[00:33] <grunthus> Hi, I've been working on my first patch, LP: #706271.
[00:33] <grunthus> Reading about the sponsorship process, I think that I should now send email to ubuntu-sponsors?
[00:33] <ari-tczew> grunthus: on IRC would be nice to use bug 706271
[00:34] <ari-tczew> grunthus: nope, subscribe ubuntu-sponsors to bug
[00:34] <grunthus> ah. Hi ari-tczew, you helped with this last week. I have added a patch for Natty. Took me a while, between work commitments!
[00:34] <ari-tczew> or set ubuntu-sponsors as branch merge reviewer if you use bzr instead debdiff
[00:34] <grunthus> I used debdiff
[00:35] <ari-tczew> then subscribe to bu
[00:35] <ari-tczew> g
[00:36] <ari-tczew> grunthus: Thank you very much, your work is appreciated! ;-)
[00:37] <grunthus> Great!
[00:41] <grunthus> ari-tczew: The wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Patches says to sponsor a debdiff, subscribe the ubuntu-sponsors to the bug, which I think is what you are saying. Erm, not sure how to do that.
[00:43] <ari-tczew> grunthus: log in to launchpad, go to bug 706271 and on the right side you have field Subscribers, do you see?
[00:50] <grunthus> Ah yes, so it is already subscribed by Ubuntu Review Team and I don't have to do anything.
[00:50] <ari-tczew> grunthus: You have to subscribe ubuntu-sponsors.
[00:52] <grunthus> Right! Done.
[00:59] <ari-tczew> grunthus: OK. now you have to wait patiently for response.
[02:11] <c2tarun> chrisccoulson: ping
[02:13] <c2tarun> chrisccoulson: whenever you get time, please look at bug 713023 I fixed all the errors you commented. Thank you.
[02:19] <micahg> c2tarun: when you believe you're done, you should set it back to confirmed and (re)subscribe ubuntu-sponsors unless someone explicitly said they'd look at it for you
[02:19] <micahg> c2tarun: oh, and unassign yourself as well
[02:20] <c2tarun> micahg: how to subscribe to ubuntu-sponsors?
[02:20] <micahg> c2tarun: subscribe someone else, search for ubuntu-sponsors
[02:21] <c2tarun> micahg: there are three team for ubuntu-sponsors
[02:21] <c2tarun> micahg: one is ubuntu-sponsors team
[02:21] <c2tarun> micahg: second is ubuntu security sponsors team
[02:21] <micahg> c2tarun: Ubuntu Sponsors Team
[02:22] <c2tarun> micahg: ok thanks :)
[02:25] <c2tarun> micahg: by debian.tar.gz file how do ubuntu-sponsors member check that packing is proper or not? I mean is there any tool for that?
[02:27] <micahg> c2tarun: they compare it against the last version that was in the archive and verify the changes you made were proper
[02:28] <c2tarun> micahg: how do they do that? by diff?
[02:28] <micahg> c2tarun: debdiff
[02:31] <c2tarun> micahg: debdiff between both debian.tar.gz files?
[02:31] <micahg> c2tarun: no, between the .dsc files or source.changes files
[02:32] <c2tarun> micahg: then why do we upload debian.tar.gz and not the .dsc files?
[02:32] <micahg> c2tarun: well, you could upload a debdiff, which is actually what the wiki suggests, it's just huge for new versions usually
[02:34] <c2tarun> micahg: so what do you do of debian.tar.gz? do you build it again?
[02:34] <micahg> c2tarun: I generally use it to pull the latest upstream, build a source package, and compare
[02:36] <c2tarun> micahg: I was trying to work on this bug 713492. I made changes to the changelog and was trying to build it, but I didn't got the debian.tar.gz, why so?
[02:37] <micahg> c2tarun: you shouldn't subscribe sponsors until there's something to sponsor
[02:37] <c2tarun> micahg: I didn't
[02:37] <micahg> it says you did
[02:38] <micahg> c2tarun: there's probably a diff.tar.gz since it's source format 1.0
[02:38] <c2tarun> micahg: I am extremely sorry, I have to do that for bibshelf bug and I did it for ccscript one :(
[02:38] <micahg> c2tarun: no worries
[02:38] <c2tarun> micahg: how can i unsubscribe them?
