[07:41] <flocculant> akxwi-dave: rebuilding iso's - should be a ubiquity fix 
[09:48] <Unit193> I use it with 1G, think VMs I give 512.
[09:50] <slickymasterWork> 1G in VMs, myself
[10:20] <akxwi-dave> 2g for me, but 1g  works fine
[10:22] <knome> so how about 512?
[10:22] <knome> i mean, the minimum is... minimum
[10:22] <knome> eg. "you can run and you can get applications open and start working"
[10:22] <knome> not "this is the smooth experience we imagined"
[10:22] <knome> (recommended is closer to that)
[10:24] <Unit193> Well...It functions in VM...
[10:24] <Unit193> In the most basic sense of the word if nothing else.
[10:25] <knome> :)
[10:32] <akxwi-dave> works with 512, but you wouldn't want a lot of apps open at once, and they do take noticabley longer to open
[10:33] <slickymasterWork> I'll set up a 512 VM at work this afternoon knome and will perform some testing
[10:59] <knome> akxwi-dave, yes, sure
[10:59] <knome> akxwi-dave, maybe we could explain a bit more what "minimum" and "recommended" means on the new version...
[10:59] <knome> eg. minimum -> run one application at a time
[11:00] <knome> recommened -> run several applications at a time as long as they are not very resource consuming
[11:00] <knome> (but word it much better than that)
[11:00] <flocculant> knome: just running in and out - but what are we telling people Xubuntu is? A smooth useful experience or a bunch of judderiness
[11:00] <flocculant> bbl
[11:01] <knome> flocculant, yes, that's the reason the minimum requirements shouldn't be too low... but otoh minimum has never meant "this is what we intended you to run this with" with any OS/game/whatever software
[11:02] <knome> and obviously it's not about the memory amount only, CPU also affects the performace
[11:02] <knome> on lower end machines, i don't think the hard drive is that big of a deal unless it's some ancient piece
[11:27] <akxwi-dave> I would add caveat's to the minimum spec along the lines of "you can run xubuntu with 512meg of ram, but performance may be limited, dependant upon your hardware"
[11:45] <knome> yep, something like that
[11:45] <knome> and i'd probably add a line mentioning the "one app at a time" policy to make it a bit more graspable
[12:10] <flocculant> that would certainly help the "xubuntu is slow ... how much ram do you have? ... foo ... best install something else then' you see from time to time in #x 
[12:12] <knome> yep
[12:12] <knome> we need to do better than we do currently...
[12:12] <flocculant> still think the minimum should be raised
[12:12] <knome> maybe
[12:12] <knome> i'm not qualified to make a good call about that
[12:13] <flocculant> well none of us are - but nevertheless we need to :p
[12:13] <knome> what i meant is that i'm the least qualified, so i'll leave that to others
[12:14] <flocculant> when was the min last looked at? probably 3 years ago - and we would likely have then based that on 'old' machines kicking around still 3 years ago (if it was 3) 
[12:14] <knome> that's possible
[12:14] <knome> i don't remember really
[12:14] <knome> it must've come up when we did the last website redesign
[12:14] <flocculant> since then non-PAE has happened - what's the chances of some old old machine being able to run xubuntu now anyway?
[12:15] <knome> i've no idea :)
[12:15] <flocculant> or rather is a PAE machine likely to have more than 512
[12:15] <knome> i understand what you're saying, but i don't know
[12:15] <flocculant> it's always going to be guess work on our part
[12:15] <knome> well... kind of :)
[12:15] <knome> or maybe :(
[12:16] <flocculant> but to my mind I would (if I was wanderng about lookiing for some linux to install) look on Xubuntu more kindly if I was told you need 1Gb ram than I would if I'd been told 512Mb and then found it was awful and had to look again, reinstall etc etc
[12:17] <flocculant> is kind of where I'm coming from :)
[12:17] <flocculant> in the first case I'd maybe come back when I had more ram - in the second I'd not
[12:18] <flocculant> does that make my point make more sense :)
[12:18] <knome> no no, it always made sense :)
[12:18] <flocculant> heh
[12:34] <flocculant> akxwi-dave: ubiquity fix appears to have done the trick 
[12:35] <flocculant> also keeping old 64bit iso's so we can track back a bit if needed
[14:00] <akxwi-dave> yay..  just seen that with todays iso.... it works,,,,   sgt launcher from menus doesn't though.. still :-)
[14:01] <akxwi-dave> wish i had seen your message earlier,, just deleted around 30 iso images I had in my downloads folder on this pc.. :-(
[17:00] <flocculant> akxwi-dave: didn't know you were doing that :p
[17:01] <flocculant> I'm only going to keep 1 arch though - issues we've been plagued with have been general
[17:04] <akxwi-dave> lol.. wasn't actually saving them.. just all the downloads of each test iso on my work pc.. never got round to deleting them since before xmas..
[17:08] <flocculant> oh right - well I decided it was a good plan to keep some - probably keep a month, then the 1st of *a* month after that
[19:34] <flocculant> knome: finished looking at contributor docs now - got a bit of an issue with the way some of the docs page looks, but more importantly about some of the apps we translate and their relative importance
[19:35] <flocculant> best to write that specific stuff as a bug? or pad? 
[19:35] <flocculant> or make it part of the mp and go from there? 
[19:36] <flocculant> I could add reasoning to the mp comments
[20:05] <knome> flocculant, probably mp directly
[20:05] <knome> flocculant, unless you think it requires thorough discussion
[20:06] <knome> (and even then, i think people should know how to look at diffs enough so just do an mp :P)
[20:07] <flocculant> knome: okey doke - works for me :)
[20:09] <knome> cheerio
[20:09] <flocculant> bye
[20:09] <knome> no i meant thanks :P
[20:10] <knome> unless you are going... :P
[20:10] <flocculant> nope not yer :)
[20:10] <knome> yeah i thought so
[20:11]  * flocculant knew you meant cheers
[20:11] <knome> heh
[20:20] <flocculant> ochosi: thinking back to last time we had locking problems - I'm sure I tried unity greeter then - I wonder what's gone on to stop it working
[22:22] <ochosi> flocculant: yeah, not sure, tbh i've lost track of this a little
[22:23] <ochosi> (the locking changes, the session stuff with systemd,...)
[22:24] <ochosi> maybe bluesabre can help...