[01:30] <nigelb> wgrant: You never know :D
[20:05] <Corey> Howdy.  I'm trying to understand why I get a failure message on upload (specifically that the Changes file must be signed with a valid GPG signature), yet... it built my package anyway.
[20:06] <Ampelbein> Corey: Known issue. bug 798957
[20:06] <Corey> Ampelbein: Ahhh...
[20:06] <Corey> I was tearing my hair out over that.  Thanks. :-)
[20:21] <Corey> File zeromq_2.1.10.orig.tar.gz already exists in Primary Archive for Ubuntu, but uploaded version has different contents. <-- Hmm, hitting that issue for a few packages.
[20:21] <Corey> Even after I removed the original from the upload.
[20:25] <Corey> The canonically correct solution is: downloading the pristine original tarball from the location pointed in the rejection message;, but I'm not sure where that would live. :-)
[20:28] <micahg> Corey: pull-lp-source zeromq will get you that tarball
[20:28] <Corey> micahg: Ah, thanks!
[20:28] <micahg> it's in precise ATM
[20:28] <Corey> micahg: Understood, thanks.
[20:30] <Corey> micahg: After that, same error, and the orig is never uploaded.
[20:31] <Corey> Ah, I think I have to rebuild.
[20:31] <micahg> Corey: you want to create the source with debuild -S -sd
[20:32] <Corey> micahg: The man page doesn't say what -s does.
[20:33] <micahg> Corey: -sd is a flag passed to dpkg-buildpackage which uploads the .diff and .dsc only
[20:34] <Corey> micahg: And this is all based on a gzip timestamp?
[20:34] <micahg> no
[20:34] <Corey> micahg: I did this procedure for a few packages, half of them "just worked" the rest keep whining about orig.tar.gz not being the same.
[20:36] <micahg> ah, that's your question :), the .orig.tar.gz check is based off of the md5sum I believe
[20:36] <Corey> micahg: Hmm.  So the procedure I've been doing is more or less  apt-get source sourcename; cd package-name; debuild -S; dput PPA packagename.changes
[20:37] <Corey> Should I replace apt-get sourcename with pull-lp-sources?
[20:37] <micahg> Corey: yeah, you want debuild -S -sd unless you're adding a new upstream
[20:37] <Corey> micahg: The entire goal here is "I don't want to have to install five PPAs for this package to work, I want to source it out of one repository."
[20:40] <micahg> Corey: let's move to #ubuntu-packaging
[21:38] <Corey> Is there a "correct" way to copy a PPA for the scenario of "I want to have a testing repository but the PPA itself should only have the stable version in it?"
[21:38] <Corey> I don't know if branching a repository works, or if I should duplicate it.
[21:40] <micahg> Corey: there is a copy packages link on the +packages page of the PPA
[21:45] <Corey> micahg: That... would have been a lot easier than rebuilding all of them. :-)
[22:22] <broder> what am i supposed to do if i get an oops loading a bug page? do i just open a bug against launchpad with the oops identifier?
[22:22] <broder> oh i see, it has a massive number of duplicates


[07:26] <tsdgeos> mzanetti: Cimi: the Qt crasher has been merged can you re-review https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/two_see_more_bugfix/+merge/234340 ?
[07:27] <tsdgeos> Cimi: and i fixed your comments in https://code.launchpad.net/~aacid/unity8/category_view_invisible_in_preview_mode/+merge/231844 i think
[07:31] <Cimi> morning
[07:32] <tsdgeos> @unity8: comments on my last comment of https://code.launchpad.net/~dobey/unity8/purchase-unprogress/+merge/234747 ?
[07:47] <Cimi> tsdgeos, any idea on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity8/+bug/1370618 ?
[07:47] <Cimi> tsdgeos, is it due to the overvew?
[07:47] <tsdgeos> don't know
[07:48] <tsdgeos> but not worth investing time now that we're killing the overview anyway
[07:49] <Cimi> tsdgeos, if is due to overview, yes
[07:49] <Cimi> tsdgeos, otherwise we will still have it
[07:49] <tsdgeos> if we still have it
[07:49] <tsdgeos> we can have a look then
[07:49] <Cimi> tsdgeos, do you shrink the view when applying the transition effect?
