[02:41] <darkxst> jbicha, what are your thoughts on the packagekit stuff? i.e. should we fix it or just revert to standard ubuntu update stack
[02:44] <jbicha> well like I said for bug 1071008 I'm not sure about how fix the updates problem yet
[02:44] <jbicha> Wheezy is shipping gpk by default too though
[02:45] <darkxst> I think can fix the automatic updates, but not sure about dist upgrades
[02:45] <jbicha> yeah I didn't know a good way to test dist-upgrades until raring got going
[02:46] <darkxst> I think we can't do dist-upgrades at all until we are an official flavour though
[02:46] <jbicha> we could have people upgrade from the command line or we could include update-manager
[02:47] <jbicha> we need update-notifier for apport to work properly but unfortunately update-notifier depends on update-manager in quantal
[02:47] <darkxst> anyway I think gnome-software-manager is pretty hopeless
[02:47] <jbicha> I'd prefer to use GNOME's tools if they work close enough
[02:48] <jbicha> I've got a patch for https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=682696 but that's a raring fix
[02:49] <jbicha> people don't read every line in the release notes and can't figure out how to install updates
[02:50] <darkxst> well people don't read until they have a problem, and by then they have probably forgotten about the release notes
[02:51] <jbicha> gnome-packagekit is in "core GNOME" so we kinda have to ship it http://git.gnome.org/browse/jhbuild/plain/modulesets/gnome-suites-core-3.6.modules
[02:52] <jbicha> but then again so is Epiphany and many GNOME distros don't include it by default
[02:53] <darkxst> but that is the dbus stuff
[02:53] <darkxst> (gnome-packagekit)
[02:53] <jbicha> the way I see it, if something is a 50/50 decision then we'll go with the GNOME choice
[02:54] <jbicha> but I'm not the only one who decides the direction of this project
[02:55] <darkxst> ubuntu patch g-c-c with a hard link to update manager
[02:56] <darkxst> and I havent looked at the source, but pretty certain software properties is hardcoded against update-manger
[02:57] <jbicha> I think the g-c-c patch is only for the Details panel but I think it's rather uncommon that people look there for software updates
[02:57] <jbicha> we had to include software properties for quantal because that's where Additional Drivers moved, but gpk has its own config dialog
[02:58] <darkxst> gpk-prefs on ubuntu has no update tab
[02:59] <jbicha> we probably need to get update-notifier to Ubuntu GNOME users on quantal
[03:00] <jbicha> I don't know what the side effects of that would be
[03:00] <darkxst> gpk-prefs is also set to NoDisplay also
[03:01] <jbicha> yeah, I'm not so sure that those changes were a good idea http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-packagekit/commit/?id=3c7585
[03:01] <jbicha> it definitely was bad without adding the keywords "breadcrumbs" so that people would know where stuff went
[03:02] <darkxst> gpk-prefs, not gpk-update-viewer
[03:02] <jbicha> yeah, that was the next commit
[03:09] <jbicha> maybe Debian will revert the NoDisplay changes and then we can just sync from Debian...
[03:10] <darkxst> how about we swap out gnome-update-viewer with update-manager
[03:11] <darkxst> and a small patch against gnome-software-manager menu to launch update-manager instead
[03:11] <jbicha> we could add a dependency on update-manager to ubuntu-gnome-desktop for quantal
[03:11] <jbicha> no I don't want to patch that
[03:12] <darkxst> well its better than having duplicated prefs tools
[03:13] <darkxst> so far we have GOA/UOA, software-prefs/gpk-prefs
[03:13] <darkxst> and I suppose there could be others
[03:13] <jbicha> I don't want to patch that for quantal because I'm not convinced update-manager is what we want to ship for raring or sparky
[03:15] <darkxst> and I don't want to see what happens when we semi-invent our own dist-upgrade process
[03:15] <jbicha> do-release-upgrade works fine
[03:16] <jbicha> update-notifier might take care of that; I need to look into splitting update-notifier away from update-manager
[03:20] <jbicha> so the updater is one question; the software installer is the other
[03:21] <darkxst> yeh, they are basically independant from my quick look
[03:21] <jbicha> gpk is better than I remember it being; and someday they're supposed to be doing their fancy overhaul to make it more directly competitive with USC
[03:21] <darkxst> really? I nearly cry every time I have to use it
[03:22] <jbicha> I think Synaptic is out of the question; we should stick with USC or Software
[03:22] <darkxst> I would probably take aptitude or even dselect over the gpk one
[03:23] <darkxst> USC will never *fit* in a gnome-ish distro
[03:23] <jbicha> but think, if you improve gpk then you help virtually every GNOME distro
[03:24] <darkxst> not me, programmers don't make good UI's last time I checked
[03:25] <jbicha> USC includes screenshots, ratings and reviews, paid app support, and even support for -backports
[03:26] <darkxst> yeh I think USC is awesome for end (non-technical) users, but the only time I use it is to sync package lists to U1
[03:26] <darkxst> oh and the odd humble bundle
[03:27] <darkxst> I suppose we could re-skin it, to fit. if/when we have a design team atleast..
