[needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

Bug #420513 reported by David Sugar
24
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Ubuntu
Wishlist
Julien Lavergne
pam (Debian)
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

I have a preliminary seed and meta for this related to Karmic blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktop and this should get uploaded to revu later today.

Changed in ubuntu:
status: New → In Progress
assignee: nobody → David Sugar (dyfet)
Revision history for this message
Brian Murray (brian-murray) wrote :

*** This is an automated message ***

This bug is tagged needs-packaging which identifies it as a request for a new package in Ubuntu. As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Specs/NeedsPackagingBugs, all needs-packaging bug reports have Wishlist importance. Subsequently, I'm setting this bug's status to Wishlist.

Changed in ubuntu:
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

Under which package name can we see those packages?

Revision history for this message
Mario Behling (mariobehling) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

Hi,

lubuntu and lubuntu karmic seeds are here:
https://code.launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

Best,

Mario

2009/8/29 Martin-Éric Racine <email address hidden>:
> Under which package name can we see those packages?
>
> --
> [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/420513
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of Lubuntu,
> which is a direct subscriber.
>
> Status in Ubuntu: In Progress
>
> Bug description:
> I have a preliminary seed and meta for this related to Karmic blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktop and this should get uploaded to revu later today.
>

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

Two bugs in the debian/rules file:

1) Typo:
make: *** "build-stamp"-kohteen tarvitseman kohteen "lubutu-i386" tuottamiseen ei ole sääntöä. Seis.
dpkg-buildpackage: failure: debian/rules build gave error exit status 2

The build-stamp should be called lubuntu, not lubutu (missing N).

2) Misses the 'make' invocation, right after dh_clean:

build-stamp: lubuntu-$(DEB_BUILD_ARCH)
 dh_clean
 $(MAKE)
 for seed in lubuntu; do \

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

Lintian also reports the following:

Now running lintian...
W: lubuntu-meta source: package-uses-deprecated-debhelper-compat-version 4
W: lubuntu-meta source: diff-contains-bzr-control-dir .bzr
W: lubuntu-desktop: old-fsf-address-in-copyright-file
W: lubuntu-desktop: unknown-section metapackages
E: lubuntu-desktop: depends-on-metapackage depends: xorg

Fixing these requires:
1)
   a) echo 5 > debian/compat
   b) bump the debhelper version to 5 in debian/control
2) in debian/rules: also delete .bzr in the clean rule and right after the make invocation.
3) Remove the address section completely; instead add a reference to the inclusion of the GPL text in the distro:
Copyright:
   (C) 2009, Canonical Ltd.

License:
   This package is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
   it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
   the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
   (at your option) any later version.

   This package is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
   but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
   MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
   GNU General Public License for more details.

On Ubuntu systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License
can be found in </usr/share/common-licenses/GPL>.
4) Is that an Ubuntu-specific section?
5) Requires adding a Lintian override.

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

Here's a patch with the resulting changes.

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

Looking at what the resulting lubuntu-desktop package tries to pull:

1) sysinfo -- As this pulls the whole MONO framework along, I contend that the inclusion of this is contrary to the goal of keeping Lubuntu lightweight, so I'd recommend its removal.

2) gstreamer0.10-alsa -- We already depend on alsa-base, alsa-utils, gstreamer0.10-pulseaudio so depending upon this is unnecessary.

3) language-pack-en -- Why not let the use choose their language packs using existing tools?

4) bluez-gnome -- this is actually replaced by gnome-bluetooth starting with Karmic. Outdated seed?

5) mirage -- Why not use gthumb instead? Similar features, plus camera import via libgphoto2.

Revision history for this message
Dallas Wiebelhaus (wiebelhaus) wrote :

I agree with Martin-Éric Racine and thanks for the patch as well , Cheers.

