**jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Introduction (jpr) | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME rodrigo: nvidia works out of the box jpr: Welcome to the openSUSE GNOME Team meeting! cyberorg: rodrigo, i hear good things about 8.42 drivers 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? rodrigo: cyberorg: ssshh,. meeting now bugbot: openSUSE bug 326829 in openSUSE 10.3 (GNOME) "Keybindings are not working" [Critical,New] rodrigo: :) 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. 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. jpr: our experiment this week is with time limits jpr: and grouping development items at the end jpr: with that, i think we can jump right in

**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 jpr: rodrigo: take it away rodrigo: not much to add, federico has been using the whiteboard to mark bugs as we discussed rodrigo: we still need people to review and file bugs rodrigo: (I've started filing bugs for 10.3) jpr: what kind of bugs do you need filed? rodrigo: so the bug squashing thing seems quite important for the bug plan rodrigo: most important bugs are the ones that make things not work mtgordon: (N.B. bug squashing is going to emphasize older distros for now) rodrigo: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Bugs#Bug_queries rodrigo: this contains the bugs federico has been marking rodrigo: gnome-function-does-not-work rodrigo: gnome-wrong-out-of-the-box rodrigo: gnome-showstopper rodrigo: gnome-crash rodrigo: gnome-usability rodrigo: those are the keywords to use on the status whiteboard rodrigo: if people could tag bugs as they file them, it would be great **rodrigo forgot btw :) suseROCKS: I've been filing bugs where desktop themes crash apps. Is that defined as gnome-usability? rodrigo: mtgordon: right, could we do it also for 10.3 bugs soon? rodrigo: suseROCKS: gnome-crash fits betters imo suseROCKS: ok. What defines usability? mtgordon: rodrigo: Not sure it's my decision to make. Maybe it would be better to clear 10.2 next. rodrigo: mtgordon: ok jpr: suseROCKS: good question rodrigo: suseROCKS: usability problems, like this one for instance: https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=334631 mtgordon: usability bugs: things which are possible but painful, unintuitive UI, ...? bugbot: openSUSE bug 334631 in openSUSE 10.3 (YaST2) "1-click install opens too many dialogs" [Major,New] psp250: suseROCKS: some examples: "totally misplaced buttons in dialog", dialogs steals keyboard focus mw: i agree with mtgordon rodrigo: that is, things work, but the GUI/way of use the app is broken or not very convenient jpr: rodrigo: a definition like we have for wrong out of the box would be good mw: also focus issues and other obnoxious behaviour, like psp250 says jpr: on the page rodrigo: AI: rodrigo -> add definition of usability category to Bugs page jpr: and anything else missing for the tags suseROCKS: May I suggest then, listing the categories, a brief explanation of what falls under each? rodrigo: yeah, good point jpr: ok jpr: other questions for rodrigo? jpr: or comments? munkii: so we should file usability issues and improvements as bugs? munkii: sorry i just popped in **nags has quit ("Linux Desktop Testing Project - http://ldtp.freedesktop.org") rodrigo: munkii: yes **AlanClark (i=AlanClar@nat/novell/x-7932b1a3f3bfb24d) has joined #opensuse-gnome suseROCKS: or as enhancement requests? mtgordon: Yeah, that can be a fine line. rodrigo: munkii: and if you add the gnome-usability thing to the status whiteboard, you'll get free beer :) mtgordon: I think radical changes would be enhancement requests. rodrigo: suseROCKS: I see enhancements as new features munkii: ok, except a whole barrel of bugs from me soon ;-) jpr: radical changes should usually be done in conjunction with upstream as well munkii: rodrigo: that would be awfully sweet of you =) jpr: munkii: maybe you want to give federico and rodrigo a sample first munkii: now? jpr: munkii: after the meeting mtgordon: I'm thinking of spatial nautilus as an old example of a usability enhancement. jpr: munkii: just so they can see how the criteria is working jpr: AI for munkii to give rodrigo and federico bug samples munkii: things like.. ah, i was going start a big rant rodrigo: btw, take care when writing the status whiteboard, it doesn't deal with typos jpr: ok jpr: anything else? suseROCKS: can I suggest one more category? rodrigo: so if you write the keywords incorrectly, the bug would get lost jpr: suseROCKS: yes, go 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. suseROCKS: If for no other reason than to heighten people's awareness to consider accessibility when developing. mtgordon: Is there maybe already a keyword for a11y? 