[02:39] <micahg> c2tarun: you can't, I took care of it, if you subscribe accidentally, you can just ask here for it to be removed if it's going to be a while before you attach something
[02:40] <micahg> only team members can unsubscribe a team
[02:40] <c2tarun> micahg: sure, one more thing, in control file the standard version is 3.8
[02:40] <c2tarun> micahg: sure, one more thing, in control file the standard version is 3.8.3
[02:40] <c2tarun> micahg: should I change it to 3.9.1?
[02:40] <micahg> c2tarun: you have to verify that it's compliant with standards version 3.9.1 (assuming this is an Ubuntu only package)
[02:41] <c2tarun> micahg: ya this as well, how can i check whether a package is in debian or not?
[02:41] <micahg> c2tarun: rmadison -uqa PKGNAME
[02:42] <micahg> c2tarun: if it's in Debian, we generally won't touch the standards version as it's an unnecessary diff
[02:43] <c2tarun> micahg: I don't think this package is in debian as I am not getting anything on running 'rmadison -uqa ccsript-doc'
[02:44] <micahg> c2tarun: no, it's not
[02:44] <c2tarun> micahg: ok, I didn't got diff.tar.gz but I got diff.gz, should I attach this with the bug?
[02:44] <micahg> c2tarun: if you want to check if it's up to the new standards version, you can install the debian-policy package and check this file /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.txt.gz
[02:45] <micahg> c2tarun: well, a tar'd version of the debian dir or a debdiff is preferable
[02:45] <c2tarun> I didn't have that package installed, what is the name of that debian-policy package?
[02:46] <micahg> c2tarun: debian-policy
[02:46] <c2tarun> micahg: ok, and i'll take the debdiff of both the .dsc files and attach that. will it be fine?
[02:46] <micahg> c2tarun: also, attaching a debian dir to a bug is assuming that you make no changes outside of the debian dir to the source
[02:47] <micahg> c2tarun: yes, that will be fine
[02:47] <c2tarun> thanks :)
[02:47] <micahg> c2tarun: thank you
[02:51] <c2tarun> micahg: wow... debdiff is huge. I uploaded the debdiff file, can you please take a look.
[02:53] <micahg> c2tarun: in a bit
[02:53] <c2tarun> micahg: thanks :)
[03:45] <YankeesFan> !ops
[03:45] <micahg> YankeesFan: is there a problem?
[03:46] <YankeesFan> BAN ME
[03:46] <jmarsden> micahg: He's doing that on multiple channels...
[03:53] <paultag> fucking yankees
[03:53] <paultag> Oh jesus, this is -motu
[03:53] <paultag> I totally thought this was -us-ma
[03:53] <paultag> sorry everyone
[05:17] <YankeesFan> !ops
[05:17] <YankeesFan> !staff
[06:02] <c2tarun> micahg: I am trying to work packages in list http://qa.ubuntuwire.com/uehs/maintainer.php?package=moserial  should we pack only those applications of which we know about the source code?
[06:03] <micahg> c2tarun: what do you mean know about the source code?
[06:05] <c2tarun> micahg: I mean know how the application is programmed, its logic, algorithms and all.
[06:06] <micahg> c2tarun: not required
[06:06] <maco> generally an interest in the package is a good thing
[06:06] <maco> as we dont want to just have people package things then disappear and not take care of them down the line
[06:07] <maco> but there's lots of devs who arent programmers. just being ready & willing to talk to upstream authors to get things resolved is enough
[06:07] <c2tarun> maco: we can communicate with upstream if required?
[06:08] <maco> can and SHOULD
[06:08] <maco> maintaining a good relationship with upstream is important
[06:08] <c2tarun> maco: ya :)
[06:47] <sagaci> if you don't communicate with upstream, you're creating an unnecessary barrier which is usually to the detriment of the package
[07:41] <c2tarun> micahg: u there? sorry I got disconnected.
[10:38] <c2tarun> there is a package of name freeimage in debian. That package is not in ubuntu + the version in debian is also old, upstream has a newer version. what should i do?
[10:39] <DktrKranz> c2tarun: package is orphaned in Debian, that means you can pick it up and maintain it
[10:40] <DktrKranz> otherwise, you can arrange for a one-shot QA upload to package new upstream release
[10:59] <c2tarun> DktrKranz: what is a one-shot QA upload?