2009/8/30 Martin-Éric Racine <email address hidden>

> Looking at what the resulting lubuntu-desktop package tries to pull:
>
> 1) sysinfo -- As this pulls the whole MONO framework along, I contend
> that the inclusion of this is contrary to the goal of keeping Lubuntu
> lightweight, so I'd recommend its removal.
>
> 2) gstreamer0.10-alsa -- We already depend on alsa-base, alsa-utils,
> gstreamer0.10-pulseaudio so depending upon this is unnecessary.
>
> 3) language-pack-en -- Why not let the use choose their language packs
> using existing tools?
>
> 4) bluez-gnome -- this is actually replaced by gnome-bluetooth starting
> with Karmic. Outdated seed?
>
> 5) mirage -- Why not use gthumb instead? Similar features, plus camera
> import via libgphoto2.
>
> --
> [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/420513
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of Lubuntu,
> which is a direct subscriber.
>
> Status in Ubuntu: In Progress
>
> Bug description:
> I have a preliminary seed and meta for this related to Karmic blueprint
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktopand this should get uploaded to revu later today.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : <email address hidden>
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

Revision history for this message
Julien Lavergne (gilir) wrote :

@Martin-Eric
you should publish a bzr branch and propose to merge with the current one for all the fixes you done. It should be easier than a patch.
Also, the choice of defaults applications should be discuss separately, the more important for now is to add the package itself to the repository. It's easier to made adjustments after.

Just a remember, we are in Feature Freeze, so it needs a Freeze Exception (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess)

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

Julien, I know that we are in Feature Freeze. Since this package hasn't yet entered KArmic, we must therefore do it right the first time, because there won't be many exceptions to get it in.

Revision history for this message
David Sugar (dyfet-deactivatedaccount) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

I had wanted to get feedback sooner and hence see this done earlier.
Most if not all of these changes noted are certainly valid. Where we
touch upon what the default apps should be, my only concern is that we
do not have a lot of revs. If we are going to split the seed to produce
variants of default apps, we should do so now. If not, I think we
should accept that it will be resolved as a post-Karmic issue and simply
come together to make the best choices we can for this first release.

Julien Lavergne wrote:
> @Martin-Eric
> you should publish a bzr branch and propose to merge with the current one for all the fixes you done. It should be easier than a patch.
> Also, the choice of defaults applications should be discuss separately, the more important for now is to add the package itself to the repository. It's easier to made adjustments after.
>
> Just a remember, we are in Feature Freeze, so it needs a Freeze
> Exception (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FreezeExceptionProcess)
>

Revision history for this message
Julien Lavergne (gilir) wrote :

@Martin-Éric
An exception is only necessary for the first inclusion of the package. Adjusting dependencies (default applications) can be made without exceptions (unless most of applications changed). The main point, like David said, is the split or not of the seed because it will probably need another exception if the package is uploaded before.

IMO, another lubuntu package is not necessary, because there is already lxde meta-packages which pull LXDE components (see lxde-common source package). If we are not happy with this, we could modify it to include packages we want, instead of splitting the seed.

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Julien
Lavergne<email address hidden> wrote:
> @Martin-Éric
> An exception is only necessary for the first inclusion of the package. Adjusting dependencies (default applications) can be made without exceptions (unless most of applications changed).

Ah, that's good to hear.

> IMO, another lubuntu package is not necessary, because there is already
> lxde meta-packages which pull LXDE components (see lxde-common source
> package). If we are not happy with this, we could modify it to include
> packages we want, instead of splitting the seed.

Actually, we at least need a separate theme package. Personally, I
don't care for most of the default applications currently included, so
 I'd rather install some meta-package that pulls a theme and sets it
as the default, in addition to pulling core LXDE packages.

Is there any way I could branch the seed and propose changes to that
via a branch, before the team agrees on what the meta-package will be
and makes a first upload?

Revision history for this message
Mario Behling (mariobehling) wrote :

Dear all,

lynxis has put together a lubuntu-iso to test:

http://lynxis.crew.c-base.org

All the best,

Mario

2009/8/31 Martin-Éric Racine <email address hidden>:
> On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Julien
> Lavergne<email address hidden> wrote:
>> @Martin-Éric
>> An exception is only necessary for the first inclusion of the package. Adjusting dependencies (default applications) can be made without exceptions (unless most of applications changed).
>
> Ah, that's good to hear.
>
>> IMO, another lubuntu package is not necessary, because there is already
>> lxde meta-packages which pull LXDE components (see lxde-common source
>> package). If we are not happy with this, we could modify it to include
>> packages we want, instead of splitting the seed.
>
> Actually, we at least need a separate theme package. Personally, I
> don't care for most of the default applications currently included, so
>  I'd rather install some meta-package that pulls a theme and sets it
> as the default, in addition to pulling core LXDE packages.
>
> Is there any way I could branch the seed and propose changes to that
> via a branch, before the team agrees on what the meta-package will be
> and makes a first upload?
>

Revision history for this message
Mario Behling (mariobehling) wrote :

Dear all,

enclosed a few desktop backgrounds and images I collected from the
lubuntu designer forum at the lxde website.

