2008/10/16/#ubuntu-desktop.txt

[08:54] <crevette> hello
[08:54] <seb128> lut crevette
[08:56] <crevette> salut seb128
[10:57] <Ng> mvo: I guess it should be settled one way or the other by the end of the day, but so far the compiz plugins package seems to be doing the job nicely :)
[10:57] <Ng> I badly need to restart X, but I'm going to hold out to see how the focus goes
[10:58] <mvo> Ng: thanks! seb128 told me the fix works for him, he even found a way to reproduce it in a reliable way
[10:58] <mvo> Ng: I uploaded it now into the archive, upstream says its the right thing(tm)
[10:58] <Ng> oh nice, well then I guess that rules very much in favour of it :)
[10:59] <Ng> and i can restart X to unwedge my mouse \o./
[10:59] <mvo> yeah, do it :)
[10:59] <Ng> thanks very much for sorting that
[10:59] <mvo> cheers, thanks for your support testing it!
[11:00] <Ng> my pleasure :)
=== asac_ is now known as asac
[11:33] <asac> hmm seb is gone :/
[11:42] <mvo> seb128: to get a better idea about the gconf failure (of silbs), do you think we should just make update-gconf-defaults more verbose? by remoing the os.dup2(1) ; close(1) at the beginning and adding more output (e.g. to the bottom except OSError)?
[11:43] <seb128> mvo: the issue is not likely a .gconf-defaults one but rather a schemas registration one
[11:43] <seb128> mvo: ie gconf-schemas --register
[11:43] <seb128> mvo: update-gconf-defaults only write debian customizations
[11:44] <mvo> right, I thought that was the suspect
[11:44] <mvo> hm, gconf-schemas --register sounds much harder to debug
[11:45] <seb128> mvo: we could write to a log rather than writting to stdout
[11:46] <mvo> hm, stdout is captured by update-manager
[11:46] <mvo> but I have not yet seen anything useful from gconf-schemas
[11:46] <mvo> or anything that looked like a clue
[11:47] <seb128> mvo: it seems it does some /dev/null redirection though
[11:53] <mvo> aha
[11:53] <seb128> mvo: sorry I had to restart again, should be stable for some time now
[11:58] <asac> pitti: do we know what happens in launchpad-o-matic if we pocket copy firefox from security to updates?
[11:58] <asac> nothing? or could it be that an old template upload gets triggered?
[11:58] <asac> s/launchpad-o/langpack-o/
[11:58] <asac> ;)
[12:48] <seb128> mvo: have you read bug #281837?
[12:48] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 281837 in gnome-panel "merge of switcher, and logout is not presented to all users" [Low,Incomplete] https://launchpad.net/bugs/281837
[12:48] <mvo> hm
[12:49] <mvo> seb128: its just shown for admin users I believe
[12:49] <seb128> right, what I was thinking too
[12:50] <mvo> meh, that needs fixing
[12:50] <mvo> or not - if we do not use the notification anymore but switch to auto migrating the config
[13:04] <asac> seb128: when i do a screenshot and select "tmp" (i set this up as a quick folder or whatever thats called) in the "Save in folder" option menu, it bounces back to my home
[13:05] <asac> seb128: i have to open the file dialog and select tmp there
[13:05] <seb128> asac: right, gtk bug and fixed to svn, we will get next tarball for GNOME 2.24.1 before intrepid
[13:05] <asac> cool
[13:05]  * asac hugs seb128 
[13:06] <asac> also i got this when hitting the "update" button in the user switch notification today: http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/tmp/Screenshot-Untitled%20Window.png
[13:06] <asac> most likely i am missing a package?