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 suseROCKS: ok jpr: somwhere in the next 3-4 months jpr: ok, great jpr: time has expired :-) rodrigo: yeah, sounds better as a themed bug fix rodrigo: ok jpr: please continue after the meeting if necessary

**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 jpr: mtgordon: take it away mtgordon: OK 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. mtgordon: (expecting lots of chaff, little wheat) mtgordon: Last week it was proposed that we spend a Friday on this. mtgordon: IMHO, tomorrow would be insufficient notice. mtgordon: So I'm going to propose Friday of next week. mtgordon: 26th mtgordon: There aren't that many, so I'm hoping we'd be able to get through them all in one day. mtgordon: Thoughts? Feedback? jpr: did you talk to apokryphos about project wide days? mtgordon: The question of the next step has already come up. 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 mtgordon: jpr: Ugh, no, I didn't. **apokryphos stumbles in mtgordon: munkii: Well, there are some where we can fairly assume that they won't get fixed for those older distros. jpr: yes, not worth the effort mtgordon: apokryphos: Any project-wide bug squashing events in the near future? rodrigo: it would be good to have howtos for people to install other virtualization software if they don't have vmware licenses rodrigo: or vmware images for the player (which is free, tright?) apokryphos: mtgordon: bug-squashing turns into bug-hunting frequently :o jpr: virtualbox is getting a lot of use jpr: http://en.opensuse.org/Virtualbox mtgordon: apokryphos: We're looking into clearing out bugs from older versions (10.1 and before). 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 rodrigo: AI: write HOWTOs for virtualization software jpr: apokryphos: yes, we discussed that too, as a separate event apokryphos: mtgordon: I don't think there'll be a project-wide one until a few stages into the alphas jpr: rodrigo: it already exists :-) mtgordon: apokryphos: Fair enough, thanks. rodrigo: jpr: for vmware only AFAIK, or am I wrong? apokryphos: group-specific ones are a very good idea, I think, though jpr: rodrigo: see the above link jpr: mtgordon: ok, so Friday Oct 26? mtgordon: jpr: That's the proposal, yes. jpr: mtgordon: we'll need a wiki setup of GNOME bug days? mtgordon: jpr: To explain the concept, give people an idea of what to expect, plus schedule? AlbertoP: hmm NM patch :-? **AlbertoP is worried jpr: yes and any rules you might want to post jpr: AlbertoP: meeting in progress :-) mtgordon: jpr: Do we want to log IRC on bug days for posterity? AlbertoP: oops sorry ^^ mtgordon: jpr: I expect the rules will evolve over time. mtgordon: Rule #1: Leave my mother out of it! jpr: mtgordon: a) maybe b) yes, but lets have a template page to record those rules AI mtgordon: Fair enough. jpr: any other questions on bug squash day? jpr: comments on the timing? jpr: volunteers to help mtgordon organize? mtgordon: By rules you mean guidelines on when/how to handle the bugs? jpr: mtgordon: yes, like if we move a bug to opensuse 11.0 jpr: i presume we want to mark the bug as OS 10.3 jpr: and also tag it from the bug plan if possible munkii: jpr: is it expected to be a one time job, or something that we'd do regularly? jpr: mtgordon: ^^ want to take that? mtgordon: I'm not sure we'll need to clear out really old bugs very often. mtgordon: In theory, we shouldn't have to. **bradya (n=banderso@137.65.168.48) has joined #opensuse-gnome mtgordon: I think we'll want to look at 10.2 bugs later, as a separate project. jpr: but holding bug days in general? mtgordon: Eventually 10.3 bugs. mtgordon: We could do this on a regular basis. munkii: i'd like that mtgordon: I'm not sure that's set in stone, but it's a distinct possibility. **calvin (n=calvin@205.208.235.225) has joined #opensuse-gnome munkii: there will always be bugs that needs squashing ^_^ rodrigo: yeah, regular bug hunting days will help a lot mtgordon: But recurring bug days would emphasize more current code. jpr: for all those watching wondering how to get involved, bug hunting is a great one to learn about development and help out! jpr: so talk to mtgordon jpr: any last questions? jpr: comments? apokryphos: the KDE guys are thinking of having more information for inexperienced people to get into packaging on the wiki apokryphos: ..with guides for simple packaging to 'scratch an itch' (i.e. some little application) suseROCKS: I'd like that apokryphos: I was wondering, is this also something that someone from the gnome team could consider? mw: apokryphos: we've taken some tentative steps towards doing that, but it would probably be good to combine efforts mtgordon: There would be a lot of duplication otherwise. jpr: yes jpr: good stuff mw: apokryphos: especially since packaging a