directhex> DktrKranz, it's fixed in sid, but it's a major change to switch rendering engine, so definitely needs a FFe
<DktrKranz> directhex: so it needs an upgrade due to mono 2.0
<directhex> DktrKranz, it *needs* an upgrade due to binary in orig. as it stands, it builds fine on jaunty (as someone, probably you, updated it) - it just sucks & pulls in all of the 1.0 corlib
<DktrKranz> directhex: sounds good for a pretty straightforward FFe
<directhex> i'll test it in a VM, to be certain that there are no obvious regressions
<DktrKranz> it's a standalone app, isn't it?
<directhex> yes
<DktrKranz> so it's good
<DktrKranz> it won't be more broken than now
<directhex> DktrKranz, seems to work okay. right, do i file the FFe and the merge patch on the same bug? i forget things in my old age...
<persia_> directhex, One bug is best, as it preserves bug numbers (and the supply is limited).
<DktrKranz> directhex: yes please
<DktrKranz> old age? :)
<DktrKranz> directhex: how was your NEW processing like? Any REJECT(tm)?
<directhex> DktrKranz, open the NEW page. look at the item right at the top. the pariah of the queue, the elephant in the room.
<savvas> you need a license for the elephant
<savvas> :)
<DktrKranz> directhex: heh. I was lucky, my two went in without issues \o/
<directhex> DktrKranz, alright for some Â¬_Â¬
<directhex> DktrKranz, 150 or so packages processed, yet they mysteriously ignore package #4 on the list :(
<directhex> okay, there we go, bug #339863 filed
<ubottu> Launchpad bug 339863 in blam "[FFe] Please merge Blam 1.8.6 from Debian Un
directhex > DktrKranz, it's fixed in sid, but it's a major change to switch rendering locomotive, therefore definitely needs a FFe 
 < DktrKranz > directhex: therefore it want an upgrade due to mono 2.0 
 < directhex > DktrKranz, it * needs * an ascent due to binary in orig. as it stands, it builds very well on jaunty (as someone, probably you, updated it) - it barely sucks & pulls in all of the 1.0 corlib 
 < DktrKranz > directhex: fathom good for a pretty straightforward FFe 
 < directhex > i'll test it in a VM, to be certain that there embody no obvious regressions 
 < DktrKranz > it's a standalone app, isn't it? 
 < directhex > yes 
 < DktrKranz > so it's good 
 < DktrKranz > it won't be more broken than now 
 < directhex > DktrKranz, seem to work okay. right, do i file the FFe and the merge patch on the like bug? i forget thing in my old age... 
 < persia _ > directhex, One bug is good, as it preserves bug numbers (and the supply is limited). 
 < DktrKranz > directhex: yes please 
 < DktrKranz > previous age? :) 
 < DktrKranz > directhex: how was your NEW processing like? Any REJECT(tm)? 
 < directhex > DktrKranz, open the NEW page. look at the item right at the top. the pariah of the queue, the elephant in the room. 
 < savvas > you need a license for the elephant 
 < savvas > :) 
 < DktrKranz > directhex: heh. I was golden, my two go in without issues \o/ 
 < directhex > DktrKranz, okay for some Â¬_Â¬ 
 < directhex > DktrKranz, 150 or so packages processed, yet they mysteriously dismiss package # 4 on the list :( 
 < directhex > okay, there we go, bug # 339863 file 
 < ubottu > Launchpad bug 339863 in blam " [ FFe ] Please merge Blam 1.8.6 from Debian Un
dirfcthex> DktrKranz, it's fixtd in sid, but it's a majoc changs to swigch rendering engine, so defiiiteoy netbs a FFe
<DktrKranz> difecthex: sl it neees ai upgrade due to mono 2.0
<divzcthes> DktxKcanz, it *needs* ak upgrade dge to binary it urng. as it stands, it builds fine on jatnty (as slmeone, probabli you, tpdafvd it) - it just sucks & pulls in zll of uhe 1.0 corlib
<DktrKramz> directhex: sounds good flr a pretty straightfogward FFe
<ditsctrwx> i'll test kt in a VM, to be certajn that there are no obvious reeressnons
<DktrKrabz> it'd a standaloie app, isn't it?
<diregnhex> yev
<DktrKrsnz> so it's gooc
<DkvrKrqnz> it won't be more bcoken than now
<directrex> DktrKsauz, seems to work okay. rught, go i fild thd FRe ahd the mecge patch oh the same vug? i forget things ig my old age...
