[09:13] bug 192906 [09:13] Launchpad bug 192906 in firefox-3.0 "use gnome's HTML icon for pages without a favicon" [Wishlist,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/192906 [09:36] <[reed]> [03:35:30AM] <[reed]> monreal: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/firefox-3.0/+bug/192906 <-- agree, disagree? [09:36] <[reed]> [03:36:05AM] [reed]: disagree... it's not possible anyway [09:36] <[reed]> [03:36:20AM] we cannot depend on icons from gnome icon theme [09:36] Launchpad bug 192906 in firefox-3.0 "use gnome's HTML icon for pages without a favicon" [Wishlist,Triaged] [09:36] <[reed]> there you go [09:37] [reed]: we can have a fallback? [09:37] <[reed]> I don't think that's possible yet [09:37] <[reed]> due to how stock icons work [09:37] <[reed]> hmm [09:37] <[reed]> but maybe [09:38] maybe currenty the icon is hard coded, but why can't one use gnomestrip mechanism for it? [09:39] <[reed]> [03:37:01AM] [reed]: but we will probably have to redo and include a similar icon [09:39] <[reed]> yeah, so we can include it directly [09:39] <[reed]> as part of gnomestripe [09:39] <[reed]> just can't use a stock icon [09:39] <[reed]> via libpr0n [09:39] <[reed]> and moz-icon:// [09:42] [reed]: why can't we use moz-icon? [09:42] does it just work for gtk stock icons? [09:43] <[reed]> it works for gnome icons, too, but we don't require that the user have gnome installed, so we can't depend on those always being available [09:43] [reed]: yes, but thats the case for other icons as well afaik [09:43] in beta 2 it falled back to the winstripe theme afaict [09:43] <[reed]> ? [09:43] <[reed]> no [09:43] <[reed]> there's no fallback mechanism in place [09:44] <[reed]> for moz-icon [09:44] <[reed]> it will just fail [09:44] hmm ... wierd. so how does it work on kde? [09:44] i think on kde we still see the "old" icons [09:45] <[reed]> really? [09:45] <[reed]> I don't think so [09:45] <[reed]> I don't see how that's possible ;) [09:45] it falls back to winstripe if gnomeui isn't installed ;) [09:45] but i think i should verify that again [09:46] <[reed]> please do [09:46] <[reed]> heh [09:55] Ubulette: ^^^ [10:06] darn i have a ubuntu developer week classroom session in 6 hours or so [10:06] @time [10:06] Current time in Etc/UTC: February 21 2008, 10:06:40 - Next meeting: Desktop Team in 3 hours 53 minutes [10:06] completely forgot [10:06] ;) [10:08] <[reed]> what is that? [10:09] [reed]: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDeveloperWeek [10:10] <[reed]> ah [10:10] <[reed]> cool [10:13] <[reed]> asac: sounds easy [10:13] <[reed]> you'll do fine [10:13] <[reed]> :) [10:14] haha [10:14] my problem is that i don't really know what to expect [10:14] how many will come? will they ask questions? or should i just teach [10:14] how to present my knowledge in a chat room :) [10:14] <[reed]> hehe [11:16] Ubulette: there? [11:16] Ubulette: what do you think about the xpi.mk i recently added [11:16] to mozilla-devscripts [11:32] bad [12:37] Ubulette: i will upload new mozilla-devscripts to mozillateam ppa (appending ~mt1) as i want it in todays ffox 2 extension packaging session [12:37] Ubulette: please veto in the next 20 minutes if you want to do a prerelease to your ppa [12:37] (i have just committed more on top of your last fix for xpi.mk" [12:37] ) [12:40] Ubulette: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/firefox-extensions/XPI.TEMPLATE [13:51] Ubulette: ok from my side we are now ready for release of mozilla-devscripts [13:52] we should use the card blanche to justify this ff exception breakage [13:52] lets wait till weekend with upload i would say [13:52] i uploaded to my ppa now [13:53] Ubulette: i have drafted https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Firefox3Extensions/Packaging ... maybe take a look if its at least a bit comprehensible [13:58] @time [13:58] Current time in Etc/UTC: February 21 2008, 13:58:21 - Current meeting: Desktop Team === asac_ is now known as asac [15:13] bug 432322 [15:13] debian bug 432322 [15:13] Debian bug 432322 in network-manager "network-manager: package upgrade kills network connections every time" [Serious,Open] http://bugs.debian.org/432322 [15:30] @time [15:30] Current time in Etc/UTC: February 21 2008, 15:30:41 - Next meeting: Community Council in 4 hours 29 minutes [15:55] @time [15:55] Current time in Etc/UTC: February 21 2008, 15:55:27 - Next meeting: Community Council in 4 hours 4 minutes [17:00] asac: I think adding firebug and mouse gestures extensions would be great [17:01] jetsaredim: yep ... the procedure is simple. add the extension to https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Firefox3Extensions [17:01] is it standard procedure to contact the maintainers first before going about this [17:01] and gather the required information. then you can adopt that extension if you want and package it like just taught [17:01] jetsaredim: if there is an obvious good contact available, its not required [17:02] point is that we want to know how to contact them ... so if they don't have an active mailing list at least verifying that they reply would be good [17:02] for the most popular extesnions that are frequently updated, we most likely don't need that [17:02] just fill in the contact you find [17:03] jetsaredim: if you want an extension to be sponsored, please try to use the procedure https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Firefox3Extensions/Packaging [17:03] if there are problems i am alwayshere to help! [17:03] (well not always, but usually) [17:03] ok [17:03] heh [17:04] db-keen: phoenix24: kyleN: did you manage to finish the second practice round? [17:04] Yes! [17:04] if you manage to create a launchpad branch, just let me know, i can review it then [17:04] :) [17:04] asac. in unbuntu mobile weekly meeting, enjoyed what I saw of your talk though. [17:04] ok! [17:05] kyleN: thanks! [17:06] asac: could we target any extensions.. ranging to all those existing ? [17:07] yes ... i would like to get 100 extensions for hardy :) ... which is of course too high a goal to reach for hardy [17:07] but you get the point [17:07] but we should definitly try to cover all most important ones [17:07] a good start is: the top 50 projects on mozdev: [17:07] http://www.mozdev.org/projects/top50.html [17:07] (not all are extensions, but at least mozdev projects usually have a CVS and a license :)) [17:08] or the top list of addons.mozilla.org [17:08] but careful: on addons.mozilla.org its not given that the extensions have a free license [17:09] thanks a lot! looking forward to it! [17:09] if we cannot find how things are licensed we should go on or if we consider the extension important enough ask the developers [17:09] phoenix24: me too ;) [17:10] ricer :P [17:20] Can I get the Firefox3 source code from the launchpad itself ? [17:21] phoenix24: unforatuntely not yet [17:23] phoenix24: well the packaging code is in launchpad [17:27] ah! yes [17:27] i will be out travelling for ~3 hours from now. maybe ask Ubulette_ if he is available(not sure) in the meantime. [17:27] he should know all about firefox-3 and xulrunner-1.9 packaging ;) [17:29] * asac off for a while [17:30] later asac! === Ubulette_ is now known as Ubulette [18:48] hi [18:48] asac, got my email ? [18:58] <[reed]> asac / Ubulette: system sqlite3 coming up today [18:58] <[reed]> :) [19:00] nice [19:10] [reed], bug id ? [19:10] <[reed]> mozilla bug 263381 [19:11] Mozilla bug 263381 in Storage "support --with-system-sqlite3 in storage builds" [Normal,Assigned] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=263381 [19:13] [reed], you can subscribe me to those kind of bugs. don't hesitate :) [19:13] <[reed]> hehe [19:13] <[reed]> k [19:43] :( [19:43] [reed]: why don't you like me? :P [19:43] <[reed]> armin76: sad? [19:43] <[reed]> lol [19:43] <[reed]> well, I can cc you, too! [19:43] you never poke me about that cool stuff! :P [19:43] armin76, do you package trunk ? [19:44] yeah [19:44] when the betas are older yes [19:44] or when some bug gets fixed [19:44] oh, ok. thought you only do releases [19:46] heya asac, just wanted to let you know that I read through the transcript of your talk, and it was really helpful [19:47] I'm going to give it a try later today, so I'll let you know how everything goes [20:13] Yasumoto, great. Which extension(s) do you plan to do ? [20:27] I'd like to work on getting the firebug extension updated [20:27] should I just add the entry to the FF3Extensions page? [20:28] yes, it's a start :) [20:31] i don't have one of those nifty @ubuntu.com email addresses, but whatever [20:48] can someone explain how to do the bzr push described in the tutorial? [20:51] sure. is your local bzr branch ready ? [20:51] Ubulette: probably things like google reader notifier, fireftp [20:51] a few other cool ones (I'll have to find out once I see what's in the repos already) [20:52] Ubulette: no - just doing the initial import of upstream [20:53] Yasumoto, start with one, then move on. btw, if you do google reader notifier, would be nice to have