[01:52] <chrisccoulson> asac - when was firefox-2 installed by default?
[02:26] <bobby_> Firefox 4.0 Beta - Will it include the updated Java engine, or will that be in later beta releases?
[02:37] <kylehuff> anybody know if the firefox extension subsystem has a mechanism for packing an NPAPI plugin with the extension? (preferably isolated/private ala chromium)
[03:13] <bobby_> Okay, anybody know when 4.0Build 1 is going to be in the daily PPA?
[03:30] <kylehuff> toolkit bundle is the answer the first part of my question.. don't know how I missed that on the developer center..
[04:28] <micahg> chrisccoulson_: firefox-2 as that package was never a default AFAIK, was firefox before hardy
[04:28] <micahg> [reed]: around?
[05:54] <micahg> chrisccoulson_: I think we need a Breaks: firefox-2 in hardy, now that I think about it, I agree we shouldn't transition people automatically as some people have certain apps that only work with firefox-2
[06:28] <ddecator> aw, i can't connect to the sb servers..
[06:29] <micahg> wfm
[06:29] <ddecator> really?
[06:29]  * ddecator tries again
[06:29] <micahg> ddecator: which connection?
[06:30] <ddecator> micahg: svn, trying to get-orig-source
[06:30] <ddecator> ah, now it's working
[06:58]  * micahg thinks firefox and thunderbird have memory leaks :(
[06:59] <ddecator> the only time i have a problem with FF is when i have a lot of LP surfing to do
[07:00] <ddecator> it gradually gets slower, but only after using LP a lot..
[07:02] <micahg> ddecator: it was 2.2GB and when I reopened it, it was 890MB
[07:04] <ddecator> micahg: whoa..
[07:06] <vish> micahg: hehe , and i get angry when firefox reaches ~180MiB  ;p
[07:06] <micahg> vish: I have about 15 tabs and 20 extensiosn
[07:06] <micahg> *extensiosn
[07:06] <micahg> ugh
[07:06] <micahg> too late to type :P
[07:07] <vish> micahg: woah! 15tabs , is my regular usage. there is some problem there then
[07:07] <ddecator> only 1am for you :p
[07:07]  * vish wonders how much memory micahg's sys has
[07:08] <vish> i often end up leaving FF open for 1-2days and end up having 30-40 tabs , thats when it starts getting crazy and i restart
[07:09] <vish> 14 extensions here , but they may be the good ones ;p
[07:15] <vish> oh just noticed comment here >  http://www.conceivablytech.com/1572/products/mozilla-posts-firefox-4-0-beta-1/
[07:15] <vish> I've had up to 40 tabs open in Firefox with 200 MB of memory used
[07:16] <vish> ddecator: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/4.0b1-candidates/build1/
[07:16] <vish> \o/
[07:17] <ddecator> vish: https://code.edge.launchpad.net/~ddecator/firefox/update-firefox-to-4.0-20100629
[07:17] <ddecator> ;)
[07:17] <micahg> vish: 4GB :)
[07:18] <vish> ah ha , i have only 2GB :)
[07:18] <vish> ddecator: you've been hiding the goodies :/
[07:18] <vish> ;p
[07:19] <ddecator> vish: i'm using it right now, but it's the same as 3.7 so far, just the version changed (and it's supposedly a little more stable)
[07:22] <vish> ddecator: you should have that up and running in a ppa ;)
[07:22] <ddecator> vish: that's what the daily ppa is for :p
[07:24] <vish> ddecator: apparently you are quicker that the dailies  :D
[07:24] <vish> than*
[07:24] <ddecator> vish: my fix was for the dailies :p
[07:24] <ddecator> vish: i'm helping to keep them maintained, so micah asked me to get things ready for the version bump
[07:25] <vish> ddecator: ooh , goody
[07:26] <ddecator> huh, the pic on lifehacker shows that the beta is referred to as Minefield still on the Windows version...guess my little temporary workaround for the lack of a codename may be alright afterall :p
[07:37] <vish> ddecator: i'v always been confused about one thing. if i want to use the current [distro stock]stable FF and use the daily ppa for FF3.7 , how do i not have it update other stable stuff? like xul..
[07:38]  * micahg does that with apt-pinning
[07:38] <ddecator> vish: like keeping FF for lucid untouched, but just having FF 3.7?
[07:38] <vish> i'v pinned the mozilla-daily to 400
[07:39] <vish> me checks the match
[07:39] <vish> ddecator: yeah
[07:39] <ddecator> vish: not sure, i like all of my mozilla stuff to be daily, so i've never looked into that :)
[07:40] <vish> :)
[08:06] <vish> micahg: i'v set the apt-pinning , > http://paste.ubuntu.com/457219/ , but still i see the xul update from the ppa, what am i doing wrong?
