[02:31] plymouth-theme-ubuntu-text? we replace it anyway... Gaa. (ISO build fail) [02:32] Well, that should effect vanilla, so I imagine it will not be a problem long. [10:27] Only about 1 1/2 months late, but hey, let's begin our feature definitioning! [15:25] OvenWerks: "plymouth-theme-ubuntu-text? we replace it anyway... Gaa. (ISO build fail)" - just unlike build time there, it was fixed shortly after already. :P [15:25] * unlucky [15:33] krytarik: No problem then we will have an ISO today. [15:34] Yep. [15:44] OvenWerks: Btw, you should soon notice them fiddling with your theme, too - for the same reason. [15:45] Like here: https://code.launchpad.net/~xubuntu-art/xubuntu-artwork/xenial [16:13] krytarik: On the repo names. I think that's a bzr/git naming clash. The repos I've named, I did so according to the package name [16:14] One of the names in the url is the project name, and the other the repo name, and from one perspective it makes sense if they match [16:14] zequence: It's not here though, for example: https://code.launchpad.net/~ubuntustudio-art/ubuntustudio-artwork/trunk [16:14] Ok, could be I didn't name that repo [16:15] Yeah. [16:15] If I start renaming the repos after the convention: trunk, trusty, xenial, etc, it wouldn't be a big problem [16:16] Could be some people would need to update their config for the remote address [16:16] I can see why it makes more sense to use this convention with bzr [16:17] zequence: When I do a push I always use the link from the web page for the package. [16:17] I do for github too. It just seems to make sure. [16:20] I can do some renaming for all our repos then, at the same time as I reorganize the blueprint stuff [16:21] I suppose the name repo is wrong for bzr, since each "repo" is a branch [16:24] krytarik: Our phymouth theme is in our -look package. [16:24] Yep. [16:25] we used to have a separate package for it. [16:26] I guess we still do, but it comes from -look [16:27] Yep, source rather than binary package.