[00:00] <yofel> folks, the firefox-4.0 package from the daily ppa gives me: http://paste.ubuntu.com/463223/ (i386)
[00:04] <micahg> yofel: you use ubuntuzilla?
[00:04] <yofel> er, what's that?
[00:06] <micahg> yofel: ugh seems like a prerm issue
[00:06]  * micahg needs to learn that graph for when which file is used
[00:07] <micahg> yofel: which version was installed previously?
[00:07] <yofel> sec
[00:08] <yofel> Preparing to replace firefox-4.0 4.0~b2~hg20100712r47317+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd2 (using .../firefox-4.0_4.0~b2~hg20100712r47341+nobinonly-0ubuntu1~umd1_i386.deb) ...
[00:09] <micahg> yofel: ugh, that's my fault :(
[00:09] <micahg> yofel: first the profile was 3.7, then 4.0
[00:10] <micahg> yofel: tonights upgrade should fix it then
[00:10] <yofel> ok, thanks :)
[00:11] <yofel> oh great, trying to look up ubuntuzilla on sf.net results in the sf page crashing aurora and rekonq
[00:12] <micahg> yofel: I guess that's more bugs to file :)
[00:12] <yofel> indeed :D
[03:47] <micahg> yofel: I'm running the same version you were before
[03:47] <micahg> there shouldn't have been a conflict there
[09:35] <BUGabundo_remote> asac: what's the current ppa for TB 3.1?
[10:33] <asac> BUGabundo_remote: 3.1 is in daily ppa ... but seems to fail ;)
[10:33] <BUGabundo_remote> asac: wasn't micah supposed to give it own PPA?
[10:33] <BUGabundo_remote> long long agio
[10:40] <asac> hmm
[10:40] <asac> i think that never happened
[10:40] <asac> for -stable we have separtae ppas maybe
[10:44] <BUGabundo_remote> maybe
[10:44] <BUGabundo_remote> is there a stable for 3.1?
[11:41] <yofel> about bug 557240: would that be SRUable and if yes before 10.04.1?
[11:41] <ubot2> Launchpad bug 557240 in ubufox (Ubuntu Lucid) (and 1 other project) "Disable "Report a Problem" menu item for the stable release (affects: 2) (heat: 47)" [High,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/557240
[11:41] <yofel> it seems everyone forgot about that
[13:35] <chrisccoulson> yofel, nobody has forgotten about that, it's just that nobody has had time to do anything with it
[13:38] <yofel> chrisccoulson: the patch works fine here, I'm not sure if the branch I attached is correct
[15:39] <micahg> chrisccoulson: did you think about instantbird and weave yet?  I'm thinking maybe we should keep them
[15:40] <chrisccoulson> micahg - i'm not so sure about weave. how certain is it that the functionality will be merged in to FF4.0?
[15:41] <chrisccoulson> i was thinking about keeping instantbird as well though, but i want to have a play around with it first
[15:41] <chrisccoulson> it looks pretty cool
[15:41] <chrisccoulson> and the screenshots on their website are taken on ubuntu ;)
[15:42] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, I want to file an archive admin bug to add mongodb and instantbird and weave if we keep them
[15:42] <micahg> to the package set I mean
[15:42] <chrisccoulson> cool, no problem
[15:42] <chrisccoulson> i need to fix instantbird so that it builds, i'll probably do that this afternoon
[15:44] <micahg> chrisccoulson: mongodb is currently unusable in Lucid because of a problem finding mozjs, I haven't had a chance to look at it yet, it slipped under the radar during the cycle
[15:48] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yes, from all the blog posts, it looks like weave/sync will be in 4.0
[15:49] <micahg> chrisccoulson: but we're not shipping 4.0 with maverick :)
[15:50] <chrisccoulson> micahg - right, but maverick probably won't be on 3.6 for too long after release (assuming the release schedule doesn't slip, we'll probably be migrating to 4.0 early next year)
[15:50] <micahg> chrisccoulson: well, I would think, hopefully until Apr 2011 :)
[15:51] <chrisccoulson> micahg - i don't mind too much. is it building native components?
[15:51] <micahg> chrisccoulson: If we can hold out until Firefox 4.1 that'll be better, maybe we can only migrate once in the maverick cycle
[15:51] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yes, that why I think it should be kept
[15:52] <chrisccoulson> micahg - ok, so we should probably keep it then
[15:53] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I'm trying to remember if there are any other rdepends I forgot about
[15:53] <micahg> mediatomb :)
[15:53] <micahg> k, so I'll file an archive admin bug to add those 4 sources to the mozilla package set
[15:54] <chrisccoulson> thanks
[15:55] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I haven't looked at the rdepends in main this cycle yet, willl you be taking care of those?
[15:56] <asac> where is the firefox-3.7.head branch nowadays? is that 4.0?
