[00:00] <bdmurray> nigelbabu: it makes sense to me if we only want notifications of bugs with patches
[00:47] <nigelbabu> bdmurray:  only trouble now is we we dont know how many people are working on reviews
[00:47] <nigelbabu> ok, you can know by mooking at moderation queue
[00:52] <bdmurray> nigelbabu: actually any comment on a bug that the team is subscribed to will end up in the moderation queue - which also means metoo's will go there - which I think is a good thing
[00:55] <nigelbabu> bdmurray: metoo?
[00:56] <bdmurray> nigelbabu: if some random person comments on a bug that happens to have the team subscribed it won't go to the mailing list
[00:56] <nigelbabu> ah
[00:57] <nigelbabu> only not everyone is subscribed
[00:59] <nigelbabu> bdmurray: is there anyway to be midway?
[00:59] <nigelbabu> i.e. have only members of the team and people who've applied be able to post
[01:00] <bdmurray> maybe one could update the list of posters with the list of team members?
[01:00] <nigelbabu> or we can say subscribe to list but keep web only if you dont want mails
[01:01] <nigelbabu> that way we can know how many people actually review bugs, so easier for dholbach to deal with membership requests
[01:03] <nigelbabu> bdmurray: btw, the graphs are supposed to show u-m-s and u-u-s too? aren't they redundant?
[01:13] <bdmurray> nigelbabu: not for the long term historical perspective
[01:14] <nigelbabu> oh, ok :)
[01:14] <nigelbabu> bdmurray: you're admin on the list right?
[01:15] <bdmurray> nigelbabu: of the patch review mailing list? yes
[01:15] <nigelbabu> ok :)
[01:15] <nigelbabu> I'll think of something to add to the wiki
[01:16] <nigelbabu> also, is it possible t get a list of mails in moderation queue? (I dont know how mailman works)
[01:16] <nigelbabu> so on patch day if I want to know who helped and in what way
[01:24] <bdmurray> nigelbabu: probably but I'm not certain how to best get it in a usable format
[01:27] <nigelbabu> bdmurray: any thing would be fine.  even a tar perhaps
[06:45] <dholbach> good morning
[06:49]  * ajmitch waves
[06:49] <ajmitch> so I suppose we've got a whole pile of fixes to review that should have gone into lucid
[07:09] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: just fyi, we have a whole pile of stuff from before  dapper ;)
[07:10] <ajmitch> I'm not at all surprised
[07:10] <nigelbabu> though for now we're giong from latest patches to older
[09:50] <nigelbabu> Ciemon: the point where we are in the release cycle also influences the "getting into debian vs getting into ubuntu"
[09:53] <Ciemon> ok.. but the importance of the bug is also a major influence?
[09:55] <nigelbabu> of course
[10:00] <nigelbabu> dholbach: I'm working on a new Getting Started page, and we'll move the Review Guide elsewhere
[10:00] <dholbach> nice
[10:01] <dholbach> give me a shout if you want me to doublecheck or review or anything
[10:01] <nigelbabu> yes, once I finish :)
[10:01] <nigelbabu> I need your help later in writing html with python
[10:01] <dholbach> ok :)
[10:15]  * ajmitch sees some life in the channel
[10:16] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: ;)
[10:17]  * ajmitch is just bored waiting for a slow computer to install lucid packages
[10:17] <nigelbabu> I will only do a clean install
[10:17] <ajmitch> I only do a clean install on getting new hardware
[10:18] <ajmitch> my original ubuntu install used to be a debian install carefully upgraded to ubuntu :)
[10:18] <nigelbabu> wow
[10:19] <ajmitch> there wasn't as much divergence from debian when hoary was in development
[10:20]  * ajmitch feels so old :(
[10:21] <nigelbabu> http://pad.ubuntu-uk.org/Z4QAoFdt7v
[10:21] <nigelbabu> ajmitch, dholbach, persia (and anyone else intersted) thats a potential new getting started page ^
[10:22]  * ajmitch reads 
[10:22] <nigelbabu> I'm making the joining M/L a requirement.
[10:23] <nigelbabu> It helps keep track of contributors
[10:23] <ajmitch> ok
[10:23]  * ajmitch joins it
[10:23] <ajmitch> you don't prefer them to be in a LP team?
[10:23] <persia> I like it, except that I disagree with the mailing list bit.
[10:23] <ajmitch> good evening persia
[10:24] <nigelbabu> persia: did you see my reasoning?
