[02:45] <duflu> Trevinho, hi(?), it seems you landed on the wrong page/date: https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/desktop-team-updates-monday-17th-february-2020/14395/14
[07:09] <didrocks> good morning
[07:10] <oSoMoN> salut didrocks
[07:10] <oSoMoN> good morning desktoppers
[07:12] <jibel> bonjour à tous
[07:13] <jibel> didrocks, if I read it well, the zsys MIR has been approved
[07:13] <jibel> \o/
[07:14] <didrocks> jibel: yes! It seems to be the case, both on the bug and trello card!
[07:14] <didrocks> hey oSoMoN
[07:16] <jibel> i didn't look at the card
[07:17] <jibel> Laney, are you looking at the build failure of desktop images of focal?
[07:17] <jibel> I reported bug 1864608 to track it
[07:26] <oSoMoN> salut jibel
[07:26] <duflu> Morning oSoMoN, jibel and anyone I missed
[07:26] <oSoMoN> hey duflu
[07:29] <didrocks> hey duflu
[08:08] <seb128> goood morning desktopers
[08:09] <duflu> Hi seb128
[08:09] <seb128> hey duflu, how are you today?
[08:09] <duflu> seb128, headache but not too bad. You?
[08:10] <seb128> duflu, the day is only starting here but I'm good so far :)
[08:10] <seb128> didrocks, congrats on getting the zsys MIR finally approved :)
[08:12] <didrocks> seb128: yeah! Now, we can do a final round of testing before releasing what we have and wire up with the installer
[08:30] <Wimpress> Morning o/
[08:32] <duflu> Morning Wimpress
[08:34] <didrocks> good morning Wimpress
[08:40] <seb128> hey Wimpress, how are you?
[08:42] <seb128> Wimpress, I think you forgot the monday rls-bugs discourse topic?
[08:44] <seb128> Laney, jamesh, tkamppeter, weekly summary reminder
[08:44] <seb128> kenvandine, oh, and you
[08:55] <oSoMoN> salut seb128
[08:55] <oSoMoN> good morning Wimpress
[08:56] <seb128> oSoMoN, salut, comment ça va aujourd'hui ?
[08:56] <oSoMoN> seb128, nuit agitée pour cause de bébé malade, mais sinon ça va
[08:56] <seb128> oSoMoN, :-(, bon courage, en espérant que ça aille mieux ce matin!
[08:57] <oSoMoN> ça va déjà un peu mieux, merci
[08:57] <seb128> c'est déjà ça
[08:58] <Wimpress> Morning seb128. I'll post the rls-bugs shortly.
[08:58] <marcustomlinson> morning duflu didrocks oSoMoN jibel seb128 and Wimpress
[08:58] <marcustomlinson> :)
[08:58] <seb128> Wimpress, thanks
[08:59] <seb128> hey marcustomlinson, how are you today?
[08:59] <marcustomlinson> seb128: bleh :P
[08:59] <didrocks> hey marcustomlinson
[08:59] <marcustomlinson> nah, alright thanks, yourself?
[08:59] <seb128> marcustomlinson, I'm good thanks, could have used more sleep but that's often the case right? :)
[08:59] <marcustomlinson> gonna miss you guys next week :/
[08:59] <seb128> we are going to miss you as well!
[08:59] <duflu> Morning marcustomlinson
[09:02] <Laney> moin
[09:02] <marcustomlinson> hey Laney
[09:02] <Laney> seb128: AH thanks I started writing that yesterday but got distracted by uploading gnome stuff and forgot to do it
[09:02] <Laney> you summary police
[09:02] <duflu> Morning Laney
[09:02] <Laney> do you like go and tick off the list or something?
[09:02] <seb128> hey Laney
[09:02] <seb128> :p
[09:02] <Laney> do it for the rls bugs too?
[09:02] <seb128> see backlog :)
[09:03] <seb128> but yeah, for people not updating, good point
[09:03] <seb128> I think the rls thing doesn't work great atm, that's on my list of topic to discuss next week
[09:04] <Laney> well if everybody ignores something then yes by definition it's not working
[09:04] <Laney> would be the same for team updates if nobody did that
[09:05] <Laney> jibel: today's image built
[09:06] <didrocks> hey Laney
[09:07] <jibel> Laney, thanks
[09:07] <Laney> moin marcustomlinson duflu and didrocks too
[09:08] <jibel> is there a know issue with snapd.seeded.service failing to start on focal and blocking default.target?
