/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2012/04/24/#ubuntu-touch.txt

=== MacSlow is now known as MacSlow|lunch
=== MacSlow|lunch is now known as MacSlow
elijahHey guys - I think I have utouch installed, how can I confirm it is working?13:57
dandraderelijah, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Multitouch/Testing13:59
dandradermore specifically https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Multitouch/Testing/UsingMtview14:00
dandraderand then https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Multitouch/Testing/UsingGeisview14:01
elijahdandrader: thanks a bunch14:02
dandraderstatus report: I'm updating the merge proposal with the fix for bug 978378 according to comments received14:16
ubot5Launchpad bug 978378 in unity (Ubuntu) "A window can be moved even when some fingers are not over it" [Low,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/97837814:16
dandradercnd, bregma, Satoris, tvoss, stand up meeting14:17
cndmorning all14:17
cndthanks dandrader :)14:17
SatorisPreparation for UDS demo.14:17
dandradermorning14:17
cndI'm going to merge in the utouch-qml fixes and hopefully release them upstream and get them uploaded as either a fix in the release or an SRU14:17
cndthen back to architecture documentation14:17
bregmaI did some reviews, catching up on correspondence, trying to get ALL the geis integration tests to pass ALL the time14:18
tvossporting the chromium patch, frame backend work14:33
Satoriscnd: probably14:41
SatorisSkype today.14:41
cndok14:41
=== dandrader is now known as dandrader|afk
=== dandrader|afk is now known as dandrader
cndbregma, what's the debhelper debug env var?15:49
cndto spit out more verbosity while dh builds a package?15:49
bregmaDH_VERBOSE ?15:49
bregmaset it to 115:50
cndok15:50
bregmaI also often end up running dh manually from the command line with --verbose to see what it's doing (it gives different output)15:51
cndhmm15:51
cndI'm building a new utouch-qml package15:51
bregmabut DH_VERBOSE=1 in the debian/rules file is easier to start with15:51
cndand it's not stripping the library in dh_strip15:51
bregmaodd15:52
cndargh15:56
cndI have a DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="noopt nostrip noudeb nocheck parallel=16" in my env :)15:56
cndfor xorg-server builds15:56
bregmathat'll do it15:57
bregmaI wish bzr had a useful working rebase, I have a case where it would just be the right tool for the job16:09
=== tvoss is now known as tvoss|dinner
=== dandrader is now known as dandrader|lunch
cndbregma, I assume you mean an interactive rebase?16:55
cndthere is bzr rebase16:55
bregmaI have that installed but last I looked at it it wasn't a true rebase, might be worth playing with though16:59
bregmayep, does exactly what I need, thanks17:11
=== dandrader|lunch is now known as dandrader
bregmacnd, testsuite/recordings/touchscreen_a/pinch_2.record seems to be missing fro geis (from your recent gtest_attrs.cpp change)18:01
cndhmm...18:01
cndI probably forgot to bzr add it18:01
cndyep18:02
cndI'll commit it18:02
cndbregma, committed18:03
cnddandrader, it looks like you're basically rebasing all your work when you update a merge proposal18:06
cndthat basically breaks how lp reviews are supposed to work :)18:07
cndand makes it not any better than making a new MP18:07
cndinstead, you can make changes as new commits18:07
cndthen it's easier for us to figure out how things really changed18:07
dandradercnd, and the idea is to organize the commits only after the whole thing gets accepted or to merge the resulting mess as it is?18:09
cndmerge the mess18:09
cndthat's the bzr+lp way of doing things18:10
cndif you want to keep distinct changes separate18:10
cndthen you can look into bzr pipeline18:10
cndfor example, each of your commits in this proposal could be its own pipe in a pipeline18:10
cndpipeline is like a mesh of the git and bzr methods18:11
dandraderso the idea is that the history inside a branch that got merged is pretty much useless and in bzr people work with (bisect, revert, blame) only the merge commits?18:14
bregmathat's the current argument18:15
bregmaor maybe the current religious orthodoxy among the converted18:15
cnddandrader, the history inside the branch serves two purposes:18:16
cnd1. during review, it's easy to see how the branch changed due to review feedback, especially since lp interleaves changes with the review comments18:16
cnd2. after merging, someone can go back and see why changes were made18:17
cndthe usefulness of 2 is dubious, imo18:17
cndbut the usefulness of 1 is very high :)18:17
bregmaagreed18:17
cndwhen reviewing your branch, I was having to go back and forth between my previous review and your current revisions to see what has been changed18:17
cndand I didn't have your old revisions any more to compare against18:17
dandraderright18:18
cndbzr pipeline is the best of both worlds18:19
cndbecause each individual change has its own branch and review history18:19
dandraderI would say the best way would be to just comment on top for the sake of an easier review ("avoiding reviewer fatigue" as bzr pipeline puts it) and then sanitizing the commits before finally merging18:19
dandraderor the bzr pipeline way, which I don't know yet18:20
cndthe problem with sanitizing commits before merging is that I don't want to do extra work :)18:20
dandraderI the submitter is not the one doing the merge than this step is not feasible indeed18:21
bregmaI do not like bzr pipeline18:21
cndbzr pipeline has some usability issues, agreed18:21
cndthere are two issues with bzr pipeline for me:18:21
cnd1. I want to be able to rebase later pipes onto earlier pipes instead of constantly merging (it kinda works under specific circumstances, but it's not worth the risk of double commits or losing work)18:22
cnd2. it shouldn't allow you to hop between pipes without pumping changes first18:22
cndI think 2 is why its easy to lose work with pipeline18:23
bregmayes, it's (1) that was really the biggest issue for me (aside from losing work somehow)18:24
bregmaa rebasing pump would make pipelines really nice18:24
cndI don't think it would be *that* hard18:26
cndbut I don't have 3 weeks of time to spend on it :)18:26
dandraderis there a point in merging a branch with a single commit instead of pushing the commit directly?18:30
cnddandrader, I don't think there's much of a difference18:56
cndI merge them just to be consistent18:56
cm-thi, i have a question, because I am not sure if I should report as a bug19:42
cm-tI am on a tablet PC (HP touchsmart tm2) and on the beta2 i had the multitouch working on touchpad and touchscreen19:43
cm-tand since an update (I can check logs) one feature does not work19:43
cm-tthis feature was not a multitouh thingĀ :  i could scroll with one finger (it looks to detect I did it on the touch screen only)19:44
cm-tfor example in empathy i need 2 finger to scroll on touchpad, i can use 2 finger on touchscreen  but it is so simple to scroll with one finger19:45
cm-tdoes this feature deseabled on purpose ?19:45
cm-t(i mean the 1 finger on touchscreen, not touchpad)19:49
=== dandrader is now known as dandrader|afk
cndcm-t, that's likely being implemented in gtk20:02
cndI would ask in #ubuntu-desktop since it's not using the utouch stack20:02
cm-tI see20:03
cm-tthanks you cnd20:03
cndnp20:03
=== dandrader|afk is now known as dandrader

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!