[03:43] <ScottK> infinity: No.  I was not around....
[05:37] <jbicha> what does final freeze mean for unseeded universe?
[05:38] <micahg> jbicha: it comes much later
[05:38] <micahg> well, not much, about a week and a half
[05:38] <jbicha> specifically would a feature freeze exception to add sushi, the GNOME 3.2 previewer for Nautilus, be considered?
[06:40] <ScottK> jbicha: It would, but please don't use a binary name that another source is already using.  It confuses things (like apt-get source will match the binary one).
[06:40] <ScottK> You'll need to find an archive admin with time to review it.
[06:41] <jbicha> right, using the same binary name as another is bad but that's not exactly what's happening here
[06:42] <jbicha> or are you saying that we need to use the same binary name as our source package?
[06:42] <ScottK> No.  I'm saying don't use as your binary the name of some other source pacakge (which is what I thought was what the bug said)
[06:43] <ScottK> IIRC it's sushi/sushi-irc and you want to be sushi-nautilus/sushi.
[06:43] <ScottK> Please don't.
[06:44] <infinity> Or we could just fix apt-get source to behave sanely. :P
[06:45] <jbicha> there were lots of ideas for names: gnome-sushi, nautilus-sushi...or sushi-previewer similar to epiphany-browser
[06:49] <jbicha> ScottK: ok, I'll get someone from the Debian GNOME team to help us pick a better name, thanks
[08:55] <ubuntu-baltix> hi all
[08:55] <ubuntu-baltix> please update ubiquity-slideshow-ubuntu, because at 28th september Lithuanian translation was half complete (about 50%), but at 29th - fully translated (100%) :)
[08:57] <ubuntu-baltix> translation freeze was on 29th of September and pitti told me, that It's OK to finish translation ubiquity-slideshow-ubuntu on 29th of September  :)
[09:01] <ubuntu-baltix> Evan Dandrea stick an upload in the queue and told me, that" the release team will decide if they want to accept it."
[09:01] <ubuntu-baltix> So, I'm asking here :)
[09:27] <infinity> ubuntu-baltix: If the upload is nothing more than updated translations, I'm fine with it.
[09:28] <cjwatson> it's not in the queue now though
[09:28] <cjwatson> unless he only *just* uploaded it?
[09:28] <infinity> Their conversation was half an hour ago..
[09:28] <infinity> So, I dunno.
[09:28] <infinity> Maybe he got sidetracked. :P
[09:31] <cjwatson> right, maybe hasn't finished it yet, I haven't seen any commits
[09:32] <cjwatson> it does take a while because you have to ask Launchpad for an export and then wait for the mail
[09:32] <cjwatson> anyway, we'll be notified here when it's uploaded
[09:34] <ubuntu-baltix> cjwatson: should ev or I do something more?
[09:35] <cjwatson> ubuntu-baltix: ev needs to do the update.  you don't need to do anything
[09:43] <ev> just reviewing the delta now
[09:46] <ubuntu-baltix> ev: thanks
[09:47]  * infinity raises his brow at https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/865150
[09:47] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 865150 in unity (Ubuntu) (and 2 other projects) "UIFe: Desktop should be titled "Ubuntu Desktop" (affects: 1) (heat: 12)" [Undecided,New]
[09:47] <infinity> Does anyone really expect us to let that in the week of RC?
[09:50] <seb128> infinity, there was a pushback from pitti and some documentation people who asked for the logo addition to be reverted because it's just confusing
[09:50] <seb128> it's similar to the bfb logo for natty which was opening the dash so user tend to click on it and nothing happen, it also makes 2 logos close from each other
[09:51] <infinity> Oh, I understand the bug.  But UIF was way back there... *points*
[09:51] <seb128> infinity, I'm not arguing that you should accept it, I'm just pointing that there was not push for it to be dropped from r-t and documentation team people
[09:51] <seb128> infinity, well the logo was added some days ago...
[09:51] <infinity> Oh, fair enough on the logo point. :P
[09:51] <infinity> But the bug addresses several items.
[09:52] <infinity> String change, nautilus menu hover, etc.
[09:53] <Laney> Can't we just have the logo removed for now?