Please include.

Best,

Mario

Revision history for this message
Glen Bizeau (gbizeau) wrote :

I like them, especially logo 2

Glen

On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 8:41 AM, Mario Behling<email address hidden> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> enclosed a few desktop backgrounds and images I collected from the
> lubuntu designer forum at the lxde website.
>
> Please include.
>
> Best,
>
> Mario
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to     : <email address hidden>
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Mario Behling<email address hidden> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> enclosed a few desktop backgrounds and images I collected from the
> lubuntu designer forum at the lxde website.
>
> Please include.

I personally like the all-blue background with the bubbly logo best.
I'd however omit the LXDE logo from the Ubuntu circle, since it looks
like some creepy insect. Instead, I'd focus on this nearly translucent
bubbly Ubuntu circle and adopt that as our logo, for the boot splash,
desktop background and Start menu icon.

FWIW, here, I've been using an orange and grey theme on my desktop. If
you look at the default themes that come with OpenBox, there's one
with orangeish window title bars that look very Ubuntu-Human friendly.
Combining this with some greyscale version of the bubbly Ubuntu
circle, we'd have ourselves some really cool Lubuntu style: Ubuntu
orange with LXDE grey and blue. We could use those 3 colors as our
primaries for our version of the Ubuntu circle logo and as our colors
for the default desktop theme, in combination with the Ubuntu Human
icon theme.

How does that sound?

Revision history for this message
Mario Behling (mariobehling) wrote :

Hi,

I like those designs, but I am not decided which way I like most. I
think we can also gather more design suggestions and it is always
easier to see, than to hear how something looks like.

Fedora created an adapted them for the LXDE spin. Openbox is just one
part, we also need to create athe theme in LXAppearance. There is no
general config file - it is actual designed this way currently, as
there is no other lightweight solution yet.

Generally would be good to get closer to the LXDE blue. Lets also try
to find something that looks light. UbuntuHuman looks somewhat heavy I
feel.

The forum for lubuntu designs is open here:
http://forum.lxde.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=437

Best,

- Mario

2009/8/31 Martin-Éric Racine <email address hidden>:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Mario Behling<email address hidden> wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> enclosed a few desktop backgrounds and images I collected from the
>> lubuntu designer forum at the lxde website.
>>
>> Please include.
>
> I personally like the all-blue background with the bubbly logo best.
> I'd however omit the LXDE logo from the Ubuntu circle, since it looks
> like some creepy insect. Instead, I'd focus on this nearly translucent
> bubbly Ubuntu circle and adopt that as our logo, for the boot splash,
> desktop background and Start menu icon.
>
> FWIW, here, I've been using an orange and grey theme on my desktop. If
> you look at the default themes that come with OpenBox, there's one
> with orangeish window title bars that look very Ubuntu-Human friendly.
> Combining this with some greyscale version of the bubbly Ubuntu
> circle, we'd have ourselves some really cool Lubuntu style: Ubuntu
> orange with LXDE grey and blue. We could use those 3 colors as our
> primaries for our version of the Ubuntu circle logo and as our colors
> for the default desktop theme, in combination with the Ubuntu Human
> icon theme.
>
> How does that sound?

Revision history for this message
Julien Lavergne (gilir) wrote :

@Martin-Éric
You can found some details about bzr here : https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bzr . Basically, you just need to branch the lubuntu-meta branch (https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop/+junk/lubuntu-meta), make your modifications, push your branch somewhere, and propose to merge your branch into the main lubuntu-meta branch.

@Mario
It's very nice :) A possible icon theme to go with this blue theme could be the Gnome-brave icon theme for GNOME-Colors icon theme. But it's easier to judge with some examples of real desktop with different themes.

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

The blue theme doesn't differentiate enough from KDE. We need to use other colors. How about these? (attachment)

Revision history for this message
actionparsnip (andrew-woodhead666) wrote :

I suggest putting the LXDE icon in the centre of the circle much like
Xubuntu puts the XFCE mouse in te logo.

