[01:17] <goddard> whats up gangsters
[01:26] <bkerensa> tgm4883: yes :) even more going on in private e-mail then on the news scene
[02:30] <goddard> the new thunderbird features are nice
[02:33] <bkerensa> goddard: which?
[02:34] <goddard> chat for one
[02:46] <goddard> bkerensa: you used it
[02:47] <bkerensa> goddard: I only use it for email
[02:47] <goddard> what do you use on irc
[03:22] <bkerensa> goddard: I use xchat
[03:30] <goddard> bkerensa: its very similar
[03:32] <bkerensa> goddard: Yeah but I use a python plugin for xchat to do ircop stuff on freenode and plus I crash Thunderbird far too much for it to be my irc client :)
[03:53] <tgm4883> bkerensa, I can't say I 100% disagree with all the hoopla
[03:54] <tgm4883> less from a trust/privacy standpoint, and more from a "there needs to be a separate lens for this"
[03:54] <bkerensa> tgm4883: also despite marks post and comment saying there is a privacy policy
[03:54] <bkerensa> I can assure that is not true
[03:54] <bkerensa> there is not currently any privacy policy that covers how Canonical handles the data
[03:54] <bkerensa> :)
[03:54] <tgm4883> well not a public one ayway
[03:54] <bkerensa> in fact in my blog post about zeitgeist I mentioned this and mpt from Canonical Design confirmed
[03:54] <tgm4883> which since this isn't released yet, probably not necessary.
[03:55] <bkerensa> well
[03:55] <bkerensa> they are collecting data now
[03:55] <bkerensa> and handling it
[03:55] <bkerensa> there must be thousands of people running 12.10 already
[03:55] <tgm4883> in either case, I still don't think it should be in the main home lens
[03:55] <bkerensa> +1
[03:55] <tgm4883> could be thousands of people that don't care though
[03:55] <bkerensa> I wonder how what some of the local canonical folks think about it being in the home dash
[03:56] <bkerensa> I would personally not mind a shopping lens
[03:56] <bkerensa> but totally seperate
[03:57] <tgm4883> bkerensa, well supposedly there is a separate lens
[03:57] <tgm4883> since the package name is unity-lens-shopping or something to that effect
[03:58] <tgm4883> although strictly speaking, it's the scope that would need to specify if it's available to global search
[03:59] <tgm4883> personally I'd just like them to stop breaking my scope in 12.10
[04:32] <bkerensa> tgm4883: yeah and the lens also pings productsearch.ubuntu.com every two minutes regardless if you are doing searches
[04:32] <bkerensa> tgm4883: what is your scope?
[04:42] <tgm4883> bkerensa, the mythtv scope
[04:42] <tgm4883> it's been broken twice now in 12.10 due to changes they've made
[04:46] <goddard> what does mozilla use for its plugin system
[04:48] <goddard> bkerensa: thats werid my thunderbird never crashes
[04:48] <goddard> how do you make it crash?
[05:28] <bkerensa> goddard: deleting 4000 e-mails at a time
[05:28] <bkerensa> :)
[05:28] <goddard> ahh haven't tried that yet
[08:53] <bkerensa> gnight
[15:22] <nathwill> hi all
[15:23] <nathwill> bkerensa, not running proposed
[15:38] <nathwill> should i?
[18:32] <bkerensa> nathwill: idk up to you
[18:32] <nathwill> why would i want to?
[18:33] <bkerensa> nathwill: idk get proposed updates?
[18:33] <nathwill> lol
[18:33] <nathwill> ok... more breakage?
[18:33] <bkerensa> I have had very little breakage
[18:34] <bkerensa> nothing has broken for me I find remotely essential
[18:34] <bkerensa> :)
[18:34] <nathwill> :)
[18:34] <bkerensa> nathwill: so I made front page Slashdot, HN, Reddit, Distrowatch
[18:34] <nathwill> cool. might do it
[18:34] <bkerensa> and some site called tweakers.net
[18:34] <nathwill> oh?
[18:34] <bkerensa> lol
[18:34] <bkerensa> nathwill: yeah
[18:34] <nathwill> is this your "quit fud'ing bitches" article?
[18:34] <bkerensa> yes
[18:34] <nathwill> it was a good article, i read it this wknd
[18:35] <bkerensa> but I did get one thing sorted which was there is no privacy policy
[18:35] <nathwill> did it cripple your site?
[18:35] <bkerensa> :)
[18:35] <bkerensa> so last night Mark put me in touch with Canonical's General Counsel
[18:35] <nathwill> well they should do a better job explaining where the data's coming from
[18:35] <nathwill> interesting
[18:35] <bkerensa> and they were not aware of this lens or the privacy manager
[18:35] <nathwill> haha
[18:35] <nathwill> wow
[18:35] <bkerensa> so idk I guess they are writing a privacy policy now
[18:35] <bkerensa> :)
[18:36] <nathwill> yeah... i maean, an easy "online search results" toggle would be good on the privacy page
[18:36] <nathwill> and i think make people ease up a bit
[18:37] <nathwill> i do really like the previews, and really like the incorporation of software-center info
[18:38] <nathwill> it's really shaping up into a sexy desktop
[18:38] <bkerensa> yeah
[18:38] <bkerensa> I would prefer the shopping lens have its own area though instead of being in the home
[18:38] <bkerensa> and more shopping providers would be nice so you could find the best price
[18:38] <bkerensa> :D
[18:38] <nathwill> well, home incorporates results from everywhere...
[18:39] <nathwill> so... even if it had its own lense, to keep the paradigm, it'd have to be shown on home too
[18:39] <nathwill> i agree the best way to exclude is use the specific lens relevant to the search you're performing
[19:41] <bkerensa> c_smith: When you are having flgrx issues is it on 12.10?
[19:52] <goddard> the amazon lens seems cool
[19:52] <goddard> i love amazon
[19:53] <bkerensa> slangasek: if I see a patch on a foundation bug and it is irrelevant to the source package can I remove the patch tag so nobody wastes time reviewing it?
[19:53] <bkerensa> The bug in question is Bug #1055433
[19:59] <slangasek> bkerensa: if the "patch" is not a patch, then by all means yes
[19:59] <slangasek> bkerensa: what do you mean "on a foundation bug", though?
[19:59] <slangasek> acerhk isn't a package the foundations team supports
[19:59] <bkerensa> slangasek: not a foundation bug I don't think but your bot commented on it. .
[19:59] <slangasek> ah, ok
[20:00] <bkerensa> slangasek: the patch does not appear to be sane since it applies to a file not found in the source package
[20:00] <slangasek> the bot automatically adds a patch tag for all new "patch" attachments
[20:00] <bkerensa> ah
[20:00] <slangasek> it's housekeeping, not gospel ;)
[20:00] <bkerensa> ;)
[20:01] <bkerensa> slangasek: so for bugs we have patches on is it more likely they will land if they had a MP over a attached patch?
[20:01] <slangasek> I don't know
[20:02] <bkerensa> k