Stuff

Oct 18 12:00:42 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Introduction (jpr) | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 12:00:44 <rodrigo>	nvidia works out of the box
Oct 18 12:00:51 <jpr>	Welcome to the openSUSE GNOME Team meeting!
Oct 18 12:00:54 <cyberorg>	rodrigo, i hear good things about 8.42 drivers
Oct 18 12:00:59 <btimothy>	cyberorg: so you think that the problem in https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=326829  ... is that they just need to enable the switcher plugin?
Oct 18 12:01:01 <rodrigo>	cyberorg: ssshh,. meeting now
Oct 18 12:01:02 <bugbot>	openSUSE bug 326829 in openSUSE 10.3 (GNOME) "Keybindings are not working" [Critical,New]
Oct 18 12:01:04 <rodrigo>	:)
Oct 18 12:01:08 <jpr>	I'm really excited up about the channel activity the last couple of days, lots of people helping each other and lots of good dev discussion too.
Oct 18 12:01:17 <jpr>	Just a note, this week we are experimenting a little bit with the meeting format so it might not be quite like our past meetings - captain_meeting will keep us in line.
Oct 18 12:01:33 <jpr>	our experiment this week is with time limits
Oct 18 12:01:42 <jpr>	and grouping development items at the end
Oct 18 12:02:03 <jpr>	with that, i think we can jump right in
Oct 18 12:02:23 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Bug plan status (federico and rodrigo) | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 12:02:28 <jpr>	rodrigo: take it away
Oct 18 12:02:46 <rodrigo>	not much to add, federico has been using the whiteboard to mark bugs as we discussed
Oct 18 12:03:02 <rodrigo>	we still need people to review and file bugs
Oct 18 12:03:19 <rodrigo>	(I've started filing bugs for 10.3)
Oct 18 12:03:29 <jpr>	what kind of bugs do you need filed?
Oct 18 12:03:44 <rodrigo>	so the bug squashing thing seems quite important for the bug plan
Oct 18 12:04:02 <rodrigo>	most important bugs are the ones that make things not work
Oct 18 12:04:30 <mtgordon>	(N.B. bug squashing is going to emphasize older distros for now)
Oct 18 12:04:37 <rodrigo>	http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Bugs#Bug_queries
Oct 18 12:04:49 <rodrigo>	this contains the bugs federico has been marking
Oct 18 12:05:04 <rodrigo>	 gnome-function-does-not-work
Oct 18 12:05:04 <rodrigo>	 gnome-wrong-out-of-the-box
Oct 18 12:05:04 <rodrigo>	 gnome-showstopper
Oct 18 12:05:04 <rodrigo>	 gnome-crash
Oct 18 12:05:04 <rodrigo>	 gnome-usability
Oct 18 12:05:14 <rodrigo>	those are the keywords to use on the status whiteboard
Oct 18 12:05:47 <rodrigo>	if people could tag bugs as they file them, it would be great
Oct 18 12:05:53 *	rodrigo forgot btw :)
Oct 18 12:06:24 <suseROCKS>	I've been filing bugs where desktop themes crash apps.  Is that defined as gnome-usability?
Oct 18 12:06:26 <rodrigo>	mtgordon: right, could we do it also for 10.3 bugs soon?
Oct 18 12:06:42 <rodrigo>	suseROCKS: gnome-crash fits betters imo
Oct 18 12:07:11 <suseROCKS>	ok.   What defines usability?
Oct 18 12:07:14 <mtgordon>	rodrigo: Not sure it's my decision to make.  Maybe it would be better to clear 10.2 next.
Oct 18 12:07:25 <rodrigo>	mtgordon: ok
Oct 18 12:07:57 <jpr>	suseROCKS: good question
Oct 18 12:08:04 <rodrigo>	suseROCKS: usability problems, like this one for instance: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=334631
Oct 18 12:08:08 <mtgordon>	usability bugs: things which are possible but painful, unintuitive UI, ...?
Oct 18 12:08:08 <bugbot>	openSUSE bug 334631 in openSUSE 10.3 (YaST2) "1-click install opens too many dialogs" [Major,New]
Oct 18 12:08:20 <psp250>	suseROCKS: some examples: "totally misplaced buttons in dialog", dialogs steals keyboard focus
Oct 18 12:08:22 <mw>	i agree with mtgordon
Oct 18 12:08:22 <rodrigo>	that is, things work, but the GUI/way of use the app is broken or not very convenient
Oct 18 12:08:38 <jpr>	rodrigo: a definition like we have for wrong out of the box would be good
Oct 18 12:08:43 <mw>	also focus issues and other obnoxious behaviour, like psp250 says
Oct 18 12:08:44 <jpr>	on the page
Oct 18 12:09:00 <rodrigo>	AI: rodrigo -> add definition of usability category to Bugs page
Oct 18 12:09:14 <jpr>	and anything else missing for the tags
Oct 18 12:09:21 <suseROCKS>	May I suggest then, listing the categories, a brief explanation of what falls under each?
Oct 18 12:09:30 <rodrigo>	yeah, good point
Oct 18 12:10:06 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 12:10:10 <jpr>	other questions for rodrigo?
Oct 18 12:10:13 <jpr>	or comments?
Oct 18 12:10:27 <munkii>	so we should file usability issues and improvements as bugs?
Oct 18 12:10:41 <munkii>	sorry i just popped in
Oct 18 12:10:47 *	nags has quit ("Linux Desktop Testing Project - http://ldtp.freedesktop.org")
Oct 18 12:10:51 <rodrigo>	munkii: yes
Oct 18 12:11:04 *	AlanClark (i=AlanClar@nat/novell/x-7932b1a3f3bfb24d) has joined #opensuse-gnome
Oct 18 12:11:05 <suseROCKS>	or as enhancement requests?
Oct 18 12:11:14 <mtgordon>	Yeah, that can be a fine line.
Oct 18 12:11:22 <rodrigo>	munkii: and if you add the gnome-usability thing to the status whiteboard, you'll get free beer :)
Oct 18 12:11:30 <mtgordon>	I think radical changes would be enhancement requests.
