[00:09] <nhaines> 110419-005643
[00:10] <nhaines> Gah, I hate PuTTY.  Disgard that misclick!
[07:26] <didrocks> good morning
[07:32] <cdbs> hi didrocks
[07:33] <cdbs> didrocks: Why were most of the devs off duty yesterday?
[07:34] <didrocks> cdbs: yeah
[07:34] <didrocks> easter holidays
[07:35] <cdbs> I thought, since easter falls on a Sunday, there were no more holidays around it. I was wrong, though :)
[07:35] <cdbs> didrocks: one thing, I've heard nouveau users are having problems with launcher rendering
[07:36] <cdbs> didrocks: any progress on that? /me searches for bug #no
[07:36] <didrocks> cdbs: there are several bugs with nouveau, and we officially don't support it
[07:36] <didrocks> hence the name experimental in the driver itself :)
[07:36] <cdbs> didrocks: But why is it on the CD then?
[07:37] <cdbs> didrocks: well, it was bug #762478
[07:37] <cdbs> has a high number of dupes and subscribers and affects
[07:37] <didrocks> cdbs: because it handles the 2D as well
[07:38] <didrocks> cdbs: anyway, we are not going to fix that in natty
[07:38] <cdbs> hmm
[07:38] <didrocks> and it has mem leak
[07:38] <cdbs> :(
[07:38] <didrocks> of course, contribution welcome :)
[07:38] <cdbs> didrocks: That's the usual Canonical way of attracting contributors :) "Patches welcome"
[07:39] <didrocks> exactly :-)
[07:39] <LLStarks> i want my super+d back
[07:39] <LLStarks> :(
[07:48] <zniavre_> good morning
[07:49] <zniavre_> where can i cjheck all blacklisted gfx card for unity please
[07:49] <zniavre_> check*
[07:51] <zniavre_> is that in unity or nux sources ?
[07:53] <zniavre_> all changelog files are empty ...
[07:55] <RAOF> zniavre_: I believe you're after unity-check-somethingorother in the nux sources.
[08:02] <DBO> RAOF, unity_support_test
[08:02] <RAOF> See?  I'm always right.
[08:02] <RAOF> Just sometimes a bit vague :)
[08:03] <DBO> is that a valid argument?
[08:04] <RAOF> Kinda ;)
[08:04] <Saamm> this is not the right place but this bug is killing me---> Bug #768901 Can someone point me to right channel
[08:06] <RAOF> Saamm: Depends on what you want to do - #ubuntu-devel would be the appropriate channel for connecting with people who can help you fix the bug, #ubuntu+1 would be the appropriate channel to help you get your system back into a usable state.
[08:06] <MacSlow> hi there folks
[08:06] <Saamm> ok thanks try ubuntu-devel
[08:09] <oSoMoN> good morning
[08:24] <zniavre_>  i did not find this blacklist
[08:26] <DBO> bug #765664
[09:04] <tbf> hi. guess i want to mix the nice parts of unity and gnome-shell somehow.
[09:04] <tbf> no idea how i'll reach that goal yet, but probably a first step one might need unity working on-top of that gnome3 ppa.
[09:05] <tbf> anyone working on this already?
[09:05] <tbf> some estimations how much effort this would be?
[09:05] <LLStarks> i can't wait for the deluge of unity patches once the oneiric repos open in a few days.
[09:05] <LLStarks> the lag between release and toolchain upload is getting smaller and smaller
[09:08] <RAOF> tbf: It'll require unity be ported to gtk3 at least; it's likely a substantial undertaking.
[09:11] <LLStarks> raof, won't that be done anyway for oneiric as part of bringing ubuntu up to gnome3 versions or will gtk2 still be used?
[09:13] <RAOF> LLStarks: I presume that it'll get updated as a part of Oneiric, yeah.  But *right now* the answer is ‘quite a lot of work’ :)
[09:14] <LLStarks> how much gnome3 can ubuntu adopt without becoming pure gnome3?
[09:15] <RAOF> All of it bar gnome-shell?
