[05:35] <pitti> Good morning
[05:35] <TheMuso> Hey pitti.
[06:35] <pitti> chrisccoulson: as the original reporter, would you mind testing language-selector in -proposed for bug 771176? would be much appreciated
[06:35] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 771176 in language-selector "langauge-selector non-functional in natty due to missing gnome-user-guide-xx packages" [High,Fix committed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/771176
[07:48] <chrisccoulson> hi pitti. sure, i can do that in a bit
[07:48] <pitti> hey chrisccoulson, good morning
[07:48] <chrisccoulson> good morning :)
[08:49] <chrisccoulson> pitti - language-selector verified now. i could have commented earlier really, i've been using language-selector to test some other stuff already ;)
[08:50] <pitti> chrisccoulson: awesome, thanks
[08:51] <chrisccoulson> pitti - if we ship firefox translations in separate packages in the future, do we need to update language-selector to pull in the firefox translations when firefox is installed?
[08:51] <pitti> chrisccoulson: yes
[08:52] <chrisccoulson> pitti - is there any way to trigger language-selector to install the correct language packs if someone installs firefox after install? (eg, someone using KDE perhaps)
[08:52] <chrisccoulson> or does that only happen manually?
[08:53] <pitti> chrisccoulson: right now it happens manually; it's a rather long-standing TODO item to integrate this into software-center
[08:54] <pitti> e. g. if you install a KDE package under Ubuntu, it should pull in l-p-kde-*
[08:54] <chrisccoulson> pitti - it might be worth discussing that at UDS then. perhaps we should have a separate session for translations after all
[08:55] <pitti> that's not a ffox specific problem, though
[08:55] <pitti> chrisccoulson: we could add it to https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-o-clean-up-language-support
[08:56] <chrisccoulson> pitti - sure, that sounds good
[08:56] <chrisccoulson> and i'm coming to that one anyway ;)
[08:56] <chrisccoulson> perhaps we should invite mvo to that one too then
[08:56] <pitti> chrisccoulson: updated description, please feel free to sub
[08:56] <chrisccoulson> thanks
[08:57] <pitti> chrisccoulson: sub'ed mvo
[08:57] <chrisccoulson> cool, thanks
[09:40] <rodrigo_> morning
[09:42] <pitti> hey rodrigo_
[09:43] <rodrigo_> hi pitti
[09:52] <seb128> hey pitti rodrigo_
[09:53] <pitti> bonjour seb128
[09:56] <rodrigo_> hi pitti
[09:56] <pitti> seb128: how's the sprint?
[09:56] <rodrigo_> sorry, hi seb128
[09:56] <rodrigo_> already said hi to pitti :)
[09:56] <seb128> pitti, less busy today with half of the people at somehand
[09:56] <seb128> but nice otherwise
[09:58] <rodrigo_> seb128, how's the weather in budapest, btw?
[10:53] <seb128> rodrigo_, sorry got sidetracked, weather is nice
[10:54] <seb128> over 20°c during the day, nice enough to have a tshirt
[10:54] <seb128> but better to have a jacket for the evenings
[10:55] <rodrigo_> ok, cool
[10:56] <rodrigo_> seb128, so after rebasing from debian, we can keep doing our own changes to the gnome3 packages, right? like updating to a new upstream version, right?
[10:56] <seb128> sure
[10:56] <rodrigo_> ok
[10:56] <seb128> you can do it in the same update
[10:56] <seb128> just bump the changelog version
[10:57] <seb128> no need of a new changelog entry
[10:57] <seb128> just update the one you are using to summarize the changes to the current version
[10:57] <rodrigo_> seb128, well, I already uploaded the package, so need a proper update
[10:59] <seb128> right
[11:15] <jbicha> what's the scope of the gnome3 PPA? is it going to be a copy of everything gnome3 from oneiric?
[11:16] <jbicha> for instance, gnome-panel 3 won't play nice with Natty's indicators so it wouldn't be as useful to have that
[11:16] <jbicha> in the PPA, right?
[11:17] <rodrigo_> jbicha, ideally, we should keep the ppa to have 3.0.x updates, at least for what we have right now
[11:17] <rodrigo_> jbicha, for the panel, once it's available in oneiric, we can just backport it to the PPA
[11:18] <rodrigo_> jbicha, but remember we 1st need e-d-s 3.0
[11:18] <rodrigo_> that's why I didn't even try to package it
[11:18] <jbicha> you mean evolution?