Oct 18 12:11:32 <rodrigo>	suseROCKS: I see enhancements as new features
Oct 18 12:11:33 <munkii>	ok, except a whole barrel of bugs from me soon ;-)
Oct 18 12:11:49 <jpr>	radical changes should usually be done in conjunction with upstream as well
Oct 18 12:12:05 <munkii>	rodrigo: that would be awfully sweet of you =)
Oct 18 12:12:09 <jpr>	munkii: maybe you want to give federico and rodrigo a sample first
Oct 18 12:12:19 <munkii>	now?
Oct 18 12:12:24 <jpr>	munkii: after the meeting
Oct 18 12:12:33 <mtgordon>	I'm thinking of spatial nautilus as an old example of a usability enhancement.
Oct 18 12:12:35 <jpr>	munkii: just so they can see how the criteria is working
Oct 18 12:12:46 <jpr>	AI for munkii to give rodrigo and federico bug samples
Oct 18 12:12:47 <munkii>	things like.. ah, i was going start a big rant
Oct 18 12:12:47 <rodrigo>	btw, take care when writing the status whiteboard, it doesn't deal with typos
Oct 18 12:13:01 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 12:13:04 <jpr>	anything else?
Oct 18 12:13:05 <suseROCKS>	can I suggest one more category?
Oct 18 12:13:06 <rodrigo>	so if you write the keywords incorrectly, the bug would get lost
Oct 18 12:13:11 <jpr>	suseROCKS: yes, go
Oct 18 12:13:37 <suseROCKS>	It probaby could fall into any of the other categories, and I know I've been talking about it a bunch lately, but I'd really like to see a dedicated a11y category.
Oct 18 12:13:54 <suseROCKS>	If for no other reason than to heighten people's awareness to consider accessibility when developing.
Oct 18 12:14:10 <mtgordon>	Is there maybe already a keyword for a11y?
Oct 18 12:14:31 <jpr>	suseROCKS: we can talk after, but I'd really like us to launch a a11y effort, spend a few weeks tweaking, setting up, configuring etc
Oct 18 12:14:43 <suseROCKS>	ok
Oct 18 12:14:46 <jpr>	somwhere in the next 3-4 months
Oct 18 12:14:51 <jpr>	ok, great
Oct 18 12:14:55 <jpr>	time has expired :-)
Oct 18 12:14:57 <rodrigo>	yeah, sounds better as a themed bug fix
Oct 18 12:15:01 <rodrigo>	ok
Oct 18 12:15:04 <jpr>	please continue after the meeting if necessary
Oct 18 12:15:06 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Ancient distro bug squash (mtgordon) | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 12:15:10 <jpr>	mtgordon: take it away
Oct 18 12:15:10 <mtgordon>	OK
Oct 18 12:15:42 <mtgordon>	So we'd like to blow through the older bugs (9.*, 10.0, 10.1) to clear out deadwood and move still relevant bugs to places where they might get fixed.
Oct 18 12:15:50 <mtgordon>	(expecting lots of chaff, little wheat)
Oct 18 12:16:03 <mtgordon>	Last week it was proposed that we spend a Friday on this.
Oct 18 12:16:19 <mtgordon>	IMHO, tomorrow would be insufficient notice.
Oct 18 12:16:28 <mtgordon>	So I'm going to propose Friday of next week.
Oct 18 12:16:36 <mtgordon>	26th
Oct 18 12:16:59 <mtgordon>	There aren't that many, so I'm hoping we'd be able to get through them all in one day.
Oct 18 12:17:16 <mtgordon>	Thoughts? Feedback?
Oct 18 12:17:28 <jpr>	did you talk to apokryphos about project wide days?
Oct 18 12:17:32 <mtgordon>	The question of the next step has already come up.
Oct 18 12:17:33 <munkii>	mtgordon: problem is, some bugs are still persistent in older distros, we have to assume nobody is using them anymore in order to close an unfixed bug
Oct 18 12:17:46 <mtgordon>	jpr: Ugh, no, I didn't.
Oct 18 12:18:09 *	apokryphos stumbles in
Oct 18 12:18:21 <mtgordon>	munkii: Well, there are some where we can fairly assume that they won't get fixed for those older distros.
Oct 18 12:18:35 <jpr>	yes, not worth the effort
Oct 18 12:19:03 <mtgordon>	apokryphos: Any project-wide bug squashing events in the near future?
Oct 18 12:19:07 <rodrigo>	it would be good to have howtos for people to install other virtualization software if they don't have vmware licenses
Oct 18 12:19:21 <rodrigo>	or vmware images for the player (which is free, tright?)
Oct 18 12:19:28 <apokryphos>	mtgordon: bug-squashing turns into bug-hunting frequently :o
Oct 18 12:19:32 <jpr>	virtualbox is getting a lot of use
Oct 18 12:20:01 <jpr>	http://en.opensuse.org/Virtualbox
Oct 18 12:20:04 <mtgordon>	apokryphos: We're looking into clearing out bugs from older versions (10.1 and before).
Oct 18 12:20:07 <apokryphos>	mtgordon: a kind of i.e. 'gnome bug day' would probably be helpful, where i.e. tell anyone to come into the channel and report bugs, and where packagers/devs and others can work on resolving them
Oct 18 12:20:16 <rodrigo>	AI: write HOWTOs for virtualization software
Oct 18 12:20:32 <jpr>	apokryphos: yes, we discussed that too, as a separate event
Oct 18 12:20:46 <apokryphos>	mtgordon: I don't think there'll be a project-wide one until a few stages into the alphas
Oct 18 12:20:49 <jpr>	rodrigo: it already exists :-)
Oct 18 12:20:59 <mtgordon>	apokryphos: Fair enough, thanks.
Oct 18 12:21:22 <rodrigo>	jpr: for vmware only AFAIK, or am I wrong?