[09:08] <seb128> not known by me at least
[09:10] <seb128> brb, changing location
[09:41] <marcustomlinson> seb128: I think I've found a relatively clean way of doing these snap transitions in update-manager now
[09:41] <seb128> marcustomlinson, ah, nice!
[09:42] <Trevinho> duflu: indeed I did, thanks :P
[09:42] <marcustomlinson> (I think I just needed to sleep on it)
[09:43] <seb128> hey Trevinho, how are you?
[09:43] <Trevinho> hi seb128 all good :)
[09:43] <Trevinho> yourself?
[09:43] <seb128> marcustomlinson, glad that you got unblocked, I hadn't forgotton you but the morning tend to be busy
[09:44] <seb128> Trevinho, I'm good!
[09:45] <marcustomlinson> seb128: np! thanks for the shoulder to cry on last night
[09:45] <marcustomlinson> I'll shout if I get stuck again
[09:46] <duflu> Morning Trevinho ;)
[09:46] <Trevinho> hi duflu
[10:09] <seb128> kenvandine, the gnome-clocks-master snap fails to build because it wants glib 2.58 and the one it gets (from the platform?) is too old
[10:16] <seb128> ricotz, hey, is there any chance you could look at the indicator-keyboard build issue? I reported https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/456 to pango upstream but got no reply, but we will need to get it rebuilt with the new gnome-desktop soname now so I wonder if there is any easy change we can do on the indicator side to restore build
[10:16] <gitbot> GNOME issue 456 in pango "Gir error, symbol PangoFc could not be found" [Opened]
[10:21] <ricotz> seb128, this pango issue looks the same as https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/issues/458
[10:21] <gitbot> GNOME issue 458 in pango "Gir: no type defined for hb_feature_t" [Opened]
[10:28] <seb128> ricotz, ah, thanks ... so we need harfbuz and pango updates in Debian/Ubuntu then I guess?
[10:31] <ricotz> seb128, no, the easiest is to add some metadata for PangoFT2-1.0 to indicator-keyboard
[10:31] <ricotz> nonetheless those gir deps need to be fixed in pango upstream
[10:32] <ricotz> I will try to take a look later
[10:39] <seb128> ricotz, thx
[11:00] <kenvandine> seb128, I have a build of clocks that uses the new build snap, just waiting for the gnome-3-34 extension to land
[11:02] <tkamppeter> seb128, weekly summary done.
[12:07] <ricotz> seb128, it is a pango meson bug
[12:08] <ricotz> seb128, https://paste.debian.net/plain/1132106
[12:09] <ricotz> so the generated PangoFc-1.0.gir is not fully correct
[12:27] <ricotz> seb128, https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/pango/-/commit/63c3eb8b7aa6ee9397c1d89a232514583f464fb5
[13:13] <Laney> tracker's crashing on current isos :'(
[13:14] <Laney> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/tracker-miners/+bug/1864153
[13:25] <jibel> on focal in general, not only the iso
[13:25] <jibel> I got this crash after this morning's update
[13:25] <Laney> believable
[13:30] <jibel> didrocks, https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1864651
[14:02] <seb128> ricotz, thanks!
[14:22] <seb128> tkamppeter, unsure if you noticed but Locutusofborg fixed your sane-backends build, see https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/sane-backends/1.0.29-0ubuntu5
[14:23] <seb128> jamesh, kenvandine, weekly status update?
[14:25] <kenvandine> seb128: sorry... I could have sworn I did that on friday!
[14:25] <kenvandine> maybe I posted it to the wrong week :)
[14:26] <hellsworth> good morning desktopers
[14:26] <oSoMoN> good morning hellsworth
[14:26] <hellsworth> hi oSoMoN !
[14:27] <seb128> hey Heather! how are you?
[14:27] <hellsworth> hi seb128 , i'm pretty good. you?
[14:27] <seb128> jibel, you should probably flag that issue to the snapd team if that hasn't been done yet
[14:27] <seb128> hellsworth, I'm great, thanks! :)
[14:27] <marcustomlinson> hey hellsworth
[14:28] <marcustomlinson> hellsworth: so did a simple rebuild of lo for arm64 do the trick?
