[07:51] <Saviq> mzanetti, I wonder if we should actually bump UNITY_API_MINOR in your branch... it's not like we're affected/affecting anything with the launcher api
[07:51] <mzanetti> Saviq: I don't mind tbh... Just did it because you asked for it
[07:52] <Saviq> mzanetti, no, not that
[07:52] <greyback> morning folks
[07:52] <mzanetti> hey greyback. good morning
[07:52] <Saviq> mzanetti, I meant here http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity-api/trunk/view/head:/include/unity/shell/launcher/CMakeLists.txt
[07:53] <Saviq> hey greyback
[07:53] <greyback> mzanetti: Guten Morgen! I had a 1-on-1 German lesson yesterday. Aside from poor grammar, I'm not terrible!
[07:53] <mzanetti> Saviq: you mean that set(VERSION 2) ?
[07:53] <greyback> Saviq: eh oh
[07:53] <mzanetti> haha
[07:53] <Saviq> mzanetti, yup
[07:53] <Saviq> greyback, eh oh what?
[07:54] <mzanetti> Saviq: so what now? bump it or not? (I still don't mind at this stage of the project)
[07:54] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, bump the launcher-specific one, not UNITY_API_VERSION
[07:54] <mzanetti> ack
[07:54] <Saviq> s/VERSION/MINOR/
[07:56] <Saviq> mzanetti, we're going for the app id in the LauncherModelInterface, btw?
[07:57] <greyback> Saviq: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wyW7uaXV8E
[07:57] <Saviq> greyback, ah
[07:58] <Saviq> greyback, it was translated here into "hey-o" or similar
[07:58] <Saviq> and it's the most psychedelic thing EVER
[07:59] <greyback> :D
[07:59] <mzanetti> Saviq: yeah sure.
[07:59] <Saviq> all of Teletubbies look like the whole thing is a recording of someone's acid trip...
[08:05]  * mzanetti remembers how he had to spend 3 months in a room with like 200 teletubbies
[08:05] <Saviq> mzanetti, that explains things...
[08:05]  * mzanetti starts crying
[08:10]  * greyback hands mzanetti some acid, thinks it might help
[08:13] <mzanetti> :D
[08:19] <Mirv> does someone know the Qt bug Florian referred to me? https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-30246 "QML Text Component ignores alpha component of color property"
[08:19] <Mirv> could you test a build with two patches for it with apt-add-repository ppa:canonical-qt5-edgers/qt5-beta2 on device?
[08:21] <Mirv> Kaleo_: I'm trying to find someone to test those patches, now built successfully ^
[08:21] <Mirv> but someone more likely awake around now :)
[08:23] <Saviq> Mirv, I'll try it out in 10, ok?
[08:24] <Mirv> Saviq: excellent, thanks
[08:24] <Mirv> filed a bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/qtdeclarative-opensource-src/+bug/1198830 for it
[08:25] <Mirv> I'm not seeing anything wrong on my device with that updated, but would like to have another confirmation. preferrably by someone who knows where the bug would be seen fixed.
[08:31] <dpm> morning Saviq. We've got a bug in the calculator app that is caused by the shell killing the process on exit without notification. I'm not sure what the best project to add a bug task for might be. Do you have any suggestions? It's bug 1188292
[08:32] <Saviq> dpm, it's something the app lifecycle will handle - apps will be given some grace period to save their data / serialize their state
[08:32] <Saviq> dpm, after that they're stopped and the process is not guaranteed to be started again
[08:34] <dpm> Saviq, gotcha. Do you know where the bugs for app lifecycle are tracked? Is it platform-api?
[08:34] <Saviq> dpm, I don't think there's any place yet, as the whole thing isn't built yet
[08:34] <Saviq> greyback, any ideas ↑
[08:35] <Saviq> mzanetti, here's a breakdown of a qmluitests run http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/5854765/
[08:36] <Saviq> mzanetti, so it's 16 mins to build, 3 mins to test
[08:36] <mzanetti> Saviq: yeah...
[08:37] <mzanetti> Saviq: there are lots of things that could be tweaked. but it takes time I don't really have right now to do such stuff
[08:38] <Saviq> mzanetti, I'm not trying to drop this work on oyu
[08:39] <greyback> dpm: please log in "qtubuntu" package for now
[08:41] <Saviq> veebers, you'll be interested, too ↑↑ (pastebin)
[08:42] <Saviq> veebers, it's a breakdown of a unity-phablet-qmluitests-saucy job
[08:42] <Saviq> veebers, which suggest we're wasting time building over and over again
[08:43] <Saviq> IMO we should only build once per CI run / arch
[08:46] <Saviq> now we're building 2 times in -ci, once in mediumtests-builder, once in qmluitests, and for qmluitests we're even building in VM, which takes 16 minutes instead of 6 (unity8-saucy-i386-ci)
[08:51]  * greyback kills unity-panel-service again to stop it using a whole cpu core
[08:58] <didrocks> greyback: do you have indicator-network or indicator-clients installed?
[08:59] <Saviq> didrocks, indicators-client is a runtime dep of unity8, so yeah, probably
[09:00] <didrocks> Saviq: i wonder if it doesn't try to communicate with u-p-s and maybe there is a mismatch
[09:02] <Saviq> Mirv, +1
[09:04] <greyback> didrocks: network.
[09:04] <greyback> didrocks: that the culprit?
[09:04] <greyback> by which I mean indicators-client-plugin-network
[09:04] <didrocks> greyback: try removing it and restarts, it thowed u-p-s crazy and that's why I remove it from daily release a month and half ago
[09:04] <didrocks> not sure if it was fixed
[09:05] <dpm> thanks Saviq, greyback, added a task for qtubuntu for that bug ^
[09:05] <greyback> didrocks: thanks for the tip!
