[04:57] <pitti> Good morning
[07:43] <dholbach> good morning
[07:46] <jibel> good morning
[07:48] <pitti> bonjour jibel
[07:49] <jibel> bonjour pitti
[12:45] <knome> i'm trying to do upgrade tests for xubuntu, but i have problems installing Q...
[15:35] <smartboyhw> HELP FOR TESTING: Someone please test the Lubuntu images......
[15:40] <phillw> smartboyhw: no need, I'm content enough. We have a PPC iso available. that is always our 'night mare' :)
[15:40] <smartboyhw> phillw, LOL
[15:40]  * balloons lubuntu iso is only 20% dl'd
[15:40] <smartboyhw> phillw, just why don't you guys drop powerpc?
[15:40] <smartboyhw> Really wondering
[15:41] <smartboyhw> Every time when I package KDE SC apps the powerpc builds slows down or breaks everything...
[15:41] <phillw> smartboyhw: coz we're the only ones dedicated to supporting it :)
[15:41] <balloons> lubuntu is the last bastion of support for such things
[15:42] <smartboyhw> balloons, you're getting ready for a fistfight......:P
[15:42] <cjwatson> powerpc often builds faster than arm these days
[15:42] <cjwatson> well, except when sagari is down as it currently is
[15:42] <smartboyhw> cjohnston, not for me that is
[15:43]  * cjwatson goes to ask about that
[15:43] <cjwatson> I am NOT cjohnston.  1 2 3 tab
[15:43] <cjohnston> 1 + 2 + 3 + tab
[15:43] <smartboyhw> BAH forgotten that again
[15:43]  * smartboyhw bangs himself
[15:46] <phillw> I'm assuming that the arm team were not taking part in beta 1. But, the arm image under lubuntu is still under their team :)
[15:46] <smartboyhw> phillw, really?
[15:47] <phillw> smartboyhw: indeed, they are the only ones with the kit to test it :)
[15:47] <smartboyhw> phillw, grr:P
[15:47] <smartboyhw> phillw, ask in #ubuntu-arm
[15:47] <phillw> no need, they are quite organised and have their release schedule.
[15:48] <smartboyhw> phillw, anyway that's just it:P
[15:48] <smartboyhw> We don't have much to do
[15:49] <smartboyhw> phillw, upgrade testcases?
[15:49] <phillw> that's beta 2 stuff :)
[15:50] <smartboyhw> lol
[19:38] <balloons> thomi, you about?
[19:39] <thomi> balloons: just about to go to lunch - can I talk to you when I get back?
[19:39] <balloons> sure thing
[19:39] <balloons> enjoy
[19:39] <thomi> thanks
[20:49] <thomi> balloons: I'm back now, what's up?
[20:49] <balloons> thomi, well a couple things
[20:49] <balloons> we'll start easy ;-)
[20:49] <thomi>  \o/
[20:49] <balloons> are you about next tuesday ?
[20:49] <balloons> in between March 19th 1200 UTC - 2300 UTC somewhere's?
[20:50] <thomi> uhhh
[20:50]  * thomi thinks
[20:52] <thomi> balloons: it looks to me like 20:00 - 23:00 on that date would be within my working day
[20:52] <thomi> Wednesday morning for me I guess
[20:52] <balloons> yes, indeed
[20:52] <balloons> I wonder if I should roll it a bit later than that even..
[20:52] <balloons> I should tell you what I'm talking about :-)
[20:53] <balloons> in the past, we've had some hackfest sessions.. get people together to write tests
[20:53] <balloons> well, I'm planning another one of those sessions, with some tweaks
[20:53] <balloons> and we're going to include manual testing this time
[20:54] <balloons> I didn't like picking the full day, so I thought I'd try a 12 hour window where yourself, me, martin, jean-baptiste, daniel, and everyone else, could all be around during (at some point of course)
[20:54] <balloons> hey Letozaf_ and Noskcaj
[20:54] <thomi> balloons: sounds good
[20:54] <Noskcaj> hello balloons
[20:55] <thomi> but... autopilot isn;t "manual testing"
[20:55] <thomi> did you mena "automated testing?"
[20:55] <Letozaf_> balloons, Hi :D
[20:55] <balloons> since your online, what do you think of March 19th 1200 UTC - 2300 UTC as the timeframe for the hackfest?
[20:55] <balloons> thomi, yes it would be manual and automated testing
[20:55] <thomi> ahh ok
[20:55] <balloons> any test contribution :-)
[20:55] <balloons> autopilot, autopkg, manual
[20:55] <thomi> right
[20:55] <Noskcaj> sounds fine by me, i would be able to be online for the end of it
[20:56] <balloons> the other question I have is about autopilot itself, but i'll hold it for a moment
[20:56] <balloons> since I siderailed this
[20:56] <thomi> balloons: so Marth 19th sounds doabl. I think it might be a good idea to see if veebers, alesage and mzanetti would be interested in joining
[20:57] <balloons> hmm.. well your pings I'm guessing will alert them
[20:57] <balloons> I'm sorry, I left you and friends off the mail completely when I asked
[20:58] <Letozaf_> balloons, for me March 19th would be fine I can be on line at about 2000 UTC
[20:58] <thomi> balloons: heh, no worries
[20:59] <balloons> should we slide back the timeframe at all? I didn't want to roll over the day in order to not confuse people :-)
[20:59] <balloons> hence I ended at 2300
[21:00] <balloons> if not, I'll send the mail about it to the list, see what everyone thinks and probably stamp it official
[21:00] <balloons> thanks for the feedback all :-)
[21:00] <balloons> ok, so thomi the other question I had was about autopilot.. specifically I'm getting some lovely dbus warnings
[21:02]  * balloons tries to find the error again
[21:02] <balloons> essentially it stemmed from using the get_all_instances class in dbus
[21:02] <balloons> a warning about how slow it was.. and indeed, I did several calls in a row and kind of killed the test
[21:03] <balloons> ahh.. here's an example
[21:03] <balloons> 17:01:53.574 WARNING dbus:133 - Constructing object 'GeditWindow' without path information. This will make queries on this object, and all child objects considerably slower.