[03:28] <jbicha> USC has got too much attention from the designers though, custom widgets & webkit
[03:29] <darkxst> well I dont know what designers do
[03:30] <jbicha> at least it's not as bad as the Ubuntu One design :)
[03:31] <jbicha> I filed some specific design bugs for U1 right after the Qt switch that have been basically ignored
[03:33] <darkxst> yeh its pretty bad, but I am mostly dependant on dropbox here...
[03:34] <darkxst> and I gave up submitting patches against core ubuntu stuff...
[03:35] <darkxst> trivial bug fixes would just be ignored or otherwise marked invalid
[04:43] <darkxst> everaldo, how did you go with the 'participating' article?
[04:47] <everaldo> darkxst, hey :)
[04:47] <darkxst> hey
[04:47] <everaldo> darkxst, writing in my language...
[04:47] <everaldo> I think that I will have it on english tomorow night
[04:47] <everaldo> I mean, 18 hours from now ;-)
[04:48] <darkxst> haha ok, I dont understand your language!
[04:48] <everaldo> to be honest, most people here don't understand a "good" portuguese too :-)
[04:50] <everaldo> darkxst, do we have a place and a domain if we found someone to make us a website?
[04:50] <darkxst> well we have http://gnomebuntu.org/
[04:51] <darkxst> not sure we can really use that domain though
[04:51] <darkxst> might have to register something else (gnome don't want us to mash their trademarks)
[04:52] <everaldo> darkxst, they explicity told us that?
[04:52] <darkxst> everaldo, yes
[04:52] <everaldo> oh, did not know that
[04:53] <darkxst> well they said would need board approval, not actually sure if we asked for that
[04:53] <everaldo> I man, my understand of their guidelines is that we can use "gnome" if we want to spread gnome
[04:53] <everaldo> so, maybe we can ask then
[04:53] <darkxst> yeh we can use gnome
[04:53] <darkxst> but not mashed words like gnomebuntu
[04:54] <darkxst> gnome <space> ubuntu
[04:54] <darkxst> is ok, I believe
[04:54] <everaldo> did you think that gubuntu is bad just because theres goobuntu ?
[04:54] <everaldo> I mean, it is just a internal google version
[04:54] <everaldo> that nobody outside of Google uses
[04:55] <darkxst> lol, nobody outside of google even knows about
[04:55] <darkxst> Gubuntu would be the obvious chouce
[04:55] <darkxst> but that said I do like ubuntu GNOME edition
[04:55] <everaldo> I really like the idea of use gubuntu
[04:56] <everaldo> and we don't even need to care about gnome trademarks
[04:57] <darkxst> yeh I don't really get the whole fuss over that
[04:57] <darkxst> i would thing Gubuntu be pronoucned with a hard G
[04:57] <darkxst> Goobuntu with a soft G
[04:58] <everaldo> exactly
[04:58] <everaldo> and the owner of gubuntu.org is sakalsiz@gmail.com
[04:59] <darkxst> who is that?
[04:59] <everaldo> don't know but seaching on google looks to be a postgres/debian/python guy
[05:00] <everaldo> so, we will probably can get success to have his domain
[05:00] <everaldo> Created On:06-Nov-2010 12:30:01 UTC
[05:00] <everaldo> Last Updated On:31-Oct-2011 22:28:55 UTC
[05:00] <everaldo> Expiration Date:06-Nov-2012 12:30:01 UTC
[05:00] <everaldo> and he is not using it
[05:00] <everaldo> let me send him a mail
[05:01] <darkxst> lol, I have a bad focus bug again... can really check much!