gnome app isn't very different jpr: AI: mw to talk to KDE team about packaging policy/itch scratching jpr: ok, moving on

**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 apokryphos: that would be great :) jpr: so jpr: one of the experiments was to see if having themed days for these meetings would be good jpr: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/Themes jpr: has some ideas, they are sort of end user functionality jpr: technical bugs/questions type things jpr: for the samples jpr: what do people think? **Riggwelter arrives jpr: bueller? munkii: Gnome UI improvement munkii: \o/ btimothy: package management UI improvement ;) mtgordon: Reminds me of Iron Chef. "Today's theme ingredient is Bluetooth!" jpr: i'm not sure how we'd theme these meetings in this context though rodrigo: btimothy: /me is filing bugs for that for your pleasure :) Riggwelter: jpr: They all look like they'd be imnportant jpr: i could see a bug fix day jpr: or days **jony has quit ("Leaving.") jpr: focussing on that suseROCKS: Are you asking whether themes are a good idea or what themes should be proposed? jpr: both rodrigo: jpr: yeah, themes look better to me as bug days munkii: review the submitted bugs that revolves around UI? jpr: the idea was originally to theme these meetings 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 jpr: but the themes so far seem more suited to bug fixing days suseROCKS: I think themes are a great idea. It will spur increased participation by people who might be intimidated by a larger encompassing meeting. jpr: btimothy: yah, good point btimothy: and if we need to spend more time on a particular item ... we can just schedule it in to the mtg. jpr: suseROCKS: so i think you are advocating a separate entity for themes other than these meetings btimothy: ...which I guess you could call the theme (since it'll take maybe longer than the other items)? jpr: and these should probably be co-ordinated with the bug plan items? munkii: jpr: they'll probably be pretty short, and kinda awkward jpr: or feature implementation/polish jpr: munkii: in what context, these meetings or separate bug fixing days mtgordon: I can see two possible directions for themes: functionality (user-oriented), and infrastructure (developer-oriented). 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 mtgordon: Infrastructure might well be forward-looking and therefore ill-suited to bug days, IMHO. munkii: not alot of people are interested in one theme munkii: a widely themed meeting is a better idea jpr: munkii: i can see either way - if you say "hey we are going to sort through all the bluetooth problems" jpr: you would get a lot of people on that day for a separate event from this meeting munkii: i for one, don't use bluetooth at all, so jpr: munkii: ok - can you give a concrete proposal? munkii: a regular weekly meeting with one major theme and few off-topics would do just fine **bradya has quit () jpr: ok jpr: so we have two proposals jpr: 1) a regular weekly meeting with one major theme and few off-topics would do just fine suseROCKS: And then funnel the findings of those meetings to a wiki jpr: 2) a separate event for fixing and reviewing all bugs in a particular topic esp. if connected to the bug plan mw: i favour 2 jpr: comments? rodrigo: I vote for 2 also rodrigo: we still need the regular meetings to keep track of progress hpj: 2 **btimothy favors #2 jpr: munkii: how would you manage 1) time wise? i'm thinking we'd want to fix the bugs in #2 as well **Riggwelter favours 2 munkii: ok, democracy sucks =P mtgordon: 2 is fine for things that are already supposed to work. suseROCKS: I favor both 1 and 2. mtgordon: It's ill-suited to forward-looking discussions, but we can find other venues for those. mauropm: 2 o/ rodrigo: mtgordon: those are projects and mini-features :) mw: if we did 1), it should probably go non-developer, developer, theme. but really, /me 2 jpr: mtgordon: right, but its also a good initial test forum for new things jpr: ie pulseaudio when it goes in hpj: maybe we can spin offadditional themed meetings if there's enough interest in one topic jpr: munkii, suseROCKS : for these meetings, do you see technical themes as well or something else? jpr: ie if we were to do 1) btimothy: I would think that if we really needed to have this meeting themed, it would become apparent ;) mtgordon: jpr: Fair enough. I'm just saying we'll need someplace to discuss pulseaudio before it goes in. btimothy: and it would consume the bulk of the metg. btimothy: mtg. 