=== mmrazik is now known as mmrazik|lunch === mmrazik|lunch is now known as mmrazik [16:06] anyone up for a MOTU meeting? [16:07] o/ [16:08] just the two of us? oh well, this should be quick [16:09] #startmeeting weekly MOTU meeting [16:09] Meeting started Thu Sep 6 16:09:16 2012 UTC. The chair is tumbleweed. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. [16:09] Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | weekly MOTU meeting Meeting | Current topic: [16:09] Agenda: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Meetings [16:09] tumbleweed, I missed the previous meeting though I have news from DAT side [16:10] #topic review of previous action items === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | weekly MOTU meeting Meeting | Current topic: review of previous action items [16:10] #link https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/Meetings/2012-08-23 [16:10] hrm, there were none [16:11] #topic Killing off sqlite 2 (src:sqlite) === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | weekly MOTU meeting Meeting | Current topic: Killing off sqlite 2 (src:sqlite) [16:11] yes [16:11] micahg: around? [16:12] oh, well, if he turns up... [16:12] #topic Update from DeveloperAdvisoryTeam === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | weekly MOTU meeting Meeting | Current topic: Update from DeveloperAdvisoryTeam [16:12] coolbhavi? [16:13] o/ [16:14] we can come back to that, after this [16:14] I'm here too :) [16:14] not many news from the DAT, business as usual :) [16:14] yep tumbleweed there was one of action items this UDS to give a session on DAT this UOW/UDW I took a session this UDW reg the same logs are here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/devweek1208/DevAdvisoryTeam [16:15] apart from that no other news [16:15] ah yes, good job coolbhavi [16:15] thanks [16:15] #topic Killing off sqlite 2 (src:sqlite) === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | weekly MOTU meeting Meeting | Current topic: Killing off sqlite 2 (src:sqlite) [16:15] micahg: all yours [16:15] nothing new yet [16:16] well, xnox fixed the tracker a little more to get us down to ~25 packages [16:16] that sounds doable, with some effort [16:16] there are decisions to be made. There is the whole stack for working with Palm phones (original Palm) [16:16] if we drop that, porting the rest should be easy [16:17] yeah, I probably won't be able to do much with it until the end of the month though, so if someone else wans to, feel free [16:17] was it like half of those 25 packages? [16:17] xnox: have you spoken with Debian at all? [16:17] micahg: that is the next action to do [16:18] xnox: you taking an action for that? [16:19] sure =) [16:19] what's the plam stack called? [16:19] gpe* [16:20] #action xnox to speak to the debian gpe maintainers about dropping it (it depends on sqlite) [16:20] ACTION: xnox to speak to the debian gpe maintainers about dropping it (it depends on sqlite) [16:20] moving on [16:20] #topic Review UbuntuDevelopment/BugFixingInitiative === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | weekly MOTU meeting Meeting | Current topic: Review UbuntuDevelopment/BugFixingInitiative [16:20] I had a chat with a couple of people in #ubuntu-devel and wrote about it to the mailing list [16:20] anything this week? I think not? [16:21] oh, yes saw that [16:21] there were concerns that some fixes would better be sent to Debian [16:21] yeah. [16:21] I added fontfixing & seems like some/most have been sponsored now. [16:21] and also that the sponsoring queue might fill up with trivial fixes, which I feel is a lesser issue [16:21] thanks xnox! [16:21] Do we need to check remaining $font packages to see if they are ok or not? [16:21] I wrote an article for the packaging guide to make it easier to make a decision where a specific bug fix should go [16:22] have we seen a reasonable influx since UDW? [16:22] xnox: well, someone should probably :), perhaps an archive scan? [16:22] I hope that will help solve the issue of debian fixes going to ubuntu [16:22] I've certainly noticed some trivial things in the queue that could have come from UDW [16:22] tumbleweed, yes - there's a lot of interest - next week I hope to start hangout sessions, etc to help get more people involved [16:22] micahg: meh. Grep Contents, install it and either run font-config over them & launch some app =) [16:23] xnox: is the problem only visible at run time, or should a regex detect it? (think lintian lab scan) [16:24] that's all I have for now [16:24] that's all we have on the agenda [16:24] #topic any other business? === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology | weekly MOTU meeting Meeting | Current topic: any other business? [16:25] not from me [16:25] dholbach, timings of the hangout please? I'd love to join :) [16:25] coolbhavi, not sure yet, but I'll let you know :) [16:25] micahg: lintian can, not sure if it already does. [16:25] dholbach, sure thanks! [16:26] ok, let's wind this up [16:26] #endmeeting === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [16:26] Meeting ended Thu Sep 6 16:26:25 2012 UTC. [16:26] Minutes (wiki): http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-09-06-16.09.moin.txt [16:26] Minutes (html): http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-09-06-16.09.html [16:26] thanks everyone [16:26] thanks tumbleweed [16:26] thanks :) [16:27] * coolbhavi hopes to start the motu-school sessions again but got busy in arb-duties [16:59] is the cc meeting now? [16:59] yep [16:59] aloha [17:00] who do we have here from CC and ARB? [17:00] pleia2: beuno ping [17:00] Gwaihir: ping [17:00] o/ [17:01] so we have 3 CC so far [17:01] dholbach, I am here from the ARB [17:01] * beuno is otp and will be for a while [17:01] wendar, ping [17:01] highvoltage, stgraber: around? [17:02] \o [17:02] hey :) [17:02] let's get started then :) [17:02] hey wendar :) [17:02] #startmeeting [17:02] Meeting started Thu Sep 6 17:02:23 2012 UTC. The chair is dholbach. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. [17:02] Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired [17:02] #topic Meet-Up with the ARB === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Meet-Up with the ARB [17:02] how are you all doing? :) [17:02] great, thanks :) [17:03] I am fine dholbach :) how about you? [17:03] Thanks for coming folks [17:03] doing well, thanks :) [17:03] how is the restaffing of the ARB going? [17:03] hey dholbach [17:03] hey highvoltage [17:03] I saw that Alessio volunteered [17:03] (my attention span is really chopped up today) [17:04] is this the CC catch-up with the ARB? [17:04] yes [17:04] highvoltage: yup [17:04] great. [17:04] wendar: so how are things in the ARB going? [17:06] highvoltage, coolbhavi: I guess you can answer the questions too :) [17:06] anyone can [17:06] true [17:06] sorry [17:06] well, technically I resigned from the ARB a few weeks back and just opportunistically doing a little when I have a chance [17:07] (and keeping up with the list) [17:07] how are you dealing with the aftermath of the app showdown? [17:07] but I'm not sure I'm the best person to comment on it. the arb is kind of complicated :) [17:07] I saw a lot of activity in the last few weeks on the mailing list [17:07] dholbach, thanks! we are just going through the queue as a backdrop of successful app showdown :) [17:08] highvoltage: in what way, I note this is the 2nd meeting of the ARB as we got to meet ye last cycle, so have things changed? improved or? [17:08] it was successful indeed :) [17:08] I can vouch for the fact that coolbhavi has been amazing, reviewing apps at a record pace [17:08] dholbach: indeed, there's been a lot of progress, I believe the majority of the apps had received feedback on them, a few of them have been published and I believe the majority of them still needs to be, but I think that's going ok [17:08] and highvoltage managed 50 in a couple of weeks, which was super-human [17:08] thanks wendar :) [17:08] * highvoltage thought it was more than that :) [17:09] highvoltage: 75? it was outrageous anyway [17:09] highvoltage, 53 votes as per the stats go :) [17:09] I think it was around 90 iirc. being at debconf helped :) [17:09] awesome :) [17:09] I do know that when I was working full-time on the queue in Feb and March, I was able to battle it down