[00:54] <bluesabre> ochosi: I'll have to check it out then... its definitely screwy on my vivid+gtk3.16 box
[00:55] <bluesabre> re the greeter, its a known issue, and there is a workaround
[00:55] <bluesabre> https://bugs.launchpad.net/lightdm-gtk-greeter/+bug/1460303/comments/6
[00:55] <Unit193> "downgrade" :---D
[00:56] <bluesabre> ;)
[00:56] <Unit193> You know, it's harder to troll/make comments when the Xubuntu devs are the actual upstream maintainers...
[00:56] <bluesabre> >.>
[00:57] <bluesabre> maybe I should go ahead and fix it myself
[00:57] <Unit193> What about the dialog box flicker?
[00:57] <Unit193> Started in 2.0.0 I believe, a bit annoying IMO.
[00:59] <bluesabre> haven't seen a flicker
[01:01] <Unit193> I see it in Xubuntu and Debian.
[01:04] <bluesabre> when does it happen?
[01:06] <Unit193> It is the login password prompt, right when typing your password and hitting <Enter>, it'll go away, flash up for a split second, then disappear again.
[01:07] <bluesabre> oh
[01:07] <bluesabre> never noticed that before
[01:07] <bluesabre> ever file a bug?
[01:07] <Unit193> "Yes"
[01:09] <bluesabre> :\
[01:13] <Unit193> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=786620 heh.
[01:16] <bluesabre> that might be the previous image not being cleared on the screen
[01:16] <bluesabre> the "flicker" that is
[01:17] <bluesabre> I might be able to fix that
[01:18] <Unit193> \o/
[01:18] <Unit193> It's minor, but a bit annoying.
[01:19] <bluesabre> yeah
[01:19] <bluesabre> I'll also try to fix the background drawing without the workaround
[01:19] <bluesabre> might not happen tonight, but I think that's my immediate goal
[01:20] <Unit193> Heh, yep.  More annoying.
[06:50] <ochosi> morning everyone
[08:15] <ochosi> bluesabre: maybe you can just post some issues/screenshots of your issues and i'll check what's up with it in wily
[10:13] <ochosi> lunchtime, babl
[10:13] <ochosi> bbabl
[11:39] <bluesabre> :D
[11:39] <Unit193> Good plan.
[11:39] <ochosi> bluesabre: feel free to create a workitem on the lp bp as well
[11:41] <bluesabre> done
[11:41] <bluesabre> bbl
[11:41] <Unit193> Oh gosh, two trackers.
[11:41] <ochosi> yeah
[11:41] <Unit193> Plus junk/todo.txt :3
[11:41] <bluesabre> one's easier for comments
[11:41] <bluesabre> :D
[11:42] <Unit193> One gets tracked in here, one via my email. :P
[18:01] <Yanpas> Hello everybody! Recently xfce leader  Olivier Fourdan has fixed old annoying bug: tearing of xfwm4 compositor! https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10439 
[18:02] <Yanpas> What does it mean for Xubuntu? New xfwm4 should be compiled with libepoxy-dev and libepoxy0 should included to Xubuntu
[18:03] <Yanpas> 15.10 of course
[18:08] <ochosi> Yanpas: hey. yes we're aware of that and i presume that'll land in wily (if it hasn't yet)
[18:12] <Yanpas> good to hear :)
[18:19] <Yanpas> And what is the status of QT icons support and theme? (In 15.04 QT apps gtk+ theme was fixed by saving qt4-qtconfig file, but it's no the correct way, just temporary workaround, cause both icons and theme work in trusty qithout any config files in user dir). Icons still unsupported. Is it XFCE or Xubuntu problem?
[18:19] <Yanpas> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xubuntu-default-settings/+bug/1451993
[20:08] <knome> ok, so we got first user telling they use chaletos...
[20:19] <drc> I saw some discussion the otherday about xubuntu-derivatives...what's the official position, help or no help?
