16:10:07 #startmeeting 16:10:07 Meeting started Thu Jun 24 16:10:07 2010 UTC. The chair is llunak. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:10:07 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:10:13 agenda: 16:10:32 * old action items 16:10:56 * status report 16:11:21 * Repository reorganisation conclusion 16:11:27 * q&a, misc 16:11:35 #topic old action items 16:12:09 * wstephenson adds a start nepomuk button to the akonadi warning dialog 16:13:14 wstephenson: daddy, try to focus :) 16:14:01 WIP 16:14:11 ie very late 16:14:31 * reddwarf collect some informations about the default applications and 16:14:48 * reddwarf; once we have the list we will know if the problem triggers for 11.2 16:14:54 done, posted to the list 16:15:15 * conclusion of repository reorganization 16:15:19 a separate topic 16:15:40 * javier will create LiveCDs of unstable KDE 16:15:50 javier_: done I assume? 16:16:20 needs more tweaking 16:16:28 ok 16:16:31 but all the hard work is done, wd there 16:17:52 hmm ... the last minutes lack an AI section, and it's not clear to me what the status of some old AIs is 16:17:54 llunak: that's right. thanks to coolo who fixed the repoe config, updated the list of packages and created a script for managing it 16:18:39 ok ... tittiatcoke to write down a complimentary note in the minutes :) 16:19:03 I'll run over the old AIs too to be sure, just say it's been handled if that's the cae 16:19:05 case 16:19:29 * wstephenson, javier_ write the ksuseinstall text 16:19:32 write down accusatory note vs sebas in the minutes? 16:19:35 done, i think. 16:19:36 discussed on the list 16:19:44 do you know how to upload it to the site? 16:20:00 Beineri told me 16:20:06 * javier_ announce and run a bug triage 16:20:23 not done 16:20:56 i'm waiting to get someone from upstream to help me since it's my first time 16:21:11 as wstephenson told me 16:21:11 * wstephenson see if rpmlint warnings can be hung on a lime tree for easy plucking 16:21:22 not done 16:21:37 wstephenson: you have contacted somebody from upstream already, right? 16:21:59 llunak: i've had 2 discussions with blauzahl 16:22:14 and she hasn't contacted javier_ 16:22:34 and darioandres retired 16:22:41 we should be able to handle this ourselves too if needed, but that might be only post 11.3 then because of akademy 16:22:52 wstephenson: if it's not possible, it's ok. i could try it myself 16:23:23 * wstephenson mail list about meeting times 16:23:25 ws 16:23:39 was this about choosing a different meeting time if needed? 16:23:58 so yes 16:23:59 yes 16:24:02 sorry, not done 16:24:18 * lunak,wstephenson document how-to-maintain Extra 16:24:27 part of the next topic, kind of done 16:24:51 so, the highlight of today's show, ladies and gentlemen 16:25:22 #topic Repository reorganisation conclusio 16:25:26 #topic Repository reorganisation conclusion 16:25:47 http://en.opensuse.org/KDE/RepositoryRenaming 16:26:03 I suggest everybody opens this page and we'll go over it 16:26:27 Ok 16:26:36 done ... 16:26:44 so, let's find answers for the questions 16:26:51 * What should stand for? 16:27:11 most people voted Distro, there's also SUSE as an interesting option 16:27:51 I like SUSE as well 16:27:57 +1 16:27:59 it is also shorter than distro :-) 16:28:03 +1 16:28:10 and clear about what the packages mean 16:28:12 but it's upper-case >:) 16:28:31 +1 16:28:31 ose can be more shorter with (*) stand for openSUSE 16:28:32 SuSE? 16:28:33 and it's not as good alphabetically :-) 16:28:39 seriously, I don't see the advantage over Distro, but I'm find with both 16:28:57 llunak: all my suggestions are about being semantically clear 16:29:04 so we go with SUSE? 16:29:04 and distro is just a pointer 16:29:11 it includes a hint that whatever follows is not upstream kde. 16:29:27 somebody seriously against? 16:29:35 llunak: against what? Distro? 