[09:53] <seb128> that's the fallback option "just use Ubuntu"
[09:53] <Laney> it seems to be a cock up that it somehow got through UIF
[09:53] <infinity> Yeah, I'd be fine with the bug if it just said "remove the logo we added two days ago".
[09:53] <infinity> The rest of it is a bit abitious. :P
[09:54] <infinity> ambitious*
[09:54] <seb128> I would be fine with that as well
[09:54] <seb128> what I care about is having that second logo dropped ;-)
[09:54] <Laney> I also care about reviewing how these kind of changes get made so late
[09:54] <Laney> but that is a separate topic :-)
[09:55]  * Laney comments.
[09:55] <Laney> oh, infinity beat me
[09:56] <seb128> Laney, "how" is easy, sabdfl and design seem to think that's the change of tweaks that should be allowed late since they are not really ui changes but rather tweaks in feedback to user testing
[09:59] <Laney> Good job we've got an LTS coming up so can tighten up the ship (and then keep on being tight thereafter).
[10:01]  * AlanBell hopes the LTS will be useable much earlier than this cycle
[10:01] <infinity> seb128: There's been discussion of redefining what UI freeze means, and letting it slide to around the same time as string freeze.  That would (probably) work if we can make a very clear division between "UI features" and "UI appearance" (the latter being minor positioning, icons, wallpaper, colours, etc)
[10:01] <infinity> seb128: But that's going to be a long and potentially contentious discussion. :P
[10:01] <infinity> seb128: And lots of stuff the design folks wanted in late this cycle was very much featurey, and that just won't fly, IMO.
[10:03] <seb128> infinity, they don't agree with you on "feature" ;-)
[10:03] <infinity> seb128: I've noticed. ;)
[10:04] <seb128> infinity, like their "new features" are "fixes for usability issues that raised in testing"
[10:04] <seb128> like adding the system settings launcher
[10:04] <seb128> or the default menu in the panel
[10:04] <infinity> Great, I find it a usability issue that my software is out of date, or that daemon X doesn't support new protocol Y, or, or...
[10:04] <seb128> I somewhat agree with them that we should try to fix known usability issues after uif and not wait a cycle
[10:05] <seb128> but anyway not something we will solve there today
[10:05] <infinity> Or, they could be planning their stuff now, land it all at the beginning of the cycle, get testing in, respond to feedback, and have it "right" by UIF.
[10:05] <seb128> but a discussion for UDS for sure
[10:05] <seb128> right, that would be ideal ;-)
[10:06] <infinity> But yes, when they don't even land most of it until UIF, it's not a shock that they then find it doesn't test well with users post-UIF.
[10:06] <infinity> And yes, time for lively debates in Orlando.
[10:07] <infinity> Need something to distract me from noticing that I'm in Florida.
[10:11] <infinity> ev: Accepted, thanks.
[10:11] <ev> thanks infinity
[10:11] <ev> ^ ubuntu-baltix
[10:12] <infinity> I'd like to say I read all the new Danish, Hungarian, and Lithuanian translations to make sure they were correct, but that would be a blatant lie. :P
[10:13] <Laney> A blatant dereliction of release team duty.
[10:16] <ubuntu-baltix> infinity, ev, thanks
[11:38] <hrw> hi
[11:38] <hrw> can armel-cross-toolchain-base 1.75 (universe) be accepted? it fixes bug 864591
[11:38] <ubot4> Launchpad bug 864591 in armel-cross-toolchain-base (Ubuntu) "gcc-4.6-arm-linux-gnueabi is uninstallable on Oneiric (affects: 1) (heat: 8)" [Medium,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/864591
[12:07] <jamespage> hello - please can nova 2011.3-0ubuntu5 be accepted - nova 2011.3-0ubuntu4 is not currently installable on fresh installs
[12:07] <jamespage> ta
[13:15] <ScottK> infinity: re apt-get source being sane, that'd be great, but that's certainly not the only issue.
[15:51] <Laney> sladen: has the font bug been sabdfled or do you expect it to be?
[15:57] <hrw> can armhf-cross-toolchain-base be accepted? should fix issue with ubuntu armel cross compiler
[15:58] <hrw> and sorry for generated noise around it
[16:00] <sladen> Laney: given Mark's desire for it over the last 12 months, I would guess that there's a 50% chance.  I would rather just facilite the process if it does happen
[16:00] <sladen> Laney: I think if we'd got the stuff from Dalton Maag ~2 weeks earlier, but own views might have been different
[16:11] <skaet> who just accepted the armhf-cross-toolchain-base?
