[20:31] <phillw> wxl: ping...
[20:43] <wxl> what up phillw ?
[20:45] <wxl> nothing obvious
[20:45] <wxl> cat /var/log/Xorg.0.log | pastebinit
[20:46] <phillw> wxl: could you ask simon to not wander in and mark bugs "Invalid" when they are active bugs?
[20:46] <tsimonq2> *sigh* when?
[20:46] <wxl> oops
[20:46] <tsimonq2> phillw: and which one?
[20:47] <phillw> wxl:  just as a request when I make the boss attention to one of them to look at in time for RC...
[20:47] <wxl> phillw: so this has no basis in any actual occurance?
[20:49] <phillw> wxl: i have reverted the bug status.... so "so this has no basis in any actual occurance?" has basis.
[20:49] <tsimonq2> wxl: he's talking about bug 1522625
[20:49] <tsimonq2> and I have a reason
[20:49] <wxl> then you'll need to be specific in the future, phillw
[20:49] <tsimonq2> it's an LXPanel problem
[20:49] <tsimonq2> NOT obconf
[20:49] <tsimonq2> it's set properly in obconf, LXPanel just fails to update
[20:50] <tsimonq2> so I'd suggest removing it from obconf altogether
[20:50] <phillw> tsimonq2: do not mark a bug that is there as invalid, mark it as duplicate to a master bug.
[20:50] <wxl> as i see he did nothing wrong, phillw
[20:50] <wxl> there's two packages the bug points out
[20:50] <tsimonq2>  /o\ there is no "master bug," it's my assessment of the problem
[20:50] <wxl> he invalidated one of them
[20:50] <tsimonq2> wxl: and I added LXPanel when I did that, FWIW
[20:51] <wxl> it seems to me his actions were quite clear
[20:51] <wxl> i'm not sure why you're confused phillw
[20:51] <phillw> wxl: and he can fix each one?.... I'll leave alone. I asked our head of dev to look at the issue... He will sort it out, not one of us.
[20:52] <tsimonq2> phillw: you want to test and confirm yo uare right? go ahead, give us reasonable proof I'm wrong, but when I tested, I changed in obconf, closed obconf, hovered in LXPanel, opened obconf, and it was set fin in obconf, the screenshot I attached showed just that
[20:52] <wxl> phillw: you are clearly not getting it. there's only one package that it's affecting.
[20:52] <tsimonq2> ^
[20:52] <phillw> so, bugs that are in our release notes that are lubuntu are to be forwarded to Julien.
[20:52] <wxl> phillw: what does that have to do with anything again?
[20:54] <phillw> wxl: how does selecting language have anything to do with installer etc? ... yet it was. Read what Julien asked for on bugs.... HE decides what they affect and how. He is the guy who will arrange a fix. Or, did you delete that from the testing page?
[20:55] <wxl> phillw: i've done the same actions before when troubleshooting, as have hoardes of others. this is not bad behavior.
[20:55] <tsimonq2> phillw: so this is a dictatorship?
[20:55] <phillw> going from B2 to RC, he needs a clean list of bugs to clean out.
[20:55] <phillw> tsimonq2: it is a technocracy, Julien is the boss.
[20:56] <phillw> we have 4 to send to him, the others are not lubuntu specific
[20:56] <wxl> phillw: yes, and with it being pointed against the wrong package, it's not a "clean list of bugs"
[20:56] <wxl> i would totally do the exact same thing were i have went through that process
[20:57] <wxl> he did nothing which makes it NOT a lubuntu bug
[20:57] <wxl> it still is
[20:57] <phillw> wxl: okies, as you wish....
[20:58] <wxl> phillw: as i wish? this is not my "opinion"
[20:58] <wxl> lxpanel is a lubuntu package
[20:58] <wxl> he made sure it was filed against lxpanel
[20:58] <wxl> he removed it being filed against obconf because he had done the steps to confirm it doesn't apply to it
[20:58] <wxl> so, after all that, is it a lubuntu bug or not?
[20:58] <phillw> I really cannot be bothered to argue. so, revert it.
[20:58] <wxl> more importantly, is it an active lubuntu bug or not?
[20:59] <wxl> if you can't be bothered to argue, don't bring this up
[20:59] <tsimonq2> phillw: I'd be curious to see if you can confirm this yourself as well...
[20:59] <phillw> wxl: does it say affects me, or does it not? ......
[20:59] <tsimonq2> and more importantly, CoC says meritocracy, if I have a reasonable suspicion to do something, I am warranted to
[20:59] <wxl> phillw: since it's still an active bug, it does
[21:00] <phillw> so, why ask me?
[21:00] <wxl> phillw: dude, YOU'RE the one doing the asking.
[21:01] <phillw> wxl: i will ask Julien to confirm his views on bugs that he is involved in. They were quite explicit.
