Status Meetings:2007-01-31:Log

From Camino Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
12:01 <@pinkerton> moof
12:01 -!- mento has joined #camino-mtg
12:01 <@mento> noon already?
12:01 <@pinkerton> afraid so
12:01 <@mento> wow
12:02 <@mento> back in 5 mins
12:02 -!- ardissone|away has joined #camino-mtg
12:03 <@froodian> Is our assembly dissembled?
12:03 <@froodian> Then let us begin
12:03 <@froodian> (I know it's a misuse of the word, it's a Shakespeare quote)
12:04 <@froodian> everybody browse to 
12:04 <@froodian> in the web browser of your choice
12:05 <@froodian> So far, 1.1a2 has been very stable
12:05 <@froodian> or, I should say, continues to be stable
12:05 -!- ardissone|away has left #camino-mtg []
12:05 <@pinkerton> good
12:05 <@pinkerton> what's our b1 plan?
12:05 -!- kreeger has joined #camino-mtg
12:05 <@froodian> We said "early February"
12:05 <@froodian> which is tomorrow
12:05 <@pinkerton> yeah
12:06 <@froodian> there are still several (8 when ardissone edited, but 1 or two fewer now) 
                  nib/string bugs
12:06 <@froodian> which need to make it before we string freeze
12:06 <@smorgan> There's no reason b1 has to be string freeze is there?
12:06 <@smorgan> I mean, yes, we have to pick something
12:06 <@smorgan> But if we really wanted to push a b1 and still had a string change pending, we 
                 could just pick some date
12:06 -!- ardissone|away has joined #camino-mtg
12:07 <@mento> aww, string freezes are soft anyway :)
12:07 <@pinkerton> yeah, what else is there besides strings?
12:07 <@smorgan> (not saying we need to necessarily, just tossing that out there)
12:07 <@froodian> kqueue is the biggie
12:07 <@pinkerton> can we just pick like 2/8 and be good with it?
12:07 <@froodian> but it keeps moving
12:07 <@mento> let's see what we've got, then we'll pick 2/8
12:07 <@pinkerton> k
12:08 <@mento> ugh, bug # for kq?
12:08 <@froodian> and string-freeze later, or try to be string-complete by then?
12:08 <@froodian> bug 318001
12:08 <@froodian>
12:08 <@smorgan> It would be nice to string freeze, but we can decide that when we get closer
12:09 <@froodian> 2/8 is pretty close
12:09 <@froodian> before our next meeting
12:09 <@froodian> errr, no
12:09 <@froodian> sorry, wrong month
12:09 <@froodian> :p
12:09 <@pinkerton> i'm out of town 2/10-2/17
12:09 <@mento> what's the target for 1.1?  one beta?  two?
12:10 <@froodian> we've been saying 1
12:10 <@pinkerton> i'd say 1
12:10 <@froodian> so this would be the last milestone
12:10 <@mento> then it'd be nice to have near-frozen nibs and strings
12:10 <@kreeger> kq should be close
12:10 <@mento> it looks close
12:11 <@kreeger> mento: ill respin that link edit error patch this afternoon
12:11 <@mento> niccie
12:11 <@pinkerton> what's the holdup on the strings? someone doing it, reviews? sr?
12:12 <@ardissone|away> reviews and writing patches
12:12 <@froodian> "yes" ;)
12:12 <@ardissone|away> if we're not string frozen for b1, we need to be shortly afterwards
12:12 <@froodian> bug 343299 is probably the one that'll need most work w/ UI changes
12:12 -!- thebot has joined #camino-mtg
12:13 <@froodian> bug 343299
12:13 < thebot> froodian: Bug nor, P3, 
                Camino1.1,, ASSI, Spell-check context menu missing Ignore 
                and Learn Spelling entries
12:13 <@ardissone|away> and give l10n a pseudo-milestone to work from
12:13 <@pinkerton> can we beta and then set like 1wk or 2wks for l10n freeze?
12:13 <@ardissone|away> we've made a lot of changes since 1.0
12:14 <@pinkerton> like what if we decide to take flashblock, etc?
