[01:00] <callmepk> good morning
[01:29] <duflu> Morning callmepk 
[01:30] <callmepk> morning duflu 
[03:18] <handsome_feng> Oh,  I think I missed something
[05:50] <didrocks> good morning
[05:50] <Maik> good morning all
[06:01] <oSoMoN> good morning desktoppers
[06:04] <Maik> good morning oSoMoN
[06:05] <handsome_feng> oSoMoN: Good morning, and sorry for the delay, there are some internet problems here lately and the email server is down, so I didn't login ircclound and no emails were received. 
[06:07] <didrocks> hey oSoMoN 
[06:21] <handsome_feng> I used heroku to keep my account online, but I can only see these messages if I'm actually logged in.
[06:25] <oSoMoN> handsome_feng, no worries, and thanks for merging!
[06:25] <oSoMoN> hey Maik, didrocks 
[06:25] <Maik> o/
[06:25] <Maik> :)
[06:27] <handsome_feng> :)
[07:01] <marcustomlinson> morning callmepk duflu didrocks oSoMoN Maik
[07:02] <Maik> marcustomlinson: hey :)
[07:07] <didrocks> hey marcustomlinson 
[07:16] <callmepk> hey marcustomlinson didrocks oSoMoN Maik 
[07:16] <Maik> heya callmepk
[07:17] <didrocks> hey callmepk 
[07:43] <seb128> goood morning desktopers
[07:44] <oSoMoN> good morning marcustomlinson, callmepk, seb128 
[07:45] <seb128> lut oSoMoN , comment ça va ?
[07:45] <marcustomlinson> hey seb128
[07:45] <seb128> hey marcustomlinson, how are you?
[07:46] <marcustomlinson> seb128: well thanks, you?
[07:47] <oSoMoN> seb128, bien, et toi?
[08:04] <Laney> yo
[08:06] <jibel> hi all
[08:08] <Laney> moin jibel 
[08:08] <Laney> how's it going?
[08:16] <marcustomlinson> hey Laney
[08:18] <KGB-0> gnome-shell-extensions pristine-tar 0fc1f2f Simon McVittie gnome-shell-extensions_3.38.0.orig.tar.xz.delta gnome-shell-extensions_3.38.0.orig.tar.xz.id * pristine-tar data for gnome-shell-extensions_3.38.0.orig.tar.xz * https://deb.li/3HTtM
[08:18] <KGB-0> gnome-shell-extensions upstream/latest 8957c27 Simon McVittie * pushed 15 commits * https://deb.li/VG6y
[08:18] <KGB-0> gnome-shell-extensions tags b7310de Simon McVittie upstream/3.38.0 * Upstream version 3.38.0 * https://deb.li/3TkI4
[08:23] <oSoMoN> hey Laney, jibel 
[08:23] <jibel> Hey Laney oSoMoN 
[08:25] <didrocks> hey hey Laney, seb128 :)
[08:36] <seb128> lut diddledan 
[08:36] <seb128> ups
[08:36] <seb128> lut didrocks 
[08:36] <seb128> & jibel
[08:38] <seb128> oSoMoN, marcustomlinson , sorry I context switched and forgot to reply, I'm slightly better but still not great, that cold is no fun, I lost my voice during the w.e and it's still not fully back, at least I start feeling I'm the recovery path, nose is unblocked now
[08:38] <seb128> hey Laney 
[08:39] <Laney> hey oSoMoN didrocks seb128!
[08:44] <jibel> salut seb128 
[10:59] <KGB-0> gobject-introspection tags 48babf5 Simon McVittie upstream/1.66.0 * Upstream version 1.66.0 * https://deb.li/BaQM
[10:59] <KGB-0> gobject-introspection upstream/latest faab8d6 Simon McVittie * pushed 77 commits * https://deb.li/9EPC
[11:00] <KGB-0> gobject-introspection pristine-tar 99916dc Simon McVittie gobject-introspection_1.66.0.orig.tar.xz.delta gobject-introspection_1.66.0.orig.tar.xz.id * pristine-tar data for gobject-introspection_1.66.0.orig.tar.xz * https://deb.li/iwEpV
[13:01] <luna_> meeting now soon?
[13:06] <luna_> also good afternoon
[13:07] <Trevinho> luna_: yeah, and good afternoon!
