[05:54] <anacrolix> where is the documentation for python bindings to appindicator? all the links here are broken: https://unity.ubuntu.com/projects/appindicators/
[08:09] <tsdgeos> morning
[08:09] <tsdgeos> i think i either caught the ubuflu or the heathrow flu
[08:10] <tsdgeos> feeling quite sick
[08:36] <Saviq> tsdgeos, get a swap day, take it easy
[08:36] <Saviq> tsdgeos, *in* Heathrow meaning you slept at the airport?
[08:37] <tsdgeos> meanig i didn't sleep
[08:37] <tsdgeos> but yeah :D
[08:37] <Saviq> jeez
[08:37] <tsdgeos> got a plane for sunday at 6am
[08:37] <tsdgeos> so i had to be there at 4am anyway
[08:37] <tsdgeos> so didn't make much sense trying to get somewhere to sleep
[08:38] <tsdgeos> bought last Dan Brown's book and read it all :D
[08:38] <Saviq> tsdgeos, :D how was it?
[08:38] <tsdgeos> i actually liked it
[08:39] <Saviq> tsdgeos, either way - get a swap day for that - especially if you're feeling sick
[08:40] <Saviq> tsdgeos, and also, there's a flight delay compensation to be fought for within the EU
[08:40] <tsdgeos> actually it was no that my flight got delayed
[08:40] <tsdgeos> is that awesome piccadilly line broke
[08:40] <tsdgeos> and i had to take an 1:30h detour
[08:40] <tsdgeos> so i got there late
[08:40] <tsdgeos> my plane actually flew as scheduled
[08:45] <Saviq> tsdgeos, ah
[08:45] <Saviq> that's "it's easier to get to Heathrow" for you...
[09:14] <Saviq> MacSlow, hey, sorry to hear about your N10
[09:14] <Saviq> MacSlow, there's one thing, though - company hardware is somewhat insured - would be good to verify what's covered
[09:23] <MacSlow> Saviq, yeah... thanks... Murphy struck hard this weekend for everybody... in some way or another
[09:23] <Saviq> MacSlow, yeah
[09:23] <MacSlow> Saviq, hm... who would know details about this?
[09:24] <Saviq> MacSlow, start with msm
[09:24] <MacSlow> Saviq, ok
[09:43] <Cimi> Saviq, hey boss, I'm looking for week's tasks
[09:44] <Saviq> Cimi, "week's"? "this week's"?
[09:44] <Cimi> this week
[09:50] <Saviq> Cimi, how 'bout bug #1259005
[09:51] <Cimi> Saviq, ok
[10:21] <mzanetti> Saviq: did we switch to use the fake applications intentionally with ./run on the desktop or is there some import path breakage going on too?
[10:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, we never had non-fake ones ;)
[10:21] <mzanetti> err... not the fake apps, but the fake scopes content
[10:22] <Saviq> mzanetti, do you have unity-plugin-scopes installed?
[10:22] <mzanetti> ah... right... going back to qt 5.0 seems to have removed all that stuff
[10:22] <mzanetti> thanks
[10:23] <Saviq> mzanetti, it now picks stuff up from ./plugins, /usr/lib/*/unity8/qml, ./tests/mocks - in that order, more or less
[10:23] <Saviq> mzanetti, so we override system-wide plugins and fall back to mocks
[10:23] <Saviq> s/system-wide/installed/
[10:23] <mzanetti> ah ok. makes sense
[10:25] <Saviq> biab, post office
[11:28] <Saviq> greyback, ping
[11:29] <Saviq> dednick, welcome back!
[11:29] <dednick> Saviq: :) thanks
[11:29] <Saviq> dednick, were you flying during UK's air traffic shutdown?
[11:32] <greyback> Saviq: pong
[11:42] <dednick> Saviq: no, missed it by a day luckily
[11:42] <dednick> i arrived a few hours ago :)
[11:42] <Saviq> dednick, straight into the office, eh? ;)
[11:42] <dednick> *home office* ;)
[11:54] <Cimi> Saviq, does qmltestrunner run with touch emulation events?