12:14 <@ardissone|away> (i wanted to decide that today :p )
12:15 <@pinkerton> ok, do we think we can be slushy (pending feedback from beta, etc) by 2/8 or 
12:15 <@ardissone|away> we just need to not let the l10n-bugs slip if we do that
12:15 <@ardissone|away> i think the 15th is reasonable for l10n freeze
12:16 <@mento> 15th's a holiday
12:16 <@mento> wait, that's the 19th
12:16 <@mento> forget it
12:16 <@pinkerton> mento: we don't get that off, do we?
12:16 <@pinkerton> omg we do
12:17 <@mento> i think we did last year
12:17 <@mento> yeah
12:17 <@pinkerton> how about we plan to be frozen by 2/15 and beta the following tuesday?
12:17 <@froodian> sounds like a plan to me
12:17 <@smorgan> Cool
12:17 <@ardissone|away> :)
12:17 -!- ardissone|away is now known as ardissone|food
12:17 <@mento> ok, that works
12:17 <@pinkerton> so let's plan on spinning beta like 2/15 just so we push to get everything in
12:18 <@ardissone|food> good
12:18  * froodian nods
12:18 <@pinkerton> then we can informally candidate for a few days, and release it that first 
12:18 <@froodian> next: pawn is in permanent orange again.  TP time need to be upped (again), or 
                  something else?
12:18 <@ardissone|food> tp is actually [CRASH]
12:19 <@pinkerton> oh, well that's bad
12:19 <@mento> maybe just rebooted
12:19 <@mento> something's leaking in a bad way
12:19 <@mento> let me get on that now
12:19 <@ardissone|food> ew
12:19 -!- kreeger is now known as kreeger-awau
12:19 -thebot:#camino-mtg- Camino: 'MacOSX Darwin 7.9.0 boxset Depend camino' has changed state 
          from Burning to Success.
12:19 <@ardissone|food> heh
12:19 <@mento> yup, 2.5GB of swap files
12:19 <@mento> again
12:19 <@froodian> uuugly
12:20 <@pinkerton> ouch, does it run any trunk stuff? 
12:20 <@pinkerton> or is i branch leaking?
12:20 <@ardissone|food> pawn is all trunk
12:20 <@mento> trunk
12:20 <@mento> might be the os
12:20 <@ardissone|food> and our only working graph stuff
12:21 <@ardissone|food> (but it started after Ts went through the roof)
12:21 <@mento> i should watch top while it's running tests
12:22 <@mento> i did check it after the first cycle last time i rebooted it and it wasn't overly 
               stuffed up with swap files
12:22 <@mento> which is why i say it may be some long-lived process and not camino
12:22 <@pinkerton> k
12:23 <@mento> restarted.
12:23 <@pinkerton> ok, what's next?
12:23 <@froodian> r q is the review bottleneck at this point, mostly due to lack of reviewers, 
                  but in general q's aren't bad atm.
12:23 <@froodian> anybody have anything else before specific bugs?
12:23 <@pinkerton> i do
12:24 <@pinkerton> we got some email from Om Malik, out of the blue, i wanted to share it with
12:24 <@mento> i talked to preed last week (in a plane we rented) and he said that they'll give 
               us a dedicated xserve plus space on a shared one
12:24 <@ardissone|food> :)
12:24 <@ardissone|food> :)
12:24 <@froodian> w00t (on both counts)
12:24 <@pinkerton> yay!
12:24 <@mento> go pink
12:24 <@pinkerton> "i have been using the nightlies and have to say, the goodness went to 
                   hotness. amazing work. keep it up. 
12:24 <@pinkerton> if there is anything I can do, don't hesitate to drop me a note. "
12:24 <@mento> excellent!
12:24 <@mento> can he review patches? :)
12:24 <@pinkerton> lol
12:25 <@froodian> heh
12:25 <@pinkerton> yeah, i think that sums up the great work everyone is doign much better than i 
                   can ;)
12:25 <@ardissone|food> yeah, or write some ;)
12:25 <@froodian> :D
12:25 <@pinkerton> folks at google are running 1.1a2 and loving it
12:25 <@ardissone|food> i have to say, i crashed yesterday for the first time in ages, and 
                        session-restore was lovely :)
12:25 <@froodian> :)
12:26 <@pinkerton> so it's important that we push this to users, who don't know of all the 
                   awesome stuff in the branch builds
12:26 <@pinkerton> so hitting our dates is important
12:26 <@ardissone|food> yeah, we need beta to get more exposure
12:26 <@pinkerton> and keeping quality high for the end run
12:26 <@pinkerton> that's it for me.
