| === m_conley is now known as m_conley_away | ||
| === asac_ is now known as asac | ||
| === m_conley_away is now known as m_conley | ||
| === m_conley is now known as m_conley_away | ||
| === m_conley_away is now known as m_conley | ||
| chrisccoulson | bhearsum, when do you start pushing out new builds to nightly and aurora users? | 14:23 |
|---|---|---|
| bhearsum | nightly updates to 8 should be out already | 14:24 |
| bhearsum | Aurora updates will probably be out late this week | 14:25 |
| bhearsum | (and incidentally, Beta updates should be out tomorrow/thursday) | 14:25 |
| chrisccoulson | bhearsum, ah, ok. thanks | 14:25 |
| chrisccoulson | i'm ready to do new aurora and beta builds this week :) | 14:25 |
| bhearsum | np, that's great! | 14:26 |
| chrisccoulson | mdeslaur, it seems that you triage more useless firefox bugs than i do ;) | 14:47 |
| chrisccoulson | i wish i could automate the closing of bugs like bug 804417 | 14:47 |
| ubot2 | Launchpad bug 804417 in firefox "facebook is not opening in firefox" [Undecided,Invalid] https://launchpad.net/bugs/804417 | 14:48 |
| mdeslaur | chrisccoulson: yes, I get them out of the security so they can get properly ignored by the firefox team | 14:48 |
| chrisccoulson | thanks! \o/ | 14:48 |
| mdeslaur | chrisccoulson: np :) | 14:48 |
| chrisccoulson | how are you enjoying the royal couple btw? | 14:48 |
| chrisccoulson | it's so great to not have them over here ;) | 14:48 |
| mdeslaur | chrisccoulson: oh, they're kayaking in the northwest territories now. Would you like some pictures? :) | 14:50 |
| chrisccoulson | mdeslaur, no thanks, i'll let you keep the pictures to yourself :) | 14:50 |
| mdeslaur | chrisccoulson: for future reference, please send more tv shows to canada, and less royal couples. thanks. | 14:51 |
| chrisccoulson | mdeslaur, oh, i'm not sure you would want some of our tv shows either ;) | 14:52 |
| chrisccoulson | some of them are pretty terrible | 14:52 |
| chrisccoulson | this looks crazy: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14041973 | 14:53 |
| mdeslaur | wow | 14:54 |
| chrisccoulson | that would be really annoying for anybody who had just spent a day washing and polishing their car | 14:55 |
| mdeslaur | chrisccoulson: I was tempted to write "Try this link: http://www.facebook.com" in that bug | 14:55 |
| chrisccoulson | lol | 14:55 |
| chrisccoulson | that might be good advice | 14:55 |
| chrisccoulson | i honestly don't know what people expect us to do with bugs like that though, and that one is fairly low down on the usefulness scale ;) | 14:56 |
| mdeslaur | I think I'll just tell them to go to askubuntu.com | 14:57 |
| chrisccoulson | that will please jcastro ;) | 14:57 |
| * mdeslaur will refrain from a fake steve jobs "Have you tried OpenBSD?" type response | 14:57 | |
| chrisccoulson | lol | 14:58 |
| micahg | the convert to question response in firefox-lp-improvements suggests askubuntu.com | 14:58 |
| mdeslaur | hmm, I should edit the one the security team uses | 14:58 |
| fta | hm, no dpm :( | 15:11 |
| chrisccoulson | sigh @ https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=669625. i honestly think we should drop firefox | 17:56 |
| ubot2 | Mozilla bug 669625 in Disability Access APIs "Linux/atk support for for e10s" [Normal,New: ] | 17:56 |
| chrisccoulson | at least google try to keep chrome working on LTS versions | 17:57 |
| micahg | well, google runs on the LTS, so it behooves them :) | 17:59 |
| micahg | I mean they are commited to keeping it running | 18:00 |
| micahg | Firefox doesn't seem to be as committed to linux as a whole | 18:00 |
| chrisccoulson | indeed | 18:08 |
| chrisccoulson | and if that bug is anything to go by, then i don't see how we can realistically support firefox anymore tbh | 18:08 |
| micahg | well, they've been conservative with technologies the past even for new releases, so I think they might change their minds there once they realize the impact | 18:09 |
| micahg | chrisccoulson: workaround already proposed in that bug :) | 18:14 |
| chrisccoulson | heh | 18:15 |
| chrisccoulson | it's still concerning that we get mixed messages from mozilla. do they expect us to ship the latest version or not? | 18:15 |
| chrisccoulson | Fernando certainly didn't think that we would be :/ | 18:16 |
| bhearsum | i can't _imagine_ we would want Ubuntu LTS to ship really old Firefoxes | 18:53 |
| micahg | bhearsum: I'm still waiting to see what comes of the LTS discussions upstream | 18:55 |
| bhearsum | specifically, whether or not Mozilla is going to have LTS versions? | 18:56 |
| micahg | bhearsum: yes, and if not Mozilla, how much community support with specific knowledge of the codebase | 18:56 |