[14:28] <hellsworth> it was still going when i stopped working yesterday so lemme go check
[14:30] <seb128> k, it's meeting time
[14:31] <seb128> #startmeeting Desktop Team Weekly Meeting - 2020-02-25
[14:31] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Feb 25 14:31:00 2020 UTC.  The chair is seb128. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[14:31] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[14:31] <seb128> Roll call:  didrocks (out), duflu (out), hellsworth, jamesh (out), jibel, kenvandine, Laney, marcustomlinson, oSoMoN, seb128 , tkamppeter, trevinho, robert_ancell (out)
[14:31] <hellsworth> o/
[14:31] <marcustomlinson> \o
[14:31] <oSoMoN>                  \o
[14:32] <seb128> oSoMoN, don't move so far to the right!
[14:32] <seb128> k, let's get started
[14:32] <seb128> #topic rls-bb-bugs
[14:33] <kenvandine> o/
[14:33] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-bb-incoming-bug-tasks.html
[14:33] <seb128> no desktop item
[14:34] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-bb-tracking-bug-tasks.html
[14:34] <seb128> nothing interesting there, either old/incomplete bugs or the nm ones we still didn't sort out (probably going to be easier to do in Frankfurt now)
[14:34] <seb128> #topic rls-ee-bugs
[14:35] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ee-incoming-bug-tasks.html
[14:35] <seb128> nothing for desktop
[14:35] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ee-tracking-bug-tasks.html
[14:35] <seb128> nothing interested there
[14:35] <seb128> #topic rls-ff-bugs
[14:35] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ff-incoming-bug-tasks.html
[14:36] <seb128> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-calculator/+bug/1797734
[14:36] <seb128> I need to talk to duflu about champagne use...
[14:36] <seb128> kenvandine, I guess just an untag for that one?
[14:36] <kenvandine> yeah
[14:36] <marcustomlinson> agreed
[14:36] <marcustomlinson> not as important if it's no longer seeded
[14:37] <seb128> bug #1864127
[14:37] <oSoMoN> I need to look into that one
[14:37] <seb128> I don't think there is enough data to convince me to rls track for now
[14:38] <seb128> oSoMoN, should we just assign to you for investigation and revisit next week once you looked?
[14:38] <oSoMoN> from a very cursory look, it sounds like a problem of the snap refreshing while running
[14:39] <oSoMoN> seb128, I don't think assigning is even needed, I have the tab open and I'll request more info
[14:39] <seb128> right
[14:39] <seb128> ack
[14:40] <seb128> bug #1864260
[14:40] <seb128> looks like that was fixed, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mozjs60/60.8.0-2ubuntu4
[14:40] <oSoMoN> (not that I mind being assigned, but it might give a false impression that I'm acknowledging the bug before even being convinced that it's an actual problem)
[14:40] <seb128> I'm closing it
[14:40] <seb128> oSoMoN, right
[14:41] <seb128> bug #1864274
[14:41] <seb128> I will ask for details on this one
[14:42] <oSoMoN> or I could do it, but thanks for the offer :)
[14:42] <Laney> accept then?
[14:43] <seb128> Laney, I'm a bit lost of what to do from the champagne to be honest, I don't think the intend there was to raise it as a rls bug ... so yeah, I probably say rls-not-fixing?
[14:44] <seb128> hopefully we can have a proper cross team discussion about those next week
[14:44] <seb128> Laney, also it just reminded me I forgot to review/comment on your email draft, sorry about that!
[14:44] <seb128> so -1 from me for that one/ rls-ff-notfixing
[14:44] <seb128> other opinions?
[14:45] <Laney> it is sort of the intent but you've argued against that multiple times now so I don't think you are minded to accept it being done this way
[14:45] <Laney> maybe you want to take over proposing a process from me
[14:46] <hellsworth> can we just evealuate it after the reporter provides more details/video?
[14:46] <seb128> let's discuss later (probably next week?)
[14:46] <hellsworth> sgtm
[14:46] <kenvandine> good topic for the sprint
[14:47] <seb128> I've asked for details
[14:47] <seb128> right
[14:47] <hellsworth> i saw that
[14:47] <seb128> let's move on
[14:47] <Laney> I personally think it's fine to assign to someone and let them close it if necessary
[14:47] <Laney> that's a valid outcome
[14:47] <kenvandine> I agree
[14:47] <hellsworth> i agree with Laney
[14:47] <seb128> so assign & untag?
[14:48] <seb128> or tag not-fixing?