12:26 <@froodian> and on that note... let's talk bugs ;)
12:26 <@ardissone|food> we have some nasty core bugs to figure out
12:26 <@froodian> Bug 343937
12:26 <@ardissone|food> (still)
12:26 < thebot> froodian: Bug nor, --, 
                Camino1.1,, NEW, Default "unblock popup" behavior should not 
                include adding site to Exceptions List
12:26 <@froodian> smorgan, did you pull together some ideas for this?
12:27 <@smorgan> I am about to toss some up for us to look at; can we come back to it in a few 
12:27 <@froodian> sure
12:27 <@froodian> Bug 295755 - does it make 1.1?
12:27 < thebot> froodian: Bug nor, --, 
                Camino1.2,, NEW, Implement Flashblock as a default 
                Camino preference
12:27 <@froodian> and if so, which scheme?
12:27 <@froodian> (see wiki)
12:28 <@pinkerton> i think it should, if the only blocker is tree mumble
12:28 <@ardissone|food> i think it's mainly a question of build-sys stuff
12:28 <@ardissone|food> presumably cl found to patch to not-bad
12:28 <@pinkerton> mento: do you have a preference?
12:29 <@mento> adding in a new prefpane?  that sounds fine to me.
12:29 <@pinkerton> no i meant about the build mumble
12:29 <@mento> do you mean that we need to find someone to do the project file ickiness?
12:29 <@ardissone|food> no
12:29 <@ardissone|food> i can do that
12:29 <@mento> then what's the question?
12:29 <@ardissone|food> pls open the agenda ;)
12:30 <@mento> hah, you caught me!
12:30 <@pinkerton> there are 3 ways to handle the tree integration
12:30 <@ardissone|food>
12:30 <@mento> i prefer 3
12:30 <@mento> easier to hack on
12:30 <@pinkerton> really?
12:31 <@mento> i really don't like having hard-to-search blobs in the tree
12:31 <@ardissone|food> it seems to me that's the hardest to maintain easily in the long run ;)
12:31 <@ardissone|food> ah
12:31 <@mento> yeah, it's the hardest for build people, but i think it's the least annoying for 
               most other developers
12:31 <@pinkerton> is the license ok for checking in?
12:31 <@ardissone|food> it's tri, iirc
12:31 <@ardissone|food> i wrote in the bug
12:32 <@ardissone|food> some time ago
12:32 <@mento> no prob there
12:32 <@ardissone|food> "Since no one's mentioned license yet, I checked and it's tri-licensed"
12:32 <@pinkerton> now someone just has to do the work
12:32 <@mento> we could do this from a makefile that builds the jar
12:32 <@mento> take advantage of the moz machinery to build jars and avoids having to maintain 
               crap in the xcodeproj each time a file is added
12:33 <@mento> the xcodeproj could just depend on the built jar
12:33 <@pinkerton> sounds good
12:33  * mento volunteers
12:33 <@pinkerton> sold.
12:33 <@froodian> :)
12:33  * ardissone|food was just about to ask
12:33 <@ardissone|food> so
12:33 <@mento> but smokey will need to get on my case about it
12:33 <@ardissone|food> 1.1 for that bug
12:33 <@ardissone|food> ?
12:33 <@pinkerton> ok that aside, what's the UI for this? did someone say a new pref panel?
12:33 <@mento> otherwise i'll forget
12:33 <@ardissone|food> heh
12:33 <@ardissone|food> new item in Web Features
12:33  * froodian nods
12:33 <@pinkerton> just a checkbox, right?
