[07:27] <Cimi> morning guys
[07:33] <tsdgeos_> Cimi: morning
[07:33] <tsdgeos_> fginther: did you have time to check why all qmluitests are failing?
[07:33] <tsdgeos_> Saviq: so was the code review i did for unsplit enough or are you guys expecting more?
[07:34] <Saviq> tsdgeos_, go for it
[07:34] <tsdgeos_> Saviq: also can we get a silo with paul's logout branch + all the things we need?
[07:34] <Saviq> tsdgeos_, yeah, will take care of that soon
[07:34] <tsdgeos_> Saviq: i already went for it yesterday :D Not sure if people blocked on me just because i didn't top approve or not though
[07:35] <Saviq> tsdgeos_, basically no one else reviewed it
[07:35] <Saviq> I tried, but couldn't focus...
[07:35] <tsdgeos_> well, i just diffed this one and the other one and made sure they were 1:1 changes
[07:36] <Saviq> tsdgeos_, good enough
[07:36] <tsdgeos_> also the regular packaging is failing for some reason in CI
[07:36] <tsdgeos_> works here
[07:37] <tsdgeos> Saviq: so i'll approve from my side, and if you want top approve too
[07:38] <Saviq> tsdgeos, yup, do that
[07:43] <Cimi> Saviq, tsdgeos I was thinking of working from 8-8:30 in summer... shifting a bit, you would prefer?
[07:44] <Saviq> Cimi, sounds kinda short ;)
[07:44] <Cimi> ahahah
[07:44] <Cimi> Saviq, basically CEST
[07:44] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, I see no reason why not
[07:44] <Saviq> Cimi, but you have to check with Kevin
[07:44] <Cimi> Saviq, sure of course
[07:45] <Cimi> Saviq, ola wakes me up at 7ish... then instead lying in bed like a zombie for another hour I should start working earlier i thought
[07:47] <Saviq> Cimi, ;)
[07:48] <Cimi> Saviq, waiting your mail about qtcs :)
[07:48] <tsdgeos> easy one https://code.launchpad.net/~aacid/unity8/no_preview_in_preview_title/+merge/223027
[07:49] <Saviq> tsdgeos, + .pot
[07:49] <tsdgeos> damn
[07:49] <tsdgeos> there's never an easy one :D
[07:50] <tsdgeos> and we didn't ever get teh pot file generation to be stable
[07:50] <tsdgeos> grr
[07:50] <tsdgeos> zillions of unneeded changes
[07:51] <Saviq> tsdgeos, "stable"?
[07:51] <Saviq> tsdgeos, the unneeded changes are probably mostly line number changes?
[07:51] <tsdgeos> no
[07:51] <tsdgeos> the globbing in my hd is different than in yours
[07:51] <tsdgeos> so qml/Components/PassphraseLockscreen.qml gets repositioned in the file
[07:51] <tsdgeos> see http://paste.ubuntu.com/7637686/
[07:52] <Saviq> huh
[07:52] <Saviq> that's interesting...
[07:52] <tsdgeos> ah wait
[07:52] <tsdgeos> no
[07:52] <tsdgeos> it's a different file name
[07:52] <Saviq>  test.qml:7
[07:52] <tsdgeos> so it's the same string but the file was renamed
[07:52] <Cimi> tsdgeos, you got my message here? https://code.launchpad.net/~aacid/unity8/obeyArtShapeFixedSize/+merge/222294
[07:53] <Saviq> tsdgeos, maybe base on unsplit? the changes should be smaller there I think?
[07:53] <Cimi> I based on unsplit the infographics
[07:53] <tsdgeos> Saviq: probably, ok let me do that
[07:59] <tsdgeos> Saviq: ok, so it's smaller diff https://code.launchpad.net/~aacid/unity8/no_preview_in_preview_title/+merge/223029
[07:59] <tsdgeos> Cimi: ok, i see what you mean, will try to do that
[07:59] <Saviq> tsdgeos, kk
[08:18] <tsdgeos> Saviq: ok, approved the unsplit branch
[08:20] <Saviq> tsdgeos, tx
[08:35]  * Saviq needs to spend the day catching up on email :|
[08:35] <Cimi> Saviq, right click -> mark all as read
[08:35] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, not gonna fly ;P
[09:18] <Cimi> Trevinho, I still have bad crashes with unity on my laptop
[09:18] <Cimi> is there a bugreport?
