[00:22] <hackel> Any idea on when we might see ff4b1 in mozilla-security?
[00:27] <micahg> hackel: you won't
[00:28] <micahg> hackel: it will be in the dailies this weekend, probably another week or 2 before I set up a beta PPA
[00:29] <hackel> Ohh, cool I thought 3.5 beta was in security last time, but a separate ppa is good too.  Would be much appreciated by all, thank you. :)
[00:29] <micahg> hackel: if you subscribe to the mailing list, I'll send an update as things happen
[01:38] <bobby> micahg, Javascript is still broken, even after the latest xulrunner update.
[02:02] <micahg> bobby: probably won't get an update till this weekend
[08:57] <LLStarks> dang, chris isn't around
[08:57] <LLStarks> need to ask him something
[08:57] <LLStarks> anyone around familiar with the firefox sru policy?
[09:10] <LLStarks> sup fta
[09:10] <fta> hi
[09:34] <BUGabundo_remote> morning, Turtles
[09:49] <vish> hmm , why cant i find firefox in SC :s
[09:51] <vish> oh , wait! it is titled "Safe & Easy browser...."
[10:22] <fta> BUGabundo_remote, --enable-tabbed-options
[10:26]  * BUGabundo_remote wonders what fta is talking about
[10:27] <BUGabundo_remote> you do know I'm blond, right?
[10:27] <BUGabundo_remote> you need to throw me a tiny bit more details, then a single line
[10:28] <fta> well, i expected a tabbed options UI, but it's weird, try it ;)
[10:30] <BUGabundo_remote> ahh
[10:30]  * BUGabundo_remote launches a new profile
[10:38] <BUGabundo_remote> $ chromium-browser --temp-profile --enable-tabbed-options
[10:38] <BUGabundo_remote> either I'm doing it wrong
[10:38] <BUGabundo_remote> or I don't see anything diff
[10:39] <fta> BUGabundo_remote, it's new in today's version
[10:39] <fta> but it's still in-progress, not sure what they have in mind here
[10:39] <BUGabundo_remote> sorry
[10:39] <fta> r51813 has it
[10:39] <BUGabundo_remote> dbus broken here
[10:40] <BUGabundo_remote> stuff is lagging like hell
[10:40] <BUGabundo_remote> I have to kill most apps just to get my desktop
[10:40] <BUGabundo_remote>   Installed: 6.0.460.0~svn20100708r51813-0ubuntu1~ucd1~karmic
[10:40] <fta> karmic?
[10:56] <BUGabundo_remote> fta: debian... karmic ppa is the only that works
[10:56] <BUGabundo_remote> anyone knows who can I talk about dbus/gcong?
[10:56] <BUGabundo_remote> *gconf
[13:12] <gnomefreak> firefox keeps crashing
[13:13] <gnomefreak> nevermind it just miniized for no reason and open the wrong home page.
[13:41] <gnomefreak> what is central time? -500
[13:46] <gnomefreak> and i figure out how to use date to get it.
[13:46]  * gnomefreak be back
[14:06] <fta> damn, my connection is still unstable.
[14:07] <fta> gave me the opportunity to write a nick recovery script for xchat
[14:27] <BUGabundo_remote> lol
[14:27] <BUGabundo_remote> you nerd
[14:36] <fta> BUGabundo_remote, why? should i just sit on my hands and complain instead?
[14:52] <fta> jcastro, hi, just read your last blog post, i don't really get your point. do you want to just forget about our efforts and push to have the upstream binaries in the 1st line?
[14:53] <jcastro> fta: I'm kind of thinking somewhere in the middle.
[14:54] <mdeslaur> argh, no upstream binaries
[14:54] <jcastro> fta: so ideally we just make said upstreams ubuntu developers
[14:55] <mdeslaur> It would be really great if upstreams produced real ubuntu packages, built on ubuntu, and integrated in the software centre....but...that's not going to happen
[15:08] <mdeslaur> actually I take that back, we should do everything we can to make that happen
[15:10] <jcastro> mdeslaur: right
[15:11] <jcastro> mdeslaur: that's kind of what I am getting it in my blog post, but it ended up being 5404 pages long
[15:14] <mdeslaur> jcastro: I was going to blog about how packaging isn't the problem, unstable ABI, rapid release schedules, and linux fragmentation is the problem...but...
