[00:12] <spadewarrior> hi
[01:21] <Lancelot> how do i join a new network using xchat>
[01:21] <Lancelot> ?
[01:22] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: /connect irc.oftc.net ?
[01:22] <Lancelot> k, let me try
[01:26] <Lancelot> didn't work :/
[01:28] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: hmm... dunno then. i don't use xchat... i was just guessing... :P
[01:28] <Lancelot> lol, k, that's fine
[01:28] <Lancelot> thanks anyway though ;)
[02:00] <Lancelot> can I use ubuntu 8.10 commands in my xubuntu terminal?
[02:01] <TheSheep> Lancelot: depends, but mostly yes
[02:01] <TheSheep> Lancelot: you will want to use 'mousepad' instead of 'gedit', that's for sure
[02:13] <wormsxulla> hello. i have a usb adapter in which i put my phone memory card. on windows, when i "eject" it, the light turns off. on xubuntu, it doesn't shut down when i unmount it. is it normal?
[02:14] <Necrosan> yes
[02:15] <wormsxulla> so there is no way to be sure it's unmounted? it still appears in thunar
[03:25] <mhd720> hello
[04:09] <aaron_> can I use ubuntu 8.10 scripts in my xubuntu terminal?
[04:09] <aaron_> i mean, do they work?
[04:11] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: what kind of scripts?
[04:15] <Lancelot> http://www.dailygyan.com/2008/11/10-things-you-should-do-immediately.html
[04:15] <Lancelot> those ones, 0dd-rationale
[04:24] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: you mean those commands?
[04:24] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: all of those commands will work on all ubuntu machines...
[04:24] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: although, i would reccomend getting the info off the official website...
[04:25] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Medibuntu
[04:26] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: Nor am i particularly fond of acroread...
[04:27] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: also, you might just want to install the "ubuntu-restricted-extras" meta-packages, as it contains flash, java, and a bunch more codecs...
[04:27] <Odd-rationale> Lancelot: libdvdcss2 and w32codecs can be gotten from medibuntu repo, as shown in the link i posted above.
[05:57] <Lancelot> thanks, 0dd-rationale! :)
[06:11] <R1cochet> is there a disk partition/resize tool for hardy?
[06:19] <Robb_M> gparted works R1cochet
[06:20] <R1cochet> i have a disk with 3 partitions and 2 OS's i would like to wipe both OS's, install 8.10 and take empty space and attack to old partition
[06:20] <R1cochet> attach*
[06:20] <R1cochet> Robb_M: can it create join to NTFS?
[06:21] <R1cochet> Nevermind Thank ¥ou again
[06:24] <Robb_M> im not sure, sorry...im helping in a mulitutde of rooms so im definately lagging in responses.
[06:24] <R1cochet> all good i checked their homepage and it says right there cant miss it
[06:24] <R1cochet> !gparted
[06:25] <R1cochet> features page
[07:28] <Smegzor> I have a xubuntu install that locks up soon after X is started and before the login can be displayed.  It appears to be a problem with the graphics driver it wants to use.  How do I make it use vesa or something?
[08:17] <volo> hi
[08:31] <hank> hi
[09:18] <RAVTUX> hello all
[09:21] <RAVTUX> Grey_Loki: hi
[09:22] <gabkdlly> hi
[09:23] <RAVTUX> gabkdlly: whats up?
[09:24] <gabkdlly> I am contemplating the possibility to privatize government.  What is up with you?
[09:26] <RAVTUX> recovering from going to the dentist then biting my own lip when it was numb
[09:26] <gabkdlly> ouch :(
[09:27] <RAVTUX> when the numbness wore off is it when it really hurt
[10:40] <dosingrat> When trying to install from CD, just when the installer begins loading it switches to the ash shell. We didn't even get to keyboard settings. What might be a problem. ISO file downloaded from Xubuntu site. Thank you.
[16:19] <nonie> hello,
[16:20] <nonie> how can i configure the wifi to 64bit wep passphrase
[16:20] <nonie> it shows me 40/128 setting
[16:20] <nonie> anyone?
[16:22] <gabkdlly> hi
[16:23] <gabkdlly> my network configuration tool is only showing me a hexidecimal option and an ascii option.  Then again, I am using gutsy.
[16:23] <gabkdlly> nonie: did you just go ahead and try the 40/128 option?
[16:26] <TheSheep> maybe they meant 40-128? you know, they can guess by the length of the passphrase you actually enter...
[16:30] <vidd> gabkdlly, what kind of encryption do you have?
[16:30] <gabkdlly> I also use wep
[16:31] <vidd> gabkdlly, wep only has hex and ascii
[16:32] <vidd> gabkdlly, check your router's wep settings....it will be set to either hex or ascii
[16:32] <gabkdlly> yeah, sorry, I meant to tell that to nonie
[16:32] <vidd> you will want it to match
[16:33] <vidd> ah...nvmd then
[16:33] <gabkdlly> looks like we lost nonie
[16:36] <nonie> im still here just went to the restroom
[16:36] <nonie> yep i tried 40/128 just doest work
[16:37] <nonie> actually its in my office network
[16:37] <nonie> all is running except this
[16:37] <nonie> i have pclinuxos running wifi without any problem
[16:38] <vidd> nonie, perhaps you may want to look into wicd
[16:39] <vidd> http://wicd.sourceforge.net
[16:39] <nonie> wicd, is it on synaptics too.
[16:39] <vidd> no
[16:39] <nonie> ill check in the website you gave me. hold on.
[16:39] <vidd> you would need to either download the .deb or add the repo
[16:40] <vidd> nonie, it will require you to completely uninstall the default network manager in *buntu
[16:41] <nonie> network manager in synaptics?
[16:45] <vidd> nonie, when you try to install it, it will tell you the conflic
[16:45] <vidd> fix the conflict and you will be good to go
[16:46] <nonie> ok i wil try it right now.
[16:46] <nonie> tnx guys.let you know if it works or not.
[16:47] <vidd> nonie, i think wicd is used by pclinuxos by defaut
[16:47] <nonie> good, then ill be getting two linuxes working....
[16:47] <nonie> do i have to remove the network manager first?
[16:47] <vidd> nonie, wicd is a wonderful tool....VERY simple to get working on any linux
[16:48] <nonie> i added the wicd website in the repos and the public key
[16:48] <vidd> nonie, just do the apt-get install.....
[16:48] <nonie> ok
[16:48]  * vidd added it via dpkg so his install was different
[16:54] <nonie> if you install wicd via synaptic it removes the network manager prior to install.
[16:54] <nonie> just doing it right now.
[17:20] <nonie_> insalled wicd but it cannot detect my wireless interface
[17:20] <nonie_> i used ndiswrapper to check the interface and it detects it.
[17:20] <nonie_> only on wicd it cannot.
[17:21] <vidd> nonie_, you need to go into your /etc/network/interfaces and comment out the interface for it
[17:22] <nonie_> yep i did it
[17:22] <nonie_> the auto lo
[17:22] <nonie_> iface lo inet loopback
[17:23] <nonie_> it was automatically created after install
[17:27] <nonie_> i used application/system/wireless drivers to check if the wireless
[17:27] <nonie_> car is detected. but if i try to configure it.
[17:27] <nonie_> i cannot
[17:28] <nonie_> i configure the network and gives me an error cannot find configuration on network
[17:33] <nonie_> i chcked with ndiswrapper -l and it shows the wireless card
[17:37] <nonie_> strange...
[17:40] <nonie_> anybody?
[17:55] <buzz_> anyone here used the "remote desktop viewer" which comes with xubuntu - binary is called "vinagre". if i run it and put in an ip and press connect it jsut crashes!
[18:09] <TheSheep> buzz_: does it show any messages when you run it from terminal?
[18:10] <buzz_> TheSheep, yup http://pastebin.com/m730d779f
[18:11] <TheSheep> buzz_: looks like you found a bug, can you please report it?
[18:11] <TheSheep> !bugs | buzz_
[18:12] <buzz_> thanks yeh i have plenty of open bugs on launchpad. but i was hoping others might have this problem, i fear it is only me,. aah well
[18:12] <TheSheep> buzz_: it might be related to your graphics card and/or drivers
[18:13] <buzz_> it is this bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/vinagre/+bug/287542 but i am unable to fix it like this guy
[18:13] <wormsxulla_> hello. can i install a .rpm package on xubuntu?
[18:13] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: yes, but it's not recommended
[18:13] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: better find a deb
[18:13] <wormsxulla_> TheSheep: i couldn't find a deb :-( what is the difference?
[18:14] <buzz_> TheSheep, any other remote desktop client guis for gtk ?
[18:14] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: rpm's are packages used by redhat and similar distros, they are from different distrbutions
[18:15] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: so there may be difference in what goes where
[18:15] <TheSheep> buzz_: I don't use any, so don't know
[18:15] <buzz_> ive confirmed that bug anyway, so it might get attention at some point. although i lost hope with all my open bugs on launchpad for kubuntu related stuff!
[18:16] <wormsxulla_> TheSheep: may i show you the site i've found with the package, so maybe you'll see if it's "maybe ok" or "not ok at all"?
[18:16] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: sure
[18:16] <wormsxulla_> http://rpmfind.net/linux/rpm2html/search.php?query=mercury-messenger i want the last one in the table
[18:18] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: http://mercury.im/#Download
[18:19] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: does it have to be 1.8?
[18:19] <wormsxulla_> TheSheep: this only offers 1.9, and i want 1.8
[18:19] <wormsxulla_> (i know, i'm weird)
[18:19] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: http://thebachman.info/public/Versions_Ubuntu/mercury-messenger-1.8.deb
[18:20] <wormsxulla_> yes. 1.9 is full of bugs :)
[18:20] <wormsxulla_> oh
[18:20] <wormsxulla_> how did you find it?
