[00:00] <ochosi> sweet
[00:00] <ochosi> in -staging?
[00:02] <Unit193> Unless I did something wrong...
[00:02] <ochosi> :)
[00:02]  * ochosi checks
[00:08] <ochosi> hmm, no gmb here: https://launchpad.net/~xubuntu-dev/+archive/ubuntu/xubuntu-staging
[00:09] <knome> (:
[00:10] <Unit193> Oh right, because we like the word 'xubuntu' so much, we repeat it.
[00:12] <ochosi> hehe
[00:12] <ochosi> good point, but a bit late in the game to change the name of the PPA just for the sake of it
[00:12] <Unit193> Take 2.
[00:14] <knome> ochosi, should ~xubuntu-project-lead own ~xubuntu-bugs ?
[00:15] <knome> ochosi, and ~xubuntu-users
[00:15] <ochosi> hm, good question
[00:15] <ochosi> who owns those teams now?
[00:15] <knome> i think bugs yes, users is a better question
[00:15] <knome> ~xubuntu-team
[00:15] <ochosi> yeah, i'd tend to agree
[00:15] <ochosi> users should be "free-er"
[00:15] <knome> they both have open membership
[00:16] <ochosi> yeah, i know, then again ownership might send the wrong signal
[00:16] <knome> xpl now owns bugs
[00:16] <ochosi> then again, i don't know if ppl really notice/care
[00:16] <knome> the logical argument is that the xpl should "own" all xubuntu teams
[00:16] <ochosi> yeah
[00:16] <knome> if not, then why should?
[00:17] <knome> there is no ~xubuntu-community
[00:17] <ochosi> true that
[00:17] <knome> which would be sematically nice, but technically so waste of time...
[00:17] <ochosi> agreed
[00:17] <knome> because that would have need to be owned by xpl..
[00:18] <knome> and that's not a right signal either ;)
[00:19] <ochosi> heh
[00:19] <knome> so should xpl just own users directly?
[00:19] <knome> it's a technical thing anyway
[00:21] <knome> ok, i guess another question
[00:21] <knome> does xpl need to be the member in all the teams?
[00:21] <knome> i think there was some argument behind that, but...
[00:21] <knome> https://launchpad.net/~xubuntu-project-lead/+participation
[00:21] <knome> that looks stupid (the first row)
[00:22] <knome> that's just wrong; the fact that the xpl team owns that team should not make it a member of other teams via the teams he owns
[00:22] <knome> and; owner should always be able to touch and do everything on the team anyway
[00:23] <ochosi> yeah
[00:23] <knome> here's the thing: i can't do *that* :)
[00:24] <knome> and a more weird thought
[00:24] <knome> maybe the xpl team could/should be "Xubuntu community managers"
[00:24] <ochosi> xpl team?
[00:25] <knome> because the argument that via that, we have access to all teams is vanished if the sole member disappears...
[00:25] <knome> https://launchpad.net/~xubuntu-project-lead
[00:25] <knome> that
[00:25] <knome> but that's not something to answer now
[00:25] <knome> or decide
[00:25] <Unit193> Progress on 1270486, that's good.
[00:25] <knome> bug 1270486
[00:25] <knome> hmmh
[00:26] <knome> aand one more thought: one team where XPL probably *should* be a member in is ~xubuntu-release
[00:27] <ochosi> Unit193: yeah, that looks like that one is going to get fixed, since trevinho already wrote a patch and larsu approved
[00:28] <Unit193> So now I'll finally know the difference between  'quit' and 'quit'!
[00:28] <ochosi> :D
[00:29] <knome> Unit193, isn't that obvious?
[00:29] <Unit193> It is if you use sed on the glade file.
[00:29] <knome> ;)
[00:30] <ochosi> Unit193: yay, shiny new gmb!
[00:30] <ochosi> and it seems that sucky crash when closing it is gone
[00:30] <Unit193> Is it shiny?
[00:30] <Unit193> \o/
[00:30] <ochosi> nah, almost no visible diff, but that fix is good
[00:30]  * Unit193 fixed it. :---3
[00:30] <ochosi> oh well, and equalizer presets
[00:30] <ochosi> that is quite awesome
[00:31] <ochosi> thanks a bunch, Unit193
[00:31] <Unit193> Of course.
[00:32] <ochosi> i'll start testing it now and report back
[00:32] <Unit193> Prepped it for Debian too, but didn't push into the pkg-multimedia repo. :P
[00:33] <ochosi> awesome
[00:33] <ochosi> never thought that one would even get close to making it into 15.04
[00:33] <ochosi> but with the regression (close-crash) we have a chance of getting it in i guess
[00:43] <Unit193> (https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/users/unit193-guest/gmusicbrowser.git)  Someone will have to FFe it, of course.  And the sooner the better.
[00:45] <jjfrv8> knome, just did some installs of today's image and noticed a couple of minor issues with the slideshow
[00:46] <jjfrv8> for one thing, at least on my laptop, the slides are too big for the window and there are vertical and horizontal scrollbars
[00:47] <knome> jjfrv8, again? oh my...