[07:49] <tsdgeos> i do lots of things to the view
[07:50] <tsdgeos> shrinking is not specially one of them afaik
[07:50] <tsdgeos> but it may be in there
[07:50] <Cimi> tsdgeos, so it is likely it, or the usual but of mir not updating the frame
[07:50] <Cimi> we will see
[07:50] <tsdgeos> yep
[07:50] <Cimi> usual bug
[07:57] <tsdgeos> marcustomlinson: looks good now :)
[07:58] <tsdgeos> marcustomlinson: do you think you can bring the
[07:58] <tsdgeos> 137	+ }
[07:58] <tsdgeos> 138	+ else {
[07:58] <tsdgeos> to just
[07:58] <tsdgeos> } else {
[07:58] <tsdgeos> ?
[07:58] <marcustomlinson> tsdgeos: k sure
[07:58] <tsdgeos> cool
[07:58] <tsdgeos> thanks for the patch :)
[07:59] <tsdgeos> i'll wait for CI to run to top approve
[08:01] <marcustomlinson> tsdgeos: cool, pushed
[08:06] <Cimi> tsdgeos, https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/two_see_more_bugfix/+merge/234340
[08:06] <tsdgeos> Cimi: we've always checked id
[08:06] <tsdgeos> no?
[08:07] <Cimi> tsdgeos, I thought we checked item before, no?
[08:07] <tsdgeos> not that i know
[08:07] <tsdgeos> or maybe someone did
[08:07] <Cimi> 62	-        property Item expandedCategoryItem: null
[08:07] <Cimi> 63	+        property string expandedCategoryId: ""
[08:07] <tsdgeos> ah yes
[08:07] <tsdgeos> someone broke it :D
[08:07] <tsdgeos> before people broke it
[08:07] <tsdgeos> i used to check id
[08:08] <tsdgeos> checking item is bad
[08:08] <tsdgeos> because if you scroll a lot and back
[08:08] <tsdgeos> you'll have the item destroyed
[08:08] <tsdgeos> and that's why you have to use id
[08:08] <Cimi> good point
[08:08] <Cimi> tsdgeos, now question is
[08:08] <tsdgeos> just that someone approved the thing without me realizing :D
[08:08] <Cimi> tsdgeos, id is always unique?
[08:08] <tsdgeos> it is
[08:08] <tsdgeos> scopes need that
[08:08] <Cimi> ok, but no ay you can write a scope and crash the dash, right?
[08:09] <tsdgeos> i guess there's millions
[08:09] <tsdgeos> like doing
[08:09] <tsdgeos> int *a = 0; *a = 33; in the code :D
[08:09] <tsdgeos> pstolowski: can you confirm that inside a single scope category id have to be different?
[08:09] <Cimi> tsdgeos, if we do public scopes, that you can install from the store, we need to be sure nothing weird happens
[08:10] <Cimi> tsdgeos, otherwise having scopes in separate processes starts to be a really good idea
[08:10] <Cimi> tsdgeos, so if a bad developer writes a bad scope, unity8-dash is safe
[08:11]  * Cimi just thought of a burger scope with all the best burgers in town
[08:12] <tsdgeos> ;)
[08:16] <tsdgeos> Cimi: fixed https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/two_see_more_bugfix/+merge/234340 again
[08:17] <Cimi> tsdgeos, let's wait for the other comment
[08:18] <tsdgeos> Cimi: which one?
[08:18] <Cimi> tsdgeos, Ids
[08:18] <tsdgeos> ah
[08:18] <tsdgeos> i'm pretty sure that's right
[08:18] <tsdgeos> as i commented there we used to do that
[08:18] <tsdgeos> and it was fixed because someone thought it was better when it was clearly not
[08:19] <tsdgeos> but sure, let's wait for pstolowski
[08:20] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, otp
[09:14] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, yes, categories have to be unique within a single scope
[09:14] <tsdgeos> Cimi: ↑↑
[09:15] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, Cimi and scopes API will reject an attempt to create a category with same id
[09:15] <Cimi> pstolowski, that is what I wanted to her
[09:15] <Cimi> good
[09:16] <Cimi> pstolowski, we have some code checking for id, which could potentially freak out in case of identical ones
[09:16] <Cimi> pstolowski, since we want to be able to install scopes from any dev, I wanted to make sure we were safe from this side
[09:18] <pstolowski> Cimi, did you have a chance to explore/discuss the stuff we discussed 2 days ago about disabling clicks for new results for 100ms?