[11:02] <c2tarun> DktrKranz: and how can i pick it for maintainance?
[11:05] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: a QA upload is an upload to an orphaned package, without any intent to maintain it into the future
[11:05] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: anyone can adopt orphaned packages
[11:11] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: how?
[11:11] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: http://debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#adopting
[11:37] <udienz> tumbleweed, if i want to maintain a packages i must sending emails to debian-mentors?
[11:40] <tumbleweed> udienz: mail debian-mentors if you want review / sponsorship. Is this a new package? orphaned package?
[11:41] <udienz> tumbleweed, orphaned packages named pdnsd
[11:42] <udienz> this packages usually sync from debian
[11:42] <udienz> but it's orphaned and upstream released new version
[11:44] <grunthus> Bug 692879. If I install ubiquity-slideshow-ubuntu in a Natty vm, how do I run it to confirm the bug?
[11:46] <tumbleweed> udienz: aah I see you've already announced intention to adopt and have it in collab-maint. Great. Yeah, go through debian-mentors for sponsorship
[11:50] <tumbleweed> grunthus: there's a README that shows how to test it
[11:52] <udienz> tumbleweed, http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/sponsor-pkglist?action=details;package=pdnsd i will send an emails to debian-mentors
[11:59] <udienz> tumbleweed, if old patches files need updated, Author field must be changed or not?
[12:00] <tumbleweed> udienz: no. Although you can add yourself if you made significant updates
[12:22] <Raydiation> according to FHS where would you store databases?
[12:22] <Raydiation> for a webapp
[12:22] <tumbleweed> /var/lib/$package
[12:23] <Raydiation> tumbleweed: ty
[12:23] <c2tarun> I was working on packaging of schedio bug 710347. There was an issue that the source tarball doesn't include the COPYING file for license. I mailed them to update a tarball almost a week ago, but I didn't got any response from the upstream. What should I do?
[12:36] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: I guess you could repack it including COPYING. However, many files don't have any copyright / licence statement at all.
[12:39] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: ok, where can I get the copying file for GPL version 3?
[12:39] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: it's one of the ones you'd find in common-licences
[12:41] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: ok, and regarding adoption of any package, http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=585421 this package is up for adoption. In order to adopt it I should mail the one who reported this bug?
[12:44] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: take ownership of the bug, retitle it to be an ITA, and state your attempt to adopt
[12:45] <c2tarun> tumbleweed: how to take the ownership? there is no button or link for that.
[12:46] <tumbleweed> c2tarun: the debian BTS is entirely e-mail driven. http://www.debian.org/Bugs/server-control
[13:53] <c2tarun> what kind of version number is this:  (1.1.8-2build1)
[13:54] <Rhonda> Is this a trick question?
[13:55] <Rhonda> build means that it got rebuilt, potential because of some library linking or similar
[13:55] <c2tarun> Rhonda: nope I found this in spyder's debian changelog
[13:55] <Rhonda> Can you describe better what puzzles you about it?
[13:56] <c2tarun> Rhonda: I was working on bug 645138
[13:56] <Rhonda> c2tarun: The changelog gives the hint.
[13:56] <Rhonda> c2tarun: http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/universe/s/spyder/spyder_1.1.8-2build1/changelog
[13:57] <Rhonda>   * Rebuild with python 2.7 as the python default.
[13:57] <c2tarun> Rhonda: actually never saw this 2build1 always packed only 2ubuntu1 or similar to that.
[13:57] <Rhonda> ubuntu means there are changes involved. build means no changes to source.
[13:58] <c2tarun> Rhonda: ok, so numbers preceding and following 'build' have the same meaning as they have in <no>ubuntu<no>?
[13:58] <Rhonda> Yes.
[13:58] <Rhonda> The 2 is the Debian-Revision, and the 1 is the number of the rebuild.
[14:00] <c2tarun> Rhonda: thanks :)
[17:08] <hakermania1> What's the most right way to call lintian in order to display even the most little error/warning about your package?
[17:10] <paultag> hakermania1: -iIE --pedantic
[17:10] <paultag> hakermania1: at least, that's how I use it
[17:11] <hakermania1> paultag: Thanks, anybody else?
[17:11] <iulian> hakermania1: The manual page.
