Status Meetings:2007-01-31:Log
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 http://wiki.caminobrowser.org/Status_Meetings:2007-01-31:Agenda 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> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=318001 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 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=343299 nor, P3, Camino1.1, camino@seanmurph.com, 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 2/15? 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 tuesday 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 way12:19 <@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 folks 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 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=343937 nor, --, Camino1.1, nobody@mozilla.org, 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 minutes? 12:27 <@froodian> sure 12:27 <@froodian> Bug 295755 - does it make 1.1? 12:27 < thebot> froodian: Bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=295755 nor, --, Camino1.2, bryan.h.atwood@gmail.com, 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> http://wiki.caminobrowser.org/Status_Meetings:2007-01-31:Agenda#Not_1.1_.28if_there.27s_time.29 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 maintian 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> http://escapedthoughts.com/popup1.png 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> http://escapedthoughts.com/popup2.png 12:38 <@ardissone|food> (so on cnn, it'd be "ads.cnn.com" wnats to shwo) 12:38 <@smorgan> Well, www.cnn.com, right? 12:38 <@smorgan> Isn't it the page domain still? 12:38 <@ardissone|food> that's my question 12:38 <@smorgan> Then http://escapedthoughts.com/popup3.png to remove ambiguity of "Allow" 12:38 <@ardissone|food> www.cnn.com is the page, but the popup/siote that gets whitelisted is ads.cnn.com 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 http://escapedthoughts.com/popup4.png 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 once" 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 www.cnn.com 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 www.cnn.com/showannoyingad.html and say "always allow" 12:49 <@smorgan> Then go to www.cnn.com/showawesomepopup.html 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 cnn.com may toss up a popup from two different domains 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 site1.cnn.com, and the user says block all, what about the next time they go to the page and get a popup from site2.cnn.com? 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 site..N.cnn.com 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> http://www.r3tro.de/frameset.html 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 now 13:08 <@smorgan> Hmm 13:08 <@ardissone|food> oh, ok 13:08 <@smorgan> FF says it whitelisted r3tro.de 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 domain 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 cnn.com 13:13 <@ardissone|food> er, not see the bar 13:13 <@ardissone|food> we have to whitelist ads.cnn.com 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