[00:37] <MTecknology> If there's no compiling required in a package and no special processing... do I need a debian/rules file?
[00:44] <MTecknology> Heh... now that I think about it, I realize how dumb that question was
[00:51] <ScottK> ari-tczew: Built.  http://pastebin.com/Zg78CKYH
[00:53] <ari-tczew> ScottK: Many thanks! New candidate for sync. ;-)
[01:19] <persia> MTecknology, It's not that dumb: it's asked frequently enough that there have been three classroom sessions about it.
[01:20] <MTecknology> persia: I just meant that.. how else do you run any dh_commands.. I need to attend those classes..
[01:20] <ari-tczew> wgrant: could you extend my membership for motu-swat?
[01:26] <wgrant> ari-tczew: Done.
[01:27] <ari-tczew> wgrant: Thanks. ;-)
[02:40] <c2tarun> I worked on the bug 682680. and now I am creating a .deb on natty machine for testing. What else should I do for this bug?
[02:43] <persia> c2tarun, It's probably worth checking if there is a similar bug in Debian,and coordinating with the Debian maintainer for an upload into Debian post-release (real soon now).
[02:44] <persia> If that doesn't go incredibly smoothly, you would attach any required artifacts to the bug (frequently diff.gz or debian.gz is sufficient), and request sponsorship.
[02:44] <c2tarun> persia: how can I check about the similar bug in debian, I meand where to look?
[02:47] <persia> c2tarun, http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?repeatmerged=no&src=gearmand
[02:47] <persia> Looks like Debian bug #590116 to me
[02:51] <c2tarun> persia: ok, thanks a lot for looking, but I really dont know what to do next, its my first time.
[02:51] <c2tarun> persia: I should contact the one who reported the bug on debian?
[02:52] <persia> I'd recommend mailing the bug, and saying that you've been working on this, and have a candidate ready, and wondered if that could be helpful for an immediate upload after release.
[02:55] <c2tarun> persia: mailing the bug means ? mailing to one who reported on LP or the one who reported it for debian?
[02:56] <persia> The Debian bug tracking system primarily uses a mail interface.  I mean sending mail directly to the bug, essentially adding a comment.
[02:56]  * persia digs up the reference
[02:57] <persia> http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#followup
[03:02] <c2tarun> I tried by clicking on reply but nothing happend. Should I mail them directly to bug-submitter's address and bug-address?
[03:03] <c2tarun> persia: ^^
[03:04] <persia> I generally just mail the bug address, unless I need something specific from the submitter: interested submitters can subscribe to bugs and get bugmail if they want it.
[03:05] <c2tarun> persia: ok, sure. so i'll mail at the bug address. is there anything that i need to attach as an attachement?
[03:07] <persia> A pointer to your completed working source package might be appreciated (don't attach the entire thing).
[03:07] <c2tarun> persia: pointer? will source.changes file will be fine?
[03:07] <persia> And subscribe to the bug: if the maintainer is willing to collaborate with you, you want to know soonest, so you can get the new version uploaded.
[03:08] <persia> Some URI that allows folks to access your source package.
[03:08] <c2tarun> persia: URI?
[03:08] <maco> c2tarun: similar to URL
[03:09] <persia> Uniform Resource Identifier.  a URL is one type of URI.
[03:09] <c2tarun> maco: any manual on how to create an URI?
[03:09] <persia> In short: some way that the maintainer can find your work.
[03:09] <c2tarun> persia: never created any URI before.
[03:09] <maco> c2tarun: you upload it somewhere and post a link to it
[03:09] <persia> So, where is your source package?
[03:10] <maco> c2tarun: do you have access to a server?
[03:10] <c2tarun> persia: in ~/pbuilder/natty_results/*.deb
[03:10] <maco> no thats a binary package
[03:10] <maco> source package is your .orig and .dsc and either .debian or .diff
[03:10] <maco> well tack .gz onto orig, debian, and diff
[03:11] <c2tarun> maco: I have .dsc into my ~/source/gearmand/*.dsc but no .diff here
[03:11] <maco> .diff.gz or .debian.gz?
[03:11] <persia> You want the .dsc and all the files mentioned in the .dsc, regardless of their names.
