[11:49] <faenil> DanChapman: yo, are you using https://github.com/qtproject/qt-labs-messagingframework for the qmf build?
[16:18] <aquarius_> jdstrand, ping: how do I go about applying for manual reviews for apps uploaded to the click store?
[16:59] <popey> aquarius_: there is a button at the bottom when your app fails
[16:59] <popey> "Request Manual Review"
[16:59] <jdstrand> yes, what popey said
[16:59] <jdstrand> sorry for the delay, was in a session
[16:59] <aquarius_> ooh, really? I haven't tried uploading an app which deliberately fails :)
[17:00] <aquarius_> jdstrand, what happens then? Does the app go into a queue and one of your team get to it at some point afterwards?
[17:00] <aquarius_> popey, didn't know about the button. That's cool.
[17:00] <jdstrand> aquarius_: it will show up in a queue, yes. a member of the reviewers team will then look at it
[17:01] <aquarius_> cool.
[17:02] <aquarius_> I shall prepare wifitransfer to do just that, then. Is there guidance on "what best to do if you want an apparmor exception", or is it better to submit the app once and let that be the start of a dialogue with the reviewer about how best to do it?
[17:06] <mcphail> aquarius_: in my experience, manual review consists of "automatic review failed so its not going in" :( - good luck
[17:06] <jdstrand> starting a dialog via the review is fine
[17:06] <mcphail> jdstrand: have any apps with non-automatically accepted apparmor profiles been accepted?
[17:07] <mcphail> jdstrand: (beyond those developed by the core devs)?
[17:08] <DanChapman> mcphail, one i know if if the "Timer" app which is accepted and requires manual review.
[17:08] <DanChapman> *on i know of is
[17:08] <DanChapman> bah *one
[17:09] <mcphail> DanChapman: well, at least that negates my argument ;)
[17:09] <DanChapman> :-p
[17:12] <popey> mcphail: timer
[17:12] <popey> oh, he said that
[17:12] <mcphail> popey: :)
[17:13] <mcphail> Not a huge list, then...
[17:13] <popey> I can't recall any others that aren't made by canonical people
[17:15] <aquarius_> ah, but the point is that there is a process for it. So I'll go through the process and see what happens, which will be useful info!
[17:26] <jdstrand> mcphail: not to my knowledge
[17:38] <mcphail> aquarius_: hope it gets approved as it would be blimmin' useful
[17:38] <aquarius_> I'll try. :)
[17:47] <mcphail> aquarius_: prodding someone to look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/canonical-developer-experience/+bug/1521292 in the submission would be appreciated ;p
[17:49] <popey> bzoltan_: you all setup for http://summit.ubuntu.com/uos-1605/meeting/22678/sdk-roadmap/ ? (you may want to join #ubuntu-uos-appdev and anyone else joining too
[22:18] <c_> d