[14:48] <hellsworth> assign & untag
[14:48] <hellsworth> or just assign
[14:48] <seb128> if we 'just assign' it's stay on the list and we see it again next week
[14:49] <hellsworth> but you ask the assignee to do simething with it before then
[14:49] <hellsworth> whether tag or close or w/e
[14:49] <kenvandine> if we leave it tagged we can keep track of the status of all champagne bugs as they are being worked
[14:49] <kenvandine> dunno
[14:49] <seb128> right
[14:49] <hellsworth> also, i'm the new kid so this is my naive perspective :)
[14:49] <seb128> we are not likely to solve that today, let's ignore the issue for another week I say
[14:49] <kenvandine> i'd say assign and leave tagged
[14:50] <seb128> let's do that for this week
[14:50]  * Laney shrugs
[14:50] <seb128> Laney, don't shrug too much, I think I'm just being lost on what the process should be for case that need info
[14:51] <seb128> or maybe it's obvious and no-enough-info -> not ready to be rls accept -> notfixing
[14:51] <hellsworth> we should have champagne with our champagne discussion next week 🎉
[14:51] <kenvandine> +1
[14:51] <seb128> anyway I don't want to make everyone waste time because I'm confused
[14:51] <hellsworth> i think you're not the only one that's confused about how this tag should be used seb128
[14:52] <oSoMoN> yeah, definitely not the only one
[14:52] <hellsworth> so it's not wasting time to discuss it but we can better discuss it in person next week
[14:52] <seb128> right
[14:52] <seb128> that's an agreement
[14:52] <seb128> moving on from that discussion until next week then!
[14:52] <Laney> better ignore my proposed email then
[14:52] <seb128> bug #1864577
[14:53] <seb128> it's minor but I think it's a regression
[14:53] <hellsworth> i think we should fix it
[14:53] <seb128> I would tend to vote +1
[14:53] <hellsworth> +1
[14:53] <kenvandine> definately +1
[14:53] <seb128> kenvandine, assigned to Robert is fine?
[14:53] <hellsworth> looks like low hanging fruit
[14:53] <kenvandine> yes
[14:53] <seb128> thx
[14:55] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ff-tracking-bug-tasks.html
[14:56] <seb128> k, nothing interesting there, the exif one is to close, nm is known, and the last one we discussed
[14:56] <seb128> #topic update_excuses_by_team.html#desktop-packages
[14:56] <seb128> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses_by_team.html#desktop-packages
[14:57] <seb128> Laney, do you want to do it or should I keep that for now since I'm still active on dealing with issue for the time being?
[14:57] <Laney> you can
[14:57] <seb128> k
[14:57] <seb128> sooo
[14:57] <seb128> long list of things blocked on icu
[14:58] <seb128> + now poppler and gnome-desktop transitions started
[14:58] <hellsworth> icu was a dependency on many of these yesterday and was triggering a LO test that was failing because of a copy timeout in the build runner
[14:58] <seb128> tjaalton, are you looking at the xorg-server issues?
[14:58]  * Trevinho wonders if icu would change also mozjs tests...
[14:58] <Trevinho> (not for this though)
[14:58] <seb128> bubblewrap/libcap is being handled, there a mp upstream now
[14:59] <hellsworth> laney has increased the copy time and that improved things but the LO arm64 test was failing in a way that a retrigger has fixed for other tests so it has been retriggered and everyone cross your fingers
[14:59] <seb128> Trevinho, https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mozjs60/60.8.0-2ubuntu4 was a simple fix needed for mozjs60, dunno for 68
[14:59] <hellsworth> its weird that this list in update_excuses doesn't say that they depend on icu anymore..
[14:59] <seb128> hellsworth, http://autopkgtest.ubuntu.com/packages/libr/libreoffice/focal/arm64 has failed retries from today ...
[15:00] <Trevinho> ok we've that already
[15:00] <seb128> yeah, I think the fact they stated what they were blocked on was a new improvement
[15:00] <seb128> unsure what happened/if they rolled back or if it broke for some reason
[15:00] <seb128> I will investigagte, it was useful info
[15:00] <seb128> anyway
[15:01] <seb128> out of those issues, we are good
[15:01] <hellsworth> seb128: right and the last failure that ran for 12h is what i'm looking at. that uicheck test has failed in other tests if you scroll down - glib and python - in both cases a rerun fixed it.
[15:02] <seb128> we really need an owner for gscan2pdf/arm, so please take the card if you want to volunteer
[15:02] <seb128> otherwise we will probably assign someone this week
[15:02] <seb128> it's block xorg-server and now the sane-backends update
[15:03] <seb128> and that's it for proposed migration
[15:03] <seb128> #topic AOB
[15:03] <seb128> a remainer that ff is this week
[15:03] <Laney> yes
[15:03] <seb128> Laney, go!
