[00:31] <Unit193> bluesabre: I/we missed another xfce4-whiskermenu-plugin release, huh.
[00:38] <bluesabre> Unit193, hard to keep up with that one
[00:39] <Unit193> Translation+memleak, grabbed it.
[00:39] <bluesabre> flocculant, how so?
[00:39] <Unit193> You keep doing the important stuff, I'll keep the others off your back. :P
[01:00] <bluesabre> Unit193, :)
[07:37] <flocculant> bluesabre: dragging on time bar with mouse works, selecting somewhere along the bar with the mouse doesn't, > mouse key tries to work
[07:41] <flocculant> thought I mentioned it when you were asking about bug 1337786
[07:41] <flocculant> bug 1667786 even
[09:57] <knome> do we have any reason not to bump the documentation license up to CC-BY-SA 4.0 (from 2.5)?
[09:57] <knome> aiui, https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/ confirms that this should be ok in terms of license compatibility, but please correct me if i'm wrong...
[09:58] <slickymasterWork> checking it knome 
[10:01] <Unit193> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2014/04/msg00032.html in regards to 3.0 vs 4.0.  Does the license say "or later"?  If we're free to, 2.5 is something to get away from.
[10:01] <knome> does not
[10:02] <knome> are translations considered contributions?
[10:02] <knome> i mean in the sense of licenses
[10:02] <slickymasterWork> knome, since we'll continue to distribute all the changes made under the same license as the original I don't see why not
[10:02] <slickymasterWork> I believe they are, knome 
[10:02] <knome> right, so if we needed to ask contributors for permission, that'd be a lot of people
[10:03] <Unit193> Yes, the headers have "Same license as the orig work"
[10:04] <Unit193> (But might be worth it, considering: https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2015/11/msg00001.html - https://wiki.debian.org/DFSGLicenses#Creative_Commons_Attribution_Share-Alike_.28CC-BY-SA.29_v4.0)
[10:19] <knome> yes what?
[10:19] <knome> we need to contact everybody or not? :)
[10:22] <slickymasterWork> from what I read in https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2015/11/msg00001.html it does seem we have
[10:25] <knome> let's take the discussion here...
[10:25] <knome> practically, what are our options?
[10:25] <knome> do we send a message to each person on the list by Unit193 via LP/email?
[10:26] <knome> or would it be "just fine" if we sent a general message on the devel mailing list?
[10:26] <slickymasterWork> what if some of the emails are no longer active?
[10:26] <knome> (potentially explicitly (C)CC'ing people with emails)?
[10:26] <knome> well their launchpad accounts are active
[10:26] <slickymasterWork> that would mean we'd have to put translations on halt
[10:26] <knome> well, not really
[10:27] <slickymasterWork> right, but do we really NEED their explicit acceptance?
[10:27] <slickymasterWork> in the form of a reply, that is?
[10:27] <knome> by Unit193s interpretation, yes
[10:27] <knome> i'm still looking at https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses/
[10:27] <knome> and speciically the point
[10:27] <knome> Version 2.0 and 2.5
[10:27] <knome> Your contributions to adaptations of BY-SA 2.0 or 2.5 materials may only be licensed under:
[10:28] <knome> The license used for the original work, or a later version of that BY-SA license.
[10:28] <knome> even more specifically: "OR A LATER VERSION OF THAT BY-SA LICENSE"
[10:28] <knome> because for 1.0, they explicitly say there is no compatibility mechanism
[10:28] <knome> so it would be different if we were porting from that...
[10:29] <slickymasterWork> that was the reason behind me saying tha since we'll continue to distribute all the changes made under the same license as the original I don't see why we couldn't bump the documentation license
[10:29] <knome> pleia2, input plz?
[10:30] <slickymasterWork> and it would be easier to get acceptances/replies from the documentation contributors than getting them from the translators since the later are a larger universe
[10:32] <knome> i don't mind the work to send a message to each translator as well
[10:32] <knome> i just don't think it will be very fruitful
[10:33] <slickymasterWork> and that's where the problem is, knome 
[10:33] <slickymasterWork> do we have the need of an explicit acceptance from them?
