[00:23] <stlsaint> Hello all,
[00:23] <stlsaint> I am looking for the file that sets the default applications within unity bar
[00:24] <stlsaint> File that i can set the default apps for a livecd and all users
[00:36] <stlsaint> well alright
[00:37] <stlsaint> am i able to ask on mailing list? Launchpad states one must be a team member to subscribe
[00:37] <stlsaint> guess im in wrong channel
[08:05] <sil2100> didrocks: hi!
[08:06] <didrocks> hey sil2100
[08:06] <sil2100> didrocks: would you mind if we did an unity video lens and scope SRU in the nearest time?
[08:07] <didrocks> sil2100: no, I would love that
[08:07] <didrocks> sil2100: does it fix the top errors on errors.ubuntu.com?
[08:07] <sil2100> Excellent, since David fixed the two top errors from that indeed
[08:07] <sil2100> ;)
[08:08] <didrocks> ah great ;)
[08:59] <sil2100> didrocks: is the merger using quantal also for the 5.0 branch of unity?
[09:00] <didrocks> sil2100: no, see my email ;) I told precise
[09:00] <didrocks> why?
[09:00] <didrocks> it should at least
[09:00] <sil2100> https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/automerge-unity/862/console <- we got this last night
[09:01] <sil2100> didrocks: this looks identical to the things that we were getting on quantal before one of my fixes for 4.7
[09:02] <sil2100> didrocks: yep, it's using quantal
[09:02] <sil2100> didrocks: Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com quantal Release.gpg [198 B]
[09:02] <didrocks> I: extracting base tarball [/var/cache/pbuilder/quantal-amd64-base.tgz]
[09:02] <didrocks> you're right
[09:02] <didrocks> hum, looking in a minute
[09:02] <sil2100> didrocks: thanks
[09:10] <didrocks> sil2100: do you have the MR handy?
[09:11] <sil2100> Yes
[09:11] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~andyrock/unity/fix-1016239-5.0/+merge/112345
[09:11] <didrocks> got it meanwhile, but thanks :)
[09:21] <didrocks> sil2100: ok fixed
[09:21] <didrocks> sil2100: that was stupid me
[09:21] <sil2100> didrocks: yaaay, thanks \o/
[09:22] <didrocks> yw :)
[09:24] <sil2100> didrocks: btw. since I think I forgot this one, but on the sprint you mentioned you have a tool for generating changelog entries automagically
[09:25] <didrocks> sil2100: lp:unify
[09:34] <sil2100> didrocks: is there some documentation on how to use unify?
[09:34] <didrocks> sil2100: no, that's why I took time to explain the options the other day :)
[09:35] <sil2100> didrocks: I think I was busy with the releases and other things... ;) Ok, I'll browse through what others wrote down
[09:35] <didrocks> ok :)
[09:38] <popey> didrocks, i think you mostly went through the source code you didnt show it running or how you invoke it
[09:39] <didrocks> popey: yep, I couldn't run it otherwise it would have change status on bugs ;) I showed options on --help and which options to use for which case :)
[09:39] <didrocks> so yeah, how to invoke it was covered I guess
[09:41] <didrocks> but if you have any question, do not hesitate
[09:42] <popey> perhaps some detail of how you actually run it?
