[00:11] hi all [00:12] i had a client google download 8.04 server (or something similar) [00:12] junior sys admin ended up downloading 8.04 from http://old-releases.ubuntu.com/releases/hardy/ [00:12] he didn't run the updates [00:12] i know it is pretty clear that he should have [00:13] can i suggest that there be something a clearly shown at the top of all pages on old-releases.u.o telling people these are old releases and to grab the latest version from releases.u.o ? [00:14] skwashd: are you looking for #ubuntu-server ? [00:14] oh [00:15] skwashd: depends on what iso he downloaded [00:16] he grabbed 8.04 cos that is what he was told we needed [00:16] I can see there 8.04.3 [00:16] from what i gather he is now having some trouble sitting comfortably ;) [00:17] he should since he didn't upgraded [00:17] stas: yes ... but it doesn't make it clear to the inexperienced visitor that the releases are all out of date [00:17] skwashd: it should not be written on website that you should keep the servers os up to date [00:17] especially now with 3 live server LTS releases hardy and dapper are both "old releases" in some people's minds [00:18] 8.04 lts is my favourite os for servers [00:18] rock solid [00:18] actually, hardy won't be old until july and 10.04.1 [00:18] stas: or me ... a sysadmin with 10yrs+ experience ... i always install updates post install [00:19] skwashd: so I don't need to tell you :) [00:19] s/or/for [00:19] it's his problem, either he installed lucid or hardy he now has updates for both [00:19] all i am suggesting is that old-releases.ubuntu.org have some text with a link to releases.ubuntu.org [00:21] stas: i am not saying he stuffed up ... i am just pointing out that there might be a case for making things easier for "human beings", rather than expecting everyone installing a server is an uber sysadmin [00:21] s/i am not saying he stuffed up/i am not saying he didn't stuff up [00:21] man ... i need to wake up more before starting discussions on irc [00:22] skwashd: yeah I understand what you're saying, actually my opinion is that old-releases should be closed since it's confusing [00:23] stas: i think that it does serve some purpose ... especially for development and testing ... but i think it is too accessible for inexperienced users [00:24] stas: is there somewhere on launchpad i should file a bug report? or is there no point? [00:24] skwashd: I think mirror@ubuntu.com are the guys that maintain some of those servers, might be wrong anyway [00:24] also ping jpds he should know more [00:26] and don't get mad if somebody's not responding, in europe its past midnight :) [00:26] stas: what timezone is jpds in? [00:26] europe i belive :) [00:26] i know what time it is .eu - got clients there :) [00:27] i will pm him and see what happens [00:29] It's almost ironic that you're asking for a notice that releases on *old*-releases.u.o are *old*, but it's easy to miss a url. [00:29] handheldCar: but for a lot of people lucid is "current" ... dapper and hardy are "old" [00:30] really, no one should use a ltr for production until it reaches .1 [00:31] handheldCar: best practice !== common practice [00:31] personally i find ubuntu alphas quite stable and things start to go down hill from beta1 [00:31] production servers are a different story tho :) [00:34] i see no reason upgrading a hardy, maybe after they bring btrfs into it [00:36] stas: for me glusterfs and a recent version of solr are 2 good reasons to run lucid servers [00:38] yeah, those are good for clouds, but for home usage/standalone servers I can see no reasons [00:39] thoug I think both can be backported into hardy (which I did with some newer packages I needed) [00:41] * handheldCar is looking forward to btrfs too. [08:02] for completeness i discuss this with jpds and have filed a bug report against cdimages ... https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-cdimage/+bug/585719 [08:02] Launchpad bug 585719 in ubuntu-cdimage "old-releases.ubuntu.com doesn't tell uses images are out of date (affects: 1)" [Undecided,New] [14:05] I see the new website is up. Great job! [14:06] It looks beautiful! [14:07] On Chrome at least, the text on the navbar is a tad bit hard to read. [14:08] Methinks it's because of the 1px drop shadow. [14:10] There are also stray pixels in the Forward\Backward buttons on the slideshow. [14:11] That's a Chrome-only issue, it seems. [15:11] hey newz2000 [15:11] hey [15:12] so yeah, I thought we'd do a clever thing by reusing a lot of the ubuntu.com theming instead of copying it around [15:12] yeah, I did that too in one place [15:12] dholbach: if you can get me the path to the files you need I can mirror it somewhere [15:13] http://paste.ubuntu.com/439904/ [15:13] that should be it as far as I can tell [15:14] dholbach: ok, I'm tracing through a maze of links and redirects but I'll have something in a little bit [15:14] it will likely be a short-term workaround [15:14] * dholbach hugs newz2000 [15:14] awesome [15:16] Wow, there's nothign like wading through your 3 year old hand-written code to make you feel humble. :-) [15:16] :-) [15:21] newz2000: has anyone talked to you about missing ubuntu09.css after the website update? [15:21] as a matter of fact, yes. :-) [15:21] okay, is there anything I can do to facilitate getting it back to where it's avaialble to loco.ubuntu.com? [15:23] mhall119: newz2000 is chasing redirects right now :) [15:24] even if we can just get a copy of the file, we can add it to the loco-dir sources [15:24] otherwise we have to patch in css from -r 99 [15:24] which is quite old now [15:24] I'm sure newz can fix us up somehow [15:24] I tried to see