[13:29] <hellsworth> good morning desktopers
[13:29] <kenvandine> hey hellsworth 
[13:30] <oSoMoN> hey hellsworth, kenvandine 
[13:30] <luna_> heya hellsworth Trevinho kenvandine oSoMoN 
[13:30] <oSoMoN> hey luna_ 
[13:30] <didrocks999> hey hellsworth, luna_ 
[13:30] <hellsworth> hi folks
[13:30] <luna_> 1 month left until the 20.10 release
[13:31] <seb128> #startmeeting Desktop Team Weekly Meeting - 2020-09-22
[13:31] <meetingology> Meeting started Tue Sep 22 13:31:11 2020 UTC.  The chair is seb128. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[13:31] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[13:31] <seb128> Roll call:  didrocks, duflu, hellsworth, jamesh, jibel, kenvandine, Laney, marcustomlinson, oSoMoN, seb128 , tkamppeter, Trevinho, robert_ancell, callmepk
[13:31] <Trevinho> o/
[13:31] <oSoMoN> o/
[13:31] <marcustomlinson> \o
[13:31] <didrocks> o/
[13:31] <luna_> o/
[13:31] <callmepk> o/
[13:31] <hellsworth> \o
[13:32] <seb128> k, let's get started!
[13:32] <seb128> #topic rls-bb-bug
[13:32] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-bb-incoming-bug-tasks.html
[13:32] <seb128> no desktop entry
[13:32] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-bb-tracking-bug-tasks.html
[13:33] <seb128> bug #1801814
[13:33] <luna_> seems a fix is released in Focal? can that be backported? (just a question)
[13:34] <seb128> it could probably
[13:34] <seb128> it's a flatpak/wayland session fix on bionic
[13:35] <seb128> I think it's not a priority to target for us, since it has no assign I would suggest deleting the bionic target for now
[13:35] <seb128> it doesn't stop someone to work on it if they want
[13:35] <didrocks> agreed
[13:35] <seb128> thanks Didier, deleted
[13:35] <seb128> and that's it for bionic
[13:36] <seb128> #topic rls-ff-bug
[13:36] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ff-incoming-bug-tasks.html
[13:36] <seb128> the one bug there is assigned and targetted but just not untagged
[13:37] <seb128> remind me that I said I would try one day to filter those cases out of the reports, I will put that for my next hacking session
[13:37] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-ff-tracking-bug-tasks.html
[13:38] <seb128> Trevinho, you forgot to assign the SRU bug to yourself
[13:38] <seb128> other items are assigned or incomplete
[13:38] <Trevinho> seb128: oh
[13:38] <seb128> #topic rls-gg-bug
[13:38] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-gg-incoming-bug-tasks.html
[13:38] <seb128> no desktop entry
[13:38] <seb128> http://reqorts.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/rls-mgr/rls-gg-tracking-bug-tasks.html
[13:39] <seb128> nothing needed there
[13:39] <seb128> #topic update_excuses_by_team.html#desktop-packages
[13:39] <seb128> https://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/proposed-migration/update_excuses_by_team.html#desktop-packages
[13:40] <seb128> gstreamer is being hanlded
[13:40] <luna_> There is a new Firefox 81, and Thunderbird (some version) released today and yesterday if oSoMoN wants something new to package up btw :)
[13:40] <seb128> gnome-control-center should clear off when retries results are updated
[13:41] <seb128> luna_, thanks, such comments are better for the AOB part of the meeting that come next :-)
[13:41] <seb128> glib/gst-omx sounds like something that needs investigated
[13:41] <seb128> any taker?
[13:41] <Laney> I already handled it
[13:41] <seb128> great
[13:41] <seb128> gnoe-shell Binaries broken by the update: gnome-shell-extensions/3.37.91-1~fakesync/amd64
[13:42] <seb128> Trevinho, ^ you are handling that?
[13:42] <Laney> Handled
[13:42] <Trevinho> sync to be done
[13:42] <luna_> seb128: alright then i know that for next time 
[13:42] <seb128> shell is what is blocking xdg portals, etc (I've a mp for the report script that would indicate that if someone wants to review it ;-)
[13:42] <seb128> k, then we are good
[13:42] <seb128> #topic AOB
[13:42] <seb128> any other topic?