[15:03] <Laney> Trevinho: do you want to describe the gjs bug situation?
[15:03] <Trevinho> yeah
[15:04] <seb128> (while you do that, I state again that we could use help on GNOME updates)
[15:04] <Trevinho> so... gjs moved to use mozjs68, gnome-shell depends on latest gjs so we had to upgrade the whole stack. Now, gjs proved to be a bit unstable while doing garbage-collection
[15:04] <Trevinho> so we may have a bit more crashes...
[15:05] <Trevinho> now, there's a WIP mr that aims to improve the situation and we included in debian
[15:05] <Trevinho> but still there are reports of crashes, so updating to .35 would imply a more unstable desktop till we don't fix gjs
[15:05] <tjaalton> seb128: yes?
[15:05] <Laney> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gjs/issues/301
[15:05] <Trevinho> now... What to do? wait for the fix to land before going .35 or not?
[15:05] <gitbot> GNOME issue 301 in gjs "Various GNOME Shell crashes during GC, mozjs68 regression" [1. Bug, 1. Crash, Opened]
[15:05] <Trevinho> thanks L
[15:06] <hellsworth> when do you think the fix will land?
[15:06] <Trevinho> personally, from random usage I didn't see many issues, but....
[15:06] <Trevinho> hellsworth: no clear idea, probably we may have to get the hands dirty to get a proper fix as upstream has not found a final solution yet
[15:06] <Trevinho> to help*
[15:07] <hellsworth> imho, i would take the safer route and wait to include .35 until the fix lands, while also trying to get it landed.
[15:07] <seb128> Laney, Trevinho, what's your gut feeling?
[15:07] <hellsworth> and by i, i mean you :)
[15:07] <Trevinho> as said, we included https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gjs/-/merge_requests/396 but not complete yet
[15:08] <seb128> can we update gnome-shell without updating gjs?
[15:08] <Trevinho> hellsworth: yeah, well... we should go past FF; so... better people to know it.
[15:08] <Trevinho> seb128: we *may*.
[15:08] <seb128> I should have added 'easily'
[15:08] <Trevinho> yeah, it's quite easy in fact
[15:09] <seb128> I would either do that
[15:09] <Trevinho> we may have two choices, go with gjs 1.93.. smth, I mean the one before mozjs68
[15:09] <Trevinho> *OR* just cherry-pick the required change that the shell depends on
[15:09]  * Trevinho blames himself for it xD
[15:09] <seb128> or update including mozjs68 and use a block-proposed to stop it migrating until it gets more testing/a proper fix
[15:10] <Trevinho> so using mozjs60 is still possible for a bit, but I *WON't*m suggest it for the lts, as we'd loose all the point-releases support.
[15:10] <Trevinho> plus ability of cherry-picking changes from upstream
[15:10] <seb128> right, I wouldn't suggest that enough
[15:11] <seb128> but we need to get gnome-shell some testing
[15:11] <seb128> so if it's easy I would do a first landing with mozjs60
[15:11] <seb128> and then go for 68 and block that in proposed
[15:11] <seb128> enough->either
[15:11] <seb128> other opinions?
[15:11] <Trevinho> ok, so let me try if we can just get the gjs patch out with the current gjs we've in ubuntu, and then we can try to move to the latest
[15:12] <Trevinho> it should be simple enough
[15:12] <seb128> k, that has my vote as step1 then
[15:12] <Laney> probably ok, but testing random combinations of stuff isn't great as a rule
[15:13] <seb128> right
[15:13] <Trevinho> Laney: isn't a random combination in this case, because the fact is that the only reason why new gjs is needed, is because a JS definition, nothing else
[15:13] <seb128> we should move to the new version whenever possible
[15:13] <Trevinho> but move on as soon as possible is indeed better.
[15:13] <seb128> but meanwhile there is value getting some testing of the new serie
[15:13] <Laney> it is random, because gnome doesn't expect you to use parts of their old release and parts of the new one
[15:13] <seb128> seeing new feature, potential UI/behaviour changes etc
[15:13] <Trevinho> but being gjs just an interpreter, and being js always the same lang, there should not be any problem
[15:14] <Laney> k
[15:14] <seb128> your call
[15:14] <Trevinho> given I'm the one who bumped that requirement upstream, I can define it not random :)
[15:14] <seb128> I think getting the update based on 68 blocked in proposed should be fine as well
[15:14] <seb128> :-)
[15:14] <seb128> Laney, Trevinho, you got what you wanted from the discussion for now?
