[09:34] <ari-tczew> bdrung_: why you didn't use syncpackage? bug 641409
[09:46] <persia> ari-tczew, While I can't answer on behalf of another, I hope the answer is because it's a bad idea, and complicates things for the archive-admins.
[09:46] <persia> (as these are true and reasonable reasons not to use syncpackage)
[09:48] <ari-tczew> persia: I'm a fresh sponsor and I'm learning, so I'm asking why just that instead otherwise. It's only my curious.
[09:52] <persia> Understood.
[09:53] <persia> I don't know all the details, but it's related to potential for issues, some data stored on the archive master, some bandwidth waste, etc.
[09:53] <persia> I do know that the reason we ask archive-admins to perform syncs has never been because we couldn't just upload them if we wanted.
[09:54] <persia> (and in certain situations, where all the archive admins were busy (and said so in -devel) this was happening even back in Dapper (and perhaps before, but I wasn't paying as close attention before that).
[09:54] <persia> There's some more work that needs to happen in LP so that we can do it properly: it's really close, but not quite done.
[09:55] <wgrant> It's now on the roadmap.
[09:55] <persia> (then we just get a LP interface that lets us select something in some other place (Debian experimental/unstable/testing/stable OR a PPA or whatever), and press the "sync" button (although we'll probably have API access before there is a UI)
[09:55] <wgrant> It's part of the immediately scheduled block of work, I believe.
[09:55] <persia> Oh cool!
[09:55] <wgrant> Derivative distros need it.
[09:56] <wgrant> And Linaro needs derivative distros.
[09:56] <persia> Very much so.
[09:56] <persia> Did someone write the changelog import tool yet, or is there still yak shaving to accomplish?
[09:56] <wgrant> So Ubuntu will become a derivative of Debian, and MoM will be replaced by an in-LP UI with a sync button.
[09:56] <wgrant> I wrote it a few months ago, but it hasn't been run yet.
[09:56] <persia> Oh, thanks for taking care of that :)  Any idea when it might be run?
[09:57] <wgrant> When I convince people that it isn't going to be too heavy to run.
[09:57] <persia> So in November then.  Sounds like a good plan.
[09:57] <wgrant> Heh.
[09:58] <persia> Are copyrights getting cleaned up also, or is that still future?
[09:58] <persia> (as there's an entire other body of work that would be eliminated by that)
[09:58] <wgrant> I really hope we can move them into the librarian.
[09:58] <wgrant> But which cleanup were you talking about?
[09:58] <persia> Moving them into librarian.
[09:59] <persia> I would just think that it makes sense to run *one* import job over everything, rather than two.
[09:59] <wgrant> I forget when we started importing copyright files.
[09:59] <persia> (but maybe I should be talking to you about this in a different channel)
[09:59] <wgrant> It may be long ago enough that it's not useful to import old ones.
[09:59] <wgrant> And moving them to the librarian is a separate thing.
[10:00] <persia> given the names on the code that touches that seciton, a very, very long time ago.
[10:00] <wgrant> (it just shuffles data around, whereas the changelog thing needs to unpack hundreds of thousands of source packages)
[10:00] <persia> Ah, so copyrights would be exported from the DB, rather than the packages?
[10:00] <wgrant> Right.
[10:01] <persia> This makes sense, and is probably safer that way.  I can't imagine anyone really cares deeply about pre-Breezy copyright files (and they may already be in the DB anyway: I'm unsure)
[10:01] <wgrant> We have copyright data for more packages than we have packages for.
[10:02] <wgrant> Since old PPA sources have been deleted.
[10:02] <wgrant> So migrating by unpacking sources would result in less data than we have now.
[10:02] <wgrant> Which is probably not a good thing.
[10:03] <persia> Can you think of a reason to care about copyright/changelog for deleted sources?
[10:03] <persia> (If you can, moving to librarian is wrong for other reasons, even though there are probably terabytes of copyright data)
[10:03] <wgrant> I can't.
[10:04] <wgrant> But I also don't much like deleting data.
[10:04] <wgrant> It's far easier to delete it later than it is to revive it.
[10:05] <persia> Makes sense, although I'd suggest it's probably only worth exporting copyright of packages that have source to librarian, but that's safely separate from the current primary requirements.
[10:22] <bdrung_> ari-tczew: i didn't have the realname and email address and i was too tired to dig that out
[10:53] <lucidfox> If I want to ship a monochrome indicator icon for my upstream application, is it acceptable to have the upstream build system install icons to ubuntu-mono-dark/ubuntu-mono-light?
