=== poolie__ is now known as poolie
[07:51] <dholbach> good morning
[08:14] <dholbach> a friend just told me about https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fabric/+bug/738669 - is anybody interested in fixing this one for natty?
[08:14] <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 738669 in fabric (Ubuntu) "fabric broken in natty" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[08:18] <dholbach> nevermind, I'll have a look at it myself :)
[08:25] <dholbach> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/fabric/+bug/764310 has a sync bug for debian - it'd be nice if somebody from the release team could have a look
[08:25] <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 764310 in fabric (Ubuntu) "Please sync fabric 0.9.3-1 from Debian sid" [Undecided,Confirmed]
[08:31] <toabctl> does the behavior for the middle mouse button changed in natty? i can no longer use it to copy text..
[08:55] <ajmitch> dholbach: sid doesn't have fabric 1.0?
[08:57] <ajmitch> hm, it doesn't, that's a shame
[09:00] <dholbach> ajmitch, 0.9.3 might be easier to get in considering being that close to release
[09:04] <ajmitch> dholbach: right, it's just unfortunately not the stable release :)
[09:04]  * dholbach nods
[09:18] <dholbach> can somebody review the lp:ubuntu-packaging-guide merge proposals please?
[09:43] <iulian> Ah! Was so close! Apparently, pitti was faster than me.
[09:43]  * iulian is still trying to wake up.
[09:43] <iulian> Morning by the way.
[09:51] <ajmitch> iulian: more coffee helps :)
[09:52] <iulian> :)
=== dpm_ is now known as dpm
[10:46] <hrw> helo
[12:32] <bdrung> tumbleweed: please go ahead with bug #712721
[12:32] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 712721 in ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu) "[sponsor-patch] help doesn't make it obvious workdir or upload is required" [Low,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/712721
[12:35] <tumbleweed> sure
[12:35] <tumbleweed> are we waiting for it to be buildable in sid?
=== yofel_ is now known as yofel
[12:51] <bdrung> tumbleweed: yes
[12:52] <bdrung> tumbleweed: will file a bug against python-launchpadlib
[12:52] <tumbleweed> bdrung: I don't know if its really bug-worthy it's a transition
[12:53] <bdrung> tumbleweed: but binNMU do not work on arch all package, do they?
[12:53] <tumbleweed> no not yet, but POX has been NMUing lower level libraries
[12:54] <tumbleweed> one of us could probably just nmu launchpadlib if DktrKranz doesn't do a new upload soon (prod)
[12:54] <bdrung> tumbleweed: so we need this bug report anyway
[12:55] <tumbleweed> POX was doing 0-day NMUs without reports, but yeah, politeness doesn't hurt :)
[13:08] <bdrung> tumbleweed: what severity should i give the bug?
[13:09] <tumbleweed> important? considering it'll get an NMU
[13:10] <bdrung> i would go for serious (to make it a rc bug)
[13:14] <tumbleweed> fine with me
[13:23] <bdrung> tumbleweed: why do we suggest "qemu-user-static | qemu-kvm-extras-static"?
[13:24] <tumbleweed> pbuilder-dist supports armel
[13:55] <DktrKranz> tumbleweed, bdrung: no chance to do a launchpadlib upload until this evening, CEST time. If you can ping me again later, I won't forget
[13:55] <DktrKranz> if needed now, feel freee to do a team upload
[13:57] <bdrung> DktrKranz: today's evening is sufficient.
=== moonflux_ is now known as moonflux
[16:26] <bdrung> DktrKranz: ping. when is "later"?
[16:27] <tumbleweed> bdrung: I suppose I should have another look at those lp-project-upload merge requests
[16:29] <bdrung> tumbleweed: yes. we should process all merge requests before the upload.
[16:29] <DktrKranz> bdrung: I noticed I have to upload all the stack (wadllib and lazr*)
[16:30] <DktrKranz> I think I can do them around 21 CEST
[16:30] <bdrung> k
[16:31] <bdrung> DktrKranz: CEST = utc + 2?
