[00:56] <micahg> asac: is it feasible to do a xul192 upload before alpha 3 (monday night)?
[00:57] <asac> micahg: thats ok
[00:57] <LLStarks> micahg. can you confirm that about:home for google is now google cs?
[00:58] <asac> LLStarks: our previous homepage was google custom search as well ...
[00:58] <LLStarks> why?
[00:58] <micahg> asac: I was going to try to have a few of the apps in main ready for upload so they can be included in alpha3
[00:59] <LLStarks> wasn't there enough rage during the karmic me incident to say that was a bad idea?
[00:59] <asac> LLStarks: this has been discussed in length last cycle ... i remember you were quite active back then
[00:59] <asac> LLStarks: i dont know what you mean. the homepage is the same as in karmic ... the searchplugin doesnt use custom search
[01:00] <asac> micahg: lets drive ppa a bit longer
[01:00] <LLStarks> yeah, but revenue boosting at the cost of functionality and image searching...
[01:00] <asac> there is not much of a difference
[01:00] <LLStarks> is canonical that desperate?
[01:01] <asac> LLStarks: its not a regression from karmic
[01:01] <asac> i cant say more
[01:01] <asac> or rather dont know what is your point
[01:01] <asac> rather than ranting etc.
[01:02] <asac> i wont repeat all this discussion every cycle
[01:02] <LLStarks> i am ranting, but i don't see why custom search needs to be used in order for canonical to make money.
[01:02] <LLStarks> why not regular google?
[01:02] <asac> LLStarks: why dont you read the ubuntu-devel thread where we announced this ... its all discussed there
[01:02] <LLStarks> i shall.
[01:03] <LLStarks> what month was it>
[01:03] <LLStarks> nvm
[01:03] <asac> january or even december
[01:03] <LLStarks> thanks.
[01:03] <asac> np
[01:04] <asac> micahg: uploads can start after a3
[01:04] <asac> xul 1.9.2 we can do before
[01:04] <asac> also we can do universe before
[01:05] <micahg> asac: right, I was just wondering if it was worth getting certain apps in for main for the CD
[01:05] <asac> no
[01:05] <micahg> k
[01:05] <asac> there is not much of a difference
[01:05] <asac> feedback from alpha stages is not that high for apps
[01:05] <asac> which is why we use two betas this cycle
[01:06] <asac> usually folks start to test for beta or even RC
[01:06] <micahg> asac: k, I guess the goal then is to have at least lucid done by beta 1?
[01:06] <asac> micahg: two weeks ;)
[01:06] <micahg> haha...k...I'll do my best :)
[01:06] <asac> yeah. all will be fine
[01:06] <asac> ;)
[01:06] <asac> for apps that turn out to be painful, we kill them
[01:07] <asac> i added a list of insecure apps to the wiki ... those apps need to be ready when 3.0/3.5 goes EOL
[01:07] <asac> chris is working on the most painful one .. epiphany
[01:07] <micahg> asac: well, 3.0 is already
[01:07] <asac> one month
[01:08] <asac> micahg: its EOL ... but not lacking security fixes atm
[01:08] <micahg> asac: right, k, where's the list?
[01:08] <asac> once there is a new security update without 3.0 we need to have the bits ready
[01:08] <asac> micahg: on the xulrunner-list page
[01:08] <micahg> ah, ok
[01:09] <asac> at the bottom
[01:10] <asac> micahg: which of tohse are already building?
[01:10] <asac> none?
[01:10] <micahg> prism should be fine, but I haven't tried yet
[01:10] <micahg> let me check
[01:11] <micahg> miro looks fine
[01:11] <micahg> although there's a new version in lucid I have to tet
[01:11] <micahg> *test
[01:12] <asac> micahg: well. for miro etc. we have to port the version used in hardy etc. rather than backporting stuff ---- if possible
[01:12] <micahg> asac: k, well it built with no changes in Lucid
[01:13] <asac> yes, but hardy might be a different thing
[01:13] <asac> we should definitly stage xul 192 for all releases
[01:13] <micahg> asac: I'm assuming lucid comes first?
[01:13] <asac> (maybe skip intrepid for now)
[01:13] <asac> micahg: at best in parallel
[01:13] <micahg> asac: so main for all releases then univers?
[01:13] <micahg> *universe?
[01:14] <asac> insecure apps for all relesaes
[01:14] <micahg> asac: k
[01:14] <micahg> I guess I'll uploaded them all this weekend to see what breaks
[01:14] <asac> for lucid everything
[01:14] <asac> or kill
[01:14] <asac> yeah. thats good
[01:14] <micahg> and start the log ;)
[01:14] <asac> push xul192 ... then when built just push everything
[01:15] <asac> also we need to testrun the builds
[01:18] <asac> micahg: oh ... i think you appended ~... to version for such pushes
[01:18] <asac> we should increase the version over what is in the archive
[01:18] <micahg> asac: I did
[01:18] <asac> so if you take ubuntu7 ... use ubuntu7.0ffox35
[01:18] <asac> or something
[01:18] <micahg> there ware some uploads
[01:18] <asac> kk
[01:18] <asac> but you used ~ ;)
[01:19] <micahg> well, if it's ubuntu7, I did ubuntu8~ffox36~lucid1
[01:19] <asac> yes. that assumes that next upload would be ubuntu8
[01:19] <asac> which you dont know
[01:19] <asac> maybe it will be ubuntu8.1
[01:19] <asac> err 7.1
[01:19] <micahg> only if it's after release
[01:19] <asac> you dont know ;)
[01:19] <micahg> that makes sense for the stable releases though
[01:20] <asac> it makes sense everywhere
[01:20] <micahg> why would someone do an ubuntu point release in devel?