to only 20 apps in the queue [17:10] but, my current job leaves me very little time for open source work, so I'm not much help anymore [17:10] did recent apps get a bit easier to review? [17:11] yes, there have been some new tools put in place that help [17:11] btw I am trying to clear the amount of apps which have +3 votes by uploading them whenever I find time [17:11] and many of the App Showdown submissions were cookie-cutter Quickly apps [17:11] coolbhavi: thanks! [17:12] * dholbach likes cookie cutters :) [17:12] yup, they simplify many things [17:12] wendar, +1 again quickly is quick to review :) [17:12] how was the response for the call for nominations? [17:13] one, who looks like a great candidate [17:13] * coolbhavi saw one application on the list from alessio [17:13] dholbach: re apps being easier to review, the fixes in quickly helped a lot. it would've been awesome if quickly was fixed before the showdown :) [17:13] wendar: do you think it'll be easy to fill the roles, are more people expiring ? [17:13] maybe it'd make sense to reach out to some arb helpers? [17:14] unfortunately, I don't think it will be, and we really need the help [17:14] with the round of expiring memberships on Sept 13, we'll be down to 2 members [17:14] why do you think it'll be hard? [17:14] the work load? or is the board big enough? [17:15] with the one new candidate, that'll be 3, which is the bare minimum needed to approve an app (and means every member has to vote on every app) [17:15] dholbach, seeing the response I think reaching out to helpers might be a good thing to do [17:15] and maybe blog about it again? [17:15] wendar: doesn;t leave much for wiggle room [17:15] dholbach: yes, new helpers would be good, or figuring out where the helpers we had during the App Showdown went? [17:15] czajkowski, and the deadline was sept 5th IIRC [17:16] maybe it'd make sense to mail them? [17:16] dholbach: I'm afraid we burned them out, or they got discouraged when they put in all that work preparing apps that then blocked on voting [17:16] for new nominations [17:16] is anyone from the expiring ARB members planning to come back again? [17:16] czajkowski: yes, I think the workload is daunting right now [17:16] wendar: so if you take away the app contest, how many apps would you normaly have? [17:17] wendar, +1 [17:17] czajkowski: of course, spreading that out over more members helps, but it's tough to recruit for such a workload [17:17] did the ARB know the app contest was happening, so ye could plan ? [17:18] maybe the new members could try to reach out to the app developer community for some help with the reviews? [17:18] dholbach: ajmitch will return. I'm not an Ubuntu Developer yet, so not qualified. (I'm one of the people who encouraged making UD a requirement, because I think it really should be) [17:18] that makes it harder [17:18] czajkowski, yes we were contacted by jono [17:18] dholbach: coolbhavi's term is not ending until next year, and no one else is returning [17:19] :/ [17:19] czajkowski: yes, it would have helped to have more advance notice of the app contest, we were scrambling at the last minute [17:19] czajkowski: though, I don't think anyone expected it would be *that* successful [17:19] czajkowski, but we were taken off by the success it had because it was all quick I believe [17:20] nods [17:20] maybe it'd make sense to extend the call for nominations then [17:20] czajkowski: our usuall submission rate was about 5/week, which was managable by one person (me) full-time [17:20] yea so that is a massive jump [17:20] wendar: coolbhavi highvoltage do you think extending the deadline and possibly increasing the ARB would be a good idea [17:21] I note there has been a lengthy discussion on ubuntu-devel on the ARB process [17:21] czajkowski, certainly +1 here we need members [17:21] Improvements to the ABR process will help, but we are talking 6+ months of development work to get the tools in place [17:22] in the mean-time we do still have a stack of developers waiting for a response, and it seems unfair to leave them waiting [17:22] how invovolved were the aRB in the draftng of this process, I guess ye would know from