# /srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/09/21/#ubuntu-manual.txt

nisshh humphreybc nisshh humphreybc: just saw your post on the planet, made me fall off my chair laughing :) 06:54 nisshh: lolwut 06:54 humphreybc: the post on Planet Ubuntu about the new Application Review Process 06:55 or whatever its called 06:55 yeah, howcome you laughed though? 06:55 humphreybc: the last sentence :) 06:55 lol 06:56 humphreybc: apparently, on the flipside, it is easier to get your app put in the repos for the NEXT version of ubuntu, and then BACKPORTED to all the rest, which is stupid 06:58 ha 06:59 that is what is happening with my app anyway 06:59 nisshh: not sure, why you are complaining.. if you want to have you app out , you always have ppa! just add a ppa and be done with it! so why is it so essential that you want it in the official repo?  do you realize that there arent many hands to review and upload such new app? 07:06 vish: PPA's are a nightmare 07:08 nisshh: while it is understandable about humphreybc's huffin-n-puffin , but what he doesnt seem to have analyzed the root cause of the problem 07:08 humphreybc: yes packaging is not easy 07:09 humphreybc: but what you are not looking at is, you are insisting that the short staffed MOTU/review peeps have to package your apps within the limited time 07:09 vish: i dont really badly want my app in the repos, but i do dislike the fact that a lot of apps now prefer PPA's over the repos so i now have a billion PPA's aded 07:10 added* 07:10 vish: maybe they should stop packaging shit like pornview and focus on decent apps 07:10 vish: plus, my app is already in a PPA, but the repos would be way more convenient 07:11 humphreybc: agreed.. but that package is from debian , not from ubuntu? have you seen where the package is from? ;) 07:11 vish: I don't care where it's from and regular end-users won't either 07:11 humphreybc: ubuntu syncs repos from debian.. so adding exception for pornview is not really easy 07:11 the fact is: it's there. 07:11 humphreybc: exactly, plus what about all the apps that havent been updated in more than 2 years 07:11 humphreybc: well, how do you think it should be solved? 07:12 humphreybc: i dont think you have tried to look into the packaging side of ubuntu :) 07:12 vish: I don't know enough about packaging and repositories to comment. From an end user perspective, I want quality apps, not crap. 07:12 Whatever needs to happen to make that a reality, should be done sooner rather than later. 07:12 * nisshh agrees 07:13 humphreybc: thats why i said i do understand the "huffin-n-puffin" but there is a problem , which is not Ubuntu 07:13 you really cant have the problem solved if no one is working on fixing the root cause 07:14 (instead everyone is off working on ubuntu one and windicators...) 07:15 humphreybc: who is working on windicators? 07:15 ;) 07:15 humphreybc: everyone has different areas of specialities , the ones working on U1 might not know about packaging.. 07:16 and vice-versa 07:16 humphreybc: dont even get me started on windicators 07:16 humphreybc: while you are able to generate these opinion pieces, it would be better, if you can try to get more people involved.. look into the cause find whats the problem, and tell the world these areas need help 07:17 humphreybc: else, the problem wont be solved any time soon :( 07:17 vish: actually, that is a good point, but because of the evident gap between users and devs for ubuntu, how are we going to get these sorts of changes accepted into ubuntu? 07:19 nisshh: hmm, which changes? 07:19 vish: well, big changes like how apps get accepted into Ubuntu and the state of some of the apps in the repos 07:20 you get those people who dont like drastic change' 07:20 or *sudden* change 07:21 i dont think there is *that* problem of people being adamant 07:21 I think you'll just see even more companies hosting their own repos for addition 07:21 its a myth ;) 07:21 pleia2: companies do that? 07:22 nisshh: google chrome ? ;) 07:22 nisshh: virtualbox and google are big examples 07:22 but plenty others do 07:22 vish: what about google chrome? 07:22 +of 07:22 yep 07:22 pleia2: ah i see what you mean yes 07:22 nisshh: how do you think google chrome gets updated? :) 07:22 vish: oh yea, but i use chromium, dont like chrome :) 07:23 nisshh: well you are using the ppa there too ;) 07:23 vish: yes, i know, but its a launchpad PPA 07:23 chrome is google hosted 07:24 nisshh: virtual box, dropbox 07:24 ok, ok, lol i get the point 07:24 yep.. when an app developer knows a bit of packaging they start to host their own ppa 07:24 either lp or somewhere 07:24 nisshh: the problem as always is there aernt enough people involved 07:25 vish: yes, but the problem i have with PPA's is that i have to add SO MANY each time i do a fresh install its rediculous 07:25 yea 07:25 it's still easier than installing an .exe and keeping it up to date :) 07:25 pleia2: yes, i agree :) 07:26 nisshh: the reason the app review process is a bit stricter is, if it were more flexible, it adds more burden on the existing people 07:26 PPA's are convenient but the repos are better 07:26 adding more burden, which is not fair.. if there were more packagers , then the process will surely be more flexible 07:26 repos will always have the updating policy restraint, it simply doesn't work for every type of app (one of the reasons I'm delighted that backports.org is now official in debian) 07:26 vish: well, i agree with some of the points about that, but some of them are silly 07:26 delighted - golly, I can't speak english tonight 07:27 nisshh: everything there is just because of fewer hands ;) 07:27 i see 07:27 get more peeps involved! you get more fun! 07:27 yea 07:28 * humphreybc is playing trumpet for the first time in 2 years 07:41 * pleia2 covers ears 07:41 * nisshh hides 07:41 humphreybc: i play guitar :) 07:41 and my cousin plays drums :) 07:41 i play trumpet, drums and guitar, and I can sing too :P 07:42 might make a one man band :P 07:42 humphreybc: you can sing!!! 07:43 lol 07:43 humphreybc: dint hear you during the all stars event.. ;) 07:43 good morning! 