16:29:40 SUSE 16:29:43 should we not stick on what others are doing in obs like http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/server:/OpenGroupware/ ? 16:30:41 llunak: well, I don't mind either way 16:30:42 I'm almost seriously against :-/ 16:30:45 tigerfoot: what are they doing there so special? 16:30:53 people might think it's for sle 16:30:53 SUSE is no more like openSUSE like Distro is like openSUSE 16:30:59 to me it doesn't make a difference 16:31:05 OOo puts whatever upstream stable version exists into STABLE, so we so not comply with that anyway. 16:31:14 cb400f: true, people might consider SUSE to be SLE, not openSUSE 16:31:17 Distro is ok 16:31:48 llunak: we have 5 votes for distro and 4 for SUSE 16:31:51 llunak: they have the distro name and after that the product, but forget, it doesn't apply to kde ... 16:32:05 ok, everybody just write +Distro or +SUSE and I'll sum up 16:32:11 cb400f: we do have SLE repos though. 16:32:17 +Distro 16:32:23 +Distro 16:32:26 +Distro 16:32:27 +Distro 16:32:29 it's still in the OBS, anyone looking for real SLE software should be shot by theirC IO 16:32:31 +SUSE 16:32:35 +Distro 16:32:36 +SUSE 16:32:47 +openSUSE ( so SUSE) 16:32:57 +Windows7 16:33:07 +1 16:33:14 10 seconds for slow typists ... 16:33:26 +SUSE 16:33:34 cmon SUSE, run boy run! 16:33:39 +Distro 16:33:48 6:4 for Distro 16:34:02 yippie! 16:34:08 finally a decision.. 16:34:14 lets move on.. 16:34:22 KDE:Backports or KDE:UpdatedApplications 16:34:29 not really listed as a question, but there's an alternative name proposal for Backports 16:34:30 dirk: but we will come back to the v12 :-) 16:35:13 I perso a 16:35:29 go on, slow typist :) 16:35:31 I personally think a bit hackerish name isn't a big deal 16:35:32 I still prefer Backports - it is consistent to what it was in the past, and there was on strong reason to change it 16:35:41 +UpdatedApplications since nobody knows what backports is and the whole renaming does not make sense if it is not meant to make the repos more understandable for the users. devs know them anyway. 16:36:08 updatedapplications,.. which ones? 16:36:09 dirk: i suspect the people who don't understand backports aren't participating in the discussion 16:36:21 rabauke: thank you, that's my point. 16:36:41 I agree with Rabauke. 16:36:50 i am also open to equivalent suggestions 16:36:59 so is everyone fine with UpdatedApplications? 16:37:00 KDE:Updates is confusable with online updates 16:37:06 Apps is shorter :-) 16:37:12 I'd shorten it at least to Apps 16:37:16 one thing that bothers me is that Applications is a difficult name to type right 16:37:26 true 16:37:27 Apps should be ok :-) 16:37:27 and it may possibly create confusion with online update 16:37:42 so KDE:Apps or KDE:UpdatedApps? 16:37:43 LastestVersionForYourStableKdeOpensuse ? (a bit long but make sense :-)) 16:38:07 * javier_ prefers backports 16:38:08 UpdatedApps 16:38:15 +UpdatedApps 16:38:19 * saschpe prefers backports too 16:38:29 tigerfoot: that's why I suggested a systemsettings GUI because IMHO it is the only way to get understandable and safe repo handling for the users. 16:38:42 I hope the Update_d_ Apps makes it clear that it is not online updates 16:38:56 javier_, saschpe: why? 16:39:01 I think backport is not a wrong choice, the wikipedia def clarify it quite well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backport 16:39:19 tigerfoot: why use a term that needs explanation though? 16:39:28 people do not read wikipedia when they open yast's repo module 16:39:31 wstephenson: it's a term that is used across a wide distro selection and I'd say that users that manage to find _and_ enable that repository know what they want 16:39:37 they do not even read the opensuse wiki 16:39:47 wstephenson: Backports is also a term used in the Debian or Fedora world 16:39:54 wstephenson: UpdatedApps is not 16:39:54 saschpe: exacty, my point. it's more clear 16:39:55 they just use urls they find in forums or mailinglists 16:39:58 saschpe: hopefully we will make it a lot easier to find and enable than it is now. 16:40:07 dirk: thanks thats what I want to explain ... 