[00:05] <knome> hullo bluesabre 
[00:09]  * bluesabre is sighted
[00:09] <knome> bad sight is sight too..
[00:10] <elfy> sight is just usually bad
[00:25] <knome> bluesabre, not too late for translations
[00:25] <knome> and please keep the devel discussion here :P
[00:26] <bluesabre> goodie
[00:26] <knome> wondering who's going to take care of that slideshow update still
[00:27] <knome> s/update/upload/
[00:27] <knome> we need one NOW and one on next week's thursday
[00:31] <bluesabre> hm, maybe not for greeter-settings translations, seems the translation template and all translation files are completely different
[00:32] <bluesabre> andrew_p has been busy x.x
[00:37] <Unit193> bluesabre: Hah, right, telling you where would help.  ppa:unit193/xfce
[00:37] <bluesabre> thanks
[00:39] <bluesabre> 20:22	Unit193	 * d/p/xubuntu_git_Make_verbose_logging_conditional.patch:
[00:39] <bluesabre> 20:22	Unit193	    - Backport a commit to turn off verbose logging by default.
[00:54] <Unit193> bluesabre: So anything not for wombat to do?
[00:54] <bluesabre> Unit193: hoping to have a new catfish or menulibre when wombat opens up
[00:55] <bluesabre> and/or a gtk3-ready exo
[06:36] <ochosi> bluesabre: does that mean i can put your name down in the 4.14 roadmap for exo? :)
[06:37] <Unit193> Heh.
[08:33] <knome> ochosi, regarding the mailing list,
[08:34] <knome> ochosi, since we do not really want non-members to "vote" on the office/image editor discussion, what should i do with a non-member, moderation queue message:
[08:34] <knome> ochosi, 1) simply discard the message; it doesn't appear on the list and no notification is made
[08:35] <knome> ochosi, 2) reject the message with a note for the original poster telling why it is rejected
[08:35] <knome> ochosi, 3) sth else
[08:35] <ochosi> 1) sounds a bit harsh to my ears
[08:35] <ochosi> 2) would be acceptable
[08:36] <ochosi> for 3) i could imagine changing the subject, thus creating a new thread
[08:36] <knome> to me, 2) sounds like we're going to have an argument over the issue with the poster
[08:36] <knome> i recognise that email address being somebody who has posted irrelevant stuff before.
[08:37] <ochosi> right, i guess if you know the poster, it's a slightly different issue
[08:37] <knome> the mail is straightforward "vote", there is very little discussion
[08:37] <ochosi> right, then my 3) is not an option
[08:38] <ochosi> wasn't sure you were talking generally or about a specific message
[08:38] <ochosi> if it's about this specific message, i would simply reject it (aka 1))
[08:38] <knome> some one-liner arguments, but then again, it's supposed to be a team vote, and at this point there has been time to bring all arguments to the table (via the general, open for all thread before)
[08:38] <knome> both this and to act as a guideline for future
[08:38] <knome> i would lean to 1) too.
[08:39] <knome> there is a way they can get their mail on the archive if they insist; just subscribe the list...
[08:39] <Unit193> How about for all team votes and such, don't just set [TEAM] but explain what that means?
[08:39] <knome> Unit193, it is explained.
[08:39] <knome> clearly people, including you, don't read the mails
[08:39] <ochosi> i thought i did explain it quite clearly in my first email
[08:39] <ochosi> (for both votes)
[08:40] <ochosi> even in CAPS :)
[08:40] <knome> exactly, anybody who has actually read the original message but post their "vote" nonetheless (and are not a team member) are just plain ignorant
[08:40] <knome> or, and this is the more likely option, they didn't read it
[08:41] <Unit193> knome: Sure I do, but as that didn't work, does listing people help or no?  Granted, you're always going to get some no matter what.
[08:41] <knome> ochosi, discarded
[08:41] <ochosi> anyway, as a more general rule, we could set up a template message that quickly explains why a message was moderated/discarded
[08:41] <knome> Unit193, i didn't..
[08:42] <knome> ochosi, these are very rare occasions really
[08:42] <Unit193> * Read this whole message, I don't always read all of them.  More so if I think it came from another list. >_>
[08:42] <ochosi> something generic like "This is a team-only vote. Your message has been discarded. Create a new thread if you want to discuss something else."
[08:42] <knome> most of the time the accident has already happened
[08:42] <knome> this is an edge case where we were able to prevent the accident from happening
[08:42] <ochosi> yeah, guess that's true
[08:42] <knome> it's literally the first time
[08:42] <ochosi> :)
[08:43] <knome> Unit193, that just proves that no matter what we said, people are going to be ignorant
[08:43] <knome> and that there is no way to stop them from posting except an all-moderated list, which people were against before
[08:44] <knome> ochosi, should we set a vote for the next meeting about the strategy document?
[08:45] <knome> elfy, i postponed survey 2, because clearly we should wait until we've done the moves for 15.10
[08:47] <ochosi> knome: is that about the SD change where we remove the developer paragraph or something else?
[08:47] <knome> ochosi, no, this is about the seeds and composition part
[08:47] <ochosi> oh right, yeah got it
[08:47] <knome> the developer paragraph is gone
[08:47] <ochosi> sounds good to me
[08:48] <ochosi> yeah, i was distracted by other stuff there
[08:48] <knome> ok, good, i'll add it to the agenda
[08:48] <knome> no worries
[08:48] <knome> just going through the open work items..
[08:50] <ochosi> thanks knome 
[08:50] <knome> np
[08:50] <knome> i'm procrastinating real work
[08:51] <ochosi> yeah, i should get back to that now
[08:51] <knome> specifically writing an offer :P
[08:51] <knome> back to procrastinating? sounds good.
