| [02:28] <sbalneav> Evening all | |
| [04:13] <LaserJock> sbalneav: around? | |
| === ogra_ is now known as ogra | |
| [17:17] <Ahmuck> nubae1: when u get a chance, could you give me a hand on the dhcpd.conf ? | |
| === daya is now known as nep | |
| [18:35] <LaserJock> morning everybody | |
| [18:37] <LaserJock> ohhh lovely, encouraging bugmail this weekend :/ | |
| [18:40] <LaserJock> sbalneav: when you have a minute I think we should chat about this Feisty LTSPfs bug that people got up-in-arms over | |
| [19:40] <morgs> LaserJock: hey | |
| [19:41] <LaserJock> hi morgs | |
| [19:41] <morgs> LaserJock: were you at UDS? | |
| [19:41] <LaserJock> nope, at home workin' unfortunately | |
| [19:42] <LaserJock> but I did spend some time working on UDS issues during UDS | |
| [19:43] <morgs> heh | |
| [19:44] <morgs> LaserJock: I could use help with bug 263173 for an SRU | |
| [19:44] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 263173 in sugar-hulahop "Sugar Browse fails on startup" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/263173 | |
| [19:44] <morgs> Requires just rebuilds against a newer xulrunner | |
| [19:50] <LaserJock> morgs: right, saw some of that in my bugmail | |
| [19:51] <LaserJock> morgs: give me a little bit to get my grading situation in order and I'll get uploads ready | |
| [19:51] <morgs> LaserJock: it's not urgent (in that it has been waiting a while already). james_w has done most of our sponsoring to date, but with UDS it was hard to get hold of him. | |
| [19:51] <morgs> LaserJock: Sure, that would be great. Thanks! | |
| [19:52] <LaserJock> np | |
| [20:42] <LaserJock> hi bdoin | |
| [20:58] <bdoin> hi | |
| [21:00] <LaserJock> bdoin: how are things in gcompris land? | |
| [21:02] <bdoin> slowly, still working on the goocanvas port | |
| [21:03] <bdoin> just made a 8.5RC2 last friday for you to test if you wish | |
| [21:11] <LaserJock> bdoin: yeah, I might have to check that out if I get some time | |
| [21:13] <bdoin> if you want a preview: http://gcompris.net/incoming/new_watercycle.png | |
| [21:13] <bdoin> http://gcompris.net/incoming/new_menu2.png | |
| [21:16] <LaserJock> bdoin: looks very nice | |
| [21:32] <LaserJock> Lns: perhaps the ltspfs bug thing needs to go to edubuntu-devel | |
| [21:33] <LaserJock> it's kind of a too-little-too-late for that bug, but is useful overall discussion | |
| [21:36] <Lns> LaserJock: i agree.. i hate making more comments but it *is* useful for the future | |
| [21:37] <Lns> LaserJock: would edubuntu-devel really be the best place for ltspfs given edubuntu technically isn't LTSP anymore? | |
| [21:37] <LaserJock> yes, yes it is | |
| [21:38] <LaserJock> who else cares? | |
| [21:38] <LaserJock> we can't just drop LTSP out the door | |
| [21:38] <Lns> I thought edubuntu was technically just the addon stuff, not ltsp bits anymore | |
| [21:38] <LaserJock> ok, you need to seperate some things a bit | |
| [21:39] <LaserJock> as a community we're interested in anything to do with Education in Ubuntu | |
| [21:39] <LaserJock> obviously LTSP is a pretty darn big part of that | |
| [21:39] <LaserJock> so of course we care about LTSP | |
| [21:39] <LaserJock> however, we don't *own* LTSP | |
| [21:39] <LaserJock> but it's in our best interest to care about it, right? | |
| [21:40] <Lns> LaserJock: well of course | |
| [21:40] <LaserJock> also, while LTSPfs is the particular example | |
| [21:40] <LaserJock> the issue is a general problem | |
| [21:40] <Lns> LaserJock: right, but the general problem isn't with Edubuntu, but Ubuntu as a whole | |
| [21:41] <LaserJock> sure, but Edubuntu I think is particularly hit by this | |
| [21:41] <Lns> I agree | |
| [21:41] <LaserJock> so it wouldn't hurt for use to figure out how we can do better at not dropping the ball | |
| [21:41] <Lns> but will the right people see the discussion that need to make a decision on actually changing how things work on a bug fixing level? | |
| [21:41] <LaserJock> for one, that bug falls off our "radar" when it's marked "Fix Released" | |
| [21:42] <LaserJock> we need to make sure things don't fall off the radar | |
| [21:42] <LaserJock> well, I suppose that's a question | |
| [21:42] <Lns> Can anyone change the status like that? Or just the one who the bug was assigned to to fix? | |
| [21:43] <LaserJock> anybody can change most of the statuses | |
| [21:43] <Lns> that's bad | |
| [21:43] <Lns> imho | |
| [21:43] <LaserJock> I think you have to have bug-control privileges to go to Triaged, but I think everything else is open | |