[00:48] <jjfrv8> not sure about again, guess I'm not up to date on the backlog
[00:49] <knome> well again in the sense that we've had similar reports before (and not just once)
[00:49] <knome> and in most cases, the slideshow has really been just okay
[00:49] <knome> i mean, it only appears in some (edge?) cases
[00:49] <knome> so it's possible when you install tomorrow, you won't have the bug...
[00:49] <knome> but please file a bug for that if you see it again
[00:50] <jjfrv8> okay, I can try an install on my desktop tomorrow, if it's not there, will try the laptop again, too.
[00:50] <knome> not like i'm not believing you, but since it's been on and off without being always reproducable... :/
[00:50] <knome> cheers :)
[00:50] <jjfrv8> sure
[00:50] <knome> anything else that looks weird there?
[00:51] <jjfrv8> not weird, but a couple of things with the text...
[00:52] <elfy> knome: should not logically groups be owned by team and team be owned by xpl 
[00:52] <jjfrv8> on the Xubuntu desktop slide, I think there's an extra comma.  Should be "single, multipurpose panel"; i.e., no comma between "multipurpose" and "panel"
[00:52] <elfy> if there is a need for ownership
[00:52] <elfy> even if it is a circle jerk
[00:53] <knome> elfy, lol... well, i guess if the team should be able to kick out people from the team and so on
[00:53] <elfy> well
[00:53] <knome> well i don't know why they would (want to) do that, but...
[00:53] <elfy> xpl could wander off
[00:53] <knome> but it's a good question
[00:53] <elfy> who owns xpl? 
[00:53] <knome> yes
[00:54] <knome> but then again, it's easier to get the LP admins to return us one team that is clearly marked as the xubuntu community leader team
[00:54] <elfy> mmm
[00:54] <knome> xpl is owned by the sitting xpl
[00:54] <elfy> so Xpl owner is xpl
[00:54] <knome> yes
[00:54] <elfy> yea - catching up
[00:54] <knome> i mean, to be exact
[00:55] <knome> ~xpl owner is xpl, currently ~ochosi
[00:55] <elfy> is there an lpl, kpl, gpl ?
[00:55] <knome> probably not
[00:55] <elfy> this could really get messy :p
[00:55] <knome> https://launchpad.net/~kubuntu-council
[00:56] <knome> that's basically same as ~xpl, but with several people
[00:56] <knome> which is what i kind of suggested, even if it wasn't a "council" as is
[00:56] <elfy> xpl is however xubuntu-team returns - so should be owned by -team :p
[00:56] <knome> lol
[00:56] <elfy> s/however/whoever
[00:57] <knome> then that would technically mean everybody in -team would be able to change every detail in every xubuntu team
[00:57] <elfy> yep
[00:57] <knome> so i would vote against that :P
[00:57] <elfy> and if xpl wanders a useful thing 
[00:57] <knome> well,
[00:57] <knome> that's why i proposed ~xpl should be "xubuntu community managers", which was a group of people who are generally trusted in the community
[00:58] <knome> kind of like what the xubuntu council would be, if one would be set up
[00:58] <elfy> mmm
[00:58] <elfy> yep
[00:58] <knome> lubuntu is going small, this is basically their "creme de la creme" team https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-dev
[00:58] <elfy> xpl being xecutive vote on a council 
[00:59] <elfy> :)
[00:59] <knome> well note that i'm not saying we should set up a council... :P
[00:59] <elfy> I like the wayt we do stuff
[00:59] <knome> just that for the possibility that the XPL suddenly disappears, we would have a backup manager for the LP teams
[00:59] <elfy> we can have a council - it'llnot have me on it 
[01:00] <Unit193> Oooh!  Ooh!  Council of elfy and ochosi!
[01:00] <knome> but fwiw, i think it's good enough that it's all under one team - doing the paperwork for that is doable
[01:00] <elfy> Unit193 cleverly ignores the previous statement :p
[01:00] <elfy> I really should just stf up 
[01:01] <knome> elfy, gnome seems to split their teams, eg. a single person is owning each subteam
[01:01] <knome> though they have https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-gnome-leaders-board
[01:02] <knome> their "users and contributors" team, https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-gnome, is owned by the developer team, which is the team that is used to grant *upload permissions* to their packageset
[01:03] <knome> which is somewhat weird, since that team is owned by the DMB
[01:04] <knome> elfy, ^ there you have some other organizational models...
[01:10] <elfy> oh lord 
[01:10] <elfy> not seriousness ... 
[01:10] <knome> lol
[01:11] <knome> well it was a good excersize
[01:11] <knome> er
[01:11] <knome> fix the typos in your head...
[01:11] <knome> anyway, now i know the way we do it is superior to others :P
[13:58] <jjfrv8> knome, experimented some more with the slideshow and different hardware. It is reproducible but it looks like it's specific to my laptop video adapter.
[13:59] <jjfrv8> if I connect my laptop to an external monitor, I have the slideshow problem. But if I install from my desktop using that same monitor, same resolution - no problem.
[14:00] <jjfrv8> So does that make it an "edge case" and not worthy of a bug report?
[14:12] <jjfrv8> knome, also pushed an MP with some suggested text changes on two slides.
[14:12] <jjfrv8> bbl
[17:33] <knome> jjfrv8, you can create a bug; please attach all the information you just said here, so we can try to find other people with the same hardware or so