07:43 humphreybc: oh, dude, can you upload some vids of you playing guitar to your youtube channel sometime? 07:44 be awesome! 07:44 vish: didn't like their music :P 07:45 nisshh: at some point maybe 07:45 lol! 07:45 humphreybc: cool :) 07:46 this is what i'm playing atm 07:51 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxcleNexvz0 07:51 * nisshh looks 07:51 humphreybc: i dont like jazz much :| 07:52 nisshh: you're missing out :P 08:13 humphreybc: meh, im a rock fan :) http://www.last.fm/user/nisshh <-- thats not even half my music collection 08:14 not even 20% of it actually 08:15 * popey files bug 644260 if anyone is interested 11:44 Launchpad bug 644260 in ubuntu "Please package ubuntu-manual" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/644260 11:44 i believe this was attempted before 11:48 I asked ben and he didnt have a bug 11:48 said it wasn't a bug, so didnt think he needed one, and didnt know the process 11:49 did someone else? 11:49 dutchie: what was the problem earlier? 11:49 i think the problem we had before was ben wanted it to appear on the desktop, which is sort of hard 11:49 not to mention not the "done thing" 11:49 dutchie: yeah getting it on desktop, thats not simple.. 11:49 thats not what my bug is about 11:49 first things first, get it in the repo 11:49 _then_ worry about getting it anywhere near the cd 11:50 :) 11:50 googling "ubuntu-manual needs-packaging launchpad bug" didnt reveal any existing bugs 11:50 popey: yeah, but ben wanted installing the package to make the manual appear on the desktop 11:50 yeah, what he wants and what happens in the real world are some distance apart 11:50 hehh 11:51 lets get the focus on the bug to get it in the repo first 11:51 if anyone can come up with a nice script to get the current release of the manual in the current locale that would be _awesome_ 11:51 popey: i think you missed what dutchie was trying to say, or maybe dutchie dint know what ben actually wanted 11:51 i think i was just unclear 11:51 what did I miss? 11:51 ben's world: apt-get install ubuntu-manual -> ubuntu-manual.pdf appears on desktop 11:52 real world: package installs don't touch ~ 11:52 right 11:52 i totally got that, didnt miss it at all 11:52 but 11:52 and /usr/share/doc/ubuntu-manual/ubuntu-manual.pdf is kind of hard to find 11:53 a pre-requisite for any of that is to put it in the repo - a pdf or script or whatever 11:53 dutchie: why cant a link be done during install? 11:53 this shit doesn't just magically appear in the repo or even on the desktop 11:53 obviously not 11:53 technically speaking, i'm happy to do the package 11:53 i'm just trying to work out the best way to present the manual 11:53 again, dont worry about that 11:54 please 11:54 stick to the bug which is "get it in the repo" 11:54 there will also be problems with latex versions 11:54 forget all about putting an icon on the desktop, thats a separate bug which can only really be addressed once its in the repo 11:54 right! 11:54 * dutchie investigates doing a ump-downloader 11:54 \o/ 11:54 * popey hugs dutchie 11:54 godbyk/daker: ping 11:55 i reckon it will be about 15 lines of python 11:55 how much of that comments? 11:59 :) 11:59 so far i have 4 lines of comment and no lines of code :) 12:00 heh 12:00 popey: could you mark that bug as in progress and assign it to me then? 12:02 dutchie: usually the people doing the progress do that.. i dont think popey has the privs right now.. assign is only allowed for bug supervisors 12:04 argh 12:04 i'll do it later then 12:04 :) 12:05 is there "source" for the pdf? 12:07 latex 12:07 see lp:ubuntu-manual 12:07 ah cool 12:08 hmm 12:58 i need an option to specify language, but i have already used -l for listing known releases 12:58 http://launchpad.net/ump-downloader 13:10 hi 13:11 sorry i was unable to attend the meeting 13:11 we were moving to a new house 13:11 dutchie, nice, having a look at the code now 13:12 dutchie, dont forget you will need to account for the printer friendly version too 13:14 nisshh: see the --print option 13:14 *facepalm* 13:15 perhaps a little more feedback would be useful 13:15 :) 13:15 it just seems to hang while it download 13:15 s 13:15 i dunno 13:16 iv never written python code that does something like this 13:16 might be easiest just to run wget 13:18 why not put it in the .deb? 13:44 just concerned about someone installing the package on 10/10/10 and getting the manual as of then, if it is updated after that how do they get updates? 13:45 the manual needs a bleeding edge version of latex to build 13:46 this is a pain 13:46 ah, that is a pain 13:46 why? 13:46 ask godbyk 13:47 godbyk: so the manual needs a version of latex newer than that which is in Maverick? 13:49 would be good to get it built from source on the build infrastructure especially as it is buildable 13:50 not like it is an OOo document or something that is printed to a pdf, this builds with make 13:50 dutchie: ping 14:01 oh, and pings to popey as well :) 14:01 :) 14:02 popey: Thanks for filing that bug on getting u-m into Ubuntu, what do you think about it? 14:02 oh, ^^ is incomplete 14:02 What do you think about it, since getting it into maverick won't be good enough 14:03 i filed it because I chatted to ben, and he wanted it on the cd, i said first step was to get it in the repo, and indeed first step of that is to file a bug 14:03 he was unaware of this 14:03 hmm 14:03 so i offered to do it for him 14:03 and I can upload to universe 14:03 which is indeed the first place a new package should go to 14:03 popey: ^^ 14:03 indeed 14:03 then it should be MIRed 14:03 then a review should be requested with the ubuntu-desktop team for including it in the CD 14:04 And 14:04 all this is NOT going to happen for maverick 14:04 I think if the package gets into universe, that is the most that can happen 14:04 one step at a time 14:05 none of that will happen until it's packaged :) 14:05 dutchie: You are preparing a recipe, but that won't give a package good enough to enter the repos 14:06 popey: ^^ is true 14:06 bilalakhtar: ok 14:06 still gives me a chance to get it buildign 14:06 dutchie: recipe builds are known to be having lintian errors, so its adviced to stay away from it 14:06 dutchie: yup 14:07 well, what do we aim for? 14:07 well, i have a python script 14:07 that sort-of works 14:07 The PDF could be installed in /usr/share/doc/ubuntu-manual, and what after that? A link in menu or desktop? 