[13:42] <Laney> It's not to be done, I fake synced it
[13:42] <Laney> yeah
[13:43] <Laney> the SRU team are asking about the scope of our micro release exception
[13:43] <Laney> looks like life is going to get harder for gnome shell updates, around extensions
[13:43] <seb128> I saw that on discourse
[13:43] <Laney> https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/scope-of-gnome-mru/18041/
[13:44] <seb128> Trevinho was reprsenting us well there I think
[13:44] <Trevinho> yeah, doesn't make much sense imho, we need to figure out a way not to be blocked by them 
[13:44] <seb128> I wonder if we should just remove any extension .deb from the ubuntu archive
[13:44] <Trevinho> it's very hard to check ALL them, not sure if we can avoid debian syncs for them at all
[13:44] <seb128> and tell users to just use the upstream facilities to install those
[13:44] <seb128> (I mean the ones we are not relying on and testing)
[13:44] <Trevinho> I'd agree, we can just support our ones, for the rest packages don't make any sense IMHO.
[13:44] <oSoMoN> I was going to suggest deleting extensions that are known offenders
[13:45] <Laney> If that's what the SRU team wants
[13:45] <Laney> then fine, let's kick all gnome-shell-extension-* out
[13:45] <seb128> that should maybe a suggestion someone (Trevinho?) should post about on discourse to have a public discussion ?
[13:45] <Trevinho> seb128: is it possible to avoid auto-syncs to apply tho those packages?
[13:45] <luna_> https://blogs.gnome.org/sri/2020/09/16/the-gnome-extensions-rebooted-initiative/ is this in anyway helpful or related? 
[13:45] <seb128> it's possible to blacklist syncs yes
[13:45] <Trevinho> I feel alone in that discussion, so if someone joins me, at least I don't feel like I speak for myself only :D
[13:46] <didrocks> agreed that it’s the only sustainable way for us due to API instability IMHO
[13:46] <seb128> I don't know if you can do gnome-shell-extensions*
[13:46] <Laney> it's just code, it can be changed to do anything
[13:46] <Trevinho> ther's basically NO api either :)
[13:46] <Trevinho> we've a volounteer :D
[13:47] <seb128> Trevinho, can you post on discourse saying we want to remove those because of SRU requirement and upstream minor versions not being compatible
[13:47] <seb128> I will create a trello card
[13:47] <Trevinho> ok
[13:47] <seb128> and I will reply on the SRU team discussion, sorry for not doing earlier
[13:48] <seb128> I though you were handling that well so stayed out of it :-)
[13:48] <Trevinho> eheeh, no worries :)
[13:48] <Laney> Is this all because of one bug that happened once, or are there other cases?
[13:48] <Trevinho> thanks then
[13:49] <Trevinho> I've given my opinion on packages we still need the exceptions for, but maybe that list could be improved, so maybe it's better if you guys review it again and propose a final one (I'm sure Laney wanted something more)
[13:49] <seb128> Laney, I will let Trevinho comment on that, maybe a good question/answer for the discourse topic
[13:49] <seb128> Trevinho, right
[13:49] <Trevinho> Laney: not that I know, but for sure may be... there could be loads of cases where it's not working, just nobody checks
[13:49] <seb128> we can discuss that more after the meeting if needed
[13:49] <seb128> any other topic ?
[13:49] <Laney> The point for SRUs though ...
[13:49] <Laney> ok
[13:50] <Trevinho> well this is still something for all the team I imagine, so... fine to skip to later, but it should be interesting for most of us
[13:50] <seb128> Laney, sorry I though we addressed the SRU question enough, anything specific you think we should cover here?
[13:51] <seb128> Trevinho, 'this'?
[13:51] <Trevinho> SRU thingy
[13:51] <Laney> yes I was just going to say that SRUs don't care if something is working in the archive or not, it's more if something is broken *by* the SRU
[13:51] <seb128> if I understand the request we need to review the discourse post and see if the list makes sense and is complete
[13:51] <seb128> and agree on a course of actions for extensions
[13:51] <Laney> it's "OK" for things to be broken and stay broken
[13:51] <Trevinho> > In that case, I think this means that we cannot push microrelease updates of gnome-shell to stable releases because such updates are known to break packaged extensions. The microrelease exception was originally granted by the technical board on the basis that such updates are not expected to break things, and that situation has clearly changed in the case of gnome-shell.