[15:15] <Laney> sure
[15:15] <Trevinho> but as you guys prefer, I mean, I'm ok with leaving a crashing desktop xD, but then I don't want to hear anybody at FRA blaming for it
[15:15] <Laney> we can do it
[15:15] <Laney> no guarantees though, that's likely to be a pretty untested combination
[15:15] <seb128> I would advice against having an update with a known crasher landing in focal proper
[15:15] <Laney> like nothing says you don't require some other fix in the new gjs for new shell
[15:16] <seb128> for the reason you just stated
[15:16] <Laney> but it might or even is likely to be ok
[15:16] <seb128> right
[15:17] <Trevinho> Laney: unless I missed something, no... Or we can actually use the *expected* version as I said, so 1.63.2 (mozjs60 based)
[15:17] <seb128> well let's block in propose and do a round of in team testing first
[15:17] <Trevinho> that wouldn't be random, but the one upstream requires
[15:17] <Trevinho> so, as you guys prefer. But just a patch could be enough imho.
[15:18] <seb128> Trevinho, you are the mainainer (upstream & downstream), do what you believe is the best :)
[15:18] <seb128> k, enough on that for now, we can keep discussing after the meeting if needed
[15:18] <seb128> any other topic?
[15:18] <seb128> I do another round of reminders
[15:18] <seb128> - we could use extra hands for GNOME updates
[15:19] <seb128> - ff is thursday, land your features!
[15:19] <Trevinho> - Signup at https://trello.com/b/z29JJK3q/gnome-336 for GNOME packaging :)
[15:20] <Trevinho> - https://people.canonical.com/~platform/desktop/desktop-packages.html to see what's missing
[15:20] <seb128> lets wrap on that note then!
[15:20] <seb128> thx for the urls Trevinho :)
[15:20] <seb128> #endmeeting
[15:20] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Feb 25 15:20:56 2020 UTC.
[15:20] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-desktop/2020/ubuntu-desktop.2020-02-25-14.31.moin.txt
[15:22] <Trevinho> seb128: could you look into libgusb update or should I? Given that it helps with libfprint (not sure the changes you had to do for testing was caused by that)
[15:23] <seb128> Trevinho, I can have a look
[15:23] <seb128> you are busy enough
[15:23] <seb128> Trevinho, also please look at your query, unsure what's going on without IRC client :)
[15:26] <Trevinho> seb128: just too many notifications everywhere... And now, signal! :(
[15:27] <jdstrand> oSoMoN: fyi, I commented on https://launchpad.net/bugs/1864127
[15:28] <didrocks> during MIR meeting ->  doko | apparently, desktop just asking kernel for a take over on -devel ;p
[15:28] <didrocks> seb128: do you know what this is about? I’m out of context
[15:28] <seb128> didrocks, I would guess https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/alsa-ucm-conf/+bug/1862776
[15:29] <seb128> didrocks, which would be funny seeing that doko opened the bug and he's the one who assigned to Kernel Packages
[15:29] <didrocks> yeah, I’m requested to review it now
[15:29] <didrocks> apparently
[15:30] <seb128> didrocks, I guess that's what you get for trying to be nice and help other teams, I should have let it to be completed by the kernel team
[15:30] <didrocks> I don’t have slots for doing it before next week though
[15:34] <seb128> didrocks, yeah, no hurry, but also feel free to bounce back from taking it, it's not a desktop item, it's a hwe one
[15:34] <seb128> didrocks, oem teams want those to support new hardware
[15:34] <didrocks> I guess I can have a look, but not timely for FF
[15:38] <oSoMoN> jdstrand, ack, thanks! that's my suspicion too
[15:40] <seb128> bah
[15:43] <seb128> e-d-s fails to build with
[15:43] <seb128> 'dh_girepository: Could not find ICalGLib-3.0.typelib dependency'
[15:44] <seb128> ricotz, ^ any idea about that one? ;)
[15:45] <Laney> seb128: do you have the new libical-dev?
[15:45] <Laney> there was something like that that I fixed a couple of weeks ago
[15:46]  * ricotz suspects a broken ical install too
[15:47] <seb128> Laney, oh, the update is blocked in proposed
[15:47] <seb128> thx for pointing that out
[15:47] <Laney> yeah, icu :(
[16:23] <k_alam> seb128: Hi, u there ?
[17:16] <k_alam> seb128: I have made few unity merges here. Can you review ?
[17:19] <k_alam> seb128: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity-settings-daemon/+bug/1863584