14:07 bilalakhtar: the bug is what it is.. "just getting it packaged" ;) 14:07 vish: Deign guys needed! 14:07 *design 14:07 vish: But that is tagged needs-packaging 14:08 and hence it means 14:08 bilalakhtar: first package.. then linking everything else we can worry later.. 14:08 'Get this thing into Ubuntu' 14:08 vish: But what would the package do? 14:08 Copy a file into /usr/share/doc/*, fine, but after that? 14:08 http://launchpad.net/ump-downloader is what I have so far 14:08 it will install in the doc folder.. then we can file bug later to get a link in desktop 14:09 bilalakhtar: ^ 14:09 hmm 14:09 i would not focus on what we do after its in the repo 14:09 * bilalakhtar looks at dutchie 's branch 14:09 the first step is 'get it into the repo 14:09 bilalakhtar: exactly what popey said, he filed the bug.. ;) 14:10 I don't get the point in doing this 14:10 We should be very much clear with the first point 14:10 and if I follow what vish is suggesting 14:10 we would need 2 FFes 14:10 one for the new package 14:11 other for the link addition, whenever it takes place 14:11 the problem with building the manual is that it requires bleeding edge latex 14:11 Shouldn't we upload a pre-built manual? the pdf itself, right? 14:11 But that would mean the package would enter multiverse and not universe 14:11 another problem is we don't have one of those yet :) 14:12 there isn't just one manual 14:12 there's a pdf per lang 14:12 in both on-screen and print versions 14:12 okay, so does maverick have latest latex? 14:13 not sure 14:13 it doesn't have what's needed, no 14:13 bilalakhtar: i'm not suggesting that we focus on the link to desktop.. i said we can think about that later, once this packaging is done .. ;) 14:13 i haven't actually tested it, but i don't think it does 14:13 hmm 14:13 okay, fine, I go with vish's idea 14:13 dutchie: What do you aim to do, then? pre-built manual or manual source? 14:14 i couldn't see a way round the latex issue 14:14 so i thought pre-built was the only way really 14:14 hmm 14:15 there is a precident 14:15 I would need more suggestions from the motu team about this 14:15 popey: wrong spelling 14:15 http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=diveintopython 14:15 bilalakhtar: chill 14:15 hmm, i thought that came as a pdf 14:16 clearly not, its html 14:16 my bad 14:16 can the manual be built as html and not pdf? 14:16 ben is not around :( Any experienced member of the u-m team? 14:17 AFAIK its a 'NO' 14:17 no, it can't 14:17 it's been on the todo list for a while iirc, but this is godbyk's area 14:17 that would probably require latex again anyway 14:18 of course, silly me 14:19 what version of latex does it need? 14:21 The Ubuntu Manual requires TeX Live 2009. The version of TeX Live in the Ubuntu 9.10 repositories is 2007. In Lucid, there are packages for TeX Live 2009, but they are not new enough. You must use the upstream version of TeX Live 2009 to compile the manual successfully. 14:22 off http://ubuntu-manual.org/getinvolved/editors 14:22 hopefully godbyk will appear and be able to answer these technical questions properly 14:23 Lucid had texlive 2009-7 and Maverick has 2009-10 14:26 217MB of downloads, lets see if it will build on that 14:29 if not then we check that a suitable version is in Debian for the sync to Natty 14:30 or fix the latex source of the manual to not depend on such a recent texlive 14:30 ! LaTeX Error: File `xifthen.sty' not found. 15:09 AlanBell: Error: I am only a bot, please don't think I'm intelligent :) 15:09 meh silly bot 15:09 I installed texlive and texlive-xetex 15:10 getting that error about xifthen.sty - any ideas? 15:10 looks like it is in texlive-latex-extra 15:14 criky another 210MB of stuff 15:16 be with you all in just a few minutes. 15:16 making my way through my email inbox. 15:16 AlanBell: i do not have that package installed 15:16 but then i just used the script on the site to setup the environment 15:16 downloading the upstream texlive? 15:16 yeah 15:17 which was not ideal 15:17 sub-optimal 15:17 I want to see if it will build against dependencies in Maverick 15:17 i tried that i think 15:17 maybe not 15:17 i just did what i was told :) 15:18 * AlanBell never does that 15:18 :D 15:18 texlive-latex-extra depends on texlive-latex-extra-doc which is 193MB of documentation for it 15:20 that's a bit crap 15:20 not a Recommends? 15:21 I did apt-get install texlive-latex-extra 15:21 try with --no-install-recommends 15:21 not stopping it now! 15:22 okay. back now. 15:22 so fill me in. 15:22 (I could read the backlog, but it'll take me a few minutes.) 15:22 godbyk: i filed a bug to get u-m in the repo 15:22 AlanBell: it will have cached the downloads 15:22 popey: right. saw that. 15:22 as the first step towards world domination 15:22 dutchie: you are right, it is a recommends 15:22 dutchie: partial downloads? 15:23 the guys are working on making it build, so it can be built on launchpad 15:23 aha. 15:23 AlanBell: if it hasnt finished downloading, just ctrl+c it 15:23 it wont harm it 15:23 Do we get any feedback from Launchpad as to what's failing? 15:23 we havent tried 15:23 okay. 15:23 i suspect we know that its missing newer texlive packages 15:23 however 15:24 a good test is just getting it built locally using stock maverick packages 15:24 (for some reason I went to type mandrake then) 15:24 seems sensible. 