[09:42] <popey> as in, how didrocks runs it
[09:43] <didrocks> popey: well, need more info, unify has 3 modes as I explained, sync bugs status
[09:43] <didrocks> release for getting changelog
[09:43] <didrocks> and creating the designify view we explored
[09:44] <didrocks> so need to be more specific :)
[09:44] <sil2100> didrocks: I was actually interested in the release part - with creating the changelog ;)
[09:44] <didrocks> popey: also, remember that there is still the question of how you would like to handle the super task
[09:44] <didrocks> as it's still heavily relying on "one unity super task"
[09:44] <didrocks> sil2100: quite easy, see --help: unify -R unity
[09:44] <didrocks> if you want to release the current version
[09:45] <didrocks> and that the target dates for current version and next version suits the timing
[09:45] <didrocks> if you want to release a particular milestone target:
[09:45] <didrocks> unify -R unity -m <milestone_to_release> -n <next_milestone_to_report_all_unclosed_bugs>
[09:46] <didrocks> beware that the changelog collects all components
[09:46] <didrocks> so it assumes that you are releasing compiz/unity/nux/bamf/dee…
[09:46] <didrocks> (all bugs attached with a unity master task in this milestone)
[09:46] <didrocks> and it's doing stuff when you the command, so don't try if you are not sure of releasing :)
[09:48] <sil2100> ACK ;)
[09:48] <sil2100> Thanks
[09:48] <didrocks> yw
[09:49] <popey> nice one, thanks
[09:49] <popey> next time, I'm video recording everything
[09:50] <didrocks> heh ;)
[09:50] <sil2100> That was what I proposed even ;)
[09:50] <popey> :)
[10:11]  * sil2100 sighs
[10:17] <sil2100> :wq
[10:20] <seb128> sil2100, there is no exit there ;-)
[10:35] <sil2100> ;)
[10:35] <seb128> sil2100, popey: how is the unity SRU going? do you have an eta for upload?
[10:36] <sil2100> didrocks: I noticed that for unity-lens-video you released the previous version 0.3.5-0ubuntu2 for quantal, and for precise-updates you created the 0.3.5-0ubuntu1.1 version instead
[10:36] <seb128> sil2100, popey: if you have your candidate version in a ppa or something let me know, I'm interested in testing it ;-)
[10:36] <didrocks> sil2100: yep, indeed
[10:36] <sil2100> didrocks: so for the new SRU release of the lens, should I do the same? i.e. 0.3.5-0ubuntu1.2 for precise and 3 for quantal ;)?
[10:37] <sil2100> seb128: from what I know, we prioritized unity 6.0.0 for quantal first, so we're in the middle of testing that
[10:37] <sil2100> seb128: besides that, there will be an SRU for dee and unity-video lens/scope
[10:38] <didrocks> sil2100: exactly!
[10:38] <sil2100> didrocks: thanks :)
[10:38] <seb128> sil2100, dee and the video lens,scope seem easy, would be good to start with those and get them uploaded today?
[10:39] <sil2100> seb128: yep - not sure about dee, since the thing confuses be a bit (still waiting for didrocks to check the precise issue) - but unity lens/scope for today is a safe bet
[10:39] <sil2100> seb128: I'm working on the lens now
[10:39] <seb128> sil2100, excellent, thank you
[10:41] <mhr3> it doesn't make much sense to sru dee if pygi with py3 doesn't work in P
[10:42] <sil2100> mhr3: that needs to be checked
[10:43] <mhr3> unless you SRU pygi as well :)
[10:45] <sil2100> mhr3: don't push me... ;)
[10:46] <mhr3> sil2100, you know it's the right thing to do ;)
[10:50] <popey> mhr3, have you seen the size of sil2100's sword!? :S
[10:50] <mhr3> uh oh, i forgot about that
[10:51] <mhr3> sil2100, well, i guess it'd be fine if pygi waited :)
[10:56] <sil2100> ...;)
[10:57] <sil2100> seb128: but we're also testing a pre-6.0.0 version of unity for quantal if you're interested
[10:57] <seb128> sil2100, I'm still running precise (I'm on the LTS .1 team) but thanks
[11:00] <popey> seb128, hey, there's this thing called dual-boot :p
[11:00] <seb128> popey, dual boot is for wimps ;-)
[11:00] <popey> haha
[11:01] <sil2100> popey: I'd like to run precise now as well btw. ;)
[11:01] <seb128> it's a pain to change between versions and installed software
[11:02] <seb128> popey, I've a netbook I use for testing though, I might just run quantal on that one, that's a more practical solution than dual booting ;-)
[11:02] <popey> yeah, I agree
[11:02] <popey> I have two machines. there's no perfect solution really
[11:02] <seb128> I do the multi machine thing
[11:04] <seb128> I recommend having a cheap netbook for testing out of your main work station, makes testing easier without having to close everything and reboot
[11:04] <seb128> you can even dual boot the test machine then :p
[11:42] <sil2100> seb128: I've uploaded the lens and scope to my PPA for testing: ppa:sil2100/ppa
[11:43] <sil2100> seb128: they didn't get built yet, but I suspect it to happen soon
[11:43] <sil2100> seb128: the fixed bugs are noted in the respective changelogs
[11:55] <sil2100> didrocks: can you ACK some nominations for me?