[13:08] <dobey> ugh :)
[13:08] <pitti> asac: re (sorry, phone call)
[13:08] <pitti> asac: security buildds don't produce langpack exports, AFAIK, due to the way they are handled (dak)
[13:08] <pitti> asac: thus pocket-copying won't get it either
[13:08] <mvo> asac: hmmm
[13:12] <asac> pitti: yeah. but something is definitly happening which causes an upload of an old template
[13:13] <asac> at least jtv said that launchpad itself doesnt maintain a history, so the old template cannot come from there in theory
[13:13] <pitti> asac: hm, weird; there shouldn't be template uploads at all for -security (which *is* a problem, but not the way you mention it)
[13:13] <asac> pitti: could it be that hppa attemps to build after pocket copy, build fails
[13:13] <pitti> asac: if the build fails, there won't be an export
[13:13] <asac> and then something old is uploaded?
[13:13] <asac> hmm
[13:14] <asac> yeah. but there is definitly something happening when we do security updates
[13:14] <pitti> maybe it's coming from a firefox SRU?
[13:14] <asac> everytime we do that we bounce back to a old en-US.xpi
[13:14] <asac> pitti: might be that its a reupload of the last update we sent to -proposed
[13:14] <asac> at least thats an idea. but still doesnt explain why something gets uploaded at all
[13:15] <pitti> I have another theory
[13:15] <pitti> sometimes the buildd admins do mass-givebacks
[13:15] <pitti> maybe that includes builds for stable-proposed as well?
[13:15] <pitti> ah, no
[13:15] <asac> maybe its also related to the random loss of .ddeb files for security updates?
[13:15] <pitti> if they FTBFS, they wouldn't export anything
[13:15] <asac> yeah
[13:15] <asac> something wierd is going on
[13:15] <pitti> asac: hm, I think this is an infinity question
[13:16] <pitti> asac: I'm 100% sure that the security buildds don't produce ddebs
[13:16] <asac> my idea was that pocket copy triggers an  upload somehow and since there is no export data the old one gets reuploaded
[13:16] <pitti> asac: but I am not sure whether they produce translation tarballs
[13:16] <pitti> asac: the translation tarball is part of the _arch.changes, so that's only there if the build succeeded
[13:16] <asac> pitti: well. even if you do mass-givebacks it would be the right version
[13:16] <asac> and not something old
[13:17] <asac> pitti: its really quite a big issue for me that we dont have ddebs for security builds :(
[13:18] <asac> is that going to change with the all-soyuz shift?
[13:18] <pitti> asac: I do believe you; I'll be the first who jumps for joy if we get rid of dak for that
[13:18] <asac> yeah ;)
[13:24] <asac> pitti: so realisitically i need to go back to -dbg packages to realibly get symbols for our stable releases?
[13:25] <pitti> asac: it would probably help, yes
[13:25] <asac> ok. i will think about that for jaunty then
[13:28] <asac> pitti: so what are the next steps to identify where those uploads come from. wait for infinity?
[13:28] <pitti> asac: you could also ask jamie and kees to look at the -security upload .changes on jackass and check whether they have translations
[13:29] <asac> pitti: ok will do that as next step then
[13:29] <asac> pitti: will keep you updated ;)
[13:29] <pitti> thanks! interests me too
[13:37] <asac> pitti: http://paste.ubuntu.com/58323/
[13:38] <asac> pitti: i guess pocket-copy doesnt copy those then or they never existed in the first place.
[13:39] <pitti> asac: that's from -security uploads?
[13:39] <asac> yes
[13:39] <pitti> asac: ah, so the -security buildds do export them
[13:39] <asac> i asked jamie to look at the -security upload .changes on jackass and check whether they have translations
[13:39] <pitti> asac: the upload from dak to soyuz -security does keep them, yes
[13:40] <asac> yeah. most likely they just get lost somewhere
[13:40] <pitti> asac: but the pocket copy from -security to -updates does *not*
[13:40] <pitti> since the tarballs are immediately discarded after login; even rosetta doesn't see them
[13:40] <asac> ok but still it triggers an upload
[13:40] <asac> and then there only is the old translation.tar.gz ?