16:40:07 updatedapps also needs clarification 16:40:12 wstephenson: have less repositories then :-) 16:40:51 ok, let's do the vote : +Backports, +UpdatedApps 16:40:57 dirk: we should aim to include users who are not fluent with Debian or Fedora 16:41:03 +UpdatedApps 16:41:05 * saschpe +Backports 16:41:07 +backports 16:41:11 +UpdatedApps 16:41:15 +UpdatedApps 16:41:18 +UpdatedApps 16:41:18 +Backports 16:41:20 +Backports 16:41:28 +UpdatedApps 16:41:58 * cb400f is torn 16:42:06 10 ... 9 ... 16:42:21 you can abstain ... I do here 16:42:22 wstephenson: google: 2.2 million hits for backports, 2nd hit is explaining it. updatedapps 300000, and it points to apple itunes 16:42:34 dirk: because it doesn't need explanation 16:42:36 Apple iTunes :D 16:42:37 how do gnome repos and others handle backports? 16:42:50 the term backport is standard 16:43:03 among a small population 16:43:05 if we start that way we can also discuss the usage of STABLE repos. 16:43:07 what are updatedapps? they are backports of blabla 16:43:11 either way it should be done the same way across all repos 16:43:15 gnome is Backport .. 16:43:19 wstephenson: well, but 2.2 million vs 300000 also shows which one is more frequent in use 16:43:26 http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/GNOME:/Backports:/ 16:43:27 that's what I've guessed 16:43:28 almost everybody else uses is for upstream versions. 16:44:09 okay, so we're 4:4 ? 16:44:10 dirk: are you sure you're not measuring the frequency of explanation of the term? 16:44:16 tigerfoot: That are no backported apps 16:44:25 well, 5:4 for updatedapps if I'm counting correctly 16:44:32 they are just new builds. backports are patches 16:44:47 ctrippe: so they confuse people also :-) ( I rarely goes there ... ) 16:44:51 wstephenson: no 16:44:53 and GNOME:Backports contains the platform too 16:45:13 wstephenson: for example, searching for news on "UpdatedApps" gives 16:45:21 wstephenson: "Updated Apps* - Lists all the apps that are updated each day" 16:45:34 I think updatedapps is technically fine too 16:46:15 ok, let's go with that one 16:46:24 dirk: to me as a native speaker it's clear without explanation. i don't buy the argument that googlish is our lingua franca 16:46:44 * stable repo name 16:46:48 however if it really looks wrong to non-native speakers, then its a problem 16:47:11 there's "stable", "released", "supported" 16:47:13 wstephenson: no, it sounds a bit verbose, but thats fine 16:47:29 what does "backports" actually mean? 16:48:12 "stable" has the existing problem that nobody knows if it's KDE's stable or SUSE's stable. 16:48:18 "released" is the same 16:48:27 I'm getting the impression that suse's definition of backports is not the same as mine :) 16:48:35 new apps for old distro :-) 16:48:38 Chani: new version compiled to the old desktop ... 16:48:56 new apps version .. 16:48:57 "supported" i hope links to the established idea that suse supports things 16:49:00 tigerfoot: what if it's the desktop that I'm upgrading? :) 16:49:21 Chani: that's not what that repo contains 16:49:27 Chani: KDE:Backports (the current naming) contains only application updates, no main modules 16:49:28 I don't find "supported" better 16:49:32 Chani: while the discussion is interesting (and you have a good point), can we stick to the current topic until the meeting is over, please? 16:49:41 dirk: oh right, sorry 16:49:49 Chani: note I agree with you that we used Backports incorrectly, 16:49:58 is it actually supported? I thought there might be unreleased patches and such 16:50:01 of course if you had chosen SUSE for Supported would give KDE:SUSE:Supported which is pretty clear IMO. 16:50:04 +supported since STABLE is used by most others for upstream stable releases, e.g. Openoffice etc. 16:50:27 cb400f: technically it is supported or imminently supported :) 16:50:54 wstephenson: but KDE:Distro:Stable still indicates that it is the stable distro, not the stable KDE release 16:51:10 don't like supported but stable compared to others is misleading in kde/opensuse ... 