[09:19] <Cimi> pstolowski, dammit I forgot
[09:19] <Cimi> pstolowski, will do now
[09:56] <Cimi> tsdgeos, in two see more bugfix
[09:57] <tsdgeos> yep?
[09:57] <Cimi> why do we need all these qround ?
[09:57] <tsdgeos> because LVWPH code is crap
[09:57] <tsdgeos> basically
[09:57] <Cimi> maybe only contentY requires, no?
[09:57] <tsdgeos> all these
[09:57] <tsdgeos> you mean 2, no?
[09:57] <tsdgeos> there's no more
[09:57]  * tsdgeos checks
[09:59] <Cimi> tsdgeos, also shrkinking
[09:59] <Cimi> typo
[10:11] <tsdgeos> Cimi: ok, so the qRounds
[10:12] <tsdgeos> let me try to explain why they are there
[10:12] <Cimi> tsdgeos, I guess, rounding issues
[10:12] <Cimi> tsdgeos, but are all of them required?
[10:13] <tsdgeos> Cimi: yes both are
[10:13] <tsdgeos> so thign is
[10:13] <tsdgeos> LVWPH needs to show the header when you scroll up
[10:13] <tsdgeos> but not always
[10:13] <tsdgeos> for example if you are going up because of an overshoot, it doesn't
[10:13] <tsdgeos> so it uses a few heuristics to try to guess what's happening
[10:13] <tsdgeos> the qrounds are needed because
[10:14] <tsdgeos> we use perpixelscrolling in the view, so contentY will almost always be integer but not the contentHeight
[10:14] <tsdgeos> then if we are shrking the view
[10:15] <tsdgeos> it may happen that contentHegiht is smaller contentY+height because of those "rounding issues"
[10:15] <tsdgeos> and then the heuristic decides we have to show the header
[10:15] <tsdgeos> when we have not
[10:15] <tsdgeos> that's the best explanation i can give
[10:21] <Cimi> tsdgeos, trusting you
[10:21] <tsdgeos> Cimi: at least the huge qmluitests don't break :D
[10:22] <Wellark> mzanetti: I've been sick
[10:22] <Wellark> what's up?
[10:23] <mzanetti> Wellark: nothing really... just mterry tried to remove some of the Lockscreen api because it wasn't used...
[10:23] <mzanetti> so I just told him that you'll use it eventually
[10:25] <Wellark> mzanetti: ok.
[10:26] <Cimi> tsdgeos, approved both
[10:26] <tsdgeos> Cimi: \o/
[10:26] <Cimi> tsdgeos, I guess we want to rebase more things on memory on that
[10:26] <Cimi> tsdgeos, I realised it was against aacid branch, not unity-team
[10:27] <tsdgeos> ouch
[10:27] <tsdgeos> hope not much conflicts
[10:31] <om26er> mzanetti, Hi! in latest utopic image, right edge switcher is kind of broken. bug 1371047
[10:31] <mzanetti> uh oh
[10:31] <mzanetti> so that's in the image already
[10:32] <mzanetti> om26er: k, thanks. will take care
[10:32] <mzanetti> greyback: ^
[10:32] <mzanetti> greyback: any idea what could be causing this?
[10:33] <greyback> mzanetti: not yet
[10:33] <mzanetti> seems a mismatch of app + surfaces
[10:33] <mzanetti> given that its a entry in the spread, it must be that its an element in ApplicationManager
[10:33] <greyback> right
[10:34] <mzanetti> so in applicationCreatedSurface we probably fail to match the existing one and create a new one
[11:04] <mzanetti> elopio: ping
[11:51] <facundobatista> Holas
[11:52] <pstolowski> hey
[11:54] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, Cimi btw, here is the bug for tracking the disabling of results on new search we discussed https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity-scopes-shell/+bug/1238979
[11:55] <tsdgeos> pstolowski: get someone to assign it a critical
[11:55] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, Cimi also one of the last comments from Saviq describe his proposed solution
[11:55] <tsdgeos> we're not doing anything non critical these days
[11:55] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, btw, can you link your branch to it (but not MP'ed)?
[11:56] <tsdgeos> sure, lunch
[11:56] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, isn't rtm tag == critical?