hands on experience ? [17:22] sure, in the meantime, there needs to be an active team of ARB helpers + members [17:22] by "extending the deadline" do you mean allowing more nominations after Sept 5th? [17:22] wendar: yes [17:22] dholbach, yes agreed [17:23] wendar: we could extend it another week or 10 days [17:23] do you think that would help ? [17:23] I'm happy to extend the deadline as long as needed, but what do we do about the expiring members? [17:23] we can't approve apps with only 2 members [17:23] yes that is a bit of an issue alright. [17:24] and holding up apps with the vote, increases the backlog [17:24] I'm sure the TB can extend the expiration period [17:24] czajkowski: the ARB did review the proposal before it was posted to ubuntu-devel, and contributed substantial changes [17:24] of course I can't speak for the TB, but the CC has done this various times before [17:24] wendar: good to hear. [17:24] and if only for a ocuple of weeks to get things organised [17:24] dholbach: +1 [17:24] wendar, can we mail luke to get him involved here? I havent seen him for ages though [17:25] coolbhavi: I don't expect much from him, and have been considering him "expired" with the rest, even though his term lasts until next year [17:25] hmm [17:25] in that case we should reach out to him [17:25] I can do that if you like [17:26] coolbhavi: he signed up when we promised "no more than 5 hours/week" so I don't think he had enough time available [17:26] ok [17:26] dholbach: you can, or I can, but be gentle [17:26] of course [17:27] dholbach: it's really just a question of whether he has any time, and if not well let him go with no hard feelings [17:27] exactly [17:27] I can also help liaise with the TB to get an extension of your terms, so there's a bit more time for nominations [17:27] how do you like the new spec - do you think that'd be our best shot at solving the apps problem? [17:27] I hate to make the one really good candidate wait for more nominations [17:28] could we recruit him and then do another round of nominations? [17:28] yes, I guess that should be possible too [17:28] dholbach, that would be great but I go with wendar here [17:28] I can start the conversation with the TB tomorrow [17:28] sure, that sounds good [17:29] excellent [17:29] I'm not sure if the other members want their terms extended, but I'm certainly happy to continue until we restaff [17:29] cool, I'll include everyone in the discussion [17:29] dholbach, great [17:30] how do you like the new spec - do you think that'd be our best shot at solving the apps problem? [17:31] As I've mentoned elsewhere, I don't 100% agree with the new spec. But, we desperately need some work in the direction of automated packaging/sandboxing. [17:31] agreed [17:31] And I'm confident we can hit a good agreement for the next 6-month cycle of work. [17:31] coolbhavi, highvoltage - how do you feel about it? [17:32] dholbach, by an initial read its much better than existing one and one part I liked was removing manual reviews which were the bottlenecks this showdown I believe [17:32] I'm actually really encouraged by the discussion on the ubuntu-devel list. It's lengthy, but the tone is quite healthy. A night and day difference from the initial discussion when the ARB was launched. :) [17:33] and it seems to be quite focused on one particular part of it :) [17:34] dholbach: the new spec? well, dropping the /opt requirements will bring more problems than it solves, afaict [17:34] highvoltage: yes, I'm also in favor of keeping the /opt requirement [17:34] it will be interesting to see how the discussion works out and which new solutions will be presented [17:34] * coolbhavi seconds highvoltage [17:35] I think all my questions are answered - Gwaihir, czajkowski, pleia2? [17:35] I don't like the opt requirement, it is inconvenient, it does add a challenge, it does make it harder to get that same package into the debian/ubuntu archives, but it's also the only way you can prevent filename clashes reliably [17:35] no, I'm good for now [17:36] dholbach, I'm good for now too [17:36] no I'm ok thanks. [17:36] ok, I'm happy to help with the restaffing [17:36] I hope we get