[21:03] <balloons> 17:01:53.574 WARNING dbus:135 - To avoid this, make sure objects are _not_ constructed with the get_all_instances(...) class method.
[21:03] <balloons> now, I'm of course using select_single and select_many
[21:04] <balloons> so a few things.. in general, I actually know the full path from my objects.. i could specify it, but I don't see how given those 2 calls
[21:05] <balloons> (I did poke in dbus.py a bit and found some interesting stuff about traversing the tree, or grabbing root nodes, etc)
[21:05] <thomi> balloons: yeah... there's a bit of a problem with autopilot right now in that regard.
[21:05] <thomi> essentially we need to change the DBus wire protocol to make it more performant
[21:05] <balloons> ok, so this is a known thing then? if so, I'll shut up about it ;-)
[21:05] <thomi> balloons: as a workaround, I recommend you use get_children_by_type multiple times to traverse the tree.
[21:06] <balloons> thomi, hmm.. ok
[21:06] <thomi> balloons: I realise it's ugly, but I'm looking at fixing this real soon
[21:06]  * balloons notes I'm always bugging thomi right before he fixes things
[21:06] <thomi> balloons: if you hide that code behind a 'get_foo_widget' method, then when autopilot gets support for more elegant selectors you can swap out the ugly code for the good stuff
[21:07] <balloons> ok.. I think we can maneuver around for know.. The second question is about focus control
[21:08] <balloons> so, when I'm using introspection i feel like I lost some of the control I had over the window (since I don't get the xid anymore), as well as knowing what's focused, and how to direct my focus
[21:08] <balloons> aka, when I type something it's a blind assumption on where the text is landing
[21:09] <balloons> that's actually a bigger problem than the other one.. aside from doing some ugly things, I was hoping you might have an insight into reining this in
[21:10] <thomi> balloons: hmmmmm
[21:10] <thomi> balloons: it seems like ideally the UI toolkit would have a 'widget_is_focused' property
[21:10] <thomi> I *think* Qt has something like this?
[21:11] <thomi> in which case you can add a 'self.assertThat(mywidget.is_ficused, Eventually(Equals(True)))
[21:11]  * balloons notes if it does, he'll just switch to writing qt autopilot only.. haha
[21:11] <thomi> balloons: I'm not saying that Gtk doesn't, I just don't know anything about Gtk at all :-/
[21:11] <thomi> perhaps charles will know?
[21:11] <balloons> thomi, yea.. being able to assert is good.. but also, I'd like to see something like
[21:12] <balloons> self.mouse.focus(object)
[21:12] <balloons> or something.. clicking a label, text field.. something
[21:12] <balloons> i suppose realistically we just manipulate the data stream
[21:13] <balloons> but gtk isn't nice in that way etheir
[21:13] <thomi> balloons: you could do that, but it seems like something's wrong if your app doesn't focus the correct window when it should
[21:13] <balloons> thomi, well it's a timing thing atm..
[21:13] <balloons> for example, I have a routine to save a file in an app.. generate a tmp file name, click the save button and type it in
[21:14] <thomi> balloons: ahhhh, so if you had a way of asserting window focus, that would solve the timing issue, right?
[21:14] <balloons> how am I to "know" when the window appears (the save window).. and I have to assume it gets proper focus as well
[21:14] <balloons> thomi, yes it would go a long way..
[21:14] <balloons> the other assumption on focus we can just continue to ignore/assume for now
[21:15] <balloons> I'd rather have more fine control, but it doesn't break things (till it does, haha!)
[21:15] <thomi> balloons: yeah, I agree that's a problem. We should look into a solution. This is probably something we should bring up at the next autopilot planning meeting
[21:16] <balloons> on the unity tests side.. does this come up for you at all?
[21:16] <balloons> I know timing was a big deal at one point
[21:17] <thomi> balloons: yeah, we had timing issues, but most of them were solved by explicitly asserting that the window was present
[21:17] <thomi> I've found that you can almost always get autopilot to wait for what you want, you just need to find the correct assertion :)
[21:17] <balloons> ah.. no subwindow issues, etc? I mean, I miss some of the bamf stuff on the introspection side of things
[21:18] <balloons> yes, if you think a little, usually there's a slick way to make ap do it :-)
[21:24] <thomi> balloons: yeah. A lot of this stuff needs to go into the new FAQ section of the documentation
[21:24] <thomi> balloons: which, BTW, would be a great place for community members to contribute to autopilot ;P
[21:24] <balloons> :-)
[21:41] <phillw> balloons: I'm trusting that only ubuntu-kylin and ubuntu-gnome are the ones approved for 13.04? :)
[21:41] <balloons> phillw, ?
[21:41] <balloons> you mean flavor wise?
[21:41] <phillw> yes
[21:41] <phillw> *new* flavor wise :)
[21:43] <balloons> ahh.. indeed
[21:47] <phillw> ta, just updating my mirror server for new comers :)