[13:51] <Trevinho> just arrived a reply....
[13:52] <Laney> so I think the scope is about whether shell stable releases do actually break extensions or if this is just one
[13:53] <seb128> I've a feeling the SRU team is not going let us get away with a 'this is one'
[13:53] <seb128> reality is that it can happen
[13:53] <kenvandine> yeah, it can
[13:53] <seb128> so we either need to remove things from the archive to reduce our testing
[13:53] <seb128> or increase our testplan to cover what is in the archive
[13:53] <Trevinho> can we remove things from focal though?
[13:53] <seb128> or another option I'm not thinking of?
[13:53] <seb128> I don't think so
[13:54] <Trevinho> I've NOT a scientific way to check if we're breaking
[13:54] <seb128> but we shouldn't have more new tarballs for focal after that round
[13:54] <Trevinho> nor saying "I teated them all" i think would be professional
[13:54] <Trevinho> tested*
[13:54] <seb128> GNOME schedules stops at .6
[13:54] <Trevinho> yeah, but... we can still do cherry-picks
[13:54] <seb128> so I say we do an effort to test extensions from the archive for that round if that's what the SRU team requires...
[13:55] <Trevinho> and they may happen (like OEM things, for example I may do in the fingerprint lands)
[13:55] <seb128> well then we need to convince the SRU team on those cases that it's fine
[13:55] <seb128> either by explaining why the changes cherry picked are not risky
[13:55] <seb128> or by testing the extensions...
[13:55] <seb128> no?
[13:56] <Trevinho> 41 extensions, not easy task
[13:57] <Trevinho> sorry 42 in focal
[13:57] <Trevinho> let's remove the 3 we handle.... still 39 to check, impossible. 
[13:57] <seb128> not impossible, but expensive to do yes
[13:58] <luna_> would it not be easier to let people download the extensions they want from: https://extensions.gnome.org/ ?
[13:58] <seb128> luna_, that's basically whar we suggested doing going forward
[13:58] <seb128> but we can't change past releases
[13:58] <luna_> ah true
[13:59] <seb128> anyway
[13:59] <seb128> I'm a bit lost at this point
[13:59] <seb128> Laney, Trevinho , did you want to get some conclusion out of the meeting?
[13:59] <seb128> or should we just wrap and keep that going here if needed?
[14:00] <Laney> it would have been nice to have had a unified position as the team
[14:00] <Laney> but it's ok, I guess that isn't going to come from a quick chat in the meeting
[14:00] <seb128> right, I think we need some data and time to process which is why I was suggesting Trevinho start a discourse topic about his proposal of removing extensions
[14:00] <Trevinho> yeah, not sure... I would like to have a statement to reply for sure
[14:00] <seb128> we can continue the discussion there
[14:01] <Trevinho> given the new one I mean
[14:01] <seb128> Trevinho, I'm going to reply
[14:01] <seb128> to the SRU post on discourse
[14:01] <Trevinho> seb128: new topic, not same on SRU exceptions, right?
[14:01] <seb128> yes
[14:01] <seb128> one specific about removing deb extensions for better shell maintainability
[14:02] <Laney> Robie asked for that conversation to be with the release team
[14:02] <seb128> they are on discourse?
[14:03] <Laney> Not sure, there's a category there but we only used it for like release schedules so far
[14:03] <seb128> k, I'm going to read the SRU post again there now
[14:03] <seb128> but no point keeping everyone in the meeting for that imho
[14:04] <seb128> so let's wrap and those interested can continue the discussion
[14:04] <kenvandine> ok
[14:05] <seb128> #endmeeting
[14:05] <meetingology> Meeting ended Tue Sep 22 14:05:01 2020 UTC.  
[14:05] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-desktop/2020/ubuntu-desktop.2020-09-22-13.31.moin.txt
[14:05] <seb128> thanks everyone!
[14:05] <luna_> np 
[14:05] <didrocks> thx!
[14:07] <seb128> so our option I think
[14:07] <seb128> 1. don't SRU gnome-shell updates
[14:07] <seb128> 2. validate every extension in the archive as part of the SRU test plan
[14:07] <seb128> 3. remove deb extensions to avoid 2.