[11:56] <tsdgeos> nope
[11:56] <pstolowski> ok
[12:02] <greyback> mzanetti: here's a fix: https://code.launchpad.net/~gerboland/qtmir/duplicate-open-apps/+merge/235109
[12:03] <greyback> mzanetti: feel free to choose someone to test :)
[12:06] <mzanetti> greyback is the hero of the day :)
[13:33] <mzanetti> MacSlow: notification autopilot tests broken. please fix
[13:34] <MacSlow> mzanetti, I've recently seen numerous (random) AP-tests failing... might be of that sort?
[13:34] <MacSlow> mzanetti, which branch are you talking about here?
[13:35] <mzanetti> I assume this one https://code.launchpad.net/~macslow/unity-notifications/fix-1335787/+merge/227334
[13:43] <dandrader> mzanetti, so lp:~gerboland/unity8/orientationLock got merged through "Focus first app if there are already some running when we're starting up Fixes: 1339883"
[13:44] <dandrader> mzanetti, was that intentional?
[13:44] <mzanetti> dandrader: no
[13:46] <dandrader> mzanetti, greyback is it going to break stuff if it lands without the qtmir, qtubuntu and papi counterparts?
[13:47] <mzanetti> dandrader: I don't *think* so, given I have tested the image before approving and it seemed to do fine
[13:47] <greyback> dandrader: I suspect not. We'll get extra warnings to the log
[13:47] <mzanetti> but still trying to figure what exactly this means
[13:52] <dandrader> greyback, just noticed that you have a dbusInterface in plugins/Unity/Session/orientationlock.h that's not used for anything :/
[13:55] <greyback> dandrader: that's reading a dbus property and watching it. But sure, it's not having any real effect atm
[13:59] <dandrader> greyback, really? I grepped for that variable and didn't see it mentioned anywhere besides its declaration
[14:00] <greyback> dandrader: OrientationLock.enabled is in qml/Shell.qml
[14:04] <dandrader> greyback, I still don't see it
[14:04] <greyback> dandrader: line 68?
[14:04] <dandrader> greyback,  I mean this "./plugins/Unity/Session/orientationlock.h:55:    QDBusInterface *dbusInterface;"
[14:05] <greyback> dandrader: oh oh I see what you mean. Yes oops
[14:05] <greyback> that's not used
[14:06]  * greyback surprised compiler didn't notice that
[14:52] <tsdgeos> pstolowski:  lp:~aacid/unity8/list_on_bottom_swipe
[14:52] <tsdgeos> i have there an initial implementation of the thing
[14:53] <tsdgeos> pstolowski: i understand that you'd do the sorting and making the second category actually "other" instead of "all" ?
[14:53] <tsdgeos> pstolowski: also if you can hack a branch with setFavorite enabled
[14:53] <tsdgeos> we can see what happens when you press stuff
[14:55] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, yes, i'll take care of that
[14:56] <pstolowski> tsdgeos, and thanks, that was fast!
[14:57] <tsdgeos> pstolowski: well i'm sure it needs work
[14:57] <tsdgeos> but it sets up something we can base on
[14:59] <greyback> dandrader|afk: https://code.launchpad.net/~gerboland/unity8/remove-unused-variable/+merge/235145
[15:07] <elopio> mzanetti: pong.
[15:13] <dandrader> greyback, done
[15:14] <greyback> dandrader: thanks! And well caught --  pity it wasn't during review ;)
[15:33] <mzanetti> elopio: hey, can I ask you for a favor?
[15:34] <mzanetti> elopio: when there's some time for it, could we fix unity8 AP tests so they aren't struggling with different languages?
[15:34] <mzanetti> right now a bunch of them fail if you don't have the phone set to en
[15:57] <elopio> mzanetti: we are trying to rely on objectNames, not texts. Unless it's like a name for a list item that we added during the test.
[15:57] <elopio> mzanetti: which ones have you found? To see if I have them in my radar
[16:01] <mzanetti> elopio: in the indicators there are a bunch
[16:02] <mzanetti> running unity8 tests with a non-english device should show it
[16:03] <elopio> mzanetti: they check the title, which is probably not necessary as I imagine you have QML tests that do that.
[16:04] <elopio> we should extend those autopilot tests to do something more useful than that.
[16:04] <elopio> I'll add an item on my TODO list. I should be able to work on it in ~2 weeks.
[16:04] <mzanetti> elopio: sounds reasonable... I didn't check details, just ran into this a couple of times now while landing stuff
[16:07] <dandrader_> mterry, is there a way to unlock the phone from command line?