15:24 which is what AlanBell is doing now 15:24 so now, you are up to speed godbyk :) 15:24 anything I can do to help? 15:24 the other option 15:25 it build to html 15:25 (I don't have mandrake^Wmaverick installed yet.) 15:25 you can be on call to fix build errors 15:25 which could then be packaged 15:25 'kay. 15:25 godbyk: do you think it will build against texlive 2009-10? 15:25 rather than having launchpad build a pdf 15:25 godbyk: whats the status of the manual being built to html? 15:25 popey: I think think building to html will work -- at least not without a ton of extra effort. 15:25 that doesn't parse quite right 15:25 you think it could be made to with lots of work? 15:26 popey: well, the usually tools for tex -> html apparently choke on the stuff we're doing because they don't understand unicode. 15:26 ok 15:26 the only reason we thought about html build was because there is already a book in the repo which is in html format 15:26 dive into python 15:26 so there is a prescident 15:26 ah, gotcha. 15:26 but thats just an alternate option 15:26 popey: precedent ;) 15:26 shush 15:26 (and thanks) 15:26 the other, other, other option was for you guys to build / host it, and just package a script that wgets the right version for your release/lang 15:27 but thats a touch icky 15:27 i have done that 15:27 ah, great 15:27 would be 'preferable' to have it build on lp 15:27 IMHO 15:27 yep 15:27 ok, so _now_ you're up to speed 15:27 I think the wget script would be the easiest of those options, frankly. 15:28 but yeah, it'd be great if we could get it to build on lp 15:28 it is, because i have already done it 15:28 godbyk: http://launchpad.net/ump-downloader 15:28 so where are we on the 'let's get it to build on lp' attempt? 15:29 we're at the "let's get it to build on AlanBell's computer" stage 15:29 dutchie: I love the map at the top of your python script.  looks like a deranged monkey threw spaghetti at the wall and you traced the pieces and coded it up. 15:30 godbyk: is that a compliment? 15:31 dutchie: I'll let you know. :) 15:31 ccicons.sty needed now 15:33 AlanBell: They *still* haven't packaged ccicons? 15:34 i suppose it can't be *that* hard to package ourselves... 15:34 not looking good 15:34 lemme look at it. I may have a trick that'll work. 15:35 (though it'll definitely be ugly) 15:35 hmm.. 15:35 actually it'll be a real PITA.. since the ccicons package uses a ccicons font, that complicates things. 15:36 * popey can't help thinking this would have been a fun thing to do maybe 6 months ago :) 15:37 popey: heh.. not even then! 15:37 well I don't think we are realistically targeting Maverick at this stage 15:37 it'd be fun if the texlive packages would be updated occasionally. 15:37 no, i dont think so either 15:38 a ppa would be good 15:38 so it can easily be added to software center/re 15:38 godbyk: so we need to do a packaging request bug for ccicons then I guess 15:39 AlanBell: among others, yeah. 15:40 I'd get missing packages in a ppa for now 15:40 mind you, bug filing could still be done 15:40 It looks like there are other PDFs that have been packaged. I don't know if they're all generated with LP or not.  http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?searchon=contents&keywords=pdf&mode=&suite=lucid&arch=any 15:40 AlanBell: run 'texdoc fontspec'  does that open up a pdf? 15:41 I know that that PDF wasn't compiled via LP, at least. 15:41 it does open a PDF 15:45 AlanBell: so there's some precedent for including PDFs not built via LP. 15:46 well yes, but it nearly builds so lets make it build 15:46 which will help it on the way to getting into main 15:46 and on the CD 15:46 quick and dirty would be to put the PDF in a .deb doing the downloader script is also a bit icky 15:48 +2 15:48 popey gets no votes! :-) 15:49 if getting it to build means fixing broken stuff in the texlive packaging then that is fantastic 15:49 story of my life 15:49 AlanBell: Right. Well, if you want to give it a shot.  Go here: http://ctan.org/pkg/ccicons. Download those files and follow the instructions in the README to install them. 15:50 FWIW, TeX Live 2010 was released last week. 15:51 does the debian maintainer know that? 15:52 hasn't been uploaded yet 15:52 still 2009-10 in sid 15:52 godbyk: so do I download the files and create that directory structure inside my ubuntu-manual directory? 15:54 AlanBell: I would snag the lucid-e1/pkgs dir.. it contains the ccicons.zip file and has a bash script that contains a function that'll put the files where they need to go. 15:56 AlanBell: note that you can't run the script as it stands.  you'll need to just run the ccicons-related function. 15:56 AlanBell: though I guess you could snag an older version of the script that would work. lemme find it for ya. 15:56 AlanBell: you can try lucid-e1/pkgs r170.  I make no promises. 16:04 so where is that then? 16:06 AlanBell: in the lp:ubuntu-manual/lucid-e1/ repository, pkgs directory (revision 170) 16:07 ok, so take a bzr branch of that then? 16:11 AlanBell: yeah, just check that revision out of bzr. 16:12 then you can go into the pkgs/ dir and run ./install-pkgs.sh 16:12 note that there may be other issues after you install ccicons. 16:13 I don't know if the maverick packages have fixed the problems we had with the lucid packages. 16:13 well lets find out, if they are not, then we ask for them to be fixed for Natty 16:15 hmm, it asked for sudo password then hung 16:19 look at the install-pkgs.log file. any errors? 16:19 After this operation, 264MB of additional disk space will be used. 16:20 not hung just silent and large 16:20 texlive-fonts-extra is most of it 16:21 ah. in the 'hung' window, press Enter. 16:23 it's probably waiting for a 'go-head: yes/no?' response or something. 