[18:21] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: I edited the url for 1.9 ;)
[18:21] <wormsxulla_> hmm, it points to 1.9
[18:21] <TheSheep> bleh
[18:22] <wormsxulla_> :) you did what?
[18:23] <TheSheep> in the repo there is only 1.9 too :/
[18:23] <wormsxulla_> trying to upgrade me without my consent! ;-)
[18:23] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: how about 2.0?
[18:23] <wormsxulla_> yeah, i wonder where old deb packages go, they seem to just vanish
[18:24] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: you could ask them
[18:24] <wormsxulla_> TheSheep: i'm pretty sure it has (and don't want to experience) MORE bugs. - i've read the forums! i trust 1.8
[18:25] <wormsxulla_> TheSheep: hehe
[18:25] <wormsxulla_> also, i'm on gutsy, so 2.0 will probably want me to be on hardy or something
[18:25] <TheSheep> I wouldn't know
[18:26] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: btw, that rpm seems to be made from deb
[18:26] <wormsxulla_> nor i! :)
[18:26] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: you could try it with alien
[18:26] <TheSheep> !alien
[18:26] <wormsxulla_> TheSheep: so that "could" work? according to Your Great Knowledge Of Those Things
[18:26] <wormsxulla_> ah
[18:27] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: I have no personal experience with alien
[18:27]  * wormsxulla_ kinda like aliens :)
[18:28] <wormsxulla_> but still, not everyone has the latest versions, aren't they kept in some big dustbin on the internet?
[18:28] <wormsxulla_> aren't the oldest, i mean
[18:29] <TheSheep> wormsxulla_: nope, the internet we use is already the dustbin
[18:29] <wormsxulla_> :)
[18:30] <wormsxulla_> you're using web 2.0, i'm still on 0.09
[18:44] <vidd> wormsxulla_, alien is ok in a pinch....but in my experience, getting the latest deb...even if its a version or too behind the rpm works better then alien'ing the rpm in
[18:45] <wormsxulla_> vidd: ah. so i should try to find the latest 1.8 deb *somewhere*
[18:45] <wormsxulla_> humpf
[18:46] <zoredache> you could find the source package for 1.8 and recompile it
[18:48] <wormsxulla_> zoredache: i don't know how to compile :-(
[18:49] <blender_> what was the question
[18:55] <wormsxulla_> the question about "compile"?
[18:56] <blender_> just says "don't know how to compile"
[18:57] <wormsxulla_> yes. that's a fact, not a question :)
[18:58] <blender_> anyone know of a better way to use and install bitchx
[18:58] <blender_> so what are you trying to install?
[18:58] <blender_> compile?
[18:59] <wormsxulla_> mercury messenger 1.8 :)
[19:00] <blender_> and why do you compile that package
[19:00] <blender_> ?
[19:00] <blender_> they have a .dev
[19:00] <blender_> .deb
[19:00] <wormsxulla_> i don't
[19:00] <wormsxulla_> they do?
[19:01] <wormsxulla_> where?
[19:01] <blender_> then what's the problem?
[19:02] <blender_> http://mercury.im/
[19:02] <wormsxulla_> finding the 1.8 deb package when everything which seem to still exist is 1.9 or 2.0
[19:02] <blender_> is it just for support of msn chat?
[19:03] <blender_> the one they have listed is 1.0
[19:03] <blender_> 1.9
[19:03] <wormsxulla_> so zoredache said: then compile it, and then you arrived while i said: i don't know how to, etc. etc.
[19:03] <wormsxulla_> no
[19:03] <blender_> compile is super easy
[19:03] <wormsxulla_> sure
[19:03] <blender_> depending on how many packages you're missing
[19:03] <blender_> generally the readme file explains everything
[19:04] <blender_> ./configure
[19:04] <blender_> make
[19:04] <blender_> make install
[19:04] <wormsxulla_> blender_: thanks, but compiling isn't for me
[19:04] <blender_> three very simple commands
[19:05] <blender_> ok
[19:05] <blender_> so then...you don't have an issue
[19:05] <Odd-rationale> what about checkinstall
[19:05] <Odd-rationale> ?
[19:05] <Odd-rationale> !checkinstall
[19:06] <blender_> yeah and
[19:06] <blender_> make clean
[19:07] <blender_> you know where a nice bitchx package might be found...other than bitchx.org
[19:07] <blender_> bitch.com
[21:39] <volo> hi
[21:42] <Odd-rationale> !hi | volo
[21:50] <volo> ubottu: thx
[21:51] <Odd-rationale> !thanks | volo
[21:53] <volo> :)
[22:04] <gasmask> Hi. I set up a RAID 5 with mdadm, set it up with ext3 filesystem following this guide http://bfish.xaedalus.net/?p=188. I also added this line to fstab to mount on boot: /dev/md0 /var/media auto defaults 0 3. But when I reboot, the array is not mounted, and when I try to mount it, it says it doesn't exist! I then assemble the array with: mdadm --assemble /dev/md0 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1. I then can mount it.   How c
[22:04] <gasmask> an I have this happen automatically?
[22:09] <zoredache> gasmask: you might need to updated your /etc/mdadm/mdadm.conf
[22:09] <gasmask> hmmm, what would I need to add to it?
[22:10] <zoredache> on my system I let the installer setup the array.  I have a line in there like this -- ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=2 UUID=77b3d5b0:fa7122be:77105787:fefc690b
[22:11] <gasmask> ok, I'll check that out
[22:11] <zoredache> do a man mdadm.conf to information about the file.  My guess is that you would need to put something like that line that describes your array
[22:12] <gasmask> ok, thanks
[22:13] <gasmask> awesome!


[03:45] <lotuspsychje> good morning
[07:03] <marcoagpinto> Morning!
[07:37] <lordievader> Good morning
[07:45] <ducasse> good morning


[03:38] <lotuspsychje> good morning to all
[03:38] <lotuspsychje> having trouble connecting freenode
[03:50] <lotuspsychje> seems like a nasty split
[03:53] <Bashing-om> with a bit of cleanup afterward .... hummm ...
[03:58] <lotuspsychje> lol
[03:58] <lotuspsychje> Bashing-om: im having a dell 16.04.1 with a broadcom pci wifi that doesnt work, only eth working
[03:59] <lotuspsychje> lubuntu & ubuntu tested, both wifi not working
[03:59] <lotuspsychje> but lshw shows wifi chipset & driver loaded
[03:59] <lotuspsychje> nothing found in syslog
[04:00] <nicomachus> lotuspsychje: got that bcmwl-kernel-source?
[04:00] <lotuspsychje> nicomachus: if tested the firmware-43-installer
[04:00] <lotuspsychje> no luck there
[04:01] <lotuspsychje> nicomachus: lemme test bcmwl holdon
[04:02] <Bashing-om> lotuspsychje: No WIFI skills .. sorry .
[04:09] <lotuspsychje> nicomachus: resuktet in segmentation fault, eth down its also a bc chip
[04:15] <lotuspsychje> wl driver loaded well on wifi, but no ssid's showing up yet
[06:17] <ducasse_> morning all
[11:50] <BluesKaj> Howdy folks


[17:48] <qwebirc17741> hello
[17:48] <qwebirc17741> can i use it on vmware if possble ?
[18:20] <qwebirc97037> hello
[18:20] <qwebirc97037> will there be an update to mythtv 0.27 soon?
[18:54] <tgm4883> qwebirc97037, what do you mean?
[18:54] <tgm4883> we already have 0.27 released via our repos
[19:00] <qwebirc97037> Ok was looking at the change logs and for the 12.04.3 releace it is saying 0.25
[19:01] <qwebirc97037> schedulesdirect.org is the correct site to sign up for the schedule?
[19:02] <qwebirc97037> ops just saw the link on the left.
[19:02] <tgm4883> qwebirc97037, well that is true, 12.04.x all default to 0.25. However you can upgrade to 0.27 using our repos
[19:02] <tgm4883> !repos
[19:02] <tgm4883> http://www.mythbuntu.org/repos
[19:03] <tgm4883> and yes, schedulesdirect.org is correct
[19:03] <qwebirc97037> thanks
[19:53] <knome> any mythbuntu contributor about? i have a question about bluetooth and your seed...
[20:03] <tgm4883> knome, whats up?
[20:04] <knome> tgm4883, we're planning to demote gnome-bluetooth from recommends to suggest in network-manager-gnome... would you like to explicitly keep seeding gnome-bluetooth?
[20:04] <tgm4883> probably not. superm1 ^^
[20:05] <knome> i've pinged him in PM already and asked about it
[20:05] <tgm4883> I don't believe there is any reason for us to have bluetooth support in our distribution
[20:05] <knome> you also seem to seed bluez
[20:05] <knome> which is pulled in from gnome-bluetooth
[20:05] <knome> for some reason or another, xubuntu doesn't have that
[20:06] <tgm4883> superm1, would know all that, he deals with all the live cd stuff
[20:06] <knome> might be blacklisted..
[20:06] <tgm4883> let me see if daviey is around
[20:06] <knome> yep
[20:06] <knome> i'll hang around here, no super hurry about it
[20:06] <knome> thanks for looking at it :)
[20:07] <tgm4883> np. I'd be surprised if we really need it
[20:12] <knome> also pretty sure you don't need unity-control-center
[20:12] <knome> ...a dependency of gnome-bluetooth
[20:12] <knome> sorry, recommend
[20:12] <knome> but yeah, we were about to drop ibus from our seed, and we thought we had it, but noticed that bluetooth is pulling it in...
[20:15] <tgm4883> knome, fwiw, I think there might be lots of things we don't need in there, but I'd be weary of pulling things out this late in the cycle. We aren't worried about the size of our ISO, so is the question more that you are going to remove it and we need to add it back in? or are you trying to get size down
[20:16] <knome> we need to get rid of ibus to get rid of a nastyish bug
[20:16] <knome> the question is that we're moving it from recommends to suggests; if you want to keep it, we can work to add it in your seed.
