[06:50] <[reed]> so, I guess Hardy is shipping b5?
[06:51] <asac> [reed]: its not in my hand ;)
[06:52] <asac> [reed]: or is there a chance that rc1 is out by 21st apr?
[06:53] <[reed]> 11 days... dunno
[06:53] <[reed]> people are saying "late April"
[06:53] <[reed]> dunno what that means
[06:53] <asac> we release on 24th
[06:53] <asac> 22nd would be good i guess
[06:54] <asac> [reed]: for me its much more important that we release something that is guaranteed to be string frozen
[06:54] <asac> e.g. no _new_ keys
[06:54] <[reed]> well, we're string frozen right now
[06:55] <asac> i doubt that b5 is really hard string frozen
[06:55] <[reed]> b5 isn't
[06:55] <[reed]> but we are string frozen now
[06:55] <asac> so what strings were added?
[06:55] <asac> after b5?
[06:55] <[reed]> http://wiki.mozilla.org/Releases/Firefox_3.0rc1
[06:55] <[reed]> umm, you'd just have to look at one of the l10n repos
[06:56] <asac> this all wouldn't be much a problem if strin bundles could fall back to en-US if they are only partially translated
[06:56] <asac> but they don't do that and so the UI ends up being busted
[06:56] <[reed]> http://bonsai-l10n.mozilla.org/cvsquery.cgi?treeid=default&module=all&branch=HEAD&branchtype=match&dir=l10n%2Fen-GB&file=&filetype=match&who=&whotype=match&sortby=Date&hours=2&date=explicit&mindate=2008-03-21+00%3A00%3A00&maxdate=2008-04-10+00%3A00%3A00&cvsroot=%2Fl10n
[06:56] <[reed]> those?
[06:57] <asac> looking
[06:57] <asac> ok lets hope for RC1 then
[06:58] <asac> hmm ... but thats en-GB
[06:58] <asac> sure that the strings really landed after b5 for en-US :?
[06:58] <asac> hmm
[06:59] <asac> ill talk to blizzard about RC1
[06:59] <asac> [reed]: how many things usually land after tree closes for baking?
[07:00] <[reed]> we have a ton to go
[07:00] <[reed]> we're not really "baking" per se
[07:00] <[reed]> we basically just went into drivers-have-to-approve-everything mode
[07:00] <[reed]> even blockers have to be approved now
[07:00] <asac> welll ... code hand-off to build means release
[07:00] <asac> :)
[07:00] <asac> for me
[07:00] <asac> ;)
[07:00] <[reed]> yeah, well
[07:01] <asac> just two steps away
[07:01] <asac> guess those are big steps
[07:02] <[reed]> I see 131 blockers left
[07:02] <asac> P2?
[07:03] <[reed]> all blockers
[07:03] <[reed]> we're not doing it by priorities anymore
[07:04] <asac> ok . sounds like not all will get fixed then ;)
[07:06] <[reed]> well, they all have to be fixed
[07:06] <[reed]> by RC1
[07:07] <asac> OTOH, 131 is still managable
[07:07] <asac> :)
[07:07] <asac> its not like you only have 4 developers ;)
[07:07] <asac> (i hope
[07:07] <asac> )
[07:07] <[reed]> hah
[07:07] <[reed]> yeah, and most blockers already have patches
[07:07] <asac> wow ... thats a trick ;)
[07:09] <asac> [reed]: do you know of any hard regressions in current trunk over b5?
[07:10] <[reed]> not anything that really sticks out
[07:10] <[reed]> nope
[07:10] <asac> [reed]: nevermind. i am sure that string freeze doesn't guarantee me that no new strings are added :(
[07:10] <[reed]> why not?
[07:10] <asac> which is what causes me restless nights right now
[07:10] <asac> id consider to ship rc1pre if that means frozen strings for sure
[07:11] <[reed]> like, we're _really_ string frozen... it'll have to be an act of God before we had another string
[07:11] <asac> well ... i read that you can still request approval from mconnor to breach new strings
[07:11] <[reed]> add*
[07:11] <[reed]> where?
[07:11] <[reed]> where do you see that?
[07:11] <asac> on some mailing list
[07:11] <asac> let me search
[07:13] <asac> That's the last string freeze for Firefox 3, if you have patches with
[07:13] <asac> string changes, make sure to have the late-l10n keyword set, and ring
[07:13] <asac> all bells and whistles to get the bugs triaged.
[07:13] <asac> no idea
[07:13] <asac> what late-l10n is empowered to
[07:13] <asac> i will ping mconnor again
[07:13] <asac> he didn't answer two days ago
[07:13] <asac> http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/msg/211615c0ace0c1ce
[07:19] <asac> [reed]: if no strings were removed i could punch the latest strings into translations
[07:19] <asac> (after b5)
[07:20] <[reed]> well, some were removed, as when we change a string, we "rev the entity", which means renaming the entity, which removes a string and adds a new one, basically
[07:20] <[reed]> but localizers are supposed to be done with all their work by today (Thursday)
[07:21] <[reed]> so, again, it'll be an act of God before we change another string
[07:21] <asac> [reed]: yeah ... point is that if we ship b5 we will have issues upgrading our translations.
[07:21] <asac>  so ... option is to ship rc1pre
[07:21] <[reed]> rc1pre isn't that bad
[07:22] <asac> yeah i know ;)
[07:22] <[reed]> it's a risk, yes
[07:22] <asac> question is if the risk is higher than shipping b5
[07:22] <asac> :)
[07:22] <[reed]> but a pretty well calculated and controlled risk
[07:22] <asac> maybe ill ask for permissions to name it 3.0ubu1
[07:22] <asac> :)
[07:23] <asac> so far our management chewed that we ship b5. but i think they are still digesting so its open if they get sick
[07:25] <[reed]> well, talk to blizzard and mconnor
[07:25] <asac> will do. have no choice i guess
[07:25] <asac> lets hope they have a minute for me ;)
[07:51] <DktrKranz2> asac: we're close to have ubuntu-it-menu, you said to move bzr repo to ~ubuntu-dev, is it enough to reparent it and adjust entry in debian/control accordingly, or there's something else to do?
[07:53] <asac> DktrKranz2: the entry in control is already fixed afaik
[07:53] <asac> you just need to branch volans .ubuntu branch and push that to ~ubuntu-dev instead
[07:54] <asac> DktrKranz2: please hurry. i thought you already uploaded that yesterday
[07:54] <asac> ill prod archive admins today to do a last round of NEW processing for ffox extensions ;)
[07:55] <DktrKranz2> asac: sure. I'll do right now.
[07:55] <asac> DktrKranz2: do a last commit on top that reads "* RELEASE VERSION to ubuntu/hardy"
[07:55] <asac> just adapt changelog date to qualify a commit
[07:55] <asac> thanks
[07:55] <DktrKranz2> thank *you*
[07:55] <asac> (maybe he still has UNRELEASED in changelog ... switch that to hardy"
[07:55] <asac> in that commit
[07:55] <asac> )
[07:55] <DktrKranz2> in a couple of minutes, it will be in NEW
[07:55] <asac> gogogo :-P
[07:56] <asac> great
[07:56] <asac> let me know
[07:56] <DktrKranz2> sure
[08:02] <asac> [reed]: read ... can you test something for me?
[08:03] <asac> [reed]: personally i ave no issues to use flashplugin without libflashsupport together with ESD(pulseaudio) in hardy
[08:03] <asac> can you confirm that everything works for you as well?
[08:03] <asac> fta: ^^ can you please test the behaviour you experience with that combination?
[08:03] <[reed]> can't test tonight
[08:03] <asac> ok
[08:03] <[reed]> maybe tomorrow
[08:04]  * asac joins #ubuntu-testing
[08:08] <asac> lets see what that channel is worth
[08:25] <DktrKranz2> asac: done!
