[07:51] <FlowRiser> Hello, folks :) So, i'm told that in order to upload a package to the archive i need help and mentoring from a MOTU. I'll start by saying i'm new (4-5 months of Linux) and i have never packaged anything for Linux, but i have made a LightDM greeter without using any KDE libs(only Qt4 ones, that mostly are already included into Ubuntu) that is highly themable and very easy to do so.
[07:52] <FlowRiser> That being said, is someone willing to help me ? Here's an example of a theme(with resources from the LoL game): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBFlNp13MQ0
[07:54] <FlowRiser> Is it worth continuing down this path (using no KDE libs) or should i just merge my effort with the guys working on the kde-lightdm greeter ?
[07:57] <tumbleweed> FlowRiser: these aren't really questions that most MOTUs can answer. I'd suggest #kubuntu-devel
[08:03] <FlowRiser> tumbleweed, i know, i'm just wondering about
[08:04] <FlowRiser> if someone is willing to install a greeter for let's say, ubuntu 12.04 (unity+compiz) would they also want to install KDE libs ?
[08:06] <tumbleweed> I'd assume not
[08:07] <FlowRiser> tumbleweed, then it isn't kubuntu related. And i've talked with d_ed, who's working on their kde-greeter and i've looked at his source-code and it's aimed highly at Kubuntu
[09:05] <jokerdino> hey, is there any procedure to get a package into ubuntu / universe without it being in debian? the package is pretty specific to ubuntu (it is a Unity configuration tool if that helps)
[09:05] <jokerdino> i would like if i could get it into repo for 13.04 before the feature freeze
[09:12] <tumbleweed> jokerdino: yes, there is. Package it, and find a MOTU to review and sponsor it
[09:12] <tumbleweed> if it's a unity configuration tool, I'd run it by the desktop people, first
[09:13] <jokerdino> we have an experimental package while the backend isn't fully done.
[09:13] <jokerdino> i suppose once we finish it, i look for a MOTU
[09:14] <jokerdino> tumbleweed: so, i ask the people in #ubuntu-desktop first?
[09:15] <tumbleweed> Well, I don't think we want a configuration tool that's going to break unity, in the archive. So I assume they should look over the things it's going to tweak
[09:16] <jokerdino> fair enough. we are just tweaking using the gsettings API
[09:18] <tumbleweed> be aware that we had myunity in the archive in the past, but had to drop it when it hadn't been updated to support quantal
[09:19] <jokerdino> yep. i heard of that.
[09:19] <jokerdino> in 12.04 (when myunity was in archive), half the settings were in gconf and it wasn
[09:19] <jokerdino> *it wasn't updated when the settings migrated to gsettings.
[09:20] <jokerdino> while our tool pretty much just deals with the post-gsettings migration.
[09:21] <jokerdino> anyway, thanks for your input. i'll get in touch with the desktop devs. :)
[09:39] <obounaim> Hello everybody
[18:39] <andi3> hi, i'm configuring mini-buildd, when I upload package it fails with: "'Unknown distribution "unstable" in[..]". Do you use mini-buildd to build ubuntu packages?
[18:40] <andi3> ubuntu doesn't seem to change Distribution field (e.g. in changes file)
[18:45] <andi3> What is a best approach to solve it? (what is a login behind it, e.g. is the correct solution to ignore it in mini-buildd?)
[18:45] <andi3> s/login/logic/
[20:07] <vagrantc> i'm curious if folks think an SRU for pithos is appropriate: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pithos/+bug/1093865
[20:21] <tumbleweed> vagrantc: sure, there's no benefit to not SRUing it
[20:22] <vagrantc> i'm pretty unfamiliar with ubuntu processes, so just looking for guidance or people to nudge it towards the next steps
[20:23] <vagrantc> can't even figure out how to tag the affected bug versions/ubuntu releases in launchpad
[20:24] <tumbleweed> I think one needs to be an ubuntu bug-control member to do that (the page is https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/pithos/+bug/1093865/+nominate )
[20:24] <tumbleweed> I've nominated it for precise
[20:24] <vagrantc> ah, thanks!
[20:25] <tumbleweed> the SRU paperwork looks good, so it's just a matter of preparing the upload
[20:26] <vagrantc> is that something i should take on?
[20:27] <vagrantc> (what upload privs are needed?)
[20:29] <tumbleweed> any MOTU can upload it
[20:29] <tumbleweed> you could prepare an upload, which they could sponsor
[20:29] <tumbleweed> but if your plan is to just backport the quantal version, that doesn't sound like much work
[20:30] <vagrantc> yeah, it's just rebuilding the newer version on precise.
[20:30] <tumbleweed> I'm about to go to bed, so I won't look at it now, although I will leave a tab open for tomorrow / the weekend / who knows when
[20:30] <vagrantc> the debdiff would be pretty ugly
[20:30] <vagrantc> tumbleweed: thanks!
[20:30] <tumbleweed> np
[20:41] <mapreri> I need only to check if a package i made is [ubuntu|debain] policy compliant.. can someone look at me? :) the link to all files is https://dl.dropbox.com/s/nvn1zn59fh93gv1/bk_5-pkg.tar.gz?dl=1