[09:05] <greyback> dpm: thank you
[09:05] <didrocks> greyback: please keep me posted
[09:05] <Mirv> Saviq: thanks
[09:12] <dednick> mzanetti: do you know what autopilot does with the console output when it's running?
[09:12] <mzanetti> dednick: it should print it at the beginning of the results output
[09:14] <dednick> mzanetti: only error's, or all output?
[09:14] <mzanetti> dednick: all output
[09:14] <mzanetti> dednick: doesn't work?
[09:14] <dednick> mzanetti: hm. not getting anything
[09:14] <dednick> https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-runner-saucy/711/testReport/indicators_client.tests.test_power/TestDisplayMenus/test_auto_bright_switch_with_mouse_/
[09:14] <dednick> mzanetti: ^
[09:15] <mzanetti> dednick: hmm... process-stdout: empty attachment
[09:15] <mzanetti> dednick: strange... should be in there...
[09:15] <dednick> mzanetti: i've never really figured out how to capture qt output though
[09:15] <mzanetti> dednick: also, the "Loading testability driver" which you can see in the process-stderr is actually a qDebug()
[09:16] <dednick> mzanetti: it doesnt seem to go to stdout
[09:25] <mhr3> didrocks, did the rebuild work on friday?
[09:26] <didrocks> mhr3: no, we still had issues, but discovered it was some regressions due to other components in proposed
[09:26] <mhr3> didrocks, which components?
[09:26] <didrocks> mhr3: so, it has been rerun without those
[09:26] <didrocks> mhr3: was quite late, didn't do the dpkg diff, but we can do those now :)
[09:27] <mhr3> didrocks, i'm just wondering if one of those components was something dbus-y
[09:29] <didrocks> mhr3: http://10.97.0.1:8080/job/autopilot-saucy-daily_release/345/, with all updates
[09:29] <didrocks> mhr3: http://10.97.0.1:8080/job/autopilot-saucy-daily_release/347/ with only the stack + xorg
[09:30] <didrocks> mhr3: and the diff: http://paste.ubuntu.com/5854882/
[09:32] <mhr3> ETOOMANY, we really need nice way to get some general dbus stats on AP runs
[09:32] <didrocks> mhr3: the thing we can be sure of is that we need to find where the regression comes from, or we'll stuck now for unity
[09:32] <mhr3> didrocks, indeed
[09:33] <didrocks> at least, we are lucky to get such a diff to know that something here makes everything screwing :p
[09:36] <didrocks> mhr3: but TBH, apart from the new udev from systemd…
[09:36] <didrocks> the only diff with patch refresh is this Add 0000-upstream-keymaps.patch: Backport latest keymap fixes from
[09:36] <didrocks>     upstream, as we won't be able to update to newer upstream releases anytime
[09:36] <didrocks>     soon
[09:38] <mhr3> didrocks, hmm, yea seems to be most likely
[09:39] <mhr3> i mean udev
[09:40] <didrocks> yep, as soon as we'll have anything merged into unity, we'll get the confirmation, but I'm a little bit afraid that will be the next issue
[09:41] <mhr3> could be an interaction of udev + something and that something might get fixed :)
[09:41] <mhr3> so called wishful thinking development :P
[09:42] <didrocks> mhr3: the diff from earlier in the morning on Friday shows the same: http://paste.ubuntu.com/5854902/
[09:43] <mhr3> theoretically could be apparmor too if it decided to disallow dbus traffic by default :)
[09:45]  * greyback bbiab
[09:47] <didrocks> mhr3: from the changelog, it's only related to sdk + apache transition
[09:51] <mhr3> mzanetti, could you look at https://code.launchpad.net/~mhr3/unity8/use-dee-filtermodel/+merge/171846/comments/387814
[09:54] <mzanetti> mhr3: done
[09:56] <mhr3> mzanetti, thx
[09:56] <mhr3> Saviq, top ack on https://code.launchpad.net/~mhr3/unity8/use-dee-filtermodel/+merge/171846 pls?
[10:04] <Cimi> Saviq, so the meeting I supposed to have last friday moved today at 3
[10:05] <Cimi> Saviq, I had a look at unity, so far I think we should make
[10:05] <Cimi> tile, ratingstarts, dash bar, panelseparatorline, maybe notifications
[10:05] <Cimi> a little bit themeable
[10:05] <Cimi> maybe panel
[10:05] <Cimi> Saviq, there's also to say that we might want to move ratingstars into the sdk
[10:06] <Cimi> and some js utils files
[10:20] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, stars should probably have light & dark mode, so yeah, SDK and theming makes sense here
[10:20] <Saviq> mhr3, done
[10:44] <dednick> Saviq: ping
[10:44] <Saviq> dednick, pong
[10:44] <tsdgeos> Saviq: greyback: i'm going to use http://paste.kde.org/~tsdgeos/791234/ to highlight the need of being able to tell a gridview the parts of it that are exposed and thus should care about it's delegate creation, what you think?
[10:45] <dednick> Saviq: hi. apparently some of the new indicator file formats are in already, and it's causing conflicts with indicators-client because it's expecting a "phone" profile. But the new indicators dont have that yet.
[10:45] <dednick> Saviq: i think this is the problem with the AP tests
[10:46] <Saviq> tsdgeos, yeah, looks good
[10:46] <dednick> Saviq: i think the test system may be installing both indicator-power and indicator-battery
[10:47] <greyback> tsdgeos: +1 from me
[10:49] <Cimi> mzanetti, did you have time to look at the calendar?
[10:49] <Saviq> dednick, having a look
[10:50] <dednick> Saviq: how does one actually have a look at the test env?
