/srv/irclogs.ubuntu.com/2013/11/21/#ubuntu-uds-client-2.txt

=== ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-uds-client-2 to: Currently no events are active in this room - http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1311/client-2/ - http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2013/11/21/%23ubuntu-uds-client-2.html
=== tvoss_ is now known as tvoss|test
=== tvoss|test is now known as tvoss
=== ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-uds-client-2 to: Track: Core | Make click apps runnable from the Unity7 dash | Url: http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1311/meeting/22035/core-1311-clicks-in-unity7/
dholbachhey hey13:55
dholbachso who wants to join in on this one?13:55
cjwatsonI'll be along soon, but you should just paste the hangout URL in here :-)13:55
cjwatson(still having lunch)13:56
dholbachhttps://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/7ecpjgq5mep8il0idsc30qv9eo13:56
dholbachalecu, are you going to join as well? ^13:59
mdeslauro/14:01
dholbachanyone else who wants to join in?14:02
beunodholbach, I'm around in case I'm needed, but I think this doesn't concern the store atm14:02
beunoI'll listen in and feel free to drag me in if needed14:03
beunodholbach, you look cold14:04
tedgbeuno, It seems everyone in Germany wares scarfs.  Not sure I'm comfortable visiting anymore.14:06
beuno+114:07
mdeslaurhehe14:07
Saviqlol14:07
dholbachnotes are here: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1311-core-1311-clicks-in-unity714:07
dholbachbeuno, yep, got a cold :)14:07
dholbachbut it's all right14:08
asacyes, we should not risk our "click store reputation" on security14:11
tedgWe should run through XVnc and then back through a VNC client.14:15
tedgMost of the integrations are via DBus, so aa-exec-click would secure those.14:16
dobeytedg: under an xvfb that's 480x960 px to match common phone res?14:16
tedgdobey, On it!14:18
tedgSounds like a command line only GSettings key14:19
dobeyalecu, dholbach: also there's the work on the emulator, for developers to use14:21
dholbachdobey, yep, that's right14:21
tedgbregma, No, not really.  Clicks are per-user, so we won't put the desktop files in.14:22
tedgbregma, They binaries are there, but no desktop file.14:22
dholbachcan somebody help a bit with taking notes? http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1311-core-1311-clicks-in-unity714:22
tedgIs the nested X stuff driver dependent?14:23
tedgI thought there was some issues on nvidia?14:23
dobeyglx inside nested X can be a problem14:26
tedgMy thoughts are that it's interesting, but probably not worth the time.14:26
dobeydriver doesn't matter14:26
jdstrandglx in nested X was a problem the last time I looked14:26
tedgdobey, It's X, drivers are tied to everything :-)14:26
jdstrandxpra has bugs open to make it better, but back then, they were already open for a long time14:27
dobeytedg: doesn't matter which driver you are using though. glx in nested X is a problem with all of them :)14:27
jdstrandI am not up to date14:27
Saviq~/.local/share/applications14:27
Saviq↑↑14:27
Saviqunity7 does pick those up14:28
tedgWait, so where do we want to put the click package desktop file?14:29
tedgIt seems to me it either needs to be in ~/.local/share/applications or not exist.14:30
dobeynowhere different to where we put them now14:30
cjwatsonSounds like the consensus was leave them in the same place but add X-Only-Show-In or whatever it is14:31
dobeyOnlyShowIn/NotShowIn14:31
tedgWhat would that OnlyShowIn be for?  Unity 8?14:32
dobeyyes, presuming "Unity8" is a different valid name, from "Unity"14:32
tedgThen why don't we just not create it?  It seems like Unity8 could just put the data in a small cache better than building a desktop file.14:33
dobeywhich would be a bit weird when we get to the point of not having unity7 any more14:33
dholbachcan somebody please help with summarising of what Colin just said? I was a bit busy taking some other notes: http://pad.ubuntu.com/uds-1311-core-1311-clicks-in-unity714:35
cjwatsondoing so14:38