[03:12] <c2tarun> these are the files i have http://paste.ubuntu.com/562321/
[03:13] <c2tarun> old is a folder having previous version in it
[03:15] <persia> c2tarun, The ones that comprise the source package are gearmand_0.14-0ubuntu1.dsc gearmand_0.14-0ubuntu1.debian.tar.gz and gearmand_0.14.orig.tar.gz
[03:15] <persia> If you examine gearmand_0.14-0ubuntu1.dsc, you should see references to the other two indicating they are included.
[03:16] <persia> In any case, you need to make those available for review, if you want review.
[03:16] <persia> A common tool for this is REVU
[03:16] <persia> !revu
[03:17] <c2tarun> That i was about to ask :) can't i just upload it to REVU and give them a link.
[03:17] <persia> But you can put it anywhere you can put things that others can get.
[03:17] <persia> A "URI" is the generalised formal name of that to which you refer when you say "link" :)
[03:18] <c2tarun> persia: but I don't have any server here :( my laptop is also not swtiched on for 24 hrs. Can i upload on revu?
[03:19] <udienz> persia, can REVU change emails address?
[03:19] <maco> pedantic persia is pedantic
[03:19] <maco> c2tarun: yes, uploading on revu then linking to revu is fine
[03:19] <maco> c2tarun: its what he is very round-about-ly saying to do
[03:19] <c2tarun> maco: :) ok sure, i'll do it now.
[03:19] <persia> c2tarun, REVU is fine :)
[03:20] <persia> udienz, How do you mean?
[03:20] <udienz> persia: bug 709375
[03:22] <persia> udienz, 1) I'm pretty sure that REVU gets the addresses from your preferred address on launchpad.  2) The NMU warning has nothing to do with Original Maintainer, and probably indicates that your versioning doesn't match Ubuntu standards.
[03:23] <udienz> persia, 1) refereeing http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/profile.py/preferences, emails box can be changed
[03:24] <udienz> 2). yes because MaintainerField in d/control not same win d/changelog. because if i give same emails my upload will rejected
[03:24] <persia> udienz, So, let's look at these separately.
[03:25] <persia> For 1) is your issue that you want REVU to maintain a separate configurable place to store your email address, or that you updated it in launchpad and REVU didn't reflect it?
[03:26] <c2tarun> persia: I got two errors on REVU, one is older version, that's ok, i'll fix it. another is maintainer field. should running update-maintainer will be enough?
[03:26] <persia> c2tarun, Don't worry about Maintainer field if you're asking for revu by the Debian maintainer.
[03:26] <persia> It'd just need to get reverted anyway, as the convention in Ubuntu differs from the convention in Debian.
[03:27] <udienz> persia, yes, revu not updating my new emails
[03:28] <persia> OK.  I'll update the bug description to indicate that.  This is completely separate from 2).
[03:28] <persia> So, about 2): what is the issue?
[03:29] <udienz> persia, 2) i think, is not a bug if 1 is resolved
[03:30] <persia> It's completely unrelated.  There is nothing about 2) that has anything to do with the email in the REVU db.
[03:31] <c2tarun> persia: I uploaded it, can u please take a look http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/gearmand, what to do next? mail this link to bug-address?
[03:32] <persia> c2tarun, Along with an explanation of what you've done, and asking if this can be helpful towards uploading it just after Wheezy opens.
[03:32] <udienz> persia, okay.. my problem is i change my $DEBEMAIL. and i can't upload wto revu ith my new emails which also identified in LP. see http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/gkamus
[03:33] <persia> Have you updated your GPG key, and published the update?
[03:33] <udienz> s/wto/to
[03:33] <udienz> persia, yes i have updated my gpg
[03:34] <persia> Ah, so you can upload to REVU, but get the NMU error?
[03:34] <udienz> i can upload to ubuntu archive with new GPG (with sponsor sign)
[03:35] <persia> If you're sponsored, you're not signing it, so your GPG doesn't matter in the least.
[03:35] <udienz> persia, yes and i can't upload with my new emails. so i change my emails in d/changelog which identified with REVU
[03:35] <persia> But if you can upload to REVU, then you're signatures are working.
[03:35] <udienz> i can upload to revu if d/changelog with @ubuntu.com
[03:36] <udienz> i'll try to upload agin. give me a sec
[03:37] <persia> udienz, A quick diversion for #1: what address do you show at http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/profile.py/preferences ?
[03:37] <udienz> persia, udienz@gmail.com this is my old emails
[03:37] <persia> Ah, OK.  Right.  Thanks,.