| * micahg would definitely prefer Mozilla to do it though :) | 18:57 | |
| micahg | and that's not a commitment in any way to an LTS, but rather would like to see what's on the table and then make an informed decision | 18:58 |
| bhearsum | ah | 18:58 |
| chrisccoulson | i wouldn't prefer an LTS version of firefox, but I would prefer to ship the latest version if it works ;) | 18:58 |
| bhearsum | i'm not a decision maker or anything, but i can tell you that there's very little to no energy behind doing an LTS version - of course, that could change with enough backlash | 18:58 |
| bhearsum | right now we're mostly treating it as a reaction to change, though | 18:59 |
| chrisccoulson | i wouldn't really want to cripple our users with an LTS version of firefox, and one of the blockers for adopting linux is that we make users wait 6 whole months to get new versions of apps, which they have to upgrade their entire OS to get | 19:00 |
| chrisccoulson | we certainly don't want that | 19:00 |
| chrisccoulson | well, i don't ;) | 19:00 |
| micahg | and I don't want to deal with people having their addons broke every 6 weeks or with some other regression in the browser :), but we've already had this discussion :) | 19:01 |
| chrisccoulson | well, the addon situation isn't really that bad, and will certainly improve | 19:02 |
| chrisccoulson | as i've said before, the number of users who want to run the latest outweigh the number who want an old version | 19:02 |
| chrisccoulson | and if we're ever going to achieve mark's ambition of 200 million users, then the current status quo isn't good enough ;) | 19:03 |
| chrisccoulson | users on every other single platform get the latest version of the browser, and other applications | 19:04 |
| chrisccoulson | it's only us who make users wait 6 months and then force them to ugrade their entire OS | 19:04 |
| micahg | chrisccoulson: well, I'd rather figure out how to easily give the ones who want the latest crack rather than force it on everyone | 19:04 |
| chrisccoulson | why make the majority of users who want it jump through hoops? | 19:04 |
| micahg | well, I'd consider making the LTS only on an LTS if we do indeed see it's a majority (since the LTS user would most likely prefer stability) | 19:05 |
| chrisccoulson | well, we already have LTS users asking for the latest version | 19:05 |
| micahg | but it's moot until the conversation happens upstream | 19:05 |
| chrisccoulson | i even have people inside canonical pinging me for it now (from people running lucid) | 19:06 |
| micahg | chrisccoulson: we have a PPA for them | 19:06 |
| chrisccoulson | i certainly don't support the LTS idea. i just want to make sure the version we do get works | 19:06 |
| chrisccoulson | PPA's suck | 19:06 |
| chrisccoulson | we shouldn't provide users with a crappy experience and then tell them they have to install from a PPA to get an acceptable experience | 19:07 |
| micahg | the experience depends on what your goals are | 19:07 |
| chrisccoulson | and 3.6 really is a bad experience compared to the version of chromium we ship in lucid | 19:07 |
| chrisccoulson | well, if you set your goals low, then we'll never get anywhere tbh | 19:07 |
| micahg | 3.6 wouldn't be the Firefox LTS inany case | 19:07 |
| chrisccoulson | yeah, but 3.6 is a perfect example of how quickly things date | 19:08 |
| micahg | it's 1.5 yrs old, there are proposal for 6 month LTSs or 1 yr LTSs | 19:09 |
| micahg | again, moot discussion until discussion happens upstream | 19:09 |
| chrisccoulson | and as bhearsum said - "there's very little to no energy behind doing an LTS version". i think it would be foolish to throw away all the support we get, and the testing community, to ship an LTS version that nobody really supports (other than a few linux distro's) | 19:09 |
| chrisccoulson | this actually sums up my thoughts exactly: http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/msg/8192ab9c6511119f | 19:12 |
| chrisccoulson | and http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.planning/msg/cdd6d90a4cfe83f2 | 19:12 |
| bhearsum | chrisccoulson: huh, do you not work for Canonical? | 19:14 |
| chrisccoulson | bhearsum, i do | 19:15 |
| bhearsum | oh, ok - i misread between the lines of backscroll | 19:15 |
| chrisccoulson | oh, which bit did you misread? | 19:15 |
| micahg | bhearsum: I'm the one responsible for the stable release security updates :) | 19:16 |
| bhearsum | i thought "people inside canonical" implied you weren't in that group | 19:16 |
| bhearsum | micahg: oh, cool | 19:16 |
| chrisccoulson | bhearsum, oh, sorry ;) | 19:16 |