some more good candidates :) [17:37] is there anything else from you, the ARB, which we CC folks could help with? [17:38] dholbach, I'm fine here as my only concern was restaffing [17:38] we really appreciate the time to talk, it's helpful [17:38] thanks for coming :) [17:38] cool :) [17:38] thanks a lot! :) [17:38] wendar, I have a suggestion here [17:39] coolbhavi: yup? [17:39] maybe we can elaborate the ubuntu developer requirement and state that we arent looking out for MOTU/Core dev explicitly as a requirement? [17:40] then we can get more applications I guess [17:40] the call for nominations did say "not a requirement" [17:40] * ScottK thought it was supposed to be a requirement. [17:40] but, we can certainly work to make the second call even more welcoming [17:41] ScottK: being an Ubuntu Developer is a requirement [17:41] OK. [17:41] ScottK: being MOTU/core-dev isn't [17:41] Right. That bug still exists. [17:41] yes but the general feeling is ubuntu developer straight goes to MOTU/core dev [17:41] ScottK, +1 [17:42] well, they could be a Kubuntu developer [17:42] that'd be fine [17:42] or a DD [17:42] (as well as UD) [17:42] fine with me though :) [17:42] :) [17:42] perfect [17:42] anything else or shall we move on? [17:43] nothing from here, thanks! [17:43] thanks again :) [17:43] #topic any other business? === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: any other business? [17:43] dholbach and the CC: thanks for your time! [17:44] the only thing I have on my list is the CoC update and I think it's still with YokoZar - I mailed him today about it [17:44] but that's all I have [17:44] anyone else? [17:44] nope [17:44] all good thanks dholbach [17:44] nope [17:45] alright then [17:45] have a great rest of your day everyone [17:45] and thanks for coming [17:45] #endmeeting === meetingology changed the topic of #ubuntu-meeting to: Ubuntu Meeting Grounds | Calendar/Scheduled meetings: http://fridge.ubuntu.com/calendar | Logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs | Meetingology documentation: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology [17:45] Meeting ended Thu Sep 6 17:45:10 2012 UTC. [17:45] Minutes (wiki): http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-09-06-17.02.moin.txt [17:45] Minutes (html): http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2012/ubuntu-meeting.2012-09-06-17.02.html [18:01] alrighty [18:01] time for the accomplishments meeting [18:01] #startmeeting [18:01] Meeting started Thu Sep 6 18:01:26 2012 UTC. The chair is jono. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. [18:01] Available commands: #accept #accepted #action #agree #agreed #chair #commands #endmeeting #endvote #halp #help #idea #info #link #lurk #meetingname #meetingtopic #nick #progress #rejected #replay #restrictlogs #save #startmeeting #subtopic #topic #unchair #undo #unlurk #vote #voters #votesrequired [18:01] cielak, s-fox all set? [18:01] yes [18:01] yup [18:01] no mfisch it seems [18:01] so I figured we could use this as an opportunity to discuss the release [18:02] I have been a bit out of the loop due to travel recently [18:02] cielak, what is your take on the maturity of the daemon/. [18:02] ? [18:02] the daemon is fine [18:02] it seems like all the bugs we wanted to fix are fixed [18:02] there is only one low-priority bug left [18:03] but it does not matter much [18:03] that can wait until 0.4 I think [18:03] what is your take on the viewer? [18:03] viewer is worse [18:03] apparently the Gtk spacing issue is still present [18:03] right, but is this a release blocker? [18:03] I see the spacing but there is not much spacing there [18:04] for mfisch all trophies are displaying in one collumn [18:04] oh I see [18:04] is he on Precise? [18:04] that looks very wrong [18:04] I am not sure, but that is probable [18:04] we should fix this on Precise for sure [18:05] I also need to test if the Quickly changes work on Precise - I have a branch, I just couldnt test it last week [18:05] i have the same problem [18:05] will test today on my Precise machine [18:05] s-fox, are you on Precise? [18:06] 12.04 jono [18:06] s-fox, cool [18:06] s-fox, can you do me a favor and