[03:40] <c2tarun> persia: I mailed them, thank you :)
[03:40] <persia> c2tarun, Good luck.  If it seems like it's taking a really long time (a couple weeks) to hear back from them, attach the debian.tar.gz to the LP bug, and request sponsoring.
[03:42] <c2tarun> persia: sure :)
[03:49] <persia> udienz, So, about your upload attempt: is that working?  Not working?
[03:50] <udienz> persia, not working. no emails from revu
[03:52] <persia> So, at what point did it not work?
[03:53] <udienz> persia, ah... sorry working now but no emails about "successfully upload..."
[03:53] <udienz> persia, thanks
[03:54] <persia> Right.  The no emails is about bug #709375
[03:54] <persia> But everything else ought just work, regardless.
[03:54] <persia> The NMU issue is about the content of your control file and your changelog file, and has nothing to do with REVU or keys or anything.
[03:56] <udienz> agreed
[03:58] <udienz> persia, can i PM you? i have some questions
[03:58] <persia> Sure
[04:37] <c2tarun> anyone please look on bug 685712 what does the last comment mean?
[04:38] <micahg> c2tarun: it means whoever the second person who gives the package the ok (from MOTU or core-dev) should upload
[04:39] <c2tarun> micahg: means there is nothing more to do in that bug?
[04:39] <micahg> c2tarun: right
[04:40] <persia> Well, needs a second reviewer, but that's a limited set of folk.
[04:43] <micahg> c2tarun: are you interested in just new packages?  We have about 80 new version update requests for the archive as well and about 3 weeks to do them (same as for new packages)
[04:43] <c2tarun> micahg: yup :)
[04:43] <c2tarun> micahg: where to look for them?
[04:43] <persia> http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/uehs/no_updated.html has 119 of them
[04:44] <micahg> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=upgrade and https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bugs?field.tag=upgrade-software-version
[04:44] <micahg> persia: I was referring to ones that people actual reported bugs for
[04:44] <persia> micahg, I guess.  My list is stuff that will never be updated unless someone does it in Ubuntu because it has no maintainer.
[04:45] <micahg> persia: I'm all for that as well, but I think that stuff that people actually care enough to file an update request should come first
[04:46] <persia> I have a suspicion that there will be a fairly significant number of version updates uploaded to Debian next week :)
[04:46] <micahg> persia: it's harder this time around with Debian being frozen for most of the dev cycle, normally we could just upstream the those update requests and focus on UEHS
[04:47] <persia> So, anyway, the most important stuff is the stuff on *both* lists, as it needs doing, and nobody else is going to do it.
[04:47] <micahg> persia: I hope so, there's been very limited interest in version updates
[04:47] <micahg> indeed
[04:47] <c2tarun> micahg:I want to start with https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bangarang/+bug/712532 :)
[04:48] <c2tarun> micahg: new version is out, i checked it on kde-apps.org so i should first confirm the bug and then assign it to myself?
[04:49] <micahg> c2tarun: no, confirmed means ready for upload
[04:49] <micahg> c2tarun: for packaging bugs that is, set to in progress if you're going to work on it
[04:49] <micahg> c2tarun: there's a watch file that works, so you can use uscan
[04:49] <persia> Confirmed is fine.
[04:49] <c2tarun> micahg: ok thanks for the link, so i'll assign it to me and set it in progress :)
[04:49] <persia> Confirmed is ready to upload, but it's also confirmed to need an update
[04:50] <persia> The only reason confirmed is used for ready-to-sponsor is because triaged is only accessible to limited folk, and fix committed is 1) hidden by default, and 2) has confusing semantics that caused arguments back in Edgy
[04:53]  * micahg sits corrected :)
[04:55]  * micahg will audit the upgrade requests for stuff in UEHS
[05:10] <c2tarun> micahg: almost done, I am creating the deb file now in natty machine for testing. what to do now?
[05:11] <micahg> c2tarun: for this a tar.gz version of the debian dir should suffice
[05:14] <c2tarun> micahg: sure :) you want to check it once?
[05:14] <micahg> c2tarun: please attach to the bug and I'll look at it
[05:15] <c2tarun> micahg: ping
[05:16] <c2tarun> micahg: ok, so i'll attach the debian.tar.gz file to the bug
[05:16] <micahg> c2tarun: i'm here
[05:17] <c2tarun> micahg: sorry that was by mistake :( i'll upload the file and leave a message here.
