From ralph at inputplus.co.uk Sun Jun 1 13:21:30 2014 From: ralph at inputplus.co.uk (Ralph Corderoy) Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 14:21:30 +0100 Subject: Bug 622179 Being Wishlist/Won't Fix on Debian Change. Message-ID: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Hi, Please CC as I'm not subscribed. The description for https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg/+bug/622179 raised by me complains the error messages produced by debian/local/xserver-wrapper.c are poor and could be improved. (It's being polite.) Bryce Harrington made it Triaged/Low back in 2010/11. And there it sat. In 2014, Christopher M. Penalver (penalvch) made it Won't-Fix/Wishlist whilst asking if it could be recreated on xorg's trunk. Clearly, it can't be as it is a Debian-specific feature. Since then, there's been a bit of to and fro, with Christopher bringing in Julien Cristau as he's contributed to Debian's xserver-wrapper.c now and again. AIUI the current status is Christopher thinks Won't-Fix/Wishlist should remain because I'm "requesting a fundamental change" whereas Julien thinks it should be fixed and then the fix sent upstream to Debian. I thought what used to happen with this kind of bug is another could be raised on Debian and Ubuntu's bug track it. Then a fix would appear on one or the other and both would end up closed. Is Won't-Fix/Wishlist subjectively correct for this bug? Cheers, Ralph. From es20490446e at gmail.com Mon Jun 2 11:41:05 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 13:41:05 +0200 Subject: Bug 622179 Being Wishlist/Won't Fix on Debian Change. In-Reply-To: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> References: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Message-ID: <538C62D1.40505@gmail.com> El 01/06/14 15:21, Ralph Corderoy escribió: > Is Won't-Fix/Wishlist > subjectively correct for this bug? Yes, because it's a technical decision concerning Debian itself; and Ubuntu cannot decide on that. -- Alberto -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From es20490446e at gmail.com Mon Jun 2 11:41:14 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 13:41:14 +0200 Subject: Bug 622179 Being Wishlist/Won't Fix on Debian Change. In-Reply-To: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> References: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Message-ID: <538C62DA.8010804@gmail.com> On 01/06/14 15:21, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > Is Won't-Fix/Wishlist > subjectively correct for this bug? Yes, because it's a technical decision concerning Debian itself; and Ubuntu cannot decide on that. -- Alberto -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hggdh2 at ubuntu.com Mon Jun 2 13:48:58 2014 From: hggdh2 at ubuntu.com (C de-Avillez) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 08:48:58 -0500 Subject: Bug 622179 Being Wishlist/Won't Fix on Debian Change. In-Reply-To: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> References: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Message-ID: On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Ralph Corderoy wrote: > Hi, > > Please CC as I'm not subscribed. > > The description for > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg/+bug/622179 raised by me > complains the error messages produced by debian/local/xserver-wrapper.c > are poor and could be improved. (It's being polite.) > > Bryce Harrington made it Triaged/Low back in 2010/11. And there it sat. > In 2014, Christopher M. Penalver (penalvch) made it Won't-Fix/Wishlist > whilst asking if it could be recreated on xorg's trunk. Clearly, it > can't be as it is a Debian-specific feature. > > Since then, there's been a bit of to and fro, with Christopher bringing > in Julien Cristau as he's contributed to Debian's xserver-wrapper.c now > and again. AIUI the current status is Christopher thinks > Won't-Fix/Wishlist should remain because I'm "requesting a fundamental > change" whereas Julien thinks it should be fixed and then the fix sent > upstream to Debian. > > I thought what used to happen with this kind of bug is another could be > raised on Debian and Ubuntu's bug track it. Then a fix would appear on > one or the other and both would end up closed. Is Won't-Fix/Wishlist > subjectively correct for this bug? It can be discussed. I personally do not see much to be gained on adding the current permissions of the file (er, socket), but it certainly would not hurt. It would be even better if you could zero in the underlying issue and report on it (or, perhaps, even provide a fix). I suggest you open this on Debian itself, and then link the Debian bug here. If Debian accepts it, then this bug will be, by definition, valid again (and, eventually, we will sync it in). Cheers, ..C.. From nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com Mon Jun 2 17:59:30 2014 From: nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com (Nicholas Skaggs) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 13:59:30 -0400 Subject: UOS Users Track Message-ID: Ubuntu Online Summit is approaching. This time it's a bit different from how vUDS has been in the past. Rather than the narrower developer focus, this intends to be a full blown community summit. If you've attending things like ubuntu open week or a classroom session in the past, all of those types of sessions are welcome and encouraged too. To help foster these types of sessions, there is a special 'users' track. "The focus of the Users track is to highlight ways to get the most out of Ubuntu, on your laptop, your phone or your server. From detailed how-to sessions, to tips and tricks, and more, this track can provide something for everybody, regardless of skill level. Track Leads: Elizabeth Krumbach Joseph Nicholas Skaggs Valorie Zimmerman" I'm happy to be a track lead for this track along with Liz and Val. We are all inviting you to consider scheduling a session to share your knowledge of ubuntu. Share an idea, discuss your passion, give a how-to, etc. Bugsquaders; talk about triaging, bug workflowing, bug shepherding, etc. Some of the recent mailing lists threads would turn into nice sessions. For the QA folks, talk about exploratory testing, running the development release, writing testcases (manual and/or automated). Regardless of your desire to contribute a session, I would encourage everyone to take a look at the schedule as it evolves and considering joining in sessions they find interesting. Here's the full list: http://summit.ubuntu.com/uos-1406/all/. Remember, this track is YOUR track and filled with YOUR sessions. Let's help make the online summit a success. Nicholas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com Tue Jun 3 01:14:22 2014 From: nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com (Nicholas Skaggs) Date: Mon, 02 Jun 2014 21:14:22 -0400 Subject: UOS Users Track In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <538D216E.5010208@canonical.com> On 06/02/2014 02:54 PM, Phill Whiteside wrote: > Hi, > > a couple of cycles ago I and kubuntu did a 30 minute session of ubuntu > beginners. Whilst I'm happy to do another session with 'what, who and > where' lubuntu is, is there a call for it? IMHO, each of the flavours > should make time to say why they exist and how we all work together. > > Regards, > > Phill. Phil, I think this is an excellent idea. I believe Val was looking at sending something to all the flavors to have a little intro to each flavor and talk a bit about it. I think it's perfect. Let me know if you have trouble registering the session. Nicholas From PhillW at PhillW.net Mon Jun 2 18:54:42 2014 From: PhillW at PhillW.net (Phill Whiteside) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2014 19:54:42 +0100 Subject: UOS Users Track In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, a couple of cycles ago I and kubuntu did a 30 minute session of ubuntu beginners. Whilst I'm happy to do another session with 'what, who and where' lubuntu is, is there a call for it? IMHO, each of the flavours should make time to say why they exist and how we all work together. Regards, Phill. On 2 June 2014 18:59, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: > Ubuntu Online Summit is approaching. This time it's a bit different from > how vUDS has been in the past. Rather than the narrower developer focus, > this intends to be a full blown community summit. If you've attending > things like ubuntu open week or a classroom session in the past, all of > those types of sessions are welcome and encouraged too. > > To help foster these types of sessions, there is a special 'users' track. > > "The focus of the Users track is to highlight ways to get the most out of > Ubuntu, on your laptop, your phone or your server. From detailed how-to > sessions, to tips and tricks, and more, this track can provide something > for everybody, regardless of skill level. > > Track Leads: > > Elizabeth Krumbach Joseph > Nicholas Skaggs > Valorie Zimmerman" > > I'm happy to be a track lead for this track along with Liz and Val. We are > all inviting you to consider scheduling a session to share your knowledge > of ubuntu. Share an idea, discuss your passion, give a how-to, etc. > > Bugsquaders; talk about triaging, bug workflowing, bug shepherding, etc. > Some of the recent mailing lists threads would turn into nice sessions. For > the QA folks, talk about exploratory testing, running the development > release, writing testcases (manual and/or automated). > > Regardless of your desire to contribute