[09:28] <brainwash> bluesabre: the last xfdesktop update for trusty (SRU) triggered an automatic crash report. any news on this? did all users get the update despite the report?
[09:30] <brainwash> bug 1415683
[09:31] <brainwash> should the fix be backported?
[09:31] <brainwash> + https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xfdesktop4/+bug/1335492/comments/58
[10:16] <elfy> knome: yup, ty 
[10:30] <brainwash> could xubuntu opt out of "One Hundred Papercuts"? alberto tends to add it to the affects list of many bug reports, but there really seems to be no benefit
[10:35] <elfy> not sure if we can opt out - possibly someone could ask him to not do it
[10:44] <slickymasterWork> yeah, I'm also under the impression that's not a possibility
[10:45] <slickymasterWork> but he does seem to be all over the place
[10:45] <brainwash> the project idea is not bad, but adding all these "easy" to fix bugs does not seem to help much
[10:46] <brainwash> most of our bugs are not trivial or require packaging skills
[10:58] <elfy> can we not just untag them? 
[11:04] <elfy> didn't we have this conversation with him a while back? 
[11:07] <slickymasterWork> wasn't that ^^^ about is fixation with emoticons in m/l instead elfy?
[11:09] <elfy> no pretty sure we did something re our bugs
[11:10] <elfy> brainwash: do you remember that? 
[12:24] <knome> i vaguely remember something like that
[12:24] <knome> wasn't it about the black background bug?
[12:51] <knome> ochosi, are there some bugs in the bugs blueprint that you aren't planning to fix?
[12:52] <knome>  [xubuntu-qa] Create rolling base release note wiki: INPROGRESS
[12:52] <knome> elfy, can't that considered to be done?
[12:52] <knome>  [xubuntu-qa] Exploratory testing information to testers via ML: INPROGRESS
[12:52] <knome> elfy, what's the status of that? since we only have a few days left, is it realistic that it's actually just postponed?
[12:52] <ochosi> knome: yes, there are, i guess i should go over them with bluesabre to decide what to unlink
[12:53] <knome> elfy, or do you consider it done?
[12:53] <knome> ochosi, fwiw, you can link them to the umbrella blueprint, and they won't show up at status.u.c
[12:53] <knome> ochosi, that way you can still keep a list of things that you want to move onto the next cycle
[12:53] <ochosi> yeah, i'll still discuss this with him first
[12:53] <knome>  [xubuntu-qa] Review and correct testcase as required (re-check Xfce4.12): INPROGRESS
[12:53] <ochosi> but good to know
[12:53] <knome> elfy, that?
[12:54] <ochosi> bluesabre: maybe we can talk about the remaining open bugreports attached to our v-bugs blueprint sometime on the weekend and move those we won't fix somewhere else
[12:55] <knome> pleia2, if you want to print the first batch of flyers on a print shop, you can do that with the current files already... the thing i need to iron out is related to home printers without FB-modes
[12:55] <knome> ochosi, should probably unlink invalid ones
[12:56] <knome> looks like it's again around 10% that didn't get done
[12:57] <ochosi> some of those are upstream bugs that won't get easy fixes
[12:57] <ochosi> i'm actually quite happy with what we accomplished this cycle
[12:57] <knome> sure, i was referring to the whole lot of blueprints, not bugs only
[13:09] <elfy> knome: could possibly have been tghe black screen thing 
[14:32] <mrkramps> a wekk or something ago, i reported keyboard media keys not being recognised on my system … well, i shoud not have diabled them, so … just forget about it
[14:34] <ochosi> :)
[14:34] <ochosi> it happens
[14:37] <mrkramps> xinput lists the media keys as seperated device in pointers AND keyboard and i incidentely disabled them in mouse and touchpad setting … just took me some days to find aut :S
[20:58] <slickymaster> okie doke brainwash, done
[21:42] <bluesabre> ochosi: here only briefly, but I will probably be around for a bit tomorrow
[21:43] <Unit193> Oki.
[21:43] <bluesabre> !info xfdesktop4 trusty
[21:43] <bluesabre> brainwash: yes, all sources seem to indicate that 4.11.8 is still rolled out to everyone in trusty, and yes, it would probably be good to get them a fix
[21:44] <Unit193> !info xfdesktop4 trusty-updates
[21:44] <Unit193> !info xfdesktop4 trusty-proposed
[21:44] <bluesabre> the bot seems to look at -updates
[21:44] <bluesabre> http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty-updates/xfdesktop4
[21:44] <bluesabre> vs http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/xfdesktop4
[21:46] <brainwash> bluesabre: is it worth the effort? could be yet another package which gets stuck in -proposed for weeks/months
[21:46] <bluesabre> trusty is supported for quite a bit longer than that, so yeah
[21:46] <bluesabre> crashes are annoying
[21:47] <Unit193> Wait, anyone cares about trusty?
[21:47] <brainwash> I think it's a silent crash, or not visible due to the crash recovery mechanism of xfce4-session
[21:47]  * bluesabre does
[21:48]  * slickymaster also
[21:48] <Unit193> upstart*
[21:49] <brainwash> some trusty users may be annoyed by the icon reset regression, and there is a patch available upstream (or 4.12.1)
[21:50] <bluesabre> let's gauge how bad it is and determine what we want to backport
[21:50] <bluesabre> I gotta run now, bbabl
[21:50] <brainwash> it mainly affects people with many desktop icons and/or slow systems
[21:51] <brainwash> so, it's bad
[21:52] <brainwash> bluesabre: a good start would be to pick the patches and let affected users test it, then got for the SRU