[08:07] <vish> i get offered the xul 1.9.11~hg
[08:08] <vish> 1.9.1.11~hg
[08:10] <micahg> vish: on lucid you shouldn't have xulrunner-1.9.1 installed
[08:11] <vish> micahg: oh , i think its a remnant from the pre-alpha lucid!
[08:13] <vish> micahg: so , i should be safe , if i can remove 1.9.1 and leave xul 1.9.2?
[08:13] <micahg> vish: yes, just watch your first upgrade to make sure you don't get anything else
[08:14] <vish> cool! ..
[08:21] <vish> micahg: neat , thanks.. but out of curiosity , why isnt xulrunner-1.9.1  not being removed when FF3.5 was installed in alpha-Lucid?
[08:22] <vish> which i guess installed xulrunner-1.9.2
[08:24] <micahg> vish: we never transitioned away from ti
[08:25] <micahg> *it
[08:26]  * vish now confused.. 
[08:27] <vish> anyway.. removed xulrunner-1.9.1  :D
[08:30] <micahg> vish: I'll explain later when I'm awake ;)
[08:31] <vish> micahg: yeah sure, knowing its late for you now, i didnt probe now :)
[08:45] <ddecator> wow, sb built first try..
[09:15] <BUGabundo_remote> morning! unleash the screw driver in you!!
[09:15] <jtv> asac: we're getting a question from someone who wants to translate an XPI-based project in Launchpad...  Perhaps you could add a quick note about how you convert XPIPO back to XPI?  The question is at https://answers.launchpad.net/rosetta/+question/116038
[09:22] <Olap> quick question: is firefox-4.0b2pre being built yet?
[09:23] <vish> Olap: quick ans: no ;)
[09:24] <Olap> such a shame, looking forward to it
[09:26] <BUGabundo_remote> we are already in beta 2?
[09:26] <BUGabundo_remote> sooo 3.7 is just changing branding?
[09:26] <BUGabundo_remote> I need to make new profiles for 3.6 and 4.x
[09:26] <BUGabundo_remote> alt+NUM stop working in 3.6 and 3.7 profile is slowwwwww
[11:40] <gnomefreak> anyone know why firefox-3.7 has a bookmarks please in menu and one on the far right side to the right of the search box
[12:05] <Olap> in preperation for 4.0 where they'll remove the toolbar
[12:07] <gnomefreak> the next build should be reversioned 4.0
[12:07] <gnomefreak> atm it is still there
[12:08] <gnomefreak> seems all builds failed last night so we were not able to get it reversioned yet
[12:16] <gnomefreak> Olap: i cant get browser to respond atm but take a look at the related titles on the right the first and second one
[12:16] <gnomefreak> http://www.helium.com/items/1833740-what-to-expect-from-firefox-40
[12:18] <gnomefreak> Olap: seems it will be gone
[12:18]  * gnomefreak gonna miss home and stop
[12:19] <gnomefreak> they are not what they said they are :(
[12:27] <Olap> nothing is yet
[12:27] <Olap> seems to change layout daily
[12:27] <Olap> hopefully the 4.0 tree should settle out
[12:35] <gnomefreak> yay OOo 3.2
[12:47] <fta2> damn, my connection at home is not stable today
[13:31] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: hi!
[13:31] <chrisccoulson> hi jdstrand
[13:31] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: did you happen to see bug #600158 ?
[13:31] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 600158 in firefox (Ubuntu) "After upgrading to firefox 3.6 java plugin and flash plugin do not work (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/600158
[13:32] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, not yet. i'm working on bug 600022
[13:32] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 600022 in firefox-3.0 (Ubuntu Hardy) (and 1 other project) "package firefox 3.0.19 nobinonly-0ubuntu0.8.04.1 failed to install/upgrade: trying to overwrite `/usr/share/bug/firefox/presubj', which is also in package firefox-2 (affects: 2) (dups: 1) (heat: 18)" [High,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/600022
[13:32] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: sure. curious on the progress on that one to (that was my next question)
[13:33] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: btw, that first can't be that widespread cause, again, can't reproduce and these are things we specifically tested for
[13:33] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, i'm almost ready to upload a fix. the conffile handling is getting quite complicated though, so it's taking a little while to get right
[13:34] <chrisccoulson> i want to ensure we don't end up with conffile prompts during the upgrade really
[13:34] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: cool. would you mind if I cleaned out the appropriate hardy bits from the ppa (including webkit)?