[11:54] <Saviq> Cimi, we have a custom touchtestrunner that does
[11:55] <Saviq> Cimi, used by the indicator tests, for example
[11:55] <Cimi> ok
[11:55] <Cimi> maybe I can use that
[11:55] <Saviq> Cimi, I *think*
[11:55] <Cimi> Saviq, cause was failing
[11:55] <Saviq> Cimi, either way - panel tests are fine with edge drags
[11:55] <Saviq> Cimi, so that must work some way ;)
[11:55] <Cimi> Saviq, I added this edgedragarea
[11:56] <Cimi> Saviq, but my tests fail
[11:56] <Saviq> Cimi, added? there is an EdgeDragArea in the panel already - would be best to use that one probably
[11:57] <Cimi> Saviq, it's only for the indicators row iirc
[11:57] <Cimi> Saviq, I'll have a look
[11:57] <Saviq> Cimi, I'd rather not, if possible, have two separate ones - maybe some refactoring is in order
[11:59] <Cimi> Saviq, in the meanwhile I'd like to have tests working :)
[11:59] <Saviq> Cimi, as in trunk tests?
[11:59] <Cimi> Saviq, nope referring to this search swipe
[12:00] <Cimi> Saviq, took me 5 mins to get the feature in
[12:00] <Cimi> Saviq, still debugging the tests failing
[12:00] <Saviq> Cimi, ok sure
[12:01] <Cimi> Saviq, ok was this mouseClick -> tap
[12:01] <Cimi> Saviq, mouseFlick -> touchFlick
[12:01] <Cimi> Saviq, when you use touch events
[12:01] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, thought we have those :)
[12:17] <Cimi> Saviq, having one big edgedragarea common won't simplify things
[12:18] <Cimi> on the tablet it will be huge
[12:18] <Cimi> while currently it's only 40gu
[12:18] <Saviq> Cimi, right
[12:19] <Cimi> also you have to abstract properties from the indicators to the panel, making them 'public'
[12:19] <Saviq> Cimi, ok, fine with split areas
[12:19] <Saviq> Cimi, makes sense when they're spread out on the tablet
[12:49] <Cimi> Saviq, you remember the tolerance area of clicks?
[12:49] <Cimi> how big is it
[13:00] <Saviq> Cimi, you mean tap vs. long-press?
[13:00] <Cimi> Saviq, I meant
[13:00] <Cimi> Saviq, I'm faking mouse clicks in the edgedragarea
[13:00] <Saviq> Cimi, that depends
[13:00] <Cimi> Saviq, so I don't have to use two input areas
[13:01] <Saviq> Cimi, EdgeDragArea.qml has them all set up
[13:01] <Cimi> Saviq, I have mouseAbs (touchx - initialtouchx) < tolerance
[13:01] <Cimi> Saviq, does not have onClicked IIRC
[13:01] <Saviq> Cimi, clicks just go through the EdgeDragArea
[13:02] <Cimi> Saviq, so you want me to use a edgedragarea AND a mousearea?
[13:02] <Cimi> thought faking was better
[13:03] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, just have a MouseArea below - that's how the EDA is supposed to be used
[13:03] <Saviq> Cimi, or well, see how the IndicatorRow has those
[13:03] <Saviq> Cimi, it does react to press
[13:04] <Saviq> Cimi, and it seems it's the EDA that handles it
[13:04] <Cimi> Saviq, they use tolerance 0 for swipes
[13:04] <Cimi> Saviq, so you can swipe right to reveal
[13:05] <Cimi> or swipe up
[13:05] <Cimi> it seems wrong
[13:05] <Cimi> to me
[13:05] <Cimi> for reference, my current code http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~cimi/unity8/searchIndicator-swipe/revision/582
[13:06] <Cimi> two ways to show search indicator
[13:07] <Cimi> 1. click within units.dp(2) from the original click
[13:07] <Cimi> 2. swipe down of at least units.gu(1.5)
[13:14] <Cimi> Saviq, edgedragrea eats mouse clicks
[13:14] <Cimi> gnam gnam, it's hungry area
[13:18] <mhr3> Saviq, forgot to bring up one topic last week - running apps
[13:18] <mhr3> Saviq, i still don't want those in a scope
[13:18] <mhr3> it's just silly
[13:19] <Cimi> mhr3, they'll go away
[13:19] <Saviq> mhr3, no worries, we might end up without them there completely
[13:19] <mhr3> wooo :)
[13:24] <mzanetti> greyback: hmm... should ApplicationManager.startApplication() cause ApplicationManager.focusedApplicationId to change eventually?
