[11:53] <gotwig> Hello masters :O
[11:53] <gotwig> May I talk to you :O
[11:53] <gotwig> Please push touchegg 1.1 to ubuntu 12.04 and 12.10, as touchegg 1.0 does not work, and delivers segfaults to the users.
[11:54] <gotwig> (see the user reviews)
[12:06] <gotwig> where can I report broken software packages in universe?
[14:13] <jtaylor> micahg: ping ipython backport?
[14:13] <jtaylor> has anything changed or are backports in ubuntu still impossible?
[14:15] <jtaylor> I find it weird that ubuntus rules for backporting are so much harsher than debians, given that in universe our general quality is so much worse
[14:19] <ScottK> jtaylor: Since 75% of Ubuntu packages are unmodified from Debian, how much worse can it really be?
[14:20] <ScottK> Our backports are, as a rule, safer to use than Debian's.
[14:20] <jtaylor> we miss out on many bugfixes debian gets
[14:21] <ScottK> Yes, releasing more often will cause that.
[14:21] <jtaylor> we are never able to pick all fixes that go into debian post autoimport stop
[14:21] <ScottK> So there are differences, but I don't think it's radically different.
[14:21] <jtaylor> my only grievance is the rdepends must build with backports
[14:21] <jtaylor> I see no reason why we need that
[14:22] <ScottK> So you don't break user's systems when they install backports.
[14:22] <ScottK> Sometimes people end up having to backport a set of packages together and that's fine.
[14:22] <jtaylor> nothing breaks its a build failure
[14:22] <jtaylor> at least there should be a way around it
[14:23] <jtaylor> right now it seems I must sru yade to backport ipython
[14:23] <ScottK> True.  Usually a build failure implies a runtime failure also.
[14:23] <jtaylor> not in this case
[14:23] <jtaylor> its just a stupid version check
[14:23] <ScottK> If it's tested OK at runtime, I think that's OK.
[14:24] <ScottK> Point me at the bug and I'll say so.
[14:24] <jtaylor> bug 1074765
[14:24] <jtaylor> I updated it to the new version in raring, which contains more bugfixes
[14:26]  * jtaylor just checking if install and upgrade still works, as some changes are in the packaging
[14:27] <jtaylor> is backports integrated into the autopkgtests?
[14:29] <ScottK> Dunno.
[14:29] <ScottK> Please put a comment in explaining the situation on yade.
[14:35] <debfx> ScottK: is there a process to apply for ~ubuntu-backporters? imho the biggest problem with backports in ubuntu is that the team is understaffed
[14:36] <ScottK> debfx: The process is talk to me.  Are you interested?
[14:36]  * ScottK totally agrees with your diagnosis.
[14:38] <debfx> ScottK: yes
[14:55] <ember> :q
[15:48] <ScottK> https://launchpad.net/saucy-backports now exists ..
[17:02] <highvoltage> saucy.
[17:24] <coolbhavi> highvoltage, :-)
[18:24] <micahg> ScottK: re bug 1173817, since there are regressions in other social media, I'm thinking to throw it in backports
[18:27] <skellat> micahg: Yeah, that's the one thing that is lost with the new version.  It also won't matter in about a month as Identica won't be a Twitter-alike service anymore.
[18:31] <debfx> what regressions are there?
[18:32] <ScottK> What's happening to identi.ca?
[18:33] <skellat> The back-end is changing to a Node.js-based bit called pump.io some time in the next 45 days or so.  The original timetable said it should have happened by now but Evan got delayed again.  No new users are being accepted for Identica as of early April, too.
[18:39] <micahg> debfx: identi.ca and statusnet no longer supported
[18:57] <debfx> micahg: in that case I agree that it should go into backports
[19:00] <ScottK> If you agree, I'm OK with it.
[19:02] <skellat> Okay, what are the next steps I need to take?
[19:03] <skellat> (If any)
[19:03] <micahg> skellat: perform the backport testing as originally specified in the description
[19:03] <skellat> Okay
[19:04] <skellat> I'll put the paperwork back to what it was
[19:04] <skellat> So I can keep track
[19:04]  * micahg resets the tasks
[19:06] <micahg> skellat: thanks for bearing with us and providing crucial feedback
[19:06] <skellat> No problem
[19:07] <skellat> I worked with the DD about getting this taken care of during the Wheezy freeze.  We couldn't get an exception but he got it into Sid and said he'd throw it in backports post-release once it became necessary and possible to do.
[19:07] <skellat> I had forgotten about it on the Ubuntu side.
[19:59] <debfx> tumbleweed: reverse-deps is sad without saucy data on the server
[20:04] <tumbleweed> debfx: oh, sure
[20:55] <gotwig> I want to report a broken universe package
[20:55] <gotwig> where can I do that?
[20:56] <gotwig> why does no one react :(
[20:56] <gotwig> the package touchegg in version 1.0 is broken in ubuntu 12.04 and 12.10
[20:57] <gotwig> It would be nice if you could offer version 1.1 for ubuntu 12.04 and 12.10
[21:00] <gotwig> please take a look at 1174070
[21:00] <gotwig> bug #1174070