| bluesabre | Can anybody confirm if this is still an issue for them: https://bugs.launchpad.net/light-locker-settings/+bug/1303652 | 09:33 |
|---|---|---|
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1303652 in light-locker-settings (Ubuntu) "Blank screen setting lost after installing nvidia driver" [Undecided,New] | 09:33 |
| bluesabre | /them/you | 09:33 |
| ochosi | elfy: hmm, those two testers on the lid-close bug seem to have misunderstood the bug. one thinks it's related to the screen DPMS setting and the other seems to think it's related to auto-login on boot time... | 09:51 |
| ochosi | so i'm kinda wondering whether to ignore that... | 09:53 |
| === brainwash_ is now known as brainwash | ||
| ochosi | hey sergio-br2 | 11:30 |
| knome | elfy, see my looong reply ;) | 11:31 |
| sergio-br2 | hey ochosi | 11:36 |
| sergio-br2 | congratulations | 11:36 |
| sergio-br2 | (late...) | 11:37 |
| ochosi | thanks sergio-br2 | 11:37 |
| ochosi | make sure you "git pull" before committing stuff in elementary-xfce ;) | 11:37 |
| ochosi | anyway, wanted to ask how things are going with the open issues for our next release | 11:38 |
| ochosi | i also noticed that i have to draw two more libreoffice sizes (there are currently 128px apps and 96px mimes in the old style) | 11:38 |
| sergio-br2 | yeah, i messed up, sorry | 11:38 |
| ochosi | hehe, no problem, it happens | 11:39 |
| sergio-br2 | lua mime is uploaded, with that 24 px icon. I don't know if it's worth doing 16 px for the news mimes | 11:42 |
| sergio-br2 | (and i tried other color, not so good) | 11:42 |
| ochosi | news mimes? | 11:44 |
| sergio-br2 | (php, perl... that i was thinking) | 11:48 |
| sergio-br2 | mimetypes | 11:48 |
| sergio-br2 | mime is other thing in english :D | 11:48 |
| ochosi | ah | 11:50 |
| ochosi | :) | 11:50 |
| sergio-br2 | i would take this 96 and 128 px libreoffice icons (i think i said i could do them), but apparently there are many things to do | 12:07 |
| sergio-br2 | when do you think to release new version ochosi? beta1 of utopic? | 12:08 |
| ochosi | well, i'd like to decouple the icon-theme a bit from xubuntu | 12:09 |
| ochosi | as we have other distros that use them too | 12:09 |
| ochosi | so i'd like to finish the stuff we need for the next release asap | 12:09 |
| ochosi | and whenever we need a new release for xubuntu, we do a 0.x.1 release | 12:09 |
| ochosi | so a maintenance release for xubuntu mostly | 12:09 |
| sergio-br2 | thougt a name for the theme? | 12:10 |
| sergio-br2 | elementary-plus? | 12:10 |
| ochosi | meh, nah | 12:11 |
| ochosi | but yeah, i haven't thought about it for a while | 12:11 |
| ochosi | sergio-br2: btw, i've started with the 96px mimes already for LO, so no need to do that | 12:17 |
| ochosi | and as you said, you already have other things to finish first | 12:18 |
| sergio-br2 | ok | 12:20 |
| elfy | afternoon | 12:38 |
| ochosi | hey elfy | 12:39 |
| elfy | saw your reply on the bug :) | 12:39 |
| ochosi | i think we oughta change the bug description | 12:40 |
| ochosi | otherwise we get more fake tests | 12:40 |
| elfy | oooh it's a bug - I'll add my kind of the same random issue to it ... | 12:40 |
| ochosi | or tests for other bugs | 12:40 |
| ochosi | suspending is generally a thing that can fail | 12:40 |
| ochosi | so we can get all kinds of issues mixed up there... | 12:40 |
| elfy | ochosi: yea - agreed | 12:41 |
| knome | elfy, read my reply? :P | 12:41 |
| ochosi | elfy: anyway, i've put things in motion so that we can test the final patch soon | 12:42 |
| elfy | knome: I did - as there were stats and 99.999% of stats are made up I ignored it :p | 12:42 |
| knome | hah, well they aren't made up :P | 12:42 |
| ochosi | elfy: (this was only a quick hack to see whether this approach actually works) | 12:42 |
| elfy | ochosi: yep - I understand | 12:42 |
| knome | elfy, the first two paragraphs, i hope, answers your question... | 12:42 |
| elfy | knome: yea it did :) | 12:42 |