[09:18] <zniavre_> RAOF, sorry to come again , this balcklist in nux is maybe not yet updated (source is nux-0.9.46) i can't find it
[09:19] <RAOF> didrocks: Could I point you at ^^^ ? :)
[09:20] <LLStarks> as long as all that gnome3 indicator nonsense and lack of global menus is part of gnome-shell, that sounds dandy
[09:20] <didrocks> zniavre_: I already answered that question in the french forum FYI :p
[09:20] <zniavre_> ho ?
[09:21] <zniavre_> ok
[09:21] <didrocks> as RAOF told, it's in unity-support-tools.c
[09:21] <LLStarks> also, before i go to sleep, i am begging anyone to tell me how to restore super+d in unity.
[09:21] <didrocks> one sec
[09:22] <didrocks> zniavre_: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~unity-team/nux/trunk/view/head:/tools/unity_support_test.c?remember=342#L72
[09:23] <zniavre_> thank you
[09:42] <tbf> RAOF: LLStarks: also wondering if things like app indicators or the app menu cannot be integrated into gnome-shell
[09:42] <tbf> ...unity's top panel seems that much saner than gnome shell's top panel
[09:43] <LLStarks> unity does some stupid things, but the paneling is amazing
[09:43] <RAOF> Well, they could be.  It'd just require gnome-shell to implement the other end of the various DBus interfaces required.
[09:43] <LLStarks> unless you want to manually minimize multiple maximized windows in quick succession
[09:44] <LLStarks> i'm really bothered as to why gnome3 needs the inch-thick top panel
[09:45] <LLStarks> i lose a fair amount browser real estate with fedora 15
[09:45] <RAOF> You just need a higher-resolution display :)
[09:45] <LLStarks> wsxga not good enough anymore?
[09:45] <RAOF> It's nowhere *near* as noticable at 250DPI :)
[09:46] <LLStarks> what are you running, quad hd?
[09:46] <RAOF> I'm not, but that's the resolution that LCD screens *should* be at!
[09:46]  * RAOF 's laptop is only 140DPI
[09:47] <RAOF> And the lovely 24" Dell Ultrasharp that should arrive Thursday is only ~96!
[09:49] <LLStarks> 96 dpi not good enough for 1440x900?
[09:51] <RAOF> 96DPI is just plain not good enough!  My 12" laptop display *should* be 2880x1800, at least.
[09:57] <LLStarks> netbooks and tunneling electron microscopes are all the rage
[09:58] <RAOF> Pfft.  Photos are significantly higher resolution than that, and most printed text is, too.
[09:59] <RAOF> Also, the iPhone has a ~250 DPI display.
[10:00] <RAOF> It would be excellent to have that level of clarity on a display that I'm reading text from the whole day!
[10:00] <gord> its a pain to even find monitors that aren't 1080p these days - such a shame
[10:00] <tbf> RAOF: n900 even had 267 DPI
[10:01] <RAOF> There's no good reason not to have that in a desktop display.  I'd pay $1000 for a nice 24" display at 250DPI!
[10:02] <LLStarks> nokia's come a long way since the snickers bar and the ngage
[10:05] <RAOF> http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2003/08/22/
[12:00] <szonek> hi
[12:02] <szonek> i have a problem with compiz/unity after upgrading to Ubuntu Natty. when i log in it doesn't display any window or panel, just wallpaper and cursor but the windows and panels are there since i can click them and they 'work'
[12:02] <szonek> OpenGL renderer string: Quadro FX 350M/PCI/SSE2
[12:02] <szonek> OpenGL version string:  2.1.2 NVIDIA 270.41.06
[12:03] <RAOF> szonek: Could you try the nvidia-173 drivers?  I understand that some people with older GPUs have problems with nvidia-current.
[12:04] <szonek> okay
[12:06] <zniavre> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/767613
[12:09] <szonek> zniavre: that doesn't look too good, but i will try it anyway
[12:09] <szonek> brb, reboot
[12:09] <zniavre> you can at least hav running driver for gnome-classic and compiz
[12:10] <szonek> zniavre: 173 or current?
[12:10] <zniavre> i do not know for current (mine only supported by 173)
[12:11] <zniavre> but i m running compiz+ gnome
[12:19] <szonek> zniavre: it works!