[15:15] <jcastro> yeah, I ran out of text box
[15:15] <jcastro> but you're right about that
[15:16] <jcastro> mdeslaur: my perspective is something like this "I meet a new upstream at say a conference, they want to get in the distro but are not expert packagers" = long hard pain
[15:16] <jcastro> if they're lucky I can find a motu and/or DD to help them
[15:17] <jcastro> if not then ...
[15:17] <mdeslaur> jcastro: so, they can produce the binaries, but are having difficulties packaging them up?
[15:17] <mdeslaur> jcastro: or difficulties packaging them up for a bunch of different distros?
[15:17] <jcastro> right, so they go quick and maybe do that or throw it up in a PPA and don't bother
[15:18] <jcastro> mdeslaur: I think they see the packaging guide and the corresponding policy docs and just glaze over
[15:18] <mdeslaur> jcastro: I still glaze over when I look at them
[15:19] <jcastro> right, and you're an expert!
[15:19] <mdeslaur> I could rant for hours on how packaging is too complex, and non standardized
[15:22] <mdeslaur> this would be a good discussion over some beer :P
[15:22] <jcastro> indeed
[15:29] <fta> imho, that won't work
[15:29] <fta> and it would limit innovation
[15:30] <fta> ie, no lcd filter & no plugin finder in firefox, no app indicator everywhere, etc.
[15:31] <fta> not to mention the security nightmare, catching all embedded libs shipped by random obscure upstreams
[15:32] <fta> and also, most upstream target only 1 dist with its (often old) toolchain
[15:39] <mdeslaur> fta: hah! I was thinking about "limiting innovation" also
[15:40] <mdeslaur> fta: upstream build one binary for the lowest common denominator
[15:40] <fta> yep
[15:58] <fta> jcastro, jfyi, nda in the package name of the ubuntu font made me run away from it. i guess i'll wait until it's really out
[16:01] <jcastro> fta: we're fixing that (someone reported a bug)
[16:03] <fta> jcastro, good. for the records, i'm not scared by NDAs (i've signed quite a few over the years as part of my job), but i don't see how the concept applies here
[16:04] <mdeslaur> fta: you do know "nda" means "New Design Approval", right? :)
[16:04] <fta> lol
[16:04] <fta> so it's even more confusing
[16:05] <BUGabundo_remote> LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
[16:07] <fta> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU1qSSZDPws
[16:08] <fta> BUGabundo_remote, http://nexusonehacks.net/nexus-one-hacks/how-to-install-ubuntu-on-your-nexus-oneandroid/
[16:10] <fta> lol, that guys installs ubuntu over android using W7
[16:11] <fta> -s
[16:12] <BUGabundo_remote> I have debian on my magic :D
[16:17] <lfaraone> micahg: is there anything I can help with re Browse / pyxpcom / hulahop?
[16:18] <micahg> lfaraone: no, I just need time which I'm severely lacking ATM, thanks, I'll let you know when there's something to test
[18:47] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: hi!
[18:47] <chrisccoulson> hi jdstrand, how are you?
[18:47] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: so my little cacao endeavor did not work
[18:47] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: oh good. you? :)
[18:48] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - oh, how come?
[18:48] <chrisccoulson> yeah, i'm good thanks. been busy tidying the house today though
[18:48] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: I don't think I can adjust the overrides in release, since it is frozen forever
[18:48] <chrisccoulson> ah, thats a bit of a pain
[18:48] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: so what we have to do is build it in the ppa, then I can copy over the bits to main for next time
[18:49] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: the versioning kinda stinks though, cause jaunty and karmic have the some version
[18:49] <chrisccoulson> ok, makes sense. do you want to do that, or do you need me to do anything?
[18:50] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: I can do it
[18:50] <chrisccoulson> ok, thanks :)
[18:51] <jdstrand> meh, I need to adjust it for jaunty - maverick
[20:18] <asac> chrisccoulson: ho ... when are we getting ffox 4 :)
[20:18] <asac> in ppa?