[10:24] <persia> But that's mostly from a cui bono point of view, rather than any specific set of objections.
[10:24] <persia> Yeah.  I still don't see any benefit *to me* to being on the mailing list.
[10:24] <nigelbabu> no, there isn't much
[10:24] <nigelbabu> but for new contributors, yes
[10:24] <ajmitch> nigelbabu: it refers to ~ubuntu-reviews, should that be ~ubuntu-reviewers?
[10:25] <persia> nigelbabu: How is there benefit *to the new contributor* to join the mailing list?
[10:25] <nigelbabu> persia: I know thta they have contributed beforehand
[10:25] <nigelbabu> I see the mails everyday
[10:25] <persia> How is this a benefit to them?
[10:25] <nigelbabu> or we can checkup on the mailing list to see it
[10:26] <ajmitch> that doesn't help them, just doing the work helps them
[10:26] <nigelbabu> easier for membership?
[10:26] <nigelbabu> oh yeah, it helps us
[10:26] <ajmitch> you could see activity from a person whether they're on the list or not
[10:26] <persia> Not really, since anyone who does anythig reasonable will have a couple good examples anyway.
[10:26] <nigelbabu> Agreed. Scratching.
[10:27] <nigelbabu> Remove the whole thing off? Or just give an option?
[10:27] <ajmitch> Give it as an option if they want to keep up with general review activity that's going on
[10:27] <persia> MInd you, it makes it *lots* easier to track stuff.  I just don't think there's any value to making something mandatory or requiring it unless it can be made to offer a benefit to the person who must perform the action.
[10:27] <ajmitch> But keep the high-traffic warning :)
[10:28] <nigelbabu> 10 mails a day is high traffic?
[10:28] <ajmitch> This would end up with every comment & status change to every bug the team is subscribed to, right?
[10:28] <nigelbabu> I said high traffic becuase it would be when everyone subscribed
[10:28] <nigelbabu> no, only when subscribers comment or change anything
[10:29] <nigelbabu> like if emet makes a change, I wont see it because he isnt subscribed
[10:29] <persia> I'm not sure I understand the value of the mailing list at all then.
[10:29] <nigelbabu> only benefit is getting a crack at the newest patches
[10:29] <persia> If it tracks *everything* that's useful.  If it is a discussion forum, that's useful.  If it tracks an arbitrary subset of stuff, seems pointless.
[10:29] <ajmitch> nigelbabu: I thought this would be for tracking bugs that ~ubuntu-reviewers is subscribed to, and that you'd keep the team subscribed to bugs
[10:29] <ajmitch> Or do you prefer to have the reviewers unsubscribe the team, like with -sponsors?
[10:30] <nigelbabu> when the review is over, they are to be unsubscribed
[10:30] <nigelbabu> persia: You've got a point there.  Should we move our disscusions to the M/l from now?
[10:30] <ajmitch> so it'll track all the comments & status changes on the bug until that point
[10:31] <ajmitch> (assuming that the mailing list is the contact address for the team)
[10:31]  * persia isn't a big ML user :)
[10:31]  * ajmitch has the firehose on for a select set of packages
[10:31] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: no.  Oddly, it does not.  It only does so for the subscribers of the M/l (yeah, even I'm confused)
[10:32] <ajmitch> nigelbabu: Something is fishy there
[10:32] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: I dunno mailmain backend, so not much clue
[10:32] <ajmitch> contact address is set for the team, so it *ought* to be getting info for any bug the team is subscribed to
[10:32] <nigelbabu> persia: changed the M/L stuff
[10:33] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: stuck in moderation I guess
[10:33] <ajmitch> since LP is meant to be whitelisted for lists.u.c, I think
[10:33] <ajmitch> I may be wrong there
[10:33]  * ajmitch isn't a team member anyway :)
[10:34] <nigelbabu> persia: +1 for changes now?
[10:39] <persia> nigelbabu: Sure, but I still think the concept of the mailing list needs more thought :)
[10:39] <nigelbabu> persia: you dont want it at all?
[10:39] <persia> I think there needs to be a point.
[10:40] <ajmitch> about the only thing I'd need to be in the team for is unsubscribing the team, right?
[10:40] <persia> I don't understand the value *to anyone* of a mailing list that tracks an arbitrary subset of changes.