16:51:27 tigerfoot: but we rename from KDE:STable to KDE:Distro:Stable 16:51:33 dirk: ack 16:51:52 KDE:Distro:Supported works too 16:52:04 yep 16:52:05 dirk: ah yes, I already forget Distro ... 16:52:19 * tigerfoot mv SUSE DISTRO ... 16:52:23 * wstephenson hands out Ritalin, since llunak already told him to focus 16:52:26 my problem with supported is that users might get funny ideas about the extent to which it is supported 16:52:49 llunak: agree with that ... 16:52:54 counterproposal? 16:52:58 it is a community distro, not SLE 16:53:08 I find stable ok 16:53:19 +Stable 16:53:36 +supported 16:53:37 any further discussion here? 16:53:53 no, lets vote 16:54:02 ok, vote 16:54:09 +Stable 16:54:09 +Stable 16:54:11 +Stable 16:54:12 +Stable 16:54:14 +Stable 16:54:15 +Stable 16:54:16 +Stable 16:54:18 Released ? KDE:Distro:Released so when we release 4.4.5 for example its clear ? 16:54:20 bah :) 16:54:27 +Marble 16:54:32 :-) 16:54:37 I think this one is clear 16:54:53 although KDE:Distro:Marble is tempting :) 16:55:15 * Should it be grouped together with the stable and development repository? 16:55:15 Miracle can work too ... 16:55:20 (snapshots repo) 16:55:52 llunak: you missed out what 'it' means. 16:56:01 it = snapshots repo 16:56:05 * Upstream snapshots repository - Should it be grouped together with the stable and development repository? 16:56:16 examples 16:56:22 this one I really prefer the wstephenson proposal KDE:Unstable:SC 16:56:27 (was KKFD discussed already ?) 16:56:28 grouped: KDE:Distro:Snapshots 16:56:38 ungrouped: KDE:Snapshots 16:56:53 ungrouped since it does not include the distro patches 16:56:55 krop: 2nd point in the wiki page, no discussion 16:57:14 ah.. I thought that's the worse name, nm 16:57:31 krop: there are not questions about KKFD, consensus seems to be clear on KDE:Distro:Factory 16:58:03 ok, back on the snapshots then 16:58:03 ok, maybe let's do this differently 16:58:20 so please consider my proposal for this point, KDE:Unstable:SC together with the next suggestion, that unstable apps go into KDE:Unstable 16:58:33 besides the unstable stuff, there is only KDE:Extra and the capitalization question, which both seem to have clear result 16:58:57 so questions related to snapshots and playground is the remaining group 16:58:58 sorry i misquoted myself 16:59:08 KDE:Unstable:Extra + KDE:Unstable:SC 16:59:35 wstephenson: that is missing the apps that are in kkfd/updatedapps 16:59:52 kde:unstable:extra replaces kde:playground? 16:59:58 where would unstable digikam go? 17:00:08 KDE:Unstable:Apps? 17:00:17 cb400f: no, see below 17:00:27 cb400f: "Playground Repository" 17:00:35 heya, could someone hit me with a log snapshot please =) 17:00:58 KDE:Unstable:Main (for what we have in KDE/) KDE:Unstable:Extra for extragear/playground stuff 17:01:30 but that may become irrelevant once upstream switches to git 17:01:40 #save 17:01:53 remur_030: http://pastebin.com/spam.php?i=58CdH9QK 17:02:23 krop: so "Main" answers the question "only SC?" with "No"? 17:02:33 thanks! 17:02:37 remur_030: http://pastebin.com/58CdH9QK 17:02:48 I don't like all these marketing decisions 17:03:02 ooh, dirty word! 17:03:10 * dirk is seriously confused about the discussion now 17:03:13 it's not marketing, it's usability :) 17:03:26 let's start with something simpler -do we have a separate (sub) repo for just KDE SC snapshots? 17:03:51 meaning, will we 17:03:58 * tigerfoot join dirk in the dark .... 17:04:09 * saschpe searches for lighters 17:04:31 llunak: your reasons for and against? 17:04:34 that is the "Should it contain only KDE SC snapshots or also other KDE software." question 17:04:34 llunak: except unstable? 