[17:11] <paultag> hakermania1: `man lintian' might help
[17:11] <paultag> iulian++
[17:12] <hakermania1> Ok, thanks, I know, but I though that some experienced guys should know better.
[17:12] <paultag> hakermania1: what I gave you is correct
[17:12] <paultag> hakermania1: I just suggesting that others might use other flags, but that shows X, I, W, E, and P tags
[17:12] <hakermania1> paultag: OK, I am happy to see that still my package has no errors.
[17:13] <paultag> hakermania1: --show-overrides  is nice, too
[17:13] <hakermania1> paultag: Hehe, nice, still nothing :)
[17:13] <paultag> hakermania1: then it looks good from lintian's perspective :)
[17:14] <paultag> hakermania1: remember to build it an run it on the .changes file
[17:14] <paultag> hakermania1: or do both the deb and the .dsc by hand
[17:14] <hakermania1> paultag: I place *deb *changes *dsc after setting the flags..
[17:15] <paultag> OK
[17:25] <Raydiation> as for the copyright file: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333136/ i use oxygen icons (bsd i guess), jquery and soundmanager (bsd) in my softwarepackage. do i have to add anything to the copyrights file and if where?
[17:26] <paultag> Raydiation: you should consider DEP3
[17:26] <Raydiation> dep3?
[17:26] <tumbleweed> he means dep5 http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/
[17:26] <grunthus>  tumbleweed> grunthus: there's a README that shows how to test it
[17:27] <Raydiation> ty
[17:27] <grunthus> ^thanks (Re: ubiquity-slideshow-ubuntu bug 692879)
[19:27] <Raydiation> hm is that copyright file fine: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333209/
[19:27] <Raydiation> i didnt get any error while running lintian
[19:39] <Raydiation> can i ignore: executable-not-elf-or-script
[19:40] <Raydiation> i mean: W: laudio: executable-not-elf-or-script ./usr/share/laudio/src/scrobbler.py
[20:03] <Raydiation> dh_fixperms doesnt correct the problem
[20:05] <Elbrus> Raydiation: you should fill in <VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL>
[20:06] <Elbrus> license of first part should be GPL-3+
[20:07] <Raydiation> Elbrus: what is version_format_url?
[20:07] <Elbrus> e.g. : http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/
[20:08] <Elbrus> or http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/dep/web/deps/dep5.mdwn?op=file&rev=REVISION
[20:08] <Raydiation> Elbrus: aah
[20:08] <Elbrus> not sure, but I think you should also join paragraphs in your license text with a single dot
[20:10] <Elbrus> I think the statement "All rights reserved." on line 26 is not located right and probably doesn't match the license (BSD)
[20:10] <Elbrus> line 57 should also mention the second license
[20:11] <Elbrus> (MIT)
[20:11] <Elbrus> consider adding a stand alone section for the GPL-3 or MIT license (you then don't need to repeat it)
[20:12] <Elbrus> line 105 should not mention GPL without version
[20:13] <Raydiation> like On Debian GNU/Linux systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License 3 can be found in `/usr/share/common-licenses/GPL'.
[20:13] <Raydiation> ?
[20:15] <Raydiation> ah ok :D
[20:15] <Raydiation> found another paragraph above
[20:16] <Elbrus> exact: it should be a versioned GPL link
[20:17] <Raydiation> Elbrus: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333226/
[20:23] <Raydiation> dapal: ive found a way to restart apache without killing requests: http://www.electrictoolbox.com/article/apache/restart-apache/
[20:23] <Raydiation> /usr/sbin/apachectl graceful
[20:23] <Raydiation> is that ok for me to run in the postint script?
[20:23] <Elbrus> Raydiation: line 7: GPL-3+
[20:23] <Raydiation> Elbrus: ty
[20:24] <Elbrus> between line 11-12 add one space, a dot and a newline
[20:24] <Elbrus> idem between line 15-16
[20:24] <Elbrus> add a space and dot on line 18
[20:25] <Raydiation> Elbrus: like http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333232/
[20:25] <Raydiation> ?