[20:17] <tgm4883> ah I see
[20:18] <tgm4883> when is the deadline for this? I imagine that superm1 will reply with a few hours but if  it's super critical I can try texting him
[20:19] <knome> it's not super critical
[20:19] <knome> the deadline is... release ;)
[20:19] <knome> but of course, the sooner, the better
[20:19] <knome> but no need for SMS's
[21:50] <Patrickdk> hmm :(
[21:50] <Patrickdk> I kindof like ibus, lets me do my japanese typing
[21:52] <knome> ibus is relatively irrelevant here...
[21:53] <knome> if mythtv wants to ship ibus, it should probably explicitly mention it, or at least that's what i'd consider fair
[21:58] <superm1> demote away


[15:01] <sil2100> o/
[15:01] <rbasak> o/
[15:02] <micahg> o/
[15:02] <sil2100> I heard something about daylight saving time in the US again, so I assume it might get things a bit complicated
[15:03] <nacc> sil2100: yeah, we sprang forward an hour this weekend
[15:05] <bdmurray> o/
[15:05] <sil2100> #startmeeting DMB
[15:05] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Mar 12 15:05:19 2018 UTC.  The chair is sil2100. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[15:05] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[15:05] <sil2100> #topic Review of previous action items
[15:05] <bdmurray> There was that one about mapreri which was done.
[15:06] <sil2100> Ok
[15:06] <sil2100> I don't think we had anything else from the previous meeting?
[15:06] <sil2100> I didn't see anything
[15:06] <sil2100> (I cleaned up the agenda already)
[15:07] <sil2100> So, we basically don't have anything really on our agenda, there's the still-standing application of Simon for Qt uploaders
[15:07] <sil2100> Do we want to handle it today, or should we continue through e-mail?
[15:07] <sil2100> If by e-mail, I would say we should start asking questions and move on to voting this week
[15:08] <sil2100> Not sure if tsimonq2 is even around to answer our questions here (if we decide to do it of course)
[15:08] <bdmurray> He's updated his wiki page correct?
[15:08] <rbasak> Yes - I can see what he has been sponsored for clearly now.
[15:09] <sil2100> Yes, that is my understanding
[15:09] <rbasak> If he's here, I'm happy to proceed in this meeting.
[15:09] <tsimonq2> Barely. ;)
[15:09] <tsimonq2> Ask questions if you have them but reception isn't good here.
[15:10] <sil2100> #topic Package Set/Per Package Uploader Applications
[15:10] <sil2100> #subtopic Qt Uploaders for tsimonq2
[15:11] <sil2100> The application, as a reminider: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/tsimonq2/Applications/Qt5Uploader
[15:11] <sil2100> Questions?
[15:14] <rbasak> I have none. I'm ready to vote.
[15:14] <bdmurray> I'm still looking at the updated app.
[15:14]  * sil2100 needs to go AFK for 5 mins
[15:18] <tsimonq2> I need to go without a phone for ~ an hour starting in ~ 5 mins. Then it's my lunch hour, so I can answer questions over IRC if there any at that time.
[15:19] <sil2100> Back
[15:21] <bdmurray> I'm ready
[15:21] <cyphermox> ready to vote as well
[15:21] <sil2100> Ok
[15:21] <sil2100> micahg: you good to vote as well?
[15:22] <micahg> sure
[15:22] <tsimonq2> Ahh, just when I need to go AFK. Sorry :(
[15:22] <tsimonq2> ttfn
[15:22] <sil2100> #vote Grant Qt Uploader PPU access to tsimonq2
[15:22] <meetingology> Please vote on: Grant Qt Uploader PPU access to tsimonq2
[15:22] <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1/-1/+0 #channelname)
[15:23] <rbasak> +1
[15:23] <meetingology> +1 received from rbasak
[15:23] <rbasak> (now that I understand the application :-)
[15:23] <sil2100> +1 (I have seen some of the work of Simon's on Qt transitions through Bileto and was happy with what was going on)
[15:23] <meetingology> +1 (I have seen some of the work of Simon's on Qt transitions through Bileto and was happy with what was going on) received from sil2100
[15:24] <bdmurray> +1
[15:24] <meetingology> +1 received from bdmurray
[15:24] <micahg> +1
[15:24] <meetingology> +1 received from micahg
[15:25] <cyphermox> +1
[15:25] <meetingology> +1 received from cyphermox
[15:25] <sil2100> #endvote
[15:25] <meetingology> Voting ended on: Grant Qt Uploader PPU access to tsimonq2
[15:25] <meetingology> Votes for:5 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0
[15:25] <meetingology> Motion carried
[15:25] <cyphermox> tsimonq2: congrats
[15:25] <sil2100> tsimonq2: congratulations!
[15:25] <sil2100> Making someone click a button in Bileto seems like not a big deal, but that also doesn't mean someone shouldn't get upload rights for the packages he/she is working on
[15:26] <sil2100> I'll add tsimonq2 to the right team in that case
[15:27] <sil2100> #action sil2100 to add tsimonq2 to the Ubuntu Qt5 Uploaders team
[15:27] <meetingology> ACTION: sil2100 to add tsimonq2 to the Ubuntu Qt5 Uploaders team
[15:27] <sil2100> #topic AOB
[15:27] <rbasak> I see an email to devel-permission@ from darkxst.
[15:27] <rbasak> I think cyphermox was going to look into that?
[15:27] <rbasak> I don't see any other ML activity needing action; that's the only one.
[15:28] <sil2100> cyphermox: are you working on that?
[15:28]  * sil2100 can't seem to find that e-mail
[15:28] <jbicha> the desktop-extra seed is poorly defined. I wonder if we should just encourage darkxst to apply for MOTU?
[15:28] <rbasak> Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 10:59:36 +1100
[15:28] <rbasak> Subject: Loosing upload rights to some GNOME components
[15:29] <jbicha> http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/packagesets/bionic/desktop-extra
[15:29] <micahg> shouldn't desktop-extra seed the packages in SUPPORTED that they want to maintain?
[15:30] <jbicha> we could try using the supported seed in ubuntu-gnome-meta and then kill desktop-extra
[15:31] <cyphermox> rbasak: there is extra work needed, as mentioned by jbicha
[15:31] <micahg> well, IIRC, desktop-extra was to give upload rights to ubuntu-desktop folks so they could also upload universe GNOME packages, if we wanted to extend ubuntu-gnome rights to them (or already are?) then there would be no need for the duplicate
[15:32] <jbicha> it looks like ubuntu-desktop is already a member of ubuntu-gnome
[15:32] <cyphermox> I think it will require a bit more investigation to figure out exactly what the best way to fix this is
[15:33] <cyphermox> especially given that tasksel needs a task to deal with too if you're indeed supposed to be able to install vanilla separately.
[15:34] <rbasak> Does darkxst know the reason for the delay?
[15:35] <jbicha> I chatted with him then. His list isn't complete and there was the desktop-extra question
[15:35] <jbicha> let's follow up on the list then?
[15:35] <rbasak> Please
[15:38] <jbicha> ok, I'm replying there. End of meeting?
[15:39] <sil2100> What about the budgie packageset?
[15:40] <sil2100> Did that get solved?
[15:40] <jbicha> sil2100: yes: http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/packagesets/bionic/ubuntu-budgie
[15:41] <sil2100> Excellent! I missed that completely
[15:41] <sil2100> Should we reach out to fossfreedom to move him to the packageset uploaders?
[15:42] <rbasak> Have we voted to make him an uploader of the packageset specifically?
[15:42] <jbicha> sil2100: we said before that we'd need to have a separate vote for that :(
[15:42] <cyphermox> that's the process
[15:42] <rbasak> IIRC some board members had doubts about the whole packageset, but were OK with a subset.
[15:42] <jbicha> micahg: sorry, I was looking at the wrong page. ubuntu-desktop doesn't have upload rights for ubuntugnome but I don't object to that happening
[15:43] <rbasak> Unless I'm thinking of some other case.
[15:43] <rbasak> But if so, then it's exactly what we wanted, rather than an unfortunate consequence of the process.
[15:43] <sil2100> Separate vote is fine
[15:44] <cyphermox> well, it's only an issue in the process because this is specifically a packageset made from a seed
[15:44] <cyphermox> so there's some variation in what might be in the seed, leading to someone applying having more generic upload rights than if it was a packageset for just some tighly-defined set of packages
[15:45] <cyphermox> ie. budgie is not "qt5 only", it's anything that is needed for budgie minus what's in some other seeds such that it lands in core.
[15:46] <sil2100> I would have to compare the packageset and what PPU rights were actually given
[15:46] <cyphermox> maybe we can be nice to fossfreedom and start voting on an hypothetical application against the packageset as it is now?
[15:46] <cyphermox> (on the ML I mean)
[15:47] <sil2100> I wouldn't mind, seems a bit informal but sounds ok
[15:47] <sil2100> cyphermox: would you maybe send out an e-mail to the ML about this?
[15:47] <cyphermox> well, if we're to think it's not ready yet, then we can tell him what we expect.
[15:48] <sil2100> Ok, let's maybe finish the meeting
[15:48] <rbasak> Does anyone have a link to his original application handy? I'd like to see the original endorsements etc.
[15:48]  * sil2100 needs to AFK for some minutes again
[15:48] <sil2100> o/
[15:48] <sil2100> (you can continue here though!)
[15:48] <sil2100> #endmeeting
[15:48] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Mar 12 15:48:48 2018 UTC.
[15:48] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2018/ubuntu-meeting.2018-03-12-15.05.moin.txt
[15:51] <jbicha> rbasak: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/fossfreedom/UbuntuBudgieDevApplication
[15:51] <rbasak> Thanks!
