[00:32] wendar: are there any extras packages for Precise yet? [00:32] "Independent" isn't showing in my USC [00:32] there aren't [00:32] so maybe mine will be first? cool [00:33] this did start off as the 'post-release apps' process [00:34] mhall119: are you trying to submit apps for precise now? [00:35] ajmitch: yeah [00:36] stgraber would know more than I would, but I don't know if that is open for uploads to be copied to it now or not [00:37] while there's a precise Sources.gz file on extras.ubuntu.com, there are a few things that happen behind the scenes [00:50] mhall119: we won't be accepting apps for precise until after the precise release [00:51] mhall119: but we can get it into Oneiric now, and then add to Precise as soon as it's launched [00:51] mhal119: or, does it depend on features of Precise? [00:51] bit hard to do that when the lense API is different [00:51] (I haven't tried compiling it yet) [00:51] I think that it'd make sense to accept apps for precise after feature freeze [00:52] ajmitch: current policy is only the "current release" of Ubuntu [00:52] like backports is meant to be opening up at FF, not sure if that's been done or not [00:52] I do know backports is opening at FF [00:52] yeah, I don't know if they've done it yet [00:52] but, if it's targeting Precise, why not just put it in using the standard process? [00:53] that avoids all the /opt stuff [00:53] wendar: right, at FF the platform should be viable for building & releasing apps on, but there could be changes [00:53] I'd certainly prefer it to just go in via the standard process [00:54] ajmitch: as in, the non-ARB process? [00:54] wendar: unfortunately the version of Singlet my lens depends on is only in Precise [00:55] wendar: right, the non-ARB process or even into backports if it's open [00:55] wendar: Can I propose my Singlet package (modified to run on Oneiric) to the ARB, and then submit the lens for Oneiric too? [00:55] ajmitch: backports only accepts packages once they've been approved for some release of Ubuntu, generally the current development release [00:56] mhall119: Extras doesn't accept libraries, only "leaf" applications [00:56] wendar: not necessarily true with the current proposal, which is meant to acecpt new packages which can then be copied into the next release as it opens [00:56] wendar: yeah, i know [00:57] the intention behind backports opening early is to have a way to upload new packages all through the 6-month cycle [00:57] mhall119: I'd say Singlet could be backported, but Extras can't automatically enable a backport, so that's problematic too [00:57] mhall119: since FF is upon us, I think the best option is getting it ready to go for Precise Extras [00:57] I'm okay with not getting this into Oneiric, I just want to get something through the ARB process, preferabbly before Precise is released, so I know how to help other devs [00:58] it might be a trial app to see if it can be put into precise extras pre-release [00:58] mhal119: I'd say it's not really a huge deal if we publish it a few weeks before the actual Precise launch date [00:58] (for testing) [00:58] wendar: there are a *lot* of lenses and scopes waiting to be packaged and send to the ARB, so unity-community-lens is going to be both a trial run and it's packaging files will serve as a template for others [00:59] but, we may have to have some policy conversations around that [00:59] wendar: that's okay [00:59] like, in general, unlike backports, Extras shouldn't be on a "open as soon as FF hits" policy [00:59] better now, while we still have some time [00:59] yup [01:00] and, if all the lenses depend on Precise features, it may be that we get them all lined up in the staging PPA [01:00] and, just ready to launch as soon as Precise hits [01:00] wendar: they don't all, currently, most will need to be upgraded to support Precise [01:00] (or, soon before Precise hits) [01:00] mhall119: okay, those are actually easier [01:00] * ajmitch still needs to hack up his lens for precise :) [01:00] mhall119: we can launch them for Oneiric, and then start the upgrade for Precise [01:01] well, I can't guarantee that they're ready for Oneiric either :) [01:01] will packages in extras automatically be upgraded to Precise? [01:01] I thought devs had to resubmit [01:01] mhall119: the general idea is to give developers notice of each upcoming so they can transition [01:01] ok [01:01] I was going to update unity-lens-launchpad & push it through to test uploading for precise [01:01] something for the weekend [01:01] mhall119: aye, no automatic transition, just an opportunity for the dev to prepare to resubmit [01:02] wendar: ajmitch: do you think we should have some kind of naming convention for lenses and scopes? [01:02] mhall119: I was wondering about that [01:02] mhall119: yes, I'd follow what's in the main archive [01:02] I have unity--lens, ajmitch has unity-lens- [01:02] mhall119: I noticed most are unity-lens- [01:02] where they were originally unity-place-X, now unity-lens-X [01:03] mhall119: yeah, one of the comments in my notes is "should this be named unity-lens-community?" [01:03] ok, I should probably change mine then [01:03] I've seen "unity-scope-*" too [01:03] we renamed the askubuntu lens to match the others [01:03] yeah, that makes more sense that way [01:04] * ajmitch should probably remember to apply for UDS sponsorship before next week as well :) [01:04] mhall119: if you want to do that renaming, I can hold off on my branch [01:05] mhall119: actually, I'll just send you my current changelog, that pretty much says everything [01:05] ajmitch: yeah, you should do that ;) [01:05] wendar: thanks [01:05] and, you can look at unity-lens-sshsearch for the details [01:05] ok [01:06] we should hopefully get some resolution on whether scopes can depend on lenses at the next TB meeting [01:06] ajmitch: is it on their agenda yet? [01:06] if you haven't added it, you should [01:06] actually [01:06] it says that a TB person should, so stgraber? :) [01:07] afaik people add items themselves & then turn up at the meeting [01:08] just add it yourself, unless you want me to introduce the topic at the meeting but I doubt it's in mhall119 or jono's best interest of having me present it ;) [01:08] heh [01:09] stgraber: gah, I just sent an email to the TB about it [01:10] oh well, I'll just look impatient [01:10] they'll forgive you, I'm sure [01:12] * mhall119 is going to owe stgraber some edubuntu contributions for this [01:12] bribery now? :) [01:12] what do you mean 'now'? [01:12] :) [01:16] wendar: I don't think there's any standard or convention for dbus names/paths on lenses or scopes, but I'll ask [01:20] for the /opt/ path, should it use /opt/extras.ubuntu.com/-/ ? [01:20] is the version number in there necessary? [01:21] mhall119: that's the standard approved by the TB [01:21] but, we haven't always followed it strictly [01:21] are we allowed to submit new versions for the same release? [01:21] (none of the other lenses do) [01:21] * ajmitch didn't follow that for tagplayer [01:22] since you shouldn't be able to have multiple versions installed at once, it shouldn't matter [01:22] mhall119: yes, it still runs through an ARB review, but it's usually a quicker review since we only need to look at the diff [01:23] ajmitch: I'm not particularly attached to the version in the path [01:23] wendar: on the .service file rename you did, is that an ARB requirement? [01:23] ajmitch: it was in the original spec, so I copied it into the guidelines [01:23] mhall119: yes, prepending 'extras-' to the .service and .lens files is an ARB requirement [01:24] ok [01:24] mhall119: basically, any files that have to be installed in the "standard" locations [01:24] mhall119: it's the same for .desktop files [01:25] the reason for the naming to to avoid namespace conflicts [01:25] which is why I don't think the version is important in the filename or path [01:25] I'm sure the TB won't jump on us too harshly if we get it wrong [01:26] yeah, I usually don't put the version in the path as it's not possible to have multiple version with the same package name installed anyway [01:26] right :) [01:26] are you guys working with anybody to incorporate these requirements into what Quickly produces? [01:26] and it makes updating the package harder in most cases [01:27] ajmitch: stgraber: actually, I'm not finding the source for the - requirement on the /opt path [01:27] wendar: great, we can ignore it then :) [01:27] I think it's just how we did the first app and it stuck ;) [01:27] ajmitch: stgraber: and, it always struck me as a little silly, so I'll just drop it from the guidelines [01:28] mhall119: I think that bugs have been filed against quickly to make it produce apps using the right paths, etc, but I'm not sure what # [01:28] mhall119: so, you can stick with /opt/extras.ubuntu.com/unity-lens-community/... [01:28] ok, I'll look [01:28] wendar: alright [01:28] it would be great to reduce the patching that we have to do to 0 [01:28] yeah [01:29] I'm hoping to do that for singlet lenses/scopes at least [01:29] * ajmitch is having issues at the moment getting a simple patch to be applied, have to track down what's going on [01:34] mhall119: yeah, I asked around and joined the Quickly talk mailing list to discuss changes with them [01:34] mhall119: Rick is happy to have folks propose changes in branches to be merged [01:34] wendar: Rick? [01:34] mhall119: mainly, I think Quickly just doesn't have much active development at the moment [01:35] mhall119: Spencer, creator of Quickly [01:35] oh, I don't think he's maintaining it anymore, TOny Bryne is I think, though didrocks has been helping me [01:35] I'm writing a singlet-lens template for it now [01:35] ah, nice [01:36] mhall119: ah, I haven't seen the name Tony Bryne at all yet [01:36] mhall119: it's mainly mvo who's made the changes I requested so far [01:36] mhall119: (as recently as a few weeks ago) [01:36] ah, it's Byrne, not Bryne [01:36] but still [01:36] I'm surprised that quickly is just in universe [01:36] ajmitch: it's not really core to Ubuntu [01:37] ajmitch: it's just the recent promotion on developer.ubuntu.com that made it appear so [01:37] wendar: no, but it's something that could be pushed more, along with other content creation [01:37] ajmitch: I'm actually happy to have it made more core, but definitely needs some work to get there [01:37] ajmitch: I think it needs more active and devoted maintenance before it gets there [01:37] ajmitch: particularly, it needs updating to GTK3 for Precise [01:38] is diveintopython still on the CD images? :) [01:38] wendar: it's still using pygtk? [01:38] ajmitch: yup pygtk [01:38] ajmitch: diveintopython was on the CD images last I checked, but that was Natty [01:40] does quickly use dh_python2 instead of python-support now? [01:40] ajmitch: it must have been removed now, the book is 8 years old [01:40] 8 years old but still in main [01:40] ajmitch: it doesn't, it still uses python-support [01:40] ajmitch: I have to manually update quickly packages [01:40] right, that's what I was doing with tagplayer as well [01:41] are there bugs filed about that? [01:41] ajmitch: though, mvo said he made some updates for Precise, I'll check trunk and see if he updated that [01:41] ajmitch: I didn't file bugs, yet, just emailed to ask if there were plans for the updates [01:42] ajmitch: we should start promoting http://diveintopython3.ep.io/ :) [01:43] * ajmitch likes the concept of 1 right way to write an app, make a package that can be approved with minimal work [01:45] * wendar too [01:46] maybe something to aim for for the next LTS? :) [02:25] ajmitch: seems sensible [02:52] wendar: quickly uses python-mkdebian, which builds debian package files from the setup.py, I think that's where we need to switch things to dh_python2 [02:53] mhall119: ah, that makes sense [02:53] mhall119: I wonder if that's a change to make all the way upstream in Debian? [02:53] is that the package name? [02:53] I can't find it on precise [02:53] mhall119: or, further upstream? is it a Python package? [02:53] the closest I know of is python-stdeb [02:54] wendar: it's from python-distutils-extra, by Martin Pitt [02:54] ah-ha, pitti beat us to it [02:54] https://code.launchpad.net/~python-distutils-extra-hackers/python-distutils-extra/debian [02:54] revision 274 [02:55] hopefully, that made it into Precise [02:55] right [02:55] I'll check with pitti tomorrow [02:55] that's the version in precise now [02:55] sweet! [02:57] https://bugs.launchpad.net/python-distutils-extra/+bug/894582 should be fixed then [02:57] hmmm, I guess I need to update [02:57] so the bug was originally filed against quickly [02:57] ah, that's my bug [02:57] lol [02:57] wendar: yep :) [02:57] forgot I filed it :) [02:58] I knew I'd seen one filed from the ARB somewhere [07:34] good morning [07:45] good morning all [12:14] mhall119, hi [12:49] hey coolbhavi [12:49] hey mhall119 how you doing? [12:49] saw your ubuntu community lenses on ARB queue [12:50] and its a cool app [12:50] :) [12:51] thanks coolbhavi [12:52] Thanks to you for making a simple and cool app :D [12:53] I'm not sure it quite qualifies to be called an 'app' [12:53] but I hope people like it [12:53] I liked it :D [12:54] can you give me the ppa link btw m interested in digging more [12:55] coolbhavi: https://launchpad.net/~scopes-packagers/+archive/ppa [12:55] mhall119, thanks! [13:05] mhall119, only thing I found is in oneiric it fails to install