[10:54] <persia> I'd probably do that in a distribution patch, simply to avoid forcing those directories on e.g. Fedora users.
[10:54] <persia> But really, the folks you want to ask are your maintainers from other distributions: we're a bit biased here :)
[10:56] <vish> persia: but why would that be a problem for Fedora?  lucidfox is trying to get an icon which works with the ubuntu-mono-* themes , if user does not use those themes, or uses something other than that.. it shouldnt cause a problem the fallback icon is used or rather should be used [assuming lucidfox is upstream]
[10:57] <lucidfox> There will be a fallback non-monochrome icon in hicolor
[10:57] <persia> vish, Creates a potentially blocking directory with a potentially displeasing name that may end up with an icon in the icon cache.
[10:58] <persia> Some folk get picky about wanting their filesystems clean.
[10:58] <vish> oh! yea..  ;)
[10:59] <vish> ..if its in a -ubuntu1.deb , probably safer :)
[11:00] <lucidfox> persia> Maybe I could only install these icons if the application is compiled with libappindicator?
[11:00] <lucidfox> or alternatively, if it detects that it's building on Ubuntu?
[11:00] <persia> lucidfox, Not safe: someone else could install that.  How about only installing them if built with a --with-mono option?
[11:01] <persia> Also not safe, other distributions use the ubuntu-mono-dark and ubuntu-mono-light themes.
[11:01] <lucidfox> That would be something like WANT_MONOCHROME for cmake, but an explicit option sounds good to me
[11:02] <persia> I'd recommend WANT_UBUNTU_MONO if you're going to drop it in the ubuntu-mono-* directories.
[11:02] <persia> Because other folks might want monochrome elsewhere.
[11:02] <vish> lets keep it WANT_UBUNTU_MONOCHROME!  "mono" ;p
[11:04] <vish> we already had ubuflu ;)
[11:04] <persia> The theme is called "ubuntu-mono" the directories are "ubuntu-mono-*".  Adding "chrome" seems extra, but it doesn't matter that much.
[11:05] <vish> yea, i know but that would probably change once gnome3 lands with symbolic icon support
[11:06] <vish> the themes would be merged and probably a new name , with more icons..
[11:06] <persia> hard for an upstream to keep up, really.
[11:06] <vish> yea, depending on how well the new icon theme plan goes.
[11:35] <persia> Harvest seems down: can anyone remind me of a good source for Fedora patches?
[13:24] <Bachstel1e> bug 641810 is fixed upstream, but Debian squeeze/sid is also still using that version, should we push the patch to Debian and hope it makes it on time or proceed on our own?
[13:24] <bilalakhtar> What should I do if I want to sponsor a sync from a person who has made NO previous upload into ubuntu and has his e-mail address private?
[13:24] <Bachstel1e> they're probably going to just use the new upstream version soon
[13:24] <bilalakhtar> I know it would be stupid to go and take the upload's credit on yourself
[13:35] <geser> Bachstel1e: right now I'd probably suggest to proceed on our own
[13:36] <geser> bilalakhtar: I think you can do anything else as upload with your name on it
[13:42] <bilalakhtar> 'kay, done
[13:54] <ari-tczew> could someone look @copyright file? I'd know whether it's good with DEP5.
[13:55] <ari-tczew> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ari-tczew/clementine/REVU/annotate/head%3A/debian/copyright
[13:55] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: ^^
[13:58] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: it fixes the issues I'd brought up
[13:58] <tumbleweed> there isn't a DEP5 lint tool yet
[13:59] <tumbleweed> (and the fromat hasn't been finalised yet
[14:00] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: ping ^^
[14:00] <davidsansome> hey
[14:01] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: did you saw discuss above?
[14:01] <davidsansome> nope...
[14:01] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: http://paste.ubuntu.com/495877/
[14:02] <davidsansome> ah ok, cool!
[14:11] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: well, ask tumbleweed what we need to change for better
[14:20] <bilalakhtar> well
[14:20] <bilalakhtar> Isn't DEP-5 incomplete?
[14:20] <bilalakhtar> ari-tczew, tumbleweed ^^
[14:20] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: it's still work in progress, yes
[14:20] <tumbleweed> but getting quite popular
[14:21] <bilalakhtar> tumbleweed: some time ago I read there 'This is still an experimental change, and at this time we don't aim to amend the debian policy'
[14:21] <bilalakhtar> so perhaps you should allow ari-tczew
[14:21] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: allow what?