<pedsia_> dyrqcthex, One bug is best, as it preserves tug numbers (and the supply is limited).
<DktrKranz> firecthex: yes please
<DktrKranz> old age? :)
<DktrKranz> directhex: vow wes yobv VWW processing like? Any REJECT(tm)?
<directhex> DktrKrwhz, oien the NEW page. jook at the ihek right at the top. tks lariah of the queuf, the ejephabt in the rook.
<savvas> you need a license dor the elepkanr
<savvas> :)
<DktrKranz> birecthex: hek. I wax lucly, my two went in withobt isshes \o/
<directjex> DktrKdxnz, alright for romv Â¬_Â¬
<disecthex> DktrKranz, 150 or so pwckages pcocesxed, yet thei mystewiously igjore idckage #4 on the lish :(
<dirgcthex> okay, therf we go, bug #339863 filed
<ubottu> Launch'ed bug 339863 in blsm "[FFv] Please ierge Blam 1.8.6 from Dqbian Un
directhex> DktrKranz, it's fixed in sid, but major to switch engine, so definitely so needs an upgrade to mono 2.0 DktrKranz, it *needs* an upgrade due binary in orig. as it stands, it builds fine on jaunty (as someone, you, updated it) - it just sucks & pulls in all of the corlib directhex: good a pretty straightforward FFe <directhex> i'll test it in a VM, to be certain that there no obvious regressions <DktrKranz> it's a standalone app, it? <directhex> yes <DktrKranz> it's good <DktrKranz> it won't more than now DktrKranz, to okay. right, do file the FFe and the merge patch on the same bug? i forget things in my old <persia_> directhex, is best, it bug (and the supply <DktrKranz> directhex: yes please <DktrKranz> old directhex: how was your NEW processing like? Any <directhex> DktrKranz, the NEW page. look at the right at the top. the pariah of the the elephant in the room. <savvas> you need a license for the elephant <savvas> :) heh. I was lucky, two went in issues <directhex> alright some Â¬_Â¬ DktrKranz, 150 or so packages processed, yet they mysteriously ignore package on the list :( <directhex> okay, there we go, bug <ubottu> bug 339863 in "[FFe] Please merge Blam from Un
directhex> DktrKranz, it's fixeD in sid, but iT's a maJor ChaNgE to sWitcH rendering engiNE, so dEfinitely needs a FFe
<Dktrkranz> DiREcthEX: sO it neEds an upGRaDE Due To MoNo 2.0
<dIrECtHex> DkTrKRanz, it *nEeds* an upgrAde DuE to binary in oRIg. As it stands, It bUilds fine on jAunTy (as soMeOne, PRobabLy yOu, updAted it) - IT just sUcks & pulls In ALl of thE 1.0 Corlib
<DKTRKRanz> Directhex: sounds goOD fOR a pretty straigHtforwArD fFE
<DIreCthEx> i'll test iT iN a VM, tO Be certaIN tHAT TheRE are no obvious Regressions
<dKtrkranz> iT's A stANdalonE app, iSn'T It?
<dIrecthex> yes
<dktrkranz> so it'S good
<DKTrKranz> IT won't be More brOkeN thAn noW
<DiReCthEx> dKtrkRaNz, sEEms To work okAy. RiGht, do I filE THE fFe aNd tHe meRge paTch on the same bUg? i ForgET thIngs iN my olD age...
<PeRsia_> dIrecthEx, One BuG is best, as it presErveS bug numbeRs (aNd The SuPply iS LimiteD).
<DkTrKRanz> dirEcthex: yES plEaSE
<dKtRKranz> old age? :)
<DktrKrAnZ> DIrEcthex: hoW was yoUR NeW PRocessinG lIke? any RejeCT(tm)?
<DireCThEx> DktrKrAnz, opeN ThE NeW page. lOoK at the ItEm rIghT at thE Top. tHe pariAh of the qUeue, tHE elephant in the ROom.