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 mtgordon: This week's theme: Hawaiian shirts hpj: mtgordon: mailing lists 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. mw: Next week's theme: Identity in post-industrial societies jpr: suseROCKS: willing to try if we have a theme suggestion munkii: but i agree on separate bug related meetings though, we don't need to bore everybody with those stuff suseROCKS: Will free refreshments be provided? **jpr hands suseROCKS a beer Riggwelter: suseROCKS: They are now - \_/ mtgordon: punch and pie jpr: so, cycling back onto the original topic munkii: ok, we're getting off-topic, jpr, what's the next tropic jpr: a theme for next week? jpr: do we have one? jpr: or do we want to work on the list some more? rodrigo: I'd vote for bug hunting/fixing of the updater 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 rodrigo: seems the most complained about thing jpr: not sure we can do that in one of these meetings jpr: but we could invite a guest start jpr: star jpr: from the mobile devices team jpr: how does that sound? rodrigo: great Riggwelter: sounds lie a plan jpr: ok suseROCKS: that's a great idea. Anything to boost participation. jpr: AI: bluetooth theme, JP to get bluetooth effort jpr: good to go munkii: Linus T +1

**jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Task Review | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME munkii: and we'll call it "meet the asshole" day jpr: task review Riggwelter: wow, we're behing schedule baaaad munkii: ah, link to tasks? jpr: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Tasks rodrigo: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Tasks jpr: for the first item, the wiki tasks, we look good suseROCKS: off-topic... are the transcripts of these meetings posted? jpr: yes jpr: we look good except for Improve Bugs:GNOME bug reporting information jpr: we really need to get that going rodrigo: suseROCKS: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings jpr: mtgordon last week was willing to be involved suseROCKS: thanks jpr: do we have a volunteer to drive that forward? jpr: we need to add info for NM, Beagle, nautilus, gdm, etc **jpr notes suseROCKS hasn't volunteered for anything yet :-) **rodrigo looks at suseROCKS jpr: also psp250 was doing a nice helpful job earlier today jpr: with munkii on the debug foo suseROCKS: Hey I'm still dipping my feet in the water here... I want to know what I'm getting myself into first.  :-) jpr: ok :-) jpr: AI: find owner for Bugs:GNOME update jpr: (JP) 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. jpr: other tasks jpr: live cd jpr: sreeves: any update? we need to finalize this **ratkinson (i=ratkinso@nat/novell/x-8f4587a42ecabb43) has left #opensuse-gnome sreeves: just checked this morning and don't see the final version out yet jpr: ok jpr: sbrabec, mw : G:S update? rodrigo: jpr: Create bug plan task can be closed I guess jpr: rodrigo: not yet i think, still have some details to work out mw: i think G:S is still a little broken jpr: mw: ok, update the ETA suseROCKS: question about the task review list I just scanned... jpr: in fact everyone should review the list, add ETA's where possible, the new column from magnus suseROCKS: example: Improve our package summaries and descriptions... What's taht about and what knowledge is required? sbrabec: jpr: I just released publish lock for 10.3. For 10.2 it's required to fix ugly failures: sbrabec: @MKDIR_P@: no such file or directory. For many packages. rodrigo: suseROCKS: you just need to go over the .spec files and put better summaries there jpr: suseROCKS: its the rpm header info - first step would be to come up with some sort of consistent policy sbrabec: I suspect gettext and tried to use version from Factory. jpr: sbrabec: ok munkii: what about --> Review http://en.opensuse.org/Wishlist_Gnome | Each IRC meeting | On going | Everyone jpr: sbrabec, mw : can you update that in the task list ? (10.3 done, 10.2 in progress) munkii: is this going to be addressed today? suseROCKS: that is an interesting project... Need more info... anyone who can help me out after the meeting.. great. jpr: munkii: good point mw: we had a similar problem with intltool when working on 10.3 jpr: munkii: i'm not sure its worth reviewing that every time jpr: munkii: but we could do wishlist packaging as a theme day munkii: jpr, well, at least today? munkii: ah munkii: ok rodrigo: munkii: we should just watch the page and file bugs for the packages suggested, imo jpr: mw: oh, packaging guidelines should have you and a status

**jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Q&A| http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME jpr: munkii: add wishlist packaging to the theme page if you good jpr: ok jpr: Q&A jpr: (yes behind scheduled, but about 1 hour for non-dev topics) munkii: yay! Q&A! btimothy: I have a question for everyone ... jpr: (no pre-questions today, so just start firing) btimothy: if you go to http://en.opensuse.org/ and then only using your mouse, how many clicks does