[01:24]  * RainCT looks at ~ubuntu-sponsors and can't believe it's empty (ignoring stuff from main)
[01:41] <jdong> Mem:  49562228k total,  2267556k used, 47294672k free,   301336k buffers
[01:41] <jdong> now THAT'S a computer!
[01:42] <ajmitch> needs more RAM
[01:43] <jdong> not enough slots!
[01:43] <ajmitch> Mem:         48952      45839       3112          0       6227      31635
[01:44] <ajmitch> pity that one will be disappearing
[02:17] <G> jdong: nah, you need an IBM x3950 :)
[02:18] <G> jdong: 32 cores per 'node' (up to 4 nodes), and looks like now 1TB RAM per node
[03:12] <jdong> G: Now that would be awesome; in this case these machines were generously donated by Dell+Intel to MIT CSAIL for a class on performance engineering
[03:13] <G> jdong: nice
[03:14] <G> the funny thing was logging into an 3950m2 (4 nodes, 96CPUs etc) it still seemed quite sluggish :P
[03:16] <jdong> eh more CPU's doesn't necessarily mean faster :)
[05:56] <bilalakhtar> nigelb: What about behind the circle?
[06:02] <MTecknology> What would it take for nginx to be in main?
[06:05] <MTecknology> I'm very surprised it's not actually..
[06:08] <Azendale> I have a PPA package in a bzr branch that is all ready to have debuild -S run on it so I can send it to my ppa, except that I don't have a .orig.tar.gz since I'm using bzr to keep track of changes. How can I get it into the PPA to build?
[06:09] <MTecknology> Azendale: doesn't it ask you if you want to continue without it?
[06:09] <MTecknology> I always use debuild -S -sa, not sure if that -sa could help any
[06:10] <Azendale> MTecknology: Yes, it asks, but it has errors later. I'll try it again and report back with the error.
[06:10] <lifeless> Azendale: bzr export ../<name>.tar.gz
[06:10] <MTecknology> lifeless: You should teach me all that you know..
[06:12] <bilalakhtar> MTecknology: nginx is too lintian-error filled
[06:13] <bilalakhtar> (from what I have seen)
[06:13] <Azendale> I tried the bzr export and I got the error "debian/rules:6: /usr/share/cdbs/1/rules/autoreconf.mk: No such file or directory" , which is what I was getting before, so maybe it's not the bzr?
[06:13] <bilalakhtar> Azendale: Do you have cdbs installed?
[06:14] <Azendale> bilalakhtar: Yes, it says it's the newest version
[06:14] <bilalakhtar> Azendale: Do you have dh-autoreconf installed?
[06:15] <Azendale> bilalakhtar: I didn't..let me try it again now
[06:19] <Azendale> Ok, that helped. Now it's complaining about not being able to represent binary changes to various files in .bzr .
[06:22] <MTecknology> bilalakhtar: and if all the errors were to go away and the package was clean?
[06:23] <bilalakhtar> MTecknology: then file an MIR
[06:23] <MTecknology> bilalakhtar: thanks
[06:26] <bilalakhtar> MTecknology: bug #547267
[06:26] <fabrice_sp> Azendale, delete them in the clean target
[06:28] <Azendale> fabrice_sp: Ok, thanks for the advice.
[06:28] <MTecknology> bilalakhtar: thanks :D
[06:37] <persia> MTecknology, Moving a package to main requires another package in main to depend upon it.  While it once meant something, in practice, there is no currently useful semantic distinction between "main" and "universe".
[06:38] <MTecknology> persia: except what I was told by lifeless
[06:38] <persia> bilalakhtar, Being incredibly buggy, without an upstream, and in violation of policy has never been a limitation for stuff being in main previously.  Having lintian errors is really completely separate from main/universe
[06:39] <persia> MTecknology, Which distinction would that be?
