[12:11] <verwilst> anyone here with 3 mins time MAX that wants to fix a bug that has been open for almost 2 years?
[12:12] <jtaylor> which bug?
[12:12] <verwilst> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot-antispam/+bug/494162
[12:12] <verwilst> all it takes is a simple recompile of this tiny package to solve it
[12:13] <verwilst> it probably took longer to confirm this bugreport 2 years ago then to just recompile it ;)
[12:16] <jtaylor> the few motu members can't check up on every package, to get some attention its best to follow  https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates and subscribe ubuntu-sponsors
[12:16] <jtaylor> or show up here and request help
[12:19] <jtaylor> verwilst: can you provide step by step instructions to reproduce it?
[12:27] <verwilst> jtaylor, fair enough
[12:39] <verwilst> jtaylor, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dovecot-antispam/+bug/494162/comments/14
[12:41] <verwilst> jtaylor, hm you might want to ready comment 15 as well :)
[12:41] <verwilst> read*
[13:37] <verwilst> jtaylor, awesome man, thanks :)
[13:46] <jtaylor> I assume maverick and natty need fixing too?
[13:46] <jtaylor> the testcase does not work there ._.
[15:58] <genjix> hey, i've packaged 2 libraries
[15:58] <genjix> how do i get them into universe?
[16:52] <broder> genjix: we try to get all of our new packages through debian. have you considered going through them? http://mentors.debian.net/intro-maintainers is probably a good place to start if you're interested in that
[16:53] <genjix> ok
[16:54] <broder> (we can still help you with that, and we can help you get your packages into ubuntu once debian has accepted them, but our processes are optimized for that)
[16:54] <genjix> sure.
[16:55] <genjix> ok my package is for a library which isn't mature yet and is using git committish numbers
[16:55] <genjix> should i wait until formal number releases, or is going for debian package good now?
[16:55] <genjix> atm they're in my ppa
[16:56] <broder> what sort of library is this? a c library?
[16:56] <genjix> c++ library
[16:56] <genjix> actually 2 of them
[16:58] <broder> ok. in that case i would personally be looking for some amount of API and ABI stability, because API/ABI breaks have to be dealt with in packaging, and i wouldn't want to start a package's lifecycle with a bunch of those
[16:58] <genjix> right ok.
[17:00] <broder> have you read http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html ? if you haven't, it would likely be a good read in terms of understanding what we expect from shared libraries at the packaging level
[17:01] <genjix> aha great. thanks for the link
[17:01] <genjix> useful
[17:10] <broder> genjix: hmm...i don't know that policy explicitly discusses what a soname is or when you need to change it. http://www.gnu.org/s/libtool/manual/html_node/Updating-version-info.html might help fill in the gaps. the version part of the soname comes from the "current" field
[17:23] <genjix> so i guess i'll just stick it in the ppa for now until there is a stable abi
[21:17] <stlsaint> were there previeous discussions about being able to get individual package upload rights?
[21:17] <Laney> you can already do that
[21:18] <stlsaint> Laney: is there documentation on that particular process?
[21:19] <broder> !ppu
[21:19] <broder> maybe?
[21:20] <broder> oh well
[21:21] <Laney> stlsaint: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#PerPackage
[21:22] <stlsaint> per package upload? (just googled ppu)
[21:22] <Laney> yes
[21:24] <Laney> !ppu is Per-Package Uploader. See https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers#PerPackage for more information and application process.
[21:26] <Pici> !ppu
[21:26] <Laney> ta
[21:26] <broder> hmm...while we're messing with irc stuff, the /topic could use updating
[21:26] <Laney> why is it +t and who can make it not so?
[21:26]  * Laney gazes at Pici 
[21:27] <Pici> Hrm. I don't actually have access here.
[21:28] <Pici> I'll find someone who does...
[21:28] <Laney> cheers
[21:30] <stlsaint> Laney: so the pacakage must be sponsored by MOTU then we are able to aid in upload/management with that motu as ppu applicants
[21:30] <Laney> stlsaint: ppu don't need sponsoring, but before you get that you do
[21:32] <stlsaint> Laney: need sponsoring for the package?
[21:32] <Laney> right
[21:33]  * Laney has to go now, ttyl
[21:35] <broder> safe travels, Laney
[22:54] <Legs> gday
[22:56] <genjix> hey
[23:11] <jcfp> anybody know who to contact or where to file bugs about the ubuntu popcon website?