[02:04] so is 1.4 million votes enough for developers to decide to allow users to move the unity bar? ;) === Guest84007 is now known as mfisch === mfisch is now known as Guest4997 [02:41] justjinxed: where are these theoretical 1.4 million votes? [02:42] justjinxed: however it is more complicated than that [02:42] it isn't the developers blocking it, but the designers [02:44] My question is more an IF than IS. Id like to know how to contact the responsible parties. I've read a number of varying opinions from the "team" but it's hard to pinpoint if any of them are an authority or not. [02:46] and now I must run for now, :( guess ill come back tomorrow and finish hunting them down :) [07:55] Trevinho: give me a sign when you're around [07:57] sil2100, he'll be around from ~14UTC [07:57] grrr [07:57] Thanks [08:33] anyone on this channel with an intel chip willing to test something quickly for me ? [08:33] intel graphics hardware [08:42] sil2100: hey, I hope you are looking at the merge request and what I'm currently doing as soon, it will be your turn to do it :) [08:42] popey: FYI ^ [08:43] didrocks: which MRQ? [08:43] sil2100: all of them, and the packaging update I'm doing, what is failing and such [08:43] didrocks: since I'm looking at the Ibus one right now [08:43] sil2100: I mean, you need to monitor all merge request, look at when/why they are failing… [08:44] didrocks: ok, looking at those as well, but I have to deal with some unity-lens thing right now [08:45] sil2100: indeed, but that shouldn't prevent monitoring merge requests :) [08:45] juts a kind reminder, I won't remind you anymore of this then ;) [08:45] didrocks: but please do, since otherwise I won't know that I screwed up again ;) And we don't want that happening too frequently! [08:46] sil2100: well, I will reject the upload then, so you will learn that way ;) [08:46] ;) [08:47] smspillaz: o/ , although a meeting soon [08:47] Mirv: thanks, though I found a volunteer [08:47] smspillaz: ok, great [08:49] seb128: hi! [08:49] sil2100, hey, how are you? [08:50] seb128: fine, although it's really hot here in Poland, how about you? [08:50] The heat is killing me [08:50] sil2100, I'm good, weather is just nice here (around 23°C) [08:51] seb128: remember the SRU for unity-lens-video that we made last week? [08:51] sil2100, yes, it got accepted yesterday [08:51] is there an issue with it? [08:52] seb128: no, no issue, but David found another fix [08:52] sil2100, for what issue? [08:53] I mean, the busy dbus issue that was seemingly fixed with this version - he found one more place where the bug might happen and fixed it yesterday as well [08:53] So it would be nice if we could release, ekhm, another SRU with the one more fix... [08:53] ...would that be possible? [08:53] seb128, dbus crash, there is a second dbus call in the code (for zeitgeist). I missed it last week. [08:54] seb128, sorry about that. [08:54] davidcalle, no worry [08:54] sil2100, yes, just do an update on top of the previous one [08:54] seb128: is there a specific branch I should use? Or you don't care about bzr history? [08:56] sil2100, don't care about the history for the SRU [08:56] sil2100, but you can use the vcs for the quantal upload [08:56] seb128: will do! Thanks [08:56] yw! === yofel_ is now known as yofel [09:15] seb128: https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity-lens-videos/unity-lens-video-precise <- I pushed here again [09:17] sil2100, btw for lenses != music, you'll just patch the icon paths? (/me hopes he doesn't need to do releases because of that) [09:18] mhr3: no, I just patched those [09:18] \o/ === zyga_ is now known as zyga [09:23] didrocks: just a quick question - if there is a green signal from everyone about unity stack trunk freeze, you're able to freeze it for a day? Or is there someone else I'll have to ask then? [09:24] sil2100: no, just tell me when to freeze :) [09:24] sil2100: and tell me for which projects I need to freeze [09:24] (once ok) [09:24] didrocks: thanks! For now I need to resolve this ibus issue though... need Trevinho for that best [09:24] mhr3: it sucks to have to change the image path name btw at every new major version of unity [09:24] yep :) [09:26] didrocks, indeed, thoughts on where to