[11:55] <sil2100> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-scope-video-remote/+bug/972304
[11:55] <sil2100> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-scope-video-remote/+bug/972304
[11:56] <sil2100> https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity-lens-videos/+bug/977158
[12:04] <didrocks> sil2100: done, why are there some upstream bugs where it's invalidated?
[12:06] <sil2100> didrocks: what do you mean?
[12:18] <didrocks> sil2100: on one bug, the upstream task is invalid
[12:20] <sil2100> I'll fix that
[13:01] <sil2100> seb128: me and popey are testing the lenses/scopes SRUs right now, but the bugs are prepared for SRUs already
[13:01] <seb128> sil2100, great, I will test your ppa in a bit
[13:01] <sil2100> seb128: same for packaging branches for precise-propose
[13:01] <sil2100> seb128: remember to only pull those two packages from that PPA, since it's full of other packages too
[13:01] <seb128> sil2100, yeah, don't worry about that ;-)
[13:02] <sil2100> seb128: you want the precise packaging branches too?
[13:02] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/unity-lens-video-precise
[13:02] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/remote-videos-scope-precise
[13:02] <sil2100> (if anything)
[13:13] <sil2100> seb128: we can't reproduce the bugs, seem fixed - and no regressions visible, so it's green from our tests
[13:13] <seb128> sil2100, same here
[13:13] <seb128> sil2100, the depends change is obvious, the other changes look right and I see to regression
[13:13] <seb128> go go go, upload ;-)
[13:14] <sil2100> hmm... can I upload to precise-proposed at all? ;p
[13:15] <seb128> sil2100, I don't think you can, I can sponsor you if you want ... let me check with didrocks first though in case he wanted to do it
[13:15] <seb128> didrocks, do you want to do the video lens,scope sponsoring or should I do it? I'm still on precise and testing them so I can upload if you want
[13:15] <seb128> didrocks, I will check the bugs, etc before uploading
[13:15] <sil2100> Ah, sponsoring!
[13:16] <seb128> ;-)
[13:16] <sil2100> The only thing needed is switching from UNRELEASED to precise-proposed in the changelogs
[13:16] <didrocks> seb128: upload them if you want
[13:16] <didrocks> sil2100: do you have put on a google doc the tests results?
[13:16] <seb128> didrocks, your call, I'm happy to do it if that helps but I don't want to steal stuff you planned to do either
[13:17] <didrocks> seb128: well, if you checked the packaging and that they followed the merge process and so on, I'm fine :)
[13:17] <didrocks> also ensure that we have a gdocs with the tests results
[13:17] <didrocks> as it's mandatory to have something more formal than IRC
[13:17] <seb128> didrocks, ok
[13:17] <sil2100> didrocks: I'm creating one now
[13:18] <didrocks> thanks sil2100, seb128
[13:18] <didrocks> but before uploading to -proposed
[13:18] <didrocks> it needs to be available and tested on quantal as well
[13:18] <didrocks> as we want the fixes first in the unstable version
[13:18] <didrocks> I can sponsor those (as I'll try on quantal)
[13:18] <sil2100> didrocks: the branches are prepared for quantal as well, I'll test it too
[13:19] <didrocks> sil2100: yeah, we need to get that building and confirmed first :)
[13:19] <didrocks> don't want to end up again in the case of FTBFS on quantal and blocked
[13:19] <seb128> sil2100, didrocks: I will look at the precise side and make sure everything is in order
[13:19] <didrocks> great ;)
[13:19] <seb128> then wait for the quantal feedback for upload
[13:19] <seb128> thanks
[13:19] <didrocks> will do the same on quantal
[13:20] <sil2100> didrocks: when you upload the quantal version, best use this branch: lp:~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/readd_missing_version <- since davidcalle didn't merge in the missing changelog entry yet
[13:20] <popey> sil2100, I can test those on quantal too if needed..