[20:18] <micahg> asac: I hope to get to it this wekeend
[20:18] <asac> great
[20:19] <asac> thats awesome stuff :)
[20:19] <micahg> asac: then , I have to make it all in one so I can make a beta ppa with the first beta
[20:19] <asac> i saw demos that made me cry!!
[20:19] <asac> of joy :)
[20:19] <micahg> awesome :)
[20:19] <asac> micahg: yeah great. beta1 is out :)
[20:20] <micahg> asac: I'm hoping it'll rival chrome in the final release
[20:20] <micahg> asac: I wanted to ask you about enigmail, do we sync that from Debian? and should the locales stay a separate package?
[20:21] <micahg> asac: also, I think chris is taking a couple days off
[20:21] <asac> heh
[20:21] <asac> is 3.6 rollout finished?
[20:22] <micahg> asac: not yet, jaunty/karmic waiting for openjdk TCK test
[20:22] <asac> micahg: i have no strong opinion on whether we should take debian enigmail or not
[20:22] <asac> they took my enigmail and improved that, so it shoyuld be fine
[20:22] <asac> we cant sync though ... we need to change build depends
[20:22] <asac> as they have icedove-dev
[20:22] <micahg> asac: k, so as long as they're using the same packaging, we can pull from tehm?
[20:22] <micahg> asac: right
[20:22] <asac> or we introduce a icedove-dev package that pulls in thunderbird-dev
[20:23] <asac> but we probablz would have to add some magic to the build system somwhere
[20:23] <micahg> asac: I can make thunderbird-dev provide icedove-dev
[20:23] <asac> maybe try if just building the package would work
[20:23] <asac> micahg: i am not sure thats enough
[20:23] <asac> you could try in ppa
[20:23] <micahg> asac: that's what we were going to do for firefox/iceweasel so we can sync more
[20:23] <asac> or pbuilder ... but the behaviour might be different there
[20:24] <asac> sure ... makes sense
[20:24] <micahg> asac: BTW, I can upload our packageset now :)
[20:24] <asac> micahg: ++ rock on!
[21:04] <fta> asac, micahg: i don't see why 4.0/linux should be different from our 3.7... did a mega patch land or something?
[21:16] <chrisccoulson> hi asac, how are you?
[21:16] <chrisccoulson> (sorry, i took a swap day today) ;)
[21:29] <micahg> fta: it's not, I haven't had time to do the merge, if you have time, feel free :)
[22:31] <LLStarks> sup chrisccoulson
[22:32] <chrisccoulson_> hi LLStarks
[22:32] <LLStarks> please tell me that i'm wrong: http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=9562437&postcount=15
[22:33] <chrisccoulson_> asac - what are your thoughts about uploading the FF security beta's to maverick for testing (ie, 3.6.7build1)?
[22:33] <chrisccoulson_> LLStarks, well, we won't rush to upgrade every release to 4.0 when it comes out (unless 3.6 is rapidly approaching EOL)
[22:34] <chrisccoulson_> but i can't predict that far in the future ;)
[22:34] <LLStarks> 3.6 EOL is Fall 2011 IIRC
[22:34] <micahg> LLStarks: the stable PPA will have it :)
[22:34] <micahg> LLStarks: should be more like Spring 2011
[22:34] <LLStarks> 3.5 just EOL'd didn't it?
[22:34] <chrisccoulson_> LLStarks, not yet
[22:34] <micahg> LLStarks: no
[22:35] <LLStarks> i'm still confused, so 4.0 proper won't ever be in -security, but more likely that 4.0.1 or 4.1 will?
[22:36] <micahg> LLStarks: right, 4.1 will probably be
[22:36] <micahg> LLStarks: I shouldn't say that
[22:36] <chrisccoulson_> LLStarks, it all depends on timing that we can't predict yet
[22:37] <LLStarks> i see.
[22:37] <micahg> LLStarks: our hope is 3.6.x will last until hardy/karmic are EOL, then Lucid would get whatever is the current stable release
[22:37] <micahg> after the 3.6 EOL
[22:37] <chrisccoulson_> yeah, hopefully. we don't want to go through this pain again for hardy and karmic ;)
[22:37] <LLStarks> i've been scouring the mozilla wiki for EOL schedules.