[15:56] <micahg> asac: yes
[15:56] <asac> ah ... me changes checkout location
[15:57] <BUGabundo_remote> micahg: http://brainbird.net/file/BUGabundo-20100713T213810-mfy4wkc.jpeg
[15:57] <asac> hmm. you guys upgraded the branch to 2.0a?
[15:57] <micahg> asac: that was an accident, I wasn't warned about it
[15:58] <asac> hmm
[15:58] <asac> not my call ;)
[15:58] <micahg> asac: fta__: said to go with it and see if there are issues
[15:58] <asac> but i hate 2.0a
[15:58] <asac> because hardy users cant branch it ;)
[15:58] <asac> huge mistake by bzr team imo to make it default before hardy is EOL
[15:58] <asac> bad for bzr reputation as a relyable thing
[15:59] <micahg> asac: right, I'm going to check the branches before merging now to make sure that doesn't happen to any others
[15:59] <asac> well. its too late
[15:59] <asac> the idea was that all mozillateam branches are fine
[15:59] <asac> now there is not much point ;)
[15:59] <chrisccoulson> b'ah, my laptop is completely unusable with maverick on it :/
[16:00] <micahg> asac: at least they backport in a PPA for hardy users
[16:01] <micahg> asac: I'm confused, is xine-plugin a xul rdepend? it seems to depend on nspr
[16:01] <asac> yes
[16:01] <asac> might also use nspr directly (or nss)
[16:01] <asac> ok so after this upgrade and can remove all mozillateam branches :/
[16:01] <asac> it busted my repo
[16:02] <fta> asac, when i hit that, it was already too late
[16:03] <asac> micahg: i am pushing a good --pack-0.92 branch
[16:03] <asac> to the old location
[16:03] <asac> you can kill the 4.0 branch and replay ;)
[16:04] <asac> hmm. takes a bit longer
[16:06] <asac> i dont understand why bzr folks dont allow to lock donw the branch format. i dont want any branch to be updated by accident
[16:07]  * asac goes and deletes 3.7 branch again and hopes that launchpad forgets the format
[16:09] <micahg> BUGabundo_remote: what was the pic?
[16:09] <asac> hell how can i tell bzr to NOT stack a branch
[16:10] <micahg> chrisccoulson: do you think nspluginwrapper is ok to request as well?
[16:10] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, should be
[16:10] <micahg> asac: do you know if nspluginwrapper upstream moved or is it dead?
[16:11] <asac> dead
[16:11] <asac> it was never really alive ;)
[16:11] <asac> just got some defilbration shock treatments back then to make this working for flash 10 :)
[16:12] <micahg> asac: you mentioned before that 1.3 was a devel tree, Debian has been running it for some time already, do you think I should merge it or just try to fix the one known issue with GDK_NATIVE_WINDOWS on amd64?
[16:12] <asac> i dont care. get feedback on 1.3 in a ppa maybe.
[16:12] <asac> before upgrading
[16:13] <asac> 1.3 is a pre-alpha... but if it helps then fine
[16:13] <micahg> asac: k, thanks
[16:14] <micahg> asac: is there a channel for armel porters in Ubuntu?  I have a couple failures that I'm not sure what to do with
[16:16] <asac> grr ... i really hate bzr now
[16:17] <BUGabundo_remote> micahg: pure awesomeness
[16:30] <asac> micahg: ok i found a way .... delete branch ... run bzr init --pack-0.92 lp:~mozillateam/firefox/firefox-4.0.head
[16:31] <asac> then you can push a fresh branch of the branch i currently create using the firefox-3.7.head
[16:31] <asac> is a workaround
[16:31] <asac> seems that launchpad changed the default to stack branches, which caused the implicit upgrade bacecause it needs format 6 to support stacking
[16:31] <asac> the remote init (after delete) does the trick)
[16:32] <asac> ki will let you know when the 3.7 branch is pushed
[16:32] <micahg> asac: k
[16:32] <asac> though my branch might not be good either anymore because i did a pull initially
[16:33] <asac> (which failed, but could be its stuck in the middle wrt fromats now)
[16:33] <micahg> asac: you can run bzr check to see
[16:33] <asac> well. bzr info -v also shows a bunch of nubmers
[16:33] <asac> i think its all fine ;)
[16:33] <asac> lets see what happends when i branch after the push
[16:34] <micahg> ah, ok
[17:27] <chrisccoulson> wow, 10 minutes and counting to create a source package is just crazy
[17:35] <micahg> asac: awesome, it looks like it worked
[17:36] <micahg> fta: asac fixed the ff4.0 branch format, can I move it back into place under firefox-4.0.head?
