Difference between revisions of "Status Meetings:2006-10-11:Agenda"

From Camino Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎Queries: updating)
(→‎Camino 1.1: deduct the license header fix :()
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
** Hold again or go?
 
** Hold again or go?
 
*** kqueue not ready yet; this weekend/by Tues hopefully
 
*** kqueue not ready yet; this weekend/by Tues hopefully
−
*** No real movement on the pop-up blocker front
+
*** No real movement on the pop-up blocker front (there are some patches and investigations)
−
*** planet says Fx2 RC 3 is Tue Oct 17 and Fx2 release is Tue Oct 24
+
*** Menu cleanup has r+; waiting on second r and sr
 +
*** planet.m.o says Fx2 RC 3 is next Tue (Oct 17) and Fx2 release is 2 weeks: Tue Oct 24
 
* What about putting l10ns into Camino source repository? (by [[User:Marcello|Marcello]])
 
* What about putting l10ns into Camino source repository? (by [[User:Marcello|Marcello]])
 
** I'd like to spend most of my efforts on the community side of Caminol10n, trying to make it better and more productive. Since I already maintain (in a very clumsy way) a cvs repository of l10n packages and text files, why not put them among Camino's source, so that the ML package might be built directly from that place?
 
** I'd like to spend most of my efforts on the community side of Caminol10n, trying to make it better and more productive. Since I already maintain (in a very clumsy way) a cvs repository of l10n packages and text files, why not put them among Camino's source, so that the ML package might be built directly from that place?
Line 20: Line 21:
 
*: ''additional pros/cons in italics by [[User:sardisson|sardisson]], who'd really like to see a unified Camino build nonetheless''
 
*: ''additional pros/cons in italics by [[User:sardisson|sardisson]], who'd really like to see a unified Camino build nonetheless''
 
* l10n of license.r on dmg?  Is that feasible tech-wise?
 
* l10n of license.r on dmg?  Is that feasible tech-wise?
−
* Tab scrolling landed on the trunk (congrats delliott!) and we're working on follow-up bugs
+
* Tab scrolling landed on the trunk (congrats delliott!); follow-up bugs being filed
 +
* Tinderboxen upgrades are on build's radar (coop)
 +
* Weekly Bugs and Queues update
 +
** Fixed a few more bugs, mostly non-1.1 bugs though
 +
** r queue fairly large with midterms and hwaara and froodian away part of the period
  
 
==Specific bugs that need action==
 
==Specific bugs that need action==
 +
* {{bug|350331}} - Pages sometimes fail to display when loaded; resizing the window fixes display
 +
** ''We have a regression range, but need more investigation''
 +
* {{bug|356242}} - Make CHBrowserListener an informal protocol
 +
** ''Any reason not to do this (see bug for rationale)?''
 +
* {{bug|306396}} - Don't show wyciwyg URLs in location bar
 +
** ''Is the home-rolled method OK, or do we need to pull in additional Gecko components to use the same method Fx does?''
 +
* {{bug|350732}} - Going back with popup bar on screen truncates scroll view
 +
** ''Any ideas why this is not working (or why some people can repro and others cannot)?''
 +
* {{bug|355080}} - prettify about:config warning in line with the error pages
 +
** ''Which proposal looks better/most in line with error pages?  [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=241287&action=view], [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=241288&action=view]''
  
 
==Queries==
 
==Queries==
Line 40: Line 55:
 
*: The above list needs to be at least spot-audited for potential 1.1 issues
 
*: The above list needs to be at least spot-audited for potential 1.1 issues
  
−
* [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Camino&chfieldfrom=2006-10-04&chfieldto=2006-10-11&chfield=resolution&chfieldvalue=FIXED&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time Bugs fixed since last meeting] ('''10''') {{greyText|[+2 since last week]}} (4 bugs were 1.1-targeted; of those, 1 was a 1.1a1 nominee)<!-- -->
+
* [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&product=Camino&chfieldfrom=2006-10-04&chfieldto=2006-10-11&chfield=resolution&chfieldvalue=FIXED&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time Bugs fixed since last meeting] ('''9''') {{greyText|[+1 since last week]}} (4 bugs were 1.1-targeted; of those, 1 was a 1.1a1 nominee)<!-- -->
  