[13:20] <sil2100> popey: ok, check if you can
[13:20] <didrocks> sil2100: this is your branch with the two fixes?
[13:20] <davidcalle> sil2100, didrocks, merging it in a minute
[13:21] <sil2100> didrocks: it's the trunk branch (which has the fix already) - I just added a missing changelog entry
[13:21] <sil2100> But David will merge it in in a moment
[13:22] <didrocks> oh right, this branch doesn't follow the regular packaging practice
[13:22] <didrocks> it should be converted at some point
[13:22] <didrocks> sil2100: interested in doing those for this release?
[13:22] <davidcalle> Merged.
[13:22] <didrocks> like, separate the packaging branch and upstream
[13:22] <didrocks> using merge-upstream
[13:22] <didrocks> and rolling tarballs
[13:23] <didrocks> it can be a first easy release ;)
[13:23] <sil2100> didrocks: but that would be for quantal, yes? Since precise needs to follow the old one still?
[13:24] <didrocks> sil2100: oh yes, quantal only ;)
[13:24] <didrocks> minimizing the diff for already released version
[13:25] <sil2100> didrocks: I'll just finish this doc and I'll try doing that ;)
[13:25] <didrocks> excellent :)
[13:26] <sil2100> https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/document/d/1GcmU2lrprBlZvSnPj27RU8lx7pWmlVeMyrRuwfatgXY/edit# <- can something as simple as this be good?
[13:28] <sil2100> davidcalle: thanks!
[13:31] <sil2100> didrocks: but to do that, I'll have to create a new bzr repository with just the source, right?
[13:31] <didrocks> sil2100: exactly, and make the first import and I did last week :)
[13:31] <didrocks> sil2100: precise "precise", but it seems perfect to me :)
[13:32] <didrocks> sil2100: also, ensure that embeeded tests or things impacted are still running
[13:32] <didrocks> unfortunatly the lens has no test :/
[13:32] <sil2100> Sadly...
[13:33] <davidcalle> Well, it has manual tests.
[13:33]  * davidcalle has his tongue a bit in his cheek
[13:42] <sil2100> didrocks: in the source tree, should I leave the bzr history from the previous branch?
[13:42] <didrocks> sil2100: for your new one, you mean?
[13:42] <didrocks> sil2100: then, trunk should really becomes trunk and not having any packaging in it
[13:42] <didrocks> so bzr rm debian/
[13:42] <sil2100> didrocks: yes, for the one I'll create
[13:43] <sil2100> Ok, so leave the history, but remove packaging
[13:43] <didrocks> yep
[13:52] <popey> sil2100, your ppa doesn't seem to have quantal sources..
[13:52] <popey> s/sources/packages/
[13:52] <sil2100> popey: no, you can try using the precise ones though ;)
[13:52] <popey> bah! I knew you'd say that :D
[13:53] <didrocks> sil2100: doesn't work
[13:53] <didrocks> sil2100: need to be built with the quantal toolchain
[13:53] <sil2100> didrocks: ACK
[13:53] <sil2100> popey: so wait a bit
[13:53] <popey> ok
[13:53] <popey> ping me, box is setup ready
[13:55] <sil2100> popey: thanks
[13:56] <seb128> sil2100, you can pocket copy from the launchpad ui
[13:56] <seb128> sil2100, https://launchpad.net/~sil2100/+archive/ppa/+copy-packages
[13:56] <didrocks> seb128: you can't do that in the same ppa for different releases
[13:57] <seb128> didrocks, oh right, versions conflict
[13:57] <didrocks> yep
[13:58] <didrocks> and yes it could have been handy for multiple reasons in the past :)
[14:20] <sil2100> didrocks: ok, so I did the merge-upstream thing, but it removed everything from the debian/changelog that was before
[14:20] <sil2100> In the 'ubuntu' repository
[14:20] <didrocks> sil2100: ok, so with the tag, everything was fine?
