[00:00] ScottL: No, never heard of him. [01:27] ScottL, astraljava, anyone else who worked on the seeds. Here is a list of what has been added/removed, and I think there is a fair amount in here that you may not want on the studio disks. http://paste.ubuntu.com/643670/ [01:27] ScottL, astraljava, I am not uploading until I hear back as to whether you wish to make more changes, or go with what is there. [01:28] astraljava, ScottL, the above is from the changelog entry for ubuntustudio-meta with the recent seed changes. [01:33] astraljava, i talked to cory via google chat and he's good with what you have done (not that he looked with much depth to be forthcoming) [01:34] man, we added a lot without removing that much :/ [01:36] astraljava, basically i told cory that i thought we should try the " forward, see what breaks, and try to fix it" method [04:58] whats replacing brasero? [06:18] ScottL: Like I said, I merged from Xubuntu without really knowing what not to include. Development stuff, sure, but not really anything outside. [06:19] TheMuso: Thanks for the output! We seriously needed to have the discussion, but as you probably noticed, there wasn't any. :-/ [07:43] * persia notices backscroll and wonders why abiword should be included. Same for orage, parole, vinagrr [08:17] We didn't have any office tools by default before? Okay, I'll scratch all of that. [08:17] No idea what the rest are. [08:17] So with abiword, we ought to get rid of gnumeric, too? [08:31] Depends on the plan. [08:32] If we think people need to be able to do flyers and calculate how much money they lose for signing with a major label, then perhaps we want those tools. [08:33] Alternately, we could tell folk who want an office suite to install one of libreoffice, gnome-office, or Calligra, depending on their preference. [08:34] orage is a calendar, parole is a media player, vinagre is a remote desktop client. [08:34] Again, there might be good reasons to have them. [08:43] persia: For Xubuntu, or us? Once again, desktop is pretty much directly copied from Xubuntu's. I left out some pretty obvious choices only (e.g. development tools and the like) [08:43] There are definite reasons for Xubuntu to have that stuff. [08:44] But I always presumed there was a reason that we had a separate desktop seed, related to wanting/not wanting certain things from Ubuntu Desktop. [08:44] If we want to have the same behaviour when using Xubuntu, I would expect the same filters to be applied. [08:45] If we just want the Xubuntu Desktop as-is, with our stuff on top, then we could just have "xubuntu-desktop" in our seed, or not even have an ubuntustudio-desktop package, and just have the other ones. [08:47] persia: I highly doubt we want it as-is, hence the discussion. But stuff like "there might be good reasons to have them" only apply for the reason that it's currently a product of direct copying. [08:48] persia: I am just not well-enough informed to make the call for removing individual packages. [08:49] That's why we wanted, especially, Cory's input on it. [08:50] persia: Ahh... your meaning wasn't "there might be reasons why they are there", but rather "there might be reasons people would want them to be there". Gotcha. Sorry. :) [08:55] I firmly believe that for Ubuntu Studio to be useful, it has to provide a coherent experience based on some vision. [08:55] I'm not at all confident that I understand that vision: I have opinions, but I know I don't have enough time to keep track of what folk are thinking closely. [08:56] So, if having an office suite is part of that coherent experience, then it needs documentation targeting the Ubuntu Studio userbase, etc. [08:56] But I believe it to be different than the past experience, and wasn't sure if that was intentional. [09:06] Yep. Well, Scott can put his foot down on this, once we have gathered enough input on the matter. Your points were excellent, though, so thanks! I'll keep that in mind. [09:09] Heh, yeah :) I should also say: nice work in sorting the migration. [09:09] It will be nice to have buildable images again. [09:15] Agreed, I hate when we couldn't test. Also, I'm highly stoked to see the new desktop. :) [10:19] hey there [10:55] Hi falktx! [11:07] hi [11:09] are the new ISOs building now? [11:09] (gnome-session and lash fixed?) [11:26] At least I didn't receive any notion of uninstallable binaries in the daily health check, but I haven't attempted a test install yet. [11:27] err... s/binaries/packages/ [11:43] Nah, installation still fails, and obviously so because Luke just informed us that he hadn't updated the seeds due to confusing nature of desktop's contents. [11:45] ah, too bad [11:46] falktx: If you could, please take a look at the desktop in the ubuntustudio.oneiric seed. [11:47] We could use the opinion in the application selection area. [11:49] I can take a quick look [11:54] it seems like oneiric has more GCC bugs than natty had [11:55] astraljava, i have luke's pastebin and i'll parse it later today (hopefully, work is pretty busy again) [11:55] hi falktx [11:58] ScottL: Yeah, no sweat. We still have a few weeks until alpha-3 (but time flies) :D [12:00] yes and i still want to make additional changes to add new plugins, etc, one xfce is sorted, so that makes the time even shorter [12:01] ScottL: did you ever tested my xfce menu patch for real? [12:06] I can see a lot of plugins missing [12:06] guitarix is not available, so it should be added [12:07] yoshimi is a good choice too [12:08] hm, it seems to me the seed are very short right now... did someone removed lots of apps? [12:08] I can't see invada-plugins in there, but I remember US using it before [12:09] ah! generation.seed adds a few more [12:09] I see plugins in audio-common and audio-plugins [12:12] damn, I need to sleep === falktx is now known as falk-nick === falk-nick is now known as falk-busy [15:13] astraljava: did you ever get ubuntu studio installed on your mac? did you dual-boot by chance? === falk-busy is now known as falktx [16:15] scott-work: I never got the mac. I had some financial issues, and when they were resolved, Apple had switched from nVidia to ATi/AMD, so I didn't bother anymore. [16:22] ah, gotcha [16:22] one of the hosts for the "terminal geeks" podcast is thinking about using a mac and was curious about dual booting it [17:03] I understand there's nothing really irky about it anymore. EFI works really well for that. [18:47] astraljava: what is EFI? [18:47] oh, and i'm still going to get you information about the back porting situation, there's just too many irons in the fire for my time [18:52] scott-work: No fear, natty/lucid is not going anywhere for a while. :) [18:54] scott-work: The BIOS equivalent on Macs, I believe. [18:56] EFI is something in the 64bit macs, that's the reason we have have a special release for mac 64 [18:59] The Unified Extensible Firmware Interface BIOS (UEFI) is a specification that defines a software interface between an operating system and platform firmware. UEFI is a replacement for the older BIOS firmware interface present in all IBM PC-compatible personal computers. (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Extensible_Firmware_Interface) [19:00] I don't see how that limits to 64-bits only, though. [19:01] I don't understand much of it, but there is something about the 64bit system that requires a special cd spin [19:09] EFI is an earlier revision of UEFI, used by Apple, Dell, HP, and maybe some other folk. Apple did it first, and in a special way that doesn't match what everyone else did, hence the amd64+mac images. [19:10] The i386 images either don't support the Intel macs *OR* do something special to get into some "compatibility mode". I forget which, but suspect the former. [19:41] Thanks for the correction, persia!