| sync350 | Hey guys, very new to triaging, was looking through bugs, is 1271340 something that should be marked wishlist? | 06:51 |
|---|---|---|
| chetan | I am very new to ubuntu. but I am very enthusiastic and want to learn how to debug ubuntu programs... | 08:08 |
| chetan | my own gnome-shell has some bug and would like to solve them. Please let me know a good starting point where i can learn on how to debug programs | 08:09 |
| chetan | anyone? | 09:10 |
| === Atheist is now known as Guest43493 | ||
| === j_f-f_ is now known as j_f-f | ||
| brainwash | I'm just curious.. the importance of bug 1222021 got reduced from HIGH to MEDIUM, is that correct? | 12:15 |
| ubot2` | Launchpad bug 1222021 in xfce4-power-manager (Debian) "[SRU] xfce4-power-manager does not inhibit systemd from handling buttons and lid events" [Unknown,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1222021 | 12:15 |
| brainwash | the user does not want the system to suspend on lid close because of bad support -> possible data loss | 12:16 |
| brainwash | the user wants to be asked what power action should be performed, when he presses the power button, but the system simply powers off -> possible data loss | 12:17 |
| brainwash | on top of that, this bug affects almost every xubuntu user | 12:17 |
| brainwash | https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/Bug%20importances | 12:20 |
| hggdh | brainwash: it does not really matter, a fix has been committed to Saucy already | 13:53 |
| brainwash | hggdh: it matters to me, what would be the correct importance in this case? | 14:19 |
| brainwash | and it did matter to person who changed the importance (although the fix has been committed already) | 14:22 |
| brendand | hggdh, actually the person who changed the importance didn't follow good practice | 14:22 |
| brendand | hggdh, you should always explain major changes to a bug | 14:22 |
| brendand | although speaking of which, i have an lplib script that does set importance without explaining :/ but only unset ones :P | 14:23 |
| brendand | no-one's ever complained | 14:23 |
| brainwash | I'm just here to understand things better, did not feel like starting a discussion about the importance level in the bug report | 14:24 |
| brainwash | you are right, an explanation would help in this case | 14:25 |
| brendand | brainwash, well you have :) | 14:25 |
| brendand | brainwash, anyway because they didn't explain why, we can all only guess | 14:25 |
| brendand | brainwash, there are a lot of possibilities | 14:26 |
| brendand | brainwash, only way to know for sure is to ask them | 14:26 |
| brainwash | thanks for clarifying :) | 14:26 |
| hggdh | in general, ALL changes to bug importance and status should commented on. | 14:53 |
| hggdh | brendand: and yes, I know he did not follow the reccomended practice... after all, I am still one of the admins on bug triaging ;-) | 14:56 |
| hggdh | (bowing, of course, to the incomparable bdmurray ;-) | 14:56 |
| brendand | hggdh, it's a pity launchpad doesn't enforce it | 14:57 |
| hggdh | yes,, it is. Unfortunately, I do not see how we could enforce it without a semantic analyser | 14:59 |
| hggdh | brainwash: anyway, you *can* comment on the bug, and ask why was the importance reduced. I would be interesting to know | 14:59 |
| === om26er is now known as om26e | ||
| === om26e is now known as om26er | ||
| brendand | hggdh, late reply - it could put a dialog in the way of changing status/importance, requiring a comment to be entered. that's unlikely to be done now though | 16:42 |
| hggdh | brendand: yes, we could, but we cannot guarantee the comment entered has anything to do with the actions performed... | 16:57 |
| Mapley | Hey, since I haven't rceived a response for nearly two weeks, I'm just going to ask this here. About two weeks ago, I filed a bug for Simple Scan, requesting that the GTK+ toolbar utilize the devices icon "scanner" instead of the application(!) icon on the scan button; see https://bugs.launchpad.net/simple-scan/+bug/1268044 and | 18:45 |
| ubot2` | Launchpad bug 1268044 in Simple Scan "Icon types used by Simple Scan [UI/not sane]" [Undecided,New] | 18:45 |
| Mapley | https://bugs.launchpad.net/simple-scan/+bug/1268044/+attachment/3945792/+files/SimpleScan-UseDeviceIcon.png | 18:45 |
| Mapley | Thoughts? | 18:45 |
| Mapley | I thought it was rather illogical, imho, for a /toolbar/ to use the /application/ icon. :S | 18:46 |
| teward | Mapley, lets keep in mind you've filed against the upstream project and not the package in Ubuntu | 18:47 |
| teward | the speed that upstream can get back to you is... um... unpredictable | 18:47 |
| teward | s/upstream/upstreams/ | 18:47 |
| teward | (where "upstream" means the project for the program) | 18:47 |
| Mapley | yeah, I know. | 18:47 |
| teward | my thoughts are "It's not a bug filed against the Ubuntu package." but I'm semi-distracted :p | 18:48 |
| Mapley | I'm not even using Ubuntu - I just thought 'lp, gnome, whatever, gimpnet support's kinda slow so I might as well ask here' | 18:48 |
| Mapley | I'll pop over onto gimpnet now, though. | 18:48 |
| Mapley | Thanks anyway. | 18:48 |
| === jackson is now known as Guest4739 | ||
| === Ursinha_ is now known as Ursinha | ||
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!
