[01:43] <OvenWerks> To those who might care :) I just saw the bug with backport Ardour 4.7 to X and T. Sounds ok to me. I would however advise against anything higher. The next likely Ardour version will be 5.0 which will have another session file change. That is 5.* ardour sessions will not work with A4.7. Ardour 5 breaks OSC control from 4.7 as well (and gains much better feedback as well as banking)
[01:54] <OvenWerks> hmm, Bug 1585007 ... Needed Carla sooner it seems... There have been some new additions to LV2 in common use. This may be the cause here.
[01:54] <ubottu> bug 1585007 in Ubuntu Studio "gxtuner hangs lv2rack" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1585007
[01:55] <OvenWerks> lv2rack has not been maintained for years.
=== benonsoftware is now known as Guest30663
=== \b is now known as benonsoftware
=== luisbg` is now known as luisbg
[09:48] <zequence> OvenWerks: Backports should not be confused with updates. Backports may include the very latest.
[09:48] <zequence> And, should
[09:48] <zequence> Updates means bug fixes only
[09:49] <zequence> And exception to that is Firefox
[09:50] <zequence> So, now that we have backports happening, we need to educate our users so they have the opportunity to turn off backports
[09:51] <zequence> Actually, we could do a backport for -controls which does a one time information for users during login.
[10:00] <zequence> I'll have a look at that after I've finished my education, at around 10th of June.
[10:28] <cub> But OvenWerks bug 1585007, does it affect other version than 15.04?*
[10:28] <ubottu> bug 1585007 in Ubuntu Studio "gxtuner hangs lv2rack" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1585007
[10:29] <cub> As 15.04 is EOL...
[10:54] <zequence> We should even add the possibility to control backports during installation, as it will be more important in the future, but again, I will not have time to work on that until later
[11:02] <zequence> sakrecoer: A new feature definition https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/FeatureDefinitions/InformUsersAboutBackports
[11:04] <zequence> sakrecoer: Also, I would not add particular work items for specific packages that we will be adding here https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/ubuntustudio-y-development, since we will add all at once. WOuld only require one line. The packages are 
[11:04] <zequence> ..listed here, as you know https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuStudio/PackageSelection/yakkety
[11:09] <zequence> sakrecoer: Another detail - you should add the LP team that is responsible for a work item at the beginning of each line
[11:09] <zequence> sakrecoer: Like so [ubuntustudio-dev]
[11:09] <zequence> When someone wants to do that work item, they replace the team name with their own LP nick
[11:10] <zequence> ..and changes TODO into INPROGRESS, and finally to DONE
[11:12]  * zequence wasn't looking into each blueprint before, and is seeing some weirdness there, but it's no big deal.
[11:16] <zequence> sakrecoer: If you wish, you can create a new blueprint for InformUsersAboutBackports and add the 2-3 things to be done as work items
[11:17] <zequence> Most probably I will be doing the work on -controls and ubiquity, so I will not need work items, but if you want to control what is going to be done during this cycle, and approve it, the blueprint is a nice way to do that
[11:19] <zequence> The hard part is formulazing the feature additions/removals into specific work items. 
[11:19] <zequence> But, for each work item there should be a longer more detailed explanation in a feature definition page
[11:19] <zequence> So, that is how the two should work together
[11:21] <zequence> Ok, I really need to focus on some things, so I will be offline most of the time the next few days