it working for prism too [20:54] Ubulette: basically I think I need to set my launchpad login info somewhere so that it doesn't try to use my linux username [20:54] jetsaredim, if you've committed that initial release, it's already possible to push it. [20:54] bzr push bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~$LAUNCHPAD_ID/firefox-extensions/$EXTENSIONNAME.ubuntu [20:55] in my case, it would be: [20:55] bzr push bzr+ssh://bazaar.launchpad.net/~jetsaredim/firefox-extensions/firebug.upstream [20:55] yes [20:55] does it work [20:55] ? [20:56] fai [20:56] l [20:56] http://dpaste.com/36326/ [20:57] do you have a launchpad account ? [20:57] yea [20:57] https://edge.launchpad.net/~jetsaredim [20:57] should I change my handle to match my linux login [20:59] try with: bzr push bzr+ssh://jetsaredim@bazaar.launchpad.net/~jetsaredim/firefox-extensions/firebug.upstream [21:00] its thinking about it [21:00] yay [21:00] workie [21:01] good. the tutorial needs to be fixed [21:01] you want I should fix it? [21:01] bzr push bzr+ssh://$LAUNCHPAD_ID@bazaar.launchpad.net/~$LAUNCHPAD_ID/firefox-extensions/$EXTENSIONNAME.upstream [21:02] just did it [21:02] all of the other commands seem to work fine [21:02] i had the edit lock - but you can try again now tho [21:02] :) [21:02] there [21:03] ok [21:04] we also need to add the version of each license. that's kind of mandatory now [21:04] i'll discuss that with asac when he's back [21:08] do I need to wrap the long description part of the control file to 80 cols? [21:08] yes [21:09] and add a space after each newline [21:12] [reed], do you plan to commit the system sqlite3 patch today ? [21:12] <[reed]> yes [21:16] is there an example of a copyright file that I can take a look at? [21:16] er debian/copyright [21:17] take an extension already in [21:19] for ex mozilla-noscript [21:20] http://paste.ubuntu.com/4875/ [21:34] Ubulette: ok - i uploaded the code with the debian dir added [21:34] but I seem to be having a build problem [21:36] logs ? [21:36] err - lemmie dpaste [21:37] http://dpaste.com/36336/ [21:38] err you can ignore the junk at the top [21:38] I had uncommented the MOZ_XPI_FILE in rules [21:38] maybe that was not a good idea [21:39] (get a different build error with MOZ_XPI_FILE commented out) [21:42] maybe because the actual build of the xpi is copying the resultant xpi file to the dist directory [21:44] is firebug.xpi built somewhere ? [21:44] i think I need to comment that out [21:44] cause what is happening is that the build of the xpi is copying the xpi to dist [21:44] and the xpi is actually called firebug-1.1.0b12.zpi [21:44] err xpi [21:45] well, the result is supposed to be firebug.xpi according to the makexpi script [21:45] hmm [21:49] ok - i fixed the name part [21:49] but still - its not finding the xpi in the dist dir [21:50] hold on, i'll try in a few minutes (i'm finishing something) [21:50] i think i'm figuring out how to modify the build.xml ant file [21:52] err [21:52] also [21:52] shouldn't this package be called mozilla-firefox-firebug? [21:53] no [21:53] we've stopped that [21:53] ok - just going by the adblock thingie [21:53] do you know if its possible to sign a gpg key with more than one email address? [21:54] in debian/changelog, you need to change the package name too [21:54] yea - just fixed that too [21:54] and the version [21:54] yep [21:54] and your name/email ;) [21:54] i just got it working except for signing it [21:56] lemmie commit it [21:57] ok - committed [21:57] i just have to figure out how to sign it [21:59] sign it ? [22:00] btw, it seems you've added the svn dirs in the bzr source branch, you shouldn't [22:01] ? [22:01] ah [22:02] good call [22:02] done [22:03] please check your xpi with unzip -v *.xpi for unwanted files [22:05] http://dpaste.com/36343/ [22:05] (looks good to me) [22:05] yes [22:06] so, now what? [22:08] run lintian on the .changes file [22:10] bunch of "in the future" messages [22:12] it should be silent [22:13] what about the release name in the changelog - should I just put hardy or something [22:16] hardy instead of UNRELEASED [22:16] how do i update that changes file so that these get cleared [22:16] rebuild [22:18] E: firebug_1.1.0b12_i386.changes: bad-distribution-in-changes-file hardy [22:18] ? [22:20] your lintian doesn't know hardy ? hm, ok, doesn't matter [22:21] btw, don't use 1.0b12 [22:21] use 1.0~b12 [22:21] because 1.0b12 > 1.0 [22:21] um - was just using the version from upstream [22:21] ah [22:21] good point [22:21] while 1.0~b12 < 1.0 [22:22] i mean use 1.1.0~b12 [22:22] right [22:23] jetsaredim: back [22:24] um hi [22:24] Yasumoto: great [22:25] hi [22:25] asac, hi [22:25] still getting the same lintian errors [22:26] paste [22:26] http://dpaste.com/36348/ [22:26] Ubulette: hey. read your mail [22:26] Ubulette: is the altest version ok? or do you have more suggestsions? [22:27] asac, for sure, you need to update the README file, it's the doc :P [22:27] jetsaredim: the distribution thing doesn't matter [22:27] what version do you have? [22:27] afaik, lintian will only complain about hardy if you don't use an ubuntu package revision. [22:27] e.g. instead of 1.0-1 use 1.0-0ubuntu1 [22:28] i think that should fix the lintian error [22:28] o ok [22:28] oh, yeah, forgot that :P [22:28] go for 1.1.0~b12-0ubuntu1 [22:28] so - i should change it to 1.1.0-b12ubuntu1 [22:28] nope [22:29] jetsaredim: use Ubulette's suggestion (if its a preview release of 1.0) [22:29] is that a beta? or is that a release that happened after 1.1.0? like a 12th build? [22:29] 1.1.0~b12-0ubuntu1 as in 1.1.0~b12 from upstream and 0ubuntu1 as debian/ubuntu revision [22:29] Ubulette: depends on what b means ;) ... haven't read the backlog [22:29] yea got it [22:30] if its 1.1.0 build 12 then 1.1.0+b12-0ubuntu1 would be good as well [22:30] not sure [22:30] i think its beta [22:30] i assumed b = beta but i didn't check [22:30] damn - gotta go have dinner [22:31] you guys on later? [22:31] jetsaredim: ok if its beta then use tilde [22:31] jetsaredim: most likely ;) [22:31] but not sure [22:31] Ubulette: yes i need to fix README [22:31] wait - so 1.1.0~b12-0ubuntu1 [22:31] same here, i'm tired. I'll be there tomorrow [22:31] Ubulette: i just forgt [22:31] jetsaredim: yes [22:33] asac, is it still possible to have cairo 1.5.10 in hardy or is it too late ? [22:33] Ubulette: we will get 1.6 final in the end [22:34] hopefully [22:34] Ubulette: sync with seb ... otherwise you will be unhappy again ;) ... ask him if he has other patches to apply [22:34] ok - still a bunch of those date errors from lintian, but all in all ok [22:34] jetsaredim: you can fix the dates by running [22:34] dch -r [22:34] right before release [22:34] that will update the date to _now_ [22:35] er ok [22:35] so those can be ignored for now? [22:35] and will replace the changelog entry name+mail with what you have setup [22:35] those dates come from a tar made on a different box either with a drifted clock or from a different timezome [22:35] timezone [22:35] ah ok [22:35] ok - i have to run - i'll check back later tonight or tomorrow [22:35] unless the server is completely off you can most likely just wait a few hours to disappear [22:35] i'd say you can ignore those [22:36] jetsaredim, try the same with linda instead of lintian [22:37] usually, you'd want to make both happy if possible [22:37] Ubulette: i scrolled up and saw that you found an error on the Packaging page [22:37] ? [22:37] yes, the bzr push. you forgot the user@ part [22:38] without it, it fails if the local login is not the same as the lp login [22:38] right [22:38] have you fixed it? [22:38] yes [22:39] great! [22:41] you should also update the license part. you must specify versions now [22:42] GPL is no longer enough [22:46] asac: linda reports no errors [22:47] so it sounds good :) [22:47] and does it work ? [22:47] that would be a good test, wouldn't it [22:48] i gotta uninstall it from my browser [22:48] maybe I'll try that ppa setup so i can install it from there [22:49] just dpkg -i the deb you've produced [22:50] asac, you should make the addons.m.o ids real urls instead of just numbers. (in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MozillaTeam/Firefox3Extensions) [22:53] doing it [22:53] Ubulette: install works, but in the addons dialog the version number is listed as 1.1.0b11 [22:53] not sure what it was before [22:54] jetsaredim: thats ok ... the addons dialog shows a version that upstream used. mozilla has adifferent versioning scheme [22:54] then ubuntu. thus the difference [22:54] s/then/than/ [22:54] install.rdf says 1.1.0b11 so it matches [22:54] right - but should the ubuntu pkg match the version displayed in the addons dialog [22:54] ok [22:54] but it's weird IMHO [22:55] the version number in the build is b12 [22:55] meaning when you build the unmodified source it names the xpi as firebug-1.1.0b12 [22:56] jetsaredim: so whats the package version (in changelog) and what is the version displayed in addons dialog? [22:56] b12 and b11 [22:57] respectively [23:01] jetsaredim: do you have firebug installed in your profile? [23:01] is "uninstall" button enabled in addons dialog? [23:01] if so uninstall ;) [23:01] otherwise you won'T see the global package. the user profile wins afaik [23:01] i had it installed [23:01] regarless of version order [23:01] and uninstalled it [23:01] so you cannot "uninstall" now? [23:01] then i installed the deb [23:01] yeah [23:01] but that didn't allow for uninstall [23:02] and now there is still the wrong version? [23:02] yes thats correct [23:02] asac, that's expected, in the xpi, install.rdf says b11 [23:02] yes thats right then [23:03] so why did you use b12 as package namein first place? [23:03] only debian/changelogs says it's b12 [23:03] jetsaredim: ^^^ [23:03] ? [23:04] it looks like it's the svn tree so maybe upstream bump install.rdf at release time [23:04] (pure speculation) [23:05] oh ... good bye ;) [23:06] asac, could we have an extension wish list in the wiki ? [23:06] Ubulette: i thought Firefox3Extensions page should be a good start. those that don't have the ubuntu contact can be considered a wish [23:07] what do you think? [23:07] i would like wishlist people to at least dig the most important info bug [23:07] s/bug/up/ [23:08] Ubulette: we could also just ask them to fill in the data on that page and file a bug against the firefox-extensions project [23:09] ideas? [23:09] I'd go for the wiki [23:10] just wiki? bugs can be better used for discussion [23:10] or doesn't that matter in practice? [23:10] i mean we could ack ready packages directly in the bug and initial package upload could close that bug [23:11] with bugs, we get emails (tons of), with wiki,nada [23:11] hehe [23:11] does it make a difference? [23:11] if you don't want emails just sort them to =most-rarely-read :) [23:11] wiki only could be easily missed [23:12] right. and we probably want a bug anyway ... first[needs packaging] ... then [sponsoring] [23:13] the main idea about the wiki page for me was to have most important information compressed on one page [23:13] would could add another row for a tracking bug [23:13] if you have a wish, you just add the [needs packaging] bug [23:14] if you want to package you add a "package intent" bug that becomes a "needs sponsor" bug once you have finished your work [23:15] no idea if thats too much overhead [23:15] and might distract from the real task ;) [23:16] jetsaredim: welcome back :) [23:16] damn netsplit [23:17] i will have to reinstall the original package to check that the version mismatch was there originally [23:17] ok - reinstalled the original and the addons dialog says b12 [23:17] only thing i can think of is that the source tree is not updated [23:17] i can just patch the install.rdf file [23:18] jetsaredim: what is the original package? [23:18] the other possibility is that the version being served up is different than the source tree [23:18] (sorry, i lack some context here i guess) [23:21] gone [23:21] maybe i'd do rikaichan that I use a lot: http://www.polarcloud.com/rikaichan/ [23:23] i like jsview too [23:24] go ahead we have a general ff exception for extensions :) [23:24] web developper too but the author still doesn't want to release his ff3 compatible code [23:24] fullerscreen is good too [23:24] bug 193225 [23:24] Launchpad bug 193225 in firefox-3.0 "FF: general exception for firefox 3 extension packages signed off by the mozillateam" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/193225 [23:25] Ubulette: if the license fits ... anything can go in [23:25] if you want more exciting packages, look out for extensions with native components [23:27] damn thing [23:27] look at the last message in Bug 144042 [23:27] Launchpad bug 144042 in ubufox "firefox plugin-install says "plugin installed" for non-completed installation" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/144042 [23:28] since when are bugs a support medium to get answers to whatever you like ;) [23:28] lol [23:29] look how he inlined my mail ;) [23:29] :-P [23:29] like 1 word per line. yeah! [23:30] at least the mailer honoured the reply-to header. what an achievement [23:30] really [23:30] could be worse ;) [23:30] outlook effect [23:30] btw, i've packaged tb3 [23:30] well, sort of [23:31] it builds fine in dist but make install doesn't work [23:41] asac: re original package - firebug - www.getfirebug.com [23:46] Ubulette: in-house router was down [23:47] jetsaredim: i don't see any b12 nor b11 on that page. where exactly? [23:48] btw, i've packaged tb3 [23:48]