[13:28] <mhr3> Saviq, and one more, tests in the scopes plugin - gtest or qtest?
[13:29] <mhr3> or rather do you see a reason why qtest would be a better choice?
[13:29] <Saviq> mhr3, your call - we use qtest mostly, as it's just better integrated
[13:29] <Saviq> mhr3, but I'm completely fine on gtest
[13:29] <mhr3> Saviq, tell me more about the integration
[13:30] <Saviq> mhr3, stuff is named Q*
[13:30] <Saviq> ;)
[13:30] <Saviq> mhr3, no really, don't see a reason
[13:31] <Saviq> mhr3, maybe the fact that it launches QApplication automagically
[13:31] <Saviq> mhr3, but it's not like you can't do it yourself if necessary
[13:32] <mhr3> i'm all for simpler life :)
[13:37] <mhr3> hmm, think i'll stay with qtest just to have QTRY_*
[13:37] <mhr3> will be handy for the highly-async scope tests
[13:39] <Saviq> mhr3, maybe the SignalSpy - useful, too
[13:43] <mzanetti> test rows/column might be useful too
[13:43] <mzanetti> and the nice output formatting :)
[14:04] <mzanetti> Saviq: is there something special in regard to the order of the recent applications grid? as in, do mainstage apps need to be before sidestage ones?
[14:05] <mzanetti> or could I get rid of firstModel and secondModel and just show all of ApplicationManager's recent apps in whatever order the appmanager holds them
[14:07] <kgunn> Saviq: snowboarding...ok...now i hate you
[14:08] <mzanetti> kgunn: finally back home?
[14:08] <greyback> mzanetti: sorry was at lunch. ApplicationManager.focusedApplicationId should update yes
[14:08] <kgunn> mzanetti: yep, yesterday afternoon
[14:08] <kgunn> mzanetti: heard you made with no issues...lucky
[14:09] <mzanetti> kgunn: mostly, yes. 45 mins late
[14:09] <mzanetti> greyback: no problem. ok. seems our various ApplicationManager implementations start to drift apart
[14:10] <mzanetti> will fix
[14:17] <Saviq> mzanetti, TBH it should be recency
[14:18] <Saviq> mzanetti, but I don't think we have that proper yet
[14:18] <mzanetti> Saviq: I agree. but I think it'd be better if the applicationmanager is sorted itself according to that
[14:18] <mzanetti> but anyways, dropping that firstModel, secondModel hack
[14:18] <Saviq> mzanetti, I'd be worried about reshuffling the launcher all the time
[14:19] <Saviq> mzanetti, not sure what's the plan there
[14:19] <mzanetti> Saviq: no. the launcher doesn't follow that order
[14:19] <mzanetti> Saviq: as when an app is pinned it needs to be there, not where it is in the app stack etc
[14:20] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah exactly, but what about recent apps in launcher
[14:20] <Saviq> mzanetti, not the pinned ones
[14:20] <mzanetti> Saviq: well, they are appended as they show up
[14:21] <mzanetti> Saviq: and stay there until either moved or removed from the recent list
[14:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, that'd be good I think
[14:21] <mzanetti> I've dropped shell's knowledge about multiple stages... that's why I asked if we need to have that distinction in the recent apps grid
[14:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, still, if we go for split right edge
[14:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, we need separate models for main and side stage
[14:21] <mzanetti> Saviq: then we still can put a sortfilterproxymodel on top
[14:22] <Saviq> mzanetti, or maybe the other way 'round - let app manager give up three models? main, side, merged?