12:34 <@froodian> yeah
12:34 <@ardissone|food> froodian and i haven't vetted the text he submitted yet
12:34 -!- kreeger-awau [Quit: kreeger-awau]
12:34 <@froodian> but if we want it for 1.1, we can play that game pretty quickly
12:34 <@ardissone|food> but 
12:34 <@pinkerton> ok i'm fine with a checkbox, anything more is dubious
12:34 <@ardissone|food> yeah
12:34 <@ardissone|food> that's all it needs
12:34 <@mento> ok, cool
12:35 <@mento> i've got to run to lunch now, guys
12:35 <@froodian> later
12:35 <@ardissone|food> so we need to get the patch under r
12:35 <@ardissone|food> thanks mento 
12:35 <@mento> i don't think anything else here needs me
12:35 -!- jcraig has joined #camino-mtg
12:35 <@froodian> kreeger had a bug, but he left, so let's push it
12:35 <@smorgan> I'm ready with mocks
12:35 <@ardissone|food> we don't want it for 1.1 anyway
12:35 <@mento> the chrome string one?
12:35 <@froodian> yeah
12:35 <@pinkerton> punt it
12:35 <@mento> ok, we'll hit it next week
12:35 <@mento> later.
12:35 <@ardissone|food> too big for l10n this late
12:36 <@froodian> ok, smorgan?
12:36 <@ardissone|food> we want it for 1.2 if it's ready by when 1.1 ships
12:36 <@smorgan> So I didn't end up doing all the mocks that I can considered but thought were 
                 not good since I was short on time, but here's what I have:
12:37 <@smorgan> This is basically what I suggested before:
12:37 <@smorgan>
12:37 <@smorgan> But with the domain in the text
12:37 <@smorgan> I still hate the flow of the checkbox text though
12:37 <@smorgan> Also, I don't like not having a close button, since it's easy to pick out if you 
                 just want to make the bar go away without thinking
12:37 <@smorgan> So then this:
12:37 <@smorgan>
12:38 <@ardissone|food> (so on cnn, it'd be "" wnats to shwo)
12:38 <@smorgan> Well,, right?
12:38 <@smorgan> Isn't it the page domain still?
12:38 <@ardissone|food> that's my question
12:38 <@smorgan> Then to remove ambiguity of "Allow"
12:38 <@ardissone|food> is the page, but the popup/siote that gets whitelisted is 
12:39 <@smorgan> Wait, so how do multiple domains work?
12:39  * smorgan is confused
12:39 <@smorgan> I guess I needed to reread the bug first
12:39 <@ardissone|food> if a site throws popups from multiple domains?
12:39 <@smorgan> Do we need UI that works on the source domains, not the page domain?
12:39 <@pinkerton> that's a lot of buttons
12:39 <@smorgan> Yeah
12:39 <@ardissone|food> i assume our current code whitelists both
12:40 <@smorgan> Other options I didn't mock up:
12:40 <@smorgan> A popup that does something on change (which I think is the devil)
12:41 <@smorgan> A popup and a "Make it happen" button, which I haven't been able to name 
                 anything that makes sense
12:41 <@smorgan> I prefer the three buttons to anything else I've tried or considered, despite it 
                 having three buttons
12:41 <@pinkerton> "I'm Feeling Lucky"
12:42 <@ardissone|food> heh
12:42 <@pinkerton> of the 3buttons, i prefer popup3
12:42 <@smorgan> Right
12:42 <@smorgan> That's the one I like
12:42 <@pinkerton> how about we beta with that and see what people say?
12:42 <@ardissone|food> i wonder how it looks in german ?
12:42 <@pinkerton> heh
12:42 <@smorgan> (also is the same with tooltips, in case 
                 people get confused)
12:43 <@ardissone|food> yeah, I'm ok with that
12:43 <@smorgan> Well, that's why we have text wrapping :P
12:43 <@ardissone|food> indeed :)
12:43 <@smorgan> So getting to the domain question for a second:
12:43 <@smorgan> What do we *want*
12:43 <@smorgan> Current page domain, or popup domain?
12:43 <@smorgan> I would think current page domain
12:43 <@ardissone|food> i think the former makes sense
12:43 <@smorgan> For ease of understanding
12:43 <@ardissone|food> for the text
12:43 <@froodian> Another thing to note is that Sam had mentioned having the bar itself be "allow 
12:44 <@ardissone|food> it obviously doesn't work that way underneath
12:44 <@froodian> Obviously with mouseover highlight, and explanatory text
12:44 <@smorgan> The entire bar?