a session, I would encourage > everyone to take a look at the schedule as it evolves and considering > joining in sessions they find interesting. Here's the full list: > http://summit.ubuntu.com/uos-1406/all/. > > Remember, this track is YOUR track and filled with YOUR sessions. Let's > help make the online summit a success. > > Nicholas > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > Ubuntu-quality at lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality > -- https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ralph at inputplus.co.uk Wed Jun 4 11:02:52 2014 From: ralph at inputplus.co.uk (Ralph Corderoy) Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 12:02:52 +0100 Subject: Bug 622179 Being Wishlist/Won't Fix on Debian Change. In-Reply-To: References: <20140601132130.7CBAC1FB62@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Message-ID: <20140604110252.910EF1FC7D@orac.inputplus.co.uk> Hi C, > I suggest you open this on Debian itself, and then link the Debian bug > here. If Debian accepts it, then this bug will be, by definition, > valid again (and, eventually, we will sync it in). Thanks. https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=750469 opened and linked from https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/xorg/+bug/622179 Cheers, Ralph. From wxwsquix at hotmail.com Thu Jun 5 05:48:59 2014 From: wxwsquix at hotmail.com (Wolf) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 15:48:59 +1000 Subject: Informational - Not expecting a response Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 OS Ubuntu 13.10 OS Type 32bit Disk 304.7GB Computer Lenovo Thinkpad Edge, Mem 3.9GB, Processor Intel Core i5-2520M CPU @2.5GHzx4, Graphics Sandybridge Mobile x86/MMX/SSE2 Application that triggers the problem - Skype for Linux Version 4.2.0.13 Audio device - Using Plantronics Headset Device reported by Skype Pulse Audio Server Symptom - After hanging up from a long conversation on Skype only the mouse motion works no input from the buttons is acted upon by the OS. If I unplug the audio headset, which I need to do since I cant access anything (with the mouse at least), the Screen Locked dialogue pops up. I unlock the screen and everything works as normal. It appears that: 1. Skype does not inhibit the screen lock functionality. 2. The Lock screen dialogue is blocked from appearing during the conversation and is somehow prevented from popping by the audio device? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQGcBAEBAgAGBQJTkAS9AAoJEFZqcrHlAql6u4EL/246o6jgKMMab6dg9OjeG/Mv 63Fe3Bj6aY8swkBTwj+UzNtxqRY2Ni63Yh50neV6hEFkOUzSvleUW48C69XCxtdj dA7C7utPjg47E85f6rLHY/vRjMgeGBtTuSUNaeAv6ADrRoSDFTT1pThgDx0gSztp fHshiAjpq3b9TiKzRZ4sV9EH3nIzzBduieelwkvnYFhuSUFLPXtNm4wYv0ePpIXp bj1iTNhREThwADJ5hu8NeOGy9as9Gja1KO7pyePgYpxIR+Wj8tyFSaY0a6DOdt5G hsKtqo1F2o4Cb6G4lJQMBjqfv8izRik3M7HsZvWwahuNIbz//GtN20HET8YUIi4b 9Sz0RXtpWadHNh4QxsQICl1BzSVyweFoh4tSEmIygernQrzCJFp6281nd/VHBh+W IVhA6gPkh3QHifZ5GIVtPtTSwtq1LOkwJVxlnuEBnH6DoTvnytjTHH0Uq64233aD lrS0GB+zEoxGVGVR3a3lxMGWdatOj872uRkv/PqOWw== =sXJQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From es20490446e at gmail.com Mon Jun 16 19:57:08 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 21:57:08 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real Message-ID: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: Do you know of some other? Regards. From hggdh2 at ubuntu.com Mon Jun 16 21:08:29 2014 From: hggdh2 at ubuntu.com (C de-Avillez) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:08:29 -0500 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: > > > > Do you know of some other? Just a few comments: Be careful with #1 (it is not open source) -- it may have been packaged by Debian (or Ubuntu), and it may be a packaging issue. Being an idea for a new feature can be closed and the OP redirected to upstream to propose it. In the cases where Ubuntu is the upstream, the bug can be kept open, and an upstream task opened. The last one is just a particular case of system misconfiguration. Cheers, -- ..hggdh.. From jose at ubuntu.com Mon Jun 16 21:31:23 2014 From: jose at ubuntu.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Antonio_Rey?=) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:31:23 -0500 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <539F622B.9040904@ubuntu.com> Is it possible to remove Emojis? I do not thing it's good we use Emojis on Wiki pages, specially when most users browse from a Desktop environment. On 06/16/2014 04:08 PM, C de-Avillez wrote: > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella > wrote: >> I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: >> >> >> >> Do you know of some other? > > Just a few comments: > > Be careful with #1 (it is not open source) -- it may have been > packaged by Debian (or Ubuntu), and it may be a packaging issue. > > Being an idea for a new feature can be closed and the OP redirected to > upstream to propose it. In the cases where Ubuntu is the upstream, the > bug can be kept open, and an upstream task opened. > > The last one is just a particular case of system misconfiguration. > > Cheers, > -- José Antonio Rey From brian at ubuntu.com Mon Jun 16 22:02:25 2014 From: brian at ubuntu.com (Brian Murray) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 15:02:25 -0700 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20140616220224.GP6659@murraytwins.com> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 09:57:08PM +0200, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: > > I don't like the phrase "isn't real". Even if the bug report is not a bug that developers of Ubuntu are going to fix doesn't mean it isn't a real issue affecting the user of an Ubuntu system. This is particularly true with the following points: "Its software package isn't open source" "Its software package has been installed from elsewhere" "The misconfigured their system" (notice the grammar change) The language "isn't real" is likely to aggravate people and rightfully so. -- Brian Murray Ubuntu Bug Master -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From cbaudier at gmail.com Mon Jun 16 22:58:27 2014 From: cbaudier at gmail.com (Cory Baudier) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 18:58:27 -0400 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <20140616220224.GP6659@murraytwins.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <20140616220224.GP6659@murraytwins.com> Message-ID: I agree with where you are headed Alberto. I would use a slightly different tact to get there. *Common situations* where a bug is not a supported triage-able or Ubuntu bug: - 🔏 The software package being installed is not open source . - 💾 The software package has not been installed from the *officially provided* Ubuntu repositories. - 💡 It is an *idea* for a new feature. - 🔦 It is a *support request*. - 🔧 The users system files have become *misconfigured*. - 🔪 The users "*/etc/apt/sources.list*" file has become corrupted. As much as I am a fan of calling it like I see it, similar to your page, with today’s everyone gets a ribbon attitude; I would think the above approach would fit more. This is especially true as eyes are being moved to distributions such as Ubuntu more and more. As much as I hate to say his system, I realize more and more users are becoming female so I figured "users" would fit beter in this context. Alberto, I believe you are one of the most active folks and contribute a great deal, so keep em coming and great work. Feel free to change whatever you like this was a scrape from your page, nothing was changed on the page. On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Brian Murray wrote: > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 09:57:08PM +0200, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > > I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: > > > > > > > I don't like the phrase "isn't real". Even if the bug report is not a > bug that developers of Ubuntu are going to fix doesn't mean it isn't a > real issue affecting the user of an Ubuntu system. This is particularly > true with the following points: > > "Its software package isn't open source" > "Its software package has been installed from elsewhere" > "The misconfigured their system" (notice the grammar change) > > The language "isn't real" is likely to aggravate people and rightfully > so. > > -- > Brian Murray > Ubuntu Bug Master > > -- > Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list > Ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugsquad > > -- Cory Baudier -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephen.webb at canonical.com Tue Jun 17 10:54:56 2014 From: stephen.webb at canonical.com (Stephen M. Webb) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 06:54:56 -0400 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <20140616220224.GP6659@murraytwins.com> Message-ID: <53A01E80.70800@ubuntu.com> On 06/16/2014 06:58 PM, Cory Baudier wrote: > > 🔧 The users system files have become *misconfigured*. > 🔧 It is the result of a manually misconfigured system. (a) note that it's still a bug if the system was automatically misconfigured by a software package (b) the "man" in "manually" is derived from the Latin for "hand" and does not indicate gender -- Stephen M. Webb https://launchpad.net/~bregma From nio.wiklund at gmail.com Tue Jun 17 06:48:39 2014 From: nio.wiklund at gmail.com (Nio Wiklund) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:48:39 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <539FE4C7.8040806@gmail.com> 