[16:11]  * skaet was looking at it and had some questions
[16:11] <Laney> that is a common question
[16:12] <cjwatson> not I; although it went with armel-cross-toolchain-base that had already been accepted, didn't it?
[16:13] <cjwatson> the patch looks OK to me
[16:14] <Laney> skaet: have we decided on a date for UUFF yet? Are you going to send the announce?
[16:14] <skaet> I was trying to figure out if the changes around the Multi-arch build code made sense.
[16:14] <hrw> skaet: it ftfbs without this change
[16:14] <skaet> Laney,  thread input seems quiescent, so yup,  will go to 1.5 days and make the announce today.   Working on a page for it.
[16:15] <Laney> I thought 1.5 days was the hard deadline and Final Freeze was some time before that
[16:15] <Laney> like the normal final freeze
[16:16] <skaet> hrw,  thanks.   would have liked someone with more multi-arch background to cross check it.
[16:16] <skaet> but water under bridge.
[16:16] <hrw> skaet: it is cross compiler - it does not do multiarch at all
[16:17] <hrw> skaet: one day we will get multiarch cross build dependencies and those packages will vanish
[16:17] <ScottK> skaet: I accepted it.
[16:18] <Laney> sladen: The font stuff seems to live on its own schedule, which is weird for something which impacts the user experience so
[16:18] <hrw> have a nice rest of day
[16:18] <skaet> hrw,  thanks.
[16:18] <skaet> ScottK,  ack.
[16:18] <sladen> Laney: outside contractors
[16:19] <Laney> quite :-)
[16:19] <cjwatson> skaet: they make sense.  they're rebasing a patch against code in another package that changed.
[16:20] <cjwatson> skaet: if you look at the structure of the patch, the first character of the changed lines is ' ', indicating that it's a change in the context against which the patch is being applied, not a change in what the patch does
[16:20] <skaet> cjwatson,  thanks for confirming.
[16:21] <skaet> and explaining.
[16:21] <cjwatson> or rather - the '-Multi-Arch: ...' lines were already in the patch
[16:21] <cjwatson> (diffs of diffs are a bit confusing.)
[16:22] <cjwatson> the change this is making is adding lines like 'Pre-Depends: dpkg (>= 1.15.6)' to the context
[16:22] <cjwatson> it makes sense, just hard to explain :)
[16:24] <skaet> :)  The Pre-Depends part made sense, but the ' ' line syntax of patch on patch was the part had me scratching head.
[16:24] <cjwatson> you have to unpack it layer by layer
[16:24]  * skaet nods
[16:25] <cjwatson> and if necessary extract both old and new and compare by eye
[17:59] <skaet> ev,  any more changes expect for WUBI at this point?  (if not, would like to get the signed copy prepared and ready for the images later this week)
[23:04] <stgraber> skaet: ping
[23:12] <infinity> stgraber: Accepted.
[23:15] <stgraber> I'm going to release a minor bugfix release of arkose (2 lines diff), I'd love to have that in the release rather than as SRU. The bug is the CWD in the container being /usr/bin instead of whatever directory you were in when you started the container.
[23:15] <stgraber> this can have nasty side effects when running "arkose -c 'blah'" as "blah" will be running in /usr/bin (and depending on the arguments, as root)
[23:16] <slangasek> stgraber: seems a straightforward proposition to me
[23:55] <cjwatson> I've tried to clear out the ~ubuntu-archive sync queue a little; there are some things that required an FFE in there, but I checked that they had one
[23:56] <cjwatson> there are a few other things in the queue I didn't sync because I wanted to think about them a bit harder, but this should not stop anyone else from doing them
[23:57] <cjwatson> looks like the syncs have gone straight through to accepted; the list was htop_0.9-4_source.changes libsynthesis_3.4.0.16.1-1_source.changes logcheck_1.3.14_source.changes phpmyadmin_3.4.5-1_source.changes pyzmq_2.1.9-1_source.changes zeromq_2.1.9-1_source.changes