Oct 18 12:21:29 <apokryphos>	group-specific ones are a very good idea, I think, though
Oct 18 12:21:36 <jpr>	rodrigo: see the above link
Oct 18 12:21:55 <jpr>	mtgordon: ok, so Friday Oct 26?
Oct 18 12:22:08 <mtgordon>	jpr: That's the proposal, yes.
Oct 18 12:22:11 <jpr>	mtgordon: we'll need a wiki setup of GNOME bug days?
Oct 18 12:22:45 <mtgordon>	jpr: To explain the concept, give people an idea of what to expect, plus schedule?
Oct 18 12:22:57 <AlbertoP>	hmm NM patch :-?
Oct 18 12:23:01 *	AlbertoP is worried
Oct 18 12:23:05 <jpr>	yes and any rules you might want to post
Oct 18 12:23:13 <jpr>	AlbertoP: meeting in progress :-)
Oct 18 12:23:15 <mtgordon>	jpr: Do we want to log IRC on bug days for posterity?
Oct 18 12:23:19 <AlbertoP>	oops sorry ^^
Oct 18 12:23:39 <mtgordon>	jpr: I expect the rules will evolve over time.
Oct 18 12:24:14 <mtgordon>	Rule #1: Leave my mother out of it!
Oct 18 12:24:19 <jpr>	mtgordon: a) maybe b) yes, but lets have a template page to record those rules AI
Oct 18 12:24:30 <mtgordon>	Fair enough.
Oct 18 12:24:45 <jpr>	any other questions on bug squash day?
Oct 18 12:24:50 <jpr>	comments on the timing?
Oct 18 12:24:58 <jpr>	volunteers to help mtgordon organize?
Oct 18 12:25:00 <mtgordon>	By rules you mean guidelines on when/how to handle the bugs?
Oct 18 12:25:25 <jpr>	mtgordon: yes, like if we move a bug to opensuse 11.0
Oct 18 12:25:36 <jpr>	i presume we want to mark the bug as OS 10.3
Oct 18 12:25:45 <jpr>	and also tag it from the bug plan if possible
Oct 18 12:25:54 <munkii>	jpr: is it expected to be a one time job, or something that we'd do regularly?
Oct 18 12:26:08 <jpr>	mtgordon: ^^ want to take that?
Oct 18 12:26:21 <mtgordon>	I'm not sure we'll need to clear out really old bugs very often.
Oct 18 12:26:25 <mtgordon>	In theory, we shouldn't have to.
Oct 18 12:26:26 *	bradya (n=banderso@137.65.168.48) has joined #opensuse-gnome
Oct 18 12:26:43 <mtgordon>	I think we'll want to look at 10.2 bugs later, as a separate project.
Oct 18 12:26:43 <jpr>	but holding bug days in general?
Oct 18 12:26:50 <mtgordon>	Eventually 10.3 bugs.
Oct 18 12:27:09 <mtgordon>	We could do this on a regular basis.
Oct 18 12:27:31 <munkii>	i'd like that
Oct 18 12:27:34 <mtgordon>	I'm not sure that's set in stone, but it's a distinct possibility.
Oct 18 12:27:42 *	calvin (n=calvin@205.208.235.225) has joined #opensuse-gnome
Oct 18 12:27:44 <munkii>	there will always be bugs that needs squashing ^_^
Oct 18 12:27:45 <rodrigo>	yeah, regular bug hunting days will help a lot
Oct 18 12:27:47 <mtgordon>	But recurring bug days would emphasize more current code.
Oct 18 12:27:59 <jpr>	for all those watching wondering how to get involved, bug hunting is a great one to learn about development and help out!
Oct 18 12:28:07 <jpr>	so talk to mtgordon
Oct 18 12:28:18 <jpr>	any last questions?
Oct 18 12:28:21 <jpr>	comments?
Oct 18 12:28:49 <apokryphos>	the KDE guys are thinking of having more information for inexperienced people to get into packaging on the wiki
Oct 18 12:29:09 <apokryphos>	..with guides for simple packaging to 'scratch an itch' (i.e. some little application)
Oct 18 12:29:25 <suseROCKS>	I'd like that
Oct 18 12:29:25 <apokryphos>	I was wondering, is this also something that someone from the gnome team could consider?
Oct 18 12:29:43 <mw>	apokryphos: we've taken some tentative steps towards doing that, but it would probably be good to combine efforts
Oct 18 12:30:03 <mtgordon>	There would be a lot of duplication otherwise.
Oct 18 12:30:06 <jpr>	yes
Oct 18 12:30:08 <jpr>	good stuff
Oct 18 12:30:18 <mw>	apokryphos: especially since packaging a gnome app isn't very different
Oct 18 12:30:24 <jpr>	AI: mw to talk to KDE team about packaging policy/itch scratching
Oct 18 12:30:33 <jpr>	ok, moving on
Oct 18 12:30:35 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Decide on next weeks theme | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 12:30:37 <apokryphos>	that would be great :)
Oct 18 12:30:47 <jpr>	so
Oct 18 12:31:20 <jpr>	one of the experiments was to see if having themed days for these meetings would be good
Oct 18 12:31:22 <jpr>	http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/Themes
Oct 18 12:31:35 <jpr>	has some ideas, they are sort of end user functionality
Oct 18 12:31:52 <jpr>	technical bugs/questions type things
Oct 18 12:31:57 <jpr>	for the samples
Oct 18 12:32:12 <jpr>	what do people think?
Oct 18 12:32:37 *	Riggwelter arrives
Oct 18 12:32:50 <jpr>	bueller?
Oct 18 12:32:51 <munkii>	Gnome UI improvement
Oct 18 12:32:58 <munkii>	\o/
Oct 18 12:33:12 <btimothy>	package management UI improvement ;)
Oct 18 12:33:18 <mtgordon>	Reminds me of Iron Chef.  "Today's theme ingredient is Bluetooth!"