2014-06-16 21:57, Alberto Salvia Novella skrev: > I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: > > > > Do you know of some other? > > Regards. > > Hi Alberto, Quote from the link: - Its software package isn't open source. - Its software package has been installed from elsewhere than those officially provided by Ubuntu. I do not agree with these two points. Such bugs can be very real, but they may not be Ubuntu bugs, rather bugs in the particular software package or lack of compatibility. Maybe you should state something like: 'Such problems are not bugs in any Ubuntu package' Best regards Nio From teward at trekweb.org Tue Jun 17 12:40:36 2014 From: teward at trekweb.org (Thomas Ward) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:40:36 -0400 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <539F622B.9040904@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: > On Jun 17, 2014, at 8:28, Javier Domingo Cansino wrote: > > 2014-06-16 23:31 GMT+02:00 José Antonio Rey : >> Is it possible to remove Emojis? I do not thing it's good we use Emojis >> on Wiki pages, specially when most users browse from a Desktop environment. > > +1 > > Javier Domingo Cansino +1 from me as well, emoji don't belong on wiki pages, just like they don't belong on emails. ------ Thomas LP: ~teward From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 00:06:51 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 02:06:51 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> On 17/06/14 00:02, Brian Murray wrote: > The language "isn't real" is likely to aggravate people and rightfully > so. So changing "isn't real" for "isn't fixable by Ubuntu". I'm also changing the page's ubication to On 16/06/14 23:08, C de-Avillez wrote: > Be careful with #1 (it is not open source) -- it may have been > packaged by Debian (or Ubuntu), and it may be a packaging issue. Nio Wiklund: > 'Such problems are not bugs in any Ubuntu package' Does the following correction fit what your mean?: "Its software hasn't been packaged by Ubuntu, but by a third party." C de-Avillez: > Being an idea for a new feature can be closed and the OP redirected to > upstream to propose it. In the cases where Ubuntu is the upstream, the > bug can be kept open, and an upstream task opened. I have rewritten it as: "It is an idea for a new feature in a software developed outside Launchpad." I think that, with this redaction, the idea of suggesting upstream is understood implicitly. C de-Avillez: > The last one is just a particular case of system misconfiguration. I have tested making this a subpoint of system misconfiguration, but it looked easier to read if every point was in the same level as the rest; specially being only five items there. Cory Baudier: > - The users system files have become misconfigured. > > - The users "/etc/apt/sources.list" file has become corrupted. > Cory Baudier: > As much as I hate to say his system, I realize more and more users are > becoming female so I figured "users" would fit better in this context. Stephen M. Webb: > note that it's still a bug if the system was automatically misconfigured by a software package I have rewritten them like this: - The user misconfigured the system. - The user mangled the "/etc/apt/sources.list" file. So it looks like fitting both requirements. On 17/06/14 00:58, Cory Baudier wrote: > Alberto, I believe you are one of the most active folks and contribute a > great deal, so keep em coming and great work. Thank you :) On 16/06/14 23:31, José Antonio Rey wrote: > I do not thing it's good we use Emojis > on Wiki pages, specially when most users browse from a Desktop environment. The reason why I have included emojis is not for making the page more eye candy, but specially for making it faster to read while navigating through wiki pages. I think there's a myth in thinking that as more wordy a content is the more precise and formal it is. While reality is very different: - The most productive corporations in the world manage people visually (http://tinyurl.com/q26y4jo). - Visual processing is 65000 times faster, more meaningful and much more easy to remember to the human brain than words or sounds. So the perfect way to assist fast reading. - In fact, there's a hole widely accepted philosophy around productivity in making signalizing more graphic, called Visual Management (http://youtu.be/I0FCrp28wbM). Thomas Ward: > +1 from me as well, emoji don't belong on wiki pages, just like they don't belong on emails. If I agreed not to use emojis in email it is because Android phones show them improperly, making the message to look very awkward. And this is not the case on wikis. Removing emojis, in the way they are used in these wikis, and leaving plain text only is the same as removing icons in applications and leaving their names only. This makes the experience dull, hard and falsely formal. It's like giving a Terminal to an employee saying that it's more enterprise like. Just people got very used to it when spending so much years at school: people filling a room full of nothingness to learn, rather than words written in a blackboard and some sheets of paper. Only very nerdy people like this, and even engineers hate it when it has nothing to do with what exactly they want! Average person will wisely avoid at all cost to deal with such environments. And will look for something more natural to learn, like what you can actually see and touch yourself. Surely this is why YouTube is so popular these days, because it eliminates layers of abstraction (words). You rarely read the free Wikiversity; but Coursera, with its paid video courses, is growing amazingly fast. We should imitate what actually works; not what actually demonstrates not to work, worldwide. As example: natural physical environments is what emojis and pictures simulate in the One Hundred Papercuts project; making some of the most delightful, enjoyable and easy to understand documentation you can have (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/One%20Hundred%20Papercuts). Surely you enjoyed less all this explanation than the following squid <コ:彡 Regards. From robert.park at canonical.com Wed Jun 18 00:20:13 2014 From: robert.park at canonical.com (Robert Park) Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:20:13 -0700 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > If I agreed not to use emojis in email it is because Android phones show > them improperly, making the message to look very awkward. And this is not > the case on wikis. And desktops are displaying the emoji exactly as desired? http://i.imgur.com/1jOLWTo.png Please. Emoji are for texting your girlfriend, they are not for a serious wiki page. > Removing emojis, in the way they are used in these wikis, and leaving plain > text only is the same as removing icons in applications and leaving their > names only. So put in some image tags depicting the icons you want, if you're so insistent on having icons. Emojis are not icons, they are BROKEN. From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 00:49:11 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 02:49:11 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> Robert Park: > Emojis are not icons, they are BROKEN. Oh hell, you're right! holy crab! (no squid then) Robert Park: > And desktops are displaying the emoji exactly as desired? > > http://i.imgur.com/1jOLWTo.png Just for curiosity, which is that desktop? I will remove emojis when I have a break, after getting some sleep. Bye bye ;) From robert.park at canonical.com Wed Jun 18 07:25:37 2014 From: robert.park at canonical.com (Robert Park) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:25:37 -0700 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Jun 17, 2014 5:49 PM, "Alberto Salvia Novella" wrote: > > And desktops are displaying the emoji exactly as desired? > > > > http://i.imgur.com/1jOLWTo.png > > Just for curiosity, which is that desktop? That's Firefox in utopic. > I will remove emojis when I have a break, after getting some sleep. Thanks. I think i speak for everybody when I say, we don't disagree with you about the effectiveness of images in conveying information. Just that Emoji are not the right way to put images in a website that's meant for everybody. Maybe if this wiki was *only* for phone users then we could have Emojis, but the vast majority of Ubuntu users are on the desktop & server, so Emoji aren't a good fit. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 11:17:10 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:17:10 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> On 18/06/14 09:25, Robert Park wrote: > Maybe if this wiki was *only* for phone users then we could have Emojis, > but the vast majority of Ubuntu users are on the desktop & server, so > Emoji aren't a good fit. Sorry, I don't understand that. Do you mean there's some further reasons than emojis not being displayed properly? And, for clarifying: why shall I expect other Ubuntu users not to see emojis properly in their systems when I can seen them in mine? Regards. From darkxst at fastmail.fm Wed Jun 18 11:22:58 2014 From: darkxst at fastmail.fm (Tim) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:22:58 +1000 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A17692.4000609@fastmail.fm> On 18/06/14 21:17, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > On 18/06/14 09:25, Robert Park wrote: >> Maybe if this wiki was *only* for phone users then we could have Emojis, >> but the vast majority of Ubuntu users are on the desktop & server, so >> Emoji aren't a good fit. > > Sorry, I don't understand that. Do you mean there's some further reasons than emojis not being displayed properly? > > And, for clarifying: why shall I expect other Ubuntu users not to see emojis properly in their systems when I can seen them in mine? Atleast in firefox, a 3rd-party greasemonkey script is required to be able to see emoji.Its far from being a stock standard feature! > > Regards. > > > From teward at trekweb.org Wed Jun 18 11:24:29 2014 From: teward at trekweb.org (Thomas Ward) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 07:24:29 -0400 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> > On Jun 18, 2014, at 7:17, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > >> On 18/06/14 09:25, Robert Park wrote: >> Maybe if this wiki was *only* for phone users then we could have Emojis, >> but the vast majority of Ubuntu users are on the desktop & server, so >> Emoji aren't a good fit. > > Sorry, I don't understand that. Do you mean there's some further reasons than emojis not being displayed properly? > > And, for clarifying: why shall I expect other Ubuntu users not to see emojis properly in their systems when I can seen them in mine? > > Regards. Perhaps you're missing the point of emoji. In phones they use some symbols in the ASCII/UTF-8 as the underlying symbols. And while the emoji render correctly on phones a LOT of systems, 12.04 stock and 14.04 stock included (and I have tested this) don't display the graphics and only display the symbols. Lubuntu does no rendering of them as images at all. That prevents the emoji from "working". I agree the use of graphics is sound, but not Emoji. Actual small sized pictures, understandable, but Emoji make no sense since not everything renders them as pictures. From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 11:51:05 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:51:05 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> Message-ID: <53A17D29.5060401@gmail.com> On 18/06/14 13:24, Thomas Ward wrote: > That prevents the emoji from "working". I agree the use of graphics is sound, but not Emoji. Actual small sized pictures, understandable, but Emoji make no sense since not everything renders them as pictures. Okay, understood: bad standard. So I'm removing it. Thank you. From nio.wiklund at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 06:00:25 2014 From: nio.wiklund at gmail.com (Nio Wiklund) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:00:25 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A12AF9.20304@gmail.com> 2014-06-18 02:06, Alberto Salvia Novella skrev: > Nio Wiklund: >> 'Such problems are not bugs in any Ubuntu package' > > Does the following correction fit what your mean?: > > "Its software hasn't been packaged by Ubuntu, but by a third party." Yes, it is better. From neal at bcn.boulder.co.us Wed Jun 18 14:19:03 2014 From: neal at bcn.boulder.co.us (Neal McBurnett) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:19:03 -0600 Subject: unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> Message-ID: <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> I'd like a better understanding of the Unicode issues here, with more specific guidance for documentation, etc. And I want to start off giving an appreciation to the author of the pages who took the time to try to make them more engaging and fun, even though it seems it led to problems for some readers. The term "emoji" covers a lot of ground, as seen at Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoji Some emoji are images, some are encoded as characters in the Unicode Private Use Area, and some have been standardized in Unicode as of 6.0 as of October 2010. The wiki page that started this conversation was https://wiki.ubuntu.com/One%20Hundred%20Papercuts/Work-flow/Triage/Real It is moved now, but I seem to also see some emoji / unicode characters e.g. here: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/One%20Hundred%20Papercuts/Work-flow/Triage/ some of them work in my browser (Chrome) but not in my editor (emacs). I expect the user at least needs the right fonts, but I'm curious to hear that a firefox add-on also works - perhaps via some font wrangling? Can someone clarify the support situation for at least these characters? Does it work for me in Ubuntu Precise 12.04 using chrome because I have the font, and Chrome knows how to use the font? Or is Chrome using some other approach to get them to work? How would I determine that for a given character / image? In general, non-ascii characters can be problematic under various circumstances. I imagine that the doc team uses a wide variety of non-ascii characters to write documentation in various languages. And, back to the topic, what exactly is the proposal for Ubuntu folks? Is it to avoid using unicode characters that aren't widely supported on Ubuntu and popular cellphones, etc? And certainly to avoid the private use areas? How will authors know where the (moving) boundary is? Or to avoid unnecessary graphics, especially when they involve such Unicode characters? Cheers, Neal McBurnett http://neal.mcburnett.org/ On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 07:24:29AM -0400, Thomas Ward wrote: > > > > On Jun 18, 2014, at 7:17, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > > > >> On 18/06/14 09:25, Robert Park wrote: > >> Maybe if this wiki was *only* for phone users then we could have Emojis, > >> but the vast majority of Ubuntu users are on the desktop & server, so > >> Emoji aren't a good fit. > > > > Sorry, I don't understand that. Do you mean there's some further reasons than emojis not being displayed properly? > > > > And, for clarifying: why shall I expect other Ubuntu users not to see emojis properly in their systems when I can seen them in mine? > > > > Regards. > > Perhaps you're missing the point of emoji. In phones they use some symbols in the ASCII/UTF-8 as the underlying symbols. And while the emoji render correctly on phones a LOT of systems, 12.04 stock and 14.04 stock included (and I have tested this) don't display the graphics and only display the symbols. Lubuntu does no rendering of them as images at all. > > That prevents the emoji from "working". I agree the use of graphics is sound, but not Emoji. Actual small sized pictures, understandable, but Emoji make no sense since not everything renders them as pictures. > > -- > Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list > Ubuntu-bugsquad at lists.ubuntu.com > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugsquad From fitoschido at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 16:00:18 2014 From: fitoschido at gmail.com (Adolfo Jayme Barrientos) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:00:18 -0500 Subject: unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> Message-ID: > Can someone clarify the support situation for at least these characters? Does it work for me > in Ubuntu Precise 12.04 using chrome because I have the font, and Chrome knows how to > use the font? Or is Chrome using some other approach to get them to work? I would say it’s because you have the font. Ubuntu doesn’t display emojis out-of-the-box because it has no fonts supporting those characters. We could ship Noto Color Emoji (an open source font from Android), as our FreeType/HarfBuzz stack is recent enough (in 14.04) so it supports color fonts, but I’m not sure about the support in Chrome. Firefox must support it, as Noto Color Emoji is included in Firefox OS. -- Adolfo From neal at bcn.boulder.co.us Wed Jun 18 17:00:25 2014 From: neal at bcn.boulder.co.us (Neal McBurnett) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:00:25 -0600 Subject: unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> Message-ID: <20140618170025.GB5572@feynman> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 11:00:18AM -0500, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote: > > Can someone clarify the support situation for at least these characters? Does it work for me > > in Ubuntu Precise 12.04 using chrome because I have the font, and Chrome knows how to > > use the font? Or is Chrome using some other approach to get them to work? > > I would say it’s because you have the font. Ubuntu doesn’t display > emojis out-of-the-box because it has no fonts supporting those > characters. > > We could ship Noto Color Emoji (an open source font from Android), as > our FreeType/HarfBuzz stack is recent enough (in 14.04) so it supports > color fonts, but I’m not sure about the support in Chrome. Firefox > must support it, as Noto Color Emoji is included in Firefox OS. > > -- > Adolfo Wow - I see that I hadn't carefully looked at the wikipedia page I linked to. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emoji It seems that the popularity of "texting" has led to a redefinition in many influential quarters of what text is. I'm now thinking that at least some emoji are downright evil (from a font perspective) - in color and animated! That makes this thread even more esoteric than I thought, though perhaps still of interest to documentation folks, who are perhaps more interested in fonts and characters than most. Some more information is here, about how on Macs, colored emoji even show up in the Terminal app, even though it still seems that Unicode does not specify what color a character can show up in. Color in the Unicode standard? - Stack Overflow http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9626115/color-in-the-unicode-standard Quoting from a Unicode FAQ: http://unicode.org/faq/emoji_dingbats.html Some of the characters from the core emoji sets have names that include a color term, for example, BLUE HEART or ORANGE BOOK. These color terms in the names do not imply any requirement about how a character must be presented; they are intended only to help identify the corresponding character in the core emoji sets. What do apps need to do to get color emoji via FreeType/HarfBuzz? Does Ubuntu support animated emoji anywhere? I see I've been missing the debate for a while. E.g. from 2011: Please Don't Use Emoji - Kirsle.net https://www.kirsle.net/blog/entry/please-don-t-use-emoji Is this as bad as I'm thinking for interoperability in general, for lots more than Ubuntu documentation? Sigh, Neal McBurnett http://neal.mcburnett.org/ From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 17:59:24 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:59:24 +0200 Subject: Emojis problems solved In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A1D37C.9050906@gmail.com> Robert Park: > Emoji are for texting your girlfriend, they are not for a > serious wiki page. Robert Park: > Emojis are not icons, they are BROKEN. Neal McBurnett: > I'm now thinking that at least some emoji are downright evil (from a font perspective) - in color and animated! That makes this thread even more esoteric than I thought, though perhaps still of interest to documentation folks, who are perhaps more interested in fonts and characters than most. I have developed a work-around for these problems, that can be easily used in any wiki page: Putted into place, looks as: Thank you. From robert.park at canonical.com Wed Jun 18 18:27:24 2014 From: robert.park at canonical.com (Robert Park) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:27:24 -0700 Subject: unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: <20140618170025.GB5572@feynman> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> <20140618170025.GB5572@feynman> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Neal McBurnett wrote: > It seems that the popularity of "texting" has led to a redefinition in many influential quarters of what text is. I'm now thinking that at least some emoji are downright evil (from a font perspective) - in color and animated! That makes this thread even more esoteric than I thought, though perhaps still of interest to documentation folks, who are perhaps more interested in fonts and characters than most. Emojis defining their own colors isn't evil (animating them is evil though). But no, the real evil of Emoji is that they are subject to the whims of whatever font designer happened to design the font you are using. Compare: https://twitter.com/mattboch/status/461502603147227136 (top row is iOS emoji font, bottom row is how android displays the exact same characters) So, true story, my girlfriend uses iOS and often sent me yellow hearts in her texts. One day I asked her "Why do you keep sending me this hairy scrotum?" She was mortified when she found out what it looked like for me, and then after that we spent a long time comparing emojis and deciding on which ones were "safe". So you can see, all it takes is one mistake, one little inconsistency, and then suddenly the picture you think you're sending comes out looking totally different on the other side. Emoji, by their very nature, give you precisely zero ability to predict what any given one will look like for any given viewer on any given platform. Although I admit the emoji fonts that render small monochrome icons look actually a little cute to me (I find the iOS ones garish in the extreme), still the fact remains that the vast majority of desktops are rendering these characters as squares with numbers inside them, so really they should not be used. Maybe at some future point the fonts will have better support for this and it won't be such a horrible situation, but right now it's really bad and should be avoided. If you really, really, really are in love with iOS emojis and really insist on using them in web pages, *please* *please* *please* take a screenshot of it and then save it as a PNG and include the PNG in the website instead. This way you can be sure that everybody will see the correct image, no matter what platform they are using. From robert.park at canonical.com Wed Jun 18 18:30:29 2014 From: robert.park at canonical.com (Robert Park) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 11:30:29 -0700 Subject: Emojis problems solved In-Reply-To: <53A1D37C.9050906@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A1D37C.9050906@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > Putted into place, looks as: > Ah, excellent use of SVG, this is very good, standard, will look the same for all platforms. Thanks so much for taking this effort ;-) From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 18:58:29 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 20:58:29 +0200 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> <20140618170025.GB5572@feynman> Message-ID: <53A1E155.2020808@gmail.com> On 18/06/14 20:27, Robert Park wrote: > If you really, really, really are in love with iOS emojis and really > insist on using them in web pages,*please* *please* *please* take a > screenshot of it and then save it as a PNG and include the PNG in the > website instead. I don't use iOS: I don't use a cell phone. I only use Ubuntu on my supa desktop! And I think that including these iOS emojis as screen-shots will be illegal! © 2014-2093 Apple Inc. From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 18 19:11:24 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:11:24 +0200 Subject: Emojis problems solved In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A1D37C.9050906@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A1E45C.1020602@gmail.com> On 18/06/14 20:30, Robert Park wrote: > Thanks so much for taking this effort ;-) Thank you. From es20490446e at gmail.com Sun Jun 22 16:07:34 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 18:07:34 +0200 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> Message-ID: <53A6FF46.80900@gmail.com> On 18/06/14 18:00, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote: > I would say it’s because you have the font. Ubuntu doesn’t display > emojis out-of-the-box because it has no fonts supporting those > characters. Shall we ask to include these by default? From jose at ubuntu.com Sun Jun 22 16:12:31 2014 From: jose at ubuntu.com (=?UTF-8?B?Sm9zw6kgQW50b25pbyBSZXk=?=) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 11:12:31 -0500 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: <53A6FF46.80900@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> <53A6FF46.80900@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A7006F.5010308@ubuntu.com> Maybe then we would fall into the situation where people who use other OSs and don't have the Emoji font installed in their systems cannot see them properly, or even the same stuff as with the Android/iOS example that was given before. On 06/22/2014 11:07 AM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > On 18/06/14 18:00, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote: >> I would say it’s because you have the font. Ubuntu doesn’t display >> emojis out-of-the-box because it has no fonts supporting those >> characters. > > Shall we ask to include these by default? > > > -- José Antonio Rey From es20490446e at gmail.com Sun Jun 22 17:59:39 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 19:59:39 +0200 Subject: unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: <53A7006F.5010308@ubuntu.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> <53A6FF46.80900@gmail.com> <53A7006F.5010308@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: <53A7198B.9070806@gmail.com> On 22/06/14 18:12, José Antonio Rey wrote: > Maybe then we would fall into the situation where people who use other > OSs and don't have the Emoji font installed in their systems cannot see > them properly, or even the same stuff as with the Android/iOS example > that was given before. I have emailed the Unicode consortium about this issue of the standard not being practicable. The message says: As seen we, the Ubuntu Community, are finding some problems while trying to include Unicode Emoticons, Symbols and Pictographs as standard; as they're presented very inconsistently across platforms. The reason behind that is operating systems have their own implementation of the standard, which can be very different from the other's, or not have implementation at all. Personally I see he root cause is reference emoticons, symbols and pictographs in to be under a restrictive license; forcing every party to implement themselves the standard. This can have no problem when speaking about glyphs, where changing shapes doesn't break the meaning of the character, but in these particular cases makes the standard not to be workable. So these charts need to be under a libre license for the Unicode Standard to be feasible in the long term. Thank you. From stephen.webb at canonical.com Sun Jun 22 21:29:23 2014 From: stephen.webb at canonical.com (Stephen M. Webb) Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2014 17:29:23 -0400 Subject: unicode / emoji in documentation (was Re: Common situations where a bug isn't real) In-Reply-To: <53A7198B.9070806@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A0E207.70901@gmail.com> <53A17536.50109@gmail.com> <1EAA854C-48F3-471A-BEF7-A75E17D9769C@trekweb.org> <20140618141902.GL6127@feynman> <53A6FF46.80900@gmail.com> <53A7006F.5010308@ubuntu.com> <53A7198B.9070806@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A74AB3.4000907@ubuntu.com> On 06/22/2014 01:59 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > On 22/06/14 18:12, José Antonio Rey wrote: >> Maybe then we would fall into the situation where people who use other OSs and don't have the Emoji font >> installed in their systems cannot see them properly, or even the same stuff as with the Android/iOS example that >> was given before. > > I have emailed the Unicode consortium about this issue of the standard not being practicable. > > The message says: > > As seen we, the Ubuntu Community, are finding some > problems while trying to include Unicode Emoticons, Symbols and Pictographs as standard; as they're presented very > inconsistently across platforms. I think your understanding of how the Unicode standard works with respect to the implementation of fonts representing Unicode. There is certainly nothing in the Unicode standard that says anything about how a foundry should provides its own artistic representation of a code point or glyph. If a font is designed such that each and every letter looks like a big hairy swollen reproductive organ (and I believe I know of at least one typeface that does so although I will not provide links), it is not wrong in the eyes of the Unicode consortium. If you really want to include graphics on a web page, use graphics. Emoji characters just do not provide the level of quality and maturity I expect from an official Ubuntu web site. -- Stephen M. Webb https://launchpad.net/~bregma From teward at trekweb.org Mon Jun 23 12:15:04 2014 From: teward at trekweb.org (Thomas Ward) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 08:15:04 -0400 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> *Sent from my iPhone. Please excuse any typos, as they are likely to happen by accident.* > On Jun 23, 2014, at 7:48, Dario Ruellan wrote: > > I was following this discussion passively, trying to filter-out the emoji > situation ;) > About the final "Common situations" I have two questions: > > "Its software has not been packaged by Ubuntu, but by a third party." Agree > that can't be fixable by Ubuntu, but, it is still a Pepercut If and only if you work with upstream/third-party to fix it. That's outside the realm of Ubuntu bug triage and probably papercuts... > "The user mangled the "/etc/apt/sources.list" file" is not the same as "The > user misconfigured the system"? Looks redundant. Looks kinda redundant, in my opinion, yes. > > Thanks! > > > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella < > es20490446e at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: >> >> >> >> Do you know of some other? >> >> Regards. >> >> >> -- >> Ubuntu-quality mailing list >> Ubuntu-quality at lists.ubuntu.com >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ >> mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality > > > > -- > Darío Ruellan [image: Google Profile] > [image: Linkedin] > [image: Twitter] > > Information Technology Professional > 17CC 5A20 2F75 610F BB0F > 57A2 9D7F 54F3 5705 DDD3 > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > Ubuntu-quality at lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality From es20490446e at gmail.com Tue Jun 24 12:23:16 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 14:23:16 +0200 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A96DB4.50707@gmail.com> Alberto Salvia Novella: > Dario Ruellan: > "Its software has not been packaged by Ubuntu, but by a third party." Agree > that can't be fixable by Ubuntu, but, it is still a Pepercut? The aim of the One Hundred Papercuts project is to gather papercuts that can be freely fixed by anyone. Dario Ruellan: > "The user mangled the "/etc/apt/sources.list" file" is not the same as "The > user misconfigured the system"? Looks redundant. It is. Just this one is so usual I thought it could save time having it in sight, as done at . Regards ○o。. From es20490446e at gmail.com Tue Jun 24 13:06:46 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:06:46 +0200 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> Message-ID: <53A977E6.5070104@gmail.com> Thomas Ward: >> "The user mangled the "/etc/apt/sources.list" file" is not the same as "The >> >user misconfigured the system"? Looks redundant. > Looks kinda redundant, in my opinion, yes. Alberto Salvia Novella: > It is. Just this one is so usual I thought it could save time having it > in sight, as done at > . So you think we can remove this with no real difference? From teward at trekweb.org Tue Jun 24 13:14:01 2014 From: teward at trekweb.org (Thomas Ward) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:14:01 -0400 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <53A977E6.5070104@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> <53A977E6.5070104@gmail.com> Message-ID: To be honest... > On Jun 24, 2014, at 9:06, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > > Thomas Ward: >>> "The user mangled the "/etc/apt/sources.list" file" is not the same as "The >>> >user misconfigured the system"? Looks redundant. >> Looks kinda redundant, in my opinion, yes. > > Alberto Salvia Novella: > > It is. Just this one is so usual I thought it could save time having it > > in sight, as done at > > . > > So you think we can remove this with no real difference? Yes I think so, If both cases point to converting a report to a question. Rather than restate the same thing it's easier to say it once. If it becomes an issue then we can show these separately, but for now I don't think we particularly need both things listed since they're basically the same statement. From es20490446e at gmail.com Tue Jun 24 13:19:41 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:19:41 +0200 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> <53A977E6.5070104@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A97AED.2080407@gmail.com> On 24/06/14 15:14, Thomas Ward wrote: > Rather than restate the same thing it's easier to say it once. Okay: removed! From brian at ubuntu.com Tue Jun 24 15:16:32 2014 From: brian at ubuntu.com (Brian Murray) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 08:16:32 -0700 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <53A97AED.2080407@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> <53A977E6.5070104@gmail.com> <53A97AED.2080407@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20140624151632.GL6659@murraytwins.com> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 03:19:41PM +0200, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > On 24/06/14 15:14, Thomas Ward wrote: > >Rather than restate the same thing it's easier to say it once. > > Okay: removed! > > I feel like there should be more information about how to determine if a bug is a "support request" or a "misconfigured system". Do you have plans to add more details or link to details about these types of situations? -- Brian Murray Ubuntu Bug Master -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From es20490446e at gmail.com Tue Jun 24 15:58:31 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 17:58:31 +0200 Subject: [Papercuts-ninja] Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <20140624151632.GL6659@murraytwins.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> <53A977E6.5070104@gmail.com> <53A97AED.2080407@gmail.com> <20140624151632.GL6659@murraytwins.com> Message-ID: <53A9A027.8040301@gmail.com> Brian Murray: > I feel like there should be more information about how to determine if a > bug is a "support request" or a "misconfigured system". Do you have > plans to add more details or link to details about these types of > situations? The original idea behind how the One Hundred Papercuts wiki is written is: - To hide complexities, till the user explicitly asks for them by clicking on links. - To provide only the 20% of documentation that solves the 90% of situations. So, what you feel it would be good to mention if we included links for those cases? From marconifabio at hotmail.it Tue Jun 24 22:26:00 2014 From: marconifabio at hotmail.it (Fabio Marconi) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 00:26:00 +0200 Subject: Apport retracing service problem Message-ID: Hallo I have opened a report automatically generated by apport and all went well. After some minutes I received a mail from the retracing service: Thank you for your report! However, processing it in order to get sufficient information for the developers failed (it does not generate a useful symbolic stack trace). This might be caused by some outdated packages which were installed on your system at the time of the report: no debug symbol package found for libv4l-0 no debug symbol package found for libv4lconvert0 no debug symbol package found for libjbig0 It close the report as 'Invalid' So, why Apport start the bug report and the retrace think differently ? Why it suggest to update a fully updated system ? If the above dbg-packages are not existing, how we can have a complete stack trace ? Thanks for the replies. Best regards Fabio -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian at ubuntu.com Tue Jun 24 22:29:40 2014 From: brian at ubuntu.com (Brian Murray) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:29:40 -0700 Subject: Apport retracing service problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20140624222940.GO6659@murraytwins.com> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:26:00AM +0200, Fabio Marconi wrote: > Hallo > I have opened a report automatically generated by apport and all went well. > After some minutes I received a mail from the retracing service: Which bug report number is this? > Thank you for your report! > However, processing it in order to get sufficient information for the > developers failed (it does not generate a useful symbolic stack trace). This > might be caused by some outdated packages which were installed on your system > at the time of the report: > no debug symbol package found for libv4l-0 > no debug symbol package found for libv4lconvert0 > no debug symbol package found for libjbig0 > > It close the report as 'Invalid' > > So, why Apport start the bug report and the retrace think differently ? > Why it suggest to update a fully updated system ? > If the above dbg-packages are not existing, how we can have a > complete stack trace ? > Thanks for the replies. > Best regards > Fabio -- Brian Murray Ubuntu Bug Master -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From brian at ubuntu.com Tue Jun 24 23:09:52 2014 From: brian at ubuntu.com (Brian Murray) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:09:52 -0700 Subject: Apport retracing service problem In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20140624230952.GP6659@murraytwins.com> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:26:00AM +0200, Fabio Marconi wrote: > Hallo > I have opened a report automatically generated by apport and all went well. > After some minutes I received a mail from the retracing service: This was http://launchpad.net/bugs/1334012 (which is private due to it failing to retrace). > Thank you for your report! > However, processing it in order to get sufficient information for the > developers failed (it does not generate a useful symbolic stack trace). This > might be caused by some outdated packages which were installed on your system > at the time of the report: > no debug symbol package found for libv4l-0 > no debug symbol package found for libv4lconvert0 > no debug symbol package found for libjbig0 > > It close the report as 'Invalid' > > So, why Apport start the bug report and the retrace think differently ? > Why it suggest to update a fully updated system ? The message given by the apport retracer is rather misleading, "might be caused by some outdated packages" leads one to believe that it may be something on their system, when in fact it isn't. The debug symbol packages come from the ddebs.ubuntu.com server and there seem to be none for libjbig0 (the only one I checked). So really the message given by apport should be changed to be conditional so that if the 'outdated_msg' (a variable in apport's code) includes the string "debug symbol package" then "outdated packages… installed on your system" should not appear. I'll open a bug report for that. > If the above dbg-packages are not existing, how we can have a > complete stack trace ? We can't really. -- Brian Murray Ubuntu Bug Master -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: From stephen.webb at canonical.com Wed Jun 18 18:03:55 2014 From: stephen.webb at canonical.com (Stephen M. Webb) Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:03:55 -0400 Subject: Emojis problems solved In-Reply-To: <53A1D37C.9050906@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A1D37C.9050906@gmail.com> Message-ID: <53A1D48B.4040109@canonical.com> On 06/18/2014 01:59 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > Robert Park: >> Emoji are for texting your girlfriend, they are not for a >> serious wiki page. > > Robert Park: >> Emojis are not icons, they are BROKEN. > > Neal McBurnett: >> I'm now thinking that at least some emoji are downright evil (from a font perspective) - in color and animated! That makes this thread even more esoteric than I thought, though perhaps > still of interest to documentation folks, who are perhaps more interested in fonts and characters than most. > > I have developed a work-around for these problems, that can be easily used in any wiki page: > > > Putted into place, looks as: > Are there not already little themed pictograms [1] that can be used? Not that they're required or exclusive, but do add to a consistent user experience. [1] http://design.ubuntu.com/brand/pictograms -- Stephen M. Webb From noreply at ubuntu.com Thu Jun 19 07:56:56 2014 From: noreply at ubuntu.com (Ubuntu Wiki) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 07:56:56 -0000 Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BUbuntu_Wiki=5D_Update_of_=22DebuggingDBus=22_by_jpakkane?= Message-ID: <20140619075656.9990.41145@mangaba.canonical.com> Dear Wiki user, You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Ubuntu Wiki" for change notification. The "DebuggingDBus" page has been changed by jpakkane: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingDBus?action=diff&rev1=7&rev2=8 }}} + 1. Reboot your machine to pick up the configuration changes. Simply reloading the DBus server configuration is not sufficient. For further info see [[https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=80186|this bug]]. + - 1. Reload D-BUS to pick up the configuration change: - {{{ - sudo reload dbus - }}} 1. Now run dbus-monitor as root. You should be able to see all signals, method calls, and method replies. {{{ sudo dbus-monitor --system From dario.ruellan at gmail.com Mon Jun 23 11:48:43 2014 From: dario.ruellan at gmail.com (Dario Ruellan) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2014 08:48:43 -0300 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> Message-ID: I was following this discussion passively, trying to filter-out the emoji situation ;) About the final "Common situations" I have two questions: "Its software has not been packaged by Ubuntu, but by a third party." Agree that can't be fixable by Ubuntu, but, it is still a Pepercut? "The user mangled the "/etc/apt/sources.list" file" is not the same as "The user misconfigured the system"? Looks redundant. Thanks! On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Alberto Salvia Novella < es20490446e at gmail.com> wrote: > I've been writing a list of common situations where a bug isn't real: > > > > Do you know of some other? > > Regards. > > > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > Ubuntu-quality at lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ > mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality > -- Darío Ruellan [image: Google Profile] [image: Linkedin] [image: Twitter] Information Technology Professional 17CC 5A20 2F75 610F BB0F 57A2 9D7F 54F3 5705 DDD3 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dario.ruellan at gmail.com Tue Jun 24 13:16:50 2014 From: dario.ruellan at gmail.com (Dario Ruellan) Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:16:50 -0300 Subject: Common situations where a bug isn't real In-Reply-To: <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <8024D93D-E4ED-4D1F-9746-DDA658375F6D@trekweb.org> Message-ID: > > > "Its software has not been packaged by Ubuntu, but by a third party." > Agree > > that can't be fixable by Ubuntu, but, it is still a Pepercut > If and only if you work with upstream/third-party to fix it. That's > outside the realm of Ubuntu bug triage and probably papercuts... > > No, it was a confusion from my part: you can have a third-party app packaged by Ubuntu, like Rhythmbox, and its OK to contact upstream to try fix a bug. But if the app is not in Ubuntu repositories it is pointless. I agree that this kind of bug not worth the effort. -- Darío Ruellan [image: Google Profile] [image: Linkedin] [image: Twitter] Information Technology Professional 17CC 5A20 2F75 610F BB0F 57A2 9D7F 54F3 5705 DDD3 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From es20490446e at gmail.com Wed Jun 25 17:26:51 2014 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 19:26:51 +0200 Subject: Emojis problems solved In-Reply-To: <53A1D48B.4040109@canonical.com> References: <539F4C14.60606@gmail.com> <53A0D81B.8070909@gmail.com> <53A1D37C.9050906@gmail.com> <53A1D48B.4040109@canonical.com> Message-ID: <53AB065B.40306@gmail.com> Stephen M. Webb: > Are there not already little themed pictograms [1] that can be used? Not that they're required or exclusive, but do > add to a consistent user experience. > > [1]http://design.ubuntu.com/brand/pictograms In the past I tried to use those, but I found that: - These pictographs barely suggest their descriptions, being too abstract to the human mind. The people who designed them gave priority to shape, sensation of simplicity and brand uniformity over meaningfulness. So I thoroughly did exactly the opposite in my designs, and worked amazingly well (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/One Hundred Papercuts/Branding)(https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-evangelists) - There isn't enough variety of them, and they are specific to technology. We need is pictographs that can cover more than devices and social media. - Having the pictogram coloured as links implicitly suggest the pictograph contains a link itself, when it doesn't. This is why I chose to colour using Ubuntu Cool Grey. I know pictographs made from Unicode characters aren't be the prettiest they could be, but they serve well their purpose. Ubuntu official pictographs don't. They are like having the most amazing hot dog, without a frankfurter in it. When you get a good frankfurter, you usually get the rest of the dog to be good easier. Have a nice