16:23 maybe 16:23 it's a very, very early version of the script, so it wasn't written all that well. 16:24 I think it is getting stuff 16:24 yeah, it's installing some packages. 16:24 it may take a bit depending on how many packages it's downloading. 16:24 is this channel logged? 16:25 AlanBell: yes 16:30 !logs 16:34 Official channel logs can be found at http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/ - For LoCo channels, http://logs.ubuntu-eu.org/freenode/ 16:34 bah 16:34 godbyk, ping 17:12 godbyk, are the staging server ready ? 17:12 godbyk, if you can't host it we can tell dutchie to host it 17:17 daker: not yet. sorry, I've been busy with other things. 17:38 if dutchie wants to host it, that's fine with me. 17:38 i don't mind either way 17:38 otherwise, I'll try to get it up and running in the next day or two. 17:38 the difference is, i have a transfer quota and godbyk doesn't :) 17:39 dutchie, godbyk oh 17:40 If you can give me a couple days, I'll try to get it running on my site. 17:41 I've just been busy with work and haven't gotten back to the website stuff yet. 17:41 siunitx.sty not found 17:50 AlanBell: I'm not sure if we're actually using it. Let me look. 17:54 looks like it's not required. 17:55 let me update the repository. 17:55 AlanBell: okay, run 'bzr pull' and try it again. 17:56 No revisions to pull. 18:03 I have revno 49 18:04 oops. forgot to push. try it again. 18:08 Font \zf@basefont="Linux Libertine O" at 10.0pt not loadable: Metric (TFM) fi 18:09 le or installed font not found. 18:09 that should be in texlive-fonts-extra, but I have that 18:11 lets try installing ttf-linux-libertine 18:12 ok, doing stuff now, and my pizza is ready 18:12 okay, make sure you have the linux libertine font installed. 18:15 either the ubuntu pkg ttf-linux-libertine (or whatever it's named) or downloaded from http://linuxlibertine.sourceforge.net/ 18:16 ok, that worked with the packaged font 18:21 Call to xindy failed (errno=32512): 18:21 sh: xindy: not found 18:21 installing xindy now 18:22 Seriously?! They don't have xindy yet either? C'mon! 18:22 it is in the repos 18:23 !info xindy 18:23 'kay. 18:23 there was some index-related problems we had with lucid.. 18:23 maybe it was makeglossaries. 18:23 Success!  Wrote 166 pages 18:26 looks good 18:27 evince main.pdf shows me the manual, it looks OK to me 18:27 does it have the glossary and index? 18:28 yes and yes 18:29 cool 18:29 clicky links in the index work 18:29 now how do you get launchpad to handle all that? 18:29 build dependencies 18:29 I am just a bit suspicious of what the install-pkgs.sh did in terms of CTAN stuf 18:30 it only installed ubuntu packages plus the ccicons package. 18:31 (at least the version you have.  the newer one installs pkgs from ctan) 18:31 ok, good 18:31 so ccicons needs sorting out, the rest is easy 18:32 or straightforward at least 18:32 perhaps. 18:33 you've only tried the english version so far. :-) 18:33 true 18:34 how do I build the others? 18:34 well, for maverick you can't yet. 18:34 in the lucid branchines, you can type 'make ubuntu-manual-XX.pdf' where XX is the language code. 18:35 ok 18:35 I don't know much about packaging, but one source package can create multiple binary packages 18:36 not sure if all languages should be in one .deb or if there should be a .deb per language 18:36 probably one per language. 18:40 dutchie: ping 19:17 jenkins: pong 19:24 hey the bug about packaging the manual how is that going? 19:25 I don't see the actuall packaging being an issue but its how people find it that is the problem 19:25 first it has to be packaged 19:25 the packaging is the easy bit 19:25 yes, so lets do it 19:26 I wanted to do it ages ago and am happy to get it done tonight 19:26 great 19:26 I managed to run make and build the manual using texlive and packages all from maverick 19:26 you will have to build the manual and put it in a package. launchpad will never be able to build the manual its self 19:27 why? 19:28 ccicons is not on a launchpad machine and not in maverick. I made the package for it which is in the latex ppa that I am working on 19:28 ccicons being a font 19:28 ok, so why can't ccicons go in the repos? 19:28 ccicons was the only bit that was a problem, the rest was packages in maverick 19:29 it could rather obvious soultion, I think its gpl v3. i have a package for that already some where 19:29 I will dig it out and see what I can drum up 19:30 so ccicons is the only reason launchpad couldn't build it? 19:31 I need to double check 19:33 and xindy has not been transfered from debian it always fails to build when getting into ubuntu 19:34 but that can also be fixed 19:34 xindy was fine 19:34 wow so it is they have fixed it this release 19:35 * jenkins jumps for joy 19:35 if the manual builds from source then it is a much better package so has a better chance of getting further down the repos in an on the CD direction 19:36 thats no problem I can sort it out I will see how much i can get done tonight 19:36 I have the ccicons package that works I just need to triple check it for errors 19:37 dutchie: how far have you got with the packaging so far? 19:37 not very far 19:39 ok godbyk I think you told me it was ok but am I alright to package it for ubuntu when it has this licence http://paste.ubuntu.com/497902/ 19:40 k how much? so I don't duplicate what you have done 19:40 well i wrote http://launchpad.net/ump-downloader and made a vague start on packaging that 19:41 but i haven't done much/anything on the actual manual 19:41 that was something I started to do but then talking to the motu guys they were not very happy with that way of doing it. I woul dhave to dig out the logs for it it was a while ago 19:42 well soemthing along that lines 19:42 you need to add a gui to tell them that there language is not avlible 19:43 or a popup 19:43 the idea was to make a separate binary package for each language 19:44 ok so we do a package per language, and only ever do that once? 19:45 is that the idea? 19:45 we have one source package generating a binary package for each language 19:45 k, i follow 19:46 are ubuntu allowing new packages in to the repos after release now? 19:46 you talking about the app review board? 