[12:19] <szonek> zniavre: Unity + compiz now works, thanks
[12:19] <zniavre> it's RAOF  to thanks
[12:20] <szonek> okay, thanks RAOF :)
[12:20] <zniavre> :o)
[12:20] <zniavre> nvidia 173 ?
[12:20] <szonek> yep
[12:20]  * zniavre is crying ...
[12:21] <szonek> zniavre: maybe you have something wrong with config files, have you tried creating new user and logging in to unity?
[12:21] <zniavre> sa many times ...
[12:21] <zniavre> so*
[12:21] <szonek> :/
[14:22] <skaet> dbarth_,  am a bit concerned that switching to boot natty in classic environment now has mixed scroll bars (some overlay and some not).   We've been saying that folks that don't want to use unity can just boot up there, and get the expected experience they were used to in maverick.     Can we customize the classic environment (via environment variables) so that people booting into classic/classic no effects gets the existing scrollbars by default.
[14:24] <didrocks> skaet: the scrollbar isn't related to unity at all, it's a separate project.
[14:24] <didrocks> like the indicators were in until ubuntu 10.10
[14:24] <didrocks> we integrated the indicators in gnome-panel, I think the same rationale goes for the classic session
[14:24] <didrocks> (and scrollbars)
[14:26] <skaet> didrocks,  yeah, but we've not been setting expectations appropriately for it to be changing.  And what benefit does it bring to the classic environment to have these mixed scroll bars showing up?
[14:26] <didrocks> skaet: it's exactly like the indicators, we didn't get all indicators migrated in one cycle, and still have the systray and indicators mixed
[14:26] <didrocks> skaet: the scrollbar isn't linked at all to unity, that's my point
[14:26] <didrocks> it's just another 11.04 feature
[14:27] <skaet> didrocks,  I now understand that.
[14:27] <skaet> but didn't until this conversation,
[14:28] <didrocks> skaet: I agree it's a pity we don't have the same scrollbar everywhere, it's just too much for a cycle as every app doesn't use gtk and the same scrollbar… (same story than appmenu)
[14:28] <spikeb> which is why the scrollbar shouldn't be on by default, but I lost that argument :)
[14:29] <didrocks> spikeb: there is a bug report where it has been discussed, you can add your input :)
[14:29] <skaet> didrocks,  am fine with it being in the unity environment.   But can we please consider setting the defaults for classic and classic no effects to be back for now.
[14:29] <skaet> didrocks,  what's the bug number?  ;)
[14:29] <didrocks> skaet: I would think it's the one where the whitelist has been disabled by default would suit
[14:29]  * skaet wants to catch up on existing discussion.
[14:30] <didrocks> skaet: but not having the same scrollbar in both session will add even more discrepancy
[14:31] <didrocks> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DesktopTeam/Meeting/2011-04-26 -> ken would know, I can have look
[14:31] <skaet> didrocks,  not sure I agree,  its a question of expectations.    Our users won't be switching between sessions and seeing this,  they'll choose the one they're comfortable in,  and stay there.
[14:32] <cjwatson> this is a discrepancy between ... what skaet said
[14:32] <didrocks> skaet: from last overlay upload: bug #766660
[14:33] <didrocks> anyway, it's not unity related at all, it's like if we would rollback indicators to systray in the classic session
[14:33] <didrocks> but I'm not the one taking the decision anyway, just pointing that it's "another feature of 11.04"
[14:34] <cjwatson> we should be separating "on by default" from "on by default in both sessions", given that it can be handled per-session
[14:38] <didrocks> cjwatson: it seems the discussion is more turning to "should the classic session be a vanilla GNOME" then
[14:38] <cjwatson> I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it, but we have sort of set ourselves up for that by calling it "classic"
[14:39] <cjwatson> the very name does rather imply that it's roughly what people are used to from before, so there's bound to be debate about how much change will fit in that name
[14:39] <didrocks> so ubuntu classic shouldn't be "GNOME 3" with gnome-panel next cycle?
[14:40] <didrocks> you're right about the name, we choosed this one, not sure of what a better fit would have been though
[14:40] <cjwatson> I'm not sure, this is something skaet is more concerned about than I am I must admit :-), but I do think there is at the very least some expectation management to be done
[14:41] <cjwatson> where do we document the classic session and what people can expect from it?