[13:40] <pitti> right, that's the point I don't understand either
[13:41] <pitti> asac: in general there is no translation.tar.gz at all
[13:41] <asac> and it even has a different name :(
[13:41] <asac> the version is in the filename
[13:41] <pitti> it's entire lifetime is between a build and a soyuz upload
[13:43] <asac> pitti: maybe it would be easier for us to prevent dak from including translations in the uploads?
[13:43] <asac> pitti: we dont need that in general for security updates
[13:44] <asac> and if we need it we have to prepare them before we release anyway
[13:44] <asac> so have to upload the template by hand (which now i remember was most likely the version we see now reappearing)
[13:44] <pitti> asac: but if they are uploaded by -security, they can hardly be "old"? usually the -security uploads have the newest version for that release anyway?
[13:45] <pitti> asac: or do you mean that a hardy upload overwrites translations in intrepid?
[13:45] <asac> pitti: no. my theory is still that the old thing gets uploaded or resurrected in launchpad because of a bug somewhere which is triggered by the translations being in that initial changes :)
[13:45] <asac> inital changes == uploaded by dak
[13:45] <asac> pitti: no the intrepid templates are ok
[13:46] <pitti> ah, cprov just came online
[13:46] <asac> actually i am not even sure if the templates are broken. what is broken is that one part of the export is an old file
[13:46] <asac> e.g. the en-US.xpi
[14:28] <james_w> tedg: hey, so your change to only respond to power button presses in active sessions won't work in Intrepid?
[14:29] <tedg> james_w: No :(  Turns out that PolicyKit support has been disabled in GPM.
[14:29] <tedg> james_w: It was done a while ago (over a year) in the Debian package and I never noticed.
[14:29] <tedg> james_w: It seemed like too big of a change to push so late.
[14:30] <james_w> it will only mean that administrators can't block access to shutdown etc. with policykit
[14:30] <james_w> even thought they will apparently be able to
[14:30] <james_w> and indeed give special permission to do those actions
[14:30] <tedg> Correct, and that we can't do active session detection.  I think that it might be worth a backport?
[14:31] <tedg> I'm not sure -- here's where my knowledge of the release process breaks down :)
[14:31] <james_w> yeah, maybe
[14:31] <james_w> bring it up with someone on the release team
[14:31] <asac> 4:06 < asac> also i got this when hitting the "update" button in the user switch notification today:  http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/tmp/Screenshot-Untitled%20Window.png
[14:31] <asac> tedg: ^^
[14:31] <asac> 14:06 < asac> most likely i am missing a package?
[14:31] <james_w> you spoke to pitti already?
[14:31] <asac> is that your area?
[14:32] <james_w> asac: do you have fusa in the panel?
[14:32] <asac> i have no idea what that is. outcome of this dialog was that i dont have any shutdown /logout item in my panel anymore
[14:32] <tedg> asac: Some, but that scripts is an mvo thing.
[14:33] <asac> at some point duringi intrepid my shutdown button became a green man that didnt allow to shutdown anymore. now it is gone completely ;)
[14:34] <tedg> asac: I think you scared the green man away.
[14:35] <asac> hmm. i was so nice. i cant remember that i ever hit it with my pointer ;)
[14:36] <Keybuk> I still think he should look like the Ampelmännchen
[14:40]  * tedg smacked the little green man around, but he liked it.
[14:50] <asac> tedg: so whats the idea? is there an explanation for that thing completely disappearing?
[14:50] <asac> e.g. can i just move on or do you need info
[14:51] <asac> also, now that its gone, what should i add instead?
[14:51] <tedg> asac: Double check with mvo, but the idea is that the button should be replaced with the FUSA applet.
[14:52] <tedg> asac: I'm not as familiar with the implementation.  It is upgrade-manager magic :)
[14:52] <mvo> asac: do you have a fusa applet on your desktop?
[14:53] <seb128> asac: I got a similar issue, if you have the session button but no user switcher the tool just drop the button and displays an error when trying to move the switcher next
[14:53] <asac> mvo: what is a fusa applet?