Oct 18 12:33:22 <jpr>	i'm not sure how we'd theme these meetings in this context though
Oct 18 12:33:29 <rodrigo>	btimothy: /me is filing bugs for that for your pleasure :)
Oct 18 12:33:29 <Riggwelter>	jpr: They all look like they'd be imnportant
Oct 18 12:33:32 <jpr>	i could see a bug fix day
Oct 18 12:33:34 <jpr>	or days
Oct 18 12:33:37 *	jony has quit ("Leaving.")
Oct 18 12:33:37 <jpr>	focussing on that
Oct 18 12:33:38 <suseROCKS>	Are you asking whether themes are a good idea or what themes should be proposed?
Oct 18 12:33:51 <jpr>	both
Oct 18 12:33:55 <rodrigo>	jpr: yeah, themes look better to me as bug days
Oct 18 12:34:01 <munkii>	review the submitted bugs that revolves around UI?
Oct 18 12:34:06 <jpr>	the idea was originally to theme these meetings
Oct 18 12:34:15 <btimothy>	I'm wondering how well a themed meeting would actually work since I assume we'll still have non-theme-related items to go through every week
Oct 18 12:34:20 <jpr>	but the themes so far seem more suited to bug fixing days
Oct 18 12:34:23 <suseROCKS>	I think themes are a great idea.  It will spur increased participation by people who might be intimidated by a larger encompassing meeting.
Oct 18 12:34:29 <jpr>	btimothy: yah, good point
Oct 18 12:34:46 <btimothy>	and if we need to spend more time on a particular item ... we can just schedule it in to the mtg.
Oct 18 12:35:03 <jpr>	suseROCKS: so i think you are advocating a separate entity for themes other than these meetings
Oct 18 12:35:14 <btimothy>	...which I guess you could call the theme (since it'll take maybe longer than the other items)?
Oct 18 12:35:21 <jpr>	and these should probably be co-ordinated with the bug plan items?
Oct 18 12:35:37 <munkii>	jpr: they'll probably be pretty short, and kinda awkward
Oct 18 12:35:39 <jpr>	or feature implementation/polish
Oct 18 12:35:58 <jpr>	munkii: in what context, these meetings or separate bug fixing days
Oct 18 12:36:06 <mtgordon>	I can see two possible directions for themes: functionality (user-oriented), and infrastructure (developer-oriented).
Oct 18 12:36:20 <suseROCKS>	yes such as feature implemtation/polish, stuff like that.  Something that end-users are more likely to get involved in if they feel they actualy have a voice
Oct 18 12:36:21 <mtgordon>	Infrastructure might well be forward-looking and therefore ill-suited to bug days, IMHO.
Oct 18 12:36:28 <munkii>	not alot of people are interested in one theme
Oct 18 12:37:01 <munkii>	a widely themed meeting is a better idea
Oct 18 12:37:07 <jpr>	munkii: i can see either way - if you say "hey we are going to sort through all the bluetooth problems" 
Oct 18 12:37:23 <jpr>	you would get a lot of people on that day for a separate event from this meeting
Oct 18 12:37:32 <munkii>	i for one, don't use bluetooth at all, so
Oct 18 12:37:33 <jpr>	munkii: ok - can you give a concrete proposal?
Oct 18 12:38:31 <munkii>	a regular weekly meeting with one major theme and few off-topics would do just fine
Oct 18 12:38:32 *	bradya has quit ()
Oct 18 12:38:39 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 12:38:43 <jpr>	so we have two proposals
Oct 18 12:38:52 <jpr>	1) a regular weekly meeting with one major theme and few off-topics would do just fine
Oct 18 12:39:11 <suseROCKS>	And then funnel the findings of those meetings to a wiki
Oct 18 12:39:17 <jpr>	2) a separate event for fixing and reviewing all bugs in a particular topic esp. if connected to the bug plan
Oct 18 12:39:23 <mw>	i favour 2
Oct 18 12:39:25 <jpr>	comments?
Oct 18 12:39:28 <rodrigo>	I vote for 2 also
Oct 18 12:39:39 <rodrigo>	we still need the regular meetings to keep track of progress
Oct 18 12:39:42 <hpj>	2
Oct 18 12:39:42 *	btimothy favors #2
Oct 18 12:39:54 <jpr>	munkii: how would you manage 1) time wise? i'm thinking we'd want to fix the bugs in #2 as well
Oct 18 12:39:59 *	Riggwelter favours 2
Oct 18 12:40:01 <munkii>	ok, democracy sucks =P
Oct 18 12:40:06 <mtgordon>	2 is fine for things that are already supposed to work.
Oct 18 12:40:17 <suseROCKS>	I favor both 1 and 2.
Oct 18 12:40:22 <mtgordon>	It's ill-suited to forward-looking discussions, but we can find other venues for those.
Oct 18 12:40:26 <mauropm>	2 o/
Oct 18 12:40:37 <rodrigo>	mtgordon: those are projects and mini-features :)
Oct 18 12:40:38 <mw>	if we did 1), it should probably go non-developer, developer, theme.  but really, /me 2
Oct 18 12:40:40 <jpr>	mtgordon: right, but its also a good initial test forum for new things
Oct 18 12:40:46 <jpr>	ie pulseaudio when it goes in
Oct 18 12:41:00 <hpj>	maybe we can spin offadditional themed meetings if there's enough interest in one topic
Oct 18 12:41:07 <jpr>	munkii, suseROCKS : for these meetings, do you see technical themes as well or something else?
Oct 18 12:41:14 <jpr>	ie if we were to do 1)
Oct 18 12:41:17 <btimothy>	I would think that if we really needed to have this meeting themed, it would become apparent ;)
Oct 18 12:41:20 <mtgordon>	jpr: Fair enough.  I'm just saying we'll need someplace to discuss pulseaudio before it goes in.
Oct 18 12:41:42 <btimothy>	and it would consume the bulk of the metg.
Oct 18 12:41:43 <btimothy>	mtg.
Oct 18 12:41:46 <munkii>	if we had too many meetings people will eventually get bored, and we will find nothing to talk about in weekly meetins, since it'll always be the same thing
Oct 18 12:41:48 <mtgordon>	This week's theme: Hawaiian shirts
Oct 18 12:41:52 <hpj>	mtgordon: mailing lists
Oct 18 12:42:08 <suseROCKS>	JPR  I'm not sure.  I think the best thing would be to experiment with a few theme meetings first and see how users participate then go from there.  Espically if this is a new concept.