[09:35] <tsdgeos> Cimi: test added
[09:41] <Cimi> tsdgeos, tested test... indeed failing without your branch, good
[09:56] <Cimi> tsdgeos, would still prefer to have another look by Saviq
[09:57] <Cimi> tsdgeos, seems quite nested in terms of connections and variables
[09:57] <tsdgeos> +1
[09:58] <Cimi> tsdgeos, found mistake
[09:58] <Cimi> root.fixedArtShapeSize.height / root.fixedArtShapeSize.height
[09:59] <tsdgeos> wops
[10:01] <tsdgeos> Cimi: fixed
[10:02] <Cimi> tsdgeos, shall we also check it is not 0?
[10:02] <Cimi> root.fixedArtShapeSize.height
[10:02] <tsdgeos> i can change != -1 to >= 0
[10:02] <tsdgeos> if you want
[10:03] <tsdgeos> this is javascript so dividing by 0 won't crash anything
[10:03] <tsdgeos> but still will make things go weird
[10:03] <tsdgeos> otoh if we're setting fixedShapeArtSize to be 0
[10:03] <tsdgeos> something is wrong somewhere elese
[10:04] <Cimi> tsdgeos, so > 0
[10:04] <Cimi> not >+
[10:04] <Cimi> >=
[10:04] <tsdgeos> right
[10:04] <Cimi> in cardtool we have
[10:04] <Cimi> readonly property size artShapeSize: cardLoader.item ? cardLoader.item.artShapeSize : 0
[10:05] <Cimi> again code is quite nested so is confusing a bit
[10:05] <tsdgeos> yeah
[10:05] <tsdgeos> but it's a loader
[10:05] <tsdgeos> it will have stuff
[10:05] <tsdgeos> except in the startup
[10:05] <Cimi> okl
[10:05] <tsdgeos> but sure, will make it > 0
[10:05] <tsdgeos> noone will get hurt
[10:06] <tsdgeos> pfff
[10:06] <tsdgeos> or not
[10:06] <Cimi> hah
[10:06] <tsdgeos> we already had code that was using -1
[10:06] <tsdgeos> as condition
[10:06] <tsdgeos> now i either change it all
[10:07] <tsdgeos> and then i'm making changes not related to this bugfix
[10:07] <tsdgeos> or end up with code that sometimes checks for -1 and sometimes for >0
[10:07] <Cimi> talk to Saviq when he finished mails
[10:07] <Cimi> to me doing division and not checking for 0 is a mistake
[10:08] <Cimi> ok it's javascript, but we should handle those cases
[10:12] <Saviq> Cimi, I don't have to be a tie-breaker here, just use reason
[10:14] <Cimi> tsdgeos, can we change to > 0 then?
[10:16] <tsdgeos> done
[10:26] <Cimi> tsdgeos, tests too
[10:27] <tsdgeos> Cimi: right
[10:31] <Saviq> tsdgeos, Cimi, the mistake you found, do we have a test for that?
[10:32] <tsdgeos> Saviq: test_art_shape_fixed_size
[10:33] <Saviq> tsdgeos, so when you fixed that, you added more test?
[10:34] <tsdgeos> Saviq: i'm confused :D
[10:34] <tsdgeos> Saviq: what is exactly that in "test for that"?
[10:34] <Saviq> tsdgeos, "<Cimi> tsdgeos, found mistake
[10:34] <Saviq>  root.fixedArtShapeSize.height / root.fixedArtShapeSize.height"
[10:35] <tsdgeos> Saviq: no, we don't have a test except the test that make sure the output is verbatim correct
[10:36] <tsdgeos> Saviq: tbh i don't know how to create a test for that
[10:37] <Saviq> tsdgeos, mhm :|
[10:39] <Cimi> tsdgeos, you check the result of that property?