alecucjwatson, dobey: there's a X-Ubuntu-Touch=true in apps installed from the click store. Perhaps we should just ignore those in the unity7 app scope?14:39
cjwatsonalecu: there are other desktops to consider too14:40
cjwatsonit seems that it might be safer to use something affirmative rather than negative14:40
tedgI'm confused why we want desktop files at all if they're OnlyShowIn=Unity814:40
dobeyi don't think NotShowIn/OnlyShowIn will be usable here14:41
cjwatsonwe still use them for unity8, don't we?14:41
cjwatsoneven if they mostly shunt through to upstart-app-launch14:41
tedgcjwatson, Kinda, but we coudl just move the desktop hook to build the cache for the apps scope instead of the desktop file.14:41
cjwatsondobey: why not OnlyShowIn?14:41
tedgThe desktop file itself is an inefficient connection point.14:42
cjwatsonwell, if we aren't using desktop files the whole thing's moot; but I'm unclear as to whether we should couple this work to that?14:42
dobeycjwatson: because there's no difference between "Unity" and "Unity8" and it would probably be a lot of work to add it.14:42
dobeycjwatson: currently there is only "Unity" as an option there14:42
tedgcjwatson, It seems like the WI's could be "drop desktop hook from UAL" and then "put desktop hook to build cache for Unity8"14:43
dobeyi don't see why we should bother hiding the click apps at all though. if they're installed, they should be discoverable14:43
dobeytedg: i'd really not want to do that. it means rewriting a large portion of the click scope14:44
dobeyjdstrand: +1 on keeping desktop files14:45
tedgdobey, The first step could be writing the desktop files to ~/.local/click-scope/applications and then migrating to something more sophisticated over time.14:45
jdstrandwhat about other DEs that move to mir?14:46
tedgNot sure.  It's an interesting question.14:46
jdstrandthey need to then adjust for this click path too14:46
tedgWe'd need a way to know that they're running Mir.14:46
tedgOtherwise we get back to the "nobody trusts us anymore" problem.14:46
mdeslaurin our fallback wrapper that is being used in the desktop file, we detect X and print a warning dialog if it's running14:47
alecumdeslaur: so, that would be if we don't move them out of  ~/.local/click-scope/applications, right?14:48
dobeymdeslaur: only because X is insecure in the context of confining click apps?14:48
mdeslaurdobey: yes14:49
tedgSecurity: It'll never catch on.14:49
tedgNo, but I'm kinda unclear what we decided.14:50
alecu"This app may be insecure. You may run it slowly under xephyr. [don't run it] [run under xephyr] [run it normally anyway]"14:50
dobeycan we make the click scope just not be used by unity7, too?14:52
tedgBasically allow them to comment out the block in aa-exec-click.14:52
alecudobey: it's currently being used on unity7, remember that most of unity-lens-app was merged into it.14:52
tedg# Comment out this line if you want to give all your data to everyone14:53
cjwatsonOr similar :-)14:53
dobeyalecu: only if you install it, will it be used by unity7 currently14:53
dobeyalecu: the switch to use it exclusively for apps was only on the touch image for saucy at least14:53
tedgmdeslaur, If we don't, askubuntu will.14:54
alecudobey: ah, right14:54
cjwatsonit's in universe right now so I'm pretty sure it isn't being used in unity7 by default :)14:54
tedgmdeslaur, Better to give them with appropriate scariness included.14:54
dobeyalso, what about click apps that are just links to web sites? should those be confied to requiring Mir or the touch browser?14:54
dobeyor should they work and run firefox/chrome/whatever14:54
mdeslaurdobey: links to web sites?14:55
dobeymdeslaur: the click "web apps"14:55
alecudobey: there's no way of telling web apps from standard apps as far as the scope is concerned14:55
mdeslaurdobey: oh, those run confined too14:55
dobeymdeslaur: so they'd require the touch browser?14:56
Saviqcjwatson, but then if you install unity8, that would pull the click scope - and it would then show in unity7 as well14:56
cjwatsonSaviq: oh, I see14:56
cjwatsonYeah, via Recommends, hmm14:57
