[00:10] <bbrawner> So I'm looking into getting involved with the Ubuntu Development team, and I figured patching bugs would be a good place to start. Is there some way I could filter them by language though? I'm hoping to find some packages written in python that I could contribute to
[00:17] <Unit193> mugshot, catfish, a few of those.
[00:39] <bluesabre> evening all
[00:40] <knome> gey sean
[01:28] <micahg> hi bluesabre can you do 13:00 or 14:00 UTC for a meeting?
[01:32] <bluesabre> hey micahg, no can do, that's when I am on my way to work/at work
[01:35] <micahg> 12:00?
[01:56] <bluesabre> micahg: 12:00 utc is doable, yes
[01:58] <micahg> 6AM works for me :)
[02:01] <bluesabre> :D
[02:12] <Unit193> I won't be attending.
[04:45] <Unit193> bluesabre: See?  Someone in #x asking about -overlay! :D
[06:24] <krytarik> knome, slickymaster: Current state of my docs changes is this, btw: http://paste.openstack.org/show/1HfnJUigyCZ5an2nRQJS/ - now just to decide whether we want to rename the "desktop-guide" source dir too, and if the current publish directories are fine.
[06:32] <Unit193> ali1234, Noskcaj: re: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mousepad/+bug/1472690 Built with that debdiff, still got the crash.
[06:43] <ali1234> Unit193: it's because the deb has a prebuilt version of the glade file
[06:43] <ali1234> mousepad-prefs-dialog-ui.h - this needs to be rebuilt with the patched glade. it doesn't exist in upstream git
[06:43] <Unit193> Cool, so I shouldn't shout to you just Noskcaj.
[06:43] <Unit193> thanks, ali1234.
[08:05] <flocculant> knome ochosi - I did link the pad from the UOS session - which has the usc demise on it
[08:06] <Unit193> Should I be scared of GSC's deps?
[08:06] <flocculant> Unit193: who knows - can't find it in the repos yet :)
[08:07] <flocculant> and tbh I'm not sure I would +1 us using that anyway - in a year it's likely to be a window with no buttons ... 
[08:07] <Unit193> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2015-November/038972.html
[08:07] <Unit193> flocculant: Ahaha!  So true.
[08:07] <Unit193> And, what would you propose?
[08:08] <flocculant> a big pot of superglue and some hope and a pair of wings
[08:08] <flocculant> I've just woken up :d
[08:09] <Unit193> Yeah alright, 3am my time.  Makes sense.  For GUIs, I've always been the most fond of Synaptic, but it's missing paid apps and I guess isn't as shiny as others.
[08:09] <flocculant> yep - I use that tbh
[08:10] <Unit193> muon!
[08:10]  * Unit193 ducks and runs.
[08:10] <flocculant> not sure what the mate thing is like
[08:10] <flocculant> you won't be able to run far or fast enough :D
[08:10] <flocculant> bluesabre micahg - ack that :)
[08:12] <Unit193> Looked at Deepin for a sec, py2 and no commits in the repo I found since 2012.
[08:13] <flocculant> well the meeting's not for another 4 weeks - so enough time to actually get some info I guess
[08:23] <flocculant> omg - you should see synaptic in numix :p
[08:25] <Unit193> http://i.imgur.com/6zgFnpv.png ?
[08:25] <flocculant> not here 
[08:26] <flocculant> http://i.imgur.com/CR3l5sd.png
[08:26] <Unit193> Numix from the shimmer ppa?  Yeah that theme is weird.
[08:26] <Unit193> ...NIiiiice.
[08:26] <flocculant> that wasn't my first reaction :p
[08:34] <flocculant> Unit193: can you add the meeting to the calendar now the time is set please :)
[08:34] <flocculant> got no xub calendar anymore 
[08:36] <Unit193> Google is stupid.
[08:36] <flocculant> no argument from me
[08:37] <flocculant> can't see how to add it AND it show AND to let me add events ... 
[08:38] <Unit193> Well, more that it logged me out as I was adding it...  Check, should be set.
[08:38] <flocculant> ha ha 
[08:38] <flocculant> not showing
[08:39] <flocculant> t'is now :)
[09:14] <ochosi> knome: since you asked yesterday i followed up in #u-desktop: it's decided that gnome-software will replace USC in 16.04
[09:15] <ochosi> however it isnt packaged anywhere apart from fedora and debian unstable, so it' a bit hard to test atm
[09:15] <ochosi> Unit193: any constructive ideas how we could get our hands on it early? also: could you check the deps for us?
[09:58] <Unit193> ochosi: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-software/3.16.5-1
[10:01] <Unit193> It is in depwait, so it'll have to be changes, but deps aren't my favorite.
[10:05] <Unit193> http://paste.debian.net/323597/ that's so far in Debian, pretty sure that'll change a bit.  So not aweful, yet™
[10:06] <Unit193> 12N
[10:18] <Unit193> (So that is, in Ubuntu needs a newer packagekit, it can come after that.  Otherwise, try in Debian? :D )
[11:03] <bluesabre> Unit193: it will probably be patched into oblivion and be unrecognizable :)
[11:04] <bluesabre> "wow, is this ubuntu software center!"