12:44 <@froodian> which could get rid of the button overload, if we wanted that
12:44 <@pinkerton> but the bar itself doesn't afford clicking
12:44 <@smorgan> No, and it makes single-pixel mistakes trigger an action
12:44 <@ardissone|food> it seems accidental and undiscoverable
12:44 <@froodian> yeah, i agree
12:44 <@pinkerton> interesting idea tho
12:45 <@smorgan> So whitelist currently operates by the popup domain?
12:45 <@ardissone|food> yes
12:45 <@ardissone|food> otherwsie, it doesn't work
12:45 <@smorgan> Because?
12:45 <@ardissone|food> because that's how the core code works
12:46 <@smorgan> Are we agreed we don't *want* that behavior?
12:46 <@ardissone|food> otherwise, we got the bar even when was whitelisted
12:46 <@ardissone|food> since we wl the wrong site
12:47 <@ardissone|food> well
12:47 <@ardissone|food> what happens when cnn shows pop-up ads
12:47 <@smorgan> I think doing it based on the popup domain is going to be way too hard for most 
                 people to understand
12:47 <@ardissone|food> and nifty info popups?
12:48 <@ardissone|food> well, i think we show the current site domain in the bar, and just wl/bl 
                        all the popup domains when the user clicks
12:48 <@smorgan> But that doesn't match the text at all
12:49 <@smorgan> If I go to and say "always allow"
12:49 <@smorgan> Then go to and I get a popup bar
12:49 <@smorgan> I'm going to think the feature doesn't work
12:50 <@ardissone|food> true
12:51 <@smorgan> I agree that there are some cases where it could be useful to break down by 
                 popup domain, but most it doesn't matter, and I think the UI complication 
                 outweighs it
12:51 <@ardissone|food> i'm just not sure of our ability to make the core code do what you want
12:51 <@smorgan> I don't think we need to
12:51 <@ardissone|food> ?
12:51 <@ardissone|food> so if cnn shows popups from 2 sites, we get 2 bars?
12:52 <@smorgan> I don't follow
12:52 <@smorgan> I'm saying we don't use core's wl/bl
12:52 <@smorgan> We use our own
12:53 <@smorgan> I'd have to look at the code again, but I think it would be really easy to 
                 implement our own wl/bl
12:53 <@ardissone|food> and make the core "do i show a poupp" code consult our list?
12:54 <@smorgan> We are getting a callback to know when to show the bar
12:54 <@smorgan> We know how to open popups that have been blocked and we've been informed about
12:54 <@smorgan> So they all come to us, we decide when to silently allow, when to silently 
                 discard, and when to show the bar
12:55 <@pinkerton> i'd rather we allowed popups by not touching them, raather than blocking them 
                   and then opening them after the fact
12:55 <@ardissone|food> well, after the first time, we can, right?
12:55 <@ardissone|food> the first time we have to show the bar
12:55 <@smorgan> pinkerton: what do you think we should do UI-wise then?
12:56 <@pinkerton> i don't see what's wrong with the current behavior
12:56 <@smorgan> Just not worry about the sites where it may seem to not work once?
12:56 <@ardissone|food> whitelisting w/o first showing is bad
12:56 <@ardissone|food> at least as our default action
12:56 <@ardissone|food> which it is now
12:56 <@smorgan> pinkerton: in most cases, nothing; in some cases, the popup bar won't do what 
                 they told it to do
12:57 <@pinkerton> because of the multiple popups case?
12:57 <@smorgan> Because two different pages on may toss up a popup from two different 
12:58 <@smorgan> And if they picked "always" or "never" the first time, the expectation would not 
                 be to get a bar the second time
12:59 <@pinkerton> hmm
12:59 <@smorgan> The worst would be a site that has, say, 20 different ad domains they have 
                 rented out space to, and show a random popup from one of them on each page load
12:59 <@pinkerton> but what about the case where the user wants to differentiate?
12:59 <@pinkerton> popups from one server are ok, popups from another are always ad
12:59 <@pinkerton> s
13:00 <@smorgan> Like I said, I think the added UI complexity is too high a cost, unless we have 
                 a whole new UI concept
13:00 <@pinkerton> what does ff do?