Dependency is not satisfiable: gir1.2-unity-5.0 [13:05] can you have a backport option for this? [13:07] coolbhavi: I'd have to get python-unity-singlet into backports, but extras packages can't enable the packports repo [13:07] so, not relaly [13:08] coolbhavi: this is targetting Precise only [13:08] I discussed with wendar and ajmitch yesterday, we'll work on getting this ready to land, and hold off until closer to Precise's release [13:10] mhall119, yes but I meant backport as in a ppa build [13:10] coolbhavi: it would take some work [13:10] the Lens API is different between Oneiric and Precise [13:11] the parts of Singlet this one uses didn't even exist in the version of Singlet that supported Oneiric [13:12] hmmm I wished to see support for different versions of ubuntu so I asked if its complicated then little sense in going through pains [13:14] actually that might be nice to have in Singlet, have it auto-detect the version of Unity and change how it works accordingly [13:15] though the issue with backports and extras still means it won't easily allow singlet lenses into Oneiric [13:16] hmm yes I understand the complexity at this point of time [15:02] hi, just wondering if my app accidentally went into the commercial queue again [15:05] what is your app? [15:05] https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/513/ [15:06] quite likely, since I don't have access to see that [15:06] ajmitch, me too [15:07] ugh, who can i talk to to fix that? [15:09] dpm, are there still any chances of finding some work for me? [15:12] looking [15:13] fixed [15:13] oh, actually, looking at the description this seems to be content only package (no actual app)? [15:14] if so, commercial (with a $0 cost) would be the right place as the ARB only accepts actual apps [15:14] (this comment is just based on a 5s read of the page, I may be completely wrong) [15:16] * ajmitch should really not be awake at this hour hacking on stuff [15:22] right, LP lens shows stuff on precise now [15:22] not much useful stuff though :) [15:23] stgraber: really? i was told it should still go through the ARB [15:24] told by who? the ARB has always had a fairly strict policy on what submissions can go through that process [15:25] david pitkin [15:25] maybe i misheard him? [15:25] cwayne: whoever told you that didn't read the ARB guidelines ;) [15:25] cwayne: "Submissions should be applications, not stand-alone documentation or media (image bundles, fonts, movies). " [15:25] cwayne: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AppReviewBoard/Review/Guidelines [15:25] could be that he doesn't know the policy as approved by the TB, he might be working solely off price & license [15:25] cielak, sure, I'd recommend talking to the other guys in this channel, I'm sure they'd be happy to get more contributors [15:26] that sounds likely indeed. I'll mention it to David and bounce the app back to the commercial queue [15:26] as amusing as rage faces would be... [15:26] done [15:30] ajmitch: hah, yeah, it makes irc much more fun :P [15:33] stgraber: ok, so what do I do now? is it in the right queue? [15:35] good morning [15:35] morning highvoltage [15:36] wow, still awake ajmitch? :) [15:36] cwayne: yep, it's in the right queue now and should be handled by dpitkin's team [15:36] highvoltage: more that I went to bed really early & ended up waking up at ~3 :) [15:38] * ajmitch should probably have had dinner before crashing though, I wonder if it's too early to have it for breakfast [15:41] my 2012 sleep policy is that if I'm inspired/excited/can't-sleep... then I should use the time instead of trying to sleep and just getting frustrated and waste the time [15:41] not sure how well that will work, but I guess it's worth a try :) [15:42] (moving 7 hours west does wonders for sleep though :) ) [15:44] going to bed at 7 & getting up at 3:30 might be pushing it a bit [15:44] yeah :) [15:47] but at least I got some code working, I just have to get the package updated for it now [15:48] ajmitch, you've mentioned some time ago that you are willing to review harmonyseq soon - are you in the middle of reviewing it? because if not, I might upload few updates to the packaging, according to recent changes in the Review/Guidelines (both to ARB queue and the PPA) [15:59] upload away, I was trying to finish off another app before moving onto yours again [15:59] which I should get done today [16:02] right - just wanted to ensure I won't interrupt your work [16:05] okay - done ;)