[00:13] <Bashing-om> Gdoc: Edits and polishing done - guiverc see if you agree with the arrangement of "Ubuntu 21.04 Testing Week" to The Hub section ( rather than moving to "General" - considering the summaries ).
[00:14] <guiverc> I'll look this arvo rather than now..
[00:15] <Bashing-om> guiverc: Plenty of time my friend :D
[00:15]  * guiverc hasn't ruled out making some noise & holes in paper :)
[00:16] <Bashing-om> guiverc: I still have my hair - on spite of all the pulling to get Gdoc where it is :P
[00:17] <guiverc> :)
[00:44] <guiverc> Bashing-om, the summary doesn't match discourse listed link (Summary is popey's own writing/blog) and not the discourse.
[00:45] <Bashing-om> guiverc: Ouch ! Teach me to rush - - thought they were the same :( Lemme re-think the sloppyation :P
[00:46] <guiverc> I much preferred the blog one, it was all Alan, rather than modified from suggested sent to Alan via gdoc
[00:46] <guiverc> I'm having issues with gdoc comments; it's started showing comments from jan-2017
[00:47] <Bashing-om> Ya advise that we go with the discourse summary - or revert back to the Planet's ?
[00:47] <guiverc> I'd like to include Popey's blog in issue personally (with summary).  I prefer the discourse link (not the content; the link I feel is more official)
[00:49] <Bashing-om> guiverc: Hokay - I can do that fairly easily. Just provide the discourse link under Alan's bog summary in the Planet section.
[01:10] <Bashing-om> guiverc: "Ubuntu 21.04 Testing Week" reformatted onto the Planet section. This workie like so ?
[01:11] <guiverc> I very much like, well done Bashing-om
[01:12] <guiverc> I'll look thru rest later though
[01:12] <Bashing-om> guiverc: :)
[02:09] <guiverc> Bashing-om, I've looked thru gdoc; two comments made.. one a suggested drop (a few words) & a confused-question over [] that felt like a note-to-self
[02:15] <Bashing-om> guiverc: the [] is editorial for verbage not from the author - I did feel the supplementary info a good thing to provide our readers - is there a better way ? also adding CVE-2021-3449 article to Gdoc. a work now in progress.
[02:19] <guiverc> I don't know... I agree it makes it more understandable/useful to readers, but I have no idea how to add it; that maybe the best way
[02:19] <guiverc> Bashing-om, ^
[02:26] <Bashing-om> guiverc: So much that I do not know about editorial concepts :(
[02:46] <Bashing-om> guiverc: Added the CVE advisory in the "in the Press" section - appropriate there, or find a way to move it up to "Other Community News"? How does it read to you ?
[02:56] <guiverc> looks great to me
[02:57] <Bashing-om> guiverc: Outstanding - Tired now and my thinking is forced :(
[02:58] <guiverc> You've done well Bashing-om , thank you once again
[02:58] <Bashing-om> guiverc: We are all in this together :D
[21:26] <Bashing-om> UWN: Issue 676 up for review and final edits: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuWeeklyNewsletter/Issue676 :D
[21:31] <krytarik> Huh, and here I figured we skipped the 21.04 UI Freeze last week because of little importance..
[21:34] <krytarik> And why are all flavors under the Testing Week summary spelled in lower case?
[21:37] <Bashing-om> krytarik: lower case. do not know - let me see what I can learn.
[21:37] <krytarik> "don't currently execute fsck on boot and that is currently being re-visited" - and I feel like the second instance of "currently" here could as well be a "now"
[21:38] <Bashing-om> krytarik: Will make it so :P
[22:23] <Bashing-om> krytarik: Above my knowledge set to find where the formatiing error is that produces that lighter text below "Ubuntu 21.04 Testing Week" section. Any ideas ?
[22:28] <krytarik> I don't see any issue there though.. :3
[22:28] -SwissBot:#ubuntu-news- ::Planet:: Stephen Michael Kellat: Pondering the News Biz @ http://coyote.works//pondering-the-news-biz.html
[22:28] <Bashing-om> krytarik: Must be the lighting (daylight) on my monitor :(
[22:30] <krytarik> Well, if it is then it'd go away on scrolling, does it? :P
[22:34] <Bashing-om> krytarik: Nope - still looking and all text below appears lighter than that above "Ubuntu 21.04 Testing Week" to me :(
[22:35] <krytarik> Post a screenshot?
[22:38] <Bashing-om> krytarik: https://imgur.com/OpbQSU0.png . Slight but I do notice .
[22:40] <krytarik> Yeah, the screenshot proves that it must be on your monitor..
[22:40] <krytarik> Because I can't see any difference there either.
[22:40] <Bashing-om> Good deal : Thanks for the looking :D
[22:40] <krytarik> Of course!
[22:45] <Bashing-om> But even on the screen shot - when I zoom in the difference is apparent :( More pronounced color saturation above and somewhat heavier lettering :(
[22:47] <krytarik> Because you are then replicating the issue just using another medium than the live website view.
[22:59] <Bashing-om> krytarik: O'Kay - Just seems strange that I only see that difference in rendering on UWN's page - not on irssi or the forum page :(
[23:07] <krytarik> Bashing-om: Try any other wiki page?  In the past, when I still had a monitor that was.. slightly old-school (CRT) and at the verge of going out, I've noticed that the page background there causes extra stress on the monitor..
[23:12] <Bashing-om> krytarik: Will do a different WIKI page - good thought - Yhis is a recent change of monitors.
[23:17] <Bashing-om> krytarik: You are so right ! I do also see the deliniation of texts on some other WIKIs -:D
[23:20] -SwissBot:#ubuntu-news- ::Planet:: Colin King: A Common C Integer Multiplication Mistake @ http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/ASmackerelOfOpinion/~3/YQcaPmaVi1Y/a-common-c-integer-multiplication.html (by noreply@blogger.com (Colin Ian King))
[23:26] <krytarik> Bashing-om: https://imgur.com/iTzpV2d.png - does this fix the issue for you?
[23:30] <Bashing-om> krytarik: Nope - even there I see a distinct difference in how heavy the text and black/red colors appear on my monitor :( Will be on my mind to know the why for a spell :D
[23:37] <krytarik> Bashing-om: https://imgur.com/C44HpwK.png - how about now? :P
[23:45] <Bashing-om> krytarik: All text following the "KDE Gear 21.04 Apps: Send us Your Features" section appears lighter to me. I had originally thought "markdown" - but as I can see the disparity on some other WIKI pages - nope, markdown does not seem now to be at fault.
[23:50] <krytarik> Curious and curioser.. :3
[23:55] <Bashing-om> krytarik: I too thought might be my failing eye-sight. Had my wife looky and she confirms the difference. :(
[23:55] <Bashing-om> (on this monitor)
[23:56] <Bashing-om> Hummm that is a thought too ... see what the page displays like on her graphic's station !