day. From nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com Thu Jun 26 18:56:40 2014 From: nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com (Nicholas Skaggs) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 14:56:40 -0400 Subject: Utopic Bug Hug (and testing!) Days Message-ID: <53AC6CE8.50300@canonical.com> Greetings everyone. Summer is now in full swing for those of us in the Northern Hemisphere (and vice versa for our friends down south). The release cycle too is now well underway, with the first alpha wrapping up this week for those flavors who chose to participate. With that in mind, I'd like to bring back some of the test days we had in past cycles; so let's get to brainstorming and scheduling! I'd like to create a combination of the testing days and bug hug days we've done in the past. Let's have them on the same day as part of a collaborated effort. We'll work on bug triaging, while executing testcases and attempting to find new bugs or confirm existing ones. Curious about what a bug hug day is/was? Checkout https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay for more information. We will collaborate via IRC as usual. In addition, I'll plan on hosting a hangout (we'll use ubuntu-on-air) with some demos to help newcomers get up to speed on the tasks we've outlined. After the hangout, we'll continue the conversation via IRC as we work on bugs (filing new ones and triaging existing ones). Here's some of the ideas I had for demos; do you have something else you'd like to see? Demonstrate installer testing, followed by running manual testcases inside new installation Demonstrate filing a bug (during install and for applications) Demonstrate bug triaging Demonstrate using the emulator (ubuntu touch) Demonstrate phone/tablet testing on real devices Demonstrate testing core apps (real devices, emulator and desktop) Demonstrate exploratory testing (talk about mindset) Demonstrate running development release (talk about using changelog, updating on desktop, potential pitfalls, bugs) Demonstrate using the qatracker (how to read testcases and run them, how to report results) We won't attempt to do all of these in one event of course! We'll try and theme each event and pick applicable demos to go with it. That means we'll focus our work on different areas of ubuntu for each event. The goal for these test and triage days is pretty simple. Work on bugs! Get new bugs found and filed, close old bugs, and triage/confirm/help move forward existing bugs. So to make these events happen we'll need a few things. Date and time (scheduling) Theme List of bugs to work on Volunteers to help demo Your participation! I'd love to hear some feedback and get the first of these scheduled. Timezones and real life can make things difficult sometimes, but I'm looking at Thursday July 10th from 1900 - 2200 UTC as the first date. I'd like to focus on the desktop, and specifically exploratory testing and running the development release. Let's look at bugs then that affect utopic, the installer or core applications on the desktop. So, I'll volunteer to give a demo on running the development release and demonstrating installer testing, talk about exploratory testing etc. Any volunteers for demoing bug triaging? I think this would be something helpful to demo each time we do one of these. Any volunteers who might be able to help put together a list of bugs for us to focus on triaging? Keep in mind we'd like to focus on the installer and desktop. I'd like to have several of these during the middle of the cycle before we all get busy again! Thanks everyone! Nicholas From ub.untu at btinternet.com Thu Jun 26 19:04:48 2014 From: ub.untu at btinternet.com (Elfy) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 20:04:48 +0100 Subject: Utopic Bug Hug (and testing!) Days In-Reply-To: <53AC6CE8.50300@canonical.com> References: <53AC6CE8.50300@canonical.com> Message-ID: <53AC6ED0.2010809@btinternet.com> On 26/06/14 19:56, Nicholas Skaggs wrote: > Greetings everyone. Summer is now in full swing for those of us in the > Northern Hemisphere (and vice versa for our friends down south). The > release cycle too is now well underway, with the first alpha wrapping > up this week for those flavors who chose to participate. With that in > mind, I'd like to bring back some of the test days we had in past > cycles; so let's get to brainstorming and scheduling! > > I'd like to create a combination of the testing days and bug hug days > we've done in the past. Let's have them on the same day as part of a > collaborated effort. We'll work on bug triaging, while executing > testcases and attempting to find new bugs or confirm existing ones. > Curious about what a bug hug day is/was? Checkout > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuBugDay for more information. > > We will collaborate via IRC as usual. In addition, I'll plan on > hosting a hangout (we'll use ubuntu-on-air) with some demos to help > newcomers get up to speed on the tasks we've outlined. After the > hangout, we'll continue the conversation via IRC as we work on bugs > (filing new ones and triaging existing ones). Here's some of the ideas > I had for demos; do you have something else you'd like to see? > > Demonstrate installer testing, followed by running manual testcases > inside new installation > Demonstrate filing a bug (during install and for applications) > Demonstrate bug triaging > Demonstrate using the emulator (ubuntu touch) > Demonstrate phone/tablet testing on real devices > Demonstrate testing core apps (real devices, emulator and desktop) > Demonstrate exploratory testing (talk about mindset) > Demonstrate running development release (talk about using changelog, > updating on desktop, potential pitfalls, bugs) > Demonstrate using the qatracker (how to read testcases and run them, > how to report results) > Demonstrate writing manual testcases and pushing that to the main branch perhaps. > We won't attempt to do all of these in one event of course! We'll try > and theme each event and pick applicable demos to go with it. That > means we'll focus our work on different areas of ubuntu for each > event. The goal for these test and triage days is pretty simple. Work > on bugs! Get new bugs found and filed, close old bugs, and > triage/confirm/help move forward existing bugs. > I can be about for hangouts if needed for installer testing/ filing bugs/ exploratory testing/ running dev release/ manual testcases (if we do that) > So to make these events happen we'll need a few things. > > Date and time (scheduling) > Theme > List of bugs to work on > Volunteers to help demo > Your participation! > > I'd love to hear some feedback and get the first of these scheduled. > Timezones and real life can make things difficult sometimes, but I'm > looking at Thursday July 10th from 1900 - 2200 UTC as the first date. > I'd like to focus on the desktop, and specifically exploratory testing > and running the development release. Let's look at bugs then that > affect utopic, the installer or core applications on the desktop. > > So, > I'll volunteer to give a demo on running the development release and > demonstrating installer testing, talk about exploratory testing etc. > Any volunteers for demoing bug triaging? I think this would be > something helpful to demo each time we do one of these. > > Any volunteers who might be able to help put together a list of bugs > for us to focus on triaging? Keep in mind we'd like to focus on the > installer and desktop. > > I'd like to have several of these during the middle of the cycle > before we all get busy again! Thanks everyone! > > Nicholas > Elfy -- Ubuntu Forum Council Member Xubuntu QA Lead From nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com Thu Jun 26 19:51:28 2014 From: nicholas.skaggs at canonical.com (Nicholas Skaggs) Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:51:28 -0400 Subject: Utopic test writing hackfest Message-ID: <53AC79C0.3050800@canonical.com> In addition to the bug hug + testing days, I'd like to also schedule some hackfests to get our tests in shape. What's a hackfest? https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Hackfest We have some outstanding needs on both the automated and manual test writing efforts. Elfy has already stepped forward to help out on the manual test front (thank you much!), while perhaps still unbeknownst to the QA folks, they'll be helping me on the automated test front :-) Thanks Leo et la! So what are we going to be hacking on? If you know python and have some autopilot knowledge (or willing to learn), we are going to be hacking on the toolkit helper for autopilot for the ubuntu sdk. That's a mouthful! Specifically it's the helpers that we use for writing autopilot tests against ubuntu-sdk applications. All app developers make use of these helpers, and we need more of them to ensure we have good coverage for all components developers use. If you don't know python, we still need help writing manual testcases! All you need is some basic tester knowledge and the ability to write in English. Don't worry, we'll be around to help, and there's guides to well, guide you! Specifically we'll be looking at writing and finishing some testcases for ubuntu studio and some other flavors. The first is scheduled for July 15th from 1900-2200 UTC. Complete details, guides, work items, etc are all being collected on the event page: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Hackfest/20140715 Questions? Ask away! hope to see everyone there! Nicholas