[16:28] <greyback> mzanetti: second opinion please: I'm writing test for qtmir's DesktopFileReader. It will obviously need a desktop file to read. Is it clearer to have plain text desktop files in the repo to read, OR generate the desktop file to test in the C++ code to a temp file and read that?
[16:28] <greyback> dandrader: ^^
[16:29] <mzanetti> greyback: I for one prefer proper files
[16:29] <dandrader> greyback, can't you make the test read from a string in memory?
[16:29] <greyback> dandrader: not without plenty of work
[16:29] <dandrader> testing reading external files are potentially more brittle
[16:30] <mzanetti> having the real file there makes it easier to maintain imo
[16:30] <greyback> darn, now I'm back where I started :D
[16:30] <alecu> Cimi: hi! tsdgeos told me you may be working on this branch: https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/card-visual-tweaks/+merge/234332
[16:30] <greyback> as I'm torn between those options, for those very reasons
[16:30] <mzanetti> so I guess there's pro and cons :) do as you wish.. fwiw the launcher tests have files already
[16:31] <greyback> mzanetti: ah in that case, better be consistent
[16:31] <dandrader> greyback, when then having a pre-generated desktop file in the test dir would be the way to go...
[16:31] <mzanetti> although not much
[16:31] <dandrader> s/when/well
[16:31] <Cimi> alecu, I will, maybe tomorrow
[16:32] <greyback> tsdgeos: there?
[16:32] <alecu> Cimi: great. I've added some comments to it, because the spec seems to have been updated and there's code in the branch that should no longer be necessary
[16:33] <greyback> tsdgeos: actually, unping, I'm ok
[16:33] <Cimi> alecu, k
[16:33] <Cimi> alecu, ta
[16:43] <racarr> hmm qtmir doesn't quite sbuild...I wierded something up about the install causing it to try install without
[16:44] <racarr> qtmir(cmake)
[16:44] <racarr> trying to install without...the right priveleges?
[17:00] <tsdgeos> greyback: i am now
[17:01] <greyback> tsdgeos: it's ok, sorry for poking you
[17:01] <tsdgeos> no worries
[17:01]  * tsdgeos leaves for good
[17:24] <mterry> dandrader, yes you can unlock from command line
[17:24] <mterry> There is a dbus command you could do
[17:24] <mterry> hold on
[17:24] <mterry> dandrader, gdbus call --session --dest com.canonical.UnityGreeter --object-path / --method com.canonical.UnityGreeter.HideGreeter
[17:24] <dandrader> mterry, ok, thanks
[17:59] <racarr> Ah! I see. make install is faling because
[17:59] <racarr> debian/rules for qtmir uses this weird double build dir system for
[17:59] <racarr> building android v.normal
[18:00] <racarr> and changes the install root via an INSTALL_ROOT variable that qmake uses but cmake doesnt
[18:44] <mterry> macsl
[18:44] <mterry> whoops
[21:19] <mzanetti> alecu: ping
[21:19] <alecu> mzanetti: pong
[21:19] <mzanetti> alecu: hey, the MP you asked for is in silo 007
[21:19] <alecu> wow, I feel like a secret agent
[21:20] <mzanetti> :D
[21:20] <alecu> mzanetti: thanks, I'll give it a round of testing now
[21:20] <mzanetti> alecu: that silo has currently one issue. apps don't start from the launcher. I have fixed that and am kicking a rebuild
[21:20] <mzanetti> alecu: but other than that it passed my manual testing, so should be good for you try the purchase thing
[21:20] <alecu> great
[22:37] <racarr> I wonder if its ok not to build qtmir-desktop for armhf
[22:37] <racarr> ugh
[22:37] <racarr> I guess it should build
[22:55] <racarr> Wheeeeeeeeee something built
[22:56] <racarr> cross built that is


[00:11] <dupondje> missing-license-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright paragraph 8 gpl-2+
[00:11] <dupondje> eh, I don't get it :(
[00:12] <jtaylor> its GPL-2+
[00:12] <jtaylor> and you need the header in the file
[00:15] <dupondje> jtaylor: http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-cryptsetup/cryptsetup/trunk/debian/copyright?revision=906&view=markup
[00:15] <dupondje> quite right no ?
[00:18] <jtaylor> I see no issue besides the wrong format url
[00:18] <jtaylor> the dep5 lintian check is a bit weird at times
[00:18] <Zhenech> dupondje, at line 40, split it up and make a separate "license: blah" block where you define the text of the license
[00:18] <jtaylor> the report does not necessarily match the real error
[00:19] <Zhenech> so you have files…\ncopyright…\nlicense..\n\nlicense…\ntext
[00:20] <jtaylor> is that really necessary in dep3?