[14:53] <asac> mvo: atm everything is gone for me
[14:53] <asac> i mean everything that looks remotely like a shutdown thing
[14:54] <seb128> asac: the fast-user-switch-applet
[14:54] <asac> seb128: how does it look like :(
[14:54] <seb128> asac: that's label showing your username
[14:54] <mvo> asac: oh, its gone for you ? hrmmm
[14:54] <seb128> asac: when clicking on it it lists other users available so you can switch between sessions
[14:55] <asac> mvo: err. i am not sure ... i think i only had a red power button in hardy
[14:55] <asac> that converted to a green ampelmännchen
[14:55] <asac> and now its gone :)
[14:55] <seb128> mvo: read what I wrote just before
[14:55] <asac> thats how the decay happened ;)
[14:55] <asac> i never had that kind of applet i think
[14:55] <asac> lets check if i can add that
[14:55] <asac> ok i have a power button again
[14:56] <seb128> mvo: the tool is not really smart, it drops the session button first and then try to move the user switcher, but if there is no user switcher it displays an error which let you with a config which has neither
[14:56] <asac> its not really obvious if you scroll through the panel list, that the "user switcher" will give you a power button
[14:56] <mvo> seb128: right, I fix that
[14:56] <seb128> asac: sudo apt-get install fast-user-switch-applet
[14:56] <asac> so when was this fusa thing introduced?
[14:56] <asac> and why wouldnt i have that?
[14:56] <asac> hmm ... no nice icons in the drop down with the operations :)
[14:57] <mvo> hrm, hrm,  I was sure I added the code that check for both first
[14:57] <seb128> asac: not sure now, I would say it was added around hardy, and user configs are not changed on upgrade usually so if you installed before that you didn't get it added to your user configuration
[14:57] <seb128> mvo: you added it to your brz and didn't upload?
[14:58] <asac> ok. so probably this is something we should consider as not everyone installed hardy
[14:58] <asac> mvo: ^^
[14:59] <mvo> asac:fixing it now
[15:06] <mvo> seb128: what should we do when no fusa applet is on the panel but available? add one?
[15:07] <dobey> i hope not
[15:07] <dobey> should use the classic method i would think
[15:08] <seb128> mvo: the user clicked to get its config updates to adding one seems reasonable
[15:08] <seb128> s/updates/updated
[15:17] <mvo> dobey: the user will be asked about this, we won't do it automatically
[15:17] <mvo> seb128: hrm, adding it brings in a new class of falure conditions
[15:18] <dobey> ok
[15:19] <seb128> mvo: which one?
[15:19]  * dobey wonders if he can make launchpad not send himself e-mails for his comments to bugs
[15:20] <mvo> seb128: figuring a name, putting sensible values in gconf, adding it to the panel applet list - not terrible, but just more than before
[15:50] <mvo> new gnome-panel uploaded
[15:52] <seb128> mvo: good ;-)
[15:52] <mvo> won't eat the button anymore
[15:53] <mvo> but will not add a applet if its missing :/
[15:53] <seb128> that's alright, we said we would migrate stock configure and let tweaker do tweaking
[15:59] <asac> mvo: that "information available" thing doesnt disappear from tray here and clicking on it does  nothing :/
[16:00] <asac> light bulb
[16:00] <mvo> asac: and there is no window open already?
[16:00] <mvo> asac: hidden somewhere behind another one?
[16:00] <asac> mvo: no i had one open ... when i pushed the "update" button ... which removed the ampelmaennchen
[16:01] <asac> mvo: is there a process i could be looking for
[16:01] <asac> there definitly is no window on no desktop which i could reach
[16:01] <asac> mvo: err
[16:01] <mvo> asac: and you closed the informatio thing with "close" ?