[11:05] <flocculant> bluesabre: lol 
[11:06] <bluesabre> morning flocculant 
[11:06] <flocculant> ochosi: thanks for pointing for that bug - once I looked I found one that bluesabre had commented on while back - so ignoring that
[11:06] <flocculant> bluesabre: :)
[11:07] <flocculant> bluesabre: anything likely to happen with bug 1500307 ? if not I won't add it to the bug list :)
[11:07] <Unit193> 'Least it won't be python.
[11:09] <bluesabre> Unit193: pretty sure usc is one of the worst examples of python gui app speed :D
[11:12] <bluesabre> flocculant: it'd be nice if there was a way to do it within the theme itself
[11:13] <bluesabre> otherwise, from what I am reading we'd have to write to sudoers, and we'll not be doing that
[11:13] <bluesabre> or just leaving them enabled
[11:13] <bluesabre> (but they are crap and incosistent)
[11:13] <flocculant> :)
[11:13] <flocculant> I'll not add it then :D
[11:14] <flocculant> as long as I know it's only greybird - didn't actually think of trying a different them - I'm *shrug* anyway 
[12:07] <knome> flocculant, totally slipped me :)
[12:07] <knome> ochosi, cheers
[12:09] <flocculant> knome: the m/l link turned up anyway :)
[12:09] <knome> :)
[12:11] <knome> bluesabre, are we interested in fixing bug 1294600
[12:21] <bluesabre> knome: it may not be a good idea. Per ochosi's discussion with olivier, that won't be seen in a stable xfwm release until 4.14
[12:23] <knome> mhm
[12:23] <knome> want to add it to a bp?
[12:58] <flocculant> why would someone (and kde/dolphin) expect a text file to be executable ? doesn't make sense to me at all ... bug 1513383
[13:02] <ali1234> because it's a shell script?
[13:03] <flocculant> except it's not as it is - it works ok if I muck about with the thing the OP has that apparently shows as executable in dolphin but not in thunar
[13:04] <flocculant> ali1234: it has 2 lines, one's rm -rf foo the other unzip foo
[13:05] <ali1234> well, look at it another way
[13:05] <ali1234> lets say you had that file and it was marked as executable in the file system
[13:05] <ali1234> but it isn't an executable
[13:05] <ali1234> how do you use thunar to remove the executable bit from it?
[13:05] <knome> if the first lin is #!/bin/bash, you can mark it executable
[13:09] <flocculant> was my understanding ^^
[13:10] <flocculant> why would I want to mark some random text file executable - anyway, that's the bug, got a bit more information on it for whoever looks further
[13:10] <knome> if the system marked the file as executable, it's probably better not remove that bit
[13:10] <knome> if it was you, you likely should know how you did it to be able to revert
[13:11] <knome> and if the label was shown always for files when they have the bit, but only for things that should be marked executable (as now), wouldn't it be confusing that the label was hidden?
[13:12] <ali1234> yes it would
[13:12] <ali1234> which is why the label should be shown for all files
[13:12] <knome> even when it can be dangerous for the system?
[13:12] <ali1234> setting the executable bit on a none-executable file is not dangerous... it cannot be executed by definition
[13:13] <knome> so why should it be set?
[13:13] <knome> or enabled to be set?
[13:13] <ali1234> to prevent the user from becoming confused for the reason you stated
[13:13] <knome> i don't understand
[13:13] <knome> if the bit is only shown for files that can be marked executable, that's fine
[13:14] <ali1234> the bit should always be shown if a file is already marked as executable
[13:14] <knome> i was referring to the label disappearing for a single file after you remove the bit
[13:14] <ali1234> therefore, in order to be consistent, it should always be shown for all files
[13:14] <knome> no, because there is no reason why some files would be marked executable
[13:15] <knome> why give the user an option that has no effect on anything?
[13:15] <knome> clean UI/not too many configuration options has always been a target for xfce
[13:15] <knome> so why would this situation be any different?
[13:15] <knome> if you want to make a script executable, use a valid markup so it's recognised as a script
[13:16] <knome> if you don't have to do that, you can dump whatever in a script and then run it
[13:16] <knome> and for plain text files, even if they "can't be run", they could potentially still be dangerous if marked executable
[13:17] <knome> what if a file looked like it was just text
[13:17] <ali1234> ultimately because a file manager should implement all operations allowed by the operating system
[13:18] <knome> but acutally had a line that did something nasty to your system?
[13:18] <knome> by which definition should it do that?
[13:20] <knome> it is not always useful for the user that a GUI application allows them to do anything and everything that the system allows
[13:20] <knome> and many applications do not allow that all
[13:20] <knome> and that's fine
[13:21] <knome> will be on/off from now, preparing lunch/dinner
[13:28] <flocculant> so - just that Dolphin allows the option and Thunar doesn't - not a bug 
[13:31] <ali1234> it's certainly not a bug, just a design choice
[13:32] <flocculant> yep
[19:29] <flocculant> bluesabre: any reason that menu items are unremovable with menulibre? bug 1513590
[19:36] <knome> flocculant, known!!!