[15:51] <jbicha> rbasak: also https://wiki.ubuntu.com/fossfreedom/budgie-extrasPPUApplication (which copies the previous endorsements and adds Simon)
[16:21] <tsimonq2> \o/
[16:21] <tsimonq2> Thank you sil2100 rbasak et. al!
[19:54] <kokoye2007> Hi
[19:58] <kyrofa> Hey there :)
[20:01] <kokoye2007> Nice to meet ya again
[20:05] <kyrofa> Letozaf_, kenvandine you two around?
[20:05] <kyrofa> Sounds like we're operating under capacity today
[20:05] <kenvandine> hey
[20:05] <kenvandine> i'm here ;)
[20:05] <kenvandine> just trying to get caught up, still recovering from jet lag
[20:06] <kyrofa> Haha, yeah I bet
[20:06] <Letozaf_> here I am :)
[20:08] <kyrofa> So there are only three of us today, but as long as we're unanimous we still represent the majority of the council
[20:08] <kenvandine> so that's a good question, you have a good point about if we are unanimous we are the majority
[20:08] <kenvandine> but
[20:08] <kenvandine> having more input is good
[20:08] <kyrofa> Of course
[20:08] <kenvandine> so the questions raised by others could be good
[20:10] <kyrofa> Are you saying you'd like to wait until the others are available? Note that we have kokoye2007 from myanmar here today
[20:10] <kenvandine> ok, maybe we should just go for it
[20:10] <kyrofa> Seems a tad unfair to push dates around because some of the council can't make it unless we can give a pretty decent heads up to folks on the agenda
[20:10] <kenvandine> yeah
[20:10] <kenvandine> agreed
[20:10] <kenvandine> and if we have representation here from the loco, we should make our best effort
[20:11] <kyrofa> Letozaf_, agreed?
[20:11] <Letozaf_> yes agreed
[20:11] <kyrofa> Excellent. kenvandine, feel like imposing your will on the bot today?
[20:11] <kenvandine> yes
[20:11] <kenvandine> let me find my notes, 2 minutes
[20:11] <kyrofa> Sure thing
[20:12] <kenvandine> #startmeeting LoCoCouncil 2018-03-12
[20:12] <meetingology> Meeting started Mon Mar 12 20:12:37 2018 UTC.  The chair is kenvandine. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology.
[20:12] <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick
[20:12] <kenvandine> roll call
[20:13] <kenvandine> let's note that gsilvapt and nhaines are not able to make the meeting this week
[20:13] <kenvandine> council members please wave to record attendance
[20:13]  * kyrofa waves
[20:13]  * kenvandine waves
[20:13] <Letozaf_> carla waves
[20:13] <Letozaf_> he he sorry...
[20:14] <kenvandine> #topic MyanmarTeam
[20:14] <kenvandine> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MyanmarTeam/VerificationApplication2018
[20:14] <kenvandine> kokoye2007, you are here to represent Myanmar?
[20:16] <kyrofa> Uh oh :P
[20:16] <thohi> me and kokoye here
[20:16] <kyrofa> Hey there thohi
[20:16] <Letozaf_> o/
[20:16] <thohi> Hi
[20:16] <kyrofa> Things seem much improved in the application this time around, thank you for updating it
[20:16] <thohi> Thanks
[20:17] <kyrofa> thohi, it claims your home page is ubuntu-mm.net, but that's a 404. Are you aware of this?
[20:17] <kokoye2007>  == You are banned from this server- You have a host listed in the DroneBL. For more information, visit http://dronebl.org/lookup?ip=<IP_ADDRESS>  Please contact<EMAIL_ADDRESS>with questions. (2018/3/12 20.14) [02:44] == ERROR: Closing Link: ubuntu/member/kokoye2007 (K-Lined) [02:44] == Disconnected from server: Connection to IRC server lost.
[20:17] <kokoye2007> :3
[20:17] <kokoye2007> sorry for dc
[20:17] <kokoye2007> our ip is blacklist again
[20:18] <kyrofa> Ouch
[20:18] <thohi> still Ok from local
[20:18] <kenvandine> 4 events already this year, that's great
[20:19] <kyrofa> And 2017 very nicely filled in
[20:19] <kokoye2007> sir @kenvandine
[20:20] <kokoye2007> 5 event ;)
[20:20] <kokoye2007> 2 Meeting
[20:20] <kokoye2007> i just add
[20:20] <kyrofa> My only comment is the 404 homepage. I really have no questions, things look good from my perspective
[20:21] <kokoye2007> opps
[20:21] <kokoye2007> i upgrade SSL
[20:21] <kenvandine> ah
[20:21] <kenvandine> https works :)
[20:21] <kyrofa> Well, without the www
[20:22] <kyrofa> Make the link https://ubuntu-mm.net and you're good
[20:22] <kyrofa> Otherwise you'll need to add www to the cert
[20:23] <kokoye2007> thanks
[20:23] <kenvandine> anyone else have questions for kokoye2007 or thohi?
[20:23] <kokoye2007> i forget www to ssl redir
[20:23] <kyrofa> No more questions from me
[20:23] <Letozaf_> I have no questions
[20:23] <kenvandine> #vote MyanmarTeam re-verification
[20:23] <meetingology> Please vote on: MyanmarTeam re-verification
[20:23] <meetingology> Public votes can be registered by saying +1, +0 or -1 in channel, (for private voting, private message me with 'vote +1/-1/+0 #channelname)
[20:23] <kenvandine> #voters Letozaf_ kenvandine kyrofa
[20:23] <meetingology> Current voters: Letozaf_ kenvandine kyrofa
[20:23] <kenvandine> #votesrequired 3
[20:23] <meetingology> votes now need 3 to be passed
[20:23] <kenvandine> +1
[20:23] <meetingology> +1 received from kenvandine
[20:23] <Letozaf_> +1
[20:23] <meetingology> +1 received from Letozaf_
[20:23] <kyrofa> +1
[20:23] <meetingology> +1 received from kyrofa
[20:24] <kenvandine> excellent!
[20:24] <kenvandine> thanks kokoye2007 and thohi!
[20:24] <kyrofa> Thank you kokoye2007 and thohi for updating your application, and for being present today
[20:24] <kokoye2007> now also done www redirect
[20:24] <kokoye2007> thanks you so much
[20:24] <thohi> Thanks to Council members
[20:25] <kyrofa> #endvote
[20:26] <kyrofa> :(
[20:26] <kenvandine> #endvote
[20:26] <meetingology> Voting ended on: MyanmarTeam re-verification
[20:26] <meetingology> Votes for:3 Votes against:0 Abstentions:0
[20:26] <meetingology> Motion carried
[20:26] <kenvandine> sorry :)
[20:26] <kenvandine> i missed that part
[20:26] <kyrofa> Haha, no problem, I guess that only works if you're a chair
[20:26] <kenvandine> yeah
[20:27] <kenvandine> i thought since i added required votes it was automatic
[20:27] <kenvandine> i've updated MyanmarTeam's status in LP already
[20:27] <kyrofa> Yeah you'd think so
[20:27] <kokoye2007> Thank sir
[20:27] <kokoye2007> any suggestion for ubuntu-mm ?
[20:28] <kyrofa> We technically have SwissTeam on our agenda as well, shall we discuss them quickly just for the meeting minutes?
[20:28] <kenvandine> kyrofa, yes
[20:28] <kenvandine> so the bug has enough +1s to pass
[20:28] <kyrofa> kokoye2007, only one: if you work to keep your pages up-to-date as you go, the re-verification app will be much easier
[20:29] <kyrofa> kenvandine, want to update the topic for the minutes?
[20:30] <kenvandine> sure
[20:30] <kenvandine> #topic Re-verification, ubuntu-ch
[20:31] <kenvandine> There was a bug filed to track getting some questions answered
[20:31] <kenvandine> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-locoteams/+bug/1750544
[20:31] <kenvandine> that private though :)
[20:32] <kyrofa> Yeah, timezones are different enough asynchronous seemed to be best
[20:32] <kyrofa> Long story short: the council voted to re-verify SwissTeam
[20:33] <kenvandine> 3 votes in favor
[20:33] <kenvandine> kyrofa, did you vote?  maybe i missed your's in the comments
[20:33] <kyrofa> kenvandine, I voted first! Haha
[20:33] <kyrofa> Four votes
[20:33] <kenvandine> 4 :)
[20:33] <kenvandine> so it passes
[20:33] <kenvandine> congratulations to the SwissTeam!
[20:35] <kenvandine> i guess that's it for this month
[20:35] <kyrofa> Indeed, if no one has any other business, that's it for our agenda
[20:35] <kenvandine> thanks everyone!
[20:35] <kenvandine> #endmeeting
[20:35] <meetingology> Meeting ended Mon Mar 12 20:35:38 2018 UTC.
[20:35] <meetingology> Minutes:        http://ubottu.com/meetingology/logs/ubuntu-meeting/2018/ubuntu-meeting.2018-03-12-20.12.moin.txt
[20:35] <Letozaf_> bye
[20:35] <Letozaf_> o/
[20:36] <kyrofa> kenvandine, mind updating SwissTeam's status while you're in there?
[20:36] <kyrofa> Perhaps you already did?
[20:36] <kenvandine> done :)
[20:36] <kenvandine> looking at the meeting logs now
[20:36] <kyrofa> So fast
[20:36] <kyrofa> Thanks kenvandine, Letozaf_
[20:37] <Letozaf_> yw
[20:39] <kenvandine> You did not change the page content, not saved!
[20:39] <kenvandine> creating the wiki page with the minutes
[20:40] <kyrofa> Hmm...
[20:40]  * kyrofa throws wiki out the window
[20:40] <kenvandine> ok... starting from scratch fixed it
[20:42] <kenvandine> Updated the wiki for next month's meeting
[20:42] <kenvandine> thanks all!