[14:22] <mzanetti> but I'd say where we need it.. instead of keeping two separate lists in shell.qml and aggregate them again all over
[14:22] <mzanetti> Saviq: so when we designed the appmanager api we went for this:
[14:23] <mzanetti> appmanager itself is a model of all apps, having a role "stage"
[14:23] <Saviq> kgunn, sorry...
[14:23] <mzanetti> so we could easily put a sortfilter on top
[14:23] <Saviq> kgunn, it's not like you don't have places to go to do that
[14:23] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, I'd rather it be provided by the app mgr itself
[14:24] <Saviq> mzanetti, or well maybe it really doesn't matter in that case
[14:24] <mzanetti> ok well, sure... we can always create instances of filtermodel's inside the appmanager if really wanted
[14:24] <mzanetti> but yeah... the question was more the other way round
[14:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, we need a merged model from app manager indeed
[14:25] <mzanetti> Saviq: yeah... that's the thing... we do have that
[14:25] <mzanetti> Saviq: then ApplicationManagerWrapper was splitting it up
[14:25] <mzanetti> the split thing was used everywhere and merged again everywhere with fancy javascript
[14:27] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, that's why I'm thinking we should simply have three - main, side, merged
[14:31] <mzanetti> Saviq: actually I was thinking to not have that distinction anywhere except inside the tablet stages code. Given that not all devices will have that
[14:33] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah maybe
[14:33] <Saviq> greyback, dednick_ standup
[14:53] <sil2100> tedg: hello!
[14:53] <sil2100> tedg: not sure if it's still super valid, but we've been discussing and wondering if the ust requirement for upstart-app-launch could be somehow made optional?
[14:55] <sil2100> tedg: by ust I mean liblttng-ust of course
[15:09] <Saviq> mzanetti, hey, I can has you to look at https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/new-scopes-integrate-card/+merge/197930/comments/459061 ?
[15:13] <mhr3> heh, was just about to ping you about that
[15:15] <mhr3> Saviq, how is the visibility of items going to work?
[15:15] <mhr3> for example right now the height is too much, cause there's no subtitle, summary etc
[15:15] <Saviq> mhr3, items meaning price etc.?
[15:15] <Saviq> mhr3, that depends
[15:16] <Saviq> mhr3, in a static-height scenario (grid, carousel), we'll to lay out a maximum card size and stick to it
[15:16] <mhr3> Saviq, right, so for those it's about the components
[15:16] <mhr3> but for the other ones it's about both components and the data
[15:16] <mzanetti> Saviq: ack
[15:17] <Saviq> mhr3, yes, prices and attributes will be just stacked next to each other - based on contents
[15:17] <Saviq> mhr3, but still we'll have to cater for the biggest case
[15:17] <Saviq> mhr3, for variable-height/width (journals) it will be what it will be in reality
[15:18] <mzanetti> Saviq: line 117, 118 is some more commented stuff. reason?
[15:18] <Saviq> mzanetti, because the card does not yet have those signals
[15:18] <Saviq> mzanetti, but it will need them - can add FIXME
[15:18] <mzanetti> ok
[15:20] <Saviq> mzanetti, shall I add FIXME?
[15:21] <mzanetti> Saviq: nah... given that you will change this soon enough in any case, no need to nitpick on it
[15:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, yup
[15:21] <mzanetti> Saviq: I'd prefer to investigate the crash in the other fixme as I have a feeling otherwise that fixme will be in there for all eternity
[15:21] <Saviq> mzanetti, oh no it won't, but yeah
[15:22] <Saviq> mzanetti, we need the sourceSize there, and need it working
[15:22] <mzanetti> yeah...