[20:25] <dapal> Raydiation: no
[20:26] <dapal> Raydiation: use the same snippet I gave you yesterday, and use "reload" instead of "restart"
[20:26] <dapal> that should be the same
[20:26] <Raydiation> dapal: ty
[20:27] <Raydiation> dapal: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333234/
[20:27] <Elbrus> Raydiation: something like that, but it is better readable if you align the dot with the text (so add multiple spaces)
[20:27] <dapal> Raydiation: err.. line 41? dbus? :D
[20:27] <Raydiation> dapal: i copied it 1:1 from the chan :)
[20:28] <dapal> Raydiation: heh, probably I forgot to edit it :D
[20:28] <Raydiation> dapal: hehe i guess i have to replace it with apache2
[20:28] <dapal> yup
[20:28] <Raydiation> Elbrus: ah k
[20:31] <Raydiation> Elbrus: like http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333236/
[20:32] <Elbrus> line 22 and 23 must be indented (I suggest the same amount as the paragraph above it)
[20:33] <Elbrus> line 30 to 53 must be indented
[20:34] <Elbrus> skip the second "Copyright" in all your "Copyright: Copyright " lines
[20:36] <Raydiation> Elbrus: http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333240/
[20:38] <Raydiation> do i have to fix the executable-not-elf-or-script outputs from lintian? http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333242/
[20:38] <Raydiation> and how? a-x or in general every user -x
[20:40] <Elbrus> Raydiation: line 59: License: GPL-3 or other
[20:41] <Elbrus> don't indent line 79 and don't use MIT as license name
[20:42] <Elbrus> from the dep5 page: There are many versions of the MIT license. Please use Expat instead, when it matches.
[20:42] <Raydiation> Elbrus: just GPL-3?
[20:42] <Elbrus> no
[20:43] <Elbrus> GPL-3 or other
[20:43] <Elbrus> don't forget the word "or"
[20:43] <Elbrus> line 111 to 115 should also be converted to the proper style
[20:44] <Raydiation> Elbrus: inserting a .?
[20:44] <Raydiation> ah k
[20:45] <Elbrus> line 94 should mention the Qt exception
[20:47] <Elbrus> the copyright statement in lines 95 to 99 don't mention a version of the GPL. please help upstream to clarify this issue. (it must be clear AFAICT)
[20:48] <Raydiation> Elbrus: i copied it from the newest package in debian unstable
[20:48] <Raydiation> ill see if i can get an older version
[20:48] <Raydiation> Elbrus: hm, thats also the file in squeeze http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/d/doxygen/doxygen_1.7.1-2/doxygen.copyright
[20:49] <Raydiation> oops wrong package :P
[20:49] <Raydiation> thats the correct one http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/o/oxygen-icons/oxygen-icons_4.4.5-1/kde-icons-oxygen.copyright
[20:51] <jmarsden> Raydiation: Getting technical issues wrong just causes bugs; getting legal info wrong can cause... lawsuits!  So be careful, go slowly, and get the copyright stuff 100% correct.
[20:52] <Elbrus> Raydiation: maybe I am wrong, or the issue was overlooked before (which doesn't make it right)
[20:52]  * Elbrus leaves
[20:56] <Raydiation> Elbrus: ty for your help
[21:04] <Raydiation> jmarsden: yeah, i just double checked all files and found 2 tiny files which ive forgotten
[21:11] <Raydiation> how do i get my package into ubuntu?
[21:11] <Raydiation> should i first get a repo on launchpad?
[21:12] <Raydiation> ppa*
[21:14] <jmarsden> Raydiation: http://askubuntu.com/questions/16446/how-to-get-my-software-into-ubuntu
[21:14] <Raydiation> jmarsden: ty
[21:14] <jmarsden> Raydiation: You're welcome
[23:17] <Raydiation> how long does it take until uploaded packages show up in a ppa?
[23:25] <RAOF> It depends.  It should be ≤ 15 minutes for the source packages to show up, then it depends on how busy the buildds are.
[23:28] <Raydiation> hm i got mixed uploads are not allowed error http://paste.pocoo.org/show/333349/
[23:28] <Raydiation> maybe it complains about a flash player
[23:28] <Raydiation> whose source is already included though
[23:29] <Raydiation> if anyone is interested, heres the deb: https://github.com/downloads/Raydiation/Laudio/laudio_0.4-beta5-1_all.deb
[23:37] <Raydiation> ah, debuild -S
[23:38] <RAOF> Right.  No binary uploads allowed to Ubuntu :)
[23:39] <Raydiation> im new to debian packaging :)
[23:41] <Raydiation> woohoo, accepted :)