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