[13:34] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: oh yes, that is tantamount
[13:34] <chrisccoulson> yeah, i think we can do that now
[13:34] <jdstrand> alright, I do it
[13:34] <jdstrand> I'll
[13:34] <chrisccoulson> for the person with the flash issue, we should maybe ask him to try a longer timeout
[13:51] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - i will create a wiki page with a list of test sequences we should test to make sure the conffile handling works correctly
[13:51] <chrisccoulson> i'm going to upload the updated package now anyway
[13:52] <jdstrand> k
[13:54] <micahg> BUGabundo_remote: 3.7 will be changing versions :)
[13:56] <BUGabundo_remote> ik
[13:58] <chrisccoulson> the builders can't be very busy, my uploads are at the front of the queue already
[14:00] <micahg> chrisccoulson: might have another bug :(, I'm going to try to get more information
[14:02] <chrisccoulson> micahg - bug 600158 by any chance?
[14:02] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 600158 in firefox (Ubuntu) "After upgrading to firefox 3.6 java plugin and flash plugin do not work (affects: 1) (heat: 6)" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/600158
[14:02] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yes :)
[14:02] <chrisccoulson> he should probably try adjusting the timeout
[14:02] <micahg> chrisccoulson: 45 seconds should be enough for most apps though
[14:02] <micahg> I'll ask
[14:03] <Milos_SD> Hi
[14:04] <Milos_SD> When will we see Firefox 4.0b2? :D
[14:04] <micahg> Milos_SD: maybe tonight
[14:04] <Milos_SD> great :D
[14:04] <micahg> Milos_SD: or at least 4.0b2pre :)
[15:03] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand / micahg - some test sequences for update - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Testing/Firefox3.6.4Upgrade/Bug600022 :)
[15:03] <chrisccoulson> if you get bored ;)
[15:06] <chrisccoulson> micahg - seems the flash issue is not unique to hardy
[15:07] <chrisccoulson> die flash die
[15:07] <Dimmuxx> what flash issue?
[15:17] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, is there much we can do when third party packages break our security updates?
[15:17] <chrisccoulson> i've seen 2 bugs now which are caused by ubuntuzilla
[15:18] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: no, not really. not unless upstream has a patch we can apply
[15:18] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: you might ask asac how he would handle that
[15:18] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: and I'll test the new package in a bit
[15:19] <chrisccoulson> thanks
[15:58] <micahg> chrisccoulson: we should do a similar test on Jaunty for FF3.6.6 since there are 2 versions on the system
[15:59] <micahg> s/are/might be/
[15:59] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, we should (although firefox-2 was removed from those)
[15:59] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yeah, but there's firefox-3.0 and firefox-3.5
[16:06] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - we'll need to do a corresponding upload of apturl btw
[16:06] <chrisccoulson> (as i've moved the preferences back to /etc/firefox-3.0)
[16:12] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: ok
[16:15] <chrisccoulson> i don't think i'm going to work very late tonight
[16:15] <chrisccoulson> i only got 2 hours sleep last night ;)
[17:00] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: you should totally leave early! you did a great job :)
[17:00] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: after I verify ff and apturl on hardy, you ok with me publishing them?
[17:01] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, yes please, they should be good to go now :)
[17:02] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: fyi, I am on vacation tomorrow through monday. please ask mdeslaur or kees to handle any emergency fixes before I am back
[17:03] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, thanks. hopefully there won't be any more ;)
[17:03] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: but I'll get these out today
[17:03] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: no, I don't think so. and the one issue was really pretty minor imo
[17:03] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson, micahg: awesome job guys :)
[17:03] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, thanks to you too :)
[17:03] <micahg> jdstrand: can we publish Seamonkey in Lucid without the rest or should they all go out at once?
[17:04] <chrisccoulson> and thanks to micahg for helping out too
[17:04] <micahg> chrisccoulson: np, wish I could've helped more
[17:04] <micahg> jdstrand: yeah, thanks for all the help with this transition
[17:04] <jdstrand> micahg: sure. it's universe. you tell me what to publish and I'll push it (mind you, I don't typically do testing for universe stuff, so I rely on you guys)
[17:05] <jdstrand> oh sure
[17:05] <jdstrand> :)
[17:05] <micahg> chrisccoulson: what do you think, if I get the changelog for Lucid, should we push that out today?
[17:05] <micahg> oh wait, it probably won't build until EOD
[17:06] <chrisccoulson> micahg - re bug 512937 - as kees pointed out to me on a similar report last night, these bugs are actually breakage caused by people using ubuntuzilla. i'm going to close it for now unless you think there's anything we should be doing to work around it
[17:06] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 512937 in firefox (Ubuntu) "[MASTER] package firefox 3.6+nobinonly-0ubuntu1 failed to install/upgrade: update-alternatives: error: alternative path /usr/bin/firefox doesn't exist. (affects: 26) (dups: 5) (heat: 119)" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/512937
[17:07] <chrisccoulson> i don't mind if we publish seamonkey in lucid first - the other releases haven't seen an update for a long time anyway, so it doesn't make much difference
[17:07] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yeah , it does seem to be because of Ubuntuzilla
[17:08] <chrisccoulson> micahg - we could probably work around it in the postinst by checking if the symlink is diverted before creating the alternative
[17:08] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I'll see if I can push the Lucid branch up soon
[17:08] <chrisccoulson> and then logging a big warning to the console ;)
[17:08] <micahg> chrisccoulson: indeed, but do we want to?