cjwatsonWhat would you suggest then?14:57
Saviqcjwatson, or wait14:57
Saviqcjwatson, we're re-doing the scope backend for unity814:57
Saviqcjwatson, so if there's no click scope for the old backend, it's just not there14:57
Saviqcjwatson, so we should actually be fine here14:58
cjwatsonWhat's the timeline on that?14:58
* cjwatson switches to IRC to avoid lag14:58
dobeymdeslaur: all the webapp APIs are just dbus calls exposed via JS right? so the dbus confinement should be enough?14:58
Saviqcjwatson, 14.0414:58
jdstranddobey: they will use a 'webapp container' which is based on the touch browser14:58
mdeslaurdobey: I can't answer that question without thinking about the implications of running it under x14:59
jdstrandright14:59
jdstrandit might be acceptable. it might not14:59
dobeymdeslaur: sure. just trying to raise the question and help clarify it :)14:59
Saviqo/15:00
jdstrandmdeslaur: I wonder if it makes a difference on if it is stuff we ship (ie, the Canonical webapps) vs arbitrary webapps in the store15:00
=== ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-uds-client-2 to: Track: Client | Design and implement a media service for Ubuntu | Url: http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1311/meeting/22088/client-1311-media-service/
jdstrandmdeslaur: because, as it is, there is no confinement at all for webapps when running under chromium or firefox15:00
dobeyand there's obvious duplication between click webapps and webapps as packaged in the webapps deb15:01
jdstrandso this could improve the situation there, even if there are some potential gaps. but yeah, would want to think about it cause there is also the reputation of click at stake15:01
jdstrandanyhoo, food for thought :)15:02
dobeyyep15:02
dobeyand on to the next session :)15:02
dobeythanks15:02
diwichangout link for the media service session?15:02
didrocksdiwic: https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/7acpjrath88ccmnne2ldam7qog?authuser=015:03
jhodappdiwic, feel free to speak up as much as you want since you helped with the music-hub implementation15:04
tvosshello :)15:05
jdstrandmay I join the fishbowl?15:08
rsalvetisure15:08
jdstrandwhat is the url? I just joined so missed it if it was pasted15:09
rsalvetihttps://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/7acpjrath88ccmnne2ldam7qog?authuser=015:09
jdstrandthanks15:09
sergiusenstvoss, jhodapp by playlist I think he means, hey, play this list of songs while I'm suspended15:24
tvosssergiusens, that will be supported for sure15:24
tvosssergiusens, we have a play queue right now that the app can fill15:24
vthompsonsergiusens, that's implemented in the trackList15:24
vthompsonI assume15:24
tvossthompson, yup, tracklist/playqueue, cannot remember how I called it :)15:25
sergiusenssorry, joined late :-)15:25
sergiusensshuffling between two sessions15:25
ricmmvthompson: I think you meant mediascanner looking up for "playlists" on the fs15:27
ricmmhowever I dont know how the mediascanner could have a concept of a playlist if it hasnt been user created in a predefined format thats storable to disk15:27
vthompsonricmm, correct15:27
thostrdon't think that common format of playlist makes a lot of sense as 3rd party players usually already have their own format15:28
vthompsonI was only asking the question as to have a reason for the the mediascanner and media service to be a single component15:28
Elleotvoss: presumably whitelisting still needs to be available in general, as there are some apps that can't use the media service (e.g. my spotify clients)15:29
ricmmrsalveti: for a QML application its a matter of updating your play status when you go from Qt.application.inactive -> active15:30
ricmmso a state transition handler15:31
ricmmtheres no concept of being resurrected or what not at that high level15:31
tvossElleo, sure, not talking about general whitelisting15:31
Elleotvoss: okay, cool15:31
rsalvetiricmm: right, I was just thinking about the user experience for that15:32
ricmmrsalveti: got it15:32
rsalvetibut guess that depends on how the app is done15:32