[08:25] <asac> DktrKranz2: thx
[08:26] <DktrKranz2> now it's in the hands of a-a guys
[08:37] <asac> carlos: morning ;)
[08:37] <carlos> asac: morning
[08:37] <asac> carlos: looking at the translation page there it reads "Used in firefox in Ubuntu Hardy package "firefox-3.0" by Alexander Sack (asac: 142348) [ubuntumembers] [ubuntu-dev] [ubuntu-bugcontrol] [ubuntu-core-dev]  on 2008-04-07"
[08:37] <carlos> asac: all patches are now on production
[08:37] <asac> does that mean that the template is already imported?
[08:38] <carlos> asac: URL?
[08:38] <asac> carlos: https://translations.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/xulrunner-1.9/+pots/xulrunner/de/+translate?show=untranslated&start=60
[08:39] <asac> every entity is now used by ffox 3 on 7th apr
[08:43] <carlos> asac: that just says that you translated that message
[08:43] <carlos> or that someone uploaded a .po file using your name as the translator
[08:44] <carlos> asac: beta5 is not yet uploaded, though. I'm trying to fix a problem with the import queue (related with oo.org)
[08:44] <asac> carlos: ok
[08:44] <carlos> and then, beta5 should be imported
[08:44] <asac> carlos: could we punch in the template at least?
[08:45] <asac> it don't need translations right now, but getting all strings would help me prepare initial langpacks for b5
[08:45] <carlos> asac: the problem is the same for template and translations, so I need to fix that problem first (waiting for approval from management people to get that applied)
[08:45] <asac> ok
[08:46] <asac> thougth you might influence the import queue to do the template in between processing ooo translations ... but fine
[08:50] <carlos> asac: the problem is that I don't have such direct control
[08:50] <carlos> asac: I need to request raw DB command execution, which is the 'fix' I just requested to speed imports anyway...
[08:50] <asac> carlos: ah ok. ill stop bothering you then ;)
[08:51] <asac> sorry
[08:51] <carlos> don't worry, you don't know the internals of our procedures so is not a problem to clarify it to you
[09:04] <carlos> asac: btw, almost all times I visit planet.ubuntu.com my firefox dies
[09:04] <carlos> asac: is that a known bug?
[09:04] <carlos> asac: I'm with Hardy
[09:05] <asac> carlos: flashplugin-nonfree?
[09:05] <asac> installed?
[09:05] <carlos> yeah, I have it
[09:05] <asac> carlos: ok ... good then you are th enext tester ;)
[09:06]  * carlos hides ...
[09:06] <asac> please move away your /usr/lib/libflashsupport.so
[09:06] <carlos> :-D
[09:06] <asac> and see if its gone
[09:06] <asac> restart everything to be sure
[09:06] <carlos> everything == my session?
[09:06] <asac> carlos: do you have sound server enabled in sound prefs
[09:06] <carlos> or just be sure that firefox is not really running?
[09:06] <carlos> asac: yes, I do
[09:06] <asac> carlos: to be safe yes. its important to see that no firefox nor flash is running anymore
[09:06] <asac> so its not required to restart session
[09:07] <asac> only instruction i have to rule out any leftovers though
[09:07] <carlos> ok
[09:07] <carlos> 'ps' and 'kill' should help here ;-)
[09:07] <asac> yeah ... but you never know ;)
[09:08] <asac> carlos: maybe its also important to see that noone has a file handle open on libflashsupport anymore (but not sure)
[09:08] <carlos> ok
[09:08] <carlos> asac: btw, why does it only happen with planet.ubuntu.com?
[09:09] <asac> carlos: not sure if its the same issue ... does it help at all?
[09:09] <carlos> it died again
[09:10] <carlos> and lsof doesn't show to me any libflash file open
[09:10] <asac> then its something different
[09:10] <carlos> asac: the interesting bit is  that when I restart firefox
[09:10] <asac> carlos: start firefox -safe-mode
[09:10] <carlos> Ubuntu's planet loads well
[09:11] <asac> he?
[09:11] <carlos> the problem seems to be my usual combination of pages
[09:11] <carlos> planet.gnome.org, barrapunto.com, planet.ubuntu.com
[09:11] <carlos> then, crahs!
[09:11] <carlos> asac: should I select any option in that dialog I get from -safe-mode ?
[09:12] <asac> carlos: no
[09:12] <asac> let me test
[09:13] <asac> carlos: i don't see that crash :(
[09:14] <carlos> trying to reproduce it now with the -safe-mode
[09:14] <asac> ok ... lets wait for that then
[09:17] <carlos> asac: hmm, nothing breaks with -safe-mode
[09:17] <asac> carlos: ok ... its either an extension or plugin then
[09:17] <asac> carlos: is flash enabled in -safe-mode?
[09:17] <asac> can you see flash content?
[09:18] <carlos> asac: given that I removed the library... I don't think so
[09:18] <carlos> but let me check
[09:18] <asac> carlos: ok, if it really crashed without flash its probably an extension
[09:19] <asac> what are you using?
[09:20] <carlos> asac: it died again... let me do the other check you asked me...
[09:20] <carlos> asac: firebug and addblocker
[09:20] <carlos> asac: firebug was installed manually not from a package
[09:21] <carlos> asac: safe-mode does include flash plugin
[09:21] <asac> include == keep enabled?
[09:21] <asac> carlos: ok we have firebug in a package ... can you try that?
[09:21] <carlos> asac: yes
[09:21] <carlos> even if I removed that library you asked me to remove
[09:22] <asac> carlos: libflashsupport?
[09:22] <carlos> asac: does it work with firefox 3 ?
[09:22] <asac> thats not flash thats just the pulse audio fix for it
[09:22] <asac> carlos: firebug in the archive should work
[09:22] <carlos> asac: I had to manually install it because the package in Ubuntu was not compatible
[09:22] <carlos> asac: ah, ok
[09:22] <carlos> ok, let me check
[09:22] <carlos> asac: btw, should I restore that library?
[09:23] <asac> carlos: no ... that library is bogus and causes crashes anyway ;)
[09:23] <asac> so better keep it removed
[09:24] <asac> carlos: ok, so if hte crash really reappears without -safe-mode it is an extension you can figure by disabling your extension and restarting and trying to reproduce
[09:24] <carlos> asac: I'm installing now the firebug extension from the archive
[09:24] <asac> great
[09:27] <carlos> same problem with the one from the archive
[09:27]  * carlos starts disabling extensions...
[09:32] <carlos> asac: seems to work if I disable firebug extension
[09:33] <asac> intersting
[09:33] <asac> carlos: maybe it interferes with adblock?
[09:33] <asac> are you using adblock-plus from the archive?
[09:33] <asac> (or from addons.mozilla.org)
[09:33] <asac> adblock-plus over adblock (plain)
[09:34] <carlos> from the archive
[09:55] <asac> carlos: so does it still crash with firebug enabled, but with adblock disabled?
[09:55] <carlos> sorry, got distracted with something else
[09:55] <carlos> let me check...
[09:56] <asac> no problem ;)
[10:09] <carlos> asac: yeah, seems to be a problem having adblockplus and firebug enabled at the same time
[10:12] <asac> carlos: hmm. ok
[11:50] <carlos> asac: just as a followup, I got a crash again with adblockplus disabled and firebug enabled
[11:51] <carlos> asac: so maybe is just firebug
[11:51] <asac> carlos: ok. thanks for the info. please file one
[11:51] <carlos> not the combination of both
[11:51] <asac> carlos: do you have a .crash that you could submit?
[11:51] <carlos> where is it stored?
[11:51] <asac> in /var/crash
[11:51] <asac> submitting by double clicking would submit it
[11:52] <carlos> oh, the bug reporting tool in Ubuntu found it
[11:52] <asac> there might be some private data in the coredump obviously, but the bug is private until we reviewed the backtrace and removed the coredump
[11:53] <carlos> that was what I was going to ask you
[11:54] <carlos> will cookies and cached password appear there?
[12:12] <asac> carlos: they might. apport submitted crashes are private. we can instantly take a look and remove any sensitive parts before we open it up
[12:12] <carlos> ok
[12:49] <carlos> asac: dude, I'm still uploading the core...