[14:42] <didrocks> cjwatson: I think that the release note should have a list of "common", as the fundation updates impact all sessions, as a new firefox as well. So not differently than other "flavors" or UNR in the past
[14:43] <cjwatson> and there are several such sections in the release notes, but I'm not sure how that's relevant here
[14:43] <didrocks> but anyway, it's just an environment variable, this can be set/unset quite easily on session bases, let's see what dbarth_ would tell
[14:43] <didrocks> why is it more relevant than an application update?
[14:43] <cjwatson> the natural place to document the classic session would be in the paragraph that begins "Unity is now the default Ubuntu desktop session", under "New Features" in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/NattyNarwhal/ReleaseNotes
[14:43] <cjwatson> rather than in a section common to all flavours, because for example this does not apply to Kubuntu
[14:44] <didrocks> right
[14:45] <didrocks> so the overlay scrollbar (if left common to everyone), should be there, as the ubuntu one control panel or USC paragraph…
[14:45] <cjwatson> but it's not common to everyone - it's GTK-specific
[14:45] <didrocks> isn't in that paragraph that we put new GNOME previous cycles?
[14:46] <cjwatson> IIRC that went in an "Ubuntu Desktop Edition" section
[14:46] <cjwatson> or similar
[14:46] <didrocks> it wasn't common to everyone, just common to flavors based on GNOME…
[14:46] <didrocks> hum, and as we don't have the name "Ubuntu Desktop" anymoe
[14:46] <didrocks> anymore*
[14:46] <cjwatson> but what I meant was that it's a bit irrelevant to discuss where it should go, because what I was asking was whether there was anywhere *right now* that described the intent of the classic session
[14:48] <didrocks> nothing formal describing the ubuntu classic session. It was first called "ubuntu fallback" for a "2D mode", and the definition was based to "still introduce latest goodness we have in ubuntu, compatible with non accelerated hardware"
[14:48] <didrocks> then, ubuntu fallback was quite unclear/unwanted, hence the rename to "classic"
[14:49] <cjwatson> it's hard to find naming (or for that matter description) that's accurate yet positive
[14:50] <cjwatson> I think we need to have something in the release notes about it alongside the bit that talks about unity being the new default, though, because that's going to be a FAQ
[14:58] <didrocks> cjwatson: either way, I don't really care, if you need help to emphasize that on the release note, I can give an hand, if you prefer to revert that, I think discuss with kenvandine and dbarth_ about it
[14:59] <cjwatson> well, we came here to discuss reverting it for the classic session
[15:03] <seb128> cjwatson, that's rather an #ubuntu-desktop discussion
[15:04] <seb128> cjwatson, #ayatan is upstream unity channel
[15:04] <cjwatson> ok
[15:04] <cjwatson> that's fine, let's take it there then
[15:04] <cjwatson> skaet and I were initially unaware that overlay-scrollbar wasn't part of unity
[15:37] <dbarth_> cjwatson, didrocks: still something i can help with here? or is the follow-up on #ubuntu-desktop?
[15:37] <didrocks> dbarth_: follow up is on #ubuntu-desktop
[15:44] <apw> does anyone know how i can diagnose why a unity launcher button does not work?
[15:44] <apw> (this is the firefox button in the live environment, which is not working about half the boots)
[15:53] <dbarth_> didrocks: where i am following the discussion as well, just in case
[16:53] <vish> wheee! i've found a way to spam mptbugs, now I just need to subscribe mpt to a bunch of bugs and bam! :p
[16:55]  * mpt rushes to report a bug to request the ability to block people from subscribing him to bug reports
[17:08] <Guest27435> Final build of 11.4 ready?
[17:08] <vish> !11.04 | Guest27435
[17:09] <vish> grr.! last part not required :)
[17:09] <vish> "due April 28 2011." ;)
[18:17] <kamusin> is there a way to do this https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/757886?
[19:00] <kenvandine> klattimer, you still around?
[19:04] <kenvandine> tedg, watch the memory usage in indicator-datetime-service
[19:04] <kenvandine> and do this "evolution --force-shutdown"
[20:11] <tedg> kenvandine, Nothing happens here, solid at 22MB
[20:11] <kenvandine> wow...