tvossElleo, although we are discouraging whitelisting :)15:32
Elleotvoss: yeah, I don't really have much choice though; I don't have any sort of stream I can pass off to other services15:33
ElleoI'm tied to the way libspotify does things15:33
ricmmjhodapp: rsalveti tvoss will we be sandwiching this with the platform-API before hitting the client (QtMultimedia) plugin?15:35
jhodappricmm, in what way?15:36
ricmmor is it expected to be direct from QtMultimedia to the service over dbus15:36
tvossricmm, direct so far15:36
jhodappricmm, to my understanding, direct15:36
ricmmok15:36
ricmmweshould still have a long standing item to integrate it at the p-api level imo15:36
ricmmfor native apps centralization, but later on of course15:37
ricmmnot right away15:37
jhodappricmm, can you give an example?15:37
rsalvetiright15:37
rsalvetiin this case we're saying that our media service is kind of our platform-api15:37
rsalvetiover dbus15:37
rsalvetibut yeah, would be nice to abstract that properly15:37
tvossricmm, ideally, we would model it in the papi and expose openmax profiles15:38
rsalvetiopenmax profiles?15:38
jdstrandvthompson: btw, music-app needs to move to use mediascanner too, correct? if so, when you are done with that you can ping me to test it under apparmor policy so I can adjust it15:43
vthompsonjdstrand, we'd use the current mediascanner... we'd need to use the new mediascanner API that will be made for 14.0415:44
jdstrandvthompson: if you track your work in bugs, then just add an apparmor-easyprof-ubuntu task for both the mediascanner and media service15:44
vthompsonjdstrand, *we currently use the existing API15:44
jdstrandright15:44
jdstrandI mean, when you change, ping me and I can get the apparmor policy together15:44
jdstrandsince I think music-app is the only to-be-confined consumer of these things right now :)15:45
vthompsonSounds good. I'll do so.15:46
jdstrandawesome, thanks! :)15:46
ricmmjhodapp: what about development practices? considering this is very hardware specific (for the gstreamer backend) there are things that will work differently across devices15:46
sergiusensyou can't top approve or HApprove ;-)15:46
jhodapplol15:46
jhodappricmm, good question, sorry I missed it15:47
tvossrsalveti, support openmax ;)15:47
ogra_thanks15:47
jhodappricmm, there are, but if I do my job with the plugins and the media hybris layer, this shouldn't matter15:47
tvossElleo, just looking at the spotify api: How do you output the frames that are coming via the callback?15:47
rsalvetitvoss: right, but why would that be a platform-api thing?15:48
rsalvetiif we want to abstract the media service itself15:48
ricmmwhy the C api to then abstract another C api15:48
ricmmis rsalveti's question I think15:48
rsalvetimy question is why our api needs to have anything specific to openmax :-)15:49
ricmmwhats the benefit of an openmax profile instead of direct usage of the platform-api natively15:49
tvossricmm, rsalveti what I'm trying to say is: let's have the platform API, clean C, easily reusable. And over time, if/when we support openmax, we can use the papi to provide an implementation15:49
tvossrsalveti, it does not have to, that's what I'm saying, too. We are in violent agreement15:49
rsalvetibut don't we want to the platform-api to use the service?15:49
rsalvetiwhich in this case would be dbus15:50
ricmmplatform-api will use the service and expose itself15:50
rsalvetiso app -> platform-api -> dbus -> media-service?15:50
ricmmI think what tvoss is saying is an example analogue to SDL for example15:50
ricmmyes15:50
tvossricmm, +115:50
rsalvetior app -> qtmultimedia -> qtubuntu-media -> platform-api ->...15:50
tvossrsalveti, yup15:50
tvossrsalveti, that's what I'm saying, too :)15:50
rsalvetiright, ok :-)15:50
ricmmwell native its direct, the Qt model if course goes through the chain15:51
rsalvetiso many abstractions15:51
rsalvetiricmm: direct how?15:51
ricmmdirect to platform-api for native15:51
ricmmnot direct to service15:51
rsalvetiright, sure15:51
ricmmsorry, miswording15:51