centralize it? [09:26] mhr3: I don't get why the path need to be versionned in fact [09:26] didrocks, that makes two of us :) [09:26] Hi :) Who is maintaining the Unity-team/staging PPA quantal ? Unity is broken there: Depends: compiz-core-abiversion-20120305 [09:26] mhr3: \o/ [09:27] MCR1: the ppa is automatic [09:27] didrocks, perhaps a "current" symlink if nothing else ? [09:27] MCR1: as told on it, it can have temporary ABI break and shouldn't be used [09:28] didrocks, i mean instead of the version number [09:28] you want a symlink to the current version number? [09:28] I'll try to start the discussion and discuss about that [09:28] whatever to get of it [09:29] and maybe we can discuss even more about the discussion [09:29] didrocks, mhr3: maybe we'd like to have that for this release? [09:29] :) [09:29] sil2100: no, the timing is too short [09:29] sil2100, yea... i don't think all of us are that fast :) [09:29] sil2100: let's transition, and maybe transition again [09:29] didrocks: ok [09:29] (from 5 to 6 to I hope unversionned) [09:30] The PPA also features a new Compiz version I would like to try to give feedback on fixed bugs, but the ABI break makes it impossible to test Unity with it :( [09:30] MCR1: yeah, you need to ensure you have compiz and unity built against the same ABI version [09:31] the ABI break should be transient and fixed automatically when you get the next unity rebuild [09:31] hm, the nux/unity fix for ibus that Trevinho is recommending seems to change the nux API [09:31] MCR1: that's why I put this stenza on the ppa description: [09:31] This archive contains the latest builds generated from trunk, that have passed the unit tests, but didn't pass the user acceptance (autopilot) tests yet. [09:31] Unless you are a developer and know what you do here, you should probably use the "unity-team/ppa" instead. [09:32] Will it work if I build Unity from source ? [09:32] MCR1: yeah, get the compiz from the ppa, install the -dev package and rebuild unity from source [09:32] or wait for the next unity version coming to the ppa [09:32] ok, thx a lot 4 the info. [09:32] MCR1: yw :) [09:32] sil2100: not an issue, you plan to merge the nux bump to version 3, right? [09:33] I still didn't see the packaging changes for it [09:33] and the branch isn't merged yet but I think it's on your roadmap [09:33] didrocks: I have it all prepared locally, since I'll have to refresh it when the freeze is on [09:34] sil2100: hum, you don't have the branch which defines the API version 3, right? [09:34] didrocks: right now I can't do anything because I don't know if any important changes won't need to be merged in [09:34] it's not merged AFAIK [09:34] so not sure what you prepared [09:35] didrocks: it's not, since it's waiting for right-before-the-freeze - since nux and unity need to have the 3.0 change merged in the same time, otherwise unity auto-merger won't work [09:35] sil2100: yeah, but it doesn't need to be right before the freeze [09:35] you do the nux work, push the branch, approve the merge [09:35] then, you do the unity work, push the branch, approve the merge [09:36] didrocks: but with unity and nux we still wait for the ibus fix to get reviewed [09:37] sil2100: that's not a pre-requesite to this change, right? [09:37] Is there a wiki or even better a script somewhere that helps me with building Unity from source ? [09:37] didrocks: yes, but we want unity to be able to perform auto-build after merging the ibus fix, right? [09:38] didrocks: once I merge in the 3.0 changes it won't build [09:38] didrocks: or does the autobuilder use the nux trunk for building unity? [09:38] sil2100: why? [09:38] sil2100: it always take the new version of everything [09:39] we won't be able to do without it otherwise [09:39] didrocks: so it's not using -proposed? Just fresh from the trunks? [09:39] remember my "local repo" I showed and emphasized many teams during the week sprint :) [09:39] yeah [09:39] they are constantly adding API, without that, the merger won't work [09:39] Still, since we want to release a new tarball, I'd like to have all the changes in the tarball [09:40] sil2100: what's the link with that? [09:40] So, if I release the new tarball now, and then add the ibus fix, I'll have to add