[20:19] <knome> it's not black and white, but if it were, no help
[22:23] <Unit193> bluesabre: https://packages.qa.debian.org/e/evince/news/20150624T221919Z.html
[22:35] <ochosi> Unit193: oh, no more evince-gtk
[22:39] <ochosi> knome: ping
[22:41] <knome> ochosi, pong
[22:41] <ochosi> you around for a bit?
[22:41] <knome> i guess
[22:42] <ochosi> motivated too?
[22:42] <pleia2> drinking
[22:42] <ochosi> hehe
[22:42] <ochosi> that sounds more like it
[22:42] <knome> awwh, she exposed me
[22:43] <knome> revealed?
[22:43] <knome> whatever
[22:43] <knome> pleia2, tut tut!
[22:43] <knome> (:
[22:43] <pleia2> :)
[22:43] <pleia2> <3
[22:43]  * knome hugs pleia2
[22:43]  * pleia2 hugs
[22:44] <knome> ochosi, so, what's up?
[22:44] <Unit193> ochosi: Hopefully it's not needed, but we'll see.
[22:44] <ochosi> :)
[22:45] <ochosi> knome: was just wondering whether you wanna work on some stuff together
[22:45] <knome> hmmh
[22:45] <ochosi> but if you're drinking, i really don't wanna keep you... ;)
[22:45] <knome> hah
[22:45] <knome> icons, likely not
[22:46] <ochosi> well you still owe me the window-close icon for greybird ;)
[22:46] <ochosi> we need that for CSD
[22:46] <knome> wait, why do i owe it to you again?
[22:46] <knome> none of the other icons are in svg either!
[22:47] <knome> i mean i'm sure that was part of the problem
[22:47] <ochosi> cause you made the original and we agreed you'd be most fit to redo it in svg ;)
[22:47] <knome> exporting an svg didn't look good
[22:47] <knome> i remember doing some pixel pushing
[22:47] <ochosi> yeah, but the current icon sucks
[22:47] <ochosi> even without making it crispy-crisp, it has to be improved
[22:47] <knome> you need it in the same size?
[22:47] <knome> and in svg?
[22:48] <ochosi> i was also considering doing one or two more xfwm4 themes that are greybird-compatible that we can ship
[22:48] <knome> what does that mean?
[22:48] <ochosi> for higher res screens and maybe one with thicker borders so ppl with resize problems can use it
[22:48] <knome> and on the same note, why not the a11y version?
[22:48] <knome> yeah...
[22:48] <knome> that's it
[22:48] <ochosi> i'm just listing stuff that i'd be up for
[22:49] <ochosi> a11y version is too much work
[22:49] <ochosi> not exactly an all-nighter
[22:49] <knome> nope
[22:49] <knome> but thicker borders can be a start for that
[22:49] <ochosi> well xfwm4 theme is only a tiny part for an a11y theme anyway
[22:49] <knome> sure
[22:49] <ochosi> the real work is elsewhere
[22:49]  * knome shrugs
[22:49] <ochosi> mostly in gtk2
[22:49] <ochosi> but also in gtk3
[22:50] <knome> yep
[22:52] <ochosi> might also just draw some more LO icons, i'm almost done with what i wanted to achieve there anyway
[22:52] <knome> anything else than icon work?
[22:54] <ochosi> humm
[22:54]  * ochosi goes to check the blueprints
[22:54] <knome> heh
[22:54] <knome> we have the derivative guideline work
[22:54] <knome> and we might get pleia2 to help
[22:54] <ochosi> yeah, could also do that
[22:55] <knome> http://pad.ubuntu.com/xubuntu-derivative-guidelines
[22:56] <knome> as you see in the pad, i've went through some of the derivatives
[22:56] <knome> and checked how they've done with our guidelines
[22:56] <knome> well, the WIP guidelines
[22:56] <knome> basically voyager is the only one very clearly breaking the rules
[22:57] <knome> lin4neuro is another that pretty much looks xubuntu with a different app selection
[22:58] <ochosi> so what is it you wanna do right now, wanna contact the most problematic ones?
[22:58] <ochosi> or do you want to finalize/publish the guidelines somewhere first?
