[08:30] what package is most applicable for software-boutique (launchpad bug that needs to package change - as I understand it doesn't belong on lp.. but already there) [08:38] Are you asking "where to report a bug for software-boutique"? I avoid snaps (I purge snapd), but I guess it should be reported upstream at https://github.com/ubuntu-mate/software-boutique [08:39] In the past, software-boutique was a .deb package, I guess that's why it's on launchpad, for its older versions (pre 16.04) [08:45] thanks alkisg; switched 1938864 to ubuntu-mate-meta; marked in incomplete anyway [08:46] I used https://github.com/ubuntu-mate/ubuntu-mate-welcome-legacy/issues though... should I change it? [08:48] guiverc: I've been seeing some people that try to cleanup launchpad; why is that, are you hired to do it or are volunteering? I mean, IMHO, what should be changed on launchpad is "report ONLY ubuntu-specific bugs on launchpad; not upstream bugs" [08:48] Now more than 50% of the reported bugs have no maintainers to answer them; and users get frustrated over this [08:49] i'm not paid anything; volunteer only [08:51] I think that effort is a bit in vain; the fundamental thing that needs to change on launchpad is to better inform users on when to use it [08:51] Otherwise you'll be cleaning 100 issues, and 1000 newer ones will come, and 900 of them will never be answered [08:52] (I've frequently done launchpad cleaning in the past for a few projects, so I'm a bit bitter about it) [08:53] my response can be read at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-mate-meta/+bug/1938864/comments/2 - i offered the link I said ^ & suggested ubuntu-mate's discourse too [08:53] Currently when I get an issue, I test in a live cd of another distribution; if it happens there too, it's not ubuntu-specific, so I completely skip launchpad and go upstream [08:54] guiverc: sure sure your response is fine, I'm just saying that your efforts are a bit in vain, the problem in launchpad isn't that it lacks cleanup volunteers... [08:56] me; I test (thinking lubuntu) bugs on lubuntu (report on lp), confirm on another box; then test in debian-testing (rarely ahead though for lxqt), opensuse tumbleweed (usually latest), fedora (latest or rawhide) then report upstream too if confirmed on more than one. [09:03] Right, that's excellent; I think that's what launchpad is missing. Users should be notified NOT to report bugs on lubuntu if they happen in all distributions [09:04] Because noone will answer them on launchpad (no maintainers there for non-ubuntu projects), and people will get disappointed and will never report bugs again, anywhere [09:05] So I think the best thing would be to start a discussion on launchpad/soyuz or even the ubuntu community forums about it, so that this notification gets on top of bugs.launchpad.net [09:05] That would be as useful as cleaning up 100.000 issues! :D === coconut__ is now known as coconut [10:24] alkisg, fyi: Lubuntu uses launchpad for bug tracking; LXQt (upstream) is github, etc but lp is used by lubuntu [10:32] I mean that all lubuntu bugs that are common with other distributions shouldn't be reported to launchpad, but upstream, [10:32] For example https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/leafpad/+bugs shouldn't have any bugs as leafpad wasn't specific to lubuntu [10:36] lubuntu consists of 50000 packages that are common between distributions and shouldn't use launchpad and 50 packages that are specific to lubuntu and should use launchpad [10:37] I.e. these ones: https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?suite=impish&keywords=lubuntu [22:04] what do you think about ubuntu mate? does it work well or do you prefer GNOME [22:10] I prefer GNOME2 but Ubuntu MATE is pretty close. [23:59] guiverc: just a note for you software-boutique is in progress of being replaced by v2 of software boutique and should be available by next release