[05:20] <c2tarun> micahg: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/bangarang/+bug/712532
[05:26] <micahg> c2tarun: why did you drop the patch?
[05:26] <c2tarun> because i copied the debian folder from the prev version, and its patch was already included by the upstream
[05:27] <micahg> c2tarun: ok, you should be more verbose then in teh changelog, I'll comment in the bug
[05:27] <c2tarun> micahg: sure, can i get any suggestion what to write there?
[05:28] <micahg> c2tarun: yep, I'll comment in the bug, there are a few things, then you can fix them all at once
[05:29] <c2tarun> micahg: sure, meanwhile, shall i generate the deb for maverick and test it? so that we can backport it?
[05:29] <micahg> c2tarun: that's a whole separate process, if you have an interest in it feel free, you can read more about backports here: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports
[05:30] <c2tarun> micahg: ya ofcourse, I want to backport it to maverick repositories :) after finalizing this natty one i'll do it as well.
[05:40] <c2tarun> micahg: is this line fine?  "* Dropped debian/patches, applied in ustream (LP: #712532)"
[05:41] <micahg> c2tarun: bug should be closed on new upstream line, s/ustream/upstream and that is fine
[05:42] <micahg> c2tarun: err, actually, just list the patch that was applied upstream
[05:42] <c2tarun> micahg: ok.
[05:43] <c2tarun> micahg: no need for reason like its applied upstream?
[05:44] <micahg> c2tarun: yes, sorry, I meant in place of debian/patches name the patch (if there's more than one, just say all patches (when appropriate))
[05:45] <micahg> c2tarun: the key is to be clear, feel free to be verbose
[05:46] <c2tarun> micahg: ok then i'll mention the patch name followed be reason like this "Dropped patch <patch-name>, applied in upstream"
[05:46] <micahg> c2tarun: sounds good, you can also leave the word 'in' out :)
[05:47] <c2tarun> micahg: sure :)
[05:49] <c2tarun> micahg: in control file the standard-version is 3.8.4 should i change it to 3.9.1? If yes do we need to mention this in changelog?
[05:49] <micahg> c2tarun: no, we don't bump standards for stuff we get from Debian, if it's Ubuntu only, then it's ok
[05:50] <c2tarun> micahg: ok :)
[05:52] <c2tarun> micahg: i posted the new debian.tar.gz can you please take a look. Thanks :)
[05:55] <micahg> c2tarun: that looks really good
[05:55] <c2tarun> micahg: grt :) so what to do now? anything else needed in that bug?
[05:56] <micahg> c2tarun: generally at this point, once you're done, you'd subscribe ubuntu-sponsors, set to confirmed, and unassign yourself
[05:57] <micahg> but in this case, I'll just take it
[05:57] <c2tarun> micahg: thanks :) shall i make it in maverick machine for testing so that we can backport it in maverick?
[05:58] <micahg> c2tarun: if you like, that would be a new bug against maverick-backports once it's in natty
[05:59] <c2tarun> micahg: sure :) i'll do. I posted a backport bug today for bluedevil. I'll do it for this as well in same steps, Thanks a lot for your help :)
[06:01] <micahg> c2tarun: one final test build, tehn I'll upload
[06:02] <micahg> c2tarun: you did a great job!
[06:02] <c2tarun> micahg: ok, can u please tell me how can i test it in natty pbuilder?
[06:02] <c2tarun> micahg: thanks :)
[06:03] <micahg> c2tarun: make a source package like you do for revu, then use pbuilder-dist to build it (assuming you have a natty pbuilder-dist instance created)
[06:06] <c2tarun> micahg: ya i have natty pbuilder-dist with me, and used the same to build it just now. I think just uploading to revu will be fine?
[06:12] <micahg> c2tarun: no, revu is only for new packages
[06:18] <micahg> c2tarun: it's also a good practice to either subscribe to a package that you update or watch your +uploaded-packages page for new bugs for the next few days to make sure there aren't any regressions
[06:19] <c2tarun> micahg: I am not getting what do u mean by new packages? I build this package 15-30 mins before.
[06:19]  * micahg didn't say new package...