[13:40] <fta> hi
[13:40] <fta> bug 49613
[13:40] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 49613 in flashplugin-nonfree "flash plugin always rendered on top of html" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/49613
[13:41] <fta> asac, any idea why this bug is back ?
[13:41] <fta> bug 177856
[13:41] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 177856 in nspluginwrapper "Gutsy 64: nspluginwrapper errors with flashplugin-nonfree 9.0.115" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/177856
[13:45] <fta> mozilla bug 427385
[13:45] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 427385 in GFX: Thebes "april 6th ff3 trunk crash when opening this huge PNG [XError: 'BadAlloc (insufficient resources for operation)']" [Critical,Assigned] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=427385
[13:51] <asac> carlos: please dn't cancel the upload ;) ... otherwise we won't get any backtrace ;)
[13:55] <asac> fta: i think its your bug and except crashing firefox it just crashes flash leaving a grey area
[13:56] <fta> ?
[13:56] <fta>  bug 49613 ?
[13:56] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 49613 in flashplugin-nonfree "flash plugin always rendered on top of html" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/49613
[13:56] <fta> i confirm this one is back
[13:57] <asac> no you didn't paste that one
[13:57] <asac> bug 49613 that was never gone. i think its waiting for the fix on flash side
[13:57] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 49613 in flashplugin-nonfree "flash plugin always rendered on top of html" [Medium,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/49613
[13:58] <fta> [Thu 14:41] <fta> bug 177856
[13:58] <asac> ah i misread
[13:58] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 177856 in nspluginwrapper "Gutsy 64: nspluginwrapper errors with flashplugin-nonfree 9.0.115" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/177856
[13:58] <asac> i read:
[13:58] <asac> 14:41 < fta> asac, any idea why this bug is back ?
[13:58] <asac> 14:41 < fta> bug 177856
[13:58] <asac> ;)
[13:58] <fta> k
[13:59] <fta> strangely, trunk in wine / vista is almost perfect :)
[14:00] <fta> i expected it to break everywhere (because of wine) but it's clean
[14:02] <asac> he?
[14:02] <asac> you mean running firefox 3 .exe?
[14:02] <fta> yes
[14:03] <fta> i need to run a windows app needing shockwave, it doesn't work out of the box so i installed ff3 inside wine and let it install shockwave from inside wine
[14:04] <fta> (as installing directly from the setup.exe didn't work at all)
[14:05] <fta> it installed fine, yet my app still complain about missing shockwave 10 (i've installed the current one, ie 11)
[14:12] <carlos> asac: I didn't cancel it, but it failed (after more than 30 minutes...)
[14:13] <asac> carlos: damn ;)
[14:13] <asac> carlos: you could install xulrunner-1.9-dbgsym and firefox-3.0-dbgsym and run firefox in gdb to get a backtrace as well
[14:14] <asac> carlos: the apt lines for dbgsym packages is in https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash
[14:14] <asac> s/gutsy/hardy/ i guess
[14:14] <asac> fta: crazy
[14:14] <carlos> ok
[14:15] <asac> maybe we should drop ffox from distribution and run wine ;)
[14:16] <fta> asac, i don't need ff3 in wine, i just need a shockwave recognized by a w$ app
[14:16] <asac> yeah i got that ;)
[14:16] <asac> still it works which is really great imo
[14:18] <fta> maybe it's a 64b issue (my laptop) as i don't remember having to do that when I setup the same app on my (32b) desktop months ago
[14:20] <asac> hmm. yeah does wine run 64b?
[14:22] <fta> donno
[14:22] <fta> oops, ff3 crash
[14:23] <fta> youtube, login, login with google account, boom
[14:23] <asac> yeah if youtube is involved everything can happen
[14:23] <asac> if flashsupport is used
[14:24] <fta> nope, seems to be another nss crash
[14:25] <asac> fta: can you pleas move libflashsupport.so away and give me an update what works and what not with most recente flash + PA ?
[14:25] <fta> I've had no crash flash related since yesterday's flash update
[14:26] <asac> fta: well it works here too
 fta: looking at flashsupport code right now. i think the ssl backtraces you got are really related to flashsupport
[14:28] <asac> fta: i tried openssl it didn't help for the crashes
[14:28] <asac> and those are nss symbols
[14:28] <asac> only thing i could imagine is that flash keeps using file descriptors that are already used somewhere else
[14:29] <fta> http://paste.ubuntu.com/6699/
[14:29] <asac> fta: the ticket that covers our crash in flashssuport is:
[14:30] <asac> http://www.pulseaudio.org/ticket/225
[14:30] <fta> i thought this PORT_ZFree_Util() crash was fixed 2 days ago.. hm
[14:31] <fta> "Opened 3 months ago"
[14:48] <fta> damn dbgsym, my upgrade was incomplete
[14:54] <asac> fta: hmm likely not because of ffox+xul dbgsym?
[14:55] <fta> i had nss dbgsym from my previous update but not for the last one
[15:03] <fta> asac, it seems i need backup from a cannonical guy to have dbgsym in ppa
[15:03] <fta> see #lp
[15:04] <asac> fta: thats has been frequently requested by other canonical guys alrady. such things take ages
[15:04] <fta> just read the last few lines..
[15:05] <asac> i am not in that channel ... just joined now
[15:05] <fta> asac, http://paste.ubuntu.com/6700/
[15:13] <fta> er, 200+ rss news every 6h those days, I can't cope with that
[15:54] <asac> fta: ill ask around, but i think that distro team already expressed their interest in this
[15:55] <fta> ok, thanks
[16:21] <asac> Volans: hi. i think your extension has been newed
[16:22] <asac> archive admins pointed out that you ship as GPLv2 or later, but some files are already GPLv3
[16:22] <Volans> Hi asac, yes, DktrKranz has uploaded it, is in the queuq
[16:22] <Volans> *queue
[16:22] <asac> Volans: it should already be source newed
[16:22] <Volans> what files are GPL3 ?
[16:22] <asac> it will get in, but we should upload an update that names the GPLv3 files in debian/copyright or upgrade everything to GPLv3
[16:22] <asac> Volans: some .js files
[16:24] <Volans> I'm checking
[16:24] <asac> Volans:
[16:25] <asac> 12:36 < seb128> content/ubuntuit files are GPL 3 or newer too
[16:25] <asac> 12:36 < seb128> chrome/content/ubuntuit files are GPL 3 or newer too
[16:25] <Volans> mmmh I have found! I have copied into any code files the preamble of the GPL license copied from the GPL site that now show the 3 version
[16:25] <Volans> and I have forgot to change the number from 3 to 2, but the link below point to the GPLv2 license...
[16:25] <asac> Volans:
[16:25] <asac> 12:35 < seb128> asac: defaults/preferences/ubuntuit.js is GPL 3 or newer, as are  build.xml chrome.manifest install.rdf and the debian/copyright says  it's GPL 2 or newer
[16:26] <Volans> yeah, I see, ig mistake, my fault, sorry
[16:26] <Volans> How I can solve this? put all in GPL 2 correctly is not possible now?
[16:27] <asac> Volans: well ... its your decision. either upgrade everything to GPLv3 or later or use GPLv2 everywhere
[16:27] <asac> Volans: id suggest to use GPLv3 :)
[16:27] <fta> could someone update adblock-plus, 0.7.5.4 is out upstream
[16:28] <asac> tell that rainCT
[16:28] <asac> upgrade .upstream ... merge to .ubuntu and bump the log
[16:29] <Volans> asac: the gnome icon theme that I use is GPL version 2 only
[16:29] <Volans> as I see in  /usr/share/doc/gnome-icon-theme/copyright
[16:32] <asac> Volans: ok. fix the licensing in .upstream to use GPLv2 or later everywhere
[16:33] <asac> and then merge that over to .ubuntu and bump upstream version with new changelog entry
[16:33] <asac> thanks
[16:33] <asac> carlos: maybe the trnaslation tar.gz didn't arrive because it was stuck in queue NEW?