[22:37] <chrisccoulson_> that would be unfortunate
[22:37] <LLStarks> no luck.
[22:38] <micahg> LLStarks: no, 3.6 should go EOL 6 months after 4.0 release
[22:38] <LLStarks> 3.6 series or 3.6.0?
[22:39] <micahg> 3.6.x or more correctly 1.9.2.x
[22:39] <LLStarks> gotcha.
[22:39] <micahg> LLStarks: like I said, we'll have the PPA for the people that can't wait for the update :)
[22:39] <LLStarks> k
[22:39] <LLStarks> is 2.0 just a relabeled 1.9.3.x or a separate branch?
[22:40] <micahg> LLStarks: renamed 1.9.3
[22:40] <LLStarks> but not mozilla 2, right?
[22:40] <micahg> LLStarks: the changes were too great to keep it in 1.9.x
[22:40] <micahg> LLStarks: yes, Gecko 2
[22:41] <LLStarks> ok
[22:42] <chrisccoulson_> heh, i disappear for a single day and we get a new bug status ;)
[22:42] <LLStarks> ?
[22:42] <micahg> chrisccoulson: that came on Wed w/the rollout
[22:45] <chrisccoulson_> micahg - oh, i never noticed that then ;)
[22:45] <micahg> chrisccoulson_: there was a discussion on the bugsquad list as well as u-d-d
[22:46] <chrisccoulson_> micahg - yeah, i just noticed your mail
[22:46] <chrisccoulson_> i tend not to read anything on u-d-d though ;)
[22:46] <micahg> chrisccoulson_: I'll have to remember that ;)
[22:47] <micahg> chrisccoulson_: I want to reply to that Ubuntu AppUpdate post explaining that Firefox cannot be offered in it because of branding issues
[22:48] <micahg> and that we already provide stable updates
[22:50] <chrisccoulson_> micahg - yeah, feel free. i just had a read of that too
[22:51] <chrisccoulson_> right, i'm going to watch a little bit of TV now :)
[22:51] <micahg> chrisccoulson_: k, enjoy :)
[22:51] <LLStarks> bug 333799
[22:51] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 333799 in firefox-3.5 (Ubuntu) (and 3 other projects) "Firefox uses en-GB by default instead of en-US (affects: 4) (dups: 2) (heat: 42)" [Low,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/333799
[22:52] <LLStarks> it's now using gb, us, au, and ca
[22:52] <micahg> LLStarks: using them all at the same time?
[22:52] <LLStarks> i'm not sure
[22:52] <jcastro> micahg: I am surprised no one had set up an AppUpdate-like thing with PPAs already
[22:53] <LLStarks> they all appear in the language tab
[22:53] <jcastro> micahg: and just snag useful bits from other ppa's on lp
[22:53] <LLStarks> and i am getting british spelling suggestions
[22:53] <micahg> jcastro: I was planning on making a tool, but I don't think I'll have time this cycle
[22:53] <LLStarks> canada and australia are both commonwealth countries
[22:53] <LLStarks> so i'm not sure
[22:54] <micahg> LLStarks: yeah, you can just change your dictionary to en-US and it shoudl remember it
[22:54] <LLStarks> it's en-gb upon installation
[22:55] <LLStarks> and i'm american
[22:55] <LLStarks> i selected america when i installed
[22:56] <LLStarks> i'm about to do reinstall of ubuntu today for unrelated reasons, so i'll see if the bug persists.
[22:57] <LLStarks> all of the langpacks are in /usr/lib/firefox-3.6.6/extensions
[22:57] <LLStarks> and aren't easily removable
[22:58] <micahg> LLStarks: right, that's why it's a triaged bug :)
[22:58] <LLStarks> okay
[22:58] <micahg> LLStarks: upstream doesn't have an en-US langpack which is part of the issue
[22:58] <LLStarks> i was just referencing it and describing new behavior associated
[23:02] <micahg> LLStarks: I know, I found it annoying too
[23:02] <LLStarks> Damn spellchecker. It's "realize", not "realise".
[23:02] <micahg> LLStarks: depends on the locale ;)
[23:03] <LLStarks> i know
[23:03] <LLStarks> that's why i'm lamenting