[10:50] <Saviq> dednick, doesn't look like it https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-runner-saucy/711/console
[10:50] <Saviq> dednick, I just go through that log and see what it installs
[10:51] <dednick> Saviq: what about the default installed packages?
[10:51] <mzanetti> Cimi: did you update the merge proposal?
[10:51] <Saviq> dednick, there shouldn't be any
[10:51] <Cimi> mzanetti, y
[10:51] <Saviq> dednick, it should be a minimal installation
[10:51] <mzanetti> Cimi: so no, I didn't yet. but I have time now
[10:51] <Saviq> dednick, if you want a look, mzanetti can get you to ssh in
[10:52] <dednick> Saviq: i see. in which case indicator-battery isn't being installed anyway
[10:52] <dednick> Saviq: do i need to add that to the recommended packages for unity8?
[10:52] <Saviq> dednick, yeah, no of them are installed - if they should be, we should Recommend them
[10:52] <mzanetti> Saviq: https://code.launchpad.net/~mzanetti/unity-api/launcher-api-pinning/+merge/173064/comments/387864
[10:52] <Saviq> dednick, or for unity8-autopilot
[10:52] <mzanetti> Saviq: and this is updated accordingly too: https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/launcher-backend/+merge/173189
[10:52] <Saviq> mzanetti, k, will look
[10:53] <mzanetti> dednick: let me know if you need some support with jenkins
[10:53] <mzanetti> Cimi: looking at it now
[10:53] <Saviq> dednick, but yeah, probably makes sense to add them to Recommends for unity8
[10:53] <Saviq> dednick, instead of indicators-client and the plugins
[11:04] <Saviq> mzanetti, shouldn't ::pin(appid) be ::pin(appid, index) already? maybe with a default of -1 in case it's not passed?
[11:05] <mzanetti> Saviq: hmm... ok. /me changes...
[11:05] <mzanetti> give me a sec
[11:05] <Saviq> mzanetti, k
[11:05] <Saviq> mzanetti, "Request removal an item from the model." +of
[11:07] <Saviq> mzanetti, I wonder if "applicationId" would be better, too... but not really sold - we're talking "apps" everywhere anyway
[11:17] <Saviq> mzanetti, also, triggerQuickListAction - would triggerAction be enough do you think?
[11:17] <Saviq> mzanetti, also, I think we used "invokeAction" in Notifications
[11:17]  * Saviq looks
[11:19] <Saviq> mzanetti, we have NotificationInterface::actionInvoked(QString id)
[11:20] <mzanetti> Saviq: yeah. the difference is that each Notification has a actionInvoked() slot while in the launcher there's only one for all. So I kinda prefer more descriptive names
[11:20] <mzanetti> I can change it to quickListActionInvoked() tho
[11:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, let's keep them as consistent as possible
[11:21] <mzanetti> ack
[11:30] <mzanetti> Saviq: both pushed
[11:30] <Saviq> mzanetti, cheers
[11:33] <Saviq> mzanetti, any idea about http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/5855131/ ?
[11:33] <mzanetti> Saviq: apt-get install autopilot-touch
[11:34] <mzanetti> Saviq: don't ask me why that is not integrated or a dependency or a recommends...
[11:34] <Saviq> mzanetti, same thing, autopilot-desktop was installed
[11:34] <Saviq> mzanetti, installed autopilot-touch, same, removed -desktop, same
[11:35] <mzanetti> Saviq: you need both for unity8 I think
[11:35] <Saviq> mzanetti, still, same
[11:35] <mzanetti> anyways... if that doesn't fix it... let me think
[11:36] <mzanetti> Saviq: hmm. it really looks like he can't create the touch input stuff
[11:37] <Saviq> mzanetti, I'm doing a minimal VM for autopilot, maybe I'm missing python-evdev or something
[11:37] <mzanetti> Saviq: python-evdev should be a dependency of autopilot-touch I think
[11:37] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, it's there
[11:41] <mzanetti> Cimi: fails to start because of ItemStyle.class assignments
[11:45] <Saviq> mzanetti, you need to update launcher-backend for the new interface
[11:45] <mzanetti> Saviq: on it
[11:45] <Saviq> mzanetti, k
[11:45] <mzanetti> Saviq: wait...
[11:45] <mzanetti> Saviq: launcher-backend?
[11:45] <Saviq> mzanetti, https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/launcher-backend/+merge/173189
[11:45] <mzanetti> Saviq: ah... the branch
[11:45] <mzanetti> Saviq: I thought you mean the real backend
[11:46] <mzanetti> Saviq: but yeah, I'm on it right now
[11:46] <Saviq> mzanetti, k
[11:46] <Saviq> mzanetti, while you're at it:
[11:46] <Saviq> 78	+ unity8-private | unity8-launcher-impl,
[11:46] <Saviq> 79	+ unity8-launcher-impl-0.2,
[11:46] <Saviq> 87	+Provides: unity-launcher-impl,
[11:46] <Saviq> 88	+ unity-launcher-impl-0.2
[11:46] <Saviq> mzanetti, this needs to be the same (unity-launcher-impl)
[11:47] <Saviq> mzanetti, and the -0.2 part needs to equal the VERSION you set in the branch for unity-api
[11:53] <mzanetti> Saviq: I'm not entirely sure what this should do
[11:54] <mzanetti> Saviq: can you explain please?
[11:54] <Saviq> mzanetti, unity-launcher-impl-2 == this package provides the implementation of the Launcher API version 2
[11:54] <Saviq> the Launcher API version is defined in unity-shell-launcher.pc (we'll automate extracting it later)
[11:55] <Saviq> mzanetti, Depends: unity8-private | unity-launcher-impl, unity-launcher-impl-2 means:
[11:55] <Saviq> we depend on *an* implementation of the Launcher API version 2, of which the default implementation is in unity8-private now
[11:56] <mzanetti> Saviq: hmm.. I would read it as "depend on unity8-private or unity-launcher-impl AND unity-launcher-impl-2
[11:57] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, that's the same, really
[11:57] <mzanetti> Saviq: why not just unity-launcher-impl-2?
