| [00:45] <ajmitch> jono: so are there restrictions on arb members entering this competition? :) | |
| [00:45] <ajmitch> apart from a lack of spare time | |
| [02:19] <jono> ajmitch, no, go ahead :-) | |
| [02:21] <ajmitch> oh good, though I'm dubious if I'll have a decent amount of time to implement what I want | |
| [07:01] <dholbach> good morning | |
| [07:03] <ajmitch> morning dholbach | |
| [07:03] <dholbach> hey ajmitch | |
| [08:15] <dholbach> ajmitch, I found http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~dholbach/ubuntu-app-reviews/cooking-lens/revision/2 very depressing | |
| [08:15] <dholbach> (the amount of stuff which needed to change) | |
| [08:15] <dholbach> it's not like pkgme could have dealt with this easily | |
| [08:15] <ajmitch> sorry about that | |
| [08:15] <dholbach> no no | |
| [08:15] <dholbach> it's not your fault :) | |
| [08:16] <dholbach> it looks like quickly + pkgme will need to get taught about extras and stuff | |
| [08:16] <ajmitch> we're sort of limited in what we can accept outside /opt | |
| [08:17] <dholbach> yeah, I know | |
| [08:26] * ajmitch wants an easy way to not have file collisions, things like arkose using overlayfs are great for standalone apps but not for lenses that need to extend another package in the archive | |
| [08:26] <dholbach> one thing I wasn't sure about with the lens above was if it should suggest or enhance gourmet or something | |
| [08:27] <ajmitch> gourmet is the scope? | |
| [08:27] <ajmitch> lens can suggest scopes, scopes should enhance lenses imo | |
| [08:27] <dholbach> no, gourmet is a separate package | |
| [08:28] <ajmitch> right | |
| [08:28] * ajmitch looks it up | |
| [08:28] <dholbach> all cooking scopes+lens are in the same package | |
| [08:28] <ajmitch> same binary package? | |
| [08:29] <dholbach> yes | |
| [08:29] <ajmitch> they're probably related enough that it's the preferred option | |
| [08:29] <ajmitch> how do they relate to gourmet? | |
| [08:30] <dholbach> I'm not 100% sure | |
| [08:31] <dholbach> ah yes, the gourmet scope watches out for ~/.gourmet/recipes.db | |
| [08:31] <dholbach> so we could suggest it - still the lens will be useful without it | |
| [08:32] <ajmitch> yeah, a suggests sounds enough | |
| [08:32] <dholbach> I think I should get another espresso | |
| [08:32] <dholbach> the suggests was already in there | |
| [08:32] <ajmitch> :) | |
| [08:32] <dholbach> nevermind then | |
| [08:32] <dholbach> la lala la | |
| [08:32] * ajmitch hugs dholbach :) | |
| [08:32] <dholbach> so as far as I'm concerned the package is ready :) | |
| [08:33] <ajmitch> excellent :) | |
| [08:33] * ajmitch spotted a wikipedia lens in the list to be looked at as well... :) | |
| [10:40] <dpm> ajmitch, there are a few apps that I've spotted that would make sense to move to the CA team queue: | |
| [10:41] <dpm> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/791 | |
| [10:41] <dpm> Muktware manual: a PDF, so doesn't qualify as an ARB app | |
| [10:42] <dholbach> ajmitch, highvoltage, wendar, stgraber: how do I put an app I worked on up for team review? | |
| [10:42] <dpm> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/757/ | |
| [10:42] <dpm> Handbrake: too big an app (need to check if it comes from the real upstream) | |
| [10:44] <dpm> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/950/ | |
| [10:44] <dpm> OpsView Core: too big an app too | |
| [10:44] <dpm> I'll move them to the CA queue | |
| [10:49] <dholbach> I updated https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/987/feedback/ - was that the right thing to do? | |
| [10:49] <dholbach> how can it be moved to another queue? | |
| [10:51] <ajmitch> dpm: ok, thank you | |
| [10:51] * ajmitch moved the full circle submission over, but hadn't got around to the others yet | |
| [10:52] <ajmitch> dholbach: it needed to be done on the review page, with the 'need more info' button | |
| [10:52] <dholbach> hum | |
| [10:53] * ajmitch logs in to see if he can move it | |
| [10:53] <dholbach> ok | |
| [10:53] <dpm> ajmitch, no worries, I've moved 2 of them, and for Handbrake I'll request more info, as I'm not sure the submitter is associated in any way with upstream | |