[14:07] <seb128> 4. accept that gnome-shell updates can create issues for some universe extensions (is that ok? needs r-t convincing)
[14:07] <seb128> 5. other?
[14:08] <seb128> what do people here think?
[14:09] <seb128> I think we can rule out 1, we want updates they are beneficial to most users
[14:09] <seb128> 2. is has a non trivial resource cost and I don't think we do have the resources for that atm
[14:09] <Trevinho> 1. would just make people sad, and as I wrote, it would be silly to make ubuntu worse for 1 offending case that was fixed anyways
[14:09] <seb128> so I would suggest 3 or maybe 4...
[14:10] <oSoMoN> 3 makes the most sense to me, but the question remains of what to do for currently supported releases
[14:10] <Trevinho> I agree
[14:10] <seb128> or a mix, we could purge things are outdated, buggy, known to break and maybe keep a few popular ones if we believe there is a value in having them as a deb (is there?)
[14:10] <Trevinho> 3 is the final path, wondering for focal though
[14:10] <Trevinho> well if there's community doing the work to maintain them, fine...
[14:10] <Trevinho> not saying we ban them
[14:10] <Trevinho> but they need to be responsible for
[14:10] <seb128> it's always tricky
[14:10] <seb128> because there is, until there isn't
[14:11] <seb128> and then we are left with a LTS to maintain and no-one to fix those that had community interest
[14:11] <seb128> is there any value to have some as deb (out of default install for us and flavors)
[14:12] <Trevinho> don't think so
[14:13] <Trevinho> for sure there may be extensions (dashtodock) for example that is outdated in e.g.o
[14:13] <Trevinho> so packages help
[14:13] <Trevinho> but this is a case where users can still always just intall it from git...
[14:13] <Trevinho> not that hard
[14:13] <seb128> right, or get the e.g.o situation sorted out
[14:13] <seb128> which is the real problem
[14:13] <Trevinho> exactly
[14:14] <Trevinho> we can't do the role of the maintainer for everything, if we're not
[14:15] <oSoMoN> I'd argue that if upstreams are not updating their extensions on e.g.o, packaging them as debs to work around the problem is not a good fix
[14:21] <seb128> Trevinho, marcustomlinson , what happened to the vte/g-t updates?
[14:22] <Trevinho> seb128: marcustomlinson was busy so I took it, but I've not finished yet
[14:22] <Trevinho> seb128: if you want to take it, feel free :)
[14:23] <seb128> Trevinho, no, maybe you should have it to marcus if you are already busy was my point :)
[14:23] <seb128> also it's done in Debian so just a merge, shouldn't be too difficult
[14:25] <Trevinho> seb128: yeah, yeah... shouldn't be long indeed
[14:25] <Trevinho> seb128: just didn't had time yet, but will do it later
[14:26] <Trevinho> I actually took it when it wasn't in debian yet so it involved a few more work
[14:27] <Laney> I was leaving that one because marcustomlinson was signed up on Trello
[14:27] <Laney> but I see that he left the card, so ...
[14:29] <Beret> quick poll - for those of you that have both - do you disable the integrated graphics in your systems for Ubuntu?
[14:29] <seb128> Trevinho, that's not true, the update was uploaded to Debian on monday and you discussed it with marcus and the card changed on thursday
[14:29] <Beret> and just use the discreet cards?
[14:29] <Trevinho> Beret: I only use integrated :)
[14:30] <Trevinho> (unless I've to test stuff on nvidia)
[14:30] <seb128> Beret, hey, I've an XPS with only intel so I'm out of that poll
[14:30] <Trevinho> seb128: I mean, I looked at that before it was in debian... then I noticed was just a merge
[14:31] <Trevinho> but I had it into my radar even before
[14:31] <seb128> Trevinho, you should have left it to marcus who said would do it on friday
[14:31] <seb128> now we are tuesday and it's still not done
[14:31] <jibel> Beret, I disable the discret card for longer battery life.
[14:32] <Beret> I'm looking to buy a new desktop/machine and I do google hangouts like ... too much... so I need hardware acceleration of that
[14:32] <Beret> so I'm thinking of getting a discrete  graphics capable NUC
[14:32] <Beret> my existing NUC is integrated only and I can't get hangouts accelerated
[14:33] <Beret> which renders the machine not really useful while in a google meet
[14:33] <Trevinho> seb128: I just wanted to help as he was busy, but I can handle quickly, nw
[14:34] <Trevinho> Beret: mh, well recent integrated card should be quite good at that, and for sure intel ones have better and earlier support for video acceleration
[14:34] <jibel> I've a recent NUC with integrated only and I can stay all day long in a HO without any problem.