19:47 maybe 19:47 but realistically I think we are targeting Natty 19:47 the important thing is to make sure stuff like ccicons actually gets in properly so that the manual can be built 19:48 hmm, well if we get another language completed how do we update it. we have either got to have one intelligent binary that works out the language or we need to think of every possible language. So that we don't have to update mid cycle 19:48 * jenkins is double checking licence files 19:49 the problem i can see is that the manual won't be finished until far too late to get it into the release relevant to it without a huge fuss 19:50 dutchie: not a major problem if it is already in 19:50 yea I know its a chicken and egg 19:50 AlanBell: you think so? 19:50 i suppose it's not like it's a core lib 19:50 if the package is in then an update to it as an SRU has a good reason, and is low risk 19:50 so a package with a draft in AlanBell? 19:51 yes 19:51 I am sure it would be a pretty good draft 19:51 but if the package isn't in then you are screwed 19:52 but then would we do that for every language. 19:52 I get the idea I am working on it 19:52 I am not sure on the languages question 19:52 how many languages is it translated to? 19:52 which edition? 19:52 well I think 3 released maverick right dutchie? 19:53 *lucid 19:53 english, greek and german 19:53 one option would be do it in one package and just install them all 19:54 === ZachK_ is now known as zkriesse and do a detecting icon that worked out what version to give you biased on the available versions and the lanugage you have. sound good? 19:55 as for visibility of it to users, why not just create a .desktop file that puts it in applications-other 19:55 and yeah some fancyness in the .desktop or in what the .desktop calls to launch the right pdf 19:56 well to use an argument that may come up not my opinion. It then give the user two places to look for help. Help centre and the manual 19:56 I agree with your thinking AlanBell, its some thing that has come up before 19:57 yes, it is two places to look for help, but it is an optional package. If the help centre wants to integrate better with the manual down the line then that would be great 19:58 don't want to upset the docs team again 19:59 I think multiple languages in one package is the easiest solution for now, it allows for additional languages to be added without adding more packages 19:59 yeah 19:59 as it isn't going on the CD any time soon we don't need to give a toss about a minor space inefficiency 20:00 seeing as the apps review board isn't going to help :( 20:00 why wouldn't they help? 20:00 apparently they won't accept docs 20:00 only actual apps 20:00 oh that 20:00 I am glad this is making some progress 20:01 meh, get the package done, submit it, see if they reject it 20:01 either way the idea is to get it into Universe 20:02 this is AlanBell not playing by the rules again :) 20:02 :) 20:03 brb 20:03 gah.. people talking and I didn't notice. 20:06 lemme read the backlog. 20:07 k ccicons is getting there 20:12 re: multiple languages in one package.. sounds fine, except that at ~4.5 MB per PDF, that's pretty expensive -- especially when you only really want one of those. 20:12 jenkins: ccicons license is probably okay.  Just use whatever is in the README: http://tug.ctan.org/tex-archive/fonts/ccicons/README 20:13 hi, I have some questions about translations 20:15 Andre_Gondim: Ask away. 20:15 if I have {string} do I need translate the string ? 20:15 Andre_Gondim: It depends.  I'd suggest looking at the Translations chapter in the style guide: http://files.ubuntu-manual.org/style-guide.pdf 20:16 It'll give you a list of {string} that should and shouldn't be translated. 20:16 thanks 20:16 No problem. 20:16 What language are you working on? 20:17 thanks godbykI did have a read of the licence and it is fine 20:17 godbyk: how do i work out the ccicons version number? 20:18 it's just a date iirc 20:19 http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#s3.2.1 20:19 jenkins: the latest version is 1.1. 20:19 released 2009-12-14 20:20 i assume that is the same as the one here http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/fonts/ccicons/ 20:20 http://ctan.org/pkg/ccicons 20:21 godbyk, pt_BR 20:21 how mnay people are running maverick with no ccicons installed but texlive full 20:21 Andre_Gondim: Ah, cool. 20:21 thanks godbyk 20:21 like this case "\newglossaryentry{applet}{name={applet}, description=" may I translate applet between { } ? 20:22 Andre_Gondim: nope. leave the first applet alone. translate the second one. 20:22 nice 20:22 (name={transate me}, description={translate me}, plural={translate me} 20:22 \newglossaryentry{don't translate me} 20:22 in the change log what is the best thing to write as its first entry? I want to get it write so it can get in asap 20:25 * jenkins runs to find motu docs to check for missing items 20:27 changelog for ccicons? 20:28 there is no ccicons change log. I ment the debian change log 20:28 well, ideally, ccicons should probably be included in one of the existing texlive packages (like texlive-fonts-extra). 20:28 * jenkins is aming to upload by tonight 20:28 in this case Welcome to \emph{Getting Started with Ubuntu},  may I translate it? 20:29 the changelog for the ccicons package itself (per its docs): 20:29 Version 1.0 (2009/11/29): Initial version 20:29 Version 1.1 (2009/12/14): New font with additional glyphs 20:29 does it have to? cos then we have to get it though debian 20:29 Andre_Gondim: yes. 20:30 ok 20:30 Andre_Gondim: \emph{this text is in italics and should be translated} 20:30 are yes found that godbyk 20:30 jenkins: I have no idea whether is has to it not.  