[14:22] <bilalakhtar> tumbleweed: allow the upload, the only thing blocking is the copyright, right?
[14:23] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: yes, it's still work in progress, it isn't debian policy.
[14:23] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: I'm not blocking his upload, I just told him that I didn't think what he had was valid
[14:25] <bilalakhtar> ah okay
[14:26]  * bilalakhtar has 4 pending uploads in REVU, will upload early in the natty cycle
[14:26] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: I'm working with davidsansome, could you suggest what is still wrong?
[14:26] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: I don't think there's anything wrong any more
[14:26] <tumbleweed> you only need one blank line between blocks
[14:27] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: ^^
[14:27] <tumbleweed> I'm not sure if spaces are allowed in licence short names
[14:27] <davidsansome> on it
[14:38] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: could you suggest me what could I improve in get-orig-source?
[14:39] <kklimonda> tumbleweed: hey, can you sponsor hamster-applet, now, that gnome-python is fixed?
[14:40] <tumbleweed> kklimonda: can you ping me in the bug, I can't do it right now
[14:40] <tumbleweed> but the bugmail will remind me
[14:51] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: what do you think about tumbleweed suggestion about: Description: "Features includes" -> "Features". "Features include" (which would be the correct concordance) can’t lead into any of the bulleted items. The first paragraph of the description could also use some work, it assumes one knows what amarok is.
[14:53] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: I'll have a look at your get-orig-source
[14:54] <tumbleweed> sorry I can't really sit down and do too much right now
[14:56] <davidsansome> ari-tczew: yeah that description does suck a bit atm
[14:57] <tumbleweed> if you want to avoid being papercut-patched :)
[14:59] <bilalakhtar> tumbleweed: There is a package which I have been uploading since it was included in Ubuntu. Infact, I got it into Ubuntu. Package is not in Debian. I am XSBC-Original-Maintainer. Should I change maintainer to myself?
[14:59] <bilalakhtar> I will change it to my ubuntu.com address
[15:00] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: get it into debian :)
[15:00] <bilalakhtar> tumbleweed: they rejected it because of its name
[15:01] <bilalakhtar> tumbleweed: package is gnome-media-player
[15:01] <tumbleweed> presumably that is something that can be improved?
[15:03] <bilalakhtar> tumbleweed: According to Debian gnome-media-player is a misleading name
[15:03] <bilalakhtar> And
[15:03] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: debian policy says " and leaves it in the current directory." re get orig source
[15:03] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: it is a misleading name
[15:03] <bilalakhtar> the replies to devs just a day after I uploaded this to mentors.d.n was shocking, since I had already got this one into Ubuntu
[15:04] <bilalakhtar> garr
[15:04] <bilalakhtar> the upstream name is misleading :)
[15:04] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: instead of hardcoded wget, you can use something like: uscan --noconf --force-download --rename --download-version=$$VER --destdir=.
[15:05] <ari-tczew> tumbleweed: blink! I'll pack stable 0.5 release (will be released tomorrow) and it won't be repacked.
[15:06] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: in that case you probably have to rename it (and that's a good reason to upload to debian first)
[15:06] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew: fantastic :)
[15:06] <ari-tczew> so get-orig-source will be obsolete
[15:06] <bilalakhtar> tumbleweed: What would you suggest? This is the upstream name!
[15:06] <davidsansome> 0.5 will be today at this rate :)
[15:06] <tumbleweed> davidsansome: heh
[15:07] <tumbleweed> bilalakhtar: you can tell the upstream "your name is considered too generic and misleading by debian, please consider renaming to something unique"
[15:07] <ari-tczew> davidsansome: 0.5 source doesn't include .dll files, right?
[15:07] <davidsansome> correct
[15:08] <ari-tczew> great
[15:08] <ari-tczew> well, everything is clear. I have to update bazaar branch after release 0.5 version.
[15:08] <ari-tczew> thanks for discuss tumbleweed and davidsansome
[15:09] <davidsansome> np!
[15:09] <tumbleweed> ari-tczew, davidsansome: cool
[17:06] <fabrice_sp> tumbleweed, could you have a look at the patch I proposed in Debian Bug 592714?
[17:14] <bilalakhtar> angelabad: Any news on bug #596913 ?
[17:15] <angelabad> bilalakhtar, im reading the mail now :-D
[17:15] <angelabad> sorry I forgot this bug, but I will mark as invalid, at the moment i think is too dificult for me
[17:15] <angelabad> and remove comment in M-O-M
[17:20] <angelabad> bilalakhtar, done, thanks for the advice!