[06:20] <micahg> oh, yeah, revu is only for a package not yet in the archive
[06:20] <micahg> c2tarun: if you need to test a package update and can't do it locally for some reason, you can use a PPA
[06:21] <c2tarun> micahg: ok :) got the revu funda :) what's about PPA, is it the one on my LP page?
[06:21] <micahg> c2tarun: if you created one
[06:21] <c2tarun> micahg: created me packaging from scratch?
[06:22] <c2tarun> micahg: created means packaging from scratch?
[06:22] <micahg> c2tarun: created was referring to a PPA
[06:22] <c2tarun> micahg: ok so i should create on e first :)
[06:23] <udienz> what happen if a package in ubuntu need to upgrade but this package is removed from debian?
[06:23] <udienz> example: phpwiki
[06:23] <micahg> udienz: if someone is interested in keeping it up to date in Ubuntu, then it can stay, otherwise it should get removed
[06:24] <udienz> micahg, i'll look at this packages. thanks
[06:24] <micahg> yeah, upgrade or drop
[06:25] <c2tarun> micahg: can you please explain creating a ppa will help me how?
[06:25] <micahg> c2tarun: https://help.launchpad.net/Packaging/PPA/
[06:26] <micahg> udienz: wow, this has been in bad shape for a while
[06:26] <micahg> I'm going to file an update bug and assign to you milestoned for alpha-3, that way we won't forget to drop it
[06:27] <micahg> udienz: ^^
[06:27] <micahg> udienz: do you think you can get it updated in a month?
[06:28] <udienz> micahg, i'll try updated this package in this week
[06:28] <micahg> udienz: doesn't have to be that soon, I just don't want to forget :)
[06:29] <udienz> micahg, hehe, i'm totally free this week so i can working daily with this package
[06:29] <micahg> udienz: great!
[06:33] <micahg> udienz: BTW, if you're really interested in the package, you can talk to the Debian maintainer about co-maintaining
[06:35] <micahg> udienz: BTW, I'd suggest starting by reading the removal bugs in Debian to see if it's something you want to tackle
[06:35] <udienz> micahg, talk to Matt Brown (previously Debian Maintainer)?
[06:35] <micahg> udienz: yes
[06:36] <udienz> micahg, okay. i'll read
[06:43] <udienz> micahg, btw, in d/control Maintainer field is Ubuntu Developer or myself?
[06:44] <micahg> udienz: ubuntu-dev, you can be XSBC-Original-Maintainer
[06:45] <micahg> udienz: actually, just leave the XSBC-Original-Maintainer alone since we got it from Debian
[06:45] <udienz> micahg, so a version number must be X-YubutuZ?
[06:45] <udienz> ok
[06:45] <micahg> udienz: -0ubuntuX
[07:25] <micahg> c2tarun: do you have an actual interest in the package?
[07:25] <c2tarun> micahg: are you talking about that particular bug?
[07:26] <micahg> c2tarun: yes, nxtvepg
[07:27] <c2tarun> micahg: don't know, i was looking through the list you gave me for some more packaging work when i found that bug pretty old and still not fixed in ubuntu. That's why i poked
[07:27] <micahg> c2tarun: ok, i'll just make a note in the bug
[07:28] <c2tarun> micahg: can i PM i got a question.
[07:31] <micahg> c2tarun: sure
[07:59] <AnAnt> Hello
[08:04] <c2tarun> AnAnt: hello
[08:05] <AnAnt> ppl still asleep :)
[08:17] <udienz> micahg, last week i have done upgrading other packages in ubuntu and not updated in Debian because orphaned. like pdnsd, gadmin-rsync. can i submitted into LP?
[08:19] <dholbach> good morning
[08:20] <AnAnt> dholbach: hello
[08:20] <dholbach> hi AnAnt
[08:52] <geser> good morning
[08:55] <udienz> morning geser
[09:11] <udienz> bug 712938
[09:11] <udienz> micahg, ^^
[09:14] <iulian> Morning.
[11:42] <c2tarun> i want to work on bug 713023 in the control file the Standards-Version is 3.8.4 do I need to change it to 3.9.1?
[11:43] <persia> c2tarun, The rule of thumb is that if a package is in Debian, we don't make trivial changes, and if it's not, we fix it as much as we can.
[11:43] <persia> You can check with `rmadison -u debian ${PACKAGE}`
[11:44] <persia> In this case, you'll want to update standards, fix any outstanding lintian reports, pull the newest upstream, review all the outstanding bug reports and try to address them, etc.