| elfy | ochosi: Black screen after reboot from lid-close suspension ? | 12:43 |
| knome | elfy, also, i'd read the conclusions after the stats ;) | 12:43 |
| knome | but bbiab, lunch/dinner | 12:43 |
| elfy | knome: I didn't really ignore it lol | 12:43 |
| ochosi | elfy: reboot is really too ambiguous. "Black screen after wakup from suspending by closing the laptop lid" maybe? | 12:43 |
| elfy | sounds good to me | 12:44 |
| elfy | done | 12:44 |
| ochosi | ty | 12:44 |
| ochosi | btw, knome mentioned a few things wrt -release today | 12:45 |
| ochosi | i'm still very new to this, so you might have to hold my hand a bit this cycle | 12:45 |
| elfy | it's shame that these things don't get discussed in here :| | 12:45 |
| elfy | ochosi: anyway - if I can help you - just ask :) | 12:46 |
| ochosi | nah, this was just a PM between him and me where he shoved all the team-ownership down my throat | 12:46 |
| ochosi | nothing of substance was discussed | 12:46 |
| elfy | ok :) | 12:46 |
| ochosi | i just asked what the release team has to do | 12:47 |
| elfy | just so long as it's not bunches of xubuntu-team stuff that should be in here being in some random shimmer channel ;) | 12:47 |
| ochosi | heh, i hear you. will try to be more focussed in this respect | 12:47 |
| ochosi | thing is, sometimes i'm not sure it's good if we pollute this channel with discussions on the greeter roadmap | 12:48 |
| ochosi | or stuff we're working on in parole | 12:48 |
| elfy | the trouble is - if bits of it are important - then it get's missed | 12:48 |
| elfy | we've already had one thing going on with non-communication this cycle | 12:49 |
| ochosi | this cycle == 14.10? | 12:49 |
| elfy | yea | 12:49 |
| ochosi | which thing then? | 12:49 |
| elfy | someone just chucking a request to the m/l for testing something - I knew absolutely nothing about it | 12:50 |
| elfy | I might have been sending something at the same time | 12:50 |
| ochosi | right | 12:52 |
| ochosi | not sure whether that was discussed anywhere | 12:52 |
| ochosi | i presume you mean the call for testing menulibre? | 12:52 |
| elfy | yea | 12:53 |
| ochosi | i think bluesabre just wanted to help you by doing the work himself | 12:53 |
| ochosi | but i agree, if an email has "testing" in the subject line, you should be made aware of that first | 12:53 |
| elfy | that's great - in itself - but if I'd been ready to do something with the testers - it wouldn't have helped | 12:54 |
| elfy | anyway - this just brings home the need for better communication - one way or the other :) | 12:54 |
| ochosi | yeah | 12:54 |
| ochosi | i think we should discuss this at tomorrow's meeting though | 12:55 |
| elfy | if we don't do something like trello team wide - perhaps we can add those likely to want things tested to the board - then they can make notes on it about that they're up to - so there are no surprises | 12:55 |
| elfy | yep | 12:55 |
| ochosi | i think the easy solution would be: if there is a call for testing, send it to you instead of the list | 12:56 |
| elfy | my issue is that I have to plan testing around immovable things like milestones - people chucking random stuff about doesn't help with that | 12:56 |
| ochosi | thing is that there aren't *so* many ppl here working on app-development | 12:56 |
| ochosi | or even bugfixing | 12:56 |
| elfy | yep I know - which makes the communication thing even more exasperating :) | 12:56 |
| elfy | it's not like we have to look at a list of 200 people to see who needs to know something lol | 12:57 |
| ochosi | yeah | 12:57 |
| ochosi | exactly | 12:57 |
| ochosi | would you be fine with this routine of just re-routing these emails through you? | 12:57 |
| ochosi | or would you prefer some other process | 12:57 |
| elfy | let's see what occurs in the meeting re m/l's and stuff | 12:57 |
| ochosi | yeah, i actually seem to have a problem with the @xfce address | 12:58 |
| ochosi | i haven't received stuff from the ML for a day oro so | 12:58 |