[16:34] <asac> carlos: its definitly in the uploaded firefox binary changes
[16:34] <asac> carlos: so maybe its there now?
[16:34] <asac> (queue is now empty)
[16:34] <asac> RainCT: i think we can upgrade adblock if we can declare this a mere bug fix release :)
[16:35] <asac> at best today as the archive is not yet locked
[16:35] <carlos> asac: did you upload an update?
[16:35] <asac> carlos: no ... the last firefox upload
[16:35] <DktrKranz2> asac: any licensing issues with ubuntu-it-menu? a-a accepted it, so probably it's ok for them ATM
[16:35] <asac> i referred to
[16:35] <asac> carlos: i just wanted to point out that it might have been stuck i nQUEUE for a day or two ... so maybe it arrived later than xulrunner
[16:36] <asac> DktrKranz2: they complained about the GPLv3 GPLv2 mix and accepted it based on the promise that we fix it
[16:36] <carlos> asac: let me check...
[16:36] <asac> DktrKranz2: and it now turned out that GPLv3 is not ok because of GPLv2 only of icon theme :(
[16:37] <DktrKranz2> asac: ah... do they want to be fixed right now, or we can dalay to new upstream?
[16:37] <asac> DktrKranz2: we should fix the .upstream branch, bump the upstream version and merge that to ubuntu branch to bake a new upload
[16:37] <asac> so its a minor new upsream bump
[16:37] <asac> and we should do that now (in cooperation with Volans)
[16:38] <DktrKranz2> and just to fix licensing issues, so I guess it won't hurt motu-release
[16:38] <Volans> yes, I can update the .upstream and .ubuntu branches in a few minutes
[16:38] <asac> DktrKranz2: they delagated the approval to me
[16:38] <asac> for extensions
[16:38] <asac> Volans: yeah. just remember to use bzr merge ../*upstream in the .ubuntu branch ;)
[16:39] <asac> but i guess you know how to merge :)
[16:39] <asac> thanks
[16:39] <DktrKranz2> asac: ah, right. I forgot.
[16:39] <carlos> asac: no, it didn't appear
[16:40] <asac> carlos: pitti said that its a problem on your side because its in .changes
[16:40] <asac> let me search for the changes uploaded
[16:40] <asac> carlos: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/13136097/firefox-3.0_3.0~b5%2Bnobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386.changes
[16:40] <asac> ad96449821055225ed3702820e885aa7 34922 raw-translations - firefox-3.0_3.0~b5+nobinonly-0ubuntu1_i386_translations.tar.gz
[16:40] <carlos> hmm
[16:41] <carlos> asac: well, I don't see it in people.ubuntu.com/~lamont/translations
[16:41] <carlos> and that's from buildd
[16:41] <asac> carlos: how does it get there?
[16:41] <carlos> before we really get it in Launchpad
[16:41] <carlos> asac: some 'magic' from buildd
[16:41] <asac> ok lets ask lamont then i guess ;)
[16:41] <carlos> I don't know that process
[16:42] <carlos> asac: I know that we had a bug in Launchpad that was ignoring .xpi files
[16:42] <carlos> that's already fixed on production
[16:42] <asac> carlos: ok. lets see if he has an idea
[16:42] <asac> i prodded him in -devel now
[16:42] <carlos> so next upload should show it if we really are getting it from buildd
[16:42] <carlos> ok
[16:46] <asac> carlos: oh the ffox template was imported?
[16:46] <carlos> ?
[16:46] <asac> i have "red" section on translation page again (which wasn't there before)
[16:46] <asac> hmm .. .maybe not.
[16:46] <asac> just confused
[16:47] <Volans> asac: what you suggest for the license due to the fact that gnome-icons are GPL 2 only. Is better that I release my code under GPL 2 only or GPL 2 and newer? and the global package can ge gpl 2 or newer or must be gpl 2 only?
[16:48] <asac> Volans: definitly "or later"
[16:48] <asac> only is always a lock in and removed flexibility without reason
[16:48] <Volans> ok, for my cose I use the standard form: "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option) any later version."
[16:48] <carlos> asac: this is what you should care of: https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu/hardy/+source/firefox-3.0/+imports
[16:48] <asac> you can use GPL 2 or later ... the icons will make it implicitly GPL 2 only ... but if you switch icons they will be GPL or later
[16:48] <Volans> s/cose/code/
[16:48] <RainCT> argh, CVS is a mess :/
[16:48] <carlos> asac: until it's not empty or with the entries in 'Imported' it's not yet handled
[16:49] <asac> Volans: maybe name the icons that are GPLv2 only explicitly (like exception)
[16:49] <Volans> quite all the icons are GPL2 only.... :(
[16:49] <asac> carlos: ok :(
[16:49] <asac> carlos: i desperately need those ;(
[16:49]  * asac whining mode
[16:49] <asac> thanks
[16:50] <carlos> asac: we already fixed the problem with oo.org
[16:50] <asac> Volans: yes. thats a shame, and probably due to folks not knowing what they are doing
[16:50] <carlos> asac: so it's just now a matter of wait for the queue to handle those
[16:50] <asac> Volans: but you have to accept their decision :)
[16:55] <asac> ok off for a while travelling the world :)
[16:55] <asac> be back later
[16:55] <asac> Volans: https://edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ubuntu-it-menu/1.0.6-0ubuntu1
[17:02] <RainCT> any idea why the version file in adblock-plus's CVS still says 0.7.5.3 (http://www.mozdev.org/source/browse/adblockplus/src/version?rev=1.27;content-type=text%2Fplain) ?
[17:02] <RainCT> (s/any idea/is that normal)
[17:03] <fta> donno, on AMO, it's 0.7.5.4
[17:03] <RainCT> fta: yes, on adblockplus.org too, but not on the CVS
[17:03] <RainCT> or at least on the versions file
[17:03] <RainCT> perhaps they just forgot to change it there..
[17:09] <RainCT> asac: btw, adblock-plus is also compatible with Thunderbird. Do we want the package to work with it?
[17:09] <fta> oh, the latest flash update was a security update. hmm.  http://mozillalinks.org/wp/2008/04/security-update-for-adobe-flash-plugin/
[18:02] <Volans> asac: I have uploaded to upstream the files with the correct license preamble, due to the GPLv2 only for Gnome icons I have changed the LICENSE file, can you see it here: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~volans/firefox-extensions/ubuntu-it-menu.upstream
[18:02] <Volans> maybe can you check it?
[18:49] <RainCT> asac, fta: bug 215201
[18:49] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 215201 in adblock-plus "New adblock-plus version: 0.7.5.4" [Wishlist,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/215201
[18:54] <fta> RainCT, no debdiff ?
[18:54] <fta> (debian/* only)
[18:56] <asac> RainCT: i added the info about FFe bug to bug
[18:56] <asac> go ahead
[18:56] <asac> asap
[18:56] <asac> (before the archive locks down)
[19:00] <asac> RainCT: i have no feedback on how much adblock plus breaks thunderbird or works so Id rather say no for hardy.
[19:00] <asac> but in the end this is the maintainers decision ;)
[19:00] <asac> or whoever cares most
[19:01] <fta> asac, for bug 214620, i propose:
[19:01] <fta> -DisplayIf: pgrep firefox -U $(id -u) > /dev/null
[19:01] <fta> +DisplayIf: ! ps -C firefox -U $(id -u)
[19:01] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 214620 in firefox-3.0 "hardy livecd asks for firefox-3.0 restart" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/214620
[19:03] <asac> fta: didn't you change that for last release?
[19:04] <fta> yep but obviously, people are still complaining
[19:05] <fta> the doc is unclear
[19:05] <asac> fta: you remember i what the original test was?