[17:52] <pangolin> cyphermox: anything happening about getting loco re-approved?
[17:53] <cyphermox> well, i think we ought to prepare a wiki page that demonstrates what we've been doing, or at least to update it
[17:53] <cyphermox> do we have a date for the reapproval?
[17:53] <pangolin> not that i know of yet
[17:53] <pangolin> I think that gets sent only to the team contact
[17:54] <pangolin> I got an email saying we have expired.
[17:56] <pangolin> I have never done anything with loco approval stuff but let me know if there is anything I can do.
[19:18] <cyphermox> ok I'll take a look -- just not today as I'm already quite busy with other things
[21:10] <Chex> EtienneG: salut there
[21:22] <Ankman> salut
[21:27] <Sebastien> salut salut, comment sa spasse ici :)
[21:45] <cyphermox> ca se passe rush :)
[21:51] <cyphermox> mdeslaur: ca t'as l'air correct ca? --> http://paste.ubuntu.com/845035/
[21:52] <mdeslaur> cyphermox: ouais
[21:52] <cyphermox> thx
[21:53] <mdeslaur> cyphermox: t'as besoin de link?
[21:53] <cyphermox> euh non en fait, bon catch
[21:53] <cyphermox> en2k je crois pas
[21:54] <mdeslaur> je sais pas, tous les autres lignes ont l,air a l'avoir...
[21:54] <mdeslaur> bof, laisse le
[21:54] <EtienneG> salut Chex!
[21:56] <cyphermox> ouan, j'ai juste copié l'entrée similaire pour connman
[21:56] <cyphermox> ce que ca fait c'est permettre a precise de faire un shutdown plus rapide :)
[21:56] <mdeslaur> \o/


[18:39] <AlanBell> hi all, what is the aspect ratio and screen resolution of the phone you are targetting?
[21:15] <imnichol> And we're back
[21:15] <MrChrisDruif> Sup Ian?
[21:15] <imnichol> Hahah
[21:15] <imnichol> Is your name actually Chris by the way?
[21:16] <MrChrisDruif> Yup, Druif is my last name even =)
[21:16] <imnichol> Trustworthy sort of fellow
[21:16] <imnichol> Using your real name on the internet
[21:17] <MrChrisDruif> Yup, it's for a good cause, isn't it?
[21:17] <imnichol> I'd say so
[21:17] <imnichol> It's been my assumption that the UPhone project would require Canonical to actually develop hardware
[21:17] <imnichol> Thoughts?
[21:18] <MrChrisDruif> Well, not necessarily..
[21:18] <imnichol> I think that as we've seen from Android/IOS, being able to present a solid device is critical if you want adoption
[21:18] <MrChrisDruif> Seeing Android can run on current hardware, we should be able to do the same
[21:18] <imnichol> Yes
[21:19] <imnichol> I'm just worried about the tendency for 3rd parties to mess with stock android, and they invariably make it worse
[21:19] <MrChrisDruif> Well, it's a bit the same like TV, and Tablet even. We should DEFINITIVELY consider our own hardware, but it should also to switch (say) Android for Ubuntu
[21:20] <imnichol> You mean allow other people to install Ubuntu on their tablets/phones if they want?
[21:20] <MrChrisDruif> Yup =)
[21:20] <imnichol> Cool
[21:20] <MrChrisDruif> Just like "Windows" PC running Ubuntu, it should be the same for phones
[21:21] <imnichol> I know my excitement for these projects rests on the ability for me to go out and buy an "Ubuntu" device sold by Canonical, and know that they'll play nicely together and I have someone to turn to if they get broken in some way
[21:21] <imnichol> I agree that even if it's not "officially supported" to install Ubuntu on your galaxy tab or whatever, we definitely want to do as much as possible to make it easy
[21:22] <MrChrisDruif> That's what I'm talking about
[21:22] <imnichol> Great
[21:23] <MrChrisDruif> Please note that, like you, I've got nothing to say in form of decision making concerning anything at all =P
[21:23] <imnichol> I really wish that Canonical staff would take a more active roll
[21:23] <MrChrisDruif> But that's what I'd like to see, be able to install Ubuntu on said devices
[21:24] <MrChrisDruif> Haha, I heard something about them not sure how to "integrate" with the community. They should hear US talking ;-)
[21:24] <imnichol> hahah
[21:25] <imnichol> With mobile devices, it's a lot harder for us to make decisions, since they're going to be the ones who (might) be making hardware
[21:25] <imnichol> Phones are going to be interesting, because I believe there's some issues with the carriers not liking non-official OSs on phones
[21:30] <MrChrisDruif> I think if we can ensure them that we can still get all the calls through their networks, then they are less warily
[21:30] <imnichol> True
[21:31] <MrChrisDruif> It's the hardware manufacturers we'd be more worried about
[21:31] <imnichol> How so?
[21:31] <MrChrisDruif> Well, what about warranties when we install on said devices?
[21:31] <MrChrisDruif> Claims?
[21:31] <imnichol> Ah yes
[21:32] <imnichol> That's why I think it's necessary for Canonical to get into the hardware business at least a little
[21:32] <imnichol> I want assurance that when I'm runing UPhone and the ssd fails, it can get replaced
[21:33] <imnichol> No questions asked, no charge
[21:33] <MrChrisDruif> Well...no questions asked? =P
[21:33] <imnichol> (Unless of course I drop it off a building, I'd be ok with getting charged for that)
[21:35] <MrChrisDruif> And no charge? Maybe only handling costs for the user?
[21:35] <imnichol> I mean, what good does Ubuntu on a phone do if you bring it in because the screen is cracked and they're like "Oh man sorry you voided the warranty, we have to charge you full price to replace this"
[21:36] <MrChrisDruif> Otherwise it would be a complete open faucet in terms of costs =P
[21:36] <imnichol> I'm speaking broadly here, my point is that it needs to be as hassle free as possible
[21:37] <MrChrisDruif> Agreed
[21:38] <imnichol> Now to open a pandoras box if you don't mind:
[21:38] <MrChrisDruif> I like opening those =)
[21:38] <imnichol> You made some comment in #ubuntu-tablet about how you don't think Unity will work on phones.  Is that what you think or did I misunderstand you?
[21:39] <MrChrisDruif> I did? When?
 I'd actually think we might need to do something for desktop, but either gs or unity are good enough for tablet & desktop
 Phones on the other hand ;-)
[21:39] <MrChrisDruif> Ahh, that
[21:39] <MrChrisDruif> =)
[21:40] <MrChrisDruif> What you missed is some bit after that...
[21:40] <MrChrisDruif> Where I said that for phones we'd atleast need a software stack for making calls with the carriers networks
[21:41] <imnichol> Wouldn't that be able to just run as an application?
[21:42] <MrChrisDruif> And indeed, maybe is current Unity not suitable for phones with their small screens
[21:43] <MrChrisDruif> Add that Unity is more for "broad" screens like laptops and tablets in landscape mode
[21:43] <MrChrisDruif> But that isn't really a natural position for a phone
[21:43] <MrChrisDruif> mode=position
[21:43] <imnichol> I agree that phones are suited to portrait orientation
[21:44] <imnichol> But I use the original Palm Pre, where webos is almost identical to Unity except that the menu is on the bottom instead of the side
[21:45] <imnichol> "Where webos's UI is amost identical to Unity"
[21:45] <imnichol> And it works just fine
[21:46] <imnichol> I think that the ability of the touch displays to identify where the user is trying to touch is great enough that the size of the icons won't be a huge problem
[21:47] <imnichol> But if they want to stick with the menubar being on the side of the screen, you're right, that will be an issue
[21:49] <MrChrisDruif> That is indeed a thought one to decide about by ourselves =P
[21:49] <MrChrisDruif> Maybe get the two Alan's in?
[21:49] <imnichol> Do you have a goat?  We should try to summon some of the Canonical engineers to help us
[21:49] <imnichol> ;)
[21:49] <MrChrisDruif> Haha
[21:50] <MrChrisDruif> I was talking about AlanBell & popey
[21:50] <imnichol> What exactly does popey do at canonical?
[21:50] <imnichol> We could really use a designer
[21:51] <MrChrisDruif> That my friend, I don't know =)
[21:52] <imnichol> I agree, if anyone with more knowledge/ability wants to jump in, it would really rock
[21:52] <MrChrisDruif> imnichol; how about this channel? #ubuntu-design ?
[21:53] <imnichol> If you wouldn't mind bringing it up, that would be awesome.  I think you're the better communicator between the two of us
[21:54] <MrChrisDruif> I am? ='D
[22:07] <popey> hello
[22:07] <MrChrisDruif> Hi popey
[22:08] <popey> imnichol: I'm an Engineering Manager
[22:08] <popey> I'm not a designer ☺
[22:09] <MrChrisDruif> popey; we're talking in #ubuntu-design atm =)
[22:10] <popey> cool
[22:10] <MrChrisDruif> Yeah, if you read the scrollback, you see we've got a design dilemma with the bar
[22:21] <MrChrisDruif> imnichol; what could be another option is to "force" landscape mode on the phone as well? Just like portrait mode is forced in Android?
[22:22] <imnichol> Hm
[22:23] <imnichol> Ya know, I've been thinking about it and I'm wondering if it's not that much of a problem after all
[22:23] <MrChrisDruif> I just thought of it and I don't think it's really an issue
[22:23] <imnichol> Because who cares if the bar on the left obscures what's on the screen?
[22:23] <MrChrisDruif> A lot of mobile apps would come better to their rights in landscape mode even
[22:24] <imnichol> The only time it will appear at all is if the user is trying to switch to a different application
[22:26] <imnichol> What do you mean by "come better to their rights"?