I don't know any of the rules for this stuff.  (It all seems fairly insane to me.) 20:30 any thoughts on http://www.foopics.com/showfull/ca23a75c684b610a91d9916b3e437834  ? 20:31 cool seperate package is a mile easier if we can get it in that way.  should we get it into debian first? 20:31 thorwil: it looks great, but i never understood what was wrong with the previous version 20:32 / 10.04 version 20:32 "Initial release", jenkins 20:32 thorwil: Where'd the color for the icons come from? 20:32 thanks dutchie 20:34 any plans to set the manual in the new Ubuntu font? 20:34 AlanBell: Not yet, at least. 20:34 i don't know if anyone got a needs-packaging bug for ccicons 20:34 but you'd reference that if it exists 20:35 The font's not ready and I don't know if it works well with our current design. 20:35 I will search for the bug before i upload 20:35 I am spending about 20 mins double checking 20:36 stuff 20:36 no bugs for it 20:38 godbyk: totally agree, it was just something that popped into my head looking at thorwil's screenshot. Not even sure the font will make it into Maverick at this stage 20:39 jenkins: well, that's why i only changed things a bit, instead of going for something new 20:39 godbyk: it's the ubuntu orange 20:40 thorwil: can you reduce how far in the fadeing goes? If that makes any sense 20:40 after \gls{string} this string is translatable? 20:41 Andre_Gondim: nope 20:42 jenkins: it does. guess i have to play with that a bit 20:42 ok 20:42 thorwil: 'kay. 'cause I'm apparently supposed to explore the aubergine and orange for colors in the manual (instead of brick red). 20:42 can we go into the debate about the colours an their meanings :P and why we should not use aubergine :P lol 20:43 Not much of a debate on my part. I've read the design statements on their use. :-) 20:44 I don't want to start it really 20:44 :) 20:44 godbyk: not that the brick red must stay as is, but aubergine for links? ridiculous 20:44 thorwil: I don't think aubergine will be the link color because it won't print well anyway. 20:45 godbyk: and you're in a strong position. nothing moves if you don't make it to, there ;) 20:45 thorwil: heh. true. 20:45 thorwil: do you have the color codes handy for the orange you used for the icons? 20:45 * jenkins hmm I need to redo some of the package 20:45 (I think I've seen too many variants floating around.) 20:45 godbyk: dd4814 20:46 \textit{central pane} translatable? 20:47 #dd4814 is the RGB colour specification of Ubuntu community orange 20:47 the CMYK specification is rather different for reasons that seem to relate to Macs being crap at colours 20:48 godbyk: that's the web/screen color, though 20:48 it's not like using the other color definition would get us anyway regarding fidelity in print 20:49 well, right now we print the interior in black and white. 20:50 (I have it turn off the color links) 20:50 the color I use for the links needs to look readable on screen and on home printers. 20:50 the color you gave me might be a little too light when converted to greyscale by the printer. 20:51 lemme print a page to test. 20:51 it seems pretty light with my printer. 20:54 I'll have to see if there's a darker shade I can use. 20:54 hey, humphreybc 20:58 \variable{connection name}}  is translatable it? 21:01 morninng 21:01 Andre_Gondim: yes. 21:01 hey humphreybc 21:02 ok 21:02 Someone went through the OMG! Ubuntu! comments and very carefully flagged all of mine and Tyler's :P 21:02 Haha! That's awesome. 21:03 I mean... not... cool. 21:03 lol thats an interesting idea 21:03 It wasn't me though. I just got a laugh from it. :P 21:03 sure sure 21:04 humphreybc: this is slightly outdated now, but: http://www.foopics.com/showfull/ca23a75c684b610a91d9916b3e437834 21:05 and i have to run. good night! 21:05 * jenkins will get this packaged tonight even if I fall asleep at work 21:05 *ccicons 21:05 humphreybc: the manual nearly builds on Maverick, just needs ccicons packaged 21:06 then it can be built from source and an icon put in the menus \o/ 21:06 AlanBell: like, latex source? 21:06 yup 21:06 wow 21:06 hear that Kev? 21:06 godbyk: nudge 21:07 I built it on my laptop, just had to install the ccicons, everything else came from the repos 21:07 AlanBell: so far. I might break it again soonish, though. :-) 21:07 ah but latex is pretty large, no? 21:07 humphreybc: yeah, I helped him. 21:07 it would pull in like 2 gigs of dependencies :P 21:07 yeah, flippin huge, but who cares? 21:07 I think the best thing to do would be a package that runs a wget script 21:07 AlanBell: I guess that would help with contributors 21:08 maybe 21:08 maybe we have one package for end users 21:08 which is just a script 21:08 does a wget 21:08 wget scripts are icky and for lame stuff like flash 21:08 another package for contributors 21:08 installs all the latex shit 21:08 the binary wouldn't have all that shit in it 21:08 then our instructions to get contributors helping on maverick and beyond can just be install this 21:08 oh 21:08 yeah of course 21:08 d'oh 21:08 latex is just a build dep 21:08 cool 21:09 so soyuz would get a hammering 21:09 well that could work then 21:09 hahaha 21:09 < AlanBell> yeah, flippin huge, but who cares? 21:09 that makes it a much nicer package as it builds cleanly from source 21:09 mm 21:09 it would also mean that editors would just have to do apt-get build-dep ubuntu-manual and check out the bzr branch 21:10 yay 21:12 the trouble is I have changed the way it was packaged before but have now broken it 21:13 the new way is loads better btw 21:13 haha 21:14 it works agian now 21:18 I am getting there 21:18 in theory the application review board won't look at standalone content or documentation, but that might be a rule that can be tested for flexibilty (not helped much by a certain recent blogpost, however we can but try) 21:18 once the package is actually in the repo for Natty It should be possible to update the package post-release 21:19 i *could* just blackmail them 21:19 :P 21:19 no you couldn't 21:19 why don't they allow for standalone documentation? 