[06:39] <bilalakhtar> persia: yup
[06:39] <bilalakhtar> persia: well, this is a lintian Error
[06:40] <MTecknology> persia: He said if it were in main there would be consideration for it to be used with LP instead of Apache
[06:40] <persia> bilalakhtar, Indeed, it's an error, and it probably ought get fixed.  This just doesn't happen to be related to the main/universe thing in any useful way.
[06:40] <MTecknology> along with a patch for converting, and benchmarks, and a good reason for it
[06:40] <persia> MTecknology, That's lifeless needing to do research then.  There's heaps of stuff used in LP that aren't in main (or at least have often been historically).
[06:41] <persia> Simply moving something to main shouldn't be part of the consideration.
[06:41] <MTecknology> oh
[06:41] <persia> That it's buggy makes it not good for LP.
[06:41] <MTecknology> ya.. I'm going to work on that
[06:42] <MTecknology> at least I don't need to knwo C for that :P
[06:47] <MTecknology> persia: I've been working on the PPA version of nginx actually - in my companies PPA it's almost entirely lintain clean - but it's also stripped down to nothing. I'm figuring I should be able to help out pretty well here :)
[06:47] <persia> Making things less buggy is good :)
[06:48] <MTecknology> ok.. nappy time - g'night ubuntu brainiacs :)
[07:52] <Rhonda> Ah, right, was RainCT for revu, should've remembered that.
[07:57] <ajmitch> Rhonda: don't worry, there are a few people who still try & keep revu alive :)
[07:58] <Rhonda> I never claimed otherwise.
[07:58] <Rhonda> I just wasn't able to remember who mentioned that he was getting source v3 supported, otherwise I would have bugged him directly for lintian update. :)
[07:59] <ajmitch> that was probably me :P
[08:02] <ajmitch> just took a dpkg backport, grabbed the one from the ~launchpad ppa
[08:02] <Rhonda> huhm
[08:02] <Rhonda> ajmitch? Can you take a look at something that might be a consider in the revu web interface?
[08:03] <Rhonda> ajmitch: http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/details.py?upid=8603 - when I click on "(toggle visibility)" below the graph, the feature list doesn't get hidden. :)
[08:03] <Rhonda> That's because <ul> can't be embedded inside a <p>
[08:04] <Rhonda> And thus the <ul> doesn't have the id="description" attached to it.
[08:04] <ajmitch> amusing bug
[08:04] <ajmitch> let me take a look at it
[08:04] <Rhonda> I *think* a <span> or <div> around the complete description might make sense.
, yeah
[08:04] <Rhonda> And the </p> at the end of the description (after the </ul>) is b0rked anyway. :)
[08:05] <Rhonda> Also, I see a <br style="clear: both;"/ after that which is missing its >
[08:05]  * ajmitch waits very very patiently for bzr
[08:05]  * Rhonda . o O ( that's why I prefer git  *hides* )
[08:06] <ajmitch> git can't fix a slow internet connection any more than bzr can :)
[08:46] <ajmitch> Rhonda: toggle works now?
[08:48] <Rhonda> If it does for you I wouldn't know why it shouldn't for me. :)  Thanks!
[08:51] <ajmitch> well you never know, especially with the evils of html ;)
[08:52] <ajmitch> I'll probably break it again while I put the fix on properly
[12:08] <nigelb> bilalakhtar: pong?
[12:08] <bilalakhtar> nigelb: yup, repoly after a loooooooooong ping
[12:08] <bilalakhtar> nigelb: Howz behindthecircle?
[12:08]  * nigelb is on vacation
[12:08] <nigelb> (technically)
[12:09] <bilalakhtar> nigelb: ah, but I was asking, Why haven't there been more interviews?
[12:09] <nigelb> bilalakhtar: I just finished updating the list of devs last week
[12:09] <nigelb> Now maia and I need to find time to get together and proof the questionss and shortlist and do the interviews!
[12:09]  * lucidfox nodnod
[12:09] <nigelb> this will probably happen some time this week :)
[12:10] <lucidfox> Indeed!