[10:40] <Cimi> fixedArtShapeSizeAspect
[10:41] <tsdgeos> yeah
[10:41] <tsdgeos> i guess i can
[11:31] <tsdgeos> aaaaaaaaaaand we are unsplit
[11:33] <Saviq> tsdgeos, ok, I'll prep silo, any reason to separate the logout?
[11:34] <Saviq> or should we just land our current queue + logout?
[11:35] <tsdgeos> Saviq: well, logout needs lots of other stuff to land at the same time
[11:35] <tsdgeos> Saviq: and i'm not even sure it works
[11:35] <Saviq> tsdgeos, mhm ok
[11:36] <tsdgeos> that's why i want a silo so it can be properly tested
[11:36] <tsdgeos> last time i did try didn't work again
[11:36] <tsdgeos> but i may have failed at compiling all the repos properly
[11:37] <Saviq> ok, I'll ask for two silos thne
[11:38] <seb128> Saviq, tsdgeos: there is only an indicator-session commit to include with it, maybe put it in the same silo?
[11:39] <tsdgeos> seb128: and  lp:~aacid/unity8-desktop-session/fix_logout  at least
[11:39] <seb128> tsdgeos, that's already in https://launchpad.net/~ci-train-ppa-service/+archive/landing-008/+packages
[11:40] <tsdgeos> ok
[11:40] <tsdgeos> it's a bit sad there's no way to know that
[11:40] <Saviq> tsdgeos, sure there is http://people.canonical.com/~rbpark/citrain/
[11:40] <tsdgeos> Saviq: but i need to go there and f5 stuff every second
[11:40] <Saviq> seb128, so maybe we should just add the logout to that silo instead?
[11:40] <Saviq> tsdgeos, it f5s for you automagically ;)
[11:41] <Saviq> tsdgeos, and then there's #ubuntu-ci-choo-choo
[11:41] <Saviq> tsdgeos, where you can talk to CI-SNCF
[11:41] <seb128> Saviq, we had the logout in a silo earlier in the week and had to clear it out because the unity8 side was not landed and we couldn't test it
[11:41] <tsdgeos> Saviq: it'd be much better imho if it could be a push method in which the MR gets a comment saying "this has been added to silo XYZ" than me having to listen to side channels
[11:41] <seb128> Saviq, oh, you mean adding unity8 in that silo? that would lock your other landing no?
[11:41] <Saviq> seb128, is fine, we should just land it then ;)
[11:41] <seb128> yeah
[11:42] <Saviq> seb128, nothing very pressing in my queue yet either
[11:42] <seb128> Saviq, and even if it's not fully working or tested, as long as it create no regression
[11:42] <seb128> I would just include it
[11:42] <Saviq> seb128, just get it in
[11:42] <Saviq> or I can for that matter
[11:42] <seb128> yeah, please include the unity8 change
[11:43] <tsdgeos> meh
[11:43] <tsdgeos> doesn't merge anymore
[11:43] <tsdgeos> paulliu: https://code.launchpad.net/~paulliu/unity8/logout/+merge/216373 needs remerging
[11:44] <Saviq> paulliu, you around to merge ↑?
[11:47]  * Saviq resubmits under unity-team then
[11:48] <paulliu> Saviq: ok.
[11:51] <Saviq> paulliu, oh you're here, please merge and let me know
[12:16] <paulliu> Saviq, done.
[13:03] <Saviq> paulliu, thanks
[13:04] <dandrader> paulliu, did you clean up the CMakeLists.txt there as well?
[13:07] <paulliu> dandrader: yes. cleaned
[13:08] <dandrader> paulliu, you missed plugins/Unity/Session/CMakeLists.txt
[13:10] <paulliu> dandrader: ok..wait
[13:14] <paulliu> dandrader: done.
[13:23] <Saviq> karni, you asked about depts (somewhere...), best to follow bug #1320847
[13:23] <karni> Saviq: aha. this bug is used to track progress on departments I gather? :D
[13:24] <Saviq> karni, it *can* be used for that, yes
[13:24] <karni> subscribed, thanks!
[13:25] <karni> mhr3: has ETA (for this week) changed for departments, or you guys still plan to wrap some work today? no rush, just asking.
[13:27] <mhr3> karni, definitely not today
[13:27] <mhr3> we're breaking abi, so it's all waiting for more changes
[13:28] <karni> mhr3: Is there a chance to have it next week? How's the work coming along?