2009/9/1 Martin-Éric Racine <email address hidden>

> The blue theme doesn't differentiate enough from KDE. We need to use
> other colors. How about these? (attachment)
>
> ** Attachment added: "lubuntu-logo.png"
> http://launchpadlibrarian.net/31098584/lubuntu-logo.png
>
> --
> [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/420513
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of Lubuntu,
> which is a direct subscriber.
>
> Status in Ubuntu: In Progress
>
> Bug description:
> I have a preliminary seed and meta for this related to Karmic blueprint
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktopand this should get uploaded to revu later today.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> Post to : <email address hidden>
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

Revision history for this message
David Sugar (dyfet-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

This had to be in this morning, so I only had time to incorporate Martin-Éric Racine's changes to the meta and seed. The tarball has the source, dsc, and changes files needed to build.

Revision history for this message
Julien Lavergne (gilir) wrote :

Just to put some wording for the FFe request for MOTU Release :
This a new meta-package to build a new flavor for Ubuntu, base on LXDE. Please consider the FFe as it blocks the work on official ISO and standard installation, and also progress on this new flavor.
You can see more information about this seed on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktop

Changed in ubuntu:
status: In Progress → New
assignee: David Sugar (dyfet) → nobody
Revision history for this message
ashgtx (ashwinhgtx-yahoo) wrote :

Why do we need both Mirage and GPicView at the same time? GPicView has a much better user interface. Why not stick to that?

Revision history for this message
David Sugar (dyfet-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

This really did not get handled correctly at the start of the week as we were requested to have this in a hurry and then learned after it could not be sponsored prior to the ffe process. I have put it in revu to correct any outstanding issue so that it can at least be properly evaluated.

http://revu.ubuntuwire.com/p/lubuntu-meta

The basis of the ffe itself is simply that it is an approved karmic spec and effects no other packages.

Revision history for this message
StefanPotyra (sistpoty) wrote :

Hi,

just subscribed ogra and StevenK. ogra: you've registered the spec in the first place, how do you feel about adding that meta package at this point in the release cycle? I assume this mainly impacts MID?

@StevenK: If this mainly impacts MID, then I guess it's your domain ;).

Cheers,
    Stefan.

Revision history for this message
Scott Kitterman (kitterman) wrote :

In principle adding a metapackage is not a big deal. Do you expect ISO images for lubuntu to be built on Launchpad? Do you have a governance process for deciding what should be in the package?

Revision history for this message
David Sugar (dyfet-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

Scott, it was not anticipated there would be spins hosted on Launchpad for Lubuntu for Karmic, just the meta package. What happens Karmic +X though may become a different question.

There is a launchpad team for Lubuntu, and there is a process for community input through the wiki, but not a formal governance process as yet, at least in terms of how this is done in other parts of Ubuntu, and I think it is necessary to do given that there is a clearly expressed desire in the community to try to have an official Lubuntu distro at some point in the future.

Revision history for this message
Scott Kitterman (kitterman) wrote : Re: [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

OK. My concern is that there be some agreement on what goes in this
metapackage before it gets approved to go in, so we don't have a lot of
contention afterwards (I'm not saying adjustments won't be needed).

Revision history for this message
Scott Kitterman (kitterman) wrote :

Additionally, the seeds are currently controlled by an open team with 118 members. I do not see this as a recipe for success.

Revision history for this message
Dallas Wiebelhaus (wiebelhaus) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

Scott , We are all grown folks and we also understand that David Sugar is
more or less the boss here , There will be no foul play.

Now let's be positive and congratulate everyone on a job well done and wish
everyone a Fantastic week end of whatever tickles your fancy!

Cheers folks! It's POETS.

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Scott Kitterman <email address hidden>wrote:

> Additionally, the seeds are currently controlled by an open team with
> 118 members. I do not see this as a recipe for success.
>
> --
> [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/420513
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of Lubuntu,
> which is a direct subscriber.
>
> Status in Ubuntu: New
>
> Bug description:
> I have a preliminary seed and meta for this related to Karmic blueprint
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktopand this should get uploaded to revu later today.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> Post to : <email address hidden>
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

Revision history for this message
David Sugar (dyfet-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

Lol! While I appreciate the vote of confidence, the goal was NEVER to have a dictatorship, benevolent or otherwise!

I think what Scott says about some form of formalizing governance is actually very correct. However, the meta package (any meta-package instance) has a "snapshot" instance of the seed; it does not pull or re-germinate it when it builds. Hence, as long as it is safe at the time of submission, a given update of the package will be safe, well, at least for the current one. Also, we could setup a separate release subteam that is not open commit, and have it moved to there. I think we should hold a quick IRC meeting in any case to ratify some basic governance...