[19:05] <asac> i got that command from mvo. he is the guy who implemented this, so he knows the pattern
[19:06] <asac> so if you just s/firefox-3/firefox/ then i don't know
[19:11] <RainCT> fta:   bzr diff -rXX..18 debian/   is your friend :)
[19:13] <RainCT> asac: uploading, thanks
[19:13] <fta> asac, pulseaudio is using ps -C
[19:13] <fta> only the return code seems to be important
[19:14] <asac> fta: yes. but why '!' ?
[19:14] <fta> try it :)
[19:15] <asac> fta: well ... i really think its a problem in the livecd creation.
[19:15] <asac> why is the notifier file placed in /var/... at all
[19:16] <asac> we do that in postinst and only if the firefox process is running
[19:16] <asac> that shouldn't be the case for the livecd
[19:16] <asac> ill ask the guy on the bug
[19:17] <asac> if the file is really placed there then displaying the notification is the right thing to do if firefox is running
[19:18] <Volans> asac: maybe have you seen the new license file I have linked above?
[19:19] <asac> no ;) ... i just arrived. let me sort before diving into things again :)
[19:19]  * asac doig that now
[19:19] <asac> ;)
[19:20] <fta> asac, this is dirty anyway, xul should handle that itself
[19:28]  * asac reconstructs (33/100)
[19:29] <fta> ?
[19:29] <asac> hehe ... just a joke
[19:29] <asac> fta: its known that this is dirty and I planned to have a session for this at UDS
[19:29] <asac> its not simple to do properly obviously
[19:30] <RainCT> asac: archives are already frozen.. "Waiting for approval: adblock-plus 0.7.5.4-0ubuntu1 (source)"
[19:30] <asac> i have a few half-grown ideas in my head. but we need to coordinate everything with the apt maintiner
[19:30] <asac> RainCT: hmm.
[19:31] <asac> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2008-April/025259.html
[19:31] <asac> those are the univers guidelines
[19:32] <asac> apparently i can approve things.
[19:33] <asac> RainCT: did you test that it works?
[19:33] <RainCT> asac: yes, I'm using it right now
[19:35] <asac> ok re-acked to be sure
[19:36] <asac> RainCT: is the bug in changelog?
[19:36] <RainCT> asac: yes :)
[19:37] <asac> ok ... if nothing happens in lets say two days let me know ;)
[19:37] <asac> but i guess archive-admins are doing this full time now ... so it shouldn't take that long
[19:37] <asac> especially since this upload is probably on top of the queue :)
[19:41] <RainCT> what's "p"? :P
[19:42] <asac> Volans: ok, can you make a new release out of .upstream by bumping extension version to 1.0.7 or 1.0.6.1? then merge it over to ubuntu, open a bug about licensing issues so i can grant exception for that and remember to note that in .ubuntu changelog entry?
[19:43] <asac> Volans: bumping version in .upstream branch first.
[19:43] <asac> Volans: maybe consider to use that bzr branch as the official upstream branch ;)
[19:43] <asac> you could even great a project for your extension in launchpad ;)
[19:43] <asac> RainCT: p == probability
[19:43]  * asac phone
[19:44] <jimmy_> asac: I just sent you the gconf patch
[19:44] <RainCT> ahh, hadn't noticed the question mark before it.. why is there a sad face then? :P
[19:46] <asac> jimmy_: thanks. looking
[19:46] <asac> takes a bit :/
[19:46] <Volans> asac: no problem to use the upstream as the official code repository and / or open a project on LP for that
[19:47] <asac> RainCT: well that means that firefox rc1 in hardy final? p < 5% :)
[19:47] <asac> Volans: welcome. if you need support to set things up let me know
[19:47] <asac> Volans: you can either use the firefox-extensions project as now ... or create your own and push the .upstream branch there
[19:49] <jimmy_> asac: i think the diff included the flip as well, so you might want to take that out, /modules/libpref/src/init/all.js
[19:49] <RainCT> asac: "p < 5%  :)
[19:49] <RainCT> p > 95% :(
[19:49] <asac> jimmy_: thanks if its just that hunk i can sort that
[19:49] <asac> jimmy_: actually midbrowser with xul works here on my amd64 ... i got a wierd X error with it on i386
[19:49] <asac> (the one from hardy archive i mean)
[19:49]  * RainCT decides to stop wondering about nonsense and goes to study for his exam tomorrow ^^
[19:49] <asac> RainCT: yeah ;)
[19:51] <asac> jimmy_: only thing i notice right away is that the grabanddrag hand in the toolbar is pretty much coarse grained because of the toolbar resize i guess
[19:54] <jimmy_> asac: why you testing it in amd64? should be intel chips only :)
[19:55] <asac> jimmy_: i have amd here
[19:56] <asac> jimmy_: it works on amd ... it breaks on intel ;)
[19:56] <asac> jimmy_: my main development system in amd ... feel free to sponsor me a quad core super intel box ... ill dispose this one gracefully :)
[19:57] <jimmy_> asac: LOL, carl is the right guy to ask :)
[19:57] <asac> damn he is not online ;)
[19:58] <jimmy_> asac: we are working on some problematic font issues right now
[19:58] <asac> jimmy_: yeah i read carls post about status
[19:58] <asac> jimmy_: why do you still run as root?
[19:58] <asac> thats a bad idea in the beginning
[19:58] <asac> does UME still have no user by default?
[19:59] <jimmy_> asac: we don't run as root in our image, but we test it in the chroot environment before in xepher
[19:59] <asac> ah. so is it reproducible in xephyr?
[19:59] <asac> (though i run it as user there as well)
[19:59] <jimmy_> asac: we didn't expect it to produce different rendering behaviors
[19:59] <jimmy_> asac: yeah, it is reproducable in xepher
[20:00] <asac> jimmy_: running as root might confuse everything. especially if you have a xul + ffox split
[20:00] <asac> its not supposed to have write access and might create component and chrom registry data in pkglibdir
[20:00] <asac> which might cause all kind of wierd issues later on
[20:00] <jimmy_> asac: also the some stupid Chinese sites don't work, even on the regular Firefox on Hardy
[20:01] <asac> further, i think there are even parts of gtk that get disabled if you run as root. at least i remember to see some wierd uid==0 checks with return in some gtk/gnome lib
[20:01] <asac> jimmy_: have a page?
[20:01] <jimmy_> asac: www.sohu.com
[20:01] <jimmy_> and mall.sina.com.cn
[20:02] <asac> jimmy_: what kind of rendering issues do you experience. the latter looks pretty decent
[20:02] <jimmy_> it's some minor font issue
[20:02] <asac> (for the untrained eye)
[20:03] <jimmy_> in sohu.com, where the top of the page, after the login password edit fields, there are 2 links 注册 帮助
[20:04] <jimmy_> they should be on the same row as the login fields, but in FF 3.0, they got wrapped to the next row
[20:05] <asac> jimmy_: zooming out fixes that for me
[20:05] <jimmy_> in mall.sina.com, the fonts in blue on the left menu also have the same problem
[20:05] <asac> jimmy_: i think they use absolute width somewhere on the site
[20:06] <asac> so it depends on the font used
[20:06] <asac> our default font appears to be too big to fit in that area
[20:06] <asac> so firefox has to overflow
[20:06] <jimmy_> asac: i know, we think that the N810 uses different chinese fonts than we do
[20:07] <asac> jimmy_: i think the chines fonts we are using could definitly be improved. please talk to ArneGoetje who is responsible for asian fonts in ubuntu
[20:07] <asac> jimmy_: maybe he knows better which fonts should be used ... and then we can figure why they are not the default
[20:07] <jimmy_> asac: is he in here?
[20:07] <asac> jimmy_: his nick is ArneGoetje in #ubuntu-devel
[20:07] <asac> he is  in taiwan so probably asleep
[20:07] <jimmy_> asac: cool, thanks
[20:07] <asac> but i can ask him to get in here tomorrow
[20:08] <asac> jimmy_: i think you can better catch each other in yours evening and his morning?