[16:01] <asac> it was :(
[16:01] <asac> mvo: that kind of thing should be really available with alt-tab
[16:01] <mvo> right
[16:02] <asac> its definitly a top level thing ;)
[16:02] <asac> mvo: or gtk_window_present
[16:02] <asac> but i guess thats not news ;)
[16:03] <asac> mvo: btw, i dont really like the idea that notification bulbs now ask questions that we are not asking during upgrade due to policy
[16:03] <mvo> asac: I make it alt-tab-able now
[16:03] <mvo> ?
[16:03] <mvo> asac: what do you mean?
[16:04] <asac> mvo: we dont ask questions on upgrade right? e.g. do you want to keep this or rather want this
[16:04] <asac> thought that was a policy thing
[16:04] <mvo> we do ask sometimes
[16:04] <mvo> debconf is still used
[16:04] <mvo> conffile prompts
[16:04] <mvo> etc
[16:04] <asac> but we dont want to add new
[16:04] <mvo> this one is because it needs to run in the users context
[16:04] <mvo> right
[16:04] <asac> well. anyway. this notification bulb was on my laptop i think
[16:04] <mvo> we do not modify user confiugration without consent
[16:05] <asac> i closed it and had no idea how to get it back
[16:05] <mvo> right, that is a UI problem with the things currently
[16:05] <asac> also the text for this "user switcher" is quite long
[16:05] <mvo> there is no easy way to get them back
[16:05] <asac> and users dont know what it means imo
[16:06] <mvo> I'm open for suggestions, the current text for the notificaiton was done in collaboration with mpt
[16:06] <mpt> asac, screenshot?
[16:08] <mvo> asac: don't get me wrong, there is plenty to improve, the currently solution is a compromise so that we can do it with low risk in short time
[16:13] <asac> mpt: i dont know how to get it back.
[16:13] <asac> mpt: only thing i can show you is the error message that came after that ;)
[16:13] <asac> http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/tmp/Screenshot-Untitled%20Window.png
[16:13] <mpt> awesome
[16:14] <asac> mvo: how can i get that thing back?
[16:14] <asac> the notification i mean
[16:14] <mpt> "applet"? "fusa"? "applet"? "panel configuration"? "manually"?
[16:14] <mpt> thorough gibberish
[16:16] <asac> let me see if i can touch the fusa-* thing in /var/lib/update-notifier/user.d
[16:16] <asac> hmm ... doesnt show up
[16:17] <asac> ok i have it
[16:17] <asac> mpt: so the user experience is that after upgrade you get a notification bulb in the tray. when you click on it, you get:
[16:18] <asac> http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/tmp/Screenshot-Untitled%20Window-2.png
[16:18] <asac> mpt: ^^
[16:18] <asac> the first time i saw that i just closed it
[16:18] <asac> (like i close every notification that comes up with a light)
[16:18] <asac> the second time i understood that i am supposed to hi "Update". when i did that the bug from above showed up
[16:19] <mvo> asac: rm .update-notifier/hooks_seen
[16:19] <asac> mvo: so do we auto migrate users that didnt place the shutdown applet manually on their panel?
[16:19] <mpt> heh
[16:19] <asac> e.g. if they are running the default setup, they should automigrate to the new default imo
[16:20] <mpt> asac, here's what I specced: http://paste.ubuntu.com/56038/
[16:20] <asac> mpt: ok. the text in itself is ok
[16:20] <mpt> asac, but I was told it would have been very difficult to implement
[16:20] <asac> what i dont understand is why we need to show any notification at all
[16:20] <mpt> Right, that's what I said *before* I specced that :-)
[16:20] <asac> if users have the default shutdown widget on their panel they just want the new default shutdown thing there imo
[16:21] <asac> i am quite sure that nobody wants the ampelmaennchen ;)
[16:22]  * mpt learns a new word, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampelm%C3%A4nnchen
[16:22] <asac> hehe
[16:22] <asac> yeah we should use the red one ;)
[16:22] <mvo> asac: we don't do auto migration at all
[16:23] <mvo> mpt, asac: the current implementation of the notes does only allow text, sorry for that
[16:23] <asac> mvo: ok ... so if i have hardy installed and upgrade and dont hit the "update" button
[16:23] <asac> what do i get?