| [10:54] <ajmitch> dpm: that was the impression I got as well | |
| [10:54] <ajmitch> the skype language pack, it's another one that looked like it was probably just content, and for a non-free app at that | |
| [10:56] <dpm> ajmitch, do you think it makes sense to swap queues for it, or reject it? | |
| [10:57] <ajmitch> probably swap queues, if it's something that might be useful to people | |
| [10:57] <ajmitch> I don't know if the CA team likes having free apps to work on or not :) | |
| [11:01] <dpm> they package them, yes | |
| [11:01] <dpm> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/958/ | |
| [11:01] <dpm> Another PDF I'll send their way ^ | |
| [11:01] <ajmitch> yep | |
| [11:01] <dholbach> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/930/ has license proprietary | |
| [11:02] <ajmitch> so you suggest that for free apps that are rather large, like https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/921/, that I push them to the commercial queue? | |
| [11:02] <ajmitch> dholbach: interesting, that shouldn't be able to go into the ARB queue | |
| [11:03] <dholbach> they submitted a .deb anyway | |
| [11:03] <ajmitch> yeah, that's common for any license :) | |
| [11:03] <dholbach> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/921/ is huge and a binary tarball - probably not suited for the ARB anyway | |
| [11:03] <ajmitch> it's huge because it's a rather large eclipse addon, so would be hard to package properly | |
| [11:04] <dholbach> yeah, it should probably be rejected | |
| [11:05] <dpm> has the askubuntu lens been uploaded? It's got 3 votes already | |
| [11:06] <ajmitch> dpm: yes, and marked as published in the arb queue | |
| [11:07] <dpm> ajmitch, it seems it's still marked as pending review: https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/815/ | |
| [11:07] <ajmitch> hm | |
| [11:07] <ajmitch> 2 submissions for it | |
| [11:07] <ajmitch> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/505/ is published | |
| [11:07] <dpm> sorry, review in progres, I meant | |
| [11:09] <dpm> ajmitch, is there any way to mark https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/815/ as published, though? That's the version of the latest maintainer, if I'm not mistaken | |
| [11:09] <ajmitch> yeah I'm trying to do that now | |
| [11:09] <dpm> cool :) | |
| [11:10] <ajmitch> ok, it shows as published now | |
| [11:10] <dpm> excellent, another one off the queue! | |
| [11:10] * ajmitch didn't spot the 2nd one there | |
| [11:10] <ajmitch> thanks for doing the queue cleanup, btw :) | |
| [11:13] <dpm> no worries, happy to help the little I can :) | |
| [11:18] <dpm> ajmitch, cielak wanted to publish https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/589/ in Precise, and I told him to resubmit. He said you were working on the Precise version. What are the next steps for this one? Are we waiting on his resubmission or are we good to go? | |
| [11:19] <ajmitch> we're waiting on votes, see the mailing list | |
| [11:20] <ajmitch> it's probably about time I sent out another ping for votes | |
| [11:20] <dpm> ah, yeah, I had missed that | |
| [11:20] <ajmitch> same with sshsearch lens | |
| [11:21] <ajmitch> there are a couple of others I'll try & get to this weekend & beg for votes on :) | |
| [11:21] <dpm> yes, it might make sense to send a friendly reminders already | |
| [11:21] <dpm> ajmitch, https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/654/ looks like a very cool, but complex app, shall I move it to the CA queue? | |
| [11:21] <ajmitch> at a glance it didn't look overly complex, it just didn't build when initially submitted | |
| [11:22] <ajmitch> still a fair bit of code, but as a game I think it was manageable, just needed the /opt love | |
| [11:23] <dpm> ok | |
| [11:23] <dpm> https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/236/ - that one can be marked as published, right? | |
| [11:23] * ajmitch needs a good place to write some of these reviewer comments | |
| [11:24] <ajmitch> I saw that one tonight, and was going to check the version in extras vs what the author has | |