[13:30] <mhr3> karni, yes, next week is the target
[13:30] <karni> thanks
[14:10] <Saviq> mhr3_, tsdgeos is of the opinion we shouldn't touch Scopes much, either
[14:10] <Saviq> mhr3_, here's what Albert wrote about the "needs" http://paste.ubuntu.com/7638985/
[14:11] <Saviq> mhr3_, tsdgeos, I'm just not sure of the "includes all, also invisible ones" is needed, though
[14:12] <Saviq> as long as we can get(QString name) (which we actually can already)
[14:13] <tsdgeos> Saviq: yeah i'm unsure on that, i thought it'd be easier "for the world" if Scopes would include all the Scope objects
[14:13] <Saviq> tsdgeos, I don't think it does, even now
[14:13] <tsdgeos> since it'd be weird doing a get("hardocdedNameForScopesScope")
[14:13] <Saviq> tsdgeos, waste of mem
[14:13] <tsdgeos> if Scopes doesn't have it
[14:13] <tsdgeos> but if it is not like that now
[14:13] <tsdgeos> i totally can live without that :D
[14:13] <Saviq> tsdgeos, that depends on the definition of what model Scopes is, really
[14:14] <tsdgeos> Saviq: sure, if it doesn't include visible scopes, we might as well remove that role and the proxymodel that makes sure only visible ones are shown :D
[14:14] <Saviq> you could say Scopes is an "entry-point" to the scopes system (which it kind of is), and a model of favourite scopes
[14:14] <Saviq> tsdgeos, I think we should, yes
[14:14] <Saviq> tsdgeos, this feels legacy (pre-new-scopes) actually
[14:14] <tsdgeos> maybe :)
[14:15] <tsdgeos> mhr3_: comments on ↑ ?
[14:30] <pdo_fn14> Okay, let me see. I know everything in here want to porting the biggest revolution Unity 8, but will it be only-default option to using that?.
[14:33] <pdo_fn14> It's totally unclear and confusing my head always.
[14:42] <mhr3_> tsdgeos, i like the idea of keeping Scopes and adding ScopesOverview
[14:43] <tsdgeos> mhr3_: oh, ScopesOverview in that document is something in my side :D, in you side it would just be ScopesScope
[14:43] <mhr3_> but seeing how special the scopes scope is, i'm not sure if regular cards is enough there
[14:43] <Saviq> mhr3_, they are built with the toolkit, they're regular cards
[14:43] <tsdgeos> but we can also make Scopes have a Scopes::getOverview instead of doing Scopess::get("harcodedName")
[14:44] <mhr3_> yea, detail
[14:44] <mhr3_> Saviq, hmm...
[14:44] <mhr3_> Saviq, it's more about the interactions though
[14:44] <mhr3_> Saviq, for example what happens when you tap on a scope in all?
[14:45] <Saviq> mhr3_, you tell me ;)
[14:45] <mhr3_> does that open new temp dash page and pan to it?
[14:45] <Saviq> mhr3_, but I believe we open that scope in the dash and zoom in again
[14:45] <mhr3_> when does it disappear?
[14:45] <Saviq> mhr3_, opening a scope always takes you back to the dash
[14:45] <mhr3_> when you do the zoom out?
[14:46] <Saviq> mhr3_, on bottom edge again
[14:46] <Saviq> mhr3_, but that's a question I did ask (what does the back button do in non-favourite scope)
[14:46] <mhr3_> should it even have a back button?
[14:47] <Saviq> mhr3_, please read/add comments under https://sites.google.com/a/canonical.com/unity8dash/dash-overview
[14:47] <mhr3_> yea, kinda didn't scroll all the way down :)
[14:51] <Saviq> mhr3_, but also, we'll be displaying smart scope results in the "all" category, so those need to be cards
[14:51] <Saviq> mhr3_, only real thing we don't have is the horizontal list in Favourites
[14:51] <mhr3_> indeed
[14:52] <Saviq> mhr3_, but that we can make custom no issue
[14:52] <mhr3_> i wonder where do the icons come from
[19:36] <lborda_> quit