17:04:39 What would be the alternative ? To push everything in one repo ? Playground joins Unstable ? 17:05:03 playground joins unstable sounds sensible as it is after all unstable :-) 17:05:25 let's put it differently, once more: 17:05:26 saschpe: well in KDE SVN we have a distinction between trunk and playground 17:05:40 extragear can join the rest of KDE as there are pretty important apps in there and Git will kill that distinction anyway 17:06:04 we can have 1, 2 or 3 repos, for unstable stuff, 1 - KDE SC, 2 - unstable UpdatedApps (i.e. apps from kkfd), 3 - whatever else unstable 17:06:15 wstephenson: i know but playground doesn't have that much apps that really deserve packaging 17:06:34 so the question is, how much do we join these and what the structure and naming will be 17:06:45 let me split into separate questions 17:06:51 saschpe: OBS KDE:Playground contains lots of deserving apps from eg kde-apps.org.. 17:07:15 separate repo for kde sc snapshots - the wiki page seems to have quite a consensus on this being yes 17:07:33 questions on this, or can we conclude this as yes? 17:07:38 +1 17:08:01 +1 17:08:03 tittiatcoke and dirk get 2 votes here :) 17:08:08 :) 17:08:09 +1 with KDE:Unstable:SC 17:08:16 wstephenson: but most kde-apps stuff will never move into trunk, so they stay in KDE:Playground forever? 17:08:20 so if a user adds that repo he might get conflicts because KDE app xy depends on a lower KDE version? 17:08:54 rabauke: kde apps generally shouldn't have a maximum version requirement 17:09:11 ok 17:09:30 saschpe: no, but once they are stably packaged they can move into KDE:Distro:Factory 17:09:30 ok, so this seems to be clear for now, next question 17:09:43 or kde:extra 17:09:45 yeah 17:10:12 * saschpe has currently 7 repositories that start with 'KDE' enabled and doesn't like it 17:10:26 the rest of unstable stuff - do we have just another repo for whatever unstable, or do we split further? (one reason why I'm asking is because KDE:Unstable:Extra will be confusing because of not matching KDE:Extra) 17:10:49 I would go for KDE:Unstable:Apps 17:11:02 the logical thing here seems to be just one unstable repo for non-SC stuff 17:11:09 +1 17:11:25 +1 17:11:42 +1 17:11:43 +1 17:11:55 so the remaining question is naming/structure 17:11:57 llunak: i proposed KDE:Unstable:Extra and KDE:Development instead of KDE:Extra for that reason 17:11:58 unstable already includes the "playground" hint 17:12:27 wstephenson: development may suggest is has -devel stuff 17:12:53 ok so one KDE:Unstable:Apps 17:13:09 so let's just throw a couple of proposals, just to see - I'd suggest KDE:Unstable:SC and KDE:Unstable: 17:13:32 would it have as repos all of KDE:Unstable:SC, KDE:Distro:Factory, KDE:Distro:Stable? 17:13:33 when I see KDE:Unstable:Apps I understand this is App for the unstable SC release ... 17:14:01 Will KDE:Unstable:Apps replace Playground? 17:14:17 ctrippe_: i think that's what llunak meant at 19:11 17:14:23 I don't like apps because it might have non-apps stuff too, let's say I put Kor there, which is more like a desktop than an app 17:14:45 ctrippe_: yes, we're discussing the new name for playground name 17:14:46 llunak: I agree. why not Extra then? 17:14:53 I don't like Factory here, Next sounds better 17:14:59 the current naming is KDE:UNSTABLE:Desktop and KDE:Playground 17:15:03 so, what do we think of "KDE:Unstable:Extra"? 17:15:10 I guess that tigerfoot is also correct that if we keep KDE:Unstable:, it will always seems it belongs to KDE:Unstable:SC 17:15:13 herby: Factory is a reserved term :) 17:15:28 wstephenson: conflict with KDE:Extra 17:15:32 llunak: wstephenson Ok, I only wanted to make sure that I understood everyting correct 17:15:47 KDE:Extra:Unstable ? 