| [21:43] <Lns> look at the security flaw in that alone...someone who hates ubuntu could go in and change statuses on all sorts of bugs | |
| [21:44] <LaserJock> sure, but that's not been a real issue | |
| [21:44] <LaserJock> we're normally looking to get as much help as possible, and hence make it as open as possible | |
| [21:45] <Lns> The structure of bug reporting needs to be revamped IMHO, not like I have the answers but that's just something I've seen over time that doesn't always get talked about | |
| [21:46] <Lns> I understand the needing help part 100% | |
| [21:46] <LaserJock> the problem with that bug seems like 1) user expectations need management 2) we need to keep things on the "radar" 3) we need somebody to sort of "drive" QA | |
| [21:46] <Lns> right..we need followups | |
| [21:46] <Lns> and there is, but obviously this one slipped through the cracks | |
| [21:46] <LaserJock> also, we need to be clear on what's going to fixed, where and when | |
| [21:47] <Lns> agreed | |
| [21:48] <Lns> I like the irc meetings idea, and maybe that can be something we do on a more frequent basis as a community to go over all of these things | |
| [21:49] <Lns> Almost like a weekly/bi-monthly status update on all open bugs | |
| [21:49] <LaserJock> now, I tried to look at all the bugs with stable release tasks and it doesn't look like we have any currently | |
| [21:49] <Lns> of course that's a TON of bugs i'd imagine | |
| [21:49] <LaserJock> so right now we're doing ok'ish that way | |
| [21:49] <Lns> ok | |
| [21:49] <LaserJock> if my searches were accurate | |
| [21:49] <LaserJock> I think they were | |
| [21:50] <LaserJock> we currently have ~250 open bugs | |
| [21:50] <LaserJock> and only a handful are assigned to anybody | |
| [21:50] <LaserJock> and quite a few are untriaged | |
| [21:51] <LaserJock> I think even less are forwarded upstream | |
| [21:52] <Lns> there's a big problem right there... we need bug maintainer(s) that can take time to do all of this on a scheduled basis | |
| [21:52] <Lns> people who "know" what bugs exist so they can assign as duplicates, triage, invalidate, etc | |
| [21:52] <Lns> and needs to be separated by project probably | |
| [21:52] <LaserJock> exactly | |
| [21:53] <Lns> I can help with that i'm sure, but some standard practices/schedules should be established | |
| [21:54] <LaserJock> which is why I think edubuntu-devel is a good place to discuss it | |
| [21:55] <Lns> LaserJock: just a thought, is there any way to send scheduled 'bug digest' e-mails to subscribers say, once a week or whatever? | |
| [21:56] <Lns> automated "these are open bugs" type things? | |
| [21:58] <LaserJock> Lns: hmm, so repeatedly giving out "this is the list of open bugs"? | |
| [21:58] <LaserJock> not just here's a new bug | |
| [21:58] <Lns> right | |
| [21:58] <Lns> kind of a reminder email | |
| [21:59] <Lns> maybe with a request for those who hadn't been commented on in X days | |
| [21:59] <LaserJock> we could script that fairly easy I think | |
| [21:59] <LaserJock> but I'm not sure how much we'd gain by it | |
| [21:59] <Lns> well, it'd help with people forgetting about certain bugs | |
| [21:59] <Lns> i dunno, it's more of a LP issue than anything else probably | |
| [22:00] <LaserJock> well, you can easily see what bugs your assigned to and subscribed to | |
| [22:00] <LaserJock> and we have a LP page that lists all the open bugs by project | |
| [22:01] <Lns> right | |
| [22:02] <LaserJock> we can write our own bug page if needed, I'm just not sure what people would find useful | |
| [22:02] <Lns> hmm...maybe some sorting mechanisms at the least, to see which ones haven't been updated/commented on | |
| [22:02] <LaserJock> bottom line it looks to me like bugs aren't getting assigned | |
| [22:02] <LaserJock> i.e. nobody wants to take them on | |
| [22:03] <LaserJock> so it's not so much a matter of people knowing what's on their list (although that's important too) as much as getting people to look at things in the first place | |
| [22:03] <Lns> can we look at other bug systems to see how they do it? Maybe Mozilla or other? | |
| [22:03] <Lns> right...we need a trigger of sorts to force people to review things i think..otherwise they're just browsing what they want to browse | |
| [22:04] <LaserJock> well, I'm ok with people just browsing | |
| [22:05] <LaserJock> we just need people | |
| [22:05] <Lns> so how do we get more people? ;) | |
| [22:07] <LaserJock> not sure exactly | |
| [22:07] <LaserJock> advertize, make it actually do stuff | |