[13:41] <jcastro> well if the intent is to get the drivers in the distro then probably not?
[14:51] <tseliot> ?
[14:54] <tseliot> jcastro: what is wrong with having a PPA now?
[14:55] <jcastro> well, that only solves half the problem?
[14:56] <tseliot> we don't have the resources for what you last suggested
[14:56] <tseliot> at least as far as I know
[14:56] <jcastro> well, it doesn't need to be perfect, because the blingers know about the PPA
[14:57] <jcastro> it just needs to not be crushingly slow
[14:57] <tseliot> maintaining all that would be a nightmare
[14:58] <tseliot> I'm talking about actual kernel patching, not only packaging changes
[14:58] <jcastro> maybe we can ask for more help then?
[14:59] <tseliot> if you can find what I suggested in my last email to the technical board, then things should be ok
[15:00] <jcastro> ok, I'll talk to leanne and see what we can do there
[15:01] <tseliot> jcastro: please make it clear that I won't be the one doing the work
[15:02] <jcastro> right
[15:02] <jcastro> tseliot: out of curiosity, how often does that happen?
[15:02] <jcastro> please don't say all the time, heh
[15:02] <ricotz> tseliot, kernel-patching? this gpl mistake was kind of a review problem of the kernel team
[15:02] <tseliot> jcastro: the last example: LP: #1479913
[15:03] <jcastro> that seems to be for fglrx?
[15:03] <tseliot> jcastro: pretty often, I would say
[15:03] <tseliot> jcastro: it could have easily affected nvidia
[15:03] <ricotz> jcastro, no, nvidia too
[15:04] <ricotz> aka flush_workqueue
[15:04] <tseliot> I had a similar problem with nvidia in wily
[15:04] <tseliot> yes, that one
[15:05] <tseliot> imagine having to fix that on even more drivers
[15:08] <tseliot> (which I already do for private OEM projects)
[15:08] <jcastro> is this usually connected to a new backported kernel?
[15:09] <jcastro> so like, if I'm on "normal" 14.04 without backported kernels this shouldn't be a problem right?
[15:09] <tseliot> not really, it happened in vivid too
[15:09] <tseliot> it was just an abi change
[15:09] <tseliot> (same bug report I mentioned)
[15:09] <jcastro> ok so the ask from you would be what, test kernels with the proprietary drivers before being published?
[15:10] <tseliot> we already have such system in place. Something went wrong (and will go wrong again)
[15:11] <tseliot> when kernels break binary drivers, the kernel team ask me to fix them
[15:11] <jcastro> and if you don't fix them the kernel team publishes the kernel anyway?
[15:12] <tseliot> that's what happened. The thing is I should fix the drivers before the kernels are published but I didn't have enough time to do it (it was a bit late when I was told)
[15:13] <tseliot> they usually wait for me to finish
[15:13] <jcastro> ok, so it's all process stuff then
[15:14] <tseliot> yep
[15:14] <jcastro> I'll ask will to talk to leann and figure out what's up
[15:14] <jcastro> so you guys can concentrate on the drivers themselves
[15:15] <tseliot> yes, you might want to ask if her team has the resources to allocate, to fix any new drivers that may be uploaded (should the drivers really become part of Ubuntu)
[15:20] <jcastro> hey so thinking outloud, don't flip out when I say this...
[15:20] <jcastro> but would the work be cut down if we concentrated on LTS-only? 
[15:21] <tseliot> :)
[15:24] <tseliot> cut down to an extent, yes, reasonable, not so much
[15:24] <ricotz> by reducing the support to 9 months of normal releases, there are not many supported versions anyway ;)
[15:24] <tseliot> right
[15:24] <ricotz> tseliot, e.g. do you care for precise?
[15:25] <jcastro> tseliot: ok, I was just thinking about low hanging fruit
[15:25] <tseliot> ricotz: I have to, we still have OEM projects that run precise
[15:25] <jcastro> like, if you're behind on the drivers for X,Y, and Z but the LTS is up to date, then it's not so bad.
[15:25] <ricotz> I was specifically asked in the past for updated nvidia driver for precise in xedgers though 
[15:25] <ricotz> ok
[15:26] <tseliot> jcastro: again, prove that you have the resources to do it. That's the main problem
[15:26] <ricotz> jcastro, currently there is nothing to skip, utopic is gone already
[15:26] <jcastro> tseliot: I don't have any, it's just us and mmarley, and maybe jderose
[15:26] <ricotz> or hire new resrouces ...
[15:27] <tseliot> jcastro: that is obviously not enough
[15:27] <jcastro> yeah which is why I was thinking of low hanging fruit
[15:27] <jcastro> I recognize that this is difficult
[15:27] <tseliot> what ricotz said. Possibly a small team
[15:28] <tseliot> adding a PPA is very easy, especially for gamers
[15:29] <jcastro> yeah
[15:29] <jcastro> ok so what happens when this kernel issue hits the people with the PPA?
[15:29] <tseliot> the packages in main/restricted are officially supported
[15:30] <ricotz> ( in relation to that: not sure how the ubuntu-x team is doing after maarten is gone )
[15:31] <tseliot> tjaalton and Sarvatt maintain the X stack now. I don't think we are going to replace Maarten
[15:32] <tseliot> jcastro: I will try to help but any such task won't have a high priority on my TODO list. After all, some breakage is expected. ppa-purge to the rescue ;)
[15:33] <tseliot> a messed up PPA is much better than a messed up archive (and the OEM projects that depend on it)
[15:33] <jcastro> ack
[15:46] <mamarley> The PPA can still have updates for all supported releases, right?
[15:47] <jcastro> yeah
[15:50] <tseliot> yep
[15:56] <tseliot> ricotz: by the way, the new code in my 355 branch works now. You might want to have a look at the changes