| elfy | I seem to be getting the digests - which is all I get | 12:59 |
| elfy | so they are coming out | 13:00 |
| ochosi | yeah | 13:00 |
| ochosi | i also haven't received stuff from the xfce-ml | 13:00 |
| ochosi | so it surely is related to my forwarding | 13:00 |
| elfy | I'd guess so | 13:01 |
| knome | one option is to leave pre-alpha time for random teting | 13:05 |
| knome | *testing | 13:05 |
| elfy | knome: I specifically have set it so that we'll have loads of time apart from milestones at the end | 13:06 |
| knome | yep | 13:06 |
| knome | i understand | 13:06 |
| knome | though, the other issue is | 13:07 |
| knome | the menulibre release was a clear bugfix release | 13:07 |
| elfy | that's not the issue | 13:07 |
| knome | which fixed many things recently reported | 13:07 |
| knome | it's better to get them confirmed fixed now | 13:07 |
| knome | than later | 13:07 |
| elfy | the issue is communication is abysmal | 13:07 |
| elfy | I would have said something to [team] in the m/l about how testing was planned - but it was completely ignored last time by the majority of us | 13:09 |
| knome | well, i can only speak for myself | 13:10 |
| knome | not replying doesn't necessarily mean ignoring | 13:10 |
| knome | even if nobody replied anything, it's good to have an informal mail on the list | 13:11 |
| elfy | well I didn't :) | 13:11 |
| knome | and it'll be more discoverable if we decide to moderate the list | 13:11 |
| elfy | well actually I did - just not to team | 13:11 |
| elfy | moderation doesn't equal people communicating things ;) | 13:12 |
| knome | no | 13:12 |
| knome | nor does it mean people will actually look at the archives | 13:12 |
| elfy | anyway - I really don't want to get into this discussion now | 13:13 |
| knome | elfy, is the QA schedule for 14.10 anywhere visible? | 13:16 |
| elfy | the draft is on the mailing list | 13:17 |
| knome | hmpf. | 13:17 |
| knome | i must have missed it this time... | 13:17 |
| knome | or then just forgot :P | 13:17 |
| knome | hmm, right | 13:18 |
| knome | actually, what i think we need to discuss is | 13:18 |
| knome | testing outside the testing schedule | 13:18 |
| knome | because we will always need it | 13:18 |
| knome | it's great we have a lot of time free at the end of the cycle | 13:19 |
| knome | however, releases do not always happen at ideal times | 13:19 |
| elfy | then that is down to those needing that stuff discussed to bring it up | 13:19 |
| knome | the other question is: | 13:20 |
| knome | is, for example, menulibre testing calls inappropriate for the xubuntu list? | 13:20 |
| elfy | no - why would it be | 13:20 |
| knome | well, | 13:20 |
| knome | it's not exactly a xubuntu project :) | 13:20 |
| elfy | testing for xubuntu is | 13:21 |
| ochosi | yeah, it's used in elementary and other distros too | 13:21 |
| knome | while it is connected, and it's in our seed, the xubuntu team isn't technically liable for the testing | 13:21 |
| knome | shouldn't the "testing for xubuntu" happen when menulibre is on the testing calendar? | 13:21 |
| knome | and within the testcases we have | 13:21 |
| elfy | surely the same can be said for nearly everything that we test | 13:21 |
| knome | yes | 13:24 |
| knome | we don't have general "please test this new abiword release" mails on the list though | 13:25 |
| knome | we only test it within our own testing routines | 13:25 |
| knome | so, the qeustion is | 13:25 |
| knome | should menulibre have a special position because it's developed "in-house"? | 13:26 |
| elfy | I guess that if someone needed something testing and it didn't impact on any planned testing then I've not too much of a problem with it | 13:26 |
| knome | and if yes, do we expect its testing to be scheduled with the xubuntu testing | 13:26 |
| knome | or do we allow it its own testing schedule, which is "test when released" | 13:27 |