[17:20] <bilalakhtar> angelabad: That's fine, but in the future if there is any such bug on which you cannot work , then please inform about that ASAP
[17:20] <bilalakhtar> This bug was filed much before FeatureFreeze
[17:21] <angelabad> yes, sorry, I note for future
[17:21] <bilalakhtar> and now it wouldn't be too good to get this one merged, but I shall see, and if I find it fit, then go ahead, or wait for natty to open
[17:21] <bilalakhtar> no problem
[17:23] <angelabad> ok, I hope you can merge it
[17:49] <PotcFdk> Hello. I have got BIG problems building .deb (source??-)packages and host them on launchpad.
[17:49] <PotcFdk> The most tutorials are "too far"...
[17:51] <PotcFdk> Is there a REALLY good one, which describes _everthing_ ("noob-safe")? I need something that starts just after finishing my (hello-world-)program.
[17:51] <PotcFdk> It should explain what I need to do with my .c/.cpp file to host it on launchpad.net as a ppa...
[17:53] <Bachstelze> PotcFdk: what do you want to package?
[17:53] <Bachstelze> if you only have .c
[17:53] <Bachstelze> or .cpp files, you'l have a lot of trouble
[17:54] <Bachstelze> using a makefile will make things much easier
[17:54] <PotcFdk> I want to host something (for the first test a hello-world program) on launchpad.
[17:54] <PotcFdk> I wrote it in c/c++
[17:54] <PotcFdk> Now I have got a source (main.cpp) and a binary
[17:55] <PotcFdk> Launchpad requires a source-package or something like that. But how to create one? (No, don't post a link to a tutorial, I've read them all, and they are too complicated)
[17:55] <Bachstelze> you need to read up about make
[17:55] <Bachstelze> it's not difficult, but not trivial either
[17:56] <PotcFdk> Isn't there a _GOOD_ tutorial which describes a HelloWorld's way from the end of it's coding to launchpad?
[17:56] <Bachstelze> no
[17:56] <PotcFdk> mhh :(
[17:57] <Bachstelze> not that I know of, at least
[17:57] <Bachstelze> all packaging tutorials assume you have a makefile of sorts
[17:57] <Bachstelze> for C code at least
[17:57] <PotcFdk> that's my problem....
[17:58] <Bachstelze> you'll have to learn to use makefiles anyway
[17:58] <Bachstelze> unless you plan to do hello world all your life
[17:59] <PotcFdk> I found a Hello-World debian file, where the source-code was written in C (single file). I first thought: "okay, this one should be simple", but when I opened the example makefile, there was much crap just like "DISTFILES = $(DIST_COMMON) $(DIST_SOURCES) $(TEXINFOS) $(EXTRA_DIST)". I mean, what the f***?
[18:00] <ari-tczew> what's the command for sign dsc file? I use debuild -S and I want sponsor one patch
[18:02] <PotcFdk> Could be  "debsign [options] [changes-file|dsc-file|commands-file ...]", but I'm not shure
[18:02] <PotcFdk> *sure
[18:03] <Bachstelze> PotcFdk: this is really not a matter of packaging, it is a matter of proper project management
[18:03] <Bachstelze> you should have a lot of tutorials about that, but they won't be debian-spacific
[18:03] <Bachstelze> because it's unrelated
[18:03] <PotcFdk> Bachstelze: What do you mean by "project management"?
[18:05] <Bachstelze> what I mean is that no project consists of a single .c file, so everyone uses makefiles (or something similar) to build the program
[18:05] <Bachstelze> as opposed to running cc on all of them
[18:05] <PotcFdk> Bachstelze: Are there automatic makefile (.deb-file ?) creators/generators/assistants?
[18:05] <Bachstelze> no
[18:05] <Bachstelze> there are autotools
[18:06] <Bachstelze> but it's not a cick-and-run thing, you have some homework to do
[18:06] <PotcFdk> could you please tell me a name of one of these autotools?
[18:07] <Bachstelze> I should have said "there is autotools", it's a suite of tools
[18:07] <Bachstelze> autoconf and automake, mostly
[18:07] <PotcFdk> Oh.
[18:09] <Laney> That stuff isn't related to Debian packaging though. Look in the debian/ subdirectory for that.
[18:09] <PotcFdk> Just to make it sure: Debian is compatible to Ubuntu, right?
[18:13] <Bachstelze> Laney: yes, that's what I've been saying
[18:13] <Bachstelze> PotcFdk: probbly, define "compatible"?