[11:57] <mzanetti> Saviq: if unity8-private provides that, that one will be selected
[11:57] <Saviq> didrocks, why was that ↑?
[11:57] <Saviq> didrocks, it's some dpkg trickery
[11:57] <Saviq> mzanetti, ↑
[11:59] <didrocks> let me backlog to get the context :)
[12:00] <mzanetti> didrocks: the question is just why to use "unity8-private | unity-launcher-impl, unity-launcher-impl-2" instead of just "unity-launcher-impl2"
[12:00] <mzanetti> didrocks: given that unity8-private provides unity-launcher-impl-2
[12:01] <didrocks> mzanetti: to ensure we are getting the right version of the API installed
[12:01] <didrocks> so that you can't update unity8-private for instance
[12:01] <didrocks> (implementing a new version of the API)
[12:01] <didrocks> without the package that adapats on this new API
[12:01] <didrocks> otherwise, you would be able to update unity8-private for instance
[12:02] <Kaleo_> Mirv: thanks, did you find somebody?
[12:02] <didrocks> without the shell which is compatible with the new "api 2" of unity-private
[12:03] <mzanetti> didrocks: hmm.. ok... still seems a bit weird but I gess its just how it works
[12:03] <mzanetti> Saviq: updated all branchtes btw
[12:04] <Saviq> didrocks, you wouldn't be able to upgrade unity8-private, if it only provided unity-launcher-impl-3
[12:04] <didrocks> mzanetti: it's just a question of enforcing the right dep :)
[12:04] <Saviq> didrocks, and unity8 depended on unity-launcher-impl-2
[12:04] <didrocks> Saviq: right, hence the ", unity-launcher-impl-2"
[12:04] <Saviq> didrocks, I think the question is why do we need "unity-launcher-impl"
[12:04] <didrocks> ah
[12:04] <mzanetti> yeah
[12:05] <didrocks> IIRC, you told that this launcher implementation can be implemented by another component, right?
[12:05] <didrocks> than unity8-private
[12:05] <mzanetti> didrocks: could be in the future, yes
[12:05] <Saviq> didrocks, yes
[12:05] <didrocks> so you need to be able to either install unity8-private
[12:05] <didrocks> or this alternative implementation
[12:05] <Saviq> didrocks, yeah, but why not "unity8-private | unity-launcher-impl-2" directly?
[12:06]  * mzanetti still doesn't see why just "unity-launcher-impl-2" wouldn't be enough...
[12:06] <Saviq> didrocks, the other component is still required to Provide: unity-launcher-impl-$VERSION
[12:06] <didrocks> Saviq: otherwise, you loose the "force having the same implementation version"
[12:06] <didrocks> that we just discussed
[12:06] <didrocks> so, let's say you update unity8-private to unity-launcher-impl-3
[12:06] <didrocks> then, we release that
[12:06] <didrocks> I just apt-get update and apt-get install unity8-private
[12:07] <didrocks> "unity8-private | unity-launcher-impl-2" is matched then
[12:07] <Saviq> didrocks, right!
[12:07] <didrocks> and I'm screwed as I have and unity-launcher-impl-3 implementation for unity8-private
[12:07] <mzanetti> yeah.... so why use unity8-private all
[12:07] <didrocks> and a unity-launcher-impl-2 for unity8
[12:07] <mzanetti> at all
[12:07] <didrocks> mzanetti: you still need to "hint" you want to install one
[12:07] <Saviq> mzanetti, it can't only be a virtual one, right, didrocks?
[12:07] <didrocks> virtual packages are not installed
[12:08] <didrocks> Saviq: yep :)
[12:08] <Saviq> that
[12:08] <mzanetti> ahhh... ok... that was the missing link
[12:08] <mzanetti> ok. everything clear now
[12:08] <didrocks> mzanetti: you can't install a virtual package, which one to pick if multiples of them? :)
[12:08] <Saviq> didrocks, thanks
[12:08] <didrocks> yw!
[12:08] <Saviq> didrocks, random ;)
[12:08] <didrocks> we all know it always work! ;)
[12:09] <mzanetti> didrocks: I would have assumed that all providers of unity-launcher-impl-2 would show up and update-alternatives or the like would ask me which one I want
[12:09] <Saviq> mzanetti, update-alternatives is unrelated :)
[12:09] <Saviq> mzanetti, since you can't have two of unity-launcher-impl-2 installed at the same time
[12:09] <Saviq> mzanetti, as they conflict
[12:10] <mzanetti> like for example phonon backends
[12:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, and yeah, that would happen
[12:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, but then you couldn't just go "apt-get install unity8"
[12:10] <mzanetti> Saviq: right
[12:10] <didrocks> mzanetti: doesn't work well when you try to spin an iso :)
[12:11] <Saviq> mzanetti, 'cause you'd have to go "apt-get install unity8 unity8-launcher-implementation unity8-notifications-implementation ..."
[12:11] <Saviq> mzanetti, the idea is that we have the default impl
[12:11] <mzanetti> ok... I start to understand reasonings behind those things
[12:11] <Saviq> mzanetti, but the seed can override
[12:12] <Saviq> and we Depend: default | some_other, version_x
[12:13] <Mirv> Kaleo_: yes, saviq tested it, I now proposed those for upload together with the other merge I mentioned
[12:15] <Kaleo_> Mirv: great
[12:16] <Kaleo_> Mirv: do you know how long it takes from now to having it in the ouch image?