Oct 18 12:42:15 <mw>	Next week's theme: Identity in post-industrial societies
Oct 18 12:42:34 <jpr>	suseROCKS: willing to try if we have a theme suggestion
Oct 18 12:42:35 <munkii>	but i agree on separate bug related meetings though, we don't need to bore everybody with those stuff
Oct 18 12:42:46 <suseROCKS>	Will free refreshments be provided?
Oct 18 12:42:58 *	jpr hands suseROCKS a beer
Oct 18 12:43:03 <Riggwelter>	suseROCKS: They are now - \_/
Oct 18 12:43:04 <mtgordon>	punch and pie
Oct 18 12:43:22 <jpr>	so, cycling back onto the original topic
Oct 18 12:43:25 <munkii>	ok, we're getting off-topic, jpr, what's the next tropic
Oct 18 12:43:28 <jpr>	a theme for next week?
Oct 18 12:43:33 <jpr>	do we have one?
Oct 18 12:43:40 <jpr>	or do we want to work on the list some more?
Oct 18 12:43:47 <rodrigo>	I'd vote for bug hunting/fixing of the updater
Oct 18 12:43:49 <suseROCKS>	JPR... well what do you think would be a popular set of themes to start out with?  You mentioned bluetooth.    I would go with popular topics first
Oct 18 12:43:59 <rodrigo>	seems the most complained about thing
Oct 18 12:44:04 <jpr>	not sure we can do that in one of these meetings
Oct 18 12:44:12 <jpr>	but we could invite a guest start
Oct 18 12:44:14 <jpr>	star
Oct 18 12:44:19 <jpr>	from the mobile devices team
Oct 18 12:44:23 <jpr>	how does that sound?
Oct 18 12:44:28 <rodrigo>	great
Oct 18 12:44:30 <Riggwelter>	sounds lie a plan
Oct 18 12:44:34 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 12:44:43 <suseROCKS>	that's a great idea.  Anything to boost participation.
Oct 18 12:44:50 <jpr>	AI: bluetooth theme, JP to get bluetooth effort
Oct 18 12:44:53 <jpr>	good to go
Oct 18 12:44:54 <munkii>	Linus T +1
Oct 18 12:45:06 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Task Review | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 12:45:10 <munkii>	and we'll call it "meet the asshole" day
Oct 18 12:45:20 <jpr>	task review
Oct 18 12:45:34 <Riggwelter>	wow, we're behing schedule baaaad
Oct 18 12:45:35 <munkii>	ah, link to tasks?
Oct 18 12:45:41 <jpr>	http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Tasks
Oct 18 12:45:42 <rodrigo>	http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Tasks
Oct 18 12:46:19 <jpr>	for the first item, the wiki tasks, we look good
Oct 18 12:46:22 <suseROCKS>	off-topic... are the transcripts of these meetings posted?
Oct 18 12:46:33 <jpr>	yes
Oct 18 12:46:39 <jpr>	we look good except for Improve Bugs:GNOME bug reporting information
Oct 18 12:46:45 <jpr>	we really need to get that going
Oct 18 12:46:49 <rodrigo>	suseROCKS: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings
Oct 18 12:47:00 <jpr>	mtgordon last week was willing to be involved
Oct 18 12:47:02 <suseROCKS>	thanks
Oct 18 12:47:13 <jpr>	do we have a volunteer to drive that forward?
Oct 18 12:47:46 <jpr>	we need to add info for NM, Beagle, nautilus, gdm, etc
Oct 18 12:48:09 *	jpr notes suseROCKS hasn't volunteered for anything yet :-)
Oct 18 12:48:21 *	rodrigo looks at suseROCKS 
Oct 18 12:48:33 <jpr>	also psp250 was doing a nice helpful job earlier today
Oct 18 12:48:40 <jpr>	with munkii on the debug foo
Oct 18 12:48:49 <suseROCKS>	Hey I'm still dipping my feet in the water here... I want to know what I'm getting myself into first.  :-)
Oct 18 12:48:56 <jpr>	ok :-)
Oct 18 12:49:16 <jpr>	AI: find owner for Bugs:GNOME update
Oct 18 12:49:17 <jpr>	(JP)
Oct 18 12:49:22 <suseROCKS>	I admit in the past people would beg me to do things and I'd gladly take them up on it, then never get around to finishing.  We don't want that here.
Oct 18 12:49:30 <jpr>	other tasks
Oct 18 12:49:33 <jpr>	live cd
Oct 18 12:49:42 <jpr>	sreeves: any update? we need to finalize this
Oct 18 12:49:45 *	ratkinson (i=ratkinso@nat/novell/x-8f4587a42ecabb43) has left #opensuse-gnome
Oct 18 12:49:48 <sreeves>	just checked this morning and don't see the final version out yet
Oct 18 12:49:52 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 12:49:59 <jpr>	sbrabec, mw : G:S update?
Oct 18 12:50:19 <rodrigo>	jpr: Create bug plan task can be closed I guess
Oct 18 12:50:40 <jpr>	rodrigo: not yet i think, still have some details to work out
Oct 18 12:50:55 <mw>	i think G:S is still a little broken
Oct 18 12:51:12 <jpr>	mw: ok, update the ETA
Oct 18 12:51:15 <suseROCKS>	question about the task review list I just scanned...
Oct 18 12:51:31 <jpr>	in fact everyone should review the list, add ETA's where possible, the new column from magnus
Oct 18 12:51:52 <suseROCKS>	example:  Improve our package summaries and descriptions...  What's taht about and what knowledge is required?
Oct 18 12:52:02 <sbrabec>	jpr: I just released publish lock for 10.3. For 10.2 it's required to fix ugly failures:
Oct 18 12:52:22 <sbrabec>	@MKDIR_P@: no such file or directory. For many packages.