| ochosi | knome: strange, i just received your mail wrt teams, but the earlier one about MLs was "lost" or something.. need to dig through the online archive i guess | 13:27 |
| knome | :) | 13:27 |
| ochosi | seems like the xfce-forward is a bit unreliable atm | 13:27 |
| elfy | in that position then xubuntu mailing list isn't the right place | 13:27 |
| knome | ochosi, https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/2014-May/010193.html | 13:28 |
| elfy | but that's nto any different than us testing a bug fix for abiword is it? | 13:28 |
| knome | well, | 13:28 |
| knome | the difference is | 13:28 |
| knome | if we're testing a bugfix for abiword | 13:28 |
| knome | it's a known bug that xubuntu users/testers reported | 13:29 |
| knome | and something that's important for us | 13:29 |
| knome | the menulibre bugfix stuff is the same, except that the call was for a whole bunch of bugs | 13:29 |
| knome | eg. a bugfix release | 13:29 |
| elfy | was that NOT important to us? | 13:30 |
| knome | heh, of course | 13:30 |
| knome | let me try to rephrase | 13:30 |
| knome | menulibre got a new bugfix release | 13:30 |
| knome | and then we got the call for testing | 13:30 |
| knome | when abiword gets a bugfix release | 13:30 |
| knome | we don't get a notification, nor do we specifically test the bugfixes right after that | 13:31 |
| knome | but in accordance to our own testing schedule | 13:31 |
| knome | well, testing always happens parallely | 13:31 |
| elfy | no - but if someone asked me to try to fit in a specific test for abiword then I would | 13:31 |
| knome | but that's different | 13:31 |
| knome | if abiword released 3.4.1 | 13:32 |
| knome | or whatever | 13:32 |
| knome | we wouldn't test the 3.4.1 release | 13:32 |
| knome | we'd check if it generally works | 13:32 |
| elfy | mmmm | 13:32 |
| knome | and if the bugs we have experienced were fixed | 13:32 |
| knome | now, | 13:32 |
| knome | menulibre got a similar release | 13:32 |
| knome | for "some" reason, all the bugs fixed were experienced by us | 13:32 |
| knome | but the call was for that menulibre release | 13:33 |
| knome | for that time only | 13:33 |
| knome | not something we'd have to keep regularly checking | 13:33 |
| elfy | if 3.4.1 got released after we'd done the call that included abiword - then nothing would specifically be done till the next cycle | 13:33 |
| knome | elfy, exactly | 13:33 |
| knome | elfy, and if it got released before we tested it | 13:33 |
| knome | elfy, we would wait until we hit the abiword dates on the schedule | 13:33 |
| elfy | then we test what is in the daily at that point | 13:33 |
| elfy | yes | 13:34 |
| knome | or we wouldn't wait | 13:34 |
| knome | because we didn't know a new version was out | 13:34 |
| knome | we'd just notice it when we test | 13:34 |
| knome | and notice those bugs were gone | 13:34 |
| elfy | but - we try to be flexible - if someone says something about something specific | 13:34 |
| knome | sure | 13:34 |
| knome | as i said, there's always parallel stuff going on | 13:34 |
| knome | regardless of the testing schedule | 13:34 |
| knome | now the question is | 13:34 |
| elfy | so I really don't understand your point here :) | 13:35 |
| knome | is menulibre important enough, and | 13:35 |
| knome | is the bug release minor enough | 13:35 |
| knome | to be okay to allow parallel testing, even if it was during some other scheduled testing | 13:35 |
| knome | and possibly: | 13:35 |
| knome | is the people who do the scheduled tests the only people who do testing at all | 13:36 |
| knome | because there might be somebody who is specifically interested about menulibre testing | 13:36 |
| knome | <- | 13:36 |
| elfy | who knows | 13:36 |
| elfy | all I *know* is who reports things | 13:36 |
| knome | but doesn't *necessarily* take part in all scheduled tests | 13:36 |
| knome | <- kind of | 13:36 |
| knome | yeah, we don't know :) | 13:37 |
| elfy | look | 13:37 |
| elfy | I really don't understand what you're getting at - frankly I'm not that worried about what we test - as long as team is happy that what needs to be tested | 13:37 |