[17:37] <fta> micahg, do it, but i assume it will break the dailies
[17:37] <micahg> fta: k
[17:42] <micahg> fta: you might want to resubscribe as well
[17:42] <micahg> fta_: you might want to resubscribe as well
[17:56] <asac> micahg: you cant move
[17:56] <asac> you have to do bzr init --pack-0.92 with the new url (e.g. creat an empty branch)
[17:56] <asac> and then you can push my branch there
[17:56] <asac> (that should work)
[18:05] <micahg> asac: yes, you can rename the branches
[18:06] <micahg> asac: and I rebranched your branch
[18:06] <micahg> so the old one won't be used anymore
[18:06] <micahg> s/rebranched/branched locally/
[18:07] <micahg> asac: and my local copy shows branch format 6 now instead of branch format 7
[18:08] <asac> yep
[18:08] <asac> also bzr info with some luck says pack-0.92
[18:08] <asac> ok out (communiting)
[18:08] <micahg> asac: on launchpad it does :)
[18:09] <micahg> asac: thanks
[19:44] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand - i pushed the pre-release version of seamonkey to the PPA today, before i realised that we haven't published 2.0.5 yet in lucid
[19:44] <chrisccoulson> is it still possible to do that?
[19:45] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: possibly
[19:45] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: well, actually, no
[19:45] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: well, possibly
[19:45] <jdstrand> :)
[19:45] <chrisccoulson> heh
[19:45] <chrisccoulson> i wasn't sure if the binaries have disappeared or not ;)
[19:45] <jdstrand> let's just say it is an operation I've not ever attempted
[19:46] <jdstrand> no, they haven't
[19:46] <jdstrand> you could delete the one in the ppa now, then move the other back in place, at which point I could publish to the archive
[19:46] <jdstrand> that should work
[19:47] <chrisccoulson> hmmm, how do i do that?
[19:47] <jdstrand> I just don't think I can publish your superceded one with our current tools
[19:47] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: if you'd like, I can do it
[19:47] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, if you don't mind, that would be great :)
[19:53] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: done
[19:53] <chrisccoulson> jdstrand, excellent, thanks
[19:53] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: how I did it was I used 'Delete packages' followed by 'Copy packages'
[19:53] <chrisccoulson> ah, ok. makes sense now :)
[19:53] <jdstrand> chrisccoulson: it is a little weird copy packages to the same ppa, but that is how you do it
[20:06] <micahg> mdeslaur: did Seamonkey never make it to Lucid?
[20:06] <chrisccoulson> micahg, it didn't
[20:07] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, should we wait a week and push 2.0.6?
[20:07] <chrisccoulson> i'd just been discussing that with jdstrand before you reappeared
[20:07] <micahg> chrisccoulson: ah
[20:07]  * micahg checks logs
[20:08] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, so 2.0.5 is going
[20:08] <micahg> great
[20:08] <chrisccoulson> micahg, yeah, that's the plan
[20:09] <micahg> chrisccoulson: are you planning on SRUing the newsblog fix in 2.0.6?
[20:09] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I also realized I forgot to do the back changelogs for hardy, jaunty, karmic
[20:09] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, probably. i need to get a SRU ack for that though
[20:10] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, I think that fix should deifinitely go in the hardy/jaunty/karmic 2.0.6 builds
[20:10] <bobby> OMG, micahg I love you, thanks for FF4.0B <3
[20:10] <micahg> bobby: enjoy :)
[20:11] <bobby> No more Java crashing :D
[20:11] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I need to make a ubuntu-mozilla-ppa-bugs project, should the owner be the team?  should the team be the bug supervisor?
[20:11] <bobby> ... There isn't a bugs project yet?
[20:11] <chrisccoulson> micahg, yeah, that should be fine (making the team the owner)
[20:12] <micahg> chrisccoulson: that means the whole team will get e-mail for the PPA bugs
[20:12] <micahg> bobby: not for PPA bugs
[20:12] <micahg> chrisccoulson: well, not because of owner, but because of bug supervisor
[20:12] <chrisccoulson> micahg - ah, maybe that's not such a good idea
[20:13] <micahg> chrisccoulson: so, should I make another bugs team for that PPA?
[20:13] <bobby> Shiretoko? When the heck did FF4 get a codename?
[20:14] <micahg> bobby: not the codename for it
[20:14] <micahg> bobby: that was 3.5
[20:14] <micahg> bobby: I'll try to fix that tonight :(
[20:14] <bobby> ... So, why am I using the Shiretoko Wbe Browser Firefox 4.0 beta
[20:14] <bobby> Oh, okay, lol
[20:14] <bobby> I was gonna say...
[20:15] <micahg> chrisccoulson: then I'll update the apport hook to report bugs there if they're from a PPA
[20:15] <bobby> Hey, anyone here know when the interface is getting update for 4.0?
[20:15] <micahg> chrisccoulson: do you want to receive the PPA bugmail?