Oct 18 12:52:34 <rodrigo>	suseROCKS: you just need to go over the .spec files and put better summaries there
Oct 18 12:52:37 <jpr>	suseROCKS: its the rpm header info - first step would be to come up with some sort of consistent policy
Oct 18 12:52:43 <sbrabec>	I suspect gettext and tried to use version from Factory.
Oct 18 12:52:53 <jpr>	sbrabec: ok
Oct 18 12:53:05 <munkii>	what about -->  Review http://en.opensuse.org/Wishlist_Gnome  | Each IRC meeting | On going | Everyone
Oct 18 12:53:10 <jpr>	sbrabec, mw : can you update that in the task list ? (10.3 done, 10.2 in progress)
Oct 18 12:53:12 <munkii>	is this going to be addressed today?
Oct 18 12:53:17 <suseROCKS>	that is an interesting project...   Need more info... anyone who can help me out  after the meeting.. great.
Oct 18 12:53:31 <jpr>	munkii: good point
Oct 18 12:53:37 <mw>	we had a similar problem with intltool when working on 10.3
Oct 18 12:54:06 <jpr>	munkii: i'm not sure its worth reviewing that every time
Oct 18 12:54:20 <jpr>	munkii: but we could do wishlist packaging as a theme day
Oct 18 12:54:23 <munkii>	jpr, well, at least today?
Oct 18 12:54:25 <munkii>	ah
Oct 18 12:54:27 <munkii>	ok
Oct 18 12:54:34 <rodrigo>	munkii: we should just watch the page and file bugs for the packages suggested, imo
Oct 18 12:54:42 <jpr>	mw: oh, packaging guidelines should have you and a status
Oct 18 12:55:06 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Q&A| http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 12:55:19 <jpr>	munkii: add wishlist packaging to the theme page if you good
Oct 18 12:55:20 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 12:55:23 <jpr>	Q&A
Oct 18 12:55:34 <jpr>	(yes behind scheduled, but about 1 hour for non-dev topics)
Oct 18 12:55:38 <munkii>	yay! Q&A!
Oct 18 12:55:39 <btimothy>	I have a question for everyone ...
Oct 18 12:55:55 <jpr>	(no pre-questions today, so just start firing)
Oct 18 12:56:02 <btimothy>	if you go to http://en.opensuse.org/  and then only using your mouse, how many clicks does it take to find GNOME?
Oct 18 12:56:25 <btimothy>	if anyone has an idea of how we can improve that, please suggest or make appropriate changes to the wiki
Oct 18 12:56:28 <munkii>	btimothy, i'd guess too many, that if you even know it's there
Oct 18 12:56:31 <jpr>	is the answer "too many"?
Oct 18 12:56:31 <suseROCKS>	What should Q&A focus on?
Oct 18 12:56:47 <munkii>	suseROCKS:  anything!
Oct 18 12:57:13 <jpr>	suseROCKS: anything you want to ask
Oct 18 12:57:15 <btimothy>	the answer _is_ "too many"!
Oct 18 12:57:27 <mw>	btimothy: /GNOME should go into the sitemap, at the very least
Oct 18 12:57:35 <jpr>	btimothy: one suggestion would be to get it on the projects page as well
Oct 18 12:57:43 <mw>	btimothy: as should a number of other important jump-off pages, i expect
Oct 18 12:57:52 *	btimothy agrees
Oct 18 12:58:13 <suseROCKS>	Evolution is owned by Novell, but when I filed an enhancement request, I was told I should file at bugzilla.gnome.org.   How do users know to file here or there?
Oct 18 12:58:35 *	Phocean has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))
Oct 18 12:58:40 <jpr>	and a link to our tasks page on the main tasks page
Oct 18 12:58:41 <btimothy>	AI: Make the GNOME page more visible in the wiki
Oct 18 12:59:22 <jpr>	suseROCKS: its a bit of a fine line - evolution is primarily written by novell people, but its also part of the gnome project
Oct 18 12:59:46 <jpr>	and the evo developers like to drive their work that way (gnome centric) rather than via opensuse (novell-centric)
Oct 18 13:00:05 <jpr>	other questions?
Oct 18 13:00:08 <psp250>	Does contributing patches/fixing packages in the OBS GNOME:* branches require adding a bug or can be discussed in here?
Oct 18 13:00:16 <rodrigo>	ideally, we would have a simple bugzilla frontend that filed the bugs to the correct one
Oct 18 13:00:43 <jpr>	psp250: depends which repo i think
Oct 18 13:00:48 <jpr>	G:C does not require a bug
Oct 18 13:01:02 <suseROCKS>	Rodrigo:  That'd be a cool idea.   Sometimes, trying to find information is hard when googling.    Try googling "evolution"  :-)
Oct 18 13:01:03 <jpr>	nor would G:U during heavily development
Oct 18 13:01:04 <jpr>	(like now)
Oct 18 13:01:19 <mw>	i like bugs for G:U all the time when possible
Oct 18 13:01:20 <jpr>	psp250: if you need to get an update shipped for 10.3 or released products you will need a bug
Oct 18 13:01:27 <jpr>	mw: oh?
Oct 18 13:01:33 <jpr>	mw: we should write that down :-)
Oct 18 13:01:35 <mw>	if a package fails to build because, say, something is missing in %files, then sure, no bug
Oct 18 13:01:45 <mw>	but otherwise, the more detailed record we have of everything we've done, the better
Oct 18 13:01:54 <rodrigo>	yes
Oct 18 13:02:05 <mw>	jpr: i'll add it to our packaging page if there's consensus
Oct 18 13:02:25 <jpr>	psp250: what do you think? want to find a line between onerous and a record of what we've done
Oct 18 13:02:45 <jpr>	psp250: do you have a particular issue in mind as a test case? (the gedit thing?)
Oct 18 13:02:50 *	xcasex (n=xcasex@c-060ee655.82-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) has joined #opensuse-gnome
Oct 18 13:02:57 <jpr>	other Questions?