[05:02] <everaldo> our bug man!
[05:02] <everaldo> bugman...that sounds nice
[05:03] <darkxst> lol, no one will want a distro with 'bug' in the name
[05:03] <everaldo> yeah, and it also looks like a porn actor name :(
[05:05] <everaldo> darkxst, is this ok?
[05:05] <everaldo> "My name is Everaldo and I am one of the guys working on GNOME based variation of Ubuntu. We just want to know if you are willing to provide us the domain gubuntu.org and in which terms."
[05:07] <darkxst> everaldo, I would wait until we decide if we actually want it!
[05:07] <everaldo> darkxst, we are just asking
[05:08] <everaldo> it is much better to know before decide right?
[05:08] <darkxst> but at this point we are not actually going to use gubuntu, perhaps we should contact google!
[05:09] <everaldo> humm
[05:09] <everaldo> ubuntu-ge.org  (maybe gnome edition)
[05:09] <everaldo> the owner is... Canonical :)
[05:10] <everaldo> I like how GNOME Edition sounds
[05:10] <darkxst> but I have no contacts a google apart from a few guts that work in maps at Sydney
[05:10] <darkxst> s/guts/guys/
[05:10] <everaldo> darkxst, ask then
[05:10] <everaldo> them
[05:10] <darkxst> they won't be able to help
[05:11] <everaldo> Domain ID:D105610408-LROR
[05:11] <everaldo> Domain Name:UBUNTU-GE.ORG
[05:11] <everaldo> Created On:21-Jan-2005 12:57:38 UTC
[05:11] <everaldo> Last Updated On:24-May-2011 00:26:11 UTC
[05:11] <everaldo> Expiration Date:21-Jan-2014 12:57:38 UTC
[05:11] <darkxst> perhaps thats a country code
[05:11] <darkxst> ???
[05:12] <everaldo> don't know
[05:12] <everaldo> jbicha just sugested "Ubuntu GNOME Edition"
[05:12] <everaldo> looks nice... but again we need to use "GNOME" word
[05:13] <darkxst> that is fine I believe
[05:13] <darkxst> GE Georgia (Republic Of)
[05:20] <everaldo> hatochna.org is available
[05:21] <everaldo> HArd TO CHoose a NAme
[05:21] <everaldo> :D
[05:22] <darkxst> I think we have to have buntu if we want to be official flavour
[05:22] <everaldo> yes, I was just kiding
[05:24] <everaldo> fubunutu, nubuntu and mubuntu... all registered
[05:24] <everaldo> mubuntu owner is also canonical
[05:25] <everaldo> obuntu.org is available
[05:25] <everaldo> gnOme
[05:26] <everaldo> darkxst, whats about obuntu.org ?
[05:26] <darkxst> seems a bit unrelated
[05:27] <everaldo> well, the only really related good name is gubuntu :(
[05:29] <everaldo> gnubuntu is also nice but... you know... gnu
[05:29] <darkxst> yeh like, we need stallman on our case!
[05:31] <darkxst> uge.org
[05:32] <everaldo> I like it
[05:32] <everaldo> but is already registered
[05:32] <everaldo> and it is used since 2002
[05:32] <everaldo> oh, "this domain is for sale"
[05:32] <everaldo> 35% off :)
[05:33] <darkxst> 35% off what? some rip off scammer
[05:33] <darkxst> ?
[05:34] <everaldo> hahaha
[05:34] <everaldo> Buy this great domain today for only $9,888.00 (USD)!..
[05:36] <darkxst> seems like uge.fm or uge.net.au
[05:36] <darkxst> is all thats available?
[05:37] <everaldo> yes
[05:38] <everaldo> ok, go sleep a little
[05:38] <darkxst> net au probably has rules
[05:38] <everaldo> be back later
[05:38] <darkxst> atleast had to provide an ABN for org.au adresses
[05:38] <everaldo> yes
[05:39] <everaldo> bye
[05:39] <darkxst> I suppose canoconical might have a ABN