it as a patch, right? [09:40] I don't speak about a release [09:40] I'm speaking about 2 branches to merge [09:40] to bump the new api [09:40] and also, about the packaging update you need to do for it [09:40] Ah, k [09:41] you can do that right now instead of waiting on the ibus fix :) [09:41] I was talking about the packaging update [09:41] packaging udpate != tarball [09:41] so, what you need to do: [09:41] But on the other hand, I could probably for now just do a packaging update with normal patches [09:41] - ensure jay's nux branch is ok, pushing an updated packaging for version 3, approve the nux merge [09:41] And then just release everything as a new tarball [09:42] - ensure jay's unity branch is ok, pushing an updated packaging for version 3, approve the unity merge [09:42] and that's it [09:42] Well, we were already testing Jay's branch [09:42] why are you speaking about patches? :/ [09:42] Since my ppa uses nux 3.0 now anyway [09:42] I'm speaking about merge in trunk [09:42] Yes, but with the merge to trunk we need to do a merge to packaging too, right? [09:42] but they are not merged in trunk, right? [09:42] yeah [09:42] that's why I'm telling, doing it now [09:42] and approving the trunk merge [09:42] They are not, but those won't work if you don't merge into packaging, right? [09:43] now [09:43] :) [09:43] So that's why I'm taalking about packaging [09:43] 11:41:57 didrocks | - ensure jay's nux branch is ok, pushing an updated packaging for version 3, approve the nux merge [09:43] That's what I'll do now [09:43] and same for unity [09:43] thanks :) [09:43] ping me to review your packaging update [09:43] As I said, we already tested nux 3.0 [09:43] and that I push it [09:43] So it'll just be an easy task [09:44] great [09:44] sil2100: there is no difference than any other package update [09:44] you see that I'm updating a lot the packaging in advance of time [09:44] like because of new files [09:44] or because of path changes [09:44] that's exactly the same case here [09:44] (or new build-dep) [09:51] didrocks: sorry about that, now when I think about it I could have really just pushed it sooner [09:51] sil2100: no worry, hope you get it now ;) [09:51] it's really like any other package update [09:51] didrocks: I just seemed to got locked-up in the idea that I need to wait with the packaging for the tarball [09:51] sil2100: fortunatly not :) [09:52] didrocks: that it doesn't make sense to push it now if the tarball will be released later ;p [09:52] sil2100: at least, we will get this hopefully merged and built before trevhino is here for the ibus thingy [09:52] just ping me with the package update [09:53] didrocks: the thing is that I thought that it's not good to do it without the new tarball - since we're essentially changing the name to nux-3.0, where the version number in packaging will be still 2.* [09:53] sil2100: no [09:53] sil2100: you are changing the packaging now [09:53] and we will push it just before setting the merge proposal to approve [09:53] and so, we will get the new packaging :) [09:54] Just to get this straight - can I change the major number of the nux version to 3 ? [09:54] In packaging? [09:57] Since normally, when changing the major number, I was doing a merge-upstream with the new tarball [09:59] didrocks: ^ ;) [10:01] sil2100: right [10:01] sil2100: change the packaging and push it to me :) [10:08] didrocks, regarding: https://code.launchpad.net/~mc-return/compiz/compiz.merge-plugin-stackswitch/+merge/111736 - do you mean our discussion here ? [10:09] MCR1: no, was in private with duflu [10:09] (PM) [10:09] ah, ok - *confused* [10:10] didrocks: https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/nux/ubuntu-3.0 <- ;) ? [10:10] brb [10:11] MCR1: basically, we are using the packaging to build an upstream source to push to the ppa, as you added some files and nobody updated the package, it failed [10:11] MCR1: now, it's fine [10:11] didrocks: I am working on getting *forgotten* plug-ins to lp:compiz, we did not have that problem with workspacenames though [10:12] but if it is fine now, it is great 8-) [10:12] thanx [10:13] yw :) [10:13] sil2100: looks good to me :) [10:16] sil2100: pushed, you can ack the nux merge now [10:41] didrocks: approved [10:41] (commit message was missing) [10:41] ;) [10:42] sil2100: well, you approved it before pushing the branch, thanks god you forgot the commit message :) [10:43] didrocks: I did? I think I did that by accident - damn, good for that missing commit message... [10:58] didrocks: eh, conflict [10:58] Oh, right, but I can push to that branch actually [10:59] Fixing [11:06] Yeah, my second contribution to Ubuntu/Compiz: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~compiz-team/compiz/0.9.8/revision/3277 [11:06] :) [11:10] btw, I also got a contribution for Unity: https://code.launchpad.net/~mc-return/unity/unity.merge-reduce-png-filesizes/+merge/110978 === MacSlow is now known as MacSlow|lunch [11:28] MCR1: sweet! let's wait for upstream to review them :) [11:29] MCR1: btw, about the recompression, we already have that automatically on the binary package [11:29] didrocks: It is nothing special, but probably should be done [11:29] your png files are not compressed very well [11:30] I used Trimage image compressor to optimize them [11:30] ofc more could be done [11:31] most of the files could use indexed colors as well (8bit instead of 24+8bit) without any visual regression as most of the files do not use more than 256 colors anyway [11:31] and alpha is empty [11:32] didrocks: I also prepared a distro branch for unity 6.0 with the new nux: https://code.launchpad.net/~sil2100/unity/ubuntu-6.0 [11:33] But nux is still building [11:33] didrocks: You can check it yourself: simply install the package trimage and drag and drop all .png files there [11:33] MCR1: hum, weird, we maybe have dh_scour which is broken then [11:33] didrocks: you will save around 80kB [11:33] sil2100: well, that's fine, we can ack it now [11:33] sil2100: as my dep system is working :) [11:34] sil2100: FYI, I'm merging you content [11:34] sil2100: as you didn't get the latest unity packaging branch [11:35] Once I got my build and test system for Unity/Compiz working here I plan to help with fixing more important stuff as well :) [11:35] sil2100: libnux-3.0-dev (>= 3.0.0-0ubuntu1), is somewhat wrong as a build-dep [11:35] MCR1: sweet! [11:36] sil2100: better to take 3.0.0 to enable backporting [11:36] sil2100: I'm fixing that [11:37] didrocks: ah, ok, sorry about that [11:37] sil2100: and you dont' want to bump the version yet on that case :) [11:38] You mean, unity to 6.0? [11:38] sil2100: yeah [11:38] do that once you will release :) [11:38] sil2100: pushed to lp:ubuntu/unity [11:38] you can approve the MR [11:39] Why not now? Since I already bumped the version for nux to 3.0, right? So we theoretically could have done the same for unity? [11:39] sil2100: because merge-upstream won't be happy [11:39] sil2100: I didn't change it for nux but it should have been 3.0~something [11:40] sil2100: because now, the version in the staging ppa are higher than the revision that would be in the distro [11:40] Ah, right, we'll have to do the trick you did with compiz on the sprint [11:40] it will be 3.0+bzr [11:40] even if they are older [11:41] Right [12:32] didrocks: the tests failed for the unity nux-3.0 branch [12:32] Could not open X display? [12:32] sil2100: there is no X in the merger [12:32] xvfb? [12:33] yep [12:33] sil2100: you should check that with upstream [12:33] seems a test is flacky or broken with the new nux :) [12:34] But it doesn't even say which test failed, geh [12:34] I'll pick this up with Jay once he's back [12:35] sil2100: well, all the output is from upstream, they should fix it to tell which one :) [12:37] Annoyiiiing! [12:37] ;) [12:37] heh ;) === MacSlow|lunch is now known as MacSlow === _salem is now known as salem_ [13:07] seb128: how's the unity-lens-video SRU branch? Was it ok? [13:08] sil2100, sorry I was out when you pinged and I got busy, I will have a look now [13:08] seb128: thanks [13:12] sil2100, yw! [13:52] Trevinho: regarding that ibus fix [13:52] Trevinho: was that something that got recently introduced? That it's broken? [13:53] Trevinho: and I see you modify the nux headers [13:54] sil2100: we had some issues... first of all we didn't properly filter the meta keys in textentry, also we didn't support ibus release activation key... so I wanted to change the thing from