[12:16] <Kaleo_> +t
[12:17] <didrocks> Saviq: exactly, the default is always the first one that apt will pick if we don't have one already seeded/installed
[12:19] <Mirv> Kaleo_: seb128 promised to upload it already earlier, so I believe we can ping him also now on this updated proposal https://code.launchpad.net/~timo-jyrinki/ubuntu/saucy/qtdeclarative-opensource-src/merge_continued/+merge/173448
[12:20] <Mirv> Kaleo_: it'd be in tomorrow's builds with luck then
[12:22] <Cimi> mzanetti, comment it
[12:22] <mzanetti> Cimi: yeah. I removed it from 5 places or so until it starts up
[12:22] <Cimi> mzanetti, it's weird cause I remember to comment everything here locally...
[12:22] <seb128> Mirv, yeah, it's on my todo but I got busy, I wouldn't say no if didrocks or the day patch pilot would handle it ... will try to have a look today otherwise
[12:22] <mzanetti> Cimi: but then the calendar just says white
[12:23] <didrocks> same, I'll try to get to it if I get a chance
[12:23] <mzanetti> Cimi: oh... I had trunk for some reason... works with your branch
[12:23] <Kaleo_> Mirv: great
[12:23] <Cimi> mzanetti, ah ok :)
[12:29] <Mirv> yeah, I'd have qtbase and now qtpim uploads tested and ready as well, but I'll wait until someone gets to that qtdeclarative first :)
[12:58] <Saviq> tvoss, TheMuso, I only just noticed the invite, won't be able to be there before 15 mins
[12:58] <tvoss> Saviq, ack :) themuso, you about?
[13:13] <tvoss> mterry, ping
[13:13] <mterry> tvoss, i just guessed on a time for you
[13:13] <mterry> tvoss, should have thought of pinging you first  ;)
[13:14] <tvoss> mterry, the time is okay-ish, but: a day ahead would help me :) Can we move the meeting to Tuesday?
[13:14] <mterry> tvoss, sure
[13:16] <tvoss> mterry, thx :)
[13:16] <tvoss> Saviq, TheMuso does not seem to be around, will reschedule the meeting
[13:23] <Saviq> guys, I gotta skip standup, got a guy coming to fix my cool
[13:30] <paulliu> mhr3: I found that there's no resulttype in your branch? How do I get that value?
[13:33] <paulliu> mhr3: should I add that by myself in categoryresults.cpp?
[13:33] <mzanetti> dednick: standup
[13:33] <mzanetti> Saviq: will you join?
[13:34] <greyback> Cimi: standup?
[13:34] <Saviq> mzanetti, <Saviq> guys, I gotta skip standup, got a guy coming to fix my cool
[13:34] <mzanetti> nic-doffay: standup
[13:34] <greyback> nic-doffay: standup?
[13:34] <Saviq> greyback, nic's out
[13:34] <greyback> Saviq: ta
[13:38] <greyback> kgunn: any link to XMir debug doc?
[13:45] <Saviq> dednick, conflict on indicators-client branch
[13:46] <kgunn> greyback: https://code.launchpad.net/~kgunn72/mir/add_xmir_debug_guide/+merge/173260
[13:46] <greyback> kgunn: thanks
[13:46] <kgunn> greyback: only a start....if you have something to add...feel free :)
[13:48] <dednick> Saviq: ta
[13:53] <mhr3> paulliu, hardcode it to 0, there's no need for dash nor scopes to know
[13:55] <greyback> kgunn:  noticed a few typos, hope you don't mind
[13:55]  * greyback really needs to eat something today
[13:56] <kgunn> greyback: aboslutely...let me have it
[13:56] <greyback> kgunn: added as MR comment.
[13:56] <kgunn> greyback: great...go eat
[13:57]  * greyback eating
[14:00] <tvoss> Saviq, ping
[14:42] <Saviq> tvoss, pong
[14:42]  * Saviq has a new mobo and heatsink... still hot as hell...
[14:52] <tsdgeos> Saviq: get some AC ¿ :D
[14:52] <Saviq> :P
[15:05] <Saviq> dednick, http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/indicators-client/revision/101 should be a separate MR against trunk
[15:06] <dednick> Saviq: yeah. i thought it probably should. i'll revert it
[15:30] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, leave it in
[15:31] <Saviq> mzanetti, just noticed you took it off the MR, last response from me just went out
[15:31] <mzanetti> Saviq: no, not on purpose... just clicked "reply" instead of "reply all"
[15:31] <Saviq> mzanetti, k
[15:31] <Saviq> mzanetti, you're actually *clicking*? ;)
[15:31] <mzanetti> haha
[15:31] <mzanetti> yes, sometimes I do
[15:31] <mzanetti> :D
[15:32] <Saviq> my left hand is just used to Ctrl+Shift+r already
[15:33] <mzanetti> hmm... its actually even easier in kmail... its just "a"
[15:33]  * mzanetti tries to remember
[15:38] <nic-doffay> Saviq, re the scrolling container. Would it make sense to make this a separate SDK or something specific to the option selector? If it's the latter I can just move it out...
[15:39] <nic-doffay> *separate SDK component.
[15:41] <Saviq> nic-doffay, it shouldn't be specific for the option selector, it should be generic for any component inheriting the Expandable
[15:41] <Saviq> nic-doffay, which right now in the SDK would only be the Option Selector
[15:41] <Saviq> nic-doffay, but the messaging entries in the indicators would be another
[15:41] <nic-doffay> Saviq, cool, I'll chat further to the sdk guys about the specifics.
[15:50] <Saviq> mzanetti, don't we need something like "type" role in QuickListModelInterface?