[16:23] <mvo> asac: no change
[16:23] <asac> if i end up having the green guy then its a migration
[16:23] <asac> mvo: no change? i dont see the old button anymore :(
[16:24] <mvo> asac: but you did hit "update", right?
[16:24] <asac> mvo: no before that the red button was a green man
[16:24] <asac> which has far less features
[16:24] <mvo> asac: and now?
[16:24] <asac> e.g. just log out
[16:24] <mvo> right, as I said, no changes
[16:24] <asac> mvo: after hitting update i had no button at all
[16:25] <asac> mvo: no changes?
[16:25] <mvo> asac: I just fixed that with my upload
[16:25] <asac> mvo: user has a shutdown button ...a fter upgrade its a green man that doesnta llow to shutdown
[16:25] <mvo> asac: it does not allow to shutdown?
[16:25] <asac> mvo: the green man button is called "log out ..."
[16:26] <asac> it offers: "logout, switch user" ... or wait for 60 seconds to get auto logged out
[16:26] <mvo> asac: sorry, I got involved into this very late, I missed that it actually lost functionatliy :/
[16:26] <asac> mvo: yeah. its not a shutdown button anymore ;)
[16:26] <asac> mvo: so migrating them to the one we have now shoudl be done
[16:26] <asac> and maybe we should offer to get the log out button
[16:26] <asac> but that is questionable imo
[16:27] <mvo> right, I think it should still offer shutdown
[16:27] <asac> mvo: there also is a "shutdown" button which i can manually "add to panel ..."
[16:28] <asac> but my shutdown button was migrated to the "log out ..." thing
[16:28] <asac> mvo: otoh, the new "shutdown" button doesnt offer to log out or switch user
[16:28] <asac> seems like the old button was split in "log out ..." and "shutdown ..." with "log out ..." replacing the old one by default
[16:29] <asac> but as i said. maybe now we get shutdown and i got "log out..." because of a bug at some point during intrepid
[16:29] <asac> who would know more?
[16:29] <mvo> seb128: ---^
[16:31] <asac> http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/tmp/Screenshot-Log%20Out%20of%20the%20Session.png
[16:31] <asac> http://people.ubuntu.com/~asac/tmp/Screenshot-Shut%20Down%20the%20Computer.png
[16:33] <seb128> what?
[16:33]  * Ng hrms, somehow I've ended up with xscreensaver installed
[16:34] <asac> seb128: what happens for users that have hardy installed and upgrade ... will they get the grey shutdown button or the green guy?
[16:34] <asac> i got the green guy ;)
[16:35] <Ng> fwiw, I would suggest that shutdown thing say "Ends your session and turns the computer off" rather than "..turns off the computer", and I'd suggest "low" instead of "minimal", but that's just my suggestion ;)
[16:35] <seb128> asac: what users?
[16:36] <asac> seb128: i dont understand that question
[16:36] <seb128> asac: the users who had a config customized or created before hardy will get a "can't migrate the config you need to do it"
[16:36] <asac> "hardy users"
[16:36] <asac> seb128: and if they dont do anthing?
[16:36] <asac> seb128: what ends up in their panel?
[16:36] <seb128> asac: hardy users had the user switching applet and the session button, they will get the new user switcher instead
[16:36] <asac> ok. for hardy users its probably fine
[16:37] <asac> the rest of the users get the green guy=
[16:37] <asac> ?
[16:37] <asac> can we at least make that the grey shutdown button ... and maybe make that red?
[16:38] <seb128> asac: no you don't
[16:38] <seb128> asac: ups, you do right
[16:38] <seb128> asac: what you don't get is the nothing you had before ;-)
[16:38] <asac> seb128: yes thats a bug now
[16:38] <seb128> asac: the icon will be fixed before intrepid
[16:38] <asac> seb128: but the session button shouldnt be migrated to the log out button
[16:39] <asac> most users are single user installs so the shutdown button is the better choice i guess
[16:39] <seb128> asac: you are joining that discussion a bit late
[16:40] <asac> seb128: was it ever discussed that the session button should become the log out button for users that installed before hardy?