[14:20] <didrocks> the upstream one which was missing?
[14:21] <sil2100> Yes, I changed the 0.3.4-0ubuntu1 tag to upstream-0.3.4
[14:21] <didrocks> sil2100: you can bzr revert debian/changelog
[14:21] <didrocks> to get it
[14:21] <didrocks> and add the new entry manually
[14:21] <sil2100> Ah, wait, I see he has a conflict with debian/
[14:23] <sil2100> Anyway, just to be sure I'm doing the right thing:
[14:23] <didrocks> sil2100: well, it's normal you got one
[14:23] <didrocks> sil2100: as you removed the debian/ directory upstream
[14:23] <didrocks> hence the bzr revert
[14:24] <sil2100> We want to release 0.3.5-0ubuntu3 for quantal
[14:24] <didrocks> no
[14:24] <sil2100> So, first what I need to do is to fetch a revision that is _before_ we released 0.3.5
[14:24] <didrocks> you will do a new release
[14:24] <sil2100> Ah, a new release? Completely?
[14:24] <didrocks> yeah :)
[14:24] <sil2100> New tarball?
[14:24] <didrocks> yep
[14:24] <sil2100> Ok, this makes things much easier ;p
[14:24] <didrocks> so 0.3.6
[14:26] <sil2100> So the first thing I need to do is prepare the 0.3.6 tarball
[14:31] <sil2100> didrocks: how to nicely create the new tarball? Since I see the previous one didn't have the po/ directory
[14:32] <sil2100> didrocks: why was it only in distro?
[14:32] <didrocks> sil2100: it's create on package build
[14:32] <didrocks> as for the .mo files
[14:32] <didrocks> that we expurge from the package
[14:33] <sil2100> didrocks: so wait, I don't have to prepare the 0.3.6 tarball first..?
[14:33] <didrocks> sil2100: hum? sure you do
[14:33] <sil2100> didrocks: since for compiz you had to do make dist before doing any merge-upstream magic
[14:33] <didrocks> it's better to get a tarball
[14:33] <didrocks> that's nothing to do with having some po or not
[14:34] <sil2100> didrocks: yes, but should I include that in the new tarball? Since I'm just creating 0.3.6, I need to create the tarball by hand, right?
[14:34] <sil2100> By taring and such
[14:35] <didrocks> sil2100: if you have them generated, yeah, it's better :)
[14:36] <sil2100> didrocks: ok so I just do it and then you'll just tell me if it's good or bad
[14:37] <didrocks> ok
[15:01] <sil2100> didrocks: can you check?
[15:01] <sil2100> http://ubuntuone.com/6uJF8oLJzKmLIXHWNjBzsU <- tarball
[15:01] <didrocks> looking
[15:01] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/trunk_PRE
[15:01] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/ubuntu_PRE
[15:01] <sil2100> brb in a moment
[15:01] <didrocks> sil2100: you didn't bump the version in setup.py
[15:02] <didrocks> you need to do that
[15:02] <didrocks> committing that to upstream trunk
[15:02] <didrocks> writing "releasing version <>"
[15:02] <didrocks> and tagging
[15:02] <didrocks> then, report that in your packaging branch
[15:14] <sil2100> didrocks: ACK, will redo
[15:18] <sil2100> didrocks: should I also add that PKG-INFO file to the tarball and trunk or not?
[15:23] <didrocks> sil2100: not needed
[15:29] <sil2100> didrocks: ok, created new branches with the same names
[15:29] <sil2100> And tarball here: http://ubuntuone.com/6uJF8oLJzKmLIXHWNjBzsU
[15:29] <sil2100> didrocks: could you re-check?