[11:45] <c2tarun> persia: I dont think this package is in debian as i execute 'rmadison -u debian bibshelf' but got no result.
[11:46] <persia> I also think it's not in Debian, which is why I recommend doing as much as you can to get it in perfect shape.  It may be a very long time before anyone else works on it.
[11:48] <c2tarun> persia: I am packing the latest version available upstream, there are no errors regarding packaging on this application. There is one error which seems to be wishlist than error but may be upstream developers fixed that too. That I can check after packing.
[11:56] <c2tarun> persia: can u please look at bug 713023 I posted a fix there.
[11:58] <persia> Format looks good.  I'm in the middle of something else, so I'm not in the best position to review it right now.  I recommend subscribing ubuntu-sponsors: someone ought get to it soon.
[11:59] <persia> If you're in a hurry, I believe chrisccoulson is currently acting as a patch pilot in #ubuntu-devel
[11:59] <chrisccoulson> yeah, i can take a look at that
[12:00] <chrisccoulson> c2tarun, ^^
[12:07] <c2tarun> chrisccoulson: sure :)
[13:09] <Laney> dholbach: hey, are you subscribed to the debian-derivatives mailing list?
[13:09] <dholbach> yes
[13:09] <dholbach> about to reply
[13:09] <Laney> cool
[13:09] <Laney> thought you'd be interested in that :-)
[13:22] <dholbach> Laney, replied
[13:22] <Laney> cool
[16:03] <dholbach> Laney, was the answer what you expected?
[16:03] <dholbach> I'm going to blog about it too now
[16:03] <Laney> just running out to the pub, will get bak to you over the weekend
[16:04] <dholbach> Laney, no worries - enjoy the weekend (and the pub)
[17:54] <rigel> hi, i'm wondering if trying to join motu is right for me
[17:55] <Bachstelze> rigel: that's something only you can tell ;)
[17:55] <rigel> i only have a bit of coding experience, in python mostly, but am trying to learn some java and eventually ruby at home. i'm actually considering trying to join motu in order to get more programming/debugging experience
[17:56] <rigel> though with some books/tutorials i can often parse my way through perl, bash scripts, php, etc
[17:56] <Bachstelze> that motu is not the right place imo
[17:57] <Bachstelze> you do deal with bugs, but most of the time they are fixed upstream, so you just need to find the right patch
[17:58] <Bachstelze> it sure helps to have some grasp of programming, but it's not the right way to learn it
[17:58] <rigel> so i was looking for a way to help out with packaging
[17:58] <Bachstelze> this is the place for packaging
[17:58] <Bachstelze> not so much for programming
[17:59] <rigel> but your opinion is that i need more coding experience in order to help out with packaging?
[17:59] <Bachstelze> no
[17:59] <Bachstelze> but you said you wanted to gain programming experience
[17:59] <rigel> oh, i see
[18:00] <Bachstelze> you can certainly do both in parallel, though ;)
[18:00] <rigel> no, i would like to contribute with regards to packaging, and i think i would get some more experience with coding and become more comfortable with harder-core administrative tasks as part of the deal
[18:00] <Bachstelze> but motu alone will be a bit short imo
[18:01] <Bachstelze> and anyway, this isn't a secret society, if you fell you're not getting enough out of it, you can go do something else
[18:01] <rigel> i asked about coding because the example application for mentoring mentioned things like i contribute to this package, i know x y and z languages
[18:02] <rigel> so i was assuming that those were representative of the skillset needed for motu
[18:02] <ari-tczew> rigel: You can join MOTU. Just show us your involvement and skill. ;-)
[18:02] <Bachstelze> rigel: everyone here is your mentor, you don't need formal mentoring imo
[18:03] <Bachstelze> read the packaging guide, start working
[18:03] <Bachstelze> if you have questions, ask here, someone will answer
[18:03] <rigel> yeah, i was reading that just now
[18:03] <Bachstelze> that's what I did
[18:03] <Bachstelze> een though I don't contribute as much as I would like :p
[18:04] <Bachstelze> so many things to do, so little time
[23:15] <rryan`> hi -- im having some trouble with my pbuilder environment and getting some packages built (multiple pbuilders for building packages for each ubuntu release we support). anybody know where I can go to get help?