[16:40] <seb128> bug #274146
[16:40] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 274146 in gnome-panel "Has not yet replaced the existing log out applet" [High,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/274146
[16:40] <seb128> asac: to see what has been discussed
[16:41] <seb128> asac: no, what has been discussed is "all users upgrading should get the new user switcher applet"
[16:41] <seb128> which has all those actions too
[16:41] <asac> seb128: that doesnt really address the problem with old installs imo
[16:42] <asac> but well. if you say it has been explicitly decided to get the green man ... fine.
[16:42] <asac> i am certainly late then
[16:42] <seb128> asac: no, that's a failing corner case
[16:42] <asac> seb128: right. thats why i am here. i want that we make the default go to the shutdown button ;)
[16:42] <asac> and old installs shouldnt be treated as "corner cases" imo
[16:43] <seb128> asac: the whole thing sucks, the discussion about those started way late in the cycle to do non trivial changes
[16:43] <asac> seb128: right. but i think the migration to the new one is what is really complex here
[16:43] <seb128> no, any migration is as complex
[16:43] <asac> seb128: making the old button migrate to the shutdown button instead of the logout shouldnt be that hard?
[16:43] <seb128> switch to the shutdown or user switcher is as difficult
[16:44] <asac> seb128: well. whats the reason why the log out thing appears? isnt it that that applet is shipped under the same name?
[16:44] <seb128> that's the object we have been using before
[16:44] <seb128> we just used to patch the logout dialog to list all actions
[16:44] <asac> seb128: right. we sshould make that object be the "shutdown" thing
[16:44] <seb128> right now there is no migration
[16:44] <asac> then we dont need to migrate
[16:44] <asac> and make the log out thing a "new" object
[16:44] <seb128> well, if you do dynamic objects change you can as well put the new applet there
[16:45] <asac> not sure if i understand
[16:45] <asac> i propose that the old shutdown button becomes the new shutdown button
[16:45] <seb128> the object on the panel is a logout button
[16:45] <asac> e.g. to ship it as the same object
[16:45] <asac> and make the loigout button something else
[16:46] <seb128> ok
[16:46] <asac> seb128: right. i just though it would be a name mapping we could change so our users get a more seamless upgrade
[16:46] <seb128> what you suggest requires patching the upstream code and keep this delta
[16:46] <seb128> and create an ubuntu specific user configuration
[16:47] <seb128> ie you change the code and semantic over upstream
[16:47] <asac> why ubuntu specific user configuration?
[16:47] <seb128> because you suggest making the logout button open the shutdown dialog on ubuntu if I understand that correctly
[16:47] <asac> yeah. if that is unacceptable then we have to accept that users get the green guy
[16:47] <seb128> so if you use the same user configuration to log into jhbuild for example you will get a different behaviour
[16:47] <seb128> that's not unacceptable
[16:48] <seb128> but we decided to modify the object listed in the user configuration
[16:48] <seb128> rather than patching the code
[16:48] <seb128> we just didn't do it for this case
[16:48] <seb128> mvo was about to do it one hour ago and I told him to not bother
[16:48] <seb128> but you are convincing me we should now ;-)
[16:49] <asac> really cool ;)
[16:49] <mvo> meh
[16:49] <asac> that together with the shutdown button being red should make all our old users happy;)
[16:49] <asac> i just looked for alternatives to not need to change user configuration. and thought that we could just maintain a patch that ships the shutdown code inthe logout binary and vice-versa ;)
[16:50] <asac> but in the end the migration appears to be the only way we can get a long-term sustainable solution
[16:50] <asac> migration == user config migration
[16:51] <seb128> right, I prefer to do one gconf change on upgrade rather than keep code changes
[16:51] <seb128> GNOME does roll tarball often and updating patches is no fun when you have to do 80 tarballs updates
[16:57] <asac> ack
[16:57] <mvo> I can look into adding the applet, but its not easy it seems
[17:21] <seb128> mvo: and can you change the session button to a fast user switcher easily?
