[00:00] canesin: What makes it a bit more complicated right now is that Maverick is in "Feature Freeze", which means no new stuff is allowed in. If there is a good reason to have this new paraview version, you can file a bug and explain why it'd be good to have and how risky it might break as opposed to the current version (this is called a Feature Freeze Exception request) [00:07] * zooko reads about backports [00:08] Neat. === milli` is now known as milli [01:11] bdrung: did I read somewhere about a new vlc PPA? [01:12] micahg: not on my blog, but i have setup one [01:12] bdrung: stable releases? [01:12] micahg: nope, bleeding edge (1.2.0~git) [01:13] bdrung: :(, any chance of a stable PPA? [01:13] or should I backport on my own? [01:13] micahg: https://edge.launchpad.net/~videolan/+archive/master-daily [01:14] micahg: you can ask me nicely when i am back from my vacation and i will setup one [01:14] bdrung: I can help maintain if you want :) [01:16] micahg: if you want to build your own one locally, grab the maverick git branch and use this patch: http://pastebin.com/E4eb2CSE [01:18] bdrung: is that for Lucid or maverick [01:19] micahg: that is for lucid [01:19] bdrung: k, thanks [01:19] micahg: for maverick you can just use the maverick branch :) [01:19] micahg: but instead of a vlc ppa, we could backport vlc 1.1.3-1+exp1ubuntu1 with the posted patch [01:20] bdrung: do you want to backport for every release? [01:20] micahg: no, for lucid [01:20] bdrung: I meant for Lucid for every release :) [01:20] micahg: if it's not too much work. [01:21] micahg: at least one backport would be nice (look at the 1.1.0-1 changelog) [01:21] bdrung: I'm not in a position to join backporters yet, but you could :) [01:24] micahg: i want to try to backport something. for self consumption i have a backports PPA: https://launchpad.net/~bdrung/+archive/backports [01:24] bdrung: I have one as well :) [01:25] bdrung: the only problem with sending vlc to backports is to keep it updated if there's a security vulnerability [01:26] micahg: if we backport the same version that will end up in maverick the workload will not be increased that much [01:27] bdrung: well, I think with backports, tis better to update than patch, but I could be wrong [01:27] can we even patch stuff in backports? [01:28] micahg: dunno. backporting the fixed version is probably the way to go [01:30] bdrung: are you waiting to see if you can sync from expermental before uploading to maverick? [01:30] bdrung: nm, I remember the issue now [01:31] micahg: i am waiting for siretart to upload the packages to sid and experimental [01:31] bdrung: ah, ok [01:31] micahg: then i will upload the package to maverick [01:32] micahg: i will sync the experimental package once x264 is accepted in debian [01:32] micahg: if this needs as long as mplayer, it will be in one year ;) === em is now known as emma [02:06] micahg: time to say goodbye. i will be on vacation tomorrow [02:06] bdrung: enjoy your vacation, anything I can keep an eye on for you while you're goine? [02:07] micahg: the sponsor queue :) [02:07] bdrung: I can't do much with it, but I'll watch my stuff :) [02:07] micahg: everything that is listed on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/BenjaminDrung [02:07] bdrung: vlc's the only think I can do anything with [02:07] oh, eclipse too [02:08] micahg: you could talk with nthykier on #debian-java - we need to sync -6 (once released). and there are new reports that it doesn't work [02:09] bdrung: k, what tz is he in? [02:10] micahg: mine - utc + 0200 [02:11] bdrung: will try him in the morning then [02:11] micahg: he lives in Denmark [02:13] bdrung: k, well, enjoy, I'll keep an eye on vlc and eclipse then, if siretart doesn't get to it until tomorrow, can I assume you're gone and do the merge? Do we need an FFe? [02:13] micahg: i probably check my mails in between. otherwise i will have ~2000 mail when i come home [02:13] nm, you did the merge, I mean upload :) [02:13] bdrung: k, I won't worry about that one then [02:14] but will try to get 3.5.2-6 for eclipse in [02:14] micahg: if i am gone, you can ask siretart to do the maverick upload (it's prepared in the maverick branch) [02:15] micahg: i talked with the release team. we don't need a FFe for vlc [02:15] bdrung: k, you know I have upload rights for it, right? [02:15] micahg: have you access to the git repository? [02:16] bdrung: pkg-multimedia? [02:16] micahg: yes [02:16] bdrung: yes, I'm a junior dev [02:18] micahg: k, then you could do it, too [02:19] bdrung: k, if I have any questions, I'll ask siretart [02:19] yes [02:26] bdrung: I"ll be back in about an hour, you can always send email to my nick at ubuntu dot com if you need something [02:26] bdrung: once again, enjoy your vacation :) [03:11] How can I figure out why a package that was in Lucid and is in Sid is not in maverick? searching for "packagename remove from maverick" does