it take to find GNOME? btimothy: if anyone has an idea of how we can improve that, please suggest or make appropriate changes to the wiki munkii: btimothy, i'd guess too many, that if you even know it's there jpr: is the answer "too many"? suseROCKS: What should Q&A focus on? munkii: suseROCKS: anything! jpr: suseROCKS: anything you want to ask btimothy: the answer _is_ "too many"! mw: btimothy: /GNOME should go into the sitemap, at the very least jpr: btimothy: one suggestion would be to get it on the projects page as well mw: btimothy: as should a number of other important jump-off pages, i expect **btimothy agrees 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? **Phocean has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) jpr: and a link to our tasks page on the main tasks page btimothy: AI: Make the GNOME page more visible in the wiki jpr: suseROCKS: its a bit of a fine line - evolution is primarily written by novell people, but its also part of the gnome project jpr: and the evo developers like to drive their work that way (gnome centric) rather than via opensuse (novell-centric) jpr: other questions? psp250: Does contributing patches/fixing packages in the OBS GNOME:* branches require adding a bug or can be discussed in here? rodrigo: ideally, we would have a simple bugzilla frontend that filed the bugs to the correct one jpr: psp250: depends which repo i think jpr: G:C does not require a bug suseROCKS: Rodrigo: That'd be a cool idea. Sometimes, trying to find information is hard when googling. Try googling "evolution"  :-) jpr: nor would G:U during heavily development jpr: (like now) mw: i like bugs for G:U all the time when possible jpr: psp250: if you need to get an update shipped for 10.3 or released products you will need a bug jpr: mw: oh? jpr: mw: we should write that down :-) mw: if a package fails to build because, say, something is missing in %files, then sure, no bug mw: but otherwise, the more detailed record we have of everything we've done, the better rodrigo: yes mw: jpr: i'll add it to our packaging page if there's consensus jpr: psp250: what do you think? want to find a line between onerous and a record of what we've done jpr: psp250: do you have a particular issue in mind as a test case? (the gedit thing?) **xcasex (n=xcasex@c-060ee655.82-1-64736c10.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se) has joined #opensuse-gnome jpr: other Questions? psp250: jpr: thanks, I'll stick to adding bugs then (which takes a bit longer than required for simple stuff I'd assume) jpr: mw: oh man - i see an osc plugin that files the bug *for you* mauropm: :O **mw adds that to the osc plugins todo list psp250: jpr: Yes, like evolution not compiling the TNEF Attachment plugin or missing gstreamer010 plugins which have a "ok" lincense jpr: ok jpr: LAST CALL FOR QUESTIONS suseROCKS: Thanks all for letting me join in this week. jpr: psp250: mw an mauropm can wrangle stuff internally, so they can be your reference jpr: suseROCKS: we're here every week, try the veal jpr: ok, great jpr: developer meeting time

**jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Packaging policy (mw) | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME jpr: mw: go for it suseROCKS: wait.. I wasn't eating veal now? (stares wonderingly at his food) mw: ok, apokryphos referred to this earlier. we're working on a set of guidelines for our patches mw: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Packaging_policy mw: right now it's pretty minimal, since we're basically saying #include <suse/packaging-policy.h> mw: so to speak mw: as you can see, the page includes a few gnome-specific things Riggwelter: + GConf scriptlets mw: Riggwelter: ? Riggwelter: mw: Sorry, typed it before you mentioned gnome-specific 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 mw: at least, i've forgotten some of them Riggwelter: Is it worth referencing the GNOME template .spec file on it? suseROCKS: I need to go now, but thanks to all... See you again soon! mw: Riggwelter: yes, thank you, i'll add that rodrigo: Riggwelter: yes, the plugin is done, will be committing later jpr: mw: do we specify .patch as the patch extension anywhere? **suseROCKS has quit ("Leaving") mw: jpr: another thing to add jpr: mw: and should we reference the osc plugin page? mw: jpr: yep, will do that too mw: see what i mean about things i do without thinking about them but aren't really obvious? :) jpr: mw: what about %make with multiple jobs and use of %configure? mw: jpr: i think that's part of the guidelines for the overall project jpr: and -p0 for patches 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. jpr: mw: ok, maybe a cheat sheet for those too? mw: jpr: also, why -p0? jpr: i do not like to search the entire guidelines :-) Riggwelter: mw ; jpr: was going to ask about -p0 also mw: jpr: ok, fair enough jpr: mw: oh, becuase i think %patch defaults to -p0 **hpj votes for -p1 mw: i prefer -p1 only because that's what quilt defaults to rodrigo: most of my patches are -p1 :( **Riggwelter normally uses -p1 mw: it would be nice to have them all the same, but it's a pretty minor detail imo jpr: rodrigo: quilt refresh -p0 :-) jpr: ok rodrigo: jpr: not only because of quilt, when working locally I just do the patch comparing 2 dirs jpr: mw: and i guess the mini howto like apokryphos talked about? mw: jpr: yeah jpr: if we have a template plugin hpj: generally i get -p1 when diffing tarballs and -p0 when diffing VCS jpr: ours might be different from KDE's enough to do our own jpr: or not **jpr is unsure mw: still, i'd like to get more questions. everyone who's chimed in now has already done packaging work jpr: :-) jpr: lejo: you were poking me on a packaging bug yesterday, any opinion? rodrigo: mw: info about running quilt locally would be helpful, although it fits better the patches page btimothy: is there a way to easily determine Requires and BuildRequires? someone mentioned that debian packages determine this automatically? mw: rodrigo: agreed. btimothy: or is that not related to this discussion? jpr: sbrabec: you've had a tool to do an initial pass about buildrequires automatically mw: btimothy: it's a good question, in any case jpr: sbrabec: thought about an osc plugin for that? rodrigo: mw: I'll add it myself, since I need to do it after you told me I could Riggwelter: btimothy: Under normal circumstances, AutoReqProv is enough for Requires rodrigo: Riggwelter: that pulls all dependencies automatically? **btimothy has never seen AutoReqProv before Riggwelter: rodrigo: Yes **hpj neither rodrigo: cool mw: it figures out library dependencies btimothy: could that be the holy grail of packaging?  :) sbrabec: jpr: I did not finished it yet. But yes, I have a tool, which analyzes pkg-config checks. mw: but not anything else hpj: is there an example of its usage somewhere? Riggwelter: Look at a random spec file in G:C mw: if your package execs /usr/bin/foo, AutoReqProv: won't be able to figure that out Riggwelter: Autoreqprov: on Riggwelter: mw: no but under normal circumstances... ;) 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 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. mw: Riggwelter: ok, but since a lot of people don't know about it, i guess it should be included in the cheet sheet sbrabec: I guess that python chain as well. Riggwelter: phone call mw: mm, do many people have trouble with the %find_lang macro? mauropm: mw, mee mauropm: me jpr: no, but only because i copy a spec file :-) sbrabec: %find_lang now does not mark docs as %doc. Riggwelter: back munkii: jpr: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/Themes mw: jpr: hehe. %find_lang does need some fiddling and diddling at times, though jpr: mw: awesome jpr: ok mw: rarely, but enough to be mystifying jpr: AI mw update page with suggestions mw: s/enough/often enough/ jpr: anything else on this? jpr: mw: timeline to do the update? munkii: should add a !Requiers field in wishlist gnome, just to make sure that packager know what there in for munkii: ? jpr: it would be nice to free up G:C work again asap mw: jpr: i think i can get most of it done today jpr: awesome **Riggwelter doesn't have long remaining

**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 jpr: Riggwelter: go man go Riggwelter: Link: http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Community_Inclusion_Policy Riggwelter: We've been waiting on the packaging guidelines - these are now in progress thank Riggwelter: s to mw and one the page is finished, we can point to it from the policy and nai Riggwelter: l it. Then we can get on with the task of bringing what's currently the Riggwelter: re up to code. mw: jpr: although i got sidetracked bigtime yesterday cleaning up the gconf macros page, so it could happen again :) Riggwelter: wow, that didn't paste well jpr: mw: understood Riggwelter: but, you get the jist Riggwelter: basically, no change **Binary_Crap36 (i=1010101a@gateway/tor/x-bd1fb626dedff8ca) has joined #opensuse-gnome jpr: Riggwelter: ok, AI link to the new policy page jpr: and next week hopefully bang on the clean up Riggwelter: jpr basically. jpr: ok

**jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting in progress - Q&A | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME jpr: any other development Q&A questions? **psp250 is now known as FunkyM jpr: exit stage right jpr: THIS MEETING IS DONE! **jpr has changed the topic to: Meeting over, archives up soon | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME/Meetings/20071018 | http://en.opensuse.org/GNOME jpr: thanks everyone very good