[21:01] <tsimonq2> phillw: I've already asked him myself
[21:01] <tsimonq2> no answer yet
[21:01] <wxl> phillw: tell me, exactly, what his explicit instructions were
[21:01] <wxl> was it "no one is to touch my bugs?"
[21:02] <phillw> wxl: indeed it was.
[21:02] <wxl> phillw: then i will no longer encourage any one to do triage
[21:02] <wxl> phillw: nor will i
[21:02] <tsimonq2> but that's just not how it works, hold on here
[21:02] <wxl> phillw: and i will accost everyone that does it
[21:03] <wxl> phillw: does that sound good to you?
[21:03] <phillw> as you wish, so it will follow... I actually suggested that we ask him for clarification.
[21:04] <wxl> phillw: isn't that consistent with what you're asking?
[21:04] <wxl> phillw: if you're saying no one's to touch bugs, no one's to touch them, right?
[21:05] <phillw> not between b2 and RC is what I read his instructions as... Hence my saying he clarify the situation.
[21:06] <wxl> phillw: please email the results to the lubuntu-devel list and make sure it's listed on the testing wiki page
[21:07] <phillw> wxl: "Within bugs related to Lubuntu, you will see bugs raised by, or allocated to Julien Lavergne. Please feel free to add to the comments but do NOT alter the status of these bugs as they are being dealt with by our head of development in readiness for the fix being released.
[21:07] <phillw> "
[21:07] <phillw> which bit did you miss?
[21:07] <wxl> phillw: the part that follows the clarification you seek
[21:08] <phillw> indeed. until then... follow his last orders.
[21:08] <wxl> phillw: it's not clear. i'm not sure i could follow it.
[21:09] <belkinsa> I was called here.
[21:09] <tsimonq2> phillw: where is this posted?
[21:09] <wxl> phillw: if the status is Confirmed in obconf and it's changed to Confirmed in lxpanel, is the status actually changed?
[21:10] <phillw> tsimonq2: in the wiki for testing.... https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Testing#Bugs
[21:11] <phillw> wxl: I do not know, all I know is that we asked not to change bug statuses once passed to Julien.
[21:11] <tsimonq2> phillw: I'm checking the revision history
[21:11] <wxl> phillw: but Confirmed -> Confirmed doesn't seem like a change in bug status
[21:12] <phillw> wxl: you are most likely correct, but I read it as "leave the bug alone"...
[21:12] <wxl> phillw: thus why you need clarity
[21:12] <phillw> indeed
[21:12] <wxl> phillw: until then, i wouldn't suggest denouncing people because of their best intentions and hard work
[21:13] <phillw> I have not denounced, i have asked that bugs are not touched once passed to Julien.
[21:13] <tsimonq2> phillw: NOWHERE has Julien himself made that notice. It's there, but gilir has not added that himself.
[21:13] <phillw> there are many bugs out there :P
[21:14] <wxl> phillw: in fact, your actions on the bug report appear to completely ignore the work that simon had done without any mention of why
[21:14] <wxl> phillw: if you have a perfectly reasonable justification, kyou should state it
[21:14] <wxl> you didn't ask a darn thing on the bug report
[21:14] <wxl> it would be similar to you creating a wiki page
[21:14] <wxl> and then me deleting it
[21:14] <wxl> with no explanation
[21:15] <wxl> this to me has a rather demeaning tone:
[21:15] <wxl> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingTouchpadDetection
[21:15] <wxl> oops
[21:15] <wxl> 1346 < phillw:#lubuntu-devel> wxl: could you ask simon to not wander in and mark bugs "Invalid" when they are active bugs?
[21:15] <wxl> suggesting he "wanders in" seems to imply he's acting haphazardly
[21:16] <wxl> when in fact he was rather thoughtful about it and made his reasoning quite clear
[21:16] <wxl> in public
[21:16] <wxl> to resolve it, you don't even approach him, but approach me
[21:16] <phillw> I'm not going to argue.... I get told off for it.... tsimonq2 go revert the bug.... and i will seek clearance from Julien as to what he means about his request to leave bugs for him alone.
[21:16] <tsimonq2> I'm asking him as well
[21:17] <wxl> phillw: maybe if you stopped trying to argue at all rather than keeping your arguments to yourself, that would be a great start
[21:17] <phillw> he's afk.
[21:19] <wxl> meanwhile, i would suggest we edit the language of the wiki page to act with caution
[21:19] <wxl> could you make that edit, tsimonq2 ?
[21:19] <phillw> wxl: i asked in private to you about my interperpration of Julien's request.... you made it all public and I saw you call in a CC member to see if if could be found guilty of breaking my oath to SABDFL.