[01:20] <asac> much safer
[01:20] <asac> even if it doesnt matter ;)
[01:20] <micahg> asac: k
[01:20] <asac> you dont know... some do a ubuntu7.build1
[01:21] <micahg> I'll do that for future uploads unless you want me to redo the ones I already pushed
[01:24] <micahg> asac: can we do a FF upload on monday?
[01:28] <micahg> asac: also, if an theme was installed before in .install, should that be changed to use dh_xul-ext
[01:30] <ari-tczew> micahg: is xulrunner-1.9.2-dev available in Ubuntu official repository?
[01:30] <ari-tczew> or only ppa?
[01:30] <micahg> ari-tczew: not yet, PPA only
[01:30] <micahg> You can add a PPA dependency on your own PPA to test
[01:31] <ari-tczew> ouh, right, can I add your ppa @ pbuilder source list?
[01:31] <micahg> ari-tczew: i dont' see why not
[02:15] <ari-tczew> micahg: FTBFS still exist :-/
[02:15] <micahg> ari-tczew: worked for me
[02:15] <ari-tczew> I think that problem is with gcc 4.4
[02:15] <ari-tczew> micahg: did you test latest debian revision?
[02:15] <micahg> ari-tczew: no
[02:15] <micahg> 0.9.5-3
[02:16] <ari-tczew> so, I test -6
[02:16] <micahg> hmm
[02:17] <micahg> ari-tczew: idk, I'm running out soon...I woudl suggest looking at the debian changes from -3 to -6 for a clue
[02:18] <ari-tczew> right, but not now, going to bed, cya
[05:42] <stefanlsd> hi guys, im looking at fixing gears for lucid, i build the xpi and install it, although the addon doesnt seem to work, is there a way to debug what the addon is doing? (tried launching firefox from command line, dont see anything...)
[05:51] <micahg> stefanlsd: probably has to be built against xul192
[06:00] <stefanlsd> micahg: mm, whats the package name for xul 1.9.2?
[06:00] <micahg> stefanlsd: not in archive yet
[06:01] <micahg> stefanlsd: here's the PPA with it: https://edge.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/ffox35/
[06:01] <micahg> xulrunner-1.9.2
[06:03] <stefanlsd> micahg: ah ok. is it gonna land in archive soon?
[06:10] <micahg> stefanlsd: yes, probably this week
[06:19] <stefanlsd> micahg: kk. thanks, will wait to it gets into archive then build and test against it
[06:20] <micahg> stefanlsd: nah, you can test in PPA now
[06:20] <micahg> in fact I already did and it failed
[06:21] <stefanlsd> micahg: tested what?
[06:21] <micahg> gears
[06:21] <micahg> stefanlsd: https://edge.launchpad.net/~mozillateam/+archive/ffox35/+build/1514289
[06:30] <stefanlsd> micahg: not sure what that error is about. i fixed gears to build not for firefox 3.6 (updated to new svn version). it compiles on lucid pbuilder and firefox says its enabled, it just doesnt actually work. so i'll just wait for 1.9.2 in archive
[06:32] <micahg> stefanlsd: k
[09:16] <kecsap> asac: hi, are you here? I marked bug 222283 as duplicate of 123713 which is assigned to you. Can I reassign to me 123713 to come up something updated package description for ubufox?
[09:16] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 222283 in ubufox "Description is useless (dup-of: 123713)" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/222283
[09:16] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 123713 in ubufox "package description needs rewrite" [Low,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/123713
[10:20] <micahg> kecsap: usually a little later on Sunday
[10:45] <kecsap> ok
[16:37] <fta> !info processingjs
[16:37] <fta> !info processing-js
[16:38] <ubottu> Package processingjs does not exist in karmic
[16:38] <ubottu> Package processing-js does not exist in karmic
[16:40] <fta> !itp
[17:39] <fta> asac, do we ship the jsshell somewhere?
[21:32] <asac> fta: no
[21:32] <asac> its not produced by the js tree from moz-cenral
[21:53] <asac> actually i had issues building tracemonkey branch standalone
[21:53] <asac> so not sure ... maybe they recently added a configure flag to moz-central to enable that
[22:03] <fta> asac, i need it
[22:03] <fta> # If your jsshell isn't at ./tools/js/src/js, update JS below
[22:03] <fta> TOOLSDIR=./tools
[22:03] <fta> JS=$(TOOLSDIR)/js/src/js
[22:03] <fta> for stuff like this:
[22:03] <fta> minified: create-release
[22:03] <fta>         $(TOOLSDIR)/minifier.py $(JS) processing.js > ./release/processing-$(VERSION).min.js
[22:06] <fta> asac, ^^, that's for http://processingjs.org/
[22:13] <asac> *shrug* ... have to check if there is a way ;)
[23:27] <BUGabundo> "What does the reload button do? Well, it reloads the page, obviously. Or  at least that was about how far I had thought about it when I thought  to poke into fixing the  age-old "Chrome should support shift-reload" bug and I discovered  there's plenty of subtlety in even a simple-sounding feature."
[23:27] <BUGabundo> LOL