 
==Queues==
 
==Queues==
  
−
* [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/request.cgi?action=queue&requester=&product=Camino&type=review&group=type Review] <!--(6) {{greyText|[unchanged]}} -->
+
* [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/request.cgi?action=queue&requester=&product=Camino&type=review&group=type Review] (13) {{greyText|[+7 net since last week]}}<!-- -->
−
* [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/request.cgi?action=queue&requester=&product=Camino&type=superreview&group=type Superreview] <!--(1) {{greyText|[-4 net since last week]}} -->
+
* [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/request.cgi?action=queue&requester=&product=Camino&type=superreview&group=type Superreview] (5) {{greyText|[+2 net since last week]}}<!-- -->

Latest revision as of 23:02, 10 October 2006

Wed 11 Oct 9am PDT (16:00 GMT/UTC) in #camino-mtg

General Plans

  • Camino 1.1 Alpha 1
    • Hold again or go?
      • kqueue not ready yet; this weekend/by Tues hopefully
      • No real movement on the pop-up blocker front (there are some patches and investigations)
      • Menu cleanup has r+; waiting on second r and sr
      • planet.m.o says Fx2 RC 3 is next Tue (Oct 17) and Fx2 release is 2 weeks: Tue Oct 24
  • What about putting l10ns into Camino source repository? (by Marcello)
    • I'd like to spend most of my efforts on the community side of Caminol10n, trying to make it better and more productive. Since I already maintain (in a very clumsy way) a cvs repository of l10n packages and text files, why not put them among Camino's source, so that the ML package might be built directly from that place?
    • Pros:
      • I shouldn't work on building and distributing, and I would not be a bottleneck as sometimes happened in the past
      • Unified Camino build more in line with Mac OS X
    • Cons:
      • The build system would need be changed
      • Moving the bottleneck to coordinating cvs checkins
      • Out-of-date translations:
        • Stale files on development branches (e.g., an out-of-date BrowserWindow.nib will hork that language) [could be worked around by keeping nightlies En-only]
        • Non-updated l10ns still in cvs across branch changes or emergency new strings on a stable branch (e.g., Pirate 1.0.x never gets updated for 1.x, or in the event string changes are needed for 1.0.x+1)
    additional pros/cons in italics by sardisson, who'd really like to see a unified Camino build nonetheless
  • l10n of license.r on dmg? Is that feasible tech-wise?
  • Tab scrolling landed on the trunk (congrats delliott!); follow-up bugs being filed
  • Tinderboxen upgrades are on build's radar (coop)
  • Weekly Bugs and Queues update
    • Fixed a few more bugs, mostly non-1.1 bugs though
    • r queue fairly large with midterms and hwaara and froodian away part of the period

Specific bugs that need action

  • Bug 350331 - Pages sometimes fail to display when loaded; resizing the window fixes display
    • We have a regression range, but need more investigation
  • Bug 356242 - Make CHBrowserListener an informal protocol
    • Any reason not to do this (see bug for rationale)?
  • Bug 306396 - Don't show wyciwyg URLs in location bar
    • Is the home-rolled method OK, or do we need to pull in additional Gecko components to use the same method Fx does?
  • Bug 350732 - Going back with popup bar on screen truncates scroll view
    • Any ideas why this is not working (or why some people can repro and others cannot)?
  • Bug 355080 - prettify about:config warning in line with the error pages
    • Which proposal looks better/most in line with error pages? [1], [2]

Queries

Camino 1.1a1

Camino 1.1

Queues

Retrieved from "http://wiki.caminobrowser.org/index.php?title=Status_Meetings:2006-10-11:Agenda&oldid=6665"