Re: Steps to become MOTU
Hello Matthias, Am Mittwoch, den 28.10.2009, 14:14 +0100 schrieb Matthias Klumpp: How is the plan to make the sponsoring-process more transparent going on? I sent my application nearly half a year ago and I know that there are several other people who want to become MOTU (and have the necessary skills) and are waiting for a very long time too. Should I send my application again? Where do I get information about the current ideas for the application-process? Do we receive an e-mail if we do now fullfill the criteria to become a MOTU? It would be very nice if someone could clarify this, because I know that something is planned in this direction. (We had some other requests on this mailing list before) could you please clarify where you sent your application? The process people usually follow to become Ubuntu developers is quite simple: * work on Ubuntu, get patches reviewed and uploaded by existing Ubuntu developers (sponsoring: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SponsorshipProcess) * once people start telling you how happy they are with your work, you should consider applying (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopers) Check out https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MOTU/GettingStarted for documentation about Ubuntu development, packaging, etc. and please ask if you have any questions. :-) Have a great day, Daniel -- Ubuntu-motu-mentors mailing list Ubuntu-motu-mentors@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu-mentors
Looking for a mentor
Hello mentors, I am looking for a mentor to help me get started packaging the Sugar Learning Platform[1] for Ubuntu. About a year ago I started by forming the ubuntu-sugarteam[2]. Due to the lead packager getting a new job and conflicts with upstream, the team petered out. I am taking another shot at it. I have set aside the next six months to get our fledgling packages[1] ready for Ubuntu 10.4. We are still working out the plan of action. So far I have: A. Learned to upload to PPAs. B. Learned to create packages from scratch. C. Learned basics of patching. D. Learned pbuilder. My next steps are: A. Learn CDBS. B. Learn quilt. Short term goal: Start to sync the SugarTeam packages with the upstream Debian packages. The upstream debian packager uses some rather unconventional packaging techniques and is somewhat challenging to work with. As such, I am hoping to simplify his packages techniques yet maintain a common patching structure so we can collaborate with Debian on an equal basis. david 1. www.sugarlabs.org 2. https://launchpad.net/~sugarteam 3. https://launchpad.net/~sugarteam/+archive/0.86 -- Ubuntu-motu-mentors mailing list Ubuntu-motu-mentors@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu-mentors
Re: LuaRocks package out of date
On 26/10/2009, at 23.49, Linus Sjögren wrote: I would just like to notify you, as maintainers of the package 'luarocks' on the Ubuntu universe repo, that the version 2.0 is the latest one available. Please push that version to the repos. The luarocks source package is sync'ed unchanged from Debian unstable and compiled for Ubuntu. Your request therefore belongs with the Debian maintainer of the package [0]. I've forwarded a copy of your email to him, so there's probably no need for you to do more. Cheers, Morten [0] http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/luarocks.html -- Morten Kjeldgaard m...@ubuntu.com Ubuntu MOTU Developer GPG Key ID: 404825E7 -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Why are some OSS packages listed as non-free?
When I lookup Xara Extreme using dpkg-query, it is listed under non-free/graphics, while their website states it is OSS? Regards, Bart -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Re: Why are some OSS packages listed as non-free?
