[00:21] <chrisccoulson> m_conley, we have a mozillateam channel on freenode btw (not sure if you knew that already) - #ubuntu-mozillateam
[00:21] <chrisccoulson> david is normally in there too
[00:23] <m_conley> chrisccoulson: cool, thanks. :)
[01:13] <Omega> Oh god, unity appeared in it's own launcher and I quit it.
[01:20] <DBO> isn't that amazing
[01:20] <DBO> I do that about once a week for fun
[01:20] <DBO> its not really unity in its own launcher sadly
[01:20] <DBO> just GIO going full retard
[01:21] <Omega> Hmm, no need to report it then DBO?
[01:22] <DBO> if you want
[01:22] <Omega> I "apport-cli unity"ed, or should I have done it with something else?
[01:24] <DBO> anything is fine
[07:57] <didrocks> good morning
[07:59] <oSoMoN> good morning
[08:06] <MacSlow> Morning folks!
[08:06] <didrocks> good morning MacSlow!
[08:06] <MacSlow> Salut didrocks
[11:18] <klattimer> davidbarth: is your internet working yet?
[13:09] <boulabiar> didrocks, ping
[13:09] <didrocks> hey boulabiar
[13:09] <boulabiar> hey !
[13:10] <boulabiar> I want to ask about ginn packaging, what lacks to do ?
[13:10] <didrocks> boulabiar: hum, did you update it? I didn't see the bug report update
[13:11] <boulabiar> hmm, I have updated it, but not the bug report
[13:12] <didrocks> ok, please do :)
[13:14] <didrocks> boulabiar: I'm also answer to bregma
[13:17] <boulabiar> didrocks, he have just told me he want to fix a licensing issue before, I'll wait for him
[13:17] <didrocks> boulabiar: ok :)
[13:17] <didrocks> bregma: I answered on the conffile question
[13:45] <kamstrup> didrocks: just to make sure... if I break ABI in libunity - no need to bump soname, or?
[13:45] <didrocks> kamstrup: no, the package is taking care of that
[13:46] <kamstrup> didrocks: breakage incoming then ;-) I know you love it
[13:46] <didrocks> kamstrup: so, please, break break ;)
[13:46] <didrocks> \o/
[13:46] <kamstrup> lol
[13:46] <didrocks> heh :)
[14:16] <lamalex> good morning folks
[14:16] <spikeb> morning
[15:34] <kamstrup> jor
[15:53] <tedg> kenvandine, After I upgraded yesterday things are seeming crashy.  Are you seeing the same?  Do you think it's one of the Ayatana updates?
[15:53] <kenvandine> tedg, no... less crashy for me
[15:54] <tedg> kenvandine, Hmm, okay.  It must be something else.  I had to back out the newest kernel as well.
[15:54] <tedg> kenvandine, And no nvidia drivers :-/
[15:54] <kenvandine> :/
[15:54] <kenvandine> tedg, did you see klattimer's indicator-datetime branch yet?
[15:55] <tedg> kenvandine, I saw it, I haven't looked in detail yet.  Still trying to get a workable system :-(
[15:55] <kenvandine> tedg, btw i can't get libindicate to build on i386
[15:55] <tedg> Besides the snow I've had a really bad Natty week.
[15:55] <kenvandine> pissing me off!
[15:55] <tedg> kenvandine, Log?
[15:56] <kenvandine> it is a cdbs problem i think
[15:56] <tedg> Oh, okay.  Then I want to know nothing of it ;)
[15:56] <kenvandine> dh_girepository gets run on the cil stuff
[15:56] <kenvandine> and fails to find a libindicate-gtk2.so.2
[15:56] <kenvandine> probably ordering... but damn it's annoying to debug
[16:25] <klattimer> kenvandine: tedg would you like the branch I requested or wait a little until the delete bug gets fixed properly, currently it's leaving one junk menu item for each click (except the first one)
[16:25] <klattimer> but it has the menu items, and does update correctly
[16:26] <lamalex> is anyone else having nux segfaults?
[16:26] <klattimer> the branch I'm currently working on also has the location menu item code in it and theoretical support for colours, neither of which add anything as I've got no locations added to the menu, and evolution color peek stuff is broken in evolution it seems
[16:27] <kenvandine> klattimer, up to tedg, i would love to get that stuff uploaded asap so we can start squashing bugs
[16:27] <klattimer> kenvandine: well mterry is helping with the dodgy menu item bug
[16:28] <klattimer> my current branch adds nothing new really, but I'd like to get locations working on monday, and hopefully this junk menu item problem by then too
[16:28] <lamalex> njpatel: jaytaoko: nux is segfaulting for me, is everything working for you guys
[16:31] <lamalex> hey does anyone have the url for the ddebs archive?
[16:32] <tedg> klattimer, Yeah, you said that mterry is looking at it?
[16:32] <klattimer> tedg: yep
[20:35] <hyperair> tedg: is it a requirement that i sign the canonical contributor agreement, or that i assign the copyright for my patches to canonical in order for you to accept my memleak patches for the indicators?
[20:36] <tedg> hyperair, It's a requirement that you assign copyright, but the only way we have to do that currently is through the contributor agreement :-/
[20:36] <hyperair> tedg: i understand that you can't change the agreement in any way, but while i'm not willing to sign that agreement, i'm willing to declare those patches under public domain and/or assign copyright to canonical.
[20:37] <hyperair> tedg: can't you accept a signed email saying that "I hereby assign my copyright blah blah blah for these patches to Canonical"
[20:37] <hyperair> ?
[20:38] <tedg> hyperair, One would think... but, I've been unable to convince legal of that.  They're very weary of excepting any deviations.
[20:38]  * hyperair grumbles
[20:38]  * tedg joins in
[20:38] <hyperair> tedg: what about public domain stuff?
[20:38] <tedg> hyperair, Tried that with another contributor ;)
[20:38] <hyperair> wtf
[20:39] <hyperair> this is ridiculous
[20:39]  * hyperair pokes jono
[20:39] <hyperair> jono: is there any way i can submit patches to canonical and assign my copyrights for those patches to canonical without signing the agreement?
[20:40] <hyperair> or is there a way to revoke my acknowledgement of the agreement at any future date?
[20:42] <tedg> hyperair, I've gotten a response that non-revocation is an "open bug" -- I'm trying to push that one.
[20:42] <tedg> BTW, I think that jono is sick today.
[20:42] <hyperair> tedg: ooh, thanks.
[20:42] <hyperair> i see.
[20:42] <hyperair> i wonder if jcastro is around
[20:43] <jcastro> yo
[20:43] <hyperair> ooh he is
[20:45] <hyperair> jcastro: so anyway, i submitted some patches to some indicator stuff sometime back. and tedg is trying to include them. but i haven't signed the canonical contributor agreement, and upon reading it, i'm not comfortable with the overly broad scope of that agreement (past, present, future)
[20:46] <hyperair> jcastro: now, i have nothing against assigning ownership/copyright of my patches to public domain or even canonical, but i won't sign that agreement as it stands today.
[20:46] <hyperair> is there any way i can do just that?
[20:47] <jcastro> I don't think so
[20:47] <jcastro> I can ask for you though
[20:47] <hyperair> thanks.
[20:47] <hyperair> tedg: i'm afraid that if there's no way out of this, you'll have to let the patches go to waste and reimplement them somehow or other
[20:48] <tedg> hyperair, Yeah, I know. :-(
[20:49] <hyperair> ;(