[17:09] <chrisccoulson> i'm not sure. it probably wouldn't be difficult to check, but then having the installation fail gives users a way of knowing that they've done something which has broken their firefox install
[17:09] <chrisccoulson> so it might be ok as it is
[18:08] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: what is the trick with apturl? it used to work sproadically on hardy, but now I am having problems. apturl.js is getting pulled in, cause I see it in about:config. do I need another package installed or something?
[18:13] <micahg> chrisccoulson: Seamonkey will have to be tomorrow, I have to get some other stuff done today
[18:20] <jdstrand> micahg: feel free to ping mdeslaur or kess on seamonkey
[18:31] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - hmm, i'm not too sure about apturl
[18:31] <micahg> jdstrand: k, thanks
[18:32] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: does 'firefox apt:dpkg' work for you?
[18:32] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: I get the 'I don't have a protocol handler for (apt)' type message...
[18:34] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, i just don't get any error message when i try that
[18:35] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: it is goofy I tell you. if I install the one in hardy release, it works, then if I upgrade to what is in the ppa now, it works. if I just install from the ppa, it didn't work
[18:35] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: I'm publishing as is
[18:36] <jdstrand> if people want to file a bug, they can...
[18:36] <chrisccoulson> thanks
[18:36] <chrisccoulson> i'm not sure why it behaves like that :/
[18:36] <jdstrand> no-- it has always been flaky on hardy. I thought you might know. thanks anyway
[19:38] <micahg> chrisccoulson: why did you change the version to 6b18-1.8-0ubuntu1~9.04.1?
[19:45] <chrisccoulson> micahg - i thought that is what we agreed last week
[19:55] <micahg> chrisccoulson: well, it's actually ubuntu2 backported, not ubuntu1, that's why I did 1.09.04.1
[19:57] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, but ubuntu2 is still in -proposed. we can always bump the version number later on if it is copied to -updates before we release
[19:58] <chrisccoulson> it's a bit awkward ;)
[19:58] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k
[19:58] <chrisccoulson> really, we just need some builds though so we can start the TCK :)
[19:58] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k
[19:59] <chrisccoulson> the bug traffic is still quite low after the upgrade
[19:59] <micahg> chrisccoulson: indeed, I hope that's a good sign :)
[19:59] <chrisccoulson> but i've been reading threads on ubuntuforums from users complaining that 3.6.6 is really slow :/
[20:00] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I also seem to have a memory leak in 3.6.x
[20:00] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I'll have to dig deeper later this month...there's just so much to do :)
[20:01] <chrisccoulson> yeah, there is. a few people have mentioned that performance is really bad on maverick too, but i've not tried that yet
[20:01]  * micahg is out for a bit
[21:08] <micahg> chrisccoulson: would it be ok for jdstrand to publish thunderbird 3.0.5 to lucid if he has time?
[21:09] <chrisccoulson> yeah, we should do that
[21:09] <micahg> chrisccoulson: i'll finish up my thunderbird fixes for maverick for upload on Friday
[21:31] <jdstrand> micahg: I do not have time. I have not tested them at all and have other updates I am publishing today. if it can't wait til next week, ask mdeslaur or kees
[21:31] <micahg> jdstrand: no, there's just 1, Lucid
[21:31] <micahg> jdstrand: k, I'll ping someone tomorrow then
[21:31] <jdstrand> thanks
[21:54] <jdstrand> micahg, chrisccoulson: fyi, I let the security team know you may ask to publish thunderbird. However, we typically won't publish on Friday, so if they are unable to get to it tomorrow, I will get to it early next week
[21:54] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - thanks. yeah, i'm reluctant to do a friday release, especially after already having a panic once this week ;)
[21:54] <jdstrand> micahg, chrisccoulson: in other words, they will prioritize based on severity of CVEs and the work they are currently doing (like normal)
[21:55] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: heh. you did great man :)
[21:55] <chrisccoulson> thanks :)
[22:03] <micahg> thanks jdstrand
[22:03]  * micahg never likes the idea of releasing production stuff on Friday 
[23:13] <Dimmuxx> micahg: will you put 4.0b1 build 1 here https://edge.launchpad.net/~micahg/+archive/mozilla-beta? Or will it be a more official beta ppa?
[23:14] <micahg> Dimmuxx: more official probably
[23:14] <micahg> Dimmuxx: probably not till the weekend though
[23:14] <Dimmuxx> okay cool :)