nux... [13:57] Trevinho: well, I'm waiting for Brandon as well to be honest - I have some bug-related things for him! [13:58] But anyway, I think that it would be REALLY nice to have this ibus thing fixed with 6.9 [13:58] *6.0 === Guest4997 is now known as mfisch [13:59] So I'd say it's a bit of a blocking issue - although if jaytaoko will think that it's a risky change or something, we'll then release without it [13:59] sil2100: code is fixed... so... we only have to get it in trunk :) [13:59] Trevinho: ;) [14:00] Trevinho: is it a regression from 5.x ? [14:00] Trevinho: but commits on both sides are needed, right? Bot the nux and unity side === arges is now known as arges_afk [14:01] didrocks: mhmh a little... I pushed a different branch in 5.0 that fixes the key filtering without changing nux and being a little bit permissive to avoid breakage... [14:01] sil2100: yes, we need both nux and unity [14:02] sil2100: so it's a regression, and we won't take it into quantal without the bug fixed :) [14:04] Trevinho: so you are trying to get your branches in for this release? [14:04] didrocks: so it's, like I said, a blocking issue then? But for reals ;) [14:04] jaytaoko: well, it seems to be an urgent fix then [14:04] well, it is, right, no regrssion for us [14:04] should have been dealt earlier, but well [14:05] didrocks: yes I opened a bug to track it since I discovered: https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity/+bug/1016354 [14:05] Ubuntu bug 1016354 in unity "IBus can't be activated on dash or HUD since r2428" [High,In progress] [14:05] jaytaoko: we should yes [14:05] sil2100: as I said to Trevinho before, the code looks fine. But I was hoping bschaefer could give a second opinion because I don't know the details of the issues [14:06] sil2100: bschaefer is not awake yet I think (eastern US) [14:06] jaytaoko: could you test build it and see if it doesn't break anything obvious? [14:07] sil2100: sorry bschaefer is in western US [14:07] sil2100: sure [14:08] jaytaoko: thanks! [14:09] sil2100: also, do you know about the compiz release status? [14:09] as Timo is doing it [14:11] didrocks: not sure, I knew he was busy yesterday, but I'll ask him in a moment [14:11] sil2100: keep me in touch please :) [14:20] didrocks: for bug #1016354 , should I also attach nux and the nux branch? [14:20] Launchpad bug 1016354 in unity "IBus can't be activated on dash or HUD since r2428" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1016354 [14:20] Since essentially it's being fixed by two merges [14:22] In unity and nux [14:25] sil2100: yeah [14:26] sil2100: the nux branches compile but I am getting errors in the tests [14:30] sil2100: so as it is, we cannot merge this branch just yet: lp:~3v1n0/nux/text-entry-virtual-clipboard [14:30] Trevinho: ^^^ are you getting errors will running "make check" for the branch? [14:32] jaytaoko: mmh, I'll try... but my tests run fine [14:32] hmm [14:33] jaytaoko: what's failing there? [14:36] Trevinho: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/1073170/ there are more test failing... [14:36] Trevinho: I am trying nux trunk... [14:37] Trevinho: we merged in some nux-3.0 changes in trunk [14:37] Trevinho: are you trying it on trunk..? [14:39] jaytaoko: mhm weird... they all passed here yesterday... [14:39] * Trevinho checks [14:40] kamstrup: ok.. found the issue... when ibus-daemon is running some of them fails... maybe I should fix that [14:40] i have a problem with the current nightly of unity.. [14:41] installed via the ppa http://ppa.launchpad.net/unity-team/staging/ubuntu [14:41] this is now trying to triggern an dist-upgrade [14:41] witch failes.. [14:42] it always means that there is no ubuntu-desktop package found [14:42] but the meta package is installed [14:42] if i do the upgrade from the sell myself, it works fine [14:42] just so you know this bug.. [14:42] if you need any additional informations, please let me know [14:45] Trevinho: how's the test issue? [14:45] sil2100: I'm fixing now... some tests fails when ibus-daemon is running [14:46] sil2100: I didn't think to that since I thought that make check was running without ibs [14:46] ibus* [14:47] Trevinho: excellent! Thanks === dandrader is now known as dandrader|afl === dandrader|afl