[10:33] <knome> so before we dig deeper in any of this, can we say "CC-BY-SA 4.0 or later" if we update the license?
[10:33] <knome> ianal
[10:34] <slickymasterWork> ianal?!
[10:34] <knome> i am not a lawyer
[10:34] <slickymasterWork> lol... same here
[10:34] <slickymasterWork> "... can we say "CC-BY-SA 4.0 or later" if we update the license?" <- no clue
[10:35] <knome> "If you take a work under BY-NC-SA 2.0 and make something new from it, for example, you can re-publish under BY-NC-SA Japan, or BY-NC-SA 7.4 (when that comes)"
[10:36] <knome> from https://creativecommons.org/2004/05/25/announcingandexplainingournew20licenses/
[10:37] <knome> so if you are free to create a new piece of work with the contributions by people A,B,C under BY-NC-SA 2.5, why wouldn't you be able to relicense the original work as well?
[10:37] <knome> (and yeah, the same goes for BY-SA: Similarly, a derivative made from a work under BY-SA 2.0 may be published only under BY-SA 2.0, BY-SA (iCommons license), or BY-SA 9.1 ...)
[10:38] <slickymasterWork> from your link knome: "Version 2.0 licenses that feature the Share Alike requirement now clarify that derivatives may be re-published under one of three types of licenses: (1) the exact same license as the original work; (2) a later version of the same license as the original work; (3) an iCommons license that contains the same license elements as the original work (e.g. BY-SA-NC, as defined in Section 1 of each license). The ve
[10:38] <slickymasterWork> "...The version 1.0 licenses required that derivative be published under the exact same license only. "
[10:39] <knome> indeed
[10:40] <slickymasterWork> but like everything legal, it's all too kafkian :P
[10:41] <knome> my take is to send an email to devel noting of this intention to upgrade (and we can send messages to LP accounts) and see what comes
[10:41] <knome> but i'd also like to hear a comment from pleia2 
[10:41] <Unit193> knome: It's not a problem to just bump it.
[10:42] <knome> Unit193, this information is based on...? :)
[10:42] <slickymasterWork> what about emailing canonical legal asking for a clarifying view on this? 
[10:42] <knome> erghh :)
[10:43] <knome> that might take a while
[10:43] <slickymasterWork> Jessica Kearns is helpful with some things regarding UF
[10:43] <knome> i'm not opposed to being in touch with them if you feel that's a good idea
[10:44] <knome> but i'd like to hear what changed Unit193's mind too :P
[10:44] <slickymasterWork> lack of sleep and too much coffee, perhaps?
[10:45] <Unit193> "You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of this License, ***a later version of this License with the same License Elements as this License***, or a Creative Commons iCommons license that contains the same License Elements as this License (e.g. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 Japan)."
[10:45] <knome> oki
[10:45] <Unit193> https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/legalcode legal text is fun.
[10:45] <knome> so as i kind of interpreted from the beginning
[10:45] <knome> yeah, i read that too
[10:45] <Unit193> **You may distribute,**
[10:46] <Unit193> As I said: Does the license say "or later"?   this one does! :D
[10:46] <knome> oh
[10:46]  * Unit193 is not a lawyer.
[10:46] <knome> the *license*
[10:46] <Unit193> But anyway, that's how I read it.
[10:46] <Unit193> Nice.
[10:46] <knome> the thing i find the most amusing is
[10:47] <knome> that an entity that creates new licenses says this:
[10:47] <knome> No. Creative Commons is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or legal services.
[10:47] <slickymasterWork> lol
[10:47] <knome> i completely understand that, but it's just so funny :P
[10:48] <Unit193> "Well, you kind of do.." :P
[10:48] <knome> yep
[12:45] <flocculant> bluesabre: is there actually any real point in reporting a thunar issue on launchpad? 