[15:50] <Saviq> mzanetti, like for the separator at least
[15:51] <mzanetti> Saviq: afaik we won't have such things in the first iteration. Thats because I removed all those properties again
[15:51] <Saviq> mzanetti, not even separators? please make sure that's the case
[15:52] <mzanetti> Saviq: however, my proposal had a groupId
[15:52] <Saviq> dednick, https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-runner-saucy/726/? same error again
[15:52] <mzanetti> Saviq: I think that could paint separators between different groups
[15:52] <Saviq> dednick, it did install indicator-battery this time
[15:53] <pstolowski> bschaefer: morning!
[15:53] <bschaefer> pstolowski, hello!
[15:53] <Saviq> mzanetti, I think that'd not be flexible enough
[15:53] <mzanetti> Saviq: yeah... probably right... just thought a bit more about it
[15:53] <mzanetti> Saviq: so yes, in the long run we'd need that
[15:54] <pstolowski> bschaefer: thanks for another look at my MP! can you top-approve today?
[15:54] <Saviq> mzanetti, and IIRC that's how it is now - you can just add a separator anywhere you like
[15:54] <bschaefer> pstolowski, yup! any changes?
[15:54]  * bschaefer digs up MP
[15:54] <pstolowski> bschaefer: nope. https://code.launchpad.net/~stolowski/unity/no-click-preview-for-apps/+merge/172787
[15:54] <Saviq> mzanetti, k, let's get to it when we need i
[15:54] <Saviq> t
[15:54] <bschaefer> pstolowski, awesome, approved :)
[15:55] <pstolowski> bschaefer: thanks!
[15:55] <bschaefer> np!
[15:56] <Saviq> mzanetti, is there fewer entries in the launcher now?
[15:57] <pstolowski> didrocks: hey, the most hated behavior about to be disabled, it's ready to land ^ :)
[15:57] <dednick> Saviq: hm. thats weird. succeeded earlier.
[15:57] <mzanetti> Saviq: hmm... shouldn't be
[15:58] <dednick> Saviq: maybe a instability rather than "not working"
[15:58] <Saviq> dednick, it didn't run the indicators_client suite
[15:58] <didrocks> pstolowski: \o/
[15:58] <Saviq> dednick, we only enable that suite manually (with "Rebuild") now
[15:58] <dednick> Saviq: ah
[15:58] <didrocks> pstolowski: autopilot tests are compatible?
[15:58] <Saviq> dednick, as otherwise we'd just fail
[15:58] <mzanetti> Saviq: no, its the same as the released version
[15:58] <mzanetti> Saviq: the new animation makes it look a bit less indeed
[15:58] <Saviq> mzanetti, k, was tricked
[15:58] <Saviq> mzanetti, ah there is a new animation
[15:59] <Saviq> mzanetti, like the fact that the last and first two items fold ~together?
[15:59] <mzanetti> Saviq: no... I mean the one with the fading out icons... as opposed the stack I had in the first revision
[15:59] <Saviq> mzanetti, right
[15:59] <Saviq> mzanetti, is it on purpose then that the first and last two items fold almost together?
[16:00] <mzanetti> Saviq: yep
[16:00] <Saviq> feels inconsistent to me...
[16:00] <Saviq> but hey
[16:00] <mzanetti> :D
[16:01] <tsdgeos> meh, the range for delegate creation is harder than i expected
[16:01] <tsdgeos> dumb optimist me
[16:01] <Saviq> tsdgeos, :/
[16:02] <tsdgeos> Saviq: it's not ultra hard
[16:02] <tsdgeos> but there's more parts of the code that expect that if nothing changed you don't need to care about culling/unculling the items
[16:02] <tsdgeos> and now i do
[16:02] <Saviq> tsdgeos, right
[16:02] <tsdgeos> i'm almost there
[16:02] <mzanetti> ultra hard :)
[16:03] <tsdgeos> but still need to fix a few small issues with my example qml code
[16:04] <Saviq> mzanetti, 178	+ * Note: If an item is not contained in the launcher yet, calling this without an index
[16:04] <Saviq> 179	+ * will fail to pin the item.
[16:04] <Saviq> mzanetti, should just pin at the end
[16:04] <Saviq> mzanetti, is what happens now
[16:04] <mzanetti> Saviq: ah ok...makes sense
[16:04]  * mzanetti fixes
[16:05] <Saviq> mzanetti, 186	+ * Note: In case the according application is running, it will only
[16:05] <Saviq> 187	+ * disappear once the application is closed. In this case, this
[16:05] <Saviq> 188	+ * operation just unpins the item.
[16:05] <dednick> Saviq: runs from installer on my box. no idea why it's failing
[16:05] <Saviq> mzanetti, that's too much, I'd say - it should really only say "it might be delayed for different reasons"
[16:05] <mzanetti> Saviq: fixing
[16:06] <Saviq> dednick, do you want access to a machine today to test, or tomorrow?
[16:06] <pstolowski> didrocks: I think so, but you know whom to attack if there are new failues.. ;)
[16:06] <dednick> Saviq: yeah, that would be usefull
[16:06] <didrocks> pstolowski: hehe, sure!
[16:07] <Saviq> dednick, you want to try and tackle it today?
[16:07] <dednick> Saviq: yeah
[16:07] <Saviq> fginther, could we have a jenkins machine unhooked for dednick to debug some autopilot issues?
[16:08] <fginther> Saviq, sure, i386 or amd64?
[16:08] <Saviq> dednick, ↑?
[16:08] <dednick> fginther: amd64 please
[16:08] <Saviq> dednick, fginther I'd suggest i386 :)
[16:08] <Saviq> dednick, as you can then get http://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-builder-saucy/817/artifact/work/output/*zip*/output.zip
[16:09] <Saviq> dednick, and test on the packages the builder came up with
[16:09] <dednick> Saviq: ok.
