[07:02] <dpm> good morning all
[07:02] <jono> morning dpm
[07:03] <jono> ...and I head to bed
[07:03] <jono> night!
[07:03] <dpm> hey jono, good night!
[07:03] <jono> night!
[20:28] <ajmitch> morning
[20:29] <stgraber> hey ajmitch
[21:46]  * ajmitch is happy at how much faster it is to build packages now
[21:46] <ajmitch> I've pushed tagplayer with some patches to lp:~ajmitch/+junk/extras-tagplayer
[21:48] <highvoltage> ajmitch: why is it faster?
[21:48] <ajmitch> highvoltage: SSD to replace my hard drive
[21:49] <ajmitch> it took ~45 min a couple of weeks ago to build a simple python package, because the hard drive was so very very slow
[21:50] <highvoltage> ajmitch: ah nice.
[21:51] <ajmitch> ok, I can see that I made a mistake with icon naming in that branch, don't try & build it yet :)
[21:51] <highvoltage> I switched to sssd a few months ago and any machine with a spinny disk just feels broken now
[21:52] <ajmitch> yeah, the difference is really noticeable
[21:58] <ajmitch> stgraber: what do you suggest for packages that ship apport hooks?
[21:58]  * ajmitch isn't sure if it's something standard in quickly or not
[21:59] <stgraber> ajmitch: oh, hmm, well, it's susprising that they do and it doesn't make sense to have them in /opt but I think we'd need a policy change for that
[21:59] <ajmitch> tagplayer has:
[21:59] <ajmitch> -rw-r--r-- root/root       185 2012-02-17 10:55 ./etc/apport/crashdb.conf.d/tagplayer-crashdb.conf
[21:59] <ajmitch> if the filename doesn't matter, we could possibly change it to extras-tagplayer-crashdb.conf
[21:59] <stgraber> oh wait, actually I think the policy change I got the TB to approve covers these
[22:00] <stgraber> well, not explicitly, but they are covered as long as we agree with the apport guys on what the files should be called and make sure there can't be any conflict
[22:00] <ajmitch> right
[22:00] <stgraber> (similar to the unity stuff and /usr/share/applications)
[22:00] <ajmitch> something to follow up with them on the file naming then
[22:51] <wendar> mhall119: I only see 0.2 of unity-community-lens in the scopes-packagers PPA, is that the one you want us to review?
[22:52] <wendar> mhall119: the comments say 0.3
[22:53] <mhall119> wendar: huh, I dput it and saw it building....
[22:53] <wendar> mhall119: (I had started making the tweaks needed for ARB, but then noticed the comment, and want to make sure I get the latest version, so I'm not duplicating work you already did)
[22:54] <mhall119> wendar: are the tweaks something I can make in my source package?
[22:54] <mhall119> I want to use this as a template for others
[22:54] <wendar> mhall119: ah, might just be slow in the build queue
[22:54] <wendar> mhall119: yes, definitely, I was going to submit them to you as a patch
[22:55] <wendar> mhall119: if you'd rather, I could do it as a bzr branch, that's what I've been doing for a lot of others
[22:55] <mhall119> wendar: I'm not even seeing it in the build queue, maybe I dput it to the wrong place
[22:55] <mhall119> wendar: bzr branch and MP would be great
[22:55] <wendar> mhall119: what's the bzr repo?
[22:56] <mhall119> https://code.launchpad.net/~mhall119/onehundredscopes/unity-community-lens
[22:57] <mhall119> hmm, doesn't look like I dput version 0.3 at all....doing it now
[22:57] <mhall119> it has some fixes to point things to /opt in that version
[22:58] <wendar> mhall119: yup, it's most of the way there, just a few small bits remaining
[22:59] <wendar> (and, actually, you may have caught all the bits now, I was looking at the 0.1 package in MyApps
[22:59] <wendar> before I saw the comment about 0.3)
[23:00] <mhall119> wendar: I'm EOD, but feel free to PM me and I'll read it in the morning
[23:00] <mhall119> or, I suppose, comment on it in myapps, there's a system for that isn't there?
[23:00] <wendar> mhall119: okay
[23:00] <wendar> mhall119: I'll work on a branch and you can review it tomorrow
[23:01] <wendar> mhall119: yes, I'll use the comment system, but that doesn't work terribly well for sharing code patches
[23:01] <mhall119> thanks wendar!
[23:23] <ajmitch> wendar: file bugs, I know I need to file a few about developer-portal behaviour
[23:24] <ajmitch> having the initial comment only in the feedback tab isn't the most obvious place to look, for example :)
[23:29] <wendar> ajmitch: so far, I really like the pattern of working on branches, when they provide the info
[23:30] <ajmitch> branches provide a nice way to track the changes & be able to view the packaging online
[23:31] <ajmitch> even if it's just a ppa submission, bzr import-dsc should work
[23:36] <ajmitch> wendar: it'd be really nice to require submissions as a branch, but I think as a PPA is best, since it requires at least a source package
[23:42] <wendar> ajmitch: aye, and with a PPA, we know it builds, which is a plus
[23:42] <wendar> ajmitch: and, that's a good point, we can certainly create a bzr branch straight from a ppa, for sharing changes
[23:45] <wendar> mhall119: ah, yup, you did pick up some of the fixes in 0.2 and 0.3, great!