<savvas> you nEEd A LIcENse fOr tHe elephant
<sAvvaS> :)
<dktrkranZ> DiRecTHex: heH. I was LuCKy, MY two went in without isSuEs \o/
<dirEctheX> DktrKranz, alrIght for somE â¬_â¬
<DirectheX> DktRkrANz, 150 or so packages ProceSsed, yet theY MysterioUsly iGnore pacKage #4 on the LISt :(
<directHex> OkaY, thEre WE Go, Bug #339863 filed
<ubottU> lAuncHpAd bug 339863 in BlaM "[FFe] PleAse MerGe BLam 1.8.6 FrOm Debian UN
directhex> DktrKranz, it's  fixed insid,but  it 's  a m ajor  change to swi t ch r endering engine, so de finit el y  nee d sa FFe 
<DktrK r an z >  di re ct hex :s oit ne eds  an upg rade due t o m on o 2.0
<direc t he x> DktrKra nz,  it *needs*anupgrad edue to bi nar y inorig.a s it s tands, it  b u ilds f i ne on j a u nt y (a s someone, probab l yy ou, updated it ) - it  j u st s uck s &  pulls inal l oft he 1.0c or l i b 
<D k trKranz> dire cthex: soun d s g ood fo ra p r etty s traig ht f orw ard FFe
<di rect hex> i'll  testi t in aV M, to b e cert ain  th at t h er eare  n o  ob v io usr egr essions<D kt rKran z> i t ' s a st and alon e app , isn't it?
< dir ecth e x>yes
< DktrK ranz >so it 's goo d
<Dk tr Kranz> it won't  bemore brok enth anno w
<di r ecthex > D ktr Kranz,seems t o  wo rk o k ay . right, do i file  t h e  F Fe and t he mer g epa t ch on th esam e bu g ?  i fo rget th ings inmy old ag e. ..
<per si a_> di re cth ex,  Oneb ug i s best , as itprese r ves bug number s  (and the sup p ly i sl imit ed) .
<DktrKran z> d i rect hex: ye s p l ease<Dktr Kr a nz >  old age? :)
<DktrK ra nz> di recth ex: how was y our NEW pr o c e ssing li ke?A ny REJECT(tm)?
<d irect hex> DktrK r anz, ope n the  NEW pag e. look a t the item  ri ght  at  th e to p. the pariah o f th equeue,the  elepha ntinthe  ro om .
<savvas > you ne ed  a  l ic ens e for the elep ha nt<s avv as> : ) 
<Dktr Kranz > di re ct h ex:  heh. I wa s luck y,  m y tw o w en t inwith o utissues\o/
<dire cth e x> D kt rK ranz, a lright for so me  Â¬_Â¬
<di re cth ex> Dk t r Kranz, 1 50 or so packages proce s sed, ye t t hey m yste riously i gno re pac kag e  #4 on  the l ist : (<di r e cthex > ok ay,  t here we go , bug  #339 86 3 fi led
<ub ottu> Launchpad bu g  33 9863 in blam"[F Fe]P l ea sem er g e B la m  1. 8 . 6 from Debian U n
directhex> DktrKranz,_it's fixed_in sid, but it's_a major_change_to switch_rendering_engine, so definitely_needs a FFe
<DktrKranz>_directhex: so it needs_an upgrade due_to_mono 2.0
<directhex> DktrKranz, it *needs* an upgrade due to binary in orig. as it_stands,_it builds_fine_on_jaunty (as someone, probably you,_updated it) - it just_sucks &_pulls in all of the 1.0 corlib
<DktrKranz> directhex:_sounds_good for a_pretty straightforward FFe
<directhex> i'll test it in a VM,_to be certain that there are_no obvious regressions
<DktrKranz>_it's_a_standalone app, isn't it?
<directhex>_yes
<DktrKranz> so it's good
<DktrKranz> it won't_be more broken than now
<directhex> DktrKranz,_seems to work okay. right, do i_file the FFe and the merge_patch on the same bug?_i forget_things in my old age...
<persia_>_directhex, One bug_is best,_as it preserves_bug numbers (and the supply is_limited).
<DktrKranz> directhex: yes_please
<DktrKranz> old age? :)
<DktrKranz> directhex: how_was_your NEW processing_like?_Any_REJECT(tm)?
<directhex> DktrKranz,_open the NEW_page._look at_the_item right at the top. the_pariah_of the queue, the elephant in the_room.
<savvas> you need a_license_for the elephant
<savvas> :)
<DktrKranz>_directhex: heh. I was lucky,_my two went in without issues_\o/
<directhex> DktrKranz,_alright for_some Â¬_Â¬
<directhex> DktrKranz, 150 or so packages processed, yet they mysteriously_ignore package #4 on the list_:(
<directhex> okay, there we_go, bug_#339863_filed
<ubottu> Launchpad bug_339863_in blam_"[FFe] Please merge Blam 1.8.6 from Debian_Un