[15:22] <Saviq> mzanetti, otherwise we'll load huge images
[15:22] <Saviq> mzanetti, so I basically need to try it out with 5.2
[15:22] <mzanetti> seeing what sort of fixme's I came by in the application stuff today :D
[15:23] <mzanetti> Saviq: ah damn... I just went back to 5.0 as too much other stuff was crashing with 5.2
[15:23] <mzanetti> otherwise I could have tested for you
[15:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, will manage
[15:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, we shall have it resolved before that whole thing gets into lp:unity8
[15:39] <mhr3> although the sooner it would get there, the better :)
[15:40] <mhr3> would lower the barrier for testing it
[15:45] <tedg> sil2100, We'd prefer to leave it in so that we could get timing results on images.  Is it causing a problem?
[16:08] <Saviq> mzanetti, I'm worried the "Qt.test.qtestroot" missing thing might be that we're trying to run the testcase under qmlscene
[16:08] <mzanetti> Saviq: not following
[16:09] <Saviq> mzanetti, remember when you tried to do make tryCard under 5.2?
[16:09] <mzanetti> ah, ok
[16:09] <mzanetti> hmm... that'd be bad
[16:09] <Saviq> yeah, we'd need to find a way to run it under qmltestrunner
[16:09] <Saviq> which, btw, could be doable
[16:10] <mzanetti> yeah, quite sure. It's just the input thing right?
[16:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, well, not even
[16:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, for tryFoo we're not testing at all
[16:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, just loading the QML and let you play with it
[16:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, so we'd need to be able to the same under qmltestrunner
[16:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, maybe our custom runner with a command line option to not actually start the tests
[16:11] <Saviq> mzanetti, or set a context prop, for that matter
[16:11] <Saviq> that we'll bind to TestCase.when:
[16:11] <Saviq> which would mean we'll load everything under the test runner, just we won't start the tests
[16:11] <mzanetti> Saviq: but wait... iirc I had the crash when doing make testCard
[16:11] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, unrelated
[16:12] <Saviq> mzanetti, crash is there indeed
[16:12] <Cimi> ppa:canonical-qt5-edgers/qt5-daily is for qt 5.2?
[16:12] <Cimi> or we have others?
[16:12] <Saviq> Cimi, qt5-beta2
[16:12] <Saviq> mzanetti, but it doesn't even start with qmlscene, complaining about Qt.test.qtestroot not being there - probably something qmltestrunner imports / adds an import path  / something
[16:13] <mzanetti> mhm
[16:36] <Saviq> mzanetti, the only symbols I got out of the qmltestrunner crash:
[16:36] <Saviq> http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/6546538/
[16:36] <Saviq> mzanetti, look familiar?
[16:36] <mzanetti> yeah. the JIT was involved here too
[16:37] <mzanetti> not sure if its the exact same thing
[16:37] <mzanetti> qv4functionobject.cpp... yeah, I think it is
[16:39] <Saviq> mzanetti, meaning https://bugs.launchpad.net/unity-api/+bug/1258057 ?
[16:40] <mzanetti> Saviq: right... I didn't try to debug testCard... so that must be the one
[16:44] <Saviq> mzanetti, thanks, will try to add more info
[16:46] <Saviq> mzanetti, https://bugreports.qt-project.org/browse/QTBUG-33658?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
[16:47] <Saviq> looks legit
[16:49] <mzanetti> Saviq: hmm... looks similar. but I wouldn't be able to say it's this one
[16:51] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah of course - I'll try to build it locally with the patch applied
[16:52] <anpok> ls
[16:57] <mhall119> Saviq: do you have time for a quick chat about Unity 8 desktop mode?
[17:02] <Saviq> mhall119, can you please put something in my calendar for tomorrow?
[17:02] <Saviq> mhall119, I'm almost at the door today
[17:03] <Saviq> mhall119, also, depending on the topic I might have more questions than answers for you...
[17:32] <mhall119> Saviq: ok, I'll find us a time tomorrow
[17:32] <Saviq> mhall119, thanks
[17:34] <mhall119> Saviq: done
[17:45] <untitled1> Saviq:  hi.  I am running run_on_devce and the build-deps for unity8 is missing  deps lcov and gcov.  are these imporant ?