| elfy | what I do worry about is a free for all - when everyone and his dog sends testing calls to the list | 13:38 |
| knome | lol | 13:38 |
| elfy | it's really simple | 13:38 |
| knome | i wouldn't consider sean "everyone and his dog" ;) | 13:38 |
| elfy | well no - but you know what I mean | 13:38 |
| knome | i do | 13:39 |
| knome | i haven't seen much calls for testing that have been irrelevant though | 13:39 |
| elfy | and is seems to me that you're just trying to make it sound ok for Sean to do what he did | 13:39 |
| knome | no, not really... | 13:39 |
| knome | i guess i personally think it's okay | 13:39 |
| elfy | if team thinks that - then that's fine - but I don't and I won't put up with being kept oput of the loop on testing | 13:39 |
| knome | but if we want that out of the list, i completely understand that too | 13:39 |
| elfy | and if it keeps happening then I'll just go | 13:39 |
| knome | well, we don't want that | 13:40 |
| knome | i agree that sean should have asked you first | 13:40 |
| elfy | it is really simple - communication was abysmal last cycle - and it looks exactly the same at the moment from where I'm sitting | 13:40 |
| ochosi | sergio-br2: LO mimes are done, so only apps/128 is missing for that piece... | 13:40 |
| sergio-br2 | great | 13:41 |
| knome | elfy, as ochosi asked, would you be fine if all calls for testing went through you then? | 13:41 |
| knome | elfy, i'm just weighing options, i'm not deciding anything, don't worry :) | 13:42 |
| knome | (i don't even have the power to do so anymore) | 13:42 |
| elfy | and I'll say the same thing again - let's see what happens in the meeting | 13:42 |
| knome | how will the meeting make a difference? | 13:42 |
| knome | decisions about mailing lists? | 13:42 |
| elfy | yep | 13:43 |
| elfy | and trello perhaps | 13:43 |
| knome | bluesabre's mail would have been automatically accepted anyway | 13:43 |
| elfy | because if that's just a we're really not going to do that - then we do need to do something | 13:43 |
| knome | or he could have approved it himself if not :P | 13:43 |
| knome | one of the issues is clearly too much traffic on the list. | 13:44 |
| knome | let me fix that: | 13:44 |
| knome | too much irrelevant traffic | 13:44 |
| knome | i seriously want to find a solution that works for you and the team, and any potential people who do calls for testing | 13:45 |
| elfy | I'm not worried about *me* :) I just want *us* to be in a better place with regard to knowing at least the bare bones about what's going on | 13:47 |
| elfy | gives us all a fighting chance | 13:47 |
| knome | yep | 13:48 |
| ochosi | knome: read up on the whole ML proposal, thanks for that! | 14:08 |
| knome | np | 14:08 |
| ochosi | after reading the statistics i somewhat agree, but we should talk to all moderators about this | 14:08 |
| ochosi | as it will suddenly increase their workload from nearly 0 to 3 per week on average | 14:09 |
| knome | all current moderators, or all moderators that were moderators when we started talking about this? | 14:09 |
| knome | well, 0 is inexisting | 14:09 |
| knome | it's probably 1 now | 14:09 |
| ochosi | well i'd want all of them to "sign up" for this | 14:09 |
| knome | and more if we count those mails we need to discard | 14:10 |
| knome | sure | 14:10 |
| === qwebirc612198 is now known as slickymasterWork | ||
| knome | but tbh, i believe the policy will take care that the workload will decrease | 14:10 |
| ochosi | hopefully yes | 14:10 |
| ochosi | actually, as an example of the past, #xfce-dev was closed a longer while ago | 14:11 |
| ochosi | because there was so much random noise there | 14:11 |
| ochosi | after a year it could be re-opened | 14:11 |
| knome | mhm | 14:11 |
| ochosi | and has been okay since then | 14:11 |
| knome | yep | 14:11 |
| ochosi | even if it might become busier/noisier again, there was a long/er term effect | 14:12 |