| [11:24] <ajmitch> if it needs an update, we need to do it, but I know it was published at one point | |
| [11:25] <ajmitch> by the version numbers, I think it needs an update (and tedious re-vote, etc) | |
| [11:27] <dpm> ok, that's weird, though. I thought once published, the Published state was sticky and new uploads only appeared as pending change requests in the main queue page. MyApps weirdness... | |
| [11:27] <ajmitch> it confuses me still | |
| [11:28] <dpm> this guy seems to be submitting stuff on behalf of the upstream authors, but I suspect without their knowledge: https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/988/ | |
| [11:29] <ajmitch> ok, I wasn't sure whether there was any relationship with upstream or not, I'd downloaded it to have a look at it | |
| [11:31] <dpm> I requested info | |
| [11:31] <ajmitch> thanks, I'm not great at explaining myself in those requests ;) | |
| [11:36] <dpm> ajmitch, ah, I see what happened with this app: https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/236/feedback/ - you're right, the author submitted a new version after it got published. The reason the status didn't stay sticky as Published is because it was never set as Published. In any case, nothing to worry about. How do app updates work? Do they need to be re-voted too? | |
| [11:37] <dpm> ah, from what you're saying above, it seems re-vote is needed | |
| [11:37] <ajmitch> from what I understand, yes | |
| [11:40] <dpm> oh, a Quickly app! https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/947/ | |
| [11:42] <ajmitch> we do have some | |
| [11:55] <dpm> ajmitch, what do you think we should do with these? Is pending QA the right status? I think it would make sense to mark the first one as Published and the rest as Pending Review: https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/arb/?state=QAPending | |
| [11:55] <dpm> what do you think? | |
| [11:59] * ajmitch saw wendar had updated the music scopes in the staging PPA a few days ago | |
| [11:59] <ajmitch> it's just gone midnight here, I won't be around for long :) | |
| [12:00] <ajmitch> I *think* the first one has been published for precise | |
| [12:01] <dpm> dholbach, do you think it might make sense to update rmadison from the ubuntu-dev-tools to check on extras.u.c as well? It would be very useful in these cases, I think | |
| [12:01] <dholbach> probably | |
| [12:01] <ajmitch> you can just check the PPA on launchpad.net/~app-review-board | |
| [12:03] <dpm> I thought it had been published in Precise, but apparently it hasn't - https://launchpad.net/~app-review-board/+archive/ppa?field.series_filter=precise | |
| [12:03] <ajmitch> I'll need to check the history for why that got missed, I swear there were more than those published for precise :) | |
| [12:04] <ajmitch> there's a thread from april about it, there were issues with desktopcouch | |
| [12:04] <ajmitch> remind me to chase that up tomorrow | |
| [12:04] <dpm> ok, thanks ajmitch :) | |
| [12:05] <dholbach> brb | |
| [12:08] <dholbach> it'd be great if somebody could review https://myapps.developer.ubuntu.com/dev/apps/959/ | |
| [12:09] <dholbach> I pushed a branch with a few small changes | |
| [12:10] <dholbach> as far as I can see are the -vm, -cooking and -wikipedia lens all ready for vote now | |
| [12:10] <dholbach> and with that I should probably head out for lunch :) | |
| [12:12] <ajmitch> dholbach: would check them out, but need sleep. please remind me about them tomorrow & I'll vote on them :) | |
| [12:12] <ajmitch> & thank you for working on them :) | |
| [12:13] <dholbach> no worries | |
| [12:13] <dholbach> they were all low hanging fruit | |
| [12:13] <dholbach> and the good news is: there's more in the queue :-D | |
| [12:13] <ajmitch> yippee | |
| [12:14] <ajmitch> ok, good night :) | |
| [12:14] <dholbach> good night | |
| [12:14] <dholbach> highvoltage, stgraber, wendar: if you have a bit of time and can have a look at the -vm, -cooking and -wikipedia lenses, that'd be sweet | |
| [19:45] <malin> ajmitch: installed and tested my app yet? | |