[15:30] <didrocks> sure
[15:30] <didrocks> let me run a test first ;)
[15:34] <didrocks> sil2100: looks good to me
[15:34] <didrocks> looking at the branches now
[15:34] <sil2100>  /me hopes he didn't screw up this time
[15:35] <sil2100> Ouch, whitespace! Damn youu
[15:36] <didrocks> sil2100: looks good for me ;)
[15:36] <didrocks> sil2100: however, you could have looked at the lintian warnings :p
[15:36] <didrocks> like no good revision, no up to date standards-version
[15:36] <didrocks> i'll update that
[15:37] <sil2100> ...;)
[15:37] <sil2100> Thanks!
[15:43] <didrocks> sil2100: can you post the release to the bamf page?
[15:44] <sil2100> didrocks: what do you mean..?
[15:45] <didrocks> sil2100: posting the tarball to launchpda?
[15:45] <didrocks> launchpad
[15:47] <sil2100> Ah, you mean, unity-lens?
[15:47] <didrocks> unity-lens-video, right
[15:47] <didrocks> sorry, got trapped into this bamf thing :)
[15:48] <didrocks> hum, the rights on this project is screwed up
[15:48] <didrocks> I can't even push to trunk
[15:48] <sil2100> didrocks: will try - what are we doing with the scopes though..?
[15:48] <didrocks> sil2100: ensure that tomorrow, davidcalle is taking your tarball and trunk please :)
[15:48] <didrocks> sil2100: same fate :)
[15:48] <didrocks> I'm sponsoring unity-lens-video to quantal now
[15:48] <didrocks> seb128: FYI ^
[15:48] <didrocks> (did some quick testing here)
[15:49] <seb128> didrocks, thanks ;-)
[15:49] <sil2100> didrocks: ok, hm, but I don't see a place where the unity-scope-video-remote tarball is published ;p
[15:49] <didrocks> sil2100: same, we need to do some publishing
[15:49] <sil2100> Ah, it's in the same place
[15:50] <sil2100> Ok, I see it now
[15:50] <didrocks> let's sort the tarball for tomorrow, just keep them
[15:50] <sil2100> Ok, I'll create the tarball for that now too for tomorrow
[15:50] <sil2100> And the branches
[15:59] <sil2100> heh, this one is more tricky
[16:11] <sil2100> didrocks: I also prepared branches for the scope...
[16:11] <sil2100> http://ubuntuone.com/37ldvMpNknG1bTaUINn3km <- tarball here
[16:12] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/scope_trunk_PRE
[16:12] <sil2100> https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/scope_ubuntu_PRE
[16:12] <didrocks> sil2100: need to pops out, so will be a real checking tomorrow or later today
[16:12] <sil2100> This one was more tricky, so it might be wrong
[16:12] <sil2100> Ok
[16:12] <sil2100> didrocks: thanks! Have fun ;)
[16:12] <didrocks> thanks, you too
[16:49] <popey> didrocks, do you know if unity looks in /usr/local/share/dbus-1/services/ as well as /usr/share/dbus-1/services/ for lenses on startup?
[16:49] <popey> I have a lens in the /usr/local place but it doesnt seem to start :S
[16:52] <didrocks> popey: this is dbus
[16:52] <didrocks> popey: dbus is local at both places
[16:52] <popey> oh, duh
[16:53] <didrocks> however unity look for the .lens file only in /usr/share/ IIRC not in local
[16:53] <didrocks> (same for .scope)
[18:02] <API> hi, today I tried to compile unity
[18:02] <API> it was a long time since the last time I tried
[18:02] <API> I used this recipe:
[18:02] <API> http://askubuntu.com/questions/28470/how-do-i-build-unity-from-source
[18:03] <API> and I was able to compile it, but it crashes if I try to use it
[18:03] <API> the only difference with respect that recipe is that in my system I have precise
[18:03] <API> any idea?