| ochosi | so i'm generally +1 on this | 14:12 |
| knome | yes | 14:12 |
| knome | i hate to say this, but there seems to be a group of people who are the root of the random noise | 14:12 |
| a5m0 | how can i get lightdm to have the correct resolution and correctly show my dual-monitor wallpaper? (xubuntu 14.04) | 14:31 |
| ochosi | a5m0: this is the development channel, for support questions ask in #xubuntu | 14:31 |
| brainwash | ochosi: logind hibernate policy has been finally adjusted | 17:10 |
| brainwash | http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/commit/?id=301f9684e6465df5d0590f6c571fe3229ded966d | 17:10 |
| ochosi | guess that'll land in ubuntu at some point automatically | 17:12 |
| brainwash | once ubuntu switches to systemd completely | 17:12 |
| brainwash | ochosi: can we merge https://code.launchpad.net/~thad-fisch/xubuntu-default-settings/migrate-kb-shortcuts ? | 17:16 |
| brainwash | and what about https://code.launchpad.net/~thad-fisch/xubuntu-default-settings/remove-leftover-conffile ? del the branch? | 17:16 |
| ochosi | brainwash: kb-shortcuts branch merged, the other one i'm not sure we really need... | 17:28 |
| brainwash | first we would need to close the lp report | 17:29 |
| ochosi | you could extend your MR to also fix https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xubuntu-default-settings/+bug/1311090 | 17:35 |
| ubottu | Launchpad bug 1311090 in xubuntu-default-settings (Ubuntu) "After removing xubuntu-default-settings package lightdm failed to start" [Medium,Triaged] | 17:35 |
| ochosi | that seems more important actually | 17:35 |
| brainwash | but why extend if the first one is somewhat obsolete? | 17:36 |
| brainwash | it happened during the development phase | 17:36 |
| ochosi | yeah, you can also just fix the latter and remove the other branch | 17:37 |
| brainwash | maybe | 17:39 |
| brainwash | I also forgot about the non working kb shortcut issue :/ | 17:39 |
| brainwash | the problem is that the user config file is created based on the xubuntu AND Xfce one | 17:41 |
| brainwash | which differ slightly | 17:41 |
| brainwash | key-wise | 17:41 |
| ochosi | how do they differ and what's the problem exactly? | 17:42 |
| ochosi | is there a bugreport already? | 17:42 |
| ochosi | brainwash: you can delete your remove-leftover.. branch now | 17:43 |
| brainwash | e.g. xubuntu uses alt+f5 to maximize a window and alt+f10 is not mapped anymore | 17:44 |
| brainwash | but the normal Xfce kb shortcut xml assigns alt-f10 to maximize window | 17:44 |
| brainwash | so the user xml will contain alt+f5 and alt+f10 for maximize window | 17:44 |
| knome | assign all unassigned keys to a script that plays a "meow" sound! | 17:45 |
| * knome hides | 17:45 | |
| brainwash | 2 entries for the same command | 17:45 |
| brainwash | now the user tries to reassign it, but only one entry will be deleted and a new one created | 17:45 |
| brainwash | the new one will be ignored | 17:46 |
| ochosi | do you have a solution for that already? | 17:46 |
| ochosi | (other than dropping xubuntu shortcuts) | 17:46 |
| knome | do not inherit xfce shortcuts? | 17:47 |
| knome | :) | 17:47 |
| brainwash | maybe it's a simply prefix issue | 17:49 |
| brainwash | because we store our xubuntu related configs in /etc/xdg/xdg-xubuntu | 17:49 |
| brainwash | so the user config file should be only created based on this file | 17:50 |
| brainwash | it's an easy fix I guess | 17:52 |
| ochosi | bbl | 17:53 |
| brainwash | we can ignore already "corrupted" xml files? | 17:54 |
| brainwash | just tell the user to delete it, so it will be re-created properly? | 17:54 |
| brainwash | one could add some sort of clean up mechanism, but that's maybe overkill | 17:55 |
| brainwash | and it won't be accepted upstream, so we'll have to carry it downstream :) | 17:56 |
| * amigamagic pc says: "eeeeh!?" when he press ALT+F13 | 19:06 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!