Revision history for this message
Rebentisch (arebentisch) wrote :

2009/9/4 David Sugar <email address hidden>

> There is a launchpad team for Lubuntu, and there is a process for
> community input through the wiki, but not a formal governance process as
> yet,
>

What precisely is required, and how could the LXDE Foundation provide
assistance?

-- A

Revision history for this message
Steve Langasek (vorlon) wrote :

gah - sorry, wrong bug...

Changed in pam (Debian):
importance: Unknown → Undecided
status: Unknown → New
Revision history for this message
Scott Kitterman (kitterman) wrote :

Sounds to me like you are moving in the right direction. +1.

I'll volunteer to do the archive admin review after it's uploaded.

Revision history for this message
hagisbasheruk (hagisbasheruk) wrote :

i have been running LXDE from a cli install on my Tatung / RM – RTABB12D using both a genkernel and a custom built onefor quite some time now.
I suggest that you try to minimize any use of gnome libs as possible, use slim instead of gdm, use Wicd for network as lxnw is too limited right now,aumix-gtk for mixer and a program to add menu entries. I am currently testing ubuntuone (we could bug them for a non gnome lib version, i am sure the xfce guys would like that too) on my setup and can assure you its working very well with pcman and lxpanel within Jaunty,be sure to set applet icon to always show in prefs menu.Sorry if i am too late with my recommendations but i only found out about Lubuntu today and downloaded the iso that was posted instead of what i had planned to do, a re-master of my own setup,unfortunately the kernel never booted for me.Anyway i would love to help with testing and am free most nights after 6pm GMT catch me on #ubuntu-uk if you require me

Revision history for this message
Mario Behling (mariobehling) wrote :

Thank you for the input about the ISO that was tested. As stated the
ISO is not a final release. Some of the changes you suggested have
already been incorporated. Others will be as we go on. We will soon be
uploading a new test iso.

All the best,

Mario

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 1:49 AM, hagisbasheruk<email address hidden> wrote:
> i have been running LXDE from a cli install on my Tatung / RM – RTABB12D using both a genkernel and a custom built onefor quite some time now.
> I suggest that you try to minimize any use of gnome libs as possible, use slim instead of gdm, use Wicd for network as lxnw is too limited right now,aumix-gtk for mixer and a program to add menu entries. I am currently testing ubuntuone (we could bug them for a non gnome lib version, i am sure the xfce guys would like that too) on my setup and can assure you its working very well with pcman and lxpanel within Jaunty,be sure to set applet icon to always show in prefs menu.Sorry if i am too late with my recommendations but i only found out about Lubuntu today and downloaded the iso that was posted instead of what i had planned to do, a re-master of my own setup,unfortunately the kernel never booted for me.Anyway i would love to help with testing and am free most nights after 6pm GMT catch me on #ubuntu-uk if you require me
>
> --
> [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/420513
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of Lubuntu,
> which is a direct subscriber.
>
> Status in Ubuntu: New
> Status in “pam” package in Debian: New
>
> Bug description:
> I have a preliminary seed and meta for this related to Karmic blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktop and this should get uploaded to revu later today.
>

Revision history for this message
Mario Behling (mariobehling) wrote :

Hi,

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 11:13 PM, David Sugar<email address hidden> wrote:
> Lol!  While I appreciate the vote of confidence, the goal was NEVER to
> have a dictatorship, benevolent or otherwise!

Thanks for making this clear. The goal for lubuntu was from the start
to build a strong and broad community, that can take care of tasks.
For example Debian packages that have been made available during
recent months by Andrew Lee and others were also planned and released
to lay the groundwork for lubuntu.

> I think what Scott says about some form of formalizing governance is
> actually very correct.

How should a formalizing governance look like? Is it necessary at this stage?

> However, the meta package (any meta-package
> instance) has a "snapshot" instance of the seed; it does not pull or re-
> germinate it when it builds.  Hence, as long as it is safe at the time
> of submission, a given update of the package will be safe, well, at
> least for the current one.  Also, we could setup a separate release
> subteam that is not open commit, and have it moved to there.  I think we
> should hold a quick IRC meeting in any case to ratify some basic
> governance...