[22:27] <MrChrisDruif> Well, they would be better suited on those screens
[22:27] <imnichol> Oh ok
[22:27] <imnichol> I'm looking at my phone as we speak
[22:28] <MrChrisDruif> Keep in mind, those apps are designed for portrait screens
[22:29] <MrChrisDruif> Take for example the mail app
[22:29] <imnichol> And of course this all depends on the size of the phone(My Pre is 100.53 mm (3.958 in) (h) by 59.57 mm (2.345 in) (w)) but I think that a vertical bar would actually be best
[22:30] <imnichol> Especially if the phone were a little wider than 2.345 inches
[22:33] <MrChrisDruif> Wide being the long side of the screen?
[22:34] <imnichol> If you're looking at an iphone that has the home button at the bottom: wide = left to right and tall = top to bottom
[22:34] <imnichol> Does that clear it up?
[22:34] <imnichol> ;)
[22:35] <MrChrisDruif> Yup
[22:35] <imnichol> I guess it can be better stated as "width" means the distance from the leftmost part of the phone to the rightmost if the phone is being held in portrait mode
[22:35] <imnichol> That way I don't have to use an Apple example hahah
[22:35] <MrChrisDruif> Haha, you could also use the Galaxy S's
[22:36] <MrChrisDruif> S & SII
[22:36] <imnichol> Ah yes
[22:41] <imnichol> Unfortunately, I'm not letting myself do any mockups until after finals week
[22:41] <MrChrisDruif> Haha
[22:41] <imnichol> I would get too distracted and probably flunk a few of them
[22:55] <imnichol> MrChrisDruif, what are the benefits of multiple workspaces?
[22:56] <MrChrisDruif> Well, with swap you can move from one workspace to the other with on them running full-screen apps.
[22:56] <MrChrisDruif> It's even how I use my desktop =D
[22:59] <imnichol> Are you talking about not bringing up the menubar to switch between them?
[23:03] <MrChrisDruif> Optionally
[23:04] <MrChrisDruif> If you move apps to workspaces, then you flip your screen to them to switch OR call the Unity bar and let IT take you to the correct workspace
[23:05] <imnichol> I've been assuming that to change between applications, we'll just be calling up the unity bar and then selecting the application icon
[23:07] <MrChrisDruif> Well, that is of course an option =)


[00:08] <rogpeppe> davecheney: ping
[00:16] <mramm> rogpeppe: hey, you still around?
[00:16] <rogpeppe> no
[00:16] <rogpeppe> mramm: not really. it's late and i'm summoned.
[00:16] <mramm> ahh
[00:16] <mramm> ok
[00:16] <mramm> have a great evening
[07:42] <TheMue> Morning.
[07:59] <fwereade_> heya TheMue
[08:02] <TheMue> fwereade_: Hi William
[08:12] <TheMue> fwereade_: You know http://hackingdistributed.com/2013/01/29/mongo-ft/?
[08:15] <fwereade_> TheMue, haven't read that one tbh
[08:16] <TheMue> fwereade_: It's about MongoDB replication and how this can lead to problems.
[08:16] <fwereade_> TheMue, it does not look unfamiliar though
[08:17] <fwereade_> TheMue, most of it seems to be the usual whining about default settings
[08:17] <fwereade_> TheMue, maybe I should read more closely?
[08:18] <TheMue> fwereade_: I'm also not through with it. It only attracted my attention due to mongo.
[08:19] <fwereade_> TheMue, it kinda seems that there's a bit of a backlash against mongo going on at the moment, which is fine, it's the usual cycle of new tech
[08:19] <fwereade_> TheMue, 1) it's the greatest thing ever and it solves all your problems! nosql!!!!!11!1!
[08:20] <fwereade_> TheMue, 2) it's the worst thing ever and will destroy your life!!!!11!1!
[08:20] <fwereade_> TheMue, 3) it's a tool and choosing to use it involves tradeoffs
[08:20] <TheMue> fwereade_: Well known as Gardner hype cycle ;)
[08:21] <fwereade_> TheMue, yeah, indeed -- I just think we're in phase 2 re mongo at the moment
[08:21] <fwereade_> TheMue, this is not to say that there will not be challenges wrtreplication
[08:22] <TheMue> fwereade_: I'm only interested in well known traps we can avoid in our further mongo usage.
[08:22] <fwereade_> TheMue, yeah, it will be interesting trying to tune it as our needs grow
[08:23] <TheMue> fwereade_: If others detected probs and discovered ways to avoid them why not use their knowledge. ;) One way of re-use.
[08:23] <fwereade_> TheMue, at the moment I mostly have the worst-case characteristics of mgo/txn on my mind :)
[08:23] <TheMue> fwereade_: Sure, wrt to scaling and HA it will get interesting.
[08:23] <TheMue> fwereade_: Yeah, you yesterday mentioned it.
[08:25] <TheMue> fwereade_: Would like to see a little paper with your current thoughts of possible probs, so that we can investigate in parallel and put our discoveries, thoughts etc into that paper.
[08:26] <fwereade_> TheMue, wrt that particular article I look forward to his followup where he talks about subtle problems with replication
[08:27] <TheMue> fwereade_: Yeo
[08:27] <TheMue> Yep
[08:28] <fwereade_> TheMue, my own concerns remain somewhat theoretical
[08:28] <TheMue> fwereade_: But still interesting as they exist.
[08:29] <TheMue> fwereade_: I would like to see my technical lead w/o concerns. :D
[08:29] <fwereade_> TheMue, it's basically concern over precisley how txn sync points can propagate across the collections
[08:29] <fwereade_> TheMue, I think the really interesting problem is service destruction
[08:30] <fwereade_> TheMue, the way it's written now has some good properties and some bad ones and I don't know which will predominate in real usage scenarios
[08:31] <TheMue> fwereade_: So maybe we should start use case oriented. First UC: service destruction, below a short description on how on high level it works and then drilling down into how the DB is involved and which probs you might expect.
[08:31] <fwereade_> TheMue, that is not an unreasonable request
[08:33] <TheMue> fwereade_: If the result shows that there's no problem that's the best we can get. ;)
[08:33] <fwereade_> TheMue, well, just because I can't think of a problem doesn't mean it won't exist ;p
[08:34] <fwereade_> TheMue, the trouble with documenting things is that the cost/benefit calulation is really simple
[08:34] <fwereade_> TheMue, s/really/rarely/
[08:35] <fwereade_> TheMue, writing good docs is expensive re time; the docs quickly become out of date anyway; and there is also a strong tendency for developer docs to be write-only for some reason
[08:35] <fwereade_> TheMue, I am firmly +1 on writing design specs
[08:36] <rogpeppe> fwereade_, TheMue: do you want to continue that meeting?
[08:36] <rogpeppe> (morning, BTW!)
[08:36] <TheMue> rogpeppe: Morning
[08:36] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, TheMue: yeah, we probably should, would one of you start a hangout? I'll be there in 5
[08:36] <TheMue> rogpeppe: Yep
[08:36] <rogpeppe> ok
[08:36] <TheMue> fwereade_: You read my mail about docs this morning?
[08:38] <rogpeppe> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/ba4d2795ce2498036f225614a2b0a488040d635f?authuser=0&hl=en-GB
[08:40] <fwereade_> TheMue, yeah, the things I was just saying are closely connected
[08:40] <fwereade_> TheMue, we could maybe touch on it live as well
[10:44] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, TheMue, omw back
[11:58] <dimitern> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/8fe5a151e983bdd6459913720de0cc4817216bc5
[11:58]  * niemeyer joins
[11:58] <niemeyer> dimitern: I assume this is the constraint discussion?
[11:58] <dimitern> niemeyer: yes it is
[11:58] <fwereade_> niemeyer, dimitern: I hope so
[11:58] <niemeyer> Mornings, btw! :-)
[11:59] <niemeyer> fwereade_, dimitern: Can you please invite the other me
[11:59]  * fwereade_ seems to be the only one in there
[11:59] <dimitern> niemeyer: morning
[11:59] <dimitern> so that's not the one
[11:59] <dimitern> jam's creating a new one and will post a link
[11:59] <jam> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/1b96582d8713f383ef4b1477073f236fa504e77d?authuser=2&hl=en
[12:00] <niemeyer> jam: Can you please invite the other me?
[12:00] <TheMue> jam: Same here
[12:01] <jam> If I missed anyone, please just poke me, if the above link doesn't work automatically
[12:49] <rogpeppe> darn, i missed all the above reminders
[13:48] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: can you point me to the original constraints discussion document (where the constraint semantics were laid out)
[13:48] <rogpeppe> ?
[13:48] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i'm relying on possibly dubious memory of what was arrived at
[13:49] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I think it's in the juju-doc project somewhere, let me poke around a bit
[13:50] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ah! this one: https://juju.ubuntu.com/docs/constraints.html
[13:51] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, that's not the spec I remember, it's the polished-up-for-users docs
[13:51] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, but maybe that's what it evolved into
[13:52] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: yeah, i remember a different document too
[13:52] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: but that's good for going on with - it documents the user expectations which is probably the most important thing
[14:00] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, actually, I think it is roughly the same
[14:00] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, if you do a deep dive in deleted bits of the juju source itself you'll find earlier versions
[14:00] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ok, cool
[14:20] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: are there any constraints that, when added, *increase* the number of machines available for allocation, rather than narrowing down the selection?
[14:21] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, hmm, not according to my mental model -- wrt machines you just filter out the ones that don;t match
[14:21] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: that is, given a set of constraints C, and another set D, can i assume that availMachines(C) is a non-strict superset of availMachines(C+D) ?
[14:22] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the example that brought this to mind was ec2-zone=any
[14:22] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I think the answer is in general no, but keep talking
[14:23] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, but I'm not actually sure exactly what you're referring to when yu say "machines"
[14:23] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: s/machines/instances/
[14:24] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: 'cos if you have C=(ec2-zone=us-east-1a) and D=(ec2-zone=any) then it seems that the above supposition is violated
[14:24] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, what does "+" mean then?