21:20 godbyk: I have absolutely no idea 21:20 I'm fairly confident there are already packages that are standalone docs.. 21:20 "put this darned book in the repositories or i'll post something evil about you" 21:20 keep the workload down? 21:20 humphreybc: or you could try "if you put this book in the repos I'll post something nice about you" 21:20 heh 21:21 didn't think of that :P 21:21 it might be they don't want packages of movies or songs or pictures or something like that 21:21 yeah 21:22 it's the carrot and stick approach 21:22 in fact, there appear to be a number of such packages. 21:22 abs-guide 21:22 could be some kind of package that turns up in the iphone store that is lame 21:22 simplecommeubuntu 21:24 i think i need a go faster stick to poke my maverick upgrade 21:25 diveintopython 21:26 yey clean lithian \0/ 21:26 right now back to double checking again 21:26 Here are a few packages that appear to be stand-alone books.  Just in case we need the fodder later: 21:36 abs-guide c++-annotations cfi-en derivations diveintopython grokking-the-gimp 21:36 hwb png-definitive-guide rubybook rutebook selflinux simplecommeubuntu 21:36 (that's a non-exhaustive list) 21:36 Btw, has everyone seen http://ubuntu-guide.org/? 21:37 interesting it references the manual in the guide. Whats the point of the guide? 21:38 its only 5 pages 21:38 http://iloverobots.net/2010/09/20/ubuntu-guide/ 21:39 so it's basically a quick-start guide, then? 21:42 (sorry, lurking) 21:42 ok fair enough i guess your right synergetic. 21:42 it does assume that they have ubuntu installed but still 21:42 * jenkins goes back to packaging 21:42 yeah. i can understand how some would like a quickstart guide, but if you're savvy enough to follow that quickstart guide, you probably don't need it. 21:44 those completely new to it would need the full manual, those with more experience could probably make do with a feature list 21:45 Hi guys... I'm the original author of the Ubuntu Guide. 21:47 We're discussing things over on #ubuntu-guide if you care to hop over there. 21:47 can anyone check if syntax in pt_BR is ok? 22:10 I am stuck anyone else done much packaging. I can't understand why I have files ending up in /etc when i want them in /var I have the ccicons.dirs file and the ccicons.install file right as far as I can tell 22:12 jenkins: shouldn't all the ccicons files end up in /usr/share/...? 22:13 Andre_Gondim: which branch are you working on? 22:13 opps thats what I ment. sorry trying to think about it too much 22:14 godbyk, https://translations.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu-manual/lucid-e1/+pots/ubuntu-manual/pt_BR/+translate?show=untranslated 22:14 Andre_Gondim: I'll download the .po file and try. It'll take a few minutes for Launchpad to email me the file. 22:16 ok 22:17 * cassidyjames is away: Busy. 22:33 humphreybc: 22:35 pingaring 22:35 hi 22:35 make it quick 22:35 have class soon 22:35 sorry, no rush, can wait until after 22:35 when's a better time? 22:36 ummm 22:36 I'm pretty busy all day, I might be around in about 4 hours 22:36 i'll try then, if not, tomorrow is fine 22:36 cool 22:36 thanks, see ya 22:36 will be here all day tomorrow I think 22:36 great 22:36 dpkg-genchanges: error: cannot read files list file: No such file or directory dpkg-buildpackage: error: dpkg-genchanges gave error exit status 2         very helpful 22:43 :$22:43 i'm sure #ubuntu-motu will be happy to help 22:43 #ubuntu-packaging is the correct channel but they have not been answering. I am about to try there now 22:45 godbyk: ping 23:46 jenkins: pong 23:48 how do i get latex to pick up the ccicons.sty it is in the right place 23:49 I should not have tried to re write this but it is better in the long run 23:49 if it's just a problem with finding the ccicons.sty file, run texhash against the directory that contains it. 23:49 rewrite what? 23:49 the ccicons package 23:49 * jenkins wishes people would build the manual before uploading 23:50 * godbyk agrees completely 23:50 Build the manual before uploading? 23:52 Muscovy: yes, before committing to the repository. 23:53 well actually the error turned out to be accicons releated issue. but you should build it to check for latex errors 23:53 Muscovy: said differently: don't break the build! 23:53 Good advice. 23:54 godbyk: sudo texhash /usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/latex/ccicons right? 23:54 jenkins: just sudo texhash /usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex should work. 23:54 (it'll check recursively) 23:54 its not working hang on I have an idea 23:55 jenkins: isn't there a thing to do tex stuff 23:55 dutchie: there is but for some reason I can't get it to work. I am just trying to check I have everything else correct except for that bit 23:56 ah 23:56 jenkins: did you do the Mapping thing? 23:56 yep 23:56 the file is there as well 23:57 and copied all the files to where they're supposed to go? 23:57 it still does not owrk 23:57 what error do you get? 23:57 run 'kpsewhich ccicons.sty' and it should tell you if it can find the .sty file 23:57 the mapping gives uke-jennings@luke-jennings-laptop:~/Projects/ubuntu-manual$ sudo texhash /usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex 23:57 texhash: Updating /usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/ls-R... 23:57 texhash: Done. 23:57 that's good. 23:58 kpsewhich should work now then. 23:58 well running it in the root directory does not work but running in the directory it is in does 23:59 luke-jennings@luke-jennings-laptop:/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/latex/ccicons$kpsewhich ccicons.sty 23:59 ./ccicons.sty 23:59 luke-jennings@luke-jennings-laptop:/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/latex/ccicons$ cd / 23:59

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!