[20:09] <asac> jimmy_: ill tell him to ping you here if he wakes up
[20:10] <asac> ok done
[20:10] <jimmy_> asac: allright
[20:11] <asac> jimmy_: he is still awake
[20:12] <ArneGoetje> hi
[20:12] <asac> ArneGoetje: jimmy_
[20:12] <asac> jimmy_: ArneGoetje  :)
[20:13] <asac> shake hands ;)
[20:13] <ArneGoetje> what's the problem?
[20:13] <asac> ArneGoetje: let me paste
[20:14] <asac> ArneGoetje: http://paste.ubuntu.com/6710/
[20:14] <asac> ArneGoetje: thats about midbrowser but the same rendering issues exist in firefox we have
[20:14] <asac> looks like the sizing of the font is not what the site expects
[20:14] <asac> most likely just a crappy site, but maybe we have a better font?
[20:15] <asac> actually to my untrained eyes the fonts look pretty coarse
[20:16] <jimmy_> asac: actually zooming out doesn't fix it for me
[20:17] <jimmy_> i am still seeing the login button and the two words after right underneath the login fields
[20:17] <jimmy_> they should line up
[20:17] <asac> jimmy_: it fixes it for me for sure.
[20:17] <asac> (welll if you can say fix at all)
[20:18] <asac> jimmy_: first zoom out -> button moves to top row
[20:18] <asac> second zooomout -> both links are up as well
[20:18] <jimmy_> asac: i tried 2 zoom-outs, still at the bottom
[20:19] <asac> wow i really think that site is too crappy to consider fix worthy
[20:19] <jimmy_> i am testing on a fresh Hardy beta image using FF beta 4 it comes with
[20:19] <asac> i mean they position the flash banners in absolute divs
[20:19] <asac> so if i resize the window things get wierd
[20:19] <jimmy_> asac: i know, carl and i don't even consider those as bugs
[20:20] <asac> hi willguaraldi ;)
[20:20] <willguaraldi> hi!
[20:20] <ArneGoetje> that's really a page design issue.
[20:20] <asac> jimmy_: do you have any rendering issues you consider real bugs?
[20:20] <asac> ArneGoetje: the font doesn't look AA for me?
[20:20] <jimmy_> but we are being pressued to fix them because the N810 which is also FF-based, can passed those sites
[20:20] <jimmy_> asac: not really, they are all the same font issues
[20:21] <jimmy_> asac: similar but a little different
[20:21] <ArneGoetje> asac: correct. it should be wwnquanyi-zenhei with embedded bitmaps turned on. AA on such a small size is unreadable and hurst the eyes.
[20:21] <asac> ok ... ArneGoetje do we have other chinese fonts that have a smaller sizing so jimmy_ can workaround this?
[20:21] <asac> embedded bitmaps? what the hell is going on :(
[20:22] <asac> anyway, do we have fonts that are somehow differently sized`
[20:22] <asac> ?
[20:22] <ArneGoetje> the page requests a fontsize of 12px and that's what it gets.
[20:22] <asac> i think the problem is not height, but width here
[20:22] <jimmy_> ArneGoetje, can we install some other font package for now to work around this?
[20:22] <ArneGoetje> jimmy_: no.
[20:23] <asac> in german there are fonts that are wider at 12px and fonts that are tinier
[20:23] <asac> maybe the same exists for chinese?
[20:23] <asac> like wwnquanyi-zenhei-squeezed ;)
[20:23] <ArneGoetje> CJK fonts are sqared. 12px is 12x12 pixels. all bitmap fonts with this size display the same.
[20:24] <asac> ok so chinese is monospaced by-definition?
[20:24] <ArneGoetje> yes
[20:24] <jimmy_> ArneGoetie, if Nokia's N810 can read those right, they must be using some proprietory fonts?
[20:24] <ArneGoetje> actually they are dualspaced.
[20:25] <asac> ArneGoetje: i read ChinaRep and 17173 in latin
[20:25] <ArneGoetje> jimmy_: probably
[20:25] <asac> maybe that is ment to be smaller?
[20:25] <asac> jimmy_: do they use firefox 2?
[20:25] <asac> e.g. gecko 1.8?
[20:25] <jimmy_> they use FF 3
[20:25] <jimmy_> alpha1 based
[20:26] <asac> jimmy_: what dpi do you have on your screens?
[20:26] <jimmy_> how do i check that?
[20:26] <Volans> asac: do we still need keeping my .ubuntu branch when there is an identical one in the ~ubuntu-dev?
[20:26] <asac> jimmy_: xpdyinfo gives you your screen width and height
[20:26] <asac> jimmy_: calculation is done accordingly
[20:27] <asac> those are in mm afaik
[20:27] <asac> so you need to convert to inch first
[20:27] <asac> Volans: no, what you do is that you mark it as "merged" in branch details
[20:27] <asac> that way it will disappear
[20:27] <asac> Volans: for next update you would push to ubuntu-it-menu.ubuntu.LPbugid or ubuntu-it-menu.ubuntu.TOPICNAME
[20:28] <asac> like ubuntu-it-menu.ubuntu.RELEASE.0.7.x
[20:28] <asac> and then you can request merge opn launchpad
[20:28] <jimmy_> command not found for xpdyinfo
[20:31] <asac> jimmy_: typo alert ;)
[20:31] <asac> $ xdpyinfo | grep resolution resolution:    93x92 dots per inch
[20:31] <asac> those are two lines ... no idea why paste messed it up
[20:32] <ArneGoetje> hmm... ok, I think I know the rendering issue.
[20:32] <jimmy_> resolution:    111x111 dots per inch
[20:32] <asac> jimmy_: try to force 96dpi
[20:32] <asac> jimmy_: do you have gnome?
[20:32] <jimmy_> yes
[20:33] <asac> appearence -> font -> details (thats where you set font dpi)
[20:33] <asac> but apparently those are not honoured for that particular chinese font
[20:33] <asac> ArneGoetje: ^^ ?
[20:33] <jimmy_> asac: but it is set to 96
[20:33] <asac> why do latin fonts resize, but those chinese dont?
[20:34] <asac> jimmy_: ok. then also tweak ffox and set layout.css.dpi to 96+
[20:34] <asac> 96
[20:34] <ArneGoetje> the rendering uses the serif font by default, which uses AR PL Uming. This font has monospaced latin characters, whereas the sans-serif font wqy-zenhei has proportional latin charcaters. This should make the difference. Enforcing the page rendering with sans-serif might fix it.
[20:34] <asac> jimmy_: otherwise maybe try to use 111 in font appearence
[20:34] <asac> ArneGoetje: thanks.
[20:34] <asac> ArneGoetje: where can we find that font?
[20:35] <asac> do we need a package?
[20:35] <ArneGoetje> ttf-wqy-zenhei. It's pulled by language-support-zh
[20:35] <asac> jimmy_: ^^
[20:35] <asac> ArneGoetje: but the non-latin chars are still monospaced?
[20:36] <asac> (just curious about this other world)
[20:36] <ArneGoetje> CJKglyphs are always monospaced
[20:36] <jimmy_> so i just apt-get that font package?
[20:36] <asac> ok ... you said that. thanks for confirming ;)
[20:36] <asac> jimmy_: install that language-support-zh thing
[20:37] <jimmy_> ok, pulling
[20:37] <jimmy_> some 155mb :)
[20:38] <asac> jimmy_: appears like you lack proper chinese support :)
[20:38] <ArneGoetje> hm no... that one still doesn't fix it... maybe they used some condensed font when they created the layout?
[20:38] <ArneGoetje> I forced firefox to use sans-serif for Simplified Chinese pages.
[20:39] <ArneGoetje> I try again by enforcing WQY-Zenhei explicitely...
[20:39] <jimmy_> right, we tried tweaking the default font types for CN-zh in about:config
[20:39] <jimmy_> they have no effect on it
[20:39] <ArneGoetje> nope, even worse...
[20:40] <ArneGoetje> so, the page expects some condensed glyphs, at least for the latin part...
