[20:13] some remarks about the upgrade process: the user is asked (several times) if he want to keep/replace certain config files. There is no way to know when those questions will pop up - makes the upgrade last a lot longer than necessary unless I watch it all the time - against what package would I file a bug in this case? [20:15] I think there isn't a clear cut answer for that. I guess all packages which got new config files? [20:16] Then again, I'm no developer. [20:17] I think I'd go for update-manager, because you the "end-user" got a problem with the upgrade progress guntbert [20:18] MrChrisDruif: will do, thx for the advice (finding the right package is sometimes the hardest part of a good bug report :) [20:19] No probs. === glebihan_ is now known as glebihan [20:44] on a totally different topic: what might be the right place/situation where the ubuntu gods (iow mark shuttleworth) would be really listening to the concerns about unity-lens-shopping being opt-out instead of opt-in (as it should be) [20:46] I read his blog and the discussion there, and he seems not to hear what many are talking about [20:49] I don't think that his response would be any different if you wrote a letter or sent him an email. [20:49] He has his talks on IRC once a month I think. But talking to Canonical staff also worth your time. [20:49] jono_; ^ [20:50] guntbert: there is a Ask Mark session at 10:00UTC on the 25th [20:50] tomorrow* [20:50] I am sure he will get many questions about it then [20:54] IdleOne: MrChrisDruif: I was not so concerned about throwing my "very special" voice into the melee - and contacting him personally about this was mot my intention - where is that session held? [20:54] in #ubuntu-classroom http://is.gd/8rtIi | [20:54] the times on the calendar are UTC [20:58] IdleOne: thx, I'll have to read the logs - lesson time :-) [20:59] same here, that will be at 6:00AM my time and i don't think I will be awake [21:00] Noon, I'm at work at that time ^_^ [21:03] guntbert, hey [21:03] Mark is well aware of the concerns, I can assure youi [21:03] he reads the blogs, discussions, and mailing list threads [21:04] hey jono_ : I am sure he is aware, but his responses didn't sound as if he really had listened [21:04] guntbert, how so? [21:05] I think he responded appropriately, he just disagreed with much of the concern [21:06] well in the blog he didn't adress the opt-out vs opt-in policy at all, and the "we have root" was just outrageous in my opinion [21:06] guntbert, to be fair, his point about root was simply a point about trust [21:06] Ubuntu developers do have root...packages run as root [21:07] he was making the point that it is fair for our users to trust Ubuntu developers [21:07] as we have always had root packages and this trust has always served our users well [21:07] guntbert, in terms of the opt out thing, this was address in Cristian Parrino's post [21:07] http://blog.canonical.com/2012/10/12/searching-in-the-dash-in-ubuntu-12-10-an-update/ [21:08] * guntbert hadn't seen that post yet [21:08] The we have root comment was meant to be cheaky [21:08] jono_: to trust someone [21:09] IdleOne, indeed [21:09] jono_: to trust someone not to mess my system is a completely different sort of trust than to trust them with my data [21:09] it was not meant to be literal, language barriers can make it difficult to grasp the humour that was intended. [21:10] guntbert, right, and I agree, but the point he made was that Ubuntu is built on a foundation of trust, and if we have managed to handle that trust well for eight years, it should provide some reassurance to our users [21:10] guntbert: although you do have a firm grasp of the English language I believe that some of the more suttle humour may still escape you. [21:10] guntbert, if you don't like the feature, switch it off [21:10] there is a button [21:10] it was definitely a tongue in cheek comment [21:10] subtle* [21:11] no doubt, and I think you raise a good point, IdleOne, about the subtlety sometimes being lost [21:11] jono_: I think Mark is often misunderstood, he does IMO have a special sense of humour [21:11] IdleOne, I agree [21:11] it is too late for me today to go into a deeper discussion - but jono_ you last remark (off-button) touches exactly my main concern: opt-out vs opt.in [21:12] IdleOne; subtle humour gets lost without the non-verbal part. =) [21:13] guntbert: I agree that the shopping lens should be an opt-in, BUT that would mean less users would get to see it. making it an opt-out feature at least allows the user to see it one time. [21:13] MrChrisDruif: true, text is not always the best medium for humour [21:13] =D [21:13] guntbert, was nice chatting [21:14] have a nice evening [21:14] IdleOne: true, but the standard rules for privacy and data protection require just that: "offer it", promote it - but let people opt-in [21:15] jono_: thx for listening - have a nice time too