[14:24] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: combined, as with environment-level and service-level constraints
[14:25] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ah, ok -- then I think the answer is "mu"
[14:26] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, combining two sets of constraints can make them tighter than the original or looser than the original, and makes no difference wrt instances which always just match a single bunch of constraints
[14:26] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: yeah, that's true. but is that true even if you're combining constraints with no overlapping attributes?
[14:27] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so forget about combining sets then
[14:29] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, or maybe not -- I'm sorry, I think I need a bit more context on what you're thinking about before I can answer with confidence
[14:29] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: more time required to think :-)
[14:30] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, in general, I think that if a given constraint is not set it will not particpate in matches
[14:30] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, and that the effect of every constraint check is to exclude some images/instances/instance-types from consideration
[14:31] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so adding a new check can only further narrow down the list and cannot grow it
[14:32] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, but that it is not sane to filter first by env constraints and then by service constraints, because that will exclude machines that should not be if the service specifies things that overlap or conflict with the env
[14:32] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i was wondering if there's a machine that has been started with constraint 'a=1 b=2', then we can be sure that the machine so allocated will also match a desired constraint 'a=1'
[14:32] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: yes, i agree with that
[14:33] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, if it does not, then we should probably have words with whoever did the provider that reported that instance info
[14:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: yeah
[14:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: it could happen if the default value for a constraint was restrictive
[14:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: but i think that would be wrong.
[14:34] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I'm +-0 on the idea of defaults anyway, I don't want to introduce them unless I'm sure about them
[14:34] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: +1
[14:35] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it may make more sense to charge the environ with doing sane things in response to empty constraints
[14:35] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, figuring out a sane thing for all openstacks is not easy, but it's easier than doing so across all possible providers
[14:36] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: can you specify constraints on a subordinate service?
[14:37] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I'm inclined to say no for now
[14:37] <TheMue> fwereade_, rogpeppe: When talking about constraints with numbers, are they meant as an exact value, as an upper limit or as a lower limit?
[14:37] <fwereade_> TheMue, in every case so far, lower limit
[14:37] <fwereade_> TheMue, if we had a "cost" that would make sense as an upper limit
[14:37] <TheMue> fwereade_: So what if I want to limit it to a maximum, e.g. for cost control reasons?
[14:38] <TheMue> fwereade_: Yep.
[14:38] <fwereade_> TheMue, nobody's actually expressed a desire for that
[14:39] <fwereade_> TheMue, if they do we can figure something out -- say, "mem<=2G"
[14:39] <TheMue> fwereade_: What we're defining is a kind of DSL for constraints. "cpu > 4000 MIPS && ram > 2 GB || cpu < 4000 MIPS && ram > 4 GB".
[14:39] <fwereade_> TheMue, I think I am trying hard not to do that
[14:39] <fwereade_> ;)
[14:39] <TheMue> fwereade_: Hehe, can understand.
[14:40] <TheMue> fwereade_: But the discussion in some points reminds me of it.
[14:40] <fwereade_> TheMue, although what you said is also perfectly correct -- that is what we are doing, we just don't want it to look like that
[14:40] <fwereade_> TheMue, yet ;p
[14:41] <TheMue> fwereade_: From a user perspective, what are the demands? More than just say "tiny, small, medium, large, xxl"?
[14:41] <fwereade_> TheMue, I think that those words are meaningless in a global context
[14:42] <TheMue> fwereade_: Together with a map what they mean for a given provider?
[14:46] <fwereade_> TheMue, I think it will be rare for an environment to have instance types that map remotely neatly onto those things
[14:48] <TheMue> fwereade_: They don't have to map between providers IMHO. So tiny in EC2 isn't tiny in an OpenStack environment. But tiny is defined per environment. And the op can so choose the best matching one instead of fiddling with details.
[14:49] <fwereade_> TheMue, if they don't map to something roughly equivalent across providers they're worthless
[14:49] <TheMue> fwereade_: Only some constraints may be hard due to software dependencies, like arch or gpu.
[14:49] <fwereade_> TheMue, yeah, arch is an interesting one, we didn't hit that one in the call
[14:50] <TheMue> fwereade_: Why do you think they are worthless?
[14:50] <fwereade_> TheMue, because their purpose is to enable sane cross-environment scripting
[14:50] <fwereade_> TheMue, if you can't say "this should run on at least a medium" and have that mean something coherent regardless of provider, it's no help at all
[14:52] <TheMue> fwereade_: Ah, forgot the charm perspective. :/
[15:03] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: RFC http://paste.ubuntu.com/1616827/
[15:03] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, looking
[15:04] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, can't match against instance constraints
[15:05] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, well we could, but it would be crap
[15:05] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, we need to match against the properties of the actual instance
[15:05] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i agree with that - see the 3rd last para
[15:06] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: in fact, yes, we can't do any matching *until* that's occurred, yeah
[15:07] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I guess I'm not seeing how this actually solves a problem though
[15:08] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: it seems like a reasonably simple scheme that means we can have provider-specific constraints in a coherent way
[15:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, how does it address the problem of specifying "instance-type=m1.small" against an openstack environment?
[15:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it doesn't address the social problem
[15:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, people will script them anyway
[15:10] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, if the social problem is not a problem, we don't need to separate them at the UI level
[15:10] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, and if it is, we still don't because it won;t help -- it's just layered complexity to no benefit
[15:11] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: in that case, you'd either get an error when you tried to specify that constrain (the juju command can check), or the constraint would fail
[15:11] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, right, just as they would if the division didn't exist
[15:11] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: break for kanban?
[15:25] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: one advantage of the divide is that lots of the awkward logic (e.g. combining constraints) can be implemented in the state, and each provider only has to deal with it in one specific place (Environ.Constraints)
[15:26] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: also, from a user-facing point of view, the rules are more straightforward, i think - they don't have to worry about overlapping constraints
[15:28] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: also, it's easy to tell if someone is using provider-specific constraints, because they're tagged as such.
[15:30] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, a question: is "arch" provider-specific?
[15:31] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: we would provide arch in the portable constraints
[15:31] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so you can't start an instance with a specific arch?
[15:32] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: sure you can
[15:32] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, s/instance/instance type/
[15:32] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, how so? I thought you can't specify both
[15:32] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the provider constraints could provide arch too, if it was appropriate
[15:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the idea is that the provider-specific constraints embody exactly the constraint capabilities of that provider
[15:33] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, having two ways of specifying arch does not seem to be a win simplicity-wise
[15:34] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i think it's reasonable actually.
[15:34] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the portable constraints and the provider-specific constraints live in different semantic spaces
[15:35] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: one provider might provide a more detailed level of "arch"
[15:35] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: whereas portable constraints might only understand amd64, i386, arm
[15:36] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, then their portability is at best suspect
[15:37] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: in some providers, arch might not be orthogonal to instance type.
[15:37] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, in some, it's already not
[15:37] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: quite so
[15:38] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: so we only have another way to specify "arch" if it's a concept that makes direct sense to a provider.
[15:38] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, if the provider's expected to understand the portable arch as well, which surely it must, then it is always a concept that makes direct sense to the provider
[15:39] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i think that almost all our difficulties when thinking about constraints come from trying to combine provider-specific and portable constraints.
[15:40] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the only parts of the provider that understands the portable arch would be the Environ.Constraints method (mapping from portable to provider-specific) and Instance.Constraints (mapping the other way); this localises the necessary knowledge.
[15:42] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: and at no point does the provider have to decide how its constraints work *alongside* portable constraints
[15:42] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: it can choose a semantic model that fits the domain it has to work with
[15:44] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i *think* this will produce a system where the results are more predictable and the model to the user is clearer, but i may well be wrong!
[15:45] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I still feel like we haven't had an answer to the question of what happens when you specify nonsensical provider constraints
[15:46] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: well, in the first instance, we can have the juju command call Constraints on the local environ to make sure it understands them
[15:47] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so we error out when incompatible constraints are specified?
[15:47] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, just like would would anyway?
[15:47] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, is this not the problem we are trying to resolve>
[15:48] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: using portable constraints, there are no incompatible constraints, right?
[15:48] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, yes, if that's all you're using
[15:51] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: so we could make the environ give an error for incompatible provider-specific constraints (so that the user knows in advance that no machine will ever satisfy the constraint), but i don't *think* that's the essence of the problem we're trying to resolve
[15:52] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, or we could just treat it as no-constraint-at-all, and then we'd do something useful to the best of our ability
[15:53] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i'd prefer not to do that. if we have a constraint, i think it should be binding.
[15:53] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: but i think we should make it obvious in the status when a constraint cannot be satisfied.
[15:54] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, +0, +1
[15:54] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it depends chiefly on how you phrase it
[15:54] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, what's your position on the prefer-near/prefer-far concept?
[15:55] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: remind me of that concept, please
[15:55] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: are you talking about placement?
[15:55] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it's a rough suggestion I made in response to the os-scheduler-hints business
[15:56] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, no more than we have been already (in that constraints is about "placement" of machines on instances)
[15:56] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ah, i'm not sure i saw it.
[15:56] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I think we had a discussion about the thread
[15:57] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, maybe it was in a followup
[15:57] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: constraints, to me, is about constraining the capabilities of a given machine, irrespective of any other entities in the system.
[15:57] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, tldr: it was confirmed that the use case that prompted os-scheduler-hints was "I want my instances to be exposed to different risks"
[15:58] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: placement, to me, is about constraining *where* a machine goes relative to some other machine
[15:58] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so what is your plan for expressing this use case?
[15:58] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i think i wouldn't try to abuse the constraint syntax to do it
[15:59] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: currently the constraint language is entirely separate from the juju state namespace. with prefer-near etc, i don't think we'd want it to be.