[14:34] <jibel> python linter in vscode is what kills the NUC 
[14:34] <Trevinho> seb128: meanwhile I've also opened https://discourse.ubuntu.com/t/removal-of-gnome-shell-extension-from-universe-and-stop-auto-syncs/18437
[14:35] <Trevinho> jibel: don't tell me that about clangd :D
[14:35] <Beret> jibel, I have i915
[14:35] <Beret> it's awful
[14:35] <jibel> I don't know what is on this machine
[14:36] <jibel> lspci says VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Device 9bca
[14:37] <Laney> Trevinho: Thanks for posting that, but I think that it should been on the ubuntu-release list, since I don't believe most release team members read the desktop group on discourse - or even read discourse at all most of the time. Maybe email the list to point to the thread?
[14:37] <Beret> what does lspci | grep VGA say?
[14:37] <Beret> 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation Iris Pro Graphics 580 (rev 09)
[14:37] <Trevinho> Laney: I don't have powers to write them, can you maybe move it?
[14:37] <Beret> that's me
[14:37] <Laney> Trevinho: email list
[14:37] <Laney> ubuntu-release@lists.ubuntu.com
[14:38] <Laney> you have the power, for sure
[14:43] <Trevinho> Laney: I meant that I've not the powers to create a topic in the Release team section
[14:43] <Trevinho> of discourse
[14:44] <Laney> yeah, I'm not sure it should be there, we didn't use that section for discussions yet
[14:44] <Laney> it's got restricted access
[14:44] <Laney> I'd have just started a thread on the email list, but if you want to have it on discourse then I'm just suggesting sending an email saying "please see this thread" to the release team list
[14:47] <Laney> so that release team members actually have a chance of seeing it :>
[14:48] <Trevinho> Laney: well can be both, I wrote there as that's what seb told me :)
[14:55] <Laney> it's fine if you prefer that, I'm just suggesting echo "I started a Discourse thread about removing gnome-shell extensions from the Ubuntu archive, would appreciate your feedback: <discourse link>" | mail -s "Thread about removing gnome-shell extensions from Ubuntu" ubuntu-release@lists.ubunt.com
[14:55] <Laney> :>
[14:55] <marcustomlinson> Trevinho: sorry :/
[14:55] <marcustomlinson> looks like I got you in trouble
[14:56] <Trevinho> marcustomlinson: no, no worries :)
[14:56] <seb128> bah, why does my client tend to drop from IRC on idle now :-/
[14:57] <seb128> Laney, Trevinho , I suggested to post on discourse to have a team + community discussion about our suggested course of actions, that's a bit orthogonal to the r-t discussion (which is taking the result of the post to them)
[14:58]  * Trevinho writes to ML to notify as well
[14:58] <seb128> thx
[14:58] <Laney> merci
[14:58] <Laney> I think it's OK / nice / good to involve that team early
[14:59] <seb128> right
[15:07] <kenvandine> seb128: which client are you using?
[15:07] <kenvandine> IRCCloud has been disconnecting me pretty often lately
[15:08] <kenvandine> used to stay connected, but that was when i was paying
[15:08] <kenvandine> i stopped paying and it would stay connected at least throughout the work day
[15:08] <kenvandine> but now i get disconnected every 3-4 hours it seems
[15:11] <Laney> Nice IRC connection you've got there...
[15:12] <Laney> ...shame if anything were to happen to it...
[15:24] <seb128> lol
[15:24] <seb128> kenvandine, no, just hexchat here but I think it's rather nm status changes
[16:48] <ricotz> Laney, hi :), is there an ETA of gtk+3.0 3.24.23 for focal?
[16:50] <Laney> ricotz: no ETA, it's somewhere on the list though
[16:51] <Laney> You Can Help™
[16:53] <ricotz> I would not expect it to more than a rebuild of the groovy package
[17:02] <Laney> the upload probably will indeed be that, also needs SRU bug and build/runtime testing
[17:03] <Laney> see you tomorrow