[16:09] <Saviq> dednick, btw, if you look at https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-runner-saucy/726/console
[16:09] <Saviq> dednick, the lines prefixed with +
[16:09] <Saviq> dednick, are usually the command lines run
[16:09] <fginther> dednick, ps-saucy-server-i386-3 is all yours
[16:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, what's the IP to naartije? naartjie? naartje?
[16:10] <Saviq> dednick, so if you follow those, you should be able to get to where jenkins fails
[16:11] <mzanetti> Saviq: .0.6
[16:12] <Saviq> dednick, so you can ssh to ubuntu@10.97.0.6
[16:12] <Saviq> dednick, and then from that ps-saucy-server-i386-3 should resolve
[16:12] <Saviq> fginther, it's down, though, is it?
[16:12] <Saviq> $ ssh ps-saucy-server-i386-3
[16:12] <Saviq> ssh: connect to host ps-saucy-server-i386-3 port 22: No route to host
[16:13] <dednick> Saviq: ya, getting that as well
[16:16] <Saviq> mzanetti, for 186	+ * Note: In case the according application is running, the actual removal of the
[16:16] <Saviq> 187	+ * item will be delayed
[16:16] <fginther> dednick, now try it
[16:16] <Saviq> mzanetti, I meant that "in case .... is running" is a detail I don't think makes sense to mention there
[16:16] <Saviq> mzanetti, i.e. it's the backend's decision when will it remove the item
[16:16] <mzanetti> Saviq: ah. sorry
[16:16] <mzanetti> yeah, changing
[16:16] <Saviq> mzanetti, don't be
[16:17] <dednick> fginther: yep, working now
[16:17] <mzanetti> Saviq: ok with this: * Note: The actual removal of the item might be delayed in certain circumstances.
[16:18] <Saviq> mzanetti, +1
[16:18] <Saviq> mzanetti, QuickListModelInterface::roleNames creates the list every time, too
[16:18] <Saviq> mzanetti, 289	+} // unity
[16:18] <Saviq> 290	+} // shell
[16:18] <Saviq> 291	+} // launcher
[16:19] <Saviq> mzanetti, reverse
[16:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, why do we have MockLauncherModel::pin, ::requestRemove, ::quickListActionInvoked, ::findApp, if we're not testing it in lp:unity-api?
[16:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, I mean why do we have them implemented
[16:21] <Saviq> same for MockQuickListModel
[16:22] <mzanetti> Saviq: there needs to be something so that the test if the function exists succeed. But yeah... the logic in the mocks is probably not that useful...
[16:22] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, just { } should be enough
[16:22] <Saviq> mzanetti, there's an indent issue in test_quicklist_model_roles_data() with the brackets
[16:23] <Saviq> mzanetti, and yeah, do we actually want test_pinning and test_remove there
[16:24] <mzanetti> Saviq: yeah... that would need to go if the mock code goes away
[16:24] <Saviq> mzanetti, I know it's tempting to put them there :)
[16:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, but those tests ideally should not test behaviours
[16:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, as they can be different per implementation
[16:25] <mzanetti> Saviq: yeah... agreed
[16:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, I will remove those from notifications probably
[16:26] <Saviq> mzanetti, do you want to push it through today/tonight? or shall we wait until tomorrow morning just in case?
[16:27] <mzanetti> Saviq: just in case of what?
[16:27] <Saviq> mzanetti, in case they both don't merge before daily release takes over
[16:28] <mzanetti> Saviq: ah... hmm... if you think tomorrow would be safer, I'm fine with that...
[16:28] <Saviq> mzanetti, what I mean is "do you want to go away and have your evening or do we want to push it through and you'll be around in case something needs tweaking?"
[16:28] <Saviq> mzanetti, your call
[16:28] <mzanetti> Saviq: I'm fine here
[16:30] <Saviq> mzanetti, ok, so for unity-api I'm +1 after the last few tweaks
[16:30] <Saviq> mzanetti, same for launcher-backend it seems, just a few last tweaks remaining
[16:32] <mzanetti> Saviq: ok. I think everything fixed and pushed
[16:34] <Saviq> mzanetti, ah, http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/5855854/
[16:35] <mzanetti> dammit
[16:37] <Saviq> mzanetti, _data() indentation is inconsistent with brackets, but I'll let it slide ;)
[16:37] <mzanetti> Saviq: can fix it, np
[16:37] <Saviq> k
[16:38] <mhr3> Saviq, btw now that scopes have the formfactor prop, could you guys set it to somewhere?
[16:38] <mhr3> to something...
[16:38] <Saviq> mhr3, k, will do
[16:39] <Saviq> mhr3, it's on the Scope class, right?
[16:39] <mhr3> Saviq, yep
[16:39] <Saviq> mhr3, k
[16:39] <mhr3> Saviq, should affect the apps lens at least
[16:42] <mzanetti> Saviq: ok, now it should be ok...
[16:45] <Saviq> mzanetti, k, here's my last comment for launcher-backend https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/unity8/launcher-backend/+merge/173189/comments/388094
[16:45] <Saviq> mzanetti, I've approved unity-api, will be back in 1/2 hr to see what's what and make sure unity8 lands
[16:45] <Saviq> mzanetti, thanks!
[18:49] <fginther> dednick, still using that VM?
[19:12] <dednick> fginther: yep
[19:13] <fginther> dednick, ok, just checking
[19:13] <dednick> fginther: i'll let you know when i'm done
[19:13] <fginther> dednick, thx
[19:44] <kgunn> mterry: ping
[19:46] <mterry> kgunn, h
[19:46] <mterry> i
[19:47] <kgunn> mterry: hey...just curious...wrt https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Touch/Testing/Mir
[19:47] <dednick> fginther: ping
[19:47] <kgunn> i know you are a N7 user
[19:47] <kgunn> any caveats there ?