[10:40]  * nigelbabu is not the person to talk bout it
[10:40] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: yup
[10:40] <nigelbabu> s/to talk bout/to talk to 'bout/
[10:41] <ajmitch> I'll put it off until I annoy dholbach about it then :)
[10:41] <nigelbabu> hah
[10:51] <nigelbabu> any corrections, please make it https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NigelBabu/SandBox
[10:51] <nigelbabu> meanwhile, I'll get the review guide sorted
[10:53]  * ajmitch is *still* waiting for synaptic to install packages :)
[10:59] <nigelbabu> okay ^ that link is redundant now :)
[11:01] <ajmitch> well this upgrade is going well
[11:01] <ajmitch> X just went byebye
[11:13] <nigelbabu> the wiki has now changed a bit
[11:14] <ajmitch> which page?
[11:15] <nigelbabu> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ReviewersTeam
[11:15] <ajmitch> ReviewersTeam/GettingInvolved ?
[11:15] <nigelbabu> see the header
[11:15] <nigelbabu> the new getting involved page is in + review guide created
[11:15] <nigelbabu> now to edit review guide
[11:16]  * ajmitch sees some bugs on the patch-accepted-debian query that he should really be touching asap
[11:19] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: yaay! (that moves fast most of the time ;)
[11:19] <ajmitch> though it's being handled by someone on the server team as expected
[11:19] <ajmitch> (the php5/mysql issue)
[11:20] <ajmitch> that was a case where the patch originated from upstream & debian
[11:21] <nigelbabu> ah
[11:21] <nigelbabu> the getting involved page looks nice now?
[11:21] <ajmitch> yeah, looks good
[11:21] <ajmitch> maybe some minor grammatical fixes, but apart from that it's good :)
[11:23] <nigelbabu> please go ahead and fix as needed :)
[11:27] <nigelbabu> what is the easiest way to test patches?
[11:28] <nigelbabu> (the only way I know is to create a deb)
[11:29] <dholbach> apply the patch (in most cases something like "patch -p1 < ~/patch") or in the case of a merge proposal: "bzr merge lp:.....", then rebuild the source package (something like "debuild -S -uc -us"), then pbuilder it
[11:29] <nigelbabu> well, thats the way I thought too :)
[11:29] <nigelbabu> then dpkg -i
[11:30] <dholbach> right
[11:30] <dholbach> it's the best way because you afterwards know that the package still builds and if you messed something up, you can easily replace it with the "old package version" again
[11:30] <nigelbabu> hm, makses sense :)
[11:31] <nigelbabu> saw the new wiki pages?
[11:34] <dholbach> not yet, I'll review in a sec
[11:40] <ajmitch> the hard part is testing if the patch did the right thing
[11:40] <ajmitch> especially if it was to fix some obscure race condition that's hard to reproduce in testing
[11:42] <dholbach> would it make sense to add a step 0 to the list that is something like "establish step-by-step reproducing instructions"?
[11:45] <ajmitch> it would, that should be an important part of knowing that the bug can be closed as being fixed
[11:46] <dholbach> nigelbabu: ^ do you think that'd make sense?
[11:47] <nigelbabu> dholbach: yes it does
[11:47] <dholbach> great
[11:47] <nigelbabu> this is the review guide right?
[11:47] <nigelbabu> saw the getting started page?
[11:48] <ajmitch> yeah it'd be for the ReviewGuide page, in the workflow section I think
[11:50] <dholbach> nice work
[11:50] <dholbach> it looks much better
[12:17] <ajmitch> aw, silenced in -release, how unfair :)
[12:42] <nigelbabu> ajmitch: I think mailing that attorney should help
[12:43] <nigelbabu> Prokurist means attorney I think
[12:43] <ajmitch> I'll let ogra deal with it, he's in .de
[12:43] <nigelbabu> ha
[12:44]  * ajmitch doesn't think there'd be much of a legal case, it's more a matter of not doing stupid things
[12:45] <nigelbabu> that too
[12:49] <nigelbabu> ok, I'm going to start coding
[12:49] <nigelbabu> I need to do that review overviewtoday
[12:50] <ajmitch> ok, cool
[12:50]  * ajmitch has tomorrow off, so might try & catch up on ubuntu stuff 
[13:42] <nigelbabu> I haz working statistics!
[13:42] <nigelbabu> now we can know exactly how many bugs would be in review queue if there was no date criteria
[13:43] <ajmitch> sounds good
[14:36] <nigelbabu> bdmurray: poke