is now known as dandrader|afk [14:50] andyrock: hi! [14:50] andyrock: are you around? [14:51] sil2100, yeah but i'm studying [14:51] do you want me to SRU something? [14:52] andyrock: well, nothing urgent ;) [14:52] sil2100, shoot! :) [14:53] andyrock: I was wondering maybe if the fix for bug #934062 is SRUable as well ;) [14:53] Launchpad bug 934062 in unity (Ubuntu) ""Keyboard Shortcuts" overlay can cause annoyance" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/934062 [14:53] sil2100, yes it's SRUable [14:53] have we the SRU freeze today? [14:54] andyrock: no, today was supposed to be quantal freeze, but we'll do that tomorrow [14:54] so i can SRU it this evening... [14:54] i can ask someone to review it [14:55] andyrock: the SRU freeze will be probably be around end of the week if anything [14:55] cool [14:56] so i think i have to SRU 2-3 branches [14:56] andyrock: ooo, thanks! ;) [14:56] np [15:02] sil2100, davidcalle: video lens new SRU uploaded, thanks [15:03] seb128, thank you [15:04] seb128: thanks \o/ [15:05] Trevinho: areyou getting the test errors? [15:06] jaytaoko: only when enabling ibus-daemon [15:06] jaytaoko: however, I've fixed the first branch... [15:06] jaytaoko: fixing the second now [15:06] Trevinho: ok [15:07] jaytaoko: this should be fine for merging, tough https://code.launchpad.net/~3v1n0/nux/text-entry-meta-filters [15:10] Trevinho: ok. so I need to get two nux branches, right? [15:11] Trevinho: first lp:~3v1n0/nux/text-entry-meta-filters and then lp:~3v1n0/nux/text-entry-virtual-clipboard [15:11] jaytaoko: there were two branches... with dependency [15:11] jaytaoko: yep [15:11] Trevinho: right! so I am merging them with nux trunk before compiling [15:15] didrocks: if we get this ibus fix merged into unity and nux, would you mind doing the freeze tomorrow? [15:16] sil2100: sure, a pity that wasn't dealt before [15:16] sil2100: or we can freeze now [15:17] then, they get the release critical branches with "UNBLOCK" [15:17] which can be the case of the ibus onces [15:22] didrocks: that wouldn't be a problem? [15:22] i.e. freezing for a whole night? [15:24] didrocks: sorry, I should have done this before... But I wanted to finish other stuff.. [15:25] jaytaoko: the problem with tests when ibus is running is that... we use an async call to check if an event has been filtered... this can cause troubles, since we always return true in IBusIMEContext::FilterKeyEvent [15:25] Trevinho: are your branch fixing a release critical issue? [15:25] jaytaoko: well, the ibus break is critical... [15:25] Trevinho: hmm! that is why I think we should get bschaefer [15:26] jaytaoko: I agree [15:26] sil2100: how much trouble is it for you to postpone the release? [15:27] sil2100: as you wish for the time of freezing [15:27] sil2100: just hope that they won't introduce regressions if we don't freeze :) [15:28] jaytaoko: well, hm, we had plans on releasing unity stack this week [15:28] jaytaoko: how much more time do you need? [15:30] sil2100: it is to leave time for bschaefer to have a look at the branches before they are merged [15:31] jaytaoko, have a look at which branches? [15:31] jaytaoko: this can be done - would you ensure that Brandon looks at those today? [15:31] Ah! [15:31] ;) [15:31] bschaefer: hi [15:31] sil2100, hello! [15:31] bschaefer: hello [15:31] jaytaoko, hello, and good morning haha [15:32] bschaefer: can you review these branches: https://code.launchpad.net/~3v1n0/nux/text-entry-virtual-clipboard/+merge/113145 [15:32] yes [15:32] jaytaoko, let me take sometime to run some test on it [15:33] bschaefer: thanks [15:33] sil2100, np! [15:33] jaytaoko, bschaefer: could you guys try merging the tested fix till tomorrow? [15:33] Since then we'll just do the release tomorrow [15:33] till tomorrow or by tomorrow? [15:34] didrocks: would you prefer to freeze today? You have more experience here ;) [15:34] bschaefer: so that it's merged in by tomorrow morning [15:34] bschaefer: since we need this fixed for the release, it's currently a blocking issue [15:34] sil2100, yup, its 8:30 am here, Ill make sure it is merge by then [15:34] bschaefer: \o/ [15:34] bschaefer: and run the "make check" please. [15:35] jaytaoko, will do! [15:35] Damn, a nasty storm here [15:37]