not give me antyhing usesul. [03:11] *anything useful [03:15] lfaraone: which package? [03:15] bdrung: libunicode-map8-perl-dfsg was formally in main. [03:16] bdrung: now it's not shipped. libunicode-map8-perl (which is in sid) was in dapper but no other release after that. [03:16] lfaraone: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libunicode-map8-perl-dfsg/+publishinghistory [03:16] (From Debian) [auto-cruft] obsolete source package [03:16] makes sense, there's no libunicode-map8-perl-dfsg in debian, because it's libunicode-map8-perl. But libunicode-map8-perl isn't there either <_<; [03:17] lfaraone: then request a sync of libunicode-map8-perl and provide all information for a FFe [03:18] bdrung: working on it. [03:18] good night [03:18] bdrung: thanks [03:18] you're welcome [05:00] I wonder if it's possible to have the same package version in Debian and Ubuntu while building with indicator libraries only on Ubuntu [05:01] Something like, Build-Depends: libappindicator-dev | not-ubuntu [05:05] LucidFox: worth a simple delta [05:07] micahg> Even when I'm the maintainer in both? -_- [05:08] LucidFox: yes :), unless there's already a convention for what you're proposing :) [05:08] LucidFox: maybe ask in #debian-ubuntu [05:15] Or push indicators into Debian :) [05:15] Although I get the feeling that anybody trying that would not survive for long. [05:15] * micahg thinks someone was working on that [05:16] wgrant: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2010/06/msg00293.html === Guest11851 is now known as jmarsden [05:50] LucidFox: might want to talk to kartik and evgeni @ debian end of things === LucidFox is now known as lucidfox [07:36] lucidfox, huh? (I'm evgeni) [07:41] Zhenech> Well, I just had an idea, to avoid introducing deltas, to have the same source package build with Ubuntu-specific libraries under Ubuntu and without them under Debian === emma is now known as em [07:42] lucidfox, from what I've observed, the deltas are usually only the thing that ubuntu ships the packages as -0ubuntu1 earlier as we ship the -1 [07:43] Zhenech> Erm [07:43] from the packaging point of view the deltas are zero [07:43] Zhenech: depends on the package [07:43] Thing is, suppose I'm the maintainer of a package in both Debian and Ubuntu, and I want -1 sync as is from Debian, but build with indicator libraries [07:43] debian has indicator libraries [07:44] so you could build on both systems with indicator? [07:44] (or is it something that needs your patched gtk to work with?) [07:44] libindicate, yes, libappindicator, no [07:45] ah, gimme a sec [07:45] do you mean https://launchpad.net/indicator-application ? [07:46] yep [07:46] Well, I suppose I could cheat and write something like libappindicator-dev | build-essential [07:46] thats ugly :) [07:46] to make it, essentially, a "soft build-dependency" [07:47] mh, maybe we should just pull appindicator to debian :) [07:48] Zhenech: there was a thread on debian devel a couple months ago about it [07:49] i added it to our wiki page as to be worked on :) [07:51] dholbach: good morning [07:51] good morning [07:52] hi micahg [07:52] dholbach: is there anywhere to track the progress of the new harvest? [07:52] micahg, "bzr branch lp:harvest; less harvest/INSTALL" I'm afraid [07:53] dholbach: oh, is there a working copy up somewhere? can I set up my own copy somewhere? [07:53] we want to fix https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/harvest/+bugs?field.importance=Critical and then get it deployed [07:54] dholbach: ooh, so soon? [07:54] the new harvest has been in the making for quite lon [07:54] g [07:54] we can always get up new improvements later on === easter_egg|off is now known as easter_egg [08:07] trying to build indicator-application [08:10] Couldn't find include 'Gtk-2.0.gir' (search path: ['.', '/usr/share/gir-1.0', '/usr/share/gir-1.0', '/usr/share/gir-1.0']) [08:10] meh [08:12] gtk gir is in gir-repository-dev in debian [08:15] ok it at least built [08:44] if I file a merge request for a package in ubuntu, do I subscribe ubuntu-sponsors to the bug report, or set ubuntu-sponsors as the reviewer of the merge request? [08:45] I'd do both (if a bug exists but don't file a new one) [08:45] ok [08:45] vish, looks like geser agrees with you :) [08:46] :) [08:46] and471: iirc, only the bugs show-up in the sponsors list.. [08:49] vish: depends on which list you look: only the bug gets shown on LP but both get listed on http://qa.ubuntu.com/reports/sponsoring/ [08:50] geser: ah, neat..! that list is what is in the topic.. hence i had told him to do both :) [08:50] wasnt sure which they might look at.. [08:51] probably depends on each sponsor [08:58] Hello [08:59] geser: but, for branch merges, I have always been told to set reviewer but never sponsor. [09:00] sorry [09:00] I have always been told to set reviewer but never subscribe to bugs [09:00] in case of branch merges ^^ [09:00] have you been told any reason? [09:02] perhaps it changed in the last couple of months, but when I did my last branch merging, I also subscribed the sponsors team to the bug because of the poor visibility of merge requests at that time [09:03] i dont see why doing both is gonna harm though.. [09:03] if some one reviews the bug they'd also be checking the merge of the list [09:03] s/reviews/sponsors [09:03] I wouldn't file a new bug but if a bug already exists, I see no reason why not subscribe the sponsors [09:03] yeah , not a new bug === fta_ is now known as fta [09:06] geser, another thing after a sync request some update will be there say a ftbfs fix and I test that bug and update saying that this is a ftbfs fix for the present version reported in the sync will a sync always be uploaded in the original reporters name? [09:09] I'm not sure === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta === yofel_ is now known as yofel === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta [11:35] Rhonda: I forgot to ping you yesterday! [11:35] Oh, right! [11:36] Rhonda: np, give me another time to ping! [11:42] Will be offline the next week? :) === ivoks-away is now known as ivoks === ivoks is now known as ivoks_away === fta_ is now known as fta === jtechidna is now known as JontheEchidna === fta_ is now known as fta [14:14] Hello [14:26] Hi all [14:26] =) .. here I'm again.. [14:26] Hello [14:27] I have run the: grab-merge command and get : [14:27] *** WARNING *** [14:28] It looks like this package is maintained in revision control: [14:28] than i trow some git and svn adress [14:28] You almost certainly don't want to continue without investigating. [14:29] ??? [14:29] Can some one help to merge that package ?? it is paraview.. [14:33] canesin: you *probably* don't need to worry about it. Many Debian Developers maintain their packages in version control systems, and ubuntu packages we've forked can be maintained in bzr branches on lp [14:35] tumbleweed: okay.. so I want to merge that package .. what should I do now ?? [14:35] tumbleweed: I have run the grab-merge tool... [14:36] canesin: if the Vcs URLs mentioned are *.debian.org you can ignore it (esp if it's a universe package) [14:37] tumbleweed: they are .debian.org [14:37] tumbleweed: so what now ?? [14:37] canesin: carry on with the merge [14:38] canesin: you are aware that we are in feature freeze? (and so you'll need a freeze exception for merges that aren't purely for bug fixes) [14:39] tumbleweed: this is a major scientific application.. it is in 3.8.1 in Debian unstable.. and in years old 3.4.0 in Ubuntu [14:39] tumbleweed: to be true.. I believe all changes in the ubuntu one do not apply anymore to the current version [14:39] you'll probably get your exception then, but you still need to file for it in your merge bug https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess [14:40] yes, your merge should be for maverick. If a newever version is necessary in lucid too, follow the backporting process (once it's in maverick) [14:41] I have to wait for maverick launch ?? === mathiaz_ is now known as mathiaz [14:47] canesin: no, you have to merge the new version of whatever this is into maverick, then you can get it backported to lucid (if it's needed there too) === fta_ is now known as fta === dholbach_ is now known as dholbach === maco2 is now known as maco [15:18] Hello === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta [17:14] * fabrice_sp has just seen that p.u.c knows about maverick packages now! Hurrahhh === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta [18:22] packages.ubuntu.com fixed \o/ [18:23] ari-tczew: yay! [18:26] it's a pity, that scarcely now. I always use packages.ubuntu.com during stricte development cycle (till FeatureFreeze) === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta [21:02] siretart: since bdrung is afk, I was going to try to update vlc this weekend in maverick, he finished everything in the git repo, but I have to reversion it since you changed the upload to experimental to be -2, will you be around this weekend at all if I run into any issues? === fta_ is now known as fta === CieD is now known as Ciemon === fta_ is now known as fta [22:34] sistpoty: sorry thunderbird took so long, I was sick half the week [22:35] micahg: no worries (I mainly wanted it to not being dragged after beta), and big thanks for working on it! [22:35] sistpoty: np, do you need any help with release stuff for mozilla related apps this time around? [22:36] micahg: looks like noone cared about delegates yet :/ [22:36] micahg: however if there's mozilla releated stuff to approve, I assume you'll offer to help, right? [22:36] sistpoty: I still want to try to get a few packages updated before beta if I can [22:37] sistpoty: sure, I'm a dev this time around as well :) [22:37] micahg: great, thanks! === fta_ is now known as fta === fta_ is now known as fta