[17:22] <mvo> seb128: yes, because the fusa is there already, I just need to move it into posittion
[17:22] <seb128> mvo: no, we are speaking about the case where there is only the session button
[17:23] <seb128> mvo: ie the case asac and users who have their config since before hardy have
[17:24] <mvo> seb128: if there is no fusa applet already, then its hard to create one (or least least it looks fragile to me)
[17:24] <seb128> mvo: and changing a session applet to a fuse one is not easier?
[17:24] <seb128> mvo: let's ask vuntz ;-)
[17:24] <asac> mvo: as a compromise we certainly want to do a one time migration from session button to new shtudown button
[17:24] <seb128> vuntz: hello
[17:24] <asac> ok
[17:25] <mvo> seb128: hm, if there is a session applet (not a object) then it should be I think
[17:25] <asac> i let the "desktop" team sort out the options
[17:25] <asac> and keep still until i get asked ;)
[17:25] <seb128> mvo: ah right, those are object
[17:25] <mvo> seb128: the session button is a "applet"?
[17:25] <mvo> aha, ok
[17:25] <mvo> hrm
[17:25] <mvo> maybe vuntz knows if there is less-insane way to create a /apps/panel/apps_foo with propper defaults
[17:35] <mvo> seb128: hrm, so I changed update-notifier to not require admin user and now it appears in the guest session *grum*
[17:35] <seb128> lol
[17:35] <seb128> mvo: I guess you can special case this one ;-)
[17:36] <mvo> seb128: yeah, I just need to be a bit careful, otherwise I get bugreports from "joe guest" :)
[17:42] <vuntz> seb128, mvo: mmh?
[17:43] <seb128> vuntz: is there an easy way to add an applet to an existant gnome-panel configuration?
[17:44] <vuntz> well, just add they keys :-)
[17:44] <vuntz> and associate them with the schemas
[17:45] <vuntz> shell script? python? c?
[17:45] <seb128> python
[17:47] <mvo> vuntz: can I do the association directly from python (sorry for my ignorance here)
[17:48] <vuntz> mvo: gconf_engine_associate_schema() in C, I guess
[17:48] <vuntz> gconf.engine_get_default().associate_schema()
[17:48] <vuntz> untested
[17:48] <vuntz> :-)
[17:49] <mvo> vuntz: and that for each key that a applet expects? or can I find that out dynamically from the schema itself?
[17:49] <seb128> hum, I'm late for sport and I've to run bbl
[17:49] <mvo> I guess I should look how the panel does it internally
[17:50] <vuntz> mvo: panel_gconf_associate_schemas_in_dir() in panel-gconf.c
[17:51] <mvo> thanks vuntz!
[18:10] <dobey> ah, shutdown menu fun
[18:11] <dobey> maybe the options should just be removed from fusa instead of the main menu, for now :)
[18:22] <james_w> which component draws the actual desktop?
[18:23] <james_w> and do you know how it interprets the "zoom" setting for "picture_options" in /desktop/gnome/background ?
[18:24] <asac> james_w: actual desktop? you mean the files on it?
[18:24] <asac> oh background ;)
[18:25] <dobey> james_w: zoom is scale up and crop such that the smaller of w/h is the ratio used
[18:28] <james_w> so it scales keeping the aspect ratio, and then crops the left over bit off?
[18:29] <james_w> whereas "stretched" would not respect the aspect ratio?
[18:29] <james_w> so what does that make "scaled"?
[18:29] <dobey> yes
[18:29] <dobey> scaled scales but doesn't exceed the size of the screen
[18:30] <dobey> the extra area is filled with the color settings
[18:31] <james_w> cool, thanks
=== ajmitch_ is now known as ajmitch