I suggest to meet on IRC freenode #lubuntu
on Sep. 6, 15.00 GMT
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=5&month=9&year=2009&hour=15&min=0&sec=0&p1=0

Please help to set up an agenda:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC_Meeting_September_6, 2009

Please also have a look at existing IRC meet ups to understand
decisions that have been made for reasons stated in previous meet up
logs: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC_Meetings

- Mario

Revision history for this message
David Sugar (dyfet-deactivatedaccount) wrote :

> Thanks for making this clear. The goal for lubuntu was from the start to build a strong and broad
> community, that can take care of tasks. For example Debian packages that have been made
> available during recent months by Andrew Lee and others were also planned and released
> to lay the groundwork for lubuntu.
> How should a formalizing governance look like? Is it necessary at this stage?

With respect to governance, Scott notes we do have a LOT of new faces in this team, indeed more than I realized. Yet, and he correctly points out, we do not have a real procedure for resolving questions or disputes like what should be in the seed other than "discussing" (or shouting ;) on the list. I also note there is a desire to have Lubuntu eventually become an Ubuntu disto in the sense of things like Xubuntu and Kubuntu. These goals suggest there should be some governance, and it should resemble where it exists what other teams do.

I really have only a few suggestions.

First, there should be a separate release team or if you will something like a "Lubuntu Council" that does manage the seed and meta branches and hence can resolve what should be in it or any other issues should disputes actually arise. I suggest myself, you, Martin Eric, Maybe Oliver, and Rebentisch initially, at least provisionally to get through the remainder of the Karmic cycle, and this also gives the project as a whole some stability going into UDS as well as a little time for the rest of the community to decide what we really wish to use for governance going forward and whether this was correct to do or not :).

Second, I suggest given that UDS for Karmic "+1" is likely going to be in two months, that we draft a new spec for that UDS for/from and most especially WITH the Lubuntu team and community. Indeed, it is the approach of UDS is one reason I think it would be good to establish some things like governance now rather than to do so later.

Third, I suggest for now a monthly irc schedule we could put up on Fridge.

Revision history for this message
Oliver Grawert (ogra) wrote :

i'm definately for adding the metapackage to universe (even though requesting it early enough pre FF would have been a lot nicer) but i fully agree with scotts suggestion here, having an open and completely uncontrolled team anyone can subscribe to in control of the seeds seems very dangerous (anyone of that team can just add or remove apps from your seeds), it is like crying for problems or bzr "commit wars" where packages are added/removed back and forth out of disagreement ...

my suggestion would be to create a lubunbtu-developers team with a kind of developer council or other form of governance and keep the lubuntu team open as it is atm. then people wanting to join lubuntu-developers would have to go through a staging process through the open lubuntu team, prove they are trustable for some time and be added to lubuntu-developers by an admin/council/dictator (or whatever form you pick for governance)
lubuntu-developers in the end should own all code centric branches then

Revision history for this message
hagisbasheruk (hagisbasheruk) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging]lubuntu desktop meta

Mario wrote
> I suggest to meet on IRC freenode #lubuntu
> on Sep. 6, 15.00 GMT
>
http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?day=5&month=9&year=2009&hour=15&min=0&sec=0&p1=0
Mario you wrote to meet on IRC freenode #lubuntu on Sep. 6, 15.00 GMT
But the link you gave is for today the 5th of Sept @ 15.00 UTC.
Great Britain/United Kingdom is one hour ahead of UTC during summer.
Which gives us a meeting time of 14.00 local time here in the UK
Could you please clarify which day the meeting is on Mario , today or
tomorrow ?

Revision history for this message
Mario Behling (mariobehling) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging]lubuntu desktop meta

> Mario you wrote to meet on IRC freenode #lubuntu on Sep. 6, 15.00 GMT
> But the link you gave is for today the 5th of Sept @ 15.00 UTC.
> Great Britain/United Kingdom is one hour ahead of UTC during summer.
> Which gives us a meeting time of 14.00 local time here in the UK
> Could you please clarify which day the meeting is on Mario , today or
> tomorrow ?

sorry, yes the meeting is on 6th - tomorrow. We should let people know
about the meeting, including the Taiwan folks in advance. So, I think
it is best tomorrow. The link should be correct on the wiki:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC_Meeting_September_6%2C_2009

For people participating, please also go through the logs of older
meet ups in order to avoid double discussions:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC_Meeting

- Mario

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 7:23 AM, David Sugar wrote:
> Second, I suggest given that UDS for Karmic "+1" is likely going to be
> in two months, that we draft a new spec for that UDS for/from and most
> especially WITH the Lubuntu team and community.  Indeed, it is the
> approach of UDS is one reason I think it would be good to establish some
> things like governance now rather than to do so later.

