[01:44] <tumbleweed> bregma: did you ever forward the patch in bug 871548 to debian?
[01:54] <bregma> not sure, I'll have to check....
[01:55] <tumbleweed> well, either way it needs a merge
[01:58] <bregma> nope, it looks like I missed forwarding that one
[01:59] <tumbleweed> :)
[02:01] <bregma> works fine in sid without the patch, at least last time I checked, it only fails in Ubuntu
[02:01] <tumbleweed> still, means, you have to regularly merge it. If you can persuade the debian maintainer to take the patch, then :)
[02:11] <bregma> OK, I'll submit the bug up to Debian
[02:48] <bobweaver> hello there I have a question about merging branches or more so on purposing merge branches. I have made changes here https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu-packaging-guide  (im joseph mills)    I have requested a merge for one of the pushes here https://code.launchpad.net/~josephjamesmills/ubuntu-packaging-guide/fixed-bug767276/+merge/106929     My question is Should I be doing this for all the merges that I want aka all the pushes that I h
[02:48] <bobweaver> ave done ? thanks for your time.
[03:58] <TheMuso> Where does discussion about ubuntu-dev-tools usually take place these days?
[03:59] <TheMuso> Other than bugs?
[06:24] <geser> TheMuso: usually here, as the most active devs (Laney, tumbleweed) are here too
[07:05] <dholbach> good morning
[07:08] <geser> good morning
[07:09] <bobweaver> hello and gooed morning to you also
[07:09] <bobweaver> dholbach,  I see that you left me a message asking to .......
[07:10] <bobweaver> about merging branches or more so on purposing merge branches. I have made changes here https://code.launchpad.net/ubuntu-packaging-guide  (im joseph mills)    I have requested a merge for one of the pushes here https://code.launchpad.net/~josephjamesmills/ubuntu-packaging-guide/fixed-bug767276/+merge/106929     My question is Should I be doing this for all the merges that I want aka all the pushes that I have done ? thanks for your time
[07:12] <dholbach> bobweaver, yes please - if you push your code to launchpad, that's fine, but only if you ask for it to be merged (merge proposal) do others really get aware of it
[07:12] <bobweaver> cool
[07:14] <bobweaver> should I be pushing code like that ?  bzr branch lp:~foo/bar  alter it then push back up  then delete the one that I just pushed and start all over again ?
[07:14] <bobweaver> for each change
[07:15] <dholbach> yes, I do separate new branches for every bug I work on - I feel it gets less confusing
[07:15] <dholbach> but maybe others in here have different modes of working
[07:16] <bobweaver> sweet thanks for your time now back to hacking ubuntu tv if I could just get this lens and sccope to work :) cya
[07:19] <dholbach> all the best with that :)
[07:25] <bobweaver> one more question Traditional Packaging or the page for the guide is like using dh_make and dpkg-buildpackage -F  and fakerooot ?
[07:26] <bobweaver> like "packaging from scratch " but with out bzr tools and what not thanks again
[10:28] <dholbach> broder, allison, tumbleweed, ajmitch, (and anybody else really): could you have a look at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/BugFixingInitiative and see if it's clear enough or add some new opportunities or edit it in any other way?
[10:30] <ogra_> you forgot to mention that all armhf bugs are the ones with the highest prio for everyone !
[10:30] <Laney> also you missed the "fix mono on arm" challenge
[10:31] <ogra_> ++
[10:31] <ajmitch> Laney: a trivial 5-minute job for a new contributor? :)
[10:31] <ogra_> yeah, its low hanging fruit
[10:31] <Laney> bzr branch; hack; commit; propose; win!
[10:31] <ajmitch> Laney: y no git clone? :)
[10:31] <ogra_> (because its such heavy fruit it hangs very low)
[10:31] <ajmitch> heh
[10:31] <Laney> put that in the packaging guide ^o)
[10:32] <Laney> it's such a ripe, juicy fruit
[10:32]  * ajmitch wants to be able to build on armhf at home
[10:32] <dholbach> any more serious notes? :)
[10:33] <ogra_> even more serious ?
[10:33] <ajmitch> dholbach: I looked at the list earlier today, it looked useful :)
[10:33] <Laney> well, are you proposing to have uploads for those typo fixes?