13:00 <@smorgan> Because otherwise we need to rely on users understanding domains and identifying 
                 good and bad ones based on some list we show them
13:00 <@smorgan> Shows a list of domains, I think
13:00  * smorgan checks...
13:00 <@froodian> Users would still be able to specify individual servers in the prefs 
                  white/black list, right?
13:01 <@pinkerton> but when ff gets a popup from, and the user says block all, what 
                   about the next time they go to the page and get a popup from
13:01 <@smorgan> Firefox gives the users a menu with every url
13:01 <@pinkerton> how doe a menu help?
13:02 <@smorgan> I don't think it does
13:02 <@pinkerton> there's just 1 popup being blocked 
13:02 <@smorgan> Sorry, that was a multi-url case
13:02  * smorgan tries to find another site
13:02 <@pinkerton> i think the right fix for is in shared code, not in us 
                   blocking and selectively showing popups by domain
13:03 <@pinkerton> that just seems like a hack
13:03 <@smorgan> That means we are essentially tying our UI to Firefox's at some level, right?
13:04 <@smorgan> And frankly, I think their popup blocking UI decisions are bad
13:05 <@smorgan> I need to rig up a cross-domain popup test to see what FF does; one sec
13:05 <@pinkerton> can we try to do the right thing before we assume they won't go for it?
13:05 <@ardissone|food> there was a good site in one of the bugs, iirc
13:06 <@ardissone|food> maybe?
13:06 <@smorgan> pinkerton: so what do we do for 1.1?
13:07 <@smorgan> ignoring it is fine, as long as we know that's what we are doing
13:07 <@pinkerton> we do as we've been doing
13:07 <@ardissone|food> people want the bar to not show up all the time
13:07 <@ardissone|food> and the default of whitelisting and showing at the same time is a bad 
                        default IMO
13:08 <@pinkerton> no, i mean we take the popup3 solution and not deal with the site1..N problem 
13:08 <@smorgan> Hmm
13:08 <@ardissone|food> oh, ok
13:08 <@smorgan> FF says it whitelisted
13:08 <@smorgan> The popup is for another domain
13:08 <@smorgan> It opens the popup
13:08 <@ardissone|food> it's still broken
13:08 <@ardissone|food> the bug about it is still open
13:08 <@smorgan> But this UI seems to work like I think it should
13:09 <@smorgan> I am looking at the whitelist pane
13:09 <@smorgan> It has the site that wants to open the popup as the only entry, and it works
13:09 <@pinkerton> let's try to steer ff to working like we think it should
13:09 <@ardissone|food> hmm
13:10 <@smorgan> ardissone|food: which bug is that?
13:10 <@smorgan> Because FF really seems to be doing what we want
13:10 <@ardissone|food> bug 280536
13:11 <@smorgan> Frames is a more specific case...
13:11 <@ardissone|food> bug 343772 claims it didn't fix bug 280536
13:12 <@smorgan> They are describing the popup system as working based on the source window's 
13:12 <@smorgan> So I think regardless of bugs they actually do want what we want
13:12 <@smorgan> So good :)
13:12 <@ardissone|food> but for us right now
13:13 <@ardissone|food> to not see popups on
13:13 <@ardissone|food> er, not see the bar
13:13 <@ardissone|food> we have to whitelist
13:13 <@smorgan> I don't think that's necessarily true
13:13 <@ardissone|food> or at least last i checked
13:13 <@smorgan> Because FF isn't appearing to do that
13:14 <@ardissone|food> and hakan's patch in bug 336020
13:14 <@ardissone|food> i think tries to do what you are talking about
13:14 <@ardissone|food> and doesn't work with the rest of the code as-is
13:15 <@smorgan> I will look into this in the next week
13:15 <@smorgan> FF is doing what we went
13:15 <@smorgan> want
13:15 <@smorgan> There must be some way to do it
13:15 <@ardissone|food> yeah, nneds more looking :")
13:15 <@froodian> ok
13:15 <@smorgan> I'll post the mock we are using in the bug
13:16 <@froodian> it's pretty late, let's call it a meeting?
13:16 <@ardissone|food> yeah, sorry about that
13:16 <@froodian> see y'all next week
13:17 <@froodian> aim for Feb 15 for 1.1b1