check out https://code.launchpad.net/~jonobacon/ubuntu-accomplishments-viewer/quickly-upgrade-test and tell me it runs [18:06] obviously start the viewer first [18:06] oops [18:06] start the daemon first [18:07] so it seems when we fix the bug on Precise we get it in Quantal, and vice versa [18:07] looks like a gtk upgrade introduced that change [18:07] i'll check it out after the meeting. [18:08] cielak, ok, so this sounds like we need to take it to seb [18:08] s-fox, if you can check that would be great and then I can commit the fix [18:09] here! [18:09] hey mfisch [18:09] hopefully that will be fixed quickly [18:09] we are just discussing the spacing bug [18:09] hi mfisch :) [18:09] ok [18:09] jono: I think it should be fixed for 0.3 [18:09] mfisch, unfortunately it sounds like a GTK issue [18:09] so we are blocking on it [18:10] I wonder if it is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gtk+3.0/+bug/1036455 [18:10] Launchpad bug 1036455 in gtk+3.0 (Ubuntu) "GTK Rendering Issue (potentially a ScrolledWindow problem)" [Undecided,Fix committed] [18:10] but unfortunately I dont have any great solutions [18:10] but if this is a gtk issue that is present in quantal [18:10] then it is actually correct that we encounter this bug on quantal and not precise (which was the case before) [18:11] I see it on precise now [18:11] as of about 2 weeks ago [18:11] cielak, right, so I guess we should get the code working for Precise and then try to get the bug fixed in Quantal [18:11] as quantal is not yet released, we may want to fix the issue in precise, and release a broken viewer in quantal [18:11] maybe the gtk bug fix will fix the already released viewer too [18:11] but if not [18:12] is the issue that the space reserved for the icons is too large? [18:12] then it won't be a big matter, as quantal is not considered as stable [18:12] cielak, agreed [18:12] there are two linked issues [18:12] mfisch, you are on Precise? [18:12] jono: yeah [18:12] mfisch, can you do me a favor and check out https://code.launchpad.net/~jonobacon/ubuntu-accomplishments-viewer/quickly-upgrade-test and tell me it runs [18:12] reserved space being too large and icons displayed in a single column [18:12] jono: yeah [18:12] mfisch, that branch has my quickly upgrade changes in it [18:12] thanks [18:13] so it sounds like this is the only bug we need to fix before release [18:13] ooh I need to also hide the web gallery prefs [18:13] we'll also need to disable some functionality [18:13] exactly [18:13] did we discuss the other "high" bug in the viewer? [18:13] I will do that today [18:13] I have the test plan about ready to go too [18:13] and I need to suggest something concerning that disabling [18:13] cielak, oh? [18:13] that we forked the code into separate series for 0.3 and trunk [18:14] so it would work this way: [18:14] 1) the code is forked into 0.3 branch and trunk branch [18:14] 2) the code in 0.3 branch has that functionality disabled [18:14] cielak, yup [18:14] 3) after releasing 0.3 we work in trunk branch [18:14] cielak, totally agree [18:15] so why don't I fork the branches today [18:15] for the viewer? [18:15] 4) when we want, we can return to 0.3 to release it again [18:15] or everything [18:15] just the viewer [18:15] ok [18:15] cielak, well we probably want to fork for the daemon and viewer [18:15] for we do not plan to do any post-release changes in daemon [18:15] so post release we can release a point release if needed [18:15] do we? [18:15] I think it is unlikely, but forking won't hurt us [18:15] agreed [18:15] true [18:16] I don't think we need to fork UCA [18:16] me either [18:16] ok so one other update [18:16] the RT ticket for t.u.c has been escalated [18:16] they will be working on it soon [18:16] we don't use milestones for UCA anyway ;) [18:16] cielak, indeed :-) [18:16] how about the ticket concerning ubuntu forums? [18:16] cielak, I haven't seen any progress on that [18:17] my priority right now is t.u.c so we can release a bunch of things [18:17] if s-fox can keep on top of the other ticket, that would be great [18:17] but there is nothing to keep on [18:17] cielak, I mean encouraging them to focus on [18:18]