[10:33] <ajmitch> I'll try & add anything else I come across that may be useful
[10:34] <dholbach> Laney, they're ubuntu-only packages
[10:34] <Laney> I know, I'm just wondering about uploading /just/ to fix a one-word typo
[10:35] <dholbach> I'll leave that to the sponsor to decide
[10:35] <dholbach> if they just want to commit into some branch, that's fine with me :)
[10:35] <Laney> ok
[10:36] <Laney> I don't know how much of an emphasis you will be placing on having stuff in the archive is all
[10:37] <dholbach> I guess the main point is that we provide new contributors with stuff they can easily start with and get their feet wet
[10:37] <ajmitch> I think if fixes aren't uploaded they may get lost in the noise
[10:37] <ajmitch> & people like to see their name on the -changes list
[10:37] <ajmitch> even if it's a really small fix for something
[10:37] <dholbach> so if they enjoy fixing something, easily learn processes and tools and find and entry point, then we have succeeded
[10:42]  * ajmitch wonders if he can switch timezones with someone in order to make it to the meeting this week
[10:43] <dholbach> it might be a good idea to try to agree on alternating times for the meeting
[10:43] <dholbach> I realised that this meeting is going to clash with a meeting I have as well :-/
[10:43] <ajmitch> could be, but only if you're going to have enough people showing up at the agreed-upon times
[10:44] <dholbach> I think we had the old meetings at 12 and 22 UTC or something - this might work better for UTC+ and UTC- timezones
[10:45] <ajmitch> we can sort that out when needed
[11:03] <geser> I saw "revu-tools" on that list? is revu-tools still used and usefull?
[11:05] <geser> dholbach: didn't the old MOTU meetings rotate with 8h?
[11:05] <dholbach> ah yes, sorry
[11:05] <dholbach> 12 and 20 UTC
[11:06] <dholbach> I just checked some of the entries on https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Headers/NextMOTUMeeting?action=info
[11:06] <geser> I mean, didn't we have 3 meeting times?
[11:06] <ajmitch> geser: it's so long ago now :)
[11:07] <dholbach> geser, I think I recall us doing that for Packaging Training sessions, but for the meeting, I'm unsure
[11:07] <geser> looking at diffs from your linked page: 4:00 UTC, 12:00 UTC and 20:00 UTC
[14:59] <cjwatson> tumbleweed: So you know the way I said that Archive.getPublishedSources() probably wouldn't be that slow for figuring out what to auto-sync?
[14:59] <cjwatson> Um, yeah
[14:59] <cjwatson> >>> date(); len([(s.source_package_name, s.source_package_version) for s in quantal_sources]); date()
[15:00] <cjwatson> Wed May 23 14:23:29 BST 2012
[15:00] <cjwatson> 19783
[15:00] <cjwatson> Wed May 23 14:36:31 BST 2012
[15:37] <tumbleweed> cjwatson: aah, I thought you were just going to look at Sources.bz2
[15:38] <cjwatson> That's the next fallback; unfortunately it doesn't correspond well with what Launchpad's imported, in the case of Debian
[15:39] <cjwatson> Which means that I need to concern myself with the case where somebody uploads something to unstable every six hours and we never sync it because Launchpad is always a bit behind Sources
[15:39] <cjwatson> I guess I can use the Debian Sources file just for "is it newer", and the rest can come from what Launchpad has imported
[15:42] <tumbleweed> that works
[16:13] <geser> cjwatson: wouldn't it be enough to check only new published records (created_since_date) since the last run? or am I missing something?
[16:13] <cjwatson> That might help if I knew when the last run was
[16:13] <cjwatson> I mean, I do, but the script doesn't
[16:14] <cjwatson> It's not necessarily always run by the same admin, for instance
[16:15] <geser> can't the script save the date it got last run in some file?
[16:17] <geser> hmm, that probably won't work if the AA run that script on their own machines, unless there is some common storage all AA can access
[16:32] <vibhav> tumbleweed: ping
[16:44] <tumbleweed> an overlap presumably wouldn't matter too much
[16:44] <tumbleweed> vibhav: yup?
[16:46] <vibhav> tumbleweed: Since I have not triaged any bugs, what do I write in my application to the bug control?
[16:47] <tumbleweed> vibhav: if you haven't been triaging bugs, what do you need bugcontrol membership for?
[16:47] <ScottK> You wait until you triage some bugs, I'd think.
[16:48] <vibhav> tumbleweed: Nominating bugs for SRU
[16:49] <jtaylor> I don't think bug control can do that anymore
[16:49] <jtaylor> or was it bug squad where it was changed?
[16:53] <vibhav> I think its still bug control
[16:53] <ScottK> In any case, you need to do some triaging first.
[16:55] <vibhav> ok
[17:07] <PaoloRotolo> Salve
[18:50] <dupondje> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/remmina/+bug/1000356 anyone knows what bugreporter just means ?
[18:50] <dupondje> can't seem to simulate it