[16:31] <DktrKranz> yes
[16:31] <tumbleweed> DktrKranz: aah I didn't look, I just test-built launchpadlib. Are there any dependancies below you that still need rebuilds?
[16:31] <DktrKranz> oauth?
[16:33] <bdrung> tumbleweed: i filed i reminder for me: bug #764763
[16:33] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 764763 in ubuntu-dev-tools (Ubuntu) "Integrate ack-sync into sponsor-patch" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/764763
[16:33] <tumbleweed> DktrKranz: ouath looks looks liket it's python-support so it's ok
[16:43] <dholbach> can somebody please review the lp:ubuntu-packaging-guide merge proposals?
[17:17] <bdrung> tumbleweed: what do you think about changing the versioning of u-d-t?
[17:18] <bdrung> x.y.z where x is rarely changed, y introduces new features, z contains only bug fixes
[17:18] <tumbleweed> fine with me, it's helpful to users too
[17:18] <bdrung> going for 1.0 once all scripts that do not belong there are moved to their correct place
[17:19] <tumbleweed> it does mean new features will take longer to get to users, though
[17:19] <bdrung> tumbleweed: really? it's just the numbering
[17:20] <tumbleweed> well assuming we aren't afraid to bump y whenever we want to.
[17:20] <bdrung> i assume that
[17:20] <tumbleweed> fine with me
[17:21] <bdrung> having bug fix numbers prevent y to get over 100 quickly
[17:21] <bdrung> tumbleweed: should we have a u-d-t session at uds?
[17:21] <tumbleweed> I suppose we should push harder on devscripts (which means either preparing some perl scripts or a devscripts-python or a patch adding a python script to devscripts)
[17:22] <tumbleweed> are we expecting any devscripts maintainers to be at UDS?
[17:22] <bdrung> devscripts-python is a no go
[17:23] <tumbleweed> going to debconf btw? I'll try to make it, but haven't booked anything yet (hoping for some sponsorship)
[17:23] <bdrung> tumbleweed: dunno (re devscripts maintainers).
[17:24] <bdrung> tumbleweed: i probably wont go to debconf
[17:24] <bdrung> tumbleweed: will you go to UDS?
[17:25] <tumbleweed> yes, I'll be at UDS, so let's talk about u-d-t there.
[17:26] <bdrung> tumbleweed: let's try to get some devscripts maintainers there!
[17:26] <tumbleweed> heh
[17:27] <tumbleweed> I assume we can expect zack, he's the only devscripts uploader I can see registered for UDS.
[17:28] <tumbleweed> err, I can't see any others, but I assume he'll be there
[17:29] <bdrung> tumbleweed: IIRC zack has a schedule conflict and won't attend UDS
[17:30] <tumbleweed> aah
[17:31] <bdrung> tumbleweed: do you know where i find the mailman page for pkg-devscripts@teams.debian.net?
[18:15] <bdrung> tumbleweed: should i setup a ppa for devscripts?
[18:22] <tumbleweed> bdrung: seems there's an incorrect A record for teams.debian.net. Try http://aietes.turmzimmer.net/index.html
=== tremolux_ is now known as tremolux
[21:09] <bdrung> DktrKranz: here's the python-launchpadlib ping :)
[21:12] <DktrKranz> here's python-launchpadlib pong :)
[21:32] <onizuka> hello
[21:33] <onizuka> somebody here ?
[21:34] <onizuka> a question I have, a question can I ask ?
[21:35] <cyphermox_> onizuka, just ask it :)
[21:36] <onizuka> ok beginner question I think, when a new open source project starts how are you supposed to register the name
[21:36] <onizuka> to avoid package name conflict for the first release ?
[21:37] <maco> i'd just google it and see if its in use yet
[21:37] <maco> you could do "apt-cache search <name>" to see if there are any packages in ubuntu as well
[21:38] <onizuka> indeed I agree, you just hope nobody release a project with the same name until the end of your project
[21:38] <maco> there's no foss-wide "registration" though...
[21:38] <onizuka> what about commercial projects
[21:38] <onizuka> imagine a company using ubuntu repository
[21:38] <maco> in canonical's partner repo?