[12:10]  * nigelb hi fives lucidfox :)
[12:10] <bilalakhtar> What about dholbach?
[12:10] <nigelb> He's in Iran
[12:10] <bilalakhtar> lol
[12:10] <bilalakhtar> I mean, is he blogging for it?
[12:11] <nigelb> No, since he didn't want the time he asked for volunteers, me, lucidfox, and bobbo took over
[12:11] <lucidfox> I actually haven't heard anything from bobbo
[12:11] <nigelb> neither have I
[12:11] <nigelb> BUt he has volunteered to help, probably busy for now
[12:12] <bilalakhtar> lucidfox: You were interviewed the last :) And now YOU can interview!
[12:13] <nigelb> bilalakhtar: actually, when she was interviewed, we had already volunteered to help :)
[12:14] <bilalakhtar> nigelb: You also wish to become MOTU, right?
[12:15] <nigelb> bilalakhtar: I don't have the time for it at present, as is evidenced my packaging work this cycle (nothing!), so perhaps next cycle.
[13:44] <shadeslayer> yofel: quick question on SRU, do i file a new bug for SRU? or can i just update that bug with new info?
[13:44] <yofel> just use that bug for the SRU
[13:44] <shadeslayer> alrighty
[13:47] <shadeslayer> yofel: i cant seem to be able to nominate it for lucid
[13:47] <yofel> you opened the wrong link, use https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/desktopcouch/+bug/565376
[13:48] <yofel> LP is a bit tricky there
[13:49] <shadeslayer> oh :D
[13:53] <shadeslayer> yofel: whom do i subscribe to the bug report? wiki doesnt say anything
[13:53] <shadeslayer> wait.. found it
[13:53] <shadeslayer> ok everything done... just wait for lp to build package in my ppa now ;)
[13:55] <yofel> shadeslayer: subscribe ubuntu-sponsors too, SRUs are now uploaded as soon as possible so the SRU team only needs to ack it
[13:55] <shadeslayer> ok
[13:57] <shadeslayer> yofel: i think everything is set, do you see any issues?
[13:58] <yofel> shadeslayer: checking
[14:01] <yofel> shadeslayer: about that debdiff, it has to be for lucid-proposed and not for lucid, and about the version.. I'm not sure but it might have to be 3.1 not 4
[14:02] <shadeslayer> hmm.. i think your right ..
[14:07] <shadeslayer> yofel: done :)
[14:08] <yofel> shadeslayer: that should still be desktopcouch (0.6.4-0ubuntu3.1) lucid-proposed; urgency=low
[14:08] <shadeslayer> ohh.. the release..
[14:10] <shadeslayer> yofel: http://paste.ubuntu.com/491575/
[14:10] <yofel> that looks right
[16:42] <AnAnt> Hello
[18:57] <alkisg> Hi, I'd like to try packaging an edu app (http://www.chemcollective.org/applets/vlab.php), can someone point me to a simple package that contains java .jar files to use as a template?
[18:57] <alkisg> (maybe debhelper 7, not cdbs...)
[19:00] <Rhonda> The package contains .jar files? You would need to generate them from source code, not just use the existing .jar files.
[19:01] <hrw|gone> morning
[19:04]  * hrw|gone will lurk during weekend here to check what is discussed here. in next 2 weeks I plan to start procedure of becoming ubuntu developer. currently there are no packages in archive which I maintain, but there are two which I maintained in past, also submitted lot of improvements to few core components (gcc/eglibc/binutils/linux) and 3 my packages are on a way to maverick (got FFe for them today).
[19:11] <kklimonda> hrw|gone: evening, feel free to lurk around :)
[19:11] <hrw|gone> kklimonda: I have a feeling that we met in person years ago
[19:11] <hrw|gone> have to go now
[19:11] <hrw|gone> bye
[19:12] <kklimonda> nah, impossible
[19:12] <hrw|gone> ok
[19:20] <alkisg> Hmmm weird, I can't find the sources for that java edu app, so I guess I'll have to make a binary deb for local use... thanks Rhonda :)
[19:24] <Rhonda> np :)
[19:32] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: what is wrong with copyright file?