Oct 18 13:02:59 <psp250>	jpr: thanks, I'll stick to adding bugs then (which takes a bit longer than required for simple stuff I'd assume)
Oct 18 13:03:22 <jpr>	mw: oh man - i see an osc plugin that files the bug *for you*
Oct 18 13:03:31 <mauropm>	:O
Oct 18 13:03:40 *	mw adds that to the osc plugins todo list
Oct 18 13:03:45 <psp250>	jpr: Yes, like evolution not compiling the TNEF Attachment plugin or missing gstreamer010 plugins which have a "ok" lincense
Oct 18 13:04:27 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 13:04:44 <jpr>	LAST CALL FOR QUESTIONS
Oct 18 13:05:07 <suseROCKS>	Thanks all for letting me join in this week.
Oct 18 13:05:11 <jpr>	psp250: mw an mauropm can wrangle stuff internally, so they can be your reference
Oct 18 13:05:23 <jpr>	suseROCKS: we're here every week, try the veal
Oct 18 13:05:31 <jpr>	ok, great
Oct 18 13:05:36 <jpr>	developer meeting time
Oct 18 13:05:40 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Packaging policy (mw) | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 13:05:46 <jpr>	mw: go for it
Oct 18 13:05:50 <suseROCKS>	wait.. I wasn't eating veal now?  (stares wonderingly at his food)
Oct 18 13:06:09 <mw>	ok, apokryphos referred to this earlier.  we're working on a set of guidelines for our patches
Oct 18 13:06:24 <mw>	http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Packaging_policy
Oct 18 13:06:43 <mw>	right now it's pretty minimal, since we're basically saying #include <suse/packaging-policy.h>
Oct 18 13:06:46 <mw>	so to speak
Oct 18 13:07:08 <mw>	as you can see, the page includes a few gnome-specific things
Oct 18 13:07:11 <Riggwelter>	+ GConf scriptlets
Oct 18 13:07:27 <mw>	Riggwelter: ?
Oct 18 13:07:41 <Riggwelter>	mw: Sorry, typed it before you mentioned gnome-specific
Oct 18 13:08:03 <mw>	anyway, i'd like to ask for suggestions.  after you've been packaging for a while, you start to forget what some of the common pitfalls and problems are
Oct 18 13:08:11 <mw>	at least, i've forgotten some of them
Oct 18 13:08:12 <Riggwelter>	Is it worth referencing the GNOME template .spec file on it?
Oct 18 13:08:15 <suseROCKS>	I need to go now, but thanks to all... See you again soon!
Oct 18 13:08:22 <mw>	Riggwelter: yes, thank you, i'll add that
Oct 18 13:08:32 <rodrigo>	Riggwelter: yes, the plugin is done, will be committing later
Oct 18 13:08:45 <jpr>	mw: do we specify .patch as the patch extension anywhere?
Oct 18 13:08:50 *	suseROCKS has quit ("Leaving")
Oct 18 13:08:51 <mw>	jpr: another thing to add
Oct 18 13:08:59 <jpr>	mw: and should we reference the osc plugin page?
Oct 18 13:09:07 <mw>	jpr: yep, will do that too
Oct 18 13:09:28 <mw>	see what i mean about things i do without thinking about them but aren't really obvious? :)
Oct 18 13:09:32 <jpr>	mw: what about %make with multiple jobs and use of %configure?
Oct 18 13:09:51 <mw>	jpr: i think that's part of the guidelines for the overall project
Oct 18 13:09:52 <jpr>	and -p0 for patches
Oct 18 13:09:52 <mtgordon>	Is there a rule to include the name of the package in the patch name? I find /usr/src/packages/SOURCES cluttered with anonymous-foo.patch all too often.
Oct 18 13:10:07 <jpr>	mw: ok, maybe a cheat sheet for those too?
Oct 18 13:10:14 <mw>	jpr: also, why -p0?
Oct 18 13:10:20 <jpr>	i do not like to search the entire guidelines :-)
Oct 18 13:10:26 <Riggwelter>	mw ; jpr: was going to ask about -p0 also
Oct 18 13:10:27 <mw>	jpr: ok, fair enough
Oct 18 13:10:33 <jpr>	mw: oh, becuase i think %patch defaults to -p0
Oct 18 13:10:39 *	hpj votes for -p1
Oct 18 13:10:40 <mw>	i prefer -p1 only because that's what quilt defaults to
Oct 18 13:10:43 <rodrigo>	most of my patches are -p1 :(
Oct 18 13:10:46 *	Riggwelter normally uses -p1
Oct 18 13:10:58 <mw>	it would be nice to have them all the same, but it's a pretty minor detail imo
Oct 18 13:11:01 <jpr>	rodrigo: quilt refresh -p0 :-)
Oct 18 13:11:05 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 13:11:23 <rodrigo>	jpr: not only because of quilt, when working locally I just do the patch comparing 2 dirs
Oct 18 13:11:27 <jpr>	mw: and i guess the mini howto like apokryphos talked about?
Oct 18 13:11:33 <mw>	jpr: yeah
Oct 18 13:11:40 <jpr>	if we have a template plugin
Oct 18 13:11:43 <hpj>	generally i get -p1 when diffing tarballs and -p0 when diffing VCS
Oct 18 13:11:51 <jpr>	ours might be different from KDE's enough to do our own
Oct 18 13:11:53 <jpr>	or not
Oct 18 13:11:57 *	jpr is unsure
Oct 18 13:12:01 <mw>	still, i'd like to get more questions.  everyone who's chimed in now has already done packaging work
Oct 18 13:12:09 <jpr>	:-)
Oct 18 13:12:32 <jpr>	lejo: you were poking me on a packaging bug yesterday, any opinion?
Oct 18 13:12:37 <rodrigo>	mw: info about running quilt locally would be helpful, although it fits better the patches page
Oct 18 13:13:00 <btimothy>	is there a way to easily determine Requires and BuildRequires?  someone mentioned that debian packages determine this automatically?
Oct 18 13:13:16 <mw>	rodrigo: agreed.