[21:39] <onizuka> yes for example
[21:39] <maco> commercial companies may wish to register a trademark in their country
[21:39] <onizuka> imagine coca-coca has a library libcocacola
[21:39] <onizuka> coca-cola sorry
[21:40] <onizuka> want it in its own repository
[21:40] <onizuka> and somebody release it as an open source project
[21:40] <bdrung> tumbleweed: fyi: https://code.launchpad.net/~devscripts-dev/+recipe/daily
[21:41] <maco> onizuka: there's nothing in foss to cover registration of names. that's trademark law. you do that at the country level
[21:41] <maco> two bits of software can share a name if neither party trademarks it
[21:41] <maco> its confusing for users, but there's no rule against it
[21:41] <maco> if you're worried someone will steal your name, trademark it
[21:42] <onizuka> maco > it's just for an open source project
[21:42] <cyphermox_> or release before they do ;)
[21:42] <onizuka> don't want to buy a domain name
[21:42] <maco> cyphermox_: or stake out a spot on launchpad or sourceforge or github or whatever first :P
[21:43] <onizuka> maco > i think it is more parano than concrete fears
[21:43] <maco> i agree
[21:43] <onizuka> maco > anyway thank's for your answers it is why I came here
[21:43] <onizuka> maco > have a good day
[21:43] <cyphermox_> onizuka, what maco said is true though -- if it's a foss project, register it in LP now, that way people have a chance to know you're working on something by that name
[21:44] <onizuka> cyphermox_, LP ?
[21:44] <cyphermox_> onizuka, I mean in Launchpad
[21:44] <onizuka> ok !
[21:44] <onizuka> cyphermox_, nice idea, sourceforge too ?
[21:45] <onizuka> launchpad is enough ?
[21:45] <cyphermox_> onizuka, depends what you want to do, do you need features in sourceforge or launchpad? use what is fit for the task, no need to register a project somewhere if you're not going to use the site
[21:47] <onizuka> cyphermox_, ok !! this situation is annoying !! I'll make an official project for projects' name reservation !
[21:48] <onizuka> cyphermox_, maco i'll keep you in touch if i hava the opportunity
[21:48] <onizuka> cyphermox_, maco, have a nice day, many thanks for your help
[21:49] <tumbleweed> bdrung: cool (although I see it already failed)
[21:49] <bdrung> tumbleweed: some bzr issue
[21:49] <tumbleweed> yeah
[21:49] <tumbleweed> DktrKranz looks like he's almost done
[21:50] <bdrung> tumbleweed: are you subscribed to pkg-devscripts?
[21:51] <tumbleweed> no
[21:51]  * tumbleweed supposes he should
[21:53] <DktrKranz> bdrung, tumbleweed: upload in progress
[21:54] <bdrung> thanks
[21:57] <bdrung> tumbleweed: lp:devscripts is outdated!
[21:57] <tumbleweed> aah
[21:57] <tumbleweed> yeah it moved to git
[22:05] <matttbe> Hello,
[22:05] <matttbe> I'm looking for a sponsor to upload Cairo-Dock packages on Natty? Is someone can help us?
[22:05] <matttbe> this is the bug report: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/cairo-dock/+bug/723994
[22:05] <ubottu> Ubuntu bug 723994 in cairo-dock (Ubuntu Natty) "FFe: Please update Cairo-Dock to 2.3.0~0rc1 version" [Wishlist,New]
[22:08] <matttbe> I also have another question: if there is a newer version of these packages (2.3.0 stable) which fix a few bugs, should I have to open a new bug report or can I update bzr branches and join a new debdiff?
[22:09] <bdrung> matttbe: if it only contains bug fixes and no new features, you don't need a ffe for it
[22:10] <matttbe> bdrung: and should I have to wait for the upload of the 2.3.0~0rc1 version or not?
[22:11] <bdrung> matttbe: dunno. if the old version is still available, i would say no.
[22:19] <bdrung> tumbleweed: once this is done (https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad/+question/153360), the daily build should work
[22:33] <bdrung> tumbleweed: i am going to bed now. feel free to do the u-d-t upload