[15:59] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: because you'd want to talk about these things in terms of juju concepts like units or services.
[15:59] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, yes, exactly
[16:00] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, of course we want to be able to express this use case in a clear and succinct way
[16:00] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: so i'd suggest that we don't try to shoehorn it into constraints, but design a specific feature to do it
[16:01] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it is your personal definition of constraints that makes the shoehorn necessary
[16:01] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, constraints are the feature by which we expose the differing capabilities of the places where services' code is actually run
[16:02] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: we have nice simple rules for constraints: "this machine satisfies that constraint"; "this machine does not". with prefer-near etc, we're breaking that model.
[16:03] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so if people want to specify placement, we should expose a separate provider-specific vocabulary in order to do so?
[16:03] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: nope. i think we should have some portable syntax, e.g. deploy --near other-service
[16:04] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, and new verbs for changing affinity and suchlike?
[16:04] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: that kind of thing, yes
[16:05] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so, from a user point of view, how is that different to a constraint other than in tedious difference in specification?
[16:06] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: it's a preference rather than a constraint
[16:06] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: and... does it make sense to have these attributes at an environment level?
[16:07] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, probably not settable at, no
[16:07] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, unsettable constraints are nothing new though
[16:07] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, specifically, series
[16:07] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, (apart from anything else, that is not a hardware constraint ;p)
[16:07] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: how is series unsettable?
[16:08] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, how would you go about setting it?
[16:08] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it is determined by the charm, full stop
[16:08] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ah, so it wouldn't be a constraint attribute at all, right?
[16:09] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: hmm, except when resolved in an actual instance.
[16:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ok, it's a separate thing that requires matching etc but is not a constraint
[16:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so far you have proposed two kinds of constraint that can share names, and two new mechanisms that look and smell very much like constraints to the average user
[16:09] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I do not think this is moving towards simplicity
[16:10] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i think it is actually simpler, because responsibilities are clearly delineated
[16:11] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: and we don't need to try to understand what it means to combine m1.small with mem=32G
[16:11] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, the user's goal AIUI is to specify things that are important to them about how their service is deployed, and to have those things happen
[16:12] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: yup
[16:13] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I do not believe that in the average user's mind there is a pre-existing crisp partition of these concepts
[16:14] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the average user will never need to use provider-constraint
[16:14] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: it's a gateway for the more provider-savvy user
[16:15] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, but what people actually do, AIUI, is to specify instance-type=m1.small and forget about cpu/mem
[16:15] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i worry that if we include provider-specific constraints in the normal constraints, that people won't see the difference and will use non-portable constraints as a matter of course.
[16:15] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I don't think your suggestion does anything to solve that problem
[16:15] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: if they do that, i think they should be made aware that they're doing something non-portable
[16:17] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i dunno. it's just a straw man. i'd like to see a counter proposal.
[16:20] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ok, opposing strawman: constraints that may have provider-specific meaning are prefixed "hint-", and are not guaranteed to work on all providers; invalid values for a particular provider are just ignored
[16:20] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, hint-instance-type=m1.medium
[16:21] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: "hint" seems wrong there - it's a genuine constraint if we're running on ec2, not just a hint.
[16:21] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ok, hint-instance-type=m1.mdeium ;p
[16:22] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ?
[16:22] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: ec2-instance-type=m1.medium ?
[16:23] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: and in general, <environ-type>-attr=val ?
[16:23] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ec2 is special
[16:23] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, openstack-instance-type is no better off
[16:23] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i don't understand, sorry
[16:23] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, the hintiness is in that if you ask ec2 for crack, it ignores you
[16:24] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: hmm. i don't think that's right. i think that if you ask ec2 for crack, and it knows it, it should tell you asap
[16:24] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, "hint-instance-type=m1.more-obvious-typo" will cause the provider to pick one and run with it
[16:25] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: but if i really have mistyped m1.medium, i don't want that to happen
[16:25] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ok, then the same applies for openstack, right?
[16:25] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: yup
[16:25] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, so openstack-instance-type is non-portable across openstacks
[16:25] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: you can't always resolve all attributes in the client.
[16:26] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, and does not fulfil the goal of gracefully ignoring irrelevant constraints -- it doesn't have the context to know that such a constraint is irrelevant rather than malformed
[16:26] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: and in the general case, the client can't resolve *anything*, because it doesn't have access to an Environ
[16:26]  * TheMue thinks about constraints for the local provider or colocation ...
[16:26] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: if we had some way of telling provider-specific constraints, that would be possible
[16:27] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: e.g. a prefix that indicates a provider-specific constraint
[16:27] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, they're really environ-specific, though, right?
[16:27] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: no, i don't think they are.
[16:28] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, even in ec2 -- environs in different regions have different instance types available
[16:28] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i think that a given provider should always provide the same set of attributes.
[16:28] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the set of possible *values* is another matter
[16:28]  * fwereade_ approves of TheMue's thoughts, and observes that we must also be able to have a provider that coherently exposes no constraints at all, and still works without crazy special-casing everywhere
[16:29] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, yeah, the set of possible values is the question ;)
[16:29] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, hum
[16:29] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, a thought
[16:29] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, *any* constraint could probably be usefully prefixed with a "hint-" prefix
[16:30] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: to impose some preference ordering on available instances?
[16:30] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, or ignore it if it's hard to do in some specific case
[16:31] <fwereade_> ;p
[16:31] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i think it's awkward. if two different instances satisfy different "hint-" constraints, which one do you choose? it seems... arbitrary.
[16:31] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: and i don't really see the use case
[16:31] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: when would you want to use hints?
[16:32] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, please state for me the problem you think we are trying to solve
[16:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i have a service i want to run and each unit has certain requirements, then i want units of that service to run on sufficiently capable machines.
[16:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: meeting break - got a 1-1
[17:10] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: back
[17:16] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, heyhey
[17:19] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I think that it is unhelpful to restrict the scope of to "sufficiently capable machines" -- you're actually trying to specify the properties of your service
[17:20] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: you're trying to specify *sufficient* properties, no? otherwise it wouldn't be constraint, it would be specification
[17:20] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, "always running with 4G of RAM" is one property, "distributed as widely as possible" is another
[17:22] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: that's an interesting take on it. that's not how i was thinking about constraints (i was thinking in terms of constraining potential machines)
[17:23] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I'm not sure I see a significant distinction between specifying that a solution must have X properties and constraining matters such that things without X properties are excluded
[17:23] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, it is all still in service of manipulating precisely how the units of a service are deployed, because that is the clay we have to work with
[17:24] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: "distributed as widely as possible" isn't a property that's possible to check for on a machine in isolation
[17:25] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, yeah, that is why I suggested *prefer*-near/far -- it is because I think it is a concept that maps clearly to a valuable feature, that different providers can and will interpret differently
[17:25] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: it seems to me that that's a fundamentally different kind of constraint
[17:25] <dimitern> is there in go a fast way to check if a key is within a map, without for range loop?
[17:25] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, soft vs hard?
[17:26] <fwereade_> dimitern, _, ok := m[k]
[17:26] <rogpeppe> dimitern: if x, ok := m[key]; ok { ... }
[17:26] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i don't really know what a "soft" constraint means.
[17:26] <dimitern> of course! :) I must need a brake already :)
[17:27] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: does it mean some kind of preference-ordering?
[17:27] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, The aim of constraint optimization is to find a solution to the problem whose cost, evaluated as the sum of the cost functions, is maximized or minimized. The regular constraints are called hard constraints, while the cost functions are called soft constraints.
[17:28] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: so each provider implements its own constraint optimiser?
[17:29] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, well, no... just a cost function, surely?
[17:29] <dimitern> and given x, ok := m[k]; will changing x change m[k], assuming m is map[string][]T ? i.e. x = append(x, y) <=> m[k] = append(m[k], y) ?
[17:29] <rogpeppe> dimitern: no
[17:29] <rogpeppe> dimitern: same as slice range or function calls, the variable is a copy of the original
[17:30] <dimitern> rogpeppe: ok, tyvm
[17:30] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, not even that, actually
[17:30] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, Distance(inst1, inst2 Instance) float
[17:31] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: so the provider has to do an n^2 algorithm through all instances to find a result?
[17:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: istm that if we leave out soft constraints, we have a very simple system that's sufficient for a great many needs (and certainly for 13.04)
[17:33] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, when would we want to do that?
[17:33] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: when optimising, no?
[17:33] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, m*n where each of m and n will already be constrained, I think
[17:34] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, I probably wouldn't recommend using them at serious scale
[17:35] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, but I think it solves a problem that people are already having at a small scale
[17:35] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, and it expresses it in a useful language
[17:36] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: could you put together some text that describes the same scenarios that my straw-man above did, (i.e. the flow of information from deploy specification to actual provider deployment)?
[17:37] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i have a very concrete idea of how my idea would work, but am quite unclear about how your thoughts might pan out
[17:37] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, sorry, for what scenario? this one right now?
[17:37] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, of the flow of the whole thing?
[17:38] <fwereade_> s/of the/or the/
[17:38] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: the same kind of structure that i had in the above paste
[17:38] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: except that it should probably mention how prefer-near etc would work too
[17:39] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: i might post my straw man to juju-dev for all to knock down
[17:41] <fwereade_> rogpeppe, ok -- I have to stop now, but I will try to write something :)
[17:41] <rogpeppe> fwereade_: thanks
[21:58] <rogpeppe1> davecheney: yo!
[22:14] <rogpeppe1> davecheney: ping
[22:17] <davecheney> hey
[22:17] <davecheney> ack
[22:17] <davecheney> two secs
[22:29] <davecheney> rogpeppe1: sorry, have to go afk for a bit (family stuff)
[22:29] <rogpeppe1> davecheney: ok. any chance you'll be around for a chat in the next hour?