[11:18] <rodrigo_> yes, evolution-data-server
[11:18] <jbicha> that's required for gnome-panel?
[11:18] <rodrigo_> yes, for the clock applet afaik
[11:19] <rodrigo_> we can build without it though
[11:20] <jbicha> but is gnome-panel 3 a good idea for Natty users?
[11:20] <rodrigo_> jbicha, are you going to UDS?
[11:20] <rodrigo_> jbicha, well, see the thread in ubuntu-devel-discuss, it seems it is for some
[11:20] <jbicha> no, I don't have the money & didn't apply for sponsorship, I'm going to try to get sponsored for Orlando though
[11:22] <jbicha> is this guy's Evolution good? https://launchpad.net/~danilo/+archive/evolution
[11:22] <rodrigo_> yes, that's danilo, so yeah!
[11:23] <jbicha> ok, I don't know him :-) but I'm relatively new to the Desktop team
[11:24] <rodrigo_> he told me about his epiphany packages, but not these ones, so cool that we have them
[11:25] <jbicha> I found it through reading through some of the forums today, the forums are a scary place
[11:25] <rodrigo_> yes, they are :)
[11:25] <rodrigo_> but I see you can find useful info sometimes :)
[11:26] <jbicha> gksudo apt-get dist-upgrade appears to break .ICEauthority permissions not that I've ever tried that
[11:27] <jbicha> I wish we could nuke the ill-advised recommendations there
[11:31] <rodrigo_> in the forums? isn't there a forum administrator/reviewer?
[11:34] <jbicha> oh, I haven't tried the report post feature, let me see if that works
[11:47] <seb128> rodrigo_, the issue is that we can't port the gnome-panel to gtk3 without applets and indicators and if indicators then unity
[11:47] <seb128> jbicha, ^
[11:49] <jbicha> seb128: so are you saying you don't want gnome-panel 3 in even Oneiric yet?
[11:49] <seb128> correct
[11:49] <rodrigo_> seb128, right, we need to port everything
[11:49] <seb128> we should start with components we can get in without breaking our default desktop and then think about transitions for the remaining bits
[11:49] <seb128> same for gdm
[11:49] <rodrigo_> yes
[12:03] <JanC> hmpf, my compose key doesn't work anymore?
[14:24] <nivardus> does the gnome3-team ppa have gnome-tweaks or is there another simple way to change icon themes?
[14:27] <xclaesse> nivardus, it has gnome-tweak-tool
[14:29] <nivardus> oop, thanks :)
[15:46] <fagan> Hmmm I wanted to catch jono or rick but they must be at the canonical summit :/
[15:46] <cassidy> seb128, are you still having users reporting this crash https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/empathy/+bug/750118 ?
[15:46] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 750118 in empathy "empathy-auth-client crashed with SIGSEGV in g_closure_invalidate() (dup-of: 726842)" [Undecided,New]
[15:46] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 726842 in telepathy-glib "empathy-auth-client crashed with SIGSEGV in g_closure_invalidate()" [Medium,Confirmed]
[15:47] <seb128> cassidy, not recently
[15:47] <seb128> we turn off apport by default in stable but we didn't get recent duplicates before doing either it seems
[15:48] <cassidy> seb128, neither of us is experiencing is any more so I'm wondering if it may have been fixed as a side effect of another change
[15:48] <seb128> could be
[15:48] <seb128> you can close it if you think it's fixed, we will reopen if needed
[15:54] <cyphermox> seb128: I'm looking at the policykit-1-gnome merge, running into a small issue -- would it be better to follow upstream, which drops status icons for temporary authz and also drop out indicator patch, or keep the indicator patch and increase it with the partial revert of the commit which drops status-icon support?
[15:54] <cassidy> seb128, ok, please let me know if more dups are reported
[15:55] <cyphermox> oops
[16:15] <seb128> re
[16:15] <seb128> cyphermox, sorry got sidetracked
[16:15] <seb128> cyphermox, do you know why they dropped it? you should check with mpt what design think about it
[16:16] <cyphermox> sure
[16:16] <cyphermox> it got dropped mostly because gnome-sheel doesn't have status icons ;)
[16:16] <mpt> \o/
[16:16] <seb128> well GNOME3 stopped using it iirc
[16:16] <cyphermox> ok
[16:17] <seb128> well they don't integrated the authentification agent in the shell, or at least the ui
[16:17] <seb128> -don't
[16:18] <seb128> mpt, \o/ means we don't need to bother about having an icon indicating that the password is unlocked?