[22:58] <knome> probably finalize them
[22:58] <knome> and get the rest of the derivatives checked
[22:58] <knome> and do a bit more research on derivatives
[22:59] <knome> eg. to see if we've missed some still
[22:59] <ochosi> sounds a bit boring considering the hour
[22:59] <knome> after that, i'd like to discuss with some kind of group what to do with the derivatives that are clearly breaking the rules
[22:59] <ochosi> but ok
[22:59] <ochosi> i guess we oughta get in touch with them
[23:00] <knome> another thing we need to cover on the guidelines is derivatives for home or very private use
[23:00] <ochosi> do we need any for that usecase?
[23:00] <knome> there was a question on the -devel queue about using a modified xubuntu system on a small office
[23:00] <knome> for like 3 people
[23:00] <knome> (i replied them)
[23:01] <knome> well it's probably good to mention that it is ok to modify xubuntu for personal/private use as long as it isn't distributed publicly
[23:01] <ochosi> right, i don't see any problem with private use
[23:01] <ochosi> yeah
[23:01] <pleia2> this is a good document
[23:01] <ochosi> that's a sentence we can add in
[23:01] <pleia2> knome: I know you had asked about money/donations whatever, but I'm inclined to ignore it entirely here and handle it privately on a case by case basis
[23:01] <pleia2> since they really do just need to chat with canonical legal
[23:02] <knome> pleia2, thing is, many of these derivatives ask for donations
[23:02] <knome> i'm wondering what we could do
[23:02] <pleia2> not my job
[23:02] <knome> one of the options i have been thinking is to ask them to consider tipping the community tip jar back
[23:03] <knome> even if that doesn't explicitly mean *we* get the money back
[23:03] <ochosi> yeah, i'm not sure that's really something i wanna get too involved in though
[23:03] <pleia2> one of the things support from canonical gets us is lawyers, I don't care but it's not my repos/direct resources they're leveraging and slapping their own name on
[23:03] <knome> yeah
[23:03] <knome> that's another thing we should discuss
[23:03] <knome> well, or not
[23:04] <knome> basically, pretty much all of these are using ubuntu repositories
[23:05] <pleia2> again, I don't really care and don't want to get involved
[23:05] <knome> yeah...
[23:05] <knome> me neither
[23:05] <knome> but it's good to ack that
[23:05] <pleia2> if they ask, we'll point them to canonical, but I don't want to initiate the discussion
[23:05] <knome> they likely won't ask
[23:05] <pleia2> if canonical has a problem with it, they'll let them know
[23:05] <knome> yep
[23:06] <knome> and they likely won't ;)
[23:06] <pleia2> pretty much
[23:06] <ochosi> yeah
[23:06] <ochosi> i'd rather not invest time/effort into "hunting folks down" for little/no obvious benefit
[23:06] <knome> yeah, that's not our point
[23:06] <ochosi> ideally yeah, they'd contribute back
[23:07] <ochosi> but they could've done so in the first place
[23:07] <knome> yep
[23:07] <ochosi> personally, the approach i prefer is sending out this questionnaire
[23:07] <pleia2> I think the point is having a complete document here for derivatives, but I'd rather just ignore it
[23:07] <ochosi> that might get us somewhere and it's basically already there, so not too much energy has to go into sending it out etc
[23:07] <knome> the complete document is the main point
[23:08] <knome> the questionnaire is to try to start some communication
[23:08] <knome> people can't really lie to us
[23:08] <pleia2> yay communicatino
[23:08] <knome> they can't tell they don't point people to our support outlets if they use our slideshow
[23:08] <ochosi> pleia2: is that spanish for "communication"? :]
[23:08] <knome> well they can, but we can call them out
[23:08] <pleia2> ochosi: har, I haven't even had beer yet!
[23:09] <ochosi> pleia2: that's not my fault!