[20:41] <fta> [reed], mozilla bug 368091 killed me
[20:41] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 368091 in XUL Widgets "Toolkit's about:license needs to allow for different "official binaries" line" [Normal,Resolved: fixed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=368091
[20:42] <fta> [reed], http://paste.ubuntu.com/6711/
[20:43] <asac> fta: does the bustage fix help?
[20:43] <[reed]> I think they're working on it
[20:43] <[reed]> yeah
[20:43] <asac> there is a patch ;)
[20:43] <[reed]> check the bustage fix
[20:43] <asac> landed
[20:44] <asac> .... so I checked in this fix to
[20:44] <asac> hopefully fix them.
[20:44] <fta> I don't have content/overrides at all
[20:45] <fta> http://mxr.mozilla.org/mozilla/source/toolkit/content/
[20:45] <asac> yeah
[20:45] <jimmy_> Arnegoetje, the language-support-zh doesn't fix it, and makes it worse, i changed the default font type for zh to serif instead of sans-serif to revert it back to normal
[20:46] <asac> jimmy_: but if it changed something there is hope imo :)
[20:46] <jimmy_> asac: yeah, that's what carl and I have been playing around, with fonts all day :(
[20:47] <jimmy_> asac: i don't really think it affects the usability at all, LOL, to us, the page seem fine
[20:47] <asac> jimmy_: yeah ... just ignore minorities :-P
[20:48] <asac> anyway. personally i would refuse to hunt anything that happens on crappy sites with fixed sizing ;)
[20:48] <jimmy_> asac: but we still need to fix them to pass those IVP tests
[20:48] <ArneGoetje> jimmy_: maybe you can google for opendesktop-fonts-1.4.2.tar.gz and try those. they have been modified to resemble M$ MingLiU, whis is used in Taiwan. Maybe the Latin glyphs there fit better... (but I doubt it).
[20:49] <asac> jimmy_: write an extension that forcefully reduces font size on that site :)
[20:49] <ArneGoetje> asac: +1
[20:49] <asac> ArneGoetje: hwat is it "traditional chinese" ?
[20:50] <asac> (taiwan or hong kong)? or simlified?
[20:50] <jimmy_> asac: simplied chinese
[20:50] <jimmy_> taiwan and hong kong uses traditional chinese
[20:50] <ArneGoetje> asac: Traditional: TW + HK + MO. Simplified: CN + SG
[20:50] <ArneGoetje> asac: the page we are talking about uses simplified chinese
[20:51] <asac> jimmy_: i managed to move the button up by changing the gnome theme ;)
[20:51] <asac> maybe you need to fix the textbox sizing in gtkrc
[20:51] <asac> yeah ... with "glider" theme the button comes up
[20:52] <ArneGoetje> asac: hey, that's a good idea... maybe compare it to a windows machine, how the textboxes render there...
[20:52] <asac> with high contrast even ... strange
[20:52] <asac> anyone knows how to tune the inner padding of text fields in gtk?
[20:54] <jimmy_> i installed the languange-support-zh, the button also came up, but the two words are still at the bottom
[20:55] <ArneGoetje> I think it might be a mixed font and layout issue... can you please compare the page on a windows box and see what is different there?
[20:55] <jimmy_> i think you are right tho, the login boxes seem to be longer in FF than in IE, at least to my eyes
[20:55] <jimmy_> maybe some theme issues as well
[20:56] <ArneGoetje> Either the font is much more condensed (which is unlikely), or the textbox sizes and other elements on that page are narrower...
[20:57] <jimmy_> its the width of the textboxes
[20:57] <jimmy_> i think
[20:57] <ArneGoetje> ok...
[20:58] <jimmy_> in IE, the end of the last textbox ends 2 words in front of TV
[21:00] <ArneGoetje> jimmy_: at 天 or at 邮 ?
[21:00] <jimmy_> 天
[21:00] <ArneGoetje> ah... that explains it...
[21:02] <ArneGoetje> I think the only font related issue might be the 'space' width... 输入法 has been forced into a new line...
[21:02] <asac> jimmy_: i think you can tweak this in gtkrc ... i am pretty sure
[21:03] <asac> ArneGoetje: can we try other space width?
[21:03] <ArneGoetje> asac: that's font specific.
[21:03] <asac> ArneGoetje: in this case its monospaced?
[21:04] <asac> hmmm rather half the size i guess
[21:04] <asac> ArneGoetje: forus also the submit button gets in the next row
[21:04] <ArneGoetje> asac: if you use sans-serif, then it's proportional... but the 'space' glyph may be wider than in some windows fonts.
[21:04] <asac> (because you said that only 输入法 is in another line for you)
[21:05] <ArneGoetje> asac: I was comparig only that line.
[21:05] <asac> ok
[21:06] <ArneGoetje> because that line apart from the logo on the left, is pure text. So, it's easier to spot font problems. So, as 输入法 gets kicked off the line, I suspect the 'space' glyph in our fonts is wider than in the windows fonts the page was designed for.
[21:08] <asac> ArneGoetje: how easy can the font be edited to have a smaller space?
[21:08] <asac> i imagine that changing spaces is one of the only tasks that appears to be not hard in designing fonts ;)
[21:09] <ArneGoetje> asac: just open the font in fontforge, adjust the glyph in U+0032 and generate a new font. For the bitmaps inside that font, they migth need to be rebuikt for that glyph.
[21:10] <ArneGoetje> eh... U+0020 of course
[21:10] <asac> jimmy_: try that as a measure ;)
[21:11] <ArneGoetje> as I see the page requests the Arial font... so, I would compare the glyphs width of the Arial font with the one in WQY ZenHei
[21:11] <ArneGoetje> but the difference should be only minimal.
[21:12] <jimmy_> i am a little lost, what is glyph in fonts?
[21:13] <ArneGoetje> optionally you can try to create a new alias in fontconfig, let's say "sans-serif-condensed" and force DejaVu Sans Condensed as first font, followed by WenQuanYi ZenHei.
[21:14] <ArneGoetje> jimmy_: the glyph is what get rendered on the screen... the graphical representation of a given codepoint. The font maps codepoints to glyphs.
[21:16] <jimmy_> ArneGoetji: so using fontconfig to create an alias will be easier?
[21:16] <ArneGoetje> jimmy_: probably... I'm trying now.
[21:20] <asac> jtv: still there?
[21:21] <jtv> asac: no, my day is really over!
[21:21] <asac> jtv: ok sleep well
[21:21] <asac> ;)
[21:21] <asac> cu @noon
[21:21] <jtv> :-)
[21:24] <jimmy_> i'll be back, grab some lunch
[21:25] <asac> ArneGoetje: i think you should go to bed too ;) ... thanks for you help so far!
[21:30] <fta> [reed], $ cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs-mirror.mozilla.org:/cvsroot -q -z 3 co -P -A -l mozilla/toolkit/content/overrides
[21:30] <fta> cvs server: cannot find module `mozilla/toolkit/content/overrides' - ignored
[21:30] <fta> cvs [checkout aborted]: cannot expand modules
[21:30] <fta> how is that patch supposed to work at all ?
[21:30] <asac> fta: i think that directlry might be created during build time
[21:31] <fta> hm, no
[21:31] <fta> Checking in browser/base/content/overrides/app-license.html;
[21:31] <fta> app-license.html
[21:31] <fta> initial revision: 1.1
[21:31] <fta> done
[21:31] <fta> that's from the bug
[21:31] <fta> oh lol
[21:32] <fta> browser/base/ vs toolkit
[21:33] <fta> cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs-mirror.mozilla.org:/cvsroot -q -z 3 co -P -A -l mozilla/browser/base/content/overrides/
[21:33] <fta> U mozilla/browser/base/content/overrides/app-license.html
[21:33] <asac> good
[21:34] <asac> fta: i think the bustage fix should fix it
[21:35] <fta> I don't have that file in my tarball, it could be mozclient...
[21:35] <asac> fta: most likely time screw again?
[21:35] <asac> or did you try to run mozclient on latest head?