Given how late in the game we are, what if we focused on helping
Andrew polish his LXDE packages with nicer default settings than it
currently has, possibly with an Ubuntu theme from the background
image, GTK2 theme and OpenBox theme for Karmic?

Then we could meet at the upcoming UDS to properly plan this and enjoy
the whole Karmic+1 cycle to produce a superb Lubuntu release for the
next Ubuntu LTS.

Personally, I feel that this is necessary, especially from the
perspective that FF is already in place and we suddenly get a dozen of
ideas as to what would constitute a good default selection of
applications and a good Lbuntu theme.

How does that sound?

Martin-Éric

Revision history for this message
Martin-Éric Racine (q-funk) wrote :

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 2:49 AM, hagisbasheruk wrote:
> I suggest that you try to minimize any use of gnome libs as possible, use slim instead of gdm, use Wicd for network as lxnw is too limited right now, aumix-gtk for mixer and a program to add menu entries.

1) slim has not been packaged. Additionally, we have to entertain the
possibility that someone might have both GNOME and LXDE installed, in
which case they need the latest GDM.

2) wicd has been packaged, but is not in-line with Ubuntu's approach
of relying upon Network-Manager for everything, hence why we need
nm-applet.

3) aumix-gtk could be usable, but would need a major load of package
dependency backflips to work around the fact that Ubuntu has become a
PulseAudio-enabled distribution, because a PA-enabled distribution
avoids touching ALSA directly.

Revision history for this message
Scott Kitterman (kitterman) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

Just as a general suggestion, the needs packaging bug probably isn't the
best venue for these meta Lubuntu discussions.

Changed in pam (Debian):
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
Julien Lavergne (gilir) wrote :

Just to have a clarification, is the open-team a blocker for MOTU-Release ACK ? Even if it could generate some problems in Lubuntu team itself, a MOTU sponsorship is still needed to modify the seed package in the archive.
This open-team issue is still under discussion in the Lubuntu team.

Revision history for this message
Scott Kitterman (kitterman) wrote : Re: [Bug 420513] Re: [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta

I don't see it as a blocker.

Changed in ubuntu:
status: New → In Progress
assignee: nobody → David Sugar (dyfet)
Revision history for this message
StefanPotyra (sistpoty) wrote :

Hi,

sorry for not having made it clear yet. As I asked ogra and he gave a +1 I certainly do second this position. FFe granted hence, please go ahead.

Cheers, and sorry again for the delay,
    Stefan.

Revision history for this message
Julien Lavergne (gilir) wrote :

Thanks for the FFe.
I'll take care of uploading it shortly, if somebody have modification to include.

Changed in ubuntu:
assignee: David Sugar (dyfet) → Julien Lavergne (gilir)
Revision history for this message
Andrew Starr-Bochicchio (andrewsomething) wrote :

Un-subscribing universe-sponsors as Julien is on it, and he no longer needs a sponsor. =)

Revision history for this message
Julien Lavergne (gilir) wrote :

version 0.4 uploaded, waiting in NEW.

Revision history for this message
Scott Kitterman (kitterman) wrote :

Through New as well and in the archive.

Changed in ubuntu:
status: In Progress → Fix Released
Revision history for this message
actionparsnip (andrew-woodhead666) wrote : From: Andrew Woodhead

Hello

http://squarenuts.vtiger.ict4b.eu/quite.php?wouldnt=rxqhr67u67

Andrew Woodhead

Sent from my iPhone

Revision history for this message
Fritz Hudnut (este-el-paz) wrote : Re: [Lubuntu-qa] [Bug 420513] From: Andrew Woodhead

mr parsnip . . . has yr account been hacked? Gmail put this in spam??

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 2:46 AM, actionparsnip <
<email address hidden>> wrote:

> Hello
>
> http://squarenuts.vtiger.ict4b.eu/quite.php?wouldnt=rxqhr67u67
>
>
> Andrew Woodhead
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are a member of Lubuntu,
> which is subscribed to the bug report.
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/420513
>
> Title:
> [needs packaging] lubuntu desktop meta
>
> Status in Ubuntu:
> Fix Released
> Status in pam package in Debian:
> Invalid
>
> Bug description:
> I have a preliminary seed and meta for this related to Karmic
> blueprint https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-
> lxde-ubuntu-desktop and this should get uploaded to revu later today.
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/420513/+subscriptions
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-qa
> Post to : <email address hidden>
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-qa
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.