[19:32] <ari-tczew> (clementine)
[19:34] <Rhonda> I did write that, didn't I?
[19:35] <Rhonda> You don't want to claim that debian/* is copyright by David Sansome and is licensed under GPL-3, do you? :)
[19:36] <Rhonda> And shouldn't the license text be mentioned at least once?
[19:37] <Rhonda> There is not a single license text in there?
[19:38] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: I wouldn't be responsible to copyright file, because David is an author of this one.
[19:39] <Rhonda> Pardon?
[19:41] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: ping
[19:41]  * davidsansome waves
[19:42] <Rhonda> Ah.
[19:42] <Rhonda> davidsansome: You wrote the debian/* files, too?
[19:42] <davidsansome> I wrote the original ones, ari-tczew has tweaked them a bit
[19:42] <Rhonda> Anyway, the copyright files are still missing the license text, at least once for each recurring license.
[19:43] <Rhonda> Then that copyright information is missing. It's not totally wrong to not specifically mention Files: debian/* - but it's extremely uncommon, thus my comment in REVU about it.
[19:44] <davidsansome> ah ok, I assumed the common licenses didn't need the full text copied and pasted in
[19:44] <Rhonda> Not the full.
[19:44] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: the files are there: https://code.launchpad.net/~ari-tczew/clementine/REVU
[19:45] <Rhonda> But GPL insists on a specific part to be copied nevertheless, and BSD isn't that "common" anyway because people seldomly are that specific university.
[19:46] <Rhonda> And I'm not too sure what the last decisions with respect to Public Domain is
[19:46] <davidsansome> right, I'll fix those two issues upstream, then ari-tczew if you want to merge my changes into your bzr repo?
[19:47] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: of course I'll update branch ASAP. btw. you can request a merge to my branch referring to debian/copyright and not only. :)
[19:47] <ari-tczew> from this branch I'm creating a package for REVU. i
[19:49] <Rhonda> ari-tczew: See the "xsol" example in the svn link you have in the first line of the copyright file - it has the required GPL excerpt.
[19:52] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: are you reffering to: http://paste.ubuntu.com/491744/ ?
[19:59] <Rhonda> ari-tczew: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/ and scroll to "Examples in pseudo-RFC-822 format", both the Simple and the Complex mention both debian/* but also for GPL-2+ the license text.
[20:00] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: ^ go ahead mate :)
[20:00] <davidsansome> working on it :)
[20:02] <davidsansome> Rhonda: how's this: http://code.google.com/p/clementine-player/source/browse/trunk/debian/copyright ?  I've added text to each one, and a debian/* section
[20:03] <Rhonda> davidsansome: You need to add the text only once for each license, no need to repeat it. :)
[20:03] <davidsansome> ok :)  do I need to put "See above" or anything, or can I assume people are smart enough to figure it out? :)
[20:04] <Rhonda> So one GPL-3, one GPL-2+, one BSD, …
[20:04] <Rhonda> No need for see above or anything from what I understood.
[20:05] <Rhonda> The License: GPL-3 line is meant to be enough reference for the linkage.
[20:05] <davidsansome> gotcha
[20:07] <Rhonda> No clue how the dep5 wants to have the "License: Qt Commercial or LGPL-2.1 or GPL-3" part expanded - you need to ask someone who has more insight into that, I'm not that big fan of that format
[20:08] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: could you check whether current version is correct? @google code
[20:15] <Rhonda> ari-tczew: Looks more appropriate, but like said, I'm neither an expert on dep5 nor too fond of it.
[20:16] <ari-tczew> Rhonda, davidsansome: ok, I'm merging into bzr
[20:16] <davidsansome> cool thanks
[21:20] <ari-tczew> ScottK: what do you think, is it benefit to merge kolabd from debian unstable?
[21:57] <ari-tczew> Rhonda: around?