if it was any easy thing, but no luck [15:26] guys one thing I must say is that I love the way you guys used the grid layouts [15:26] mhall119: I'm actively working on this right now so we'll have something soon [15:26] wow, when the update was rolled out? :) [15:27] congrats btw [15:37] dholbach, mhall119: try now [15:37] And then we need to get these assets moved to a new source [15:38] newz2000: looks great [15:38] http://loco.ubuntu.com [15:39] dholbach: can you guys mirror the source into your local branch? [15:39] until the work on the new branding is done? [15:39] will old branding always be wiped again? [15:40] newz2000: ^? [15:41] dholbach: no guarantees [15:41] consider it "buying time" [15:41] that's good to know, I thought that all the "node pages" could rely on the ubuntu.com theming somehow [15:41] from Spads newz2000: but please get the word out if you can, this is a temporary stopgap [15:41] dholbach: there is a community effort (right here in this channel) to make community themes with the new look [15:42] right [15:42] we'll be moving quick to get some work done on that so you can switch to the new look [15:42] I'll copy it in for now - I was keen for us to inherit as much as possible and copy as little as possible [15:44] dholbach: the new theme will have a base theme all the sub-sites can derive from so this model will be supported I believe [15:44] ok [15:47] When will the wiki.ubuntu.com theme be updated? [16:00] newz2000: is there going to be some kind of announce or is there a bug I subscribe myself to, so I know when we can drop all the nicked theming again? [16:00] dholbach: I'm guessing that there's no intention to deliberately remove it, but instead it's just a bad idea to count on it being there [16:02] newz2000: I was a happy man when I thought we had removed all "copy / pasted" theming from our code and just maintained our own stuff [16:19] thanks newz2000 [16:20] ;-) === method_man_1 is now known as bihari [17:14] ? [17:23] newz2000: if you move from http://www.ubuntu.com/netbook to /server, the logo on the right "jumps" [17:24] * newz2000 checks [17:24] interesting [17:26] newz2000, the "server edition" slide is distracting [17:26] newz2000, the dots do not work that well on the arrows... [17:27] ok, I think I might get overwhelmed with bug reports this way... [17:27] I've posted thorwil's bug, knome: would you post yours to https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-website-content/ [17:27] newz2000, do you consider that a bug? [17:28] if you put it there my project manager will forward it to the designers to consider [17:28] okay [17:34] newz2000, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-website-content/+bug/585949 [17:34] knome: Error: Bug #585949 is private. [17:34] thanks knome [17:34] oh well... :) [17:34] do you want to be subscribed, or can you do that yourself? [17:38] ooh, do you want secret bug reports? [17:38] * thorwil clears the backlog too soon sometimes [18:43] Hello people, please see bug #585873 [18:43] Launchpad bug 585873 in ubuntu-website "Page http://www.ubuntu.com/how-can-it-be-free is unreadable (affects: 3) (dups: 1) (heat: 24)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/585873 [18:44] opk, I got it. Its an overlay. Thanks, people [19:37] stas: thanks for taking the lead on that email. I think you should wait about 30 min or so to see if a reply comes through then just pick your favourite choices from the options you outlined and reply as such. [19:37] that will spur people with a passion on the subject to quickly speak up, and in case no one has a strong opinion you can begin without delay [19:38] regarding fixed vs. fluid, there are benefits to both and you're going to upset half the world which ever is chosen [19:39] newz2000: thanks, yeah you're right, if people don't get involved soon, they loose all the interest [19:40] newz2000: yeah, about that, we can get some fixed width for website and see something more fluid for forums and wiki if the problem gains popularity [19:40] good plan [19:40] I just always hope for the best, thats why I proposed it :) [19:42] basically the ubuntu-ru team work will give us a great boost if we accept it, but of course I would rewrite most of its html and css [19:46] Someone has to take the reigns and drive it. :-) [19:54] Ugh. kubuntu. [20:51] Is this thr right place to ask why http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop/get-ubuntu/download says "64-bit - Not recommended for daily desktop usage" A few people have asked why it says that in #ubuntu today & it'd be useful to be able to give them an answer [20:56] DJones: Probably because simply most computers support 32bits but not all support 64bits in the home today [20:58] ianto: Quite possibly, just seems that the wording sounds a bit odd, as though the 64 bit isn't stable enough for everyday use [21:00] I guess it's just a step to avoid people downloading the wrong architecture and then having a bad experience with the OS, i.e. it wouldn't boot from the disk at all for them [22:19] hey ryanakca, around? [23:24] newz2000: hi [23:24] hey ofirk [23:24] newz2000: just saw the new website [23:24] newz2000: great work! [23:25] thanks (on behalf of the team that did the work) [23:25] ofirk: did you see the email I sent you a bit ago? [23:25] newz2000: yeah, and I fixed it. [23:25] Thanks! [23:25] awesome [23:43] newz2000: bug 585816 [23:43] Launchpad bug 585816 in ubuntu-website "No styling on: http://webapps.ubuntu.com/partners/ (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/585816 [23:43] should the new theme already be on all pages? [23:43] got plenty of new bugs for ya