17:15:59 I would go along with that one :-) 17:16:09 dirk: then digikam is not in KDE:Extra but is in KDE:Extra:Unstable 17:16:40 llunak: now i'm confused, i thought you just proposed dropping KDE:Extra in favour of KDE:Unstable:Extra 17:16:58 huh, KDE:Extra is stable 17:17:13 so if a user wants amarok beta.. he adds kde:unstable:/opensuse_11.3_Stable/ 17:17:21 to make it clear again - we are not discussing what is now called KKUD and Playground 17:17:33 agh kill me now, i misunderstood the whole section when commenting the wiki 17:17:36 damn, "we are now" 17:17:53 :-) 17:18:10 backports, extra (old community), stable, factory is already decided 17:18:14 * tigerfoot kill wstephenson has he ask it :-) don't like this job :-)) 17:18:20 we have the 2 unstable repos remaining 17:18:53 for those we already decided that we will have one for KDE SC snapshots and one for everything else unstable 17:18:56 I don't like moving kde:playground into kde:unstable:something 17:19:16 many people will want some "playground" stuff with stable or factory 17:19:19 * tigerfoot see that llunak has a good strong rope to navigate in repo :-) 17:19:21 * wstephenson does 17:19:33 so the remaining question is name of kde sc snapshots repo and playground name repo (including their place in the structure) 17:19:40 cb400f: and we could build KDE:Unstable:GoodName vs Stable and Factory 17:20:22 that means no stable apps for unstable sc :-) 17:21:13 one solution is to have KDE:Snapshots and KDE:Playground 17:21:23 cb400f: it doesn't exclude building KDE:Extra vs KDE:Unstable:SC 17:21:35 second is KDE:Unstable:Snapshots (or SC) and KDE:Unstable: 17:22:33 personally I would rather go for the first option. At least the KDE:Playground is not grouped with KDE:Snapshots 17:22:36 having KDE:Snapshots and KDE:Extra:Unstable is an option too, but there I see the problem that kkfd apps, such as digikam, would not be in KDE:Extra but would be in KDE:Extra:Unstable 17:22:54 * wstephenson is for the latter option 17:22:57 we just need a good name 17:23:20 i agree with dirk's point that the distinction is thin 17:23:21 so under KDE:Unstable: we have all stuff marked as unstable ... ? 17:23:43 tigerfoot: that's an option 17:24:01 SC (kde5), Apps (like digikam) ... 17:24:11 I am not sure I can follow, but shouldn't we try reducing the amount of repositories? 17:24:11 wstephenson: a released version of digikam would be in a repo named unstable? 17:24:23 rabauke: no 17:24:24 erm projects in obs terms 17:24:41 rabauke: you're confusing things. released digikam would be in KDE:Extras. 17:24:52 rabauke: as I understand it's goes in KDE:Distro:Stable 17:24:55 snapshots of unreleased digikam would be in KDE:Unstable:Goodname 17:25:02 released digikam should be in kde:updatedapps 17:25:03 wstephenson: ok that makes sense 17:25:05 damned ... wstephenson as right ... 17:25:16 question is where it's built for unstable:sc 17:25:16 remur_030: I think we cannot go below 6 for what we want, since I think it's good to have KDE SC separately from all the playground stuff 17:25:36 it doesn't matter for that it is built 17:25:48 any repo can be built for any other repo if necessary 17:25:57 cb400f: add a KDE:Unstable:SC repo on the KDE:Extra project 17:26:06 so let's think of Goodname 17:26:08 kde:updatedapp can build for kde:Snaphot for all I care 17:26:09 Stuff 17:26:17 llunak: ah ok, it's just looking like dependencies go cross alot of projects here 17:26:39 remur_030: let's discuss that separately 17:27:14 we have some options there 17:27:17 ok, so I posted 3 options above, with to be filled in, other proposals? 17:27:40 how do we express "Non-SC Stuff"? 17:28:01 not using SC at all is an interesting option 17:28:15 we could possibly have KDE:Unstable:SC and KDE:Unstable for the rest 17:28:45 Sounds logical 17:28:46 llunak: yeah i think i considered that too 17:29:18 any more schemes? 