[20:12] <kenvandine> tedg, it climbed for me several times in a row when doing a force-shutdown
[20:12] <kenvandine> i rebooted now and it seems fine
[20:12]  * kenvandine tries again :)
[20:13] <tedg> kenvandine, It's all those appointments with your mistress ;-)
[20:13] <kenvandine> hehe
[20:19] <spikeb> since natty is basically ready, I've been testing Unity with my users. I think every single one of them had the same reaction.
[20:20] <spikeb> "woah what the heck happened to my desktop?....hey, this is pretty neat!"
[20:23] <tedg> spikeb, Heh, cool.  Change is hard, sometimes it's hard to get past the ellipsis there. :-)
[20:23] <spikeb> so far it seems to take them about ten clicks on various bits of unity and they're hooked. I'd say you guys did a pretty good job :)
[20:33] <kenvandine> spikeb, that is great to hear!
[20:35] <tbf> really just love how unity merges titlebars of maximized windows into the top panel
[20:35] <tbf> well done guys.
[20:44] <LLStarks> this is absurd. it shouldn't take 10 seconds of fiddling around to close the firefox download popup.
[20:49] <LLStarks> is there a blueprint for oneiric unity goals?
[22:11] <alex4556> is it possible to move the launcher in Unity to the right side of the screen?
[22:13] <davidcalle> Hi alex4556, for this kind of questions, you should join #ubuntu+1. Nevertheless, the answer is no. :)
[22:13] <alex4556> thanks
[22:13] <alex4556> :-(
[22:14] <tbf> davidcalle: alex4556: actually wondering of the lences could be split into two panels...
[22:14] <tbf> ...e.g. launchers on left and active lences on right
[22:14] <tbf> "active", "smart", "interactive"
[22:15] <davidcalle> tbf, IMHO it would clutter the screen.
[22:16] <davidcalle> tbf, lenses are like smart widgets... Cool but they shouldn't stay in the way. Bottom left is fine for me.
[22:20] <tbf> davidcalle: pretty sure must be connected with auto hide or something...
[22:21] <tbf> davidcalle: or maybe less saturated, less prominent appearance. dunno.
[22:21] <tbf> ...or maybe don't hide them entirely. keep a pretty handle visible
[22:22] <tbf> DaveDavenport: but at least on my idea pad this left panel does not only appear __very__ old fashioned, anti-modern...
[22:22] <tbf> ...it also feels very cluttered on 1280x600
[22:22] <tbf> (or what crazy resolution this thing has)
[22:23] <tbf> 1024x600
[22:24] <tbf> 8 launchers in psychodelic colors. after that many stacked icons
[22:26] <davidcalle> tbf, I admit there is some design work to be done. I wonder when we'll begin to see the first Oneiric launcher mockups.
[22:29] <tbf> why did i highlight DaveDavenport instead of davidcalle? sorry dave.
[22:31] <LLStarks> tbf, is there a blueprint for oneiric unity goals?
[22:33] <tbf> LLStarks: i hope so. no idea actually.
[22:59] <elleuca> vish, https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/747871
[23:01] <vish> DanRabbit: ^^
[23:01] <vish> elleuca: that seems to been done in Natty to maintain the spacing between icons..
[23:02] <elleuca> vish, but wifi, volume and message icons seem wider :/
[23:02] <vish> elleuca: all the 22px are wonky sizes
[23:03] <DanRabbit> yea, the width doesn't matter
[23:03] <DanRabbit> it's done on purpose because not every icon is the same width
[23:03] <DanRabbit> makes the spacing more consistent
[23:04] <elleuca> DanRabbit, and now bluetooth icon is harder to click...
[23:05] <DanRabbit> elleuca: you can scrub the indicators, so even if you miss you can just move your mouse.
[23:14] <elleuca> DanRabbit, sure, but from my point of view and feeling, the usage of different widths conveys the idea of slovenly and careless, more than different spacing (but, I said, it's a feeling)
[23:16] <DanRabbit> elleuca: yea, unfortunately it's either differently sized indicators or unevenly spaced indicators :p