[00:20] <Zhenech> at least for the checker
[00:21] <Zhenech> and my personal oppinion is that it is more readable tha way
[00:21] <Zhenech> and the url is now final: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/
[00:21] <Zhenech> Stand-alone License paragraphs can be used to provide the full license text for a given license once, instead of repeating it in each Files paragraph that refers to it. The first line of the License field must be a single license short name or a short name followed by a license exception.
[00:22] <dupondje> I changed to Format: http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/, and the error is gone now :s
[00:25] <dupondje> getting cryptsetup package in a better health :D
[01:13] <Gaming4JC> How much do I have to pay to hire a MOTU to push ia32libs into natty? :D
[01:13] <Gaming4JC> the one with LibOpenGL ofc :)
[01:19] <EvilResistance> an infinite amount
[01:20] <EvilResistance> Gaming4JC:  show a need for it to be updated, complete an SRU, and *maybe* it'll be updated, but not in main, in natty-updategs
[01:20] <EvilResistance> natty-updates *
[01:20] <EvilResistance> (according to how i've been explained the process)
[01:22] <Gaming4JC> Well,  the bug has been reported I've not done an SRU. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ia32-libs/+bug/821100/
[01:23] <Gaming4JC> I'll send you an https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_algorithm ;)
[01:23] <Gaming4JC> infinite amount
[01:23] <Gaming4JC> lol.
[01:25] <Gaming4JC> looks like another Dev already mentioned it was SRU'able' actually. And it seems to be a workflow not a form to write up.
[01:31] <Gaming4JC> too bad the bug never made it to ... http://people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-archive/pending-sru
[01:31] <Gaming4JC> :/
[01:32] <Gaming4JC> If I could find any documentation I'd compile ia32libs myself
[01:32] <Gaming4JC> :)
[09:52]  * valdur55 is away: I'm busy
[11:52] <verwilst> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/servercloud-p-php54 < will php 5.4 be included in precise? anyone knows?
[11:54] <geser> ajmitch: ^^ didn't you experiment with php 5.4?
[18:59] <ajmitch> geser: I did, but that's not my decision to make :)
[19:27] <plipp1> Could you help me navigate a bit? https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/unity/+bug/923668
[19:30] <plipp1> "Changed in Unity",  "Changed in Unity (Ubuntu)",  "Changed in ayatana-design"..
[19:33] <plipp1> Apparently a fix has been committed upstream (ayatana-design). Triaged in "Unity" & assigned,  Triaged and unassigned in "Unity Ubuntu".
[19:34] <plipp1> However, milestone is set to "unity backlog" in 'Unity', and "Ubuntu ubuntu-12.04-beta-2"...
[19:35] <plipp1> "unity backlog" sounds to me that it's unclear when it will be fixed, but in Ubuntu the milestone is set (regardless of this fact) nor is anyone assigned to it (which makes sense as there's nothing to be done yet, I guess).
[19:35] <plipp1> Any thoughts on my ramblings?
[19:38] <Laney> I think that #ubuntu-unity will likely know more, but possibly not on a weekend.
[19:39] <plipp1> Also, "Fix committed", shouldn't there be a link to the commit? I have no idea where to find stuff (yet).
[19:39] <plipp1> Laney: Well, it's really more of a general question in how things usually work out
[19:39] <plipp1> In case this is "normal"
[19:40] <Laney> The workflow being applied here is goign to be specific to these projects
[19:42] <plipp1> Laney: Ok. I thought there might be a unified process on how to commit to a Ubuntu milestone
[19:42] <plipp1> As in, "don't promise stuff you won't keep anyway" :)


[11:21] <andygraybeal> wake up wake up
[11:22] <andygraybeal> today i sgonna be a goooood day
[11:22] <andygraybeal> yesterday was awesome
[11:22] <andygraybeal> omg
[11:22] <andygraybeal> winter was very hard
[11:22] <Unit193> I've been awake for hours. :P
[11:22] <Unit193> Happy easter.  I'm personally very fond of winter.
[11:23] <andygraybeal> yea come february ... i start to wonder about my sanity
[13:25] <belkinsa> Happy Easter all (this includes Orthodox).