[17:46] <Saviq> untitled1, that's just a warning
[17:46] <untitled1> camke warrning yeah but what are they used for ?
[17:46] <Saviq> untitled1, unless you want to see test coverage, no - they're not important
[17:46] <untitled1> thanks
[17:46] <Saviq> untitled1, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gcov
[17:47] <untitled1> I also had to mount my devce as dpkg would not work with out it
[17:47] <untitled1> maybe could add to bash script  ?
[17:47] <Saviq> untitled1, you mean make writable?
[17:47] <untitled1> yeah
[17:47] <Saviq> untitled1, that's dangerous, we don't want to do it by default
[17:47] <untitled1> what is up with that ?
[17:47] <Saviq> untitled1, we could bail out if not writable, though
[17:48] <untitled1> I can not run_on_device with out that ?
[17:48] <Saviq> no
[17:48] <untitled1> because of the build deps and what not
[17:48] <Saviq> yes
[17:48] <untitled1> cmake and many other thins are not installed by default
[17:48] <Saviq> untitled1, having a writable rootfs on a phone is not feasible - battery outage could result in unbootable phone
[17:48] <Saviq> untitled1, exactly
[17:48] <Saviq> untitled1, it's really like making the phone go into developer mode
[17:48] <untitled1> I see
[17:48] <Saviq> untitled1, we have plans to make it better / less invasive on your installation
[17:48] <untitled1> thanks Saviq
[17:49] <Saviq> untitled1, ideally you should be able to revert what you did during the development session
[17:49] <Saviq> untitled1, at least to the rootfs
[17:49] <untitled1> maybe I should make a qprocess app for this like a gui that uses them scripts
[17:49] <untitled1> or add to qtcreator not sure what are your thoughts ?
[17:50] <untitled1> at that what do you think about qprocess ?
[17:50] <Saviq> untitled1, a qtcreator target could be used, sure
[17:50] <Saviq> untitled1, although for that we'd rather cross-build and transfer pre-built onto the device
[17:51] <Saviq> untitled1, this should happen relatively soon
[17:51] <untitled1> Saviq:  are the plugins for the creator still in source or are they outside branchs now ?
[17:51] <Saviq> untitled1, the ubuntu plugins?
[17:51] <untitled1> Saviq: yeah
[17:51] <Saviq> untitled1, they are separate - and will mostly remain so
[17:52] <Saviq> untitled1, until we get upstream support for Ubuntu in QtCreator at least
[17:52] <untitled1> I built ubuntu-ui-toolkit to qt5.2 and might go after the creator today
[17:52] <untitled1> qtcreator takes forever to build lol
[17:52] <Saviq> untitled1, naah, qtcreator is nothing - try qt itself ;)
[17:53] <untitled1> lol
[17:53] <untitled1> esp on arm
[17:53] <untitled1> done that many times when android was getting "wheels" on Qt
[17:55] <untitled1> Saviq:  one of the things that is hard for me to deal with is when I press the qt home screen and then press develop to go to last session and it opens like 5 windows that I can not close :(  know any work a rounds ?
[17:55] <Saviq> untitled1, here's a branch I did off of qtcreator 3.0-beta
[17:55] <Saviq> https://code.launchpad.net/~unity-team/kubuntu-packaging/qtcreator-30
[17:55] <untitled1> thanks
[17:55] <Saviq> untitled1, it should build now - importing rc could be useful, though
[17:56] <Saviq> untitled1, ough
[17:56] <untitled1> Oo
[17:56] <Saviq> untitled1, if that's still the same in QtC 3.0
[17:56] <Saviq> untitled1, that's a bug that needs fixing
[17:56] <Saviq> untitled1, in the mean time you can use File > Sessions or so
[17:57] <untitled1> Thanks I think that I will build to rc and see what is going on in the welcome plugin
[17:58] <Saviq> untitled1, actually, let me quickly update that branch to rc