Oct 18 13:13:17 <btimothy>	or is that not related to this discussion?
Oct 18 13:13:26 <jpr>	sbrabec: you've had a tool to do an initial pass about buildrequires automatically
Oct 18 13:13:32 <mw>	btimothy: it's a good question, in any case
Oct 18 13:13:33 <jpr>	sbrabec: thought about an osc plugin for that?
Oct 18 13:13:39 <rodrigo>	mw: I'll add it myself, since I need to do it after you told me I could
Oct 18 13:13:40 <Riggwelter>	btimothy: Under normal circumstances, AutoReqProv is enough for Requires
Oct 18 13:14:07 <rodrigo>	Riggwelter: that pulls all dependencies automatically?
Oct 18 13:14:18 *	btimothy has never seen AutoReqProv before
Oct 18 13:14:23 <Riggwelter>	rodrigo: Yes
Oct 18 13:14:26 *	hpj neither
Oct 18 13:14:26 <rodrigo>	cool
Oct 18 13:14:26 <mw>	it figures out library dependencies
Oct 18 13:14:29 <btimothy>	could that be the holy grail of packaging?  :)
Oct 18 13:14:31 <sbrabec>	jpr: I did not finished it yet. But yes, I have a tool, which analyzes pkg-config checks.
Oct 18 13:14:31 <mw>	but not anything else
Oct 18 13:14:32 <hpj>	is there an example of its usage somewhere?
Oct 18 13:14:34 <Riggwelter>	Look at a random spec file in G:C
Oct 18 13:14:49 <mw>	if your package execs /usr/bin/foo, AutoReqProv: won't be able to figure that out
Oct 18 13:15:06 <Riggwelter>	Autoreqprov:  on
Oct 18 13:15:21 <Riggwelter>	mw: no but under normal circumstances... ;)
Oct 18 13:15:23 <mw>	or if your package sticks file in another package's directory -- eg, things that go into /etc/xinetd.d/, /etc/dbus-1/system.d/, etc
Oct 18 13:15:58 <sbrabec>	Riggwelter: btimothy: rodrigo: AutoReqProv is by default on and is far from being enough - it does not trace devel requirements, symlink targets, perl req chain.
Oct 18 13:15:58 <mw>	Riggwelter: ok, but since a lot of people don't know about it, i guess it should be included in the cheet sheet
Oct 18 13:16:08 <sbrabec>	I guess that python chain as well.
Oct 18 13:16:10 <Riggwelter>	phone call
Oct 18 13:16:33 <mw>	mm, do many people have trouble with the %find_lang macro?
Oct 18 13:16:54 <mauropm>	mw, mee
Oct 18 13:16:55 <mauropm>	me
Oct 18 13:17:01 <jpr>	no, but only because i copy a spec file :-)
Oct 18 13:17:01 <sbrabec>	%find_lang now does not mark docs as %doc.
Oct 18 13:17:11 <Riggwelter>	back
Oct 18 13:17:24 <munkii>	jpr: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/Themes
Oct 18 13:17:31 <mw>	jpr: hehe.  %find_lang does need some fiddling and diddling at times, though
Oct 18 13:17:40 <jpr>	mw: awesome
Oct 18 13:17:51 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 13:17:53 <mw>	rarely, but enough to be mystifying
Oct 18 13:17:58 <jpr>	AI mw update page with suggestions
Oct 18 13:17:59 <mw>	s/enough/often enough/
Oct 18 13:18:02 <jpr>	anything else on this?
Oct 18 13:18:29 <jpr>	mw: timeline to do the update?
Oct 18 13:18:38 <munkii>	should add a !Requiers field in wishlist gnome, just to make sure that packager know what there in for
Oct 18 13:18:41 <munkii>	?
Oct 18 13:18:42 <jpr>	it would be nice to free up G:C work again asap
Oct 18 13:18:58 <mw>	jpr: i think i can get most of it done today
Oct 18 13:19:02 <jpr>	awesome
Oct 18 13:19:03 *	Riggwelter doesn't have long remaining
Oct 18 13:19:06 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - GNOME:Community policy status (Riggwelter) | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 13:19:09 <jpr>	Riggwelter: go man go
Oct 18 13:19:11 <Riggwelter>	Link: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Community_Inclusion_Policy
Oct 18 13:19:11 <Riggwelter>	We've been waiting on the packaging guidelines - these are now in progress thank
Oct 18 13:19:11 <Riggwelter>	s to mw and one the page is finished, we can point to it from the policy and nai
Oct 18 13:19:11 <Riggwelter>	l it.  Then we can get on with the task of bringing what's currently the
Oct 18 13:19:11 <Riggwelter>	re up to code.
Oct 18 13:19:15 <mw>	jpr: although i got sidetracked bigtime yesterday cleaning up the gconf macros page, so it could happen again :)
Oct 18 13:19:18 <Riggwelter>	wow, that didn't paste well
Oct 18 13:19:41 <jpr>	mw: understood
Oct 18 13:20:09 <Riggwelter>	but, you get the jist
Oct 18 13:20:14 <Riggwelter>	basically, no change
Oct 18 13:20:17 *	Binary_Crap36 (i=1010101a@gateway/tor/x-bd1fb626dedff8ca) has joined #opensuse-gnome
Oct 18 13:21:25 <jpr>	Riggwelter: ok, AI link to the new policy page
Oct 18 13:21:35 <jpr>	and next week hopefully bang on the clean up
Oct 18 13:21:36 <Riggwelter>	jpr basically.
Oct 18 13:21:41 <jpr>	ok
Oct 18 13:21:50 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Q&A | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 13:22:00 <jpr>	any other development Q&A questions?
Oct 18 13:22:03 *	psp250 is now known as FunkyM
Oct 18 13:23:03 <jpr>	exit stage right
Oct 18 13:23:07 <jpr>	THIS MEETING IS DONE!
Oct 18 13:23:17 *	jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting over, archives up soon | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME
Oct 18 13:23:23 <jpr>	thanks everyone very good