[20:16] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, i probably should do
[20:16] <chrisccoulson> i'm just trying to work out how it works at the moment
[20:16] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, so I'll make a team with you, me and ddecator
[20:16] <micahg> assuming he wants it :)
[20:17] <chrisccoulson> micahg, we should probably have a team similar to mozilla-bugs (called mozilla-ppa-bugs or something), which we use as the bug contact
[20:18] <micahg> chrisccoulson: with a ML that's subscribed to?
[20:19] <micahg> chrisccoulson: or just for the team membership to get the bugs
[20:21] <chrisccoulson> micahg - we probably don't need a mailing list
[20:22] <chrisccoulson> we could just create the team and make mozillateam a member, much like how mozilla-bugs works already
[20:22] <micahg> chrisccoulson: k, I'll set it up tonight, probably won't fix the apport hook till the weekend though
[20:22] <chrisccoulson> (and i've just realised why i get 2 mails for every bug)
[20:22] <micahg> chrisccoulson: no, mozilla-bugs has an ML, that's why we don't get the bugs
[20:24] <chrisccoulson> micahg - ah, i get it now. we should probably do it the same way then
[20:25] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I don't think we need the overhead of the ML
[20:25] <micahg> chrisccoulson: plus these are bugs that are for prereleases, so I don't they need to be archived
[20:25] <micahg> *think
[20:27] <chrisccoulson> i'm slightly confused now. is there a team setting to not receive bug mail? i'm just wondering why i don't get mail for mozilla-bugs
[20:27] <micahg> chrisccoulson: because it goes to the Mailing list since that's the team contact address
[20:27] <chrisccoulson> ah, now that makes sense
[20:35] <bobby> Hey micahg... JS still isn't working :(
[20:35] <micahg> bobby: what do you mean?
[20:36] <bobby> Well, when I try to open up a site that uses Javascript (Newegg in particular), it just doesn't load
[20:36] <micahg> bobby: that's weird
[20:37] <bobby> The little clock thing is about 80% full, and it says "Loading..." but it never loads...
[20:38] <bobby> Java works fine though from what I've used though.
[20:39] <micahg> bobby: I'll have to look into it later
[20:39] <bobby> m'kay
[20:40] <micahg> bobby: BTW, saw an article that the new JS engine will be in around Sep 1
[20:40] <bobby> *Twitch*
[20:40] <bobby> How about July 14th?
[20:41] <micahg> bobby: it should still work, I'm talking about Jaegermonkey
[20:42] <bobby> Yeah, I know :P, Oh yeah, why is 4k video on youtube running slow :P?
[20:42] <micahg> bobby: flash or HTML5?
[20:42] <bobby> Flash :P, HTML5 on YouTube runs slow on any browser :P
[20:43] <micahg> bobby: idk, can't do anything about flash being slow
[20:43] <bobby> Is it because it is in the new 4k resolution, would that slow it down?
[20:45] <micahg> bobby: yeah, that might do it :)
[20:45] <bobby> Oh okay. BTW: HTML5 video on YouTube runs slow, but I don't think that it is FF. The player itself is what is lagging, especially the interface
[20:45] <bobby> HTML5 is too experimental ATM.
[20:45] <micahg> bobby: unless you have lots of RAM and a GPU w/RAM as well
[20:46] <micahg> bobby: well, it works pretty well
[20:46] <bobby> Hey! 4GB of DDR2 RAM, and an NVIDIA 9600M GT - 512MB dedicated, overclocked to 575MHz!
[20:47] <fta> html5/youtube is smooth here
[20:47] <fta> chromium
[20:47] <chrisccoulson> micahg - nice, i got instantbird working now
[20:47] <micahg> chrisccoulson: cool, I fix weave this weekend
[20:47] <chrisccoulson> thanks
[20:47] <micahg> chrisccoulson: BTW, 0.2 was released
[20:47] <micahg> instantbird
[20:48] <chrisccoulson> micahg - do you think we should be shipping a symlink in /usr/include/xulrunner-1.9.2.7/ pointing to /usr/include/nss, much like we do already with nspr?
[20:48] <chrisccoulson> instantbird is looking in there for the nss headers, and i'm just wondering which one is right
[20:48] <chrisccoulson> the upstream SDK has a nss folder
[20:49] <chrisccoulson> but no headers in it :/
[20:49] <chrisccoulson> oh, actually, the upstream xulrunner SDK does ship the nss headers
[20:49] <chrisccoulson> perhaps we should be symlinking those then
[20:50] <micahg> chrisccoulson: yeah, that makes sense, I think we've been patching them to use pkg-config to find teh headers
[20:50] <chrisccoulson> ok, i'll add a symlink in our xulrunner packaging
[20:52] <micahg> chrisccoulson: I think we should probably test rebuild all the rdepends against it to see if there are any issues, what do you think?
[20:52] <chrisccoulson> micahg - yeah, can do