17:29:57 ok, let me put numbers to the proposals and then we vote 17:30:09 1) KDE:Snapshot, KDE:Playground 17:30:31 2) KDE:Unstable:SC, KDE:Unstable: 17:30:38 3) KDE:Unstable:SC, KDE:Unstable 17:30:51 4) KDE:Snapshot, KDE:Extra:Unstable 17:31:07 ok, vote now 17:31:09 * wstephenson votes 2 17:31:10 4 17:31:12 no no 17:31:13 shit 17:31:18 * wstephenson votes 3 17:31:27 * tittiatcoke votes 3 17:31:36 1 17:31:58 4 17:31:58 3 17:32:03 3 17:32:03 3 17:32:15 dirk: ? this is your territory 17:32:32 I'm fine with 3 as well 17:32:43 2 17:32:50 though it is completely different than what we did before 17:33:26 I wonder if people wont' get a bit confused with a repo that contains both packages and a subrepo for 3 17:33:40 llunak: yep, my fear as well 17:33:44 it is confusing 17:33:46 hopefully they won't see URLs much 17:34:08 wstephenson: I see url ... as I synchronize mirror :-) 17:34:22 well, those who don't see the url don't care about the repository name :-) 17:34:26 tigerfoot: corner case 17:34:43 hmm .. maybe let's do this only as a structure vote - KDE:Playground can stand for KDE: 17:35:04 llunak: then 1) and 4) is the same 17:35:16 4 is in a different place 17:35:57 wstephenson: fregl was quite confused today looking at the urls 17:36:01 my vote KDE:Unstable:SC + KDE: 17:36:47 please vote again, the right-most part of each repo name is a variable (i.e. by voting for 1) you do not vote for the name to be KDE:Playground but maybe KDE:foo too) 17:37:02 3 17:37:17 1 17:37:19 1 17:37:29 1 17:37:35 1 17:37:56 1 17:38:07 3 first part, 1 second part 17:38:14 great, now define $foo $bar :) 17:38:41 tigerfoot: that's 1, basically 17:38:44 * dirk is confused by the outcome of the vote 17:39:01 no 3 ... most important is KDE:Unstable:SC 17:39:02 so most people like KDE:Unstable:SC, KDE: 17:39:28 so lets settle for KDE:Unstable:SC now 17:39:34 KDE:, KDE:, to be precise 17:39:38 * tigerfoot really don't understand ... but agree ... 17:39:51 +1 for KDE:Unstable:SC 17:39:59 +1 17:40:03 +1 KDE:Unstable:SC 17:40:29 +1 KDE:whatever_without_SC 17:40:44 so you want SC to be in KDE:Unstable:SC and the rest in e.g. KDE:Playground ? 17:41:04 now I am confused :) 17:41:21 +1 KDE:Unstable:SC 17:41:42 dirk: i understood the outcome of the penultimate vote to be 1) KDEnapshot, KDElayground 17:41:44 I still don't understand where an unstable:sc user is supposed to find all the apps that exist in kkud today, but are not part of sc 17:41:49 oh fsck these emoticons 17:42:44 cb400f: both repo enabled, sc wins by having newer versions? 17:43:09 today amarok is in kkud.. but of course it won't be in unstable:sc 17:43:24 tittiatcoke, dirk: ? 17:43:31 cb400f: an amarok snapshot would be in KDE: 17:43:54 so someone will make weekly snapshots of every app in factory all of a sudden? 17:44:03 (non-sc app) 17:44:30 llunak: it seems people prefer KDE:Unstable:SC over KDE:Snapshot for (weekly snapshots of SC) 17:44:44 llunak: so I wanted to settle that first. we can discuss KDE:Playground vs the-rest later 17:45:10 llunak: for me, KDE:Unstable:SC is a bit of a misnomer as we don't actually know (formally) what is part of the SC until it is actually released 17:45:22 so is kdepim in or out of KDE:Unstable:SC - you don't know 17:45:40 dirk: I guess that the discussion is now what we are going to put in KDE:Unstable:SC. Would we have there just the kde tarballs or would we also place there applications like amarok ? 17:46:31 i'm going to have to leave 17:46:37 tittiatcoke: well, if the unstable SC snapshots are built so that they can be installed in parallel, it does not matter 17:46:57 but others do most of the KKUD work so i trust you to come up with a good scheme/name combination. 17:46:58 dirk: True, but that would mean you need Factory and Snapshots enabled 17:47:16 tittiatcoke: which does not hurt as long as both packages don't overlap 17:47:29 it is dangerous though in case of packaging mistakes 17:47:43 * dirk has to leave as well.. 17:47:51 how about we postpone this part of the discussion? 17:48:01 I think we made great progress already today, the rest needs one more night to sleepover 17:48:09 Yup. Sounds good. 17:48:11 k 17:48:19 +1 17:49:00 llunak: next topic? 