[12:45] <bluesabre> flocculant, potentially... but would be nice to clean up the issues we have once/if we get the SRU moving
[12:46] <flocculant> so for the moment I won't make sure something is in 2 places
[12:46] <flocculant> just confirmed xfce 13364
[12:47] <bluesabre> fun
[12:47] <flocculant> mmm - but at least it stays up :)
[12:47] <bluesabre> sounds like it should be an easy fix
[12:47] <bluesabre> but its thunar
[12:47] <flocculant> hah
[12:49] <bluesabre> flocculant, I might have found another one, noticed yesterday
[12:50] <bluesabre> if thunar is watching a directory where there are lots of changes, say "Downloads" when you're grabbing media files, it freezes at some point
[12:50] <flocculant> bluesabre: I'll be trying to clean up thunar bugzilla 
[12:50] <flocculant> bluesabre: oh - I just saw that on lp
[12:50] <bluesabre> oh nice
[12:51] <flocculant> well sort of at least > bug 1643178
[12:51] <flocculant> bluesabre: ftr - I've not seen that, but it would be something I would likely have hit
[13:23] <triode13> i'm new here. i've just set up KVM and performed an Install (entire disk) with the Zest daily. no bugs. should i report results?
[13:42] <Perigee> triode13:  Thanks to flocculant training me yesterday I know the answer to this! You can login with your Ubuntu One account here and record your result at the bottom of the page: http://iso.qa.ubuntu.com/qatracker/milestones/369/builds
[14:16] <knome> triode13, Perigee: nice to see new faces around here :)
[14:16] <knome> welcome!
[14:16] <triode13> oops. didn't realize my Launchpad id was not triode13. changed my Launchpad id from 'fishski13' to 'triode13'. 
[14:16] <knome> we welcome all kinds of launchpad id's ;)
[14:18] <Perigee> lol, yeah who took Perigee on Launchpad?! *shakes fist*
[14:18] <Perigee> knome: \o/
[14:28] <knome> slickymasterWork, akxwi-dave: https://code.launchpad.net/~knome/xubuntu-docs/contributor-doc-improvements/+merge/318780
[14:28] <knome> you also should have mail regarding this
[14:28] <slickymasterWork> yes
[14:28] <slickymasterWork> will review it later at home, knome 
[14:29] <knome> sure
[14:29] <knome> fwiw, the documentation team basic stuff is from a document that i wrote for jjfrv8 back when he was pondering if he wanted to take the doc lead hat :)
[14:30] <slickymasterWork> ack
[14:30] <knome> aaaand now i can clean that file from temp.knome.fi :P
[14:30] <slickymasterWork> :)
[14:31] <knome> (if you're wondering, yes, that was the source for all the motivation to get this update done :P)
[14:31] <knome> it kind of got out of hand, i admit it
[14:31] <knome> would've been easy to hit and run
[14:31] <Perigee> Hey since you're talking docs, I was curious if there was any interest in video training for Xubuntu. I thought I saw mention of it somewhere in the past few days on the site. My side-job is creating IT video training courses, so I thought I would offer.
[14:32] <knome> Perigee, absolutely, if there are people who are willing to create the content
[14:32] <Perigee> knome: Is there a wishlist/outline of what you want? Or just go through the written Xubuntu/XFCE docs and make videos for each piece?
[14:33] <knome> no, that would probably be the first thing to figure out
[14:33] <knome> not sure if we want videos for exactly the same kind of stuff, because text and video are very different formats and enable different kinds of things to be done
[14:34] <knome> you'll want to talk with slickymasterWork (the doc lead) and pleia2 (the marketing lead) about that
[14:34] <Perigee> Yeah, following a rigid "here is how you change a setting" document can get boring. Most of the stuff I do is teaching concepts + a demo, which is a bit different in style.
[14:34] <knome> and starting a discussion thread in the devel mailing list can produce some results as well
[14:35] <knome> another question we need to tackle is the "where"
[14:35] <knome> we'll want to create some kind of official account if we do "official" videos
[14:35] <Perigee> Yeah, I assume an official Xubuntu Youtube channel would be a good start
[14:35] <knome> (we can definitely give you the control over that too, along with somebody from the team)
[14:35] <knome> yeah - that's one of the questions - youtube, vimeo, or something else ;)
[14:36] <Perigee> Ok cool, well if slickymasterWork wants to chime in at all, I'm here all day. I'll get around to sending an email to the mailing list as well.