[18:17] <PotcFdk> tutorials on how to build .deb packages also work for ubuntu?
[18:18] <Bachstelze> yes
[18:35] <ari-tczew> pbuilder will give you .deb file
[19:08] <matttbe> Hello
[19:08] <matttbe> Is someone can sponsor an update of Cairo-Dock into Ubuntu Maverick?
[19:08] <asantoni> Hey guys, we (mixxx devs) just found out our mixxx package in universe for 10.10 is missing a dependency on libqt4-sql-sqlite, so it doesn't work for anyone with a clean install :O
[19:09] <matttbe> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cairo-dock/+bug/638527
[19:09] <matttbe> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cairo-dock-plug-ins/+bug/638529
[19:09] <matttbe> Everything should be ok! I've uploaded a new revision on a personal branch. It just needs to be merged to the main branch.
[19:11] <Bachstelze> asantoni: have you filed a bug?
[19:14] <asantoni> Bachstelze: oops, sorry: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mixxx/+bug/642232
[19:14] <asantoni> it's like a one-line fix in the debian control file, right? How do you add runtime (not build) depdencencies to a package?
[19:15] <asantoni> (Qt's sqlite plugin is loaded at runtime)
[19:25] <Bachstelze> hmm I need to install some dependencies to build the source package
[19:25] <Bachstelze> gotta run for dinner, I'll look at it later
[19:29] <asantoni> Thanks a lot Bachstelze!
[19:37] <lostis> hello
[19:37] <fabrice_sp> Hi asantoni
[19:37] <fabrice_sp> wrong ping
[19:38] <fabrice_sp> hi lostis
[19:38] <lostis> ;)
[19:38] <fabrice_sp> :-)
[19:38] <asantoni> lol
[19:38] <lostis> i have packaged a new java program how do i get it into universe?
[19:39] <lostis> how exactly?
[19:39] <BlackZ> lostis: why don't you get it in Debian first?
[19:40] <fabrice_sp> !revu | lostis
[19:40] <lostis> can you give me one page to start with plz ;)
[19:40] <lostis> ok
[19:40] <fabrice_sp> but as BlackZ said, Debian would be more easy
[19:40] <lostis> thx
[19:41] <BlackZ> lostis: http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/welcome
[19:41] <lostis> wow im am impressed for the help, i am first time in a irc ;)
[19:43] <Laney> lostis: I recommend you join #debian-java on OFTC and talk to the people there
[19:44] <lostis> okey, thank you guys
[19:44] <fabrice_sp> good luck
[19:57] <Bachstelze> ari-tczew: freeciv needs testing, I had to modify the patch to make it apply cleanly
[19:57] <ari-tczew> Bachstelze: could you test it?
[19:58] <Bachstelze> I don't play freeciv so it would take a while before I figure out how it works
[19:58] <Bachstelze> the person who reported the bug can test it probably
[19:58] <ari-tczew> Bachstelze: package built fine.
[20:02] <bilalakhtar> ari-tczew: Good to see you sponsoring so much!
[20:03] <vish> bilalakhtar: jealous, are ya?  ;p
[20:03] <ari-tczew> bilalakhtar: hehe nothing strange
[20:03] <bilalakhtar> vish: no ! Don't take it the other way!
[21:54] <Bachstelze> asantoni1: if you are i386, I have a fixed package on my PPA for testing
[21:54] <Bachstelze> amd64 is still waiting to build >.>
[22:28] <asantoni1> Bachstelze: link? I can pass it along to the person who reported the problem
[22:28] <Bachstelze> +mixxx (1.8.0+dfsg-0ubuntu2) maverick; urgency=low
[22:28] <Bachstelze> +
[22:28] <Bachstelze> +  * debian/control: Add a run-time dependency on libqt4-sql-sqlite
[22:28] <Bachstelze> +    (LP: #642232)
[22:28] <Bachstelze> +
[22:28] <Bachstelze> + -- Firas Kraiem <firas@fkraiem.org>  Sat, 18 Sep 2010 20:21:32 +0200
[22:28] <Bachstelze> argh
[22:28] <Bachstelze> https://launchpad.net/~firas/+archive/ppa <=
[22:29] <Bachstelze> seems to work fine to me
[22:29] <Bachstelze> well, at least it starts :p
[22:29] <Bachstelze> I can't see what could go wrong but oh well
[23:45] <ari-tczew> Bachstelze: are you interested in merging packages from Debian?