Bart Genuit bartgen...@gmail.com writes: When I lookup Xara Extreme using dpkg-query, it is listed under non-free/graphics, while their website states it is OSS? you can read the copyright statement of the package here: http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/multiverse/x/xaralx/xaralx_0.7r1785-2ubuntu1/xaralx.copyright short: you have to consider the licenses of all files inside the source package. It seems that there are some file that must not be used in commercial applications which renders the whole package non-free. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
New MOTU: Jonathan Carter
Hello everybody, we're very pleased to announce that Jonathan highvoltage Carter just joined the MOTU team. His great work on Edubuntu and particularly LTSP Cluster was much appreciated. Please give South-African MOTU #2 Jonathan Carter a warm welcome to the team! Have a great day, Daniel -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
software ugrade versions
I am a relatively inexperienced user of Ubuntu and have noticed that even though new versions of applications are available from developers as source code, the package versions seem to lag significantly. Do application packages remain at the version that existed when the specific version of Ubuntu was released or do the MOTU maintainers update application versions as time and resources permit? The specific package I have in mind is Avogadro, for which version 1.0 was just released. The version available on Jaunty is 0.8 and on Karmic is 0.9.7. I have considered compiling the source for version 1.0. But compiling version 1.0 depends on a number of other applications which are not available as packages and would, themselves, need to be compiled from source. Although I have installed a few applications from the source in the past, doing this for Avogadro seems too daunting a task. So I am wondering whether there will ever be a version update to Avogadro on either Jaunty or Karmic. -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Re: software ugrade versions
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Mike Luntz lap...@mltserv.com wrote: I am a relatively inexperienced user of Ubuntu and have noticed that even though new versions of applications are available from developers as source code, the package versions seem to lag significantly. Do application packages remain at the version that existed when the specific version of Ubuntu was released or do the MOTU maintainers update application versions as time and resources permit? First, see this document: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports Versions may be backported if you have time or inclination to follow a process. New versions can be placed in -backports, but it has to be in development branch (Lucid) first, for both technical and social reasons. The specific package I have in mind is Avogadro, for which version 1.0 was just released. The version available on Jaunty is 0.8 and on Karmic is 0.9.7. I have considered compiling the source for version 1.0. But compiling version 1.0 depends on a number of other applications which are not available as packages and would, themselves, need to be compiled from source. Although I have installed a few applications from the source in the past, doing this for Avogadro seems too daunting a task. Two commands you may very much appreciate are: * apt-get source avogadro and * apt-get build-dep avogadro These will get you the existing source, including debian/ubuntu specific patches, and install the build dependencies. That may give you the tools you need to build 1.0. If you get it to work, consider reporting this to MOTU or the Debian maintainers. So I am wondering whether there will ever be a version update to Avogadro on either Jaunty or Karmic. It looks like right now the only attention this package gets in Ubuntu is fixing build failures. Which is fine; you should get in contact with Debian and see if they're working on it. If they are, it could be possible to get it sync/merged from Debian unstable to Lucid, test it, then backport to Karmic. This may take some time, but it's an unavoidable consequence; 1.0.0 released little over a week ago. Justin Dugger -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Re: software ugrade versions
You probably want to think about why you need the slightly newer version. All new versions will have new bugs. The highest number isn't necessarily the best. Caroline Sent from a mobile device. On 30 Oct 2009, at 02:39, Mike Luntz lap...@mltserv.com wrote: Thanks for the reply Justin. I'll take a look at the references you provided and decide, based on what I find, what my next step will be. Mike On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 21:30 -0500, Justin Dugger wrote: On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Mike Luntz lap...@mltserv.com wrote: I am a relatively inexperienced user of Ubuntu and have noticed that even though new versions of applications are available from developers as source code, the package versions seem to lag significantly. Do application packages remain at the version that existed when the specific version of Ubuntu was released or do the MOTU maintainers update application versions as time and resources permit? First, see this document: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UbuntuBackports Versions may be backported if you have time or inclination to follow a process. New versions can be placed in -backports, but it has to be in development branch (Lucid) first, for both technical and social reasons. The specific package I have in mind is Avogadro, for which version 1.0 was just released. The version available on Jaunty is 0.8 and on Karmic is 0.9.7. I have considered compiling the source for version 1.0. But compiling version 1.0 depends on a number of other applications which are not available as packages and would, themselves, need to be compiled from source. Although I have installed a few applications from the source in the past, doing this for Avogadro seems too daunting a task. Two commands you may very much appreciate are: * apt-get source avogadro and * apt-get build-dep avogadro These will get you the existing source, including debian/ubuntu specific patches, and install the build dependencies. That may give you the tools you need to build 1.0. If you get it to work, consider reporting this to MOTU or the Debian maintainers. So I am wondering whether there will ever be a version update to Avogadro on either Jaunty or Karmic. It looks like right now the only attention this package gets in Ubuntu is fixing build failures. Which is fine; you should get in contact with Debian and see if they're working on it. If they are, it could be possible to get it sync/merged from Debian unstable to Lucid, test it, then backport to Karmic. This may take some time, but it's an unavoidable consequence; 1.0.0 released little over a week ago. Justin Dugger -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
Re: software ugrade versions
Please make sure you've filed the bug on launchpad. Thanks! Sent from a mobile device. On 30 Oct 2009, at 02:52, Mike Luntz lap...@mltserv.com wrote: The available version has a bug, at least on my machine, in that attempting to export a png file of a graphic does not re-draw the screen prior to computing the export, making the export unusable. I was hoping that the newer version had fixed that bug. Mike On Fri, 2009-10-30 at 02:45 +, Caroline Ford wrote: You probably want to think about why you need the slightly newer version. All new versions will have new bugs. The highest number isn't necessarily the best. Caroline -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