[23:09] <pleia2> lol
[23:09] <ochosi> knome: true, i guess for most you've done the necessary research already
[23:09] <knome> for some of the derivatives, yeah
[23:10] <knome> we still have a bunch to go
[23:10] <ochosi> but doing that research is just really boring and i wonder where it'll get us if we don't act on it
[23:10] <knome> it likely is somewhat in vain
[23:11] <knome> but i don't think it's bad to know what people do with xubuntu either
[23:11] <ochosi> (i mean, maybe not the most boring thing i can imagine, since it's interesting to know... then again, i can imagine more constructive things to do)
[23:11] <knome> for example, pretty much all derivatives use the whisker menu
[23:11] <knome> so using it is likely a good idea
[23:11] <knome> or at least something the derivatives agree on
[23:12] <ochosi> right, we got no complaints about that one
[23:12] <ochosi> at least none that i heard/red
[23:12] <ochosi> read
[23:13] <knome> yep
[23:13] <knome> there is that one list too
[23:13] <knome> "Packages with Xubuntu branding"
[23:13] <knome> i need some insight to that from you/sean
[23:14] <Unit193> :3
[23:14] <knome> and Unit193 of course
[23:14] <knome> ochosi, remeber that we practically tell them to not use the *name* xubuntu either, so it needs to be a nasty purge :>
[23:15] <knome> so, onto specific problems....
[23:16] <knome> 1) voyager uses our installer slideshow; this is something i wouldn't give rope on - it needs to go
[23:16] <knome> 2) uxubos (http://sourceforge.net/projects/uxubos/) is problematic on several levels
[23:17] <knome> it claims to be a "respin" (which isn't a good/supported term) and implies to be "up-to-date"
[23:17] <knome> the latter can be interpreted as "xubuntu isn't up-to-date (or safe)"
[23:17] <knome> it also uses the xubuntu branding without the slightest intention to hide it
[23:18] <knome> and the long-version name "updated xubuntu os" is against the trademark laws
[23:18] <knome> if you asked me, i would rather just ask the person running it to stop doing it completely
[23:19] <knome> but of course they can keep on doing it - under a different name and with no xubuntu branding
[23:19] <Unit193> There's a few stray icons, I'd put them in the 'meta' xubuntu-artwork.  You also mentioned xubuntu-docs, I don't like the restriction personally on this even though it does have a lot of Xubuntu related stuff, it's valid for basic respinds.
[23:19] <knome> 3) security onion (http://securityonion.net/) is basically a PPA for ubuntu
[23:20] <knome> i would be in touch with them and discuss if they really want to go on distributing an ISO
[23:21] <knome> because then we could - based on our guidelines - likely support the core part of the OS
[23:21] <knome> just not the PPA
[23:22] <knome> Unit193, if you are really interested in being very kind to derivatives, we should 1) separate the startpage to another package 2) make sure the documentation doesn't have any mentions to xubuntu and 3) provide the logo from another package and link to it
[23:23] <knome> my personal opinion is that shipping the xubuntu documentation isn't a huge problem
[23:23] <knome> shipping the startpage is
[23:23] <ochosi> humm, i think i'm with pleia2 on this one, i'd rather ignore the derivatives. so far none of them has posed a real problem. as soon as they flood our support ML or channel, i'd probably reconsider. but for now i just see too little incentive (or maybe i'm just tired)
[23:24] <knome> ochosi, with what exactly? you both said the last thing 15 minutes ago
[23:24] <knome> ochosi, i think she was referring to using canonical/ubuntu repositories and asking for donations
[23:24] <pleia2> no, I'm not interested in going after them in general
[23:24] <knome> using the repositories won't be a problem to us - ever
[23:25] <pleia2> we should ask them to stop things that actively cause us problems, like using our support resources
[23:25] <ochosi> well, even following up with derivatives - even with problematic ones like voyager - is what i meant
[23:25] <drc> And what will you(all) do if you do not ignore them and one/any of them tell you to FOAD?
[23:25] <knome> i've seen enough support questions from voyager people to start to get annoying
[23:25] <knome> pleia2, ++
[23:25] <pleia2> but I won't go on a hunt for people using our logos, because eh
[23:25] <ochosi> right
[23:26] <ochosi> that's ok, we can tell voyager to stop pointing at our support resources
[23:26] <pleia2> we will officially ask them not to on our page, so they will know they're breaking rules (I think they're just unaware)
[23:26] <knome> pleia2, we'll see...