[14:36] <slickymasterWork> the idea wouldn't be to flood the potential venue of the videos with loads of material, Perigee 
[14:37] <knome> i use both (and any) to consume, but i don't know well enough to know which one would suit us better
[14:37] <slickymasterWork> and thanks for volunteering to make them
[14:37] <knome> oh, also, we'll likely want to use some consistent artwork with them - you'll want to poke me when you need some
[14:38] <Perigee> Sure, I know XFCE has specifics for screenshots, so I'm sure we would want the same
[14:38] <slickymasterWork> preferably those videos would demonstrate a wider scope of the nuclear use of Xubuntu and core Xfce apps
[14:38] <knome> for the configuration, probably just default settings
[14:38] <knome> (unless the videos cover changing them, obviously you should do that then ;))
[14:39] <knome> but i was meaning some intro artwork - and the video cover art
[14:39] <knome> or whatever it is called
[14:43] <slickymasterWork> Perigee, potential candidates for videos can be Catfish, LightDM GTK+ Greeter, Whiskermenu, LightDM GTK+ Greeter Settings, MenuLibre, Mugshot
[14:44] <slickymasterWork> another potential series could be done about contributing
[14:45] <slickymasterWork> QA testing, and documentation
[14:46] <slickymasterWork> something like setting up a launchpad account, submitting merge proposals, etc
[14:47] <Perigee> Makes sense
[14:49] <slickymasterWork> Perigee, like knome already stated starting a discussion thread in the devel mailing list should be one of your first steps so everyone in the team can also chime in
[15:08] -SwissBot:#xubuntu-devel- ::xubuntu-docs:: [contributor-doc-improvements] r628 Merge flocculant's improvements for the contributor document... (by Pasi Lallinaho)
[15:08] -SwissBot:#xubuntu-devel- ::xubuntu-docs:: [contributor-doc-improvements] r630 Improvements for contributor docs:... (by Pasi Lallinaho)
[16:20] <flocculant> thanks triode13 - thanks also to Perigee for actually taking some notice of me :)
[16:23] <flocculant> Perigee: also see work items here http://dev.xubuntu.org/#tab-details/spec=xubuntu-z-qa
[16:24]  * flocculant notes not invited to the contributor doc merge party so will wait until it's been merged and approved before saying anything 
[16:24] <flocculant> :p
[16:26] <knome> flocculant, meh :P
[16:26] <knome> flocculant, feel free to comment if there is anything
[16:26] <flocculant> I assume it's the same as it was yesterday when I acked it :)
[16:26] <knome> close to
[16:27] <knome> i mean, i've poked around a *bit* but mostly things that are just minutiae
[18:33] <knome> flocculant, otherwise important is hard to define, as it means many things, amongst others important because it's highlighted on the slideshow or because it's a feature that is particularly complex or something else
[18:36] <knome> flocculant, will propose this:
[18:36] <knome> flocculant, The documentation team works with the developers to ensure any new features that are part of the core functionality of the operating system are covered in the documentation. In addition, the documentation team makes sure features highlighted in the installer slideshow or any other marketing material are appropriately documented.
[18:36] <flocculant> knome: yea I realise that
[18:37] <knome> it's mostly the "marketing" stuff, anything that's "xubuntu-like" could already be considered "core"
[18:38] <flocculant> ack - wfm
[18:38] <flocculant> assuming that replaces the first sentence :)
[18:38] <knome> yes
[18:38] <flocculant> k
[18:39] <knome> also: When any documented features are removed or changed, the team makes sure the documentation does not refer to any removed functionality
[18:39] <knome> replacing again
[18:39] <flocculant> yep - wfm again
[18:39] <flocculant> :)
[18:40] <knome> next one: The team should be aware of changes to new releases, particularly on LTS releases and potential SRUs, as those might affect documentation.