[21:36] <fta> latest head
[21:36] <ArneGoetje> asac: yeah.. nothing I can do here... DejaVu Sans Condensed also doesn't help much here...
[21:36] <fta> but I use dates anyway
[21:37] <asac> fta: that could be it i guess
[21:37] <fta> cvs -d :pserver:anonymous@cvs-mirror.mozilla.org:/cvsroot -q -z 3 co -P -A -D '2008/04/10 12:06 PST' -l mozilla/browser/base/content/overrides/
[21:37] <fta> U mozilla/browser/base/content/overrides/app-license.html
[21:37] <fta> seems to work
[21:37]  * ArneGoetje -> bed
[21:38] <fta> and in mozclient, i ask for mozilla/browser
[21:38] <asac> fta: I noticed a while ago that mozclient passes the right date to the client.mk checkout, but then just used the changelog date format for the MOZ_CO_DATE thing?
[21:38] <asac> or is that fixed?
[21:39] <fta> really ?
[21:39] <fta> http://paste.ubuntu.com/6713/
[21:40] <asac> let me check something :)
[21:41] <asac> fta: here is what i see
[21:41] <asac> -D "$(shell echo $(DEBIAN_DATE) | $(DATE_FILTER))"
[21:41] <asac> but in other place we have:
[21:41] <asac> -D "$(DEBIAN_DATE)"
[21:41] <asac> we use the latter for
[21:41] <asac> ifneq (,$(DEBIAN_DATE))
[21:41] <asac> so probably whenever you specify a date explicitly
[21:41] <asac> and thats what i saw: -D "20080101t1000"
[21:42] <fta> hm
[21:42] <asac> that was two weeks ago ... i planned to fix this, but then dropped the ball
[21:43] <asac> fta: http://paste.ubuntu.com/6715/
[21:44] <asac> makes sense?
[21:45] <fta> hm, it depends on the project. nss/nspr are direct co, ff/xul are using client.mk
[21:47] <asac> ack
[21:47] <fta> damn, how I could have let that pass through...
[21:48] <asac> no problem ... we can fix that for hardy
[21:49] <asac> but lets check if there are other places like this
[21:49] <asac> i don't see any
[21:50] <asac> i think with that fix maybe combined branch tags + dates might even work
[21:50] <asac> which would be a good thing to track branches i guess
[21:51] <asac> fta: let me know when i can upload 0.06.1 or 6a or something ;)
[21:53] <asac> or if you want me to prepare this
[21:53] <fta> couldn't it be 0.07 ?
[21:54] <fta> i'd like to keep the X.YY format
[21:54] <asac> fta: whatever you want. 0.06a would just better show that this is a pure glitch release
[21:54] <asac> but since we need a debdiff anyway for approval that should be ok
[21:55] <fta> your diff seems ok but it doesn't solve my base/content/overrides/ mystery
[22:02] <fta> do we have other bugs for m-devscripts ?
[22:03] <asac> fta: thats the only one i am aware of ... i doubt that there is another bug that qualifies for a freeze breach
[22:03] <fta> I only see bug 210314 but it's a whish bug so it could wait
[22:04] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 210314 in mozilla-devscripts "please add midbrowser and xulmidbrowser targets" [Wishlist,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/210314
[22:04] <Volans> bene!
[22:07] <asac> mozilla bug 428382
[22:07] <ubotu> Mozilla bug 428382 in Download Manager "Choosing an helper application involve using a file pick in /usr/bin" [Normal,Unconfirmed] http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=428382
[22:07] <asac> fta: yes that should be done in intrepid
[22:09] <fta> so the next mozilla-devscripts will depend on bzr, cvs, git, hg and svn
[22:09] <fta> hmm
[22:13] <Volans> asac: bug #215375 and push of the .ubuntu branch done :)
[22:13] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 215375 in ubuntu-it-menu "Licensing issues in ubuntu-it-menu" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/215375
[22:13] <fta> asac, do you need a bug to push that?
[22:14] <asac> fta: yes. we need a bug, there we need a debdiff and need to close the bug in changelog
[22:15] <asac> at best keep the changelog verbose as well (on stable release quality leve)
[22:17] <fta> bug 215382
[22:19] <fta> bug 215382
[22:19] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 215382 in mozilla-devscripts "Please sponsor mozilla-devscripts 0.07" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/215382
[22:20] <asac> fta:  a please sponsor bug is not really a bug of the bug itself ;)
[22:20] <fta> well, it was that or another line with not much to say
[22:20] <asac> ill change the title
[22:21] <fta> "Fix checkout by dates" ?
[22:21] <asac> no wait a second :)
[22:27] <fta> ok, thx
[22:33] <asac> fta: did you verify that the patch fixes the bug?
[22:33] <fta> sure
[22:34] <asac> good
[22:50] <asac> fta: upload has happened
[22:50] <fta> wonderful
[22:59] <asac> yay gconf patch applied :)
[22:59] <asac> lets hope it doesn't pull in all kind of dependencies :(
[23:01] <fta> gconf patch ?
[23:01] <asac> let me find the bug
[23:01] <fta> Bug 215403
[23:01] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 215403 in firefox-3.0 "firefox download dialog state corrupted after running out of disk space" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/215403
[23:02] <fta> Bug 215399
[23:02] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 215399 in firefox-3.0 "firefox beta 3 does not always display images" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/215399
[23:02] <fta> some people are still getting black rectangles
[23:04] <asac> fta: bug 23369
[23:04] <ubotu> Launchpad bug 23369 in firefox "firefox(-gnome-support) should get proxy from gconf" [Unknown,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/23369
[23:05] <asac> fta: the user experience is awesome. its bi-directional. you can map settings from gconf to firefox. if you edit them in firefox they will change in gcnof and vice-versa :)
[23:05] <asac> the patch maps the setting for gconf for now
[23:06] <fta> the patch is huge
[23:06] <asac> yeah. and we need to rip parts of it to build from somewhere else because that directory will be build at a time where there are no base libs for "plain components" availabel yet ..
[23:07] <asac> once that is done we can give it back to upstream bug from where we took the start :)
[23:10] <Volans> asac: I have recommitted due to a mistake in the debian/changelog file, maybe have you see the bug
[23:11] <asac> Volans: if it wasn't merged to ubuntu-dev its ok
[23:11] <asac> otherwise please stay on top of ubuntu-dev always
[23:11] <asac> uncommitting on release branches is just ugly ;)
[23:11] <asac> and we try to not do that more or less successful nowadays ;)
[23:13] <asac> Volans: plesae branch the ~ubuntu-dev branch and fix on top of that
[23:14] <asac> sorry for this pickiness, but it makes sense :)
[23:15] <asac> Volans: ok. what you should do is: branch ~ubuntu-dev. then bzr merge https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~volans/firefox-extensions/ubuntu-it-menu.upstream
[23:15] <fta> asac, I don't see this gconf patch in 3.0, it seems late
[23:16] <asac> it won't be enabled by default. so i think its ok
[23:20] <Volans> asac:  after the merge with .upstream I have also to merge with the .ubuntu? (for the changes in the debian/* files)
[23:22] <asac> Volans: you should have droppped you branch and started on top of the ~ubuntu-dev
[23:22] <asac> thats the easiest way
[23:23] <asac> you branch the ubuntu-dev .ubuntu branch ... and merge the .upstream into that.
[23:23] <asac> then push to your branch
[23:23] <asac> (maybe use a different name)
[23:39] <Volans> asac: done: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~volans/firefox-extensions/ubuntu-it-menu.LP215375
[23:40] <asac> thanks will upload it tomorrow morning
[23:44] <Volans> asac: ok, thank you very much (if you prefer I can tell DktrKranz to do this)
[23:53] <asac> Volans: hmm . you should have added a new changelog entry with UNRELEASED during the merge and document in there as well
[23:53] <asac> anyway ... will take a look tomorrow.
[23:57] <Volans> asac: if you want I can change this now, as you prefer
[23:58] <asac> just add changelog entry for the upcoming release on top. that should be fine. document the fix in there.