17:49:11 ok, who wants teh action item of updating the page to the current decided state and the outstanding items? 17:50:27 it seems we lost llunak 17:50:36 i'm back, sorry 17:50:55 ok, we'll postpone the unstable discussion 17:51:05 we can already proceed with what we have 17:51:58 so, I have created http://en.opensuse.org/KDE/Backports_Repository and http://en.opensuse.org/KDE/Extra_Repository 17:52:25 #topic UpdatedApps repository 17:53:24 what I'll do is update the maintainers list for the UpdatedApps repo 17:53:47 and then maintainers can set it up with all the links 17:54:08 BTW, I think it's better to link KKFD directly rather than o:F 17:54:32 yes, faster updates :-) 17:54:49 I know I've already asked at least twice, but maintainers, please raise your hands now 17:55:01 hand 17:55:10 also, is it nececessary to add something to the page? 17:55:17 \o/ 17:55:27 llunak: change the description, you mean? 17:55:46 content - e.g. is it enough to say osc linkrev? 17:56:04 or should an example be added 17:56:14 example, or i will find a way to fsck it up 17:56:18 ;) 17:56:25 ok 17:56:35 so that's all for this repo 17:56:41 #topic Extra repository 17:56:46 basically the same here 17:57:01 \o/ 17:57:07 \o/ 17:57:14 we will copy packages from KDE:KDE4:Community as deemed appropriate 17:57:31 and somewhen later the old repos will be nuked 17:57:32 I believe that bitshuffler also volunteerd for maintainership here 17:57:59 AI: llunak write a summary about UpdatedApps and Extra repositories to the list 17:58:13 AI: llunak update status about repository reorganization 17:58:25 * dirk drops off, sorry 17:58:43 llunak: add a directory layout ( like the tree output ) 17:58:52 ? 17:59:01 a diagram 17:59:16 ah 17:59:29 llunak: do the mkdir, lauch tree on that so we can better understand where things goes ... 17:59:36 wstephenson: yeap a diagram :-) 17:59:45 any other AI here? 18:00:40 seems not ... 18:00:49 #topic misc, Q&A 18:01:12 +1 for constant Capitalization ... 18:01:25 so thanks everyone for their contributions 18:01:28 oh, I haven't given op rights to the meetbot, that's why the topic doesn't update ... :-/ 18:01:52 javier_ has done great work with the unstable-live cd and various bugfixes 18:02:02 * tigerfoot kick off ... 18:02:25 not really, some small details 18:02:45 marcus also picking up distribution dev tasks 18:02:55 I arrived late, was the default apps thing talked about? 18:03:02 of course not possible without a good KKUD, we know who to thank about that :) 18:03:15 :-) 18:03:15 I did not blog last week becaue there was not that much to blog about and I did not have anything "personal" to write about KDE. This week I do, so I'll need some info on what you did within the last fortnight. 18:03:15 reddwarf: no, I'll try to do it on the list 18:03:23 rabauke: cool, thank you 18:03:29 reddwarf: but basically I think we need to talk to upstream about the technical details 18:03:52 oh can we talk about covering the channel and community over the next couple of weeks? 18:04:11 i'll probably be out of the office and sporadically online at best 18:04:23 and llunak and dirk are at akademy soonish 18:04:28 I will be on holidays from the 3rd of July till 27th 18:04:34 very nice :) 18:04:41 not that I have any great idea to improve the current system, but yes, perhaps that would help 18:05:27 reddwarf: otherwise I agree with the suggestions for the defaults, so the best thing to do there would be to patch the .desktop file for now, where possible 18:05:29 can whoever is left please pickup any slack in welcoming new folk? 18:05:46 don't we always do ;) 18:05:53 sure 18:06:08 just don't point them to ppl who are probably not going to be responsive 18:06:14 ok 18:06:36 i hope 11.3 is in good shape now 18:06:44 next meeting in 2 weeks, which is akademy, so I don't know if I'll be available for it 18:07:20 ok, thanks for attending 18:07:23 #endmeeting