[18:40] <flocculant> yep - wfm again
[18:41] <knome> right, the essential issue
[18:41] <knome> the packages that only exist in xubuntu are essential as well
[18:41] <knome> maybe s/essential/important/ and add essential to the first one?
[18:42] <knome> actually, i'd do the following
[18:42] <knome> first title == Essential: Packages that only exist in Xubuntu
[18:42] <knome> second == Important: Used by Xubuntu
[18:42] <knome> third == $something_else: Mainly built for and used by Xubuntu
[18:43] <flocculant> yup - I'll not say it again :p
[18:43] <knome> does that work though?
[18:43] <knome> and any suggestions for the last one?
[18:43] <flocculant> that last is really just wording - the other way round it looks a bit odd
[18:44] <knome> gmm
[18:44] <knome> hmm too
[18:44] <knome> maybe we should merge the last two?
[18:44] <knome> so i'll do that, remove the prefixes and we'll see how that looks
[18:45] <flocculant> yea I think used and important could merge
[18:45] <knome> yep
[18:45] <knome> done that already
[18:45] <knome> now let me push the new rev
[18:46] <flocculant> knome: did you do Documentation String Freeze prior to uploading ?
[18:46] <knome> yep
[18:46] <flocculant> k
[18:46] <knome> was happy with the new proposal so
[18:47] <flocculant> yea - just checking before you new rev :D
[18:48] <knome> and done
[18:49] <knome> also see slight wording change on "used by" - no essential there eitehr :P
[18:49] <knome> either either
[18:52] <flocculant> knome: thanks - I commented but didn't approve - just in case you can only have 1 approve :D
[18:53] <flocculant> bbl
[19:05] <Perigee> flocculant: 10-4
[19:14] <knome> flocculant, you can have as many approves as there are reviewers
[19:15] <knome> had to jump off in a rush
[19:15] <knome> and now off again, bbl today
[19:23] -SwissBot:#xubuntu-devel- ::xubuntu-docs:: [contributor-doc-improvements] r631 Improvements based on Kev's comments on MP #318780... (by Pasi Lallinaho)
[20:22] <flocculant> akxwi-dave: did you see ping yesterday on the new page at x.org?
[20:25] <knome> now we only need slowmasterWork's approval
[20:42] <Unit193> knome: And certainly nice to see new faces, yours is getting old!
[20:53] <knome> indeed!
[20:53]  * knome tries to hide the wrinkles
[21:03] <flocculant> knome: and did you look at the page on x.org?
[21:03] <knome> which one again? :)
[21:03] <flocculant> Unit193: yea - always good to see new faces
[21:12] <flocculant> knome: the newest one created by me - when it was really new when I pinged the url
[21:12] <knome> i might have seen it but forgotten
[21:12] <flocculant> before today - which would make it old :p
[21:14] <knome> oh right, yes, the new page (which is an article) looks good
[21:14] <knome> maybe s/iso/ISO/
[21:14] <flocculant> yea - isn't meant to be an article - but to replace the qa page 
[21:14] <knome> the tracker link seems to have one " too many
[21:14] <knome> yep, i gathered
[21:18] <flocculant> bluesabre you noticed this connectivity checking chatter on the u-dev list? 
[21:18] <flocculant> Unit193: ^^ 
[21:18] <knome> i think Unit193 even commented about it
[21:18] <knome> i really think we should blacklist that feature
[21:19] <knome> 01:35  knome: my vote is on blacklisting that
[21:19] <knome> 02:26  bluesabre: Unit193, feel free to also blacklist that for us
[21:19] <flocculant> I did read it - then forgot - but remembered when I see the rt for it wondering IS can handle that
[21:19] <flocculant> aah cool - I read that as well 
[21:19] <knome> rt?
[21:19] <knome> IS?
[21:19] <flocculant> .ubuntu.com
[21:19] <knome> yeah
[21:19] <knome> i don't think those are related at all :P
[21:19] <Unit193> flocculant, knome: I haven't only because it doesn't exist yet, but we're gonna blacklist it.
