[07:00] <dholbach> good morning
[07:26]  * Unit193 slowpokes barry.
[07:50] <dholbach> Unit193, barry is very likely asleep
[07:50] <Unit193> dholbach: Yep, it happens.
[07:50] <Unit193> He'll be unasleep sometime.
[08:57] <pvlos> hello guys, is there any ETA for backported packages about apache regarding Logjam attack?
[10:15] <pvlos> anybody around?
[10:16] <Rhonda> never
[10:17] <Laney> pvlos: you probably want to ask in #ubuntu-server if it's a security fix
[10:20] <pvlos> Laney: thanks
[10:20] <Laney> or #ubuntu-hardened, but either should work as a first step
[10:20] <pvlos> Laney: asked already in -hardened but no answer yet
[10:20] <Laney> okay
[13:20] <barry> Unit193: yawn! :)
[17:34] <slackner> hello, i was wondering a bit how to proceed with https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/1437520 - so far this packaging request was ignored, and as i just heard in a different channel Maarten lankhorst, the previous wine maintainer, is not hired by canonical anymore. who is responsible now?
[17:34] <slackner> we from the wine staging team would also do the packaging of vanilla wine versions if noone else wants to take over this task, currently it is terribly outdated (1.7.38).
[17:37] <Unit193> !info wine-development
[17:39] <DarkPlayer> slackner was referring to the ubuntu-wine ppa: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-wine/+archive/ubuntu/ppa/+index?batch=75&memo=75&start=75
[17:40] <Unit193> Yeah, guessed.
[17:40] <slackner> wasn't aware that there is also a wine-development package in newer versions, but as it seems its even more outdated
[17:40] <Unit193> !info wine-development wily
[17:40] <DarkPlayer> since winehq does not accept bug reports for the stable versions, users are forced to get the wine version from some ppa if they don't want to build from source
[17:41] <slackner> current one is 1.7.43, so still outdated *g* ;)
[17:41] <Unit193> I'm just checking what's in the repos now. :P
[17:43] <slackner> are these packages just ported from debian? or who is responsible? we would like to proceed somehow with resolving bug 1437520 or at least hear some opinions ^^
[17:44] <DarkPlayer> Maintainer: Debian Wine Party <pkg-wine-party@lists.alioth.debian.org>
[17:44] <DarkPlayer> Uploaders:  Michael Gilbert <mgilbert@debian.org>, Stephen Kitt <skitt@debian.org>
[17:44] <DarkPlayer> looks like the debian package
[17:47] <micahg> slackner: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/NewPackages?upid=9399#Packaging_it_yourself would be the next step if no one else wants to do it
[17:47] <micahg> have you contacted the wine team in Debian
[17:47] <micahg> that's probably the best bet
[17:48] <micahg> https://pkg-wine.alioth.debian.org/
[17:49] <DarkPlayer> micahg: there was already a bug report in debian for adding wine staging (from someone else), but it didn't receive any attention
[17:51] <slackner> micahg: i am not sure if this has changed now that mlankhorst doesn't seem to be responsible anymore, but so far the ubuntu wine packages were packaged by ubuntu directly
[17:51] <DarkPlayer> moreover, debian also only provides the stable version and their solution to rename all executables in the wine-development package is more than hacky
[17:52] <slackner> micahg: and as DarkPlayer already said, based on the previous discussions debian didn't seem to be very interested, so we would prefer to get into ubuntu directly - ubuntu seems to be much more user friendly and also applied patches for pulseaudio support in the past, for example ;)
[17:57] <micahg> last update from the Ubuntu maintainer was 6 months ago, so, generally, it's usually good for Ubuntu specific packages to have a dedicated team or maintainer that'll look after it as Debian has that for its packages, it's technically not a requirement, but without that, the package is likely to get out of date
[17:58] <DarkPlayer> we wouldn't have a problem with maintaining the vanilla wine package together with wine-staging
[17:58] <DarkPlayer> we already build wine-staging for a lot of distributions (debian, ubuntu, fedora, mageia, opensuse, ...)
[17:59] <DarkPlayer> so there is no problem for us maintaining an additional package
[18:00] <DarkPlayer> since we work on wine for a long time now, we also know how to build wine, many distributions contain broken packages because they use incompatible build flags or miss some important dependency etc.
[18:00] <micahg> I would suggest contacting https://launchpad.net/~scottritchie/ as he's been maintaining wine in Ubuntu for a long while
[18:05] <slackner> micahg: we added him to the bug report which was opened two months ago, no answer so far - i am also not sure if i should still expect an answer
[18:05] <micahg> slackner: I'd suggest sending an email either through launchpad or directly, some people filter bug reports
[18:06] <micahg> I'd suggest giving about 2 weeks after sending the email, if you don't hear anything and you have it packaged, we can work on getting it into Ubuntu
[18:09] <slackner> micahg: kk, i'll give it another try then, thx
[18:09] <micahg> slackner: thanks and good luck
[18:10] <micahg> we're early in the cycle, so there's time :)
[19:23] <slackner> micahg: just about to send the mail, should i add you as CC?
[19:24] <micahg> sure, I don't mind
[22:59] <utlemming> I just filed Bug 1459455 for inclusion in Wily. Wondering if any of you kind motu's could take a look. This is a Ubuntu specific package for xe-guest-utilities.
[23:08] <micahg> I can take a look a little later