[16:18] <rodrigo_> status icons are deprecated in gnome3, notifications are used instead
[16:19] <seb128> rodrigo_, well notifications are not great at telling you the status of something
[16:19] <cyphermox> rodrigo_: yeah, the problem is what to do with the indicator patch that more or less depends on it ;)
[16:19] <seb128> they are nice to tell you what changed
[16:19] <cyphermox> fwiw, I don't feel strongly about that particular indicator
[16:19] <rodrigo_> seb128, there's a bar at the bottom in the shell, with icons for the notifications
[16:20] <cyphermox> all it would allow you to do would be drop the privs; you can still wait for it to timeout, or lock screen which should eventually drop them
[16:20] <rodrigo_> seb128, so, it can be used for status notifications
[16:20] <seb128> well it also tell you that the authentification is granted
[16:20] <rodrigo_> cyphermox, which indicator patch?
[16:20] <pitti> good night everyone!
[16:20] <cyphermox> rodrigo_: the one for policykit-1-gnome
[16:20] <seb128> rodrigo_, right, so it's not totally deprecated
[16:20] <cyphermox> night pitti
[16:20] <seb128> pitti, have fun
[16:21] <rodrigo_> seb128, no, what is deprecated, or being deprecated, is GtkStatusIcon
[16:21] <seb128> rodrigo_, they still display those in the messaging area though?
[16:22] <rodrigo_> seb128, in the bottom bar of gnome-shell, which is hidden all the time until you hover the mouse to the bottom right corner
[16:22] <seb128> right
[16:22] <rodrigo_> seb128, the icons in the top bar are, afaik, gnome-shell extensions
[16:22] <rodrigo_> although there is the network manager icon, so I guess it has a systray also
[16:22] <seb128> well it's bit orthogonal to the question to know if we need a visual clue that authentification are granted and a way to revoke the active token
[16:23] <seb128> which was the question there
[16:23] <rodrigo_> yeah, sorry, joined the discussion in the middle :)
[16:23] <mpt> seb128, sorry, was in a meeting
[16:24] <seb128> mpt, no worry
[16:25] <mpt> seb128, yes, if the icon is gone, there's a bug reported about that that is now fixed
[16:25] <mpt> about the icon not being understandable
[16:25] <seb128> ok great
[16:25] <mpt> bug 550502
[16:25] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 550502 in policykit-1-gnome ""Drop all elevated privileges" menu doesn't make sense" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/550502
[16:26] <cyphermox> great
[16:26] <seb128> should we indicate in some other way that they is an active privilege token?
[16:26] <seb128> let me read the bug ;-)
[16:28] <seb128> well there is still an usecase it solved, but I guess if people have issues they will file a bug and we can handle it as a wishlist for better priviledge handling
[16:28] <mpt> seb128, right. One example might be a checkbox in the initial PolicyKit dialog.
[16:29] <mpt> (Though that still wouldn't let you clear it after the fact.)
[16:30] <seb128> let's do the obvious and easy fix for now and follow upstream on dropping the icon
[16:32] <cyphermox> ok.
[16:33] <cyphermox> as for dropping privs, it was in the upstream bug about this being dropped (or the commit), that eventually screensaver should call for polkit to drop privs, which may cover one such use case
[16:33] <mpt> yeah, I was just thinking about dropping them when you choose Lock Screen
[16:37] <cyphermox> we need to rework screensaver stuff this cycle no? this should probably be added to the blueprint
[17:53] <cyphermox> someone wants to review my merge for policykit-1-gnome? --> https://code.launchpad.net/~mathieu-tl/policykit-1-gnome/merge-debian-0.101-2/+merge/60099
[23:49] <bdrung_> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/desktop-o-units-policy/
[23:52] <TheMuso> bdrung_: Good idea.
[23:53] <bdrung_> TheMuso: i hope that enough desktop and gnome people attend.
[23:53] <TheMuso> Has it bee scheduled yet?
[23:54] <bdrung_> TheMuso: no. i just created it.
[23:54] <TheMuso> Ah ok.
[23:54] <TheMuso> You'll have to wait till the powers that be get to it then.
[23:54]  * bdrung_ is a little bit late with creating blueprints.
[23:54] <TheMuso> Thats alright, you can probably squeeze it in there somewhere, and it is rather important, at least IMO.