rsalvetibut no one, besides the platform-api, should be using the service api15:51
rsalvetiright?15:51
rsalvetiotherwise we end up supporting 2 different apis for the same thing15:52
ricmmindeed15:52
ricmmno one but the platform api should know the service implementation15:52
ricmmwhich then allows us to change behind scenes for all types of apps15:52
ricmmanyways, DONE with this session, next15:53
rsalvetijhodapp: ^15:54
rsalvetiright15:54
jhodapprsalveti, sorry, had to run quickly15:58
=== ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-uds-client-2 to: Track: Client | Need to find alternatives for the SRU process | Url: http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1311/meeting/22100/client-1311-webapps-sru-alternatives/
dbarthhi16:04
dbarthdidrocks: are your running this one?16:04
greybacko/16:04
didrocksdbarth: robru is going to16:05
didrocksdbarth: https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/76cpiqsrkccej2hpsej2g4bim0?authuser=016:05
dbarthcool16:06
dbarthwe're on16:06
cjwatsonhttps://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel-announce/2009-March/000550.html16:22
cjwatsonfound it at last16:22
cjwatsonthe phrasing was for things that come from upstream, but ...16:23
cjwatsonmy example of a currently-outstanding failure is bug 1097833, which I appreciate was for quantal16:27
udsbotuUbuntu bug 1097833 in webapps-applications (Ubuntu Raring) "GooglePlus.js test fails" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/109783316:27
cjwatson(in fact, that one has failed twice)16:28
LaneyThe process should apply to all webapps, not just the ones that Canonical provides support for16:47
Laneyyeah, that16:47
robrudidrocks, we are wrapping up soon16:53
didrocksrobru: ok16:53
Laneyyou already covered that16:54
Laneydon't know how much lag I have16:54
robruLaney, there's usually a couple minutes lag I think. was just trying to be responsive to IRC ;-)16:54
dbarthi am incorrigible, i know...16:54
=== ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-uds-client-2 to: Currently no events are active in this room - http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1311/client-2/ - http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2013/11/21/%23ubuntu-uds-client-2.html
=== ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-uds-client-2 to: Track: Client | Desktop Web Apps | Url: http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1311/meeting/22074/client-1311-desktop-webapps/
dbarthhttps://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/presentation/d/10vetdx3_muY4MCneztuKYD55RtifkryNNmfxwMVObXc/edit#slide=id.g1246cfde2_0718:01
qenghohi, D.18:07
oSoMoNdidrocks, can you send me the link to the hangout?18:07
alex-abreuqengho, hey !18:07
alex-abreuoSoMoN, https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/7acpimdnnn05mhnr489us6bccc?authuser=018:08
didrocksalex is so fast!18:08
alex-abreuoSoMoN, hoefully that's the right one18:08
alex-abreuoSoMoN, yeah efficiency is the key for T ! :)18:08
alex-abreuoops18:08
alex-abreudidrocks, ^18:08
oSoMoNalex-abreu, thanks18:09
didrocksyep ;)18:09
qenghoYAY18:27
chrisccoulsonhah :)18:27
qenghoIt dies in Cr32, I am pretty sure.18:29
qenghoNPAPI^18:29
qenghoOr 33? Something.18:30
qenghoYes, soon.  The current Dev channel, I think.18:30
qenghoNow +218:30
qenghoI do not think that we didn't say would stop Phoronix from reporting it.18:41
chrisccoulsonin that case, we're switching to w3m18:41
alex-abreuqengho, now it is mentioned in the irc logs at least ! ...18:42
qenghoI heard the DEFAULT WEB BROWSER is going to be XEMACS.18:42
chrisccoulsonlol18:42
robrudbarth, yep, i can review18:55
dbarthrobru: cool19:00
dbarththanks everyone19:00
alex-abreuthx19:00
=== ChanServ changed the topic of #ubuntu-uds-client-2 to: Currently no events are active in this room - http://summit.ubuntu.com/uds-1311/client-2/ - http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2013/11/21/%23ubuntu-uds-client-2.html
=== bfiller is now known as bfiller_afk
=== bfiller_ is now known as bfiller

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!