[21:19] <flocculant> was just going to try logging in at x.org and ready to create a ticket
[21:20] <knome> Unit193, ack
[21:20] <flocculant> Unit193: k
[21:20] <flocculant> knome: https://rt.ubuntu.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=29600
[21:20] <knome> oh...
[21:22] <flocculant> knome: logged in first time - I think browser knew I was at rt.u.c and told x.org
[21:22] <knome> ;)
[21:22] <flocculant> anyway changed iso and "
[21:22] <knome> great
[21:22] <knome> let's get akxwi-dave have a look at it
[21:22] <knome> then we can publish imo
[21:23] <flocculant> yup
[21:23] <flocculant> akxwi-dave: https://xubuntu.org/?p=4279&preview=true
[21:23] <Unit193> flocculant: Dang, David is emailing them like they're friends.
[21:24] <flocculant> talking to Perigree made me do that
[21:24] <knome> who?
[21:25] <flocculant> Unit193: ha - I think I know what you mean :)
[21:25] <flocculant> knome: I suspect all the forum tickets 
[21:25] <knome> oh
[21:25] <knome> heh
[21:25] <knome> yeah, i've seen them...
[21:25] <knome> that's the most you see when you log in :P
[21:26] <flocculant> :)
[21:29] <Unit193> https://rt.ubuntu.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=3025 heh.
[21:36] <slickymaster> evening
[21:39] <knome> 'lo
[21:39] <slickymaster> well Unit193, after more than seven months dealing with unresolved UF issues, I started to follow the tone of their own mails
[22:02] <slickymaster> ok knome https://code.launchpad.net/~knome/xubuntu-docs/contributor-doc-improvements/+merge/318780 ← approved 
[22:03] <knome> so what i'm doing is acutally just pushing to main, not merging
[22:03] <knome> aaand that's done
[22:03] <slickymaster> great
[22:03] <slickymaster> thanks
[22:04] <knome> now feel free to extend the documentation documentation :P
[22:04] <slickymaster> :P
[22:04]  * Unit193 waits for the merge proposal about merge proposals.
[22:05] <knome> ok, next things next
[22:05] <knome> eg. update the xubuntu brand assets package
[22:16] <krytarik> knome: I'm sure this is an oversight, but why not put 'xubuntu-docbook-xhtml-contributor.xsl' into 'contributor-docs/libs/' rather than 'libs-common/'?
[22:16] <knome> laaaaaaaaaazy
[22:17] <knome> i'll likely get it fixed the next time i touch that file - i'm pretty sure that's sooner than later...
[23:00] <bluesabre> evening all
[23:01] <knome> helloooooooo!
[23:02] <slickymaster> evening bluesabre 
[23:02] <bluesabre> hi knome 
[23:02] <bluesabre> hi slickymaster 
[23:03] <bluesabre> no bananas yet
[23:03] <bluesabre> :D
[23:03] <knome> nope
[23:03] <knome> or wallpapers
[23:03] <bluesabre> >.<
[23:03] <slickymaster> but mañanas in no time
[23:03] <bluesabre> :D
[23:07] <ochosi> evening bluesabre 
[23:07] <bluesabre> hi ochosi 
[23:08] <knome> all peoples!
[23:11] <bluesabre> woo!
[23:12] <slickymaster> hi ochosi 
[23:26] <bluesabre> one week to UI freeze
[23:26] <bluesabre> two weeks to doc string freeze
[23:27] <knome> yep
[23:29] <knome> slickymaster, time to schedule the next meeting
[23:33] <slickymaster> thinking of net week
[23:33] <slickymaster> * next
[23:34] <slickymaster> I'll be in Lisbon from monday and tuesday
[23:34] <slickymaster> s/and/to
[23:35] <slickymaster> maybe wednesday
[23:35] <Unit193> Got anything interesting for the meeting?
[23:36] <slickymaster> the upcoming UI and doc string freezes is something
[23:36] <knome> yeah, but really just the general