[21:20] <tsimonq2> that was me, I was feeling threatened, so I would advise that you tone it down a bit
[21:20] <wxl> phillw: you brought it up on a public channel. and you didn't ask about your interpretation. you demanded your interpretation be enforced
[21:20] <tsimonq2> ^^^
[21:21] <phillw> i stand corrrected.
[21:21] <phillw> my apologies.
[21:21] <wxl> thanks
[21:21] <wxl> please try resolving your concerns in a more *productive* and less insulting manner in the future. it would make a big difference
[21:22] <wxl> phillw: one other thing. this bug is not "raised by, or allocated to Julien Lavergne"
[21:23] <wxl> phillw: which is to say it doesn't even apply
[21:23] <wxl> and this whole thing was all for naught
[21:23] <phillw> wxl: well, i would have PM'd you, but i have a direct instruction from you to not PM you... So, public channel is my only way to get live chat. If you'd like to remove that prohibition for the future, none of this would have occurred ... But, meh....
[21:24] <wxl> phillw: this is not a private matter. it's a public matter. it should have been approached in the bug report, if at all
[21:24] <wxl> phillw: but as above, this is not even applicable to what you're using as your justification
[21:25] <phillw> x
[21:25] <tsimonq2> and I would have liked to know about it in the bug report if it was a problem, NOT through someone else, this is trivial and I could have cleared things up EASILY
[21:25] <tsimonq2> just saying
[21:25] <wxl> i completely agree
[21:26] <phillw> tsimonq2: no complaints from me.... but, as not allowed to PM wxl we had a row on public channel that could have been resolved out of view and without you feeling threatened.
[21:27] <wxl> phillw: or you could have brought it up in the bug report
[21:27] <wxl> phillw: and used less threatening language
[21:27] <ianorlin> hmm I wonder if some guvcview bugs need triaging and that cannot really be done in a virtual machine
[21:28] <tsimonq2> ianorlin: go right ahead :)
[21:28] <tsimonq2> triage away
[21:31] <tsimonq2> wxl: bug 1522625 - please change bug importance on obconf to Undecided or something that reflects the status
[21:31] <tsimonq2> I still have to get Bug Control :)
[21:31] <phillw> wxl: I use direct words, when annoyed over things.... To say my thoughts on a public channel to you is my only way to contact you. You have a cc of the email I sent to Julien.... you *could* have copied it lubuntu-devel list... It was an email from me to Julien to ask him to chase up 4 bugs. :D :D we approach RC and these, as far as I can see are the 4 bugs lubuntu needs to resolve :)
[21:34] <ianorlin> is the boot to black wallpaper one of them?
[21:34] <phillw> ianorlin: indeed
[21:34] <wxl> phillw: then maybe you should get less annoyed at the people that are trying to help contribute to the same project you're trying to help contribute to
[21:34] <tsimonq2> ^ I fully agree
[21:35] <phillw> wxl: if i were allowed to talk to you, things would be easier.... But, heay,, that's life :)
[21:36] <wxl> phillw: that's the wrong channel for this discussion
[21:37] <wxl> phillw: this is not a personal discussion
[21:38] <phillw> as you wish.
[21:38] <wxl> phillw: isn't not a wish, it's the facts
[21:41] <phillw> wxl: the facts are if me and you had started this as PM, it would have been resolved between us amicably and your padawan would not have felt so threatened as to ask a CC member to log on.
[21:42] <wxl> phillw: i'm not sure that's true. *I* don't feel good about the way you brought this up, whether or not it was in a PM or not.
[21:42] <phillw> but, that's just my opinion.... I always yield to your judgement.
[21:42] <wxl> phillw: and besides, this is not a private matter. this involves a public bug report. you're basing your feelings on a public wiki page. why does this need to be private?
[21:42] <wxl> privacy is great for private things
[21:42] <wxl> and terrible for public things
[21:44] <ianorlin> also isn't tihs a really small bug to be having this big a fight over
[21:44] <phillw> so, you not in nipping something in the bud... something that Donald Trump's father should have done...... but that is another story :) ...
[21:44] <tsimonq2> come on, let's nto bring up Mr. Trump :P
[21:44] <tsimonq2> *not
[21:44] <wxl> phillw: i'm not even sure what you're trying to say.
[21:45] <tsimonq2> ^
[21:45] <ianorlin> I am starting to question if that should be medium and not low and I was the one that orginally reported the bug
[21:45] <tsimonq2> +1 ianorlin
[21:45] <tsimonq2> let's be positive
[21:45] <phillw> wxl: we could have had a quiet chat and none of the last hour, or so.... would have occured.
[21:45] <tsimonq2> wxl: what do you think?
[21:45] <wxl> phillw: you're still not getting it.
[21:46] <wxl> tsimonq2: i'd probably call it low.
[21:46] <tsimonq2> alright :)