[23:26] <Unit193> pleia2: Like all the annoying French voyager users that join #xubuntu...
[23:26] <pleia2> Unit193: yes, that's really disruptive to us
[23:26] <knome> drc, you know i don't like that kind of language on this channel.
[23:27] <Unit193> "Ask nicer"?
[23:27] <Unit193> :P
[23:27] <drc> my appoligies.
[23:27] <Unit193> That is, to ask them nicer? :P
[23:27] <drc> the question remains.
[23:28] <knome> anyway, things we need to tackle (imo) are voyager, uxubos (updated xubuntu os) and that weird "xubuntu piqo edition"
[23:28] <knome> no, i don't think they can say "xubuntu" on the derivative name, that's a bit too far (yeah, it isn't too hard to not do that...)
[23:28] <pleia2> I don't really have the energy for the latter 2
[23:29] <knome> who said you should? :)
[23:29] <knome> i can handle that
[23:29] <knome> and when i say handle, i don't mean i'll pester them night and day until they stop doing that
[23:29] <pleia2> heh, ok
[23:29] <knome> i mean just asking them and pointing out that they really shouldn't do that
[23:29] <knome> and "here's the derivative guideline document"
[23:30] <knome> drc, ^ does that answer your question?
[23:30] <knome> but seriously,
[23:30] <drc> yes, but what if they continue to ignore it/you?  
[23:31] <drc> And I am serious.
[23:31] <knome> even the voyager questions might be more okay on our channel if we actively communicated with the voyager developer(s) about what they are changing in xubuntu etc
[23:31] <drc> What I'm getting at is you have only one option...sic the lawyers on them....have you cleared this with the lawyers yet?
[23:31] <knome> i don't know, but it isn't out of question to poke the canonical legal dept.
[23:32] <pleia2> except in the case of voyager using our support resources, I'd just let the rest go
[23:32] <knome> we don't need to clear this with the lawyers - canonical owns the trademark "xubuntu" and legally, they need to defend their trademarks
[23:32] <knome> pleia2, sure, i was referring to those who mention xubuntu in the OS name
[23:32] <drc> but will they, that's what I'm asking?
[23:32] <pleia2> we can contact them, explain the rules, and live our life
[23:33] <knome> well that's constructive
[23:33] <pleia2> o_O
[23:33] <knome> yeah, whether canonical legal will or won't do something isn't to my interest
[23:34] <knome> drc, whether canonical legal will or won't do something isn't to my interest
[23:35] <knome> but from a common sense point of view, if i was a derivative developer, i'd think twice changing the derivative name if somebody said they'll notice a legal department about a potential trademark breach
[23:36] <knome> and no, my intention isn't to scare derivatives off
[23:36] <knome> i'd like their developers to hang out on this channel (and be active enough that we knew who they were)
[23:38] <Unit193> Wait, so they can't say "derivative of Xubuntu"? 0_o
[23:38] <knome> they can.
[23:38] <Unit193> So, I read what you said wrong then.
[23:38] <knome> but the derivative name can't be "Xubuntu Piqo Edition" (for example)
[23:38] <Unit193> Right.
[23:39] <Unit193> A-ok.
[23:39] <knome> nor can they say (or imply) that they are a respin or any other official variant of xubuntu
[23:39] <knome> which is what uxubos and voyager might be doing
[23:39] <knome> uxubos because what they tell they are (and the name) and voyager, because they use our installer slideshow which says "welcome to xubuntu"
[23:40] <knome> compare the latter to the documentation, which says "welcome to xubuntu xx.xx documentation"
[23:41] <ochosi> sry folks, i'm out. too tired, need to get some sleep
[23:41] <ochosi> nighty!
[23:41] <pleia2> night ochosi 
[23:41] <knome> nighty ochosi 
[23:43] <knome> and the guidelines do say that we try to make removing the branding easy too
[23:43] <knome> which is what we should try to do
[23:43] <knome> it's not like we're deliverately hiding xubuntu icons in every possible package