[19:47] <fginther> dednick, hello
[19:47] <dednick> fginther: hi. do you know how to turn on the debug logging in autopilot?
[19:47] <kgunn> e.g. "this doesn't work on N7" :)
[19:48] <mterry> kgunn, yes, those are instructions I was following to try to get N7 to work, (and theoretically would let it work), but when I got to the end, nothing showed on screen after all
[19:48] <fginther> dednick, 'autopilto run -v -v test-suite' I think
[19:48] <mterry> kgunn, so "this doesn't work on N7, but it should and I don't know why not"
[19:49] <dednick> fginther: thanks, that did it
[20:42] <dednick> Saviq: figured out the AP issue. the indicators-client app is starting at a negative x/y which is screwing with the pointer. Dont know why it's starting at that position though :(
[20:42] <Saviq> dednick, ugh!
[20:42] <Saviq> dednick, I thought the window was quite small in the videos...
[20:43] <Saviq> but wouldn't have guessed
[20:44] <dednick> Saviq: yeah. me too. i've been screwing around with object introspection for the last few hours before i found that out.
[20:44] <Saviq> dednick, is the window set up the same way as in main.cpp for unity8?
[20:46] <dednick> except for the explicit size, i think so.
[20:46] <dednick> I'm trying it with explicit sizing and see how it goes.
[20:46] <dednick> Saviq: have to check it in detail some more
[20:47] <dednick> Saviq: AP specifies an explicit size for the window in unity8. Also the grid size.
[20:47] <Saviq> dednick, right, that might be what's helping (we need that for testing for different devices)
[20:47] <Saviq> dednick, but obviously it should work fine without
[20:48] <dednick> Saviq: i think unity8 is also started frameless.
[20:48] <Saviq> dednick, yeah, but that shouldn't be an issue
[20:49] <dednick> Saviq: but yeah. not sure why either would change anything. it's not position related, it's all about size.
[20:50] <Saviq> veebers, ping
[20:51] <veebers> Saviq: pong
[20:51] <Saviq> veebers, hey, we're trying to get a job like so https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-saucy/815/parameters/?
[20:52] <Saviq> veebers, working with two test suites (note there's unity8 and indicators_client)
[20:52] <Saviq> veebers, dednick just found out the window in indicators_client is laid out at negative geometry
[20:53] <Saviq> veebers, which makes the tests fail 'cause the input can't reach the right coords
[20:53] <Saviq> veebers, would you have time to investigate? or even have a ready-made solution?
[20:53] <veebers> Saviq: I can have a look today and see what I can find
[20:53] <Saviq> veebers, one thing dednick's not doing in the indicators_client suite is that he's not setting the geometry explicitly in autopilot
[20:54] <Saviq> veebers, which we're doing for unity8 (which tests fine
[20:54] <veebers> Saviq: sure, cheers that gives me a good starting place
[20:54] <Saviq> veebers, so that could probably be one solution - but then it'd be surprising if that's really required
[20:55] <Saviq> dednick, and you man go away
[20:55] <veebers> Saviq: I've been meaning to look closer at the geometry/setup of the tests, so this will be the start :-)
[20:55] <Saviq> veebers, yup, thanks
[20:56] <veebers> Saviq: nw
[20:57] <dednick> veebers, Saviq: ta
[20:58] <veebers> Hi dednick :-)
[20:59] <dednick> veebers: Hi :)
[20:59] <dednick> veebers: just ran a test on jenkins, looks like setting explicit geo in qt fixes the issue
[20:59] <dednick> https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-runner-saucy/735/testReport/junit/indicators_client.tests.test_battery/TestDisplayMenus/test_auto_bright_switch_with_mouse_/
[20:59] <dednick> it got further
[20:59] <veebers> dednick: ah ok. I'll look into the setup and need for the geo etc. today
[21:00] <dednick> veebers: thanks
[21:25] <Saviq> veebers, one more question - I'm trying to build a minimal VirtualBox VM we could use for autopilot / UI tests that would not take your host over
[21:25] <Saviq> veebers, everything seems almost fine except that autopilot errors out with http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/5856659/
[21:26] <Saviq> veebers, any idea what I'm missing
[21:26] <Saviq> ?
[21:27] <Saviq> veebers, I could get you a more complete and verbose log from autopilot if it'd help
[21:34] <dednick> Saviq: now indicators-battery-service is seg-faulting :)
[21:34] <Saviq> dednick, right
[21:34] <dednick> Saviq: which means i'm going to bed
[21:34] <dednick> :)
[21:34] <Saviq> dednick, go to sleep! veebers is having a look at the autopilot issue
[21:35] <dednick> Saviq: ok. the remaining issue i think is because indicators-battery-service is not running on jenkins (it crashes on startup), so the indicator menu isn't being populated.
[21:36] <dednick> veebers: ^
[21:36] <Saviq> dednick, you sorted out the geometry?
[21:36] <Saviq> dednick, by explicitly sizing in autopilot?
[21:36] <dednick> Saviq: setting it explicitly fixes, but not auto
[21:36] <Saviq> dednick, right
[21:37] <dednick> Saviq: the fix is in a debug branch at the moment. https://code.launchpad.net/~nick-dedekind/unity8/indicators-client.jenkins-debug/+merge/173563
[21:38] <Saviq> dednick, k
[21:38] <dednick> fginther: i'm done with the VM.
[21:39] <fginther> dednick, thanks
[21:47] <veebers> Saviq: that's odd, I'll take a look at it now