[00:04] <thinkndev> What does it mean when "Packaging Branch Status: OUT-OF-DATE" occurs when bzr-branching a project.
[00:04] <thinkndev> *package.
[00:06] <ScottK> It means what you got is out of date and not what's currently in the archive.
[00:10] <thinkndev> Ah, so it's not good when that happens.  How can this be fixed?
[00:10] <thinkndev> I've been looking at this right now
[00:10] <thinkndev> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier/+bug/934517
[00:11] <ScottK> Whining at someone on the appropriate mailing list, which is, I think ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com.
[00:11] <ScottK> Myself, I just stay away from the branches and pull the source from the archive.
[00:11] <ScottK> There use is entirely optional.
[00:12] <thinkndev> ahh, I see.
[00:13] <thinkndev> I'm new to development, btw.  Where can I find the update-notifier archive?
[00:15] <ScottK> If you look at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/update-notifier you'll see the most recent version is 0.119ubuntu15
[00:15] <thinkndev> yeah, and from bzr, i pulled 0.119ubuntu10
[00:15] <ScottK> If you have the package devscripts installed, you can get it with dget https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/primary/+files/update-notifier_0.119ubuntu15.dsc
[00:17] <thinkndev> what is a .dsc file?
[00:17] <ScottK> It's part of the Debian source package (the format we use)
[00:18] <ScottK> dget will use that to also download the rest of the package.
[00:19] <thinkndev> from what I heard, it contains metadata of a package.
[00:20] <ScottK> It does
[00:28] <thinkndev> Now, reading the bug description, it talks that the problem exists in Precise alpha.  Does that mean it's reproducible in future versions?
[00:28] <thinkndev> Is the precise stable considered as precise alpha?
[00:29] <RAOF> Unless it's been accidentally fixed (or fixded but the bug being missed) it probably still exists.
[00:32] <thinkndev> how can I reproduce this specific problem? The directions don't seem suffice...
[00:37] <RAOF> If you can't reproduce it, then maybe it's fixed?
[00:38] <RAOF> Ah. String fix.
[00:38] <RAOF> You can see whether those strings referenced have changed.
[06:56] <dholbach> good morning
[17:52] <paultag> Anyone know offhand how the Ubuntu theming is handled? E.g. for GDM, etc? I know desktop-base isn't used
[18:06] <stgraber> paultag: well, for gdm I doubt there's really much modification as ubuntu no longer uses it. The rest should be covered by ubuntu-artwork
[18:07] <paultag> stgraber: ACK, thank you
[18:57] <trijntje> Hi all, before I figured out how to properly use ppa's, I messed around a lot and deleted a bunch of ppa's. Is there a way to revive the default ppa ~user/+archive/ppa after it has been deleted?
[18:58] <paultag> trijntje: you might consider asking in #launchpad, but they use very exacting terms about PPA deletions being 4evah
[18:58] <paultag> trijntje: but the LP guys should be able to explain it better then that
[18:59] <Laney> I think it would just be easier to move on from that name
[18:59] <Laney> call it phoenix
[18:59] <trijntje> Yeah, I was afraid of that, trial and error is not always the best method I guess ;)
[19:17] <paultag> nope :)
[19:17] <paultag> Laney++
[19:19] <trijntje> I asked in launchpad, it's only possible to half-ressurect one, and then mess around with urls for the rest of your life ;)
[19:20] <paultag> mini-dinstall 4 lyfe :)
[19:25] <arand> Yeah, if you go to the deleted ppa page and append /+edit to the url it appears as though you can revive it, it will remain a tad undead though.