[19:37] <knome> well actually
[19:37] <knome> nope
[19:37]  * knome retracts
[19:37] <flocculant> really - well I can't see the bug? 
[19:37]  * flocculant does that too :D
[19:37] <flocculant> I did look :p
[19:37] <knome> bug 1341447 ?
[19:38] <knome> bug 1444668 ?
[19:38] <knome> sigh
[19:38] <knome> bug 1444668
[19:38] <knome> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/menulibre/+bug/1444668
[19:38] <flocculant> not really - doesn't crash here - just refuses to do what it says it will do :)
[19:39] <flocculant> private bug I guess
[19:39] <knome> not
[19:39] <knome> oh
[19:39] <knome> it is
[19:39] <knome> sigh
[19:39] <flocculant> :)
[19:39]  * knome sees if there is actually anything private
[19:41] <knome> bug 1444668
[19:41] <flocculant> again a crash - not seeing it crash here
[19:43] <knome> commented on the bug
[19:44] <knome> oh,
[19:44] <knome> you are talking about it in #xubuntu 
[19:44] <knome> SNEAKY
[19:44] <knome> :P
[19:45] <flocculant> :D
[20:01] <flocculant> bit more info on it now too 
[20:02]  * flocculant hopes he got the unknowable knome likes it this way docbook syntax right this time :p
[20:02] <knome> that sentence made no sense :P
[20:02] <flocculant> \o/
[20:03] <flocculant> that's because moveable punctuation :p
[20:05] <knome> :P
[20:08] <knome> flocculant, at least i like the IDs now <3
[20:09] <flocculant> :D
[20:10] <flocculant> why is lp:xubuntu-docs/utopic not gone? 
[20:11]  * flocculant wanders off to package tracker where it makes some sense :D
[20:12] <knome> flocculant, lp:xubuntu-docs/saucy isn't gone either
[20:12] <knome> now utopic shouldn't appear any more on regular lists
[20:13] <flocculant> you're right :)
[21:06] <SwissBot> feed xubuntu-docs had 8 updates, showing the latest 3
[21:43] <knome> Unit193, hm.. can we change the output format for SwissBot?
[22:40] <bluesabre> evening all
[22:40] <bluesabre> flocculant: fun!
[22:41] <bluesabre> I'll start reviewing bugs and kicking tires this weekend
[23:07] <Unit193> knome: Not sure what you mean.
[23:09] <knome> Unit193, the notice format
[23:10] <knome> it's now ::branch:: [fixes] r### Description... (by Committer)
[23:11] <Unit193> That's because it's what the RSS feed shows.
[23:11] <knome> aha.
[23:24] <krytarik> knome: I'll hazard a guess and say we could spare all the stuff at the top here, and just have it in the index file - no?: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-core-doc/xubuntu-docs/xenial/view/head:/desktop-guide/C/administrative-tasks.xml
[23:25] <knome> tbh, i'm not sure if that would still let us validate all of the files
[23:25] <knome> but if yes, then i'm happy to do that
[23:29] <tracker5> Hi, I was trying to report a bug in the Xubuntu 16.04 installer
[23:29] <knome> 16.04?
[23:30] <tracker5> Yes, I downloaded the alpha from cdimage
[23:31] <knome> it's pre-alpha really
[23:31] <knome> what's the "bug" you found?
[23:31] <tracker5> I initially tried to install by bypassing the live CD, and the installer hung near the very end of the process (something to do with my old packages)
[23:32] <tracker5> the installed system wouldn't let me do anything besides move the mouse on blank desktop!
[23:32] <knome> well... it's pre-alpha
[23:32] <tracker5> So i reinstalled from the live CD and it worked, but all my previous packages weren't there (which is likely deliberate)
[23:33] <tracker5> I totally understand that it's at a pre-alpha state.  just thought somebody might like to be aware of that!
[23:33] <knome> you're describing two different things here, upgrade and a clean install
[23:33] <knome> well, anybody who installs a pre-alpha operating system should know they might mess up their system.
[23:33] <tracker5> initially it was an upgrade
[23:33] <tracker5> when i reinstalled using live CD it was also an upgrade
[23:34] <tracker5> I was totally prepared for possibly messing it up
[23:34] <tracker5> but seems to work well now that i've reinstalled the missing packages
[23:35] <krytarik> knome: Nope, doesn't work without. :P
[23:36] <knome> krytarik, yeah :P
[23:36] <knome> krytarik, unfortunately...
[23:37] <Unit193> tracker5: For what it's worth, we don't usually touch the installer, it's the one from Ubuntu.  I've not heard an issue about that though.
[23:41] <tracker5> ok
[23:41] <Unit193> (The installer is 'ubiquity')