh?
[20:45] <crimsun> the latter URL gives me "We are not testing at the moment"
[20:45] <crimsun> am I missing something?
[20:49] <ScottL> i did not understand that either and was hoping it was a lack on my knowledge and would become clear when someone explained more
[20:50] <crimsun> well, I don't see any list of isos at the latter, so I can't tell you anything
[20:50] <crimsun> normally there's a link from the latter to something resembling the former
[20:50] <crimsun> it's usually dated, however
[20:51] <ScottL> would it be fair to say that th former is "cutting edge" with daily builds and the latter is more formalized for testing and documentation purposes?
[20:52] <crimsun> I don't think so
[20:53] <crimsun> again, normally the latter links to a specific dated iso hosted on the former
[20:53] <ScottL> i'm hoping to aggregate the information i gain and make a ubuntu studio community testing documentation page to help the community at large and the launchpad testing team specifically
[20:54] <ScottL> well, to be honest, stochastic has already started something and I wanted to flesh it out more