| chrisccoulson | micahg, i'm going to try and get our firefox-next PPA building on armel btw | 19:22 |
| chrisccoulson | i spoke briefly to jelmer at the rally last week, and he seemed fairly open to the idea of letting us do that | 19:23 |
| micahg | chrisccoulson: umm, I think that's a bad idea until we get the faster arm builders | 19:23 |
| chrisccoulson | micahg, not for firefox-next, it will only be about 1 build/wk | 19:23 |
| chrisccoulson | we have no armel testing coverage at any point until we try to do a release build | 19:24 |
| micahg | um, I hope the beta channel isn't once a week | 19:24 |
| chrisccoulson | why? | 19:24 |
| chrisccoulson | i'm not sure how often builds will come from the beta channel, but i can't imagine it would be much less frequently than that | 19:24 |
| chrisccoulson | and why is that a problem? | 19:24 |
| micahg | I was still under the impression that the first beta should be the release build unless big issues are found | 19:24 |
| micahg | if they're rebuilding once a week, something is wrong with the process | 19:25 |
| chrisccoulson | well, new builds are inevitable as more people test them and find issues | 19:25 |
| chrisccoulson | i don't think that would indicate anything wrong with the process at all | 19:25 |
| chrisccoulson | and it's not like it's difficult for me to support that | 19:25 |
| micahg | well, in that case, they're really betas and not RCs | 19:25 |
| chrisccoulson | i'm already ready to push the button on the first 6.0 beta tomorrow | 19:26 |
| micahg | I'd like to actually use -proposed for extended user testing for this new process | 19:26 |
| micahg | but I can't do that if they rebuild every week | 19:27 |
| micahg | well, I could, it'll just be annoying | 19:27 |
| chrisccoulson | well, i don't know how often we'll get builds. but i honestly don't think that tomorrows beta will be the release build in 8 weeks time ;) | 19:27 |
| micahg | I think I need to talk to the RM about this and find out what the actual goal of the beta channel is | 19:28 |
| chrisccoulson | to fix all the remaining issues before release? | 19:28 |
| chrisccoulson | m_conley, did you see my comment in #ubuntu-desktop earlier, about an issue that didrocks had with thunderbird? | 19:37 |
| m_conley | chrisccoulson: no - what's up? | 19:37 |
| chrisccoulson | m_conley, he was running a nightly build (because 5.0 crashes on startup), and he hit an issue where the UI main window was displaying with no contents in the folder pane | 19:38 |
| chrisccoulson | and this error in the error console: | 19:38 |
| chrisccoulson | "Error: tree is undefined" @ chrome://messenger/content/folderPane.js:885 | 19:38 |
| chrisccoulson | and when you look at the code, that exception is actually impossible | 19:38 |
| chrisccoulson | so, we deleted the startup cache from his profile, and it worked again afterwards :/ | 19:39 |
| m_conley | chrisccoulson: hrm | 19:39 |
| chrisccoulson | obviously, not reproducible, which is helpful ;) | 19:39 |
| m_conley | chrisccoulson: yeah. :/ | 19:39 |
| chrisccoulson | i wish we'd kept the contents of the startup cache now | 19:40 |
| chrisccoulson | hindsight is a wonderful thing ;) | 19:40 |
| m_conley | chrisccoulson: no way to retrieve it? | 19:43 |
| chrisccoulson | m_conley, no, i just asked him to delete it, before i realized it might actually be useful to keep it | 19:44 |
| m_conley | chrisccoulson: and what was this about TB 5 crashing on startup? I remember you mentioning it earlier, but it strikes me as odd. How did that pass our tests? | 19:44 |
| chrisccoulson | m_conley, that's basically https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=660778 | 19:45 |
| ubot2 | Mozilla bug 660778 in JavaScript Engine "Stack Overflow Crash [@ js::gc::Cell::arenaHeader() | js::gc::Cell::address()] | ASSERTION: JSEventListener has wrong script context?: 'stack && NS_SUCCEEDED(stack- >Peek(&cx)) && cx && GetScriptContextFromJSContext(cx) == mContext'" [Critical,Resolved: fixed] | 19:45 |
| chrisccoulson | i'm not sure what conditions actually trigger it | 19:45 |
| m_conley | it's extremely strange that this got through our QA. | 19:46 |
| m_conley | chrisccoulson: oh - the patch only landed yesterday... | 19:47 |
| BUGabundo | and here comes Firefox 8.0 :O | 21:03 |
| BUGabundo | evening | 21:04 |
| === m_conley is now known as m_conley_away | ||
| chrisccoulson | is this guy spying on me? http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=11020681&postcount=471 | 22:40 |
| chrisccoulson | i uploaded that, like, 1 minute ago | 22:41 |
| chrisccoulson | ok, maybe 10 minutes ago ;) | 22:43 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!