[07:28] <Cimi> morning
[07:28] <Saviq> elo
[07:28] <Saviq> Cimi, can we go with a flat white highlight for now? that's the last thing missing in alt nav currently
[07:32] <Cimi> Saviq, only in the bad case of weird images and such
[07:32] <Cimi> Saviq, otherwise we want what we did
[07:32] <Cimi> Saviq, I'd still get the average pixel color and shade it instead white
[07:32] <Saviq> Cimi, we can't do that
[07:32] <Saviq> Cimi, we can't sample images in QML
[07:33] <Saviq> Cimi, the solution is the shader, but I don't know how to do it, you don't know how to do it, and only you are going to notice, so let's stop wasting time
[07:33] <Cimi> Saviq, you can use a shadereffectsource of width and height 1pxof the image then stretch it?
[07:34] <Cimi> but I see the issue with the color, right
[07:34] <Saviq> Cimi, how's that gonna help
[07:34] <Cimi> it is not indeed
[07:40] <Cimi> Saviq, scope settings?
[07:40] <Saviq> Cimi, did you reply to all the comments?
[07:40] <Cimi> apart one
[07:40] <Saviq> Cimi, in both revisions?
[07:40] <Saviq> s/revisions/diffs/
[07:41] <Saviq> Cimi, no you didn't
[07:42] <Saviq> Cimi, there's a bunch of unanswered comments in the r1122 into r1160 diff
[07:42] <Saviq> Cimi, and another bunch in r1134 into r1185
[07:43] <Saviq> Cimi, it's difficult to find what you did change or not in the big diffs, please reply to all the inline comments
[07:46] <Cimi> Saviq, inline diff is still a mess indeed
[07:48] <Cimi> Saviq, commented
[09:06] <mzanetti> seb128: hello
[09:06] <seb128> mzanetti, hey
[09:06] <mzanetti> seb128: I'd need a new schema for the launcher favorites... the AS stuff as we do currently doesn't work out
[09:06] <mzanetti> seb128: and can't use the existing unity7 for some incompatibility reason
[09:07] <seb128> mzanetti, oh? which ones?
[09:07] <mzanetti> seb128: any suggestion on what would be a good one?
[09:07] <mzanetti> seb128: incompatibility, well, appid:// for one
[09:07] <mzanetti> unity7 would drop those entries again when started on a unity8 config
[09:07] <mzanetti> same the other way round...
[09:07] <seb128> k
[09:07] <seb128> do you need a gsettings or a.s schemas or both?
[09:08] <mzanetti> gsettings
[09:08] <mzanetti> as too eventually I guess
[09:08] <mzanetti> but that would be just a one way sync to update the greeter's launcher. not for actual persistent config
[09:08] <seb128> k
[09:09] <mzanetti> Saviq: mentioned something like /com/ubuntu/touch/ becoming popular?
[09:09] <mzanetti> err... add seb128: in front and drop the ":" after Saviq ^
[09:09] <seb128> mzanetti, no, don't use "touch", we are tried to not use that
[09:09] <Saviq> good
[09:09] <mzanetti> ack
[09:09] <mzanetti> +1
[09:11] <seb128> mzanetti, we currently have the unity stuff under com.canonical.unity ... not sure if we want to keep that
[09:11] <mzanetti> well, that's the thing... unity7 uses that too for the launcher
[09:11] <mzanetti> I guess we could use a different key in there though?
[09:11] <seb128> we could have com.canonical.unity.Launcher <name>
[09:11] <seb128> right
[09:11] <seb128> you could create "items" or "config" instead of "favorites"
[09:11] <larsu> why don't we update unity7?
[09:12] <larsu> to honor appid:// things as well?
[09:12] <mzanetti> might be an option too I guess
[09:12] <mzanetti> well, at least to not kick them
[09:12] <larsu> right
[09:13] <mzanetti> but its additional efforts In the long run I guess
[09:13] <mzanetti> also unity8 would need to deal with the other keys of unity7 which we don't need/want
[09:13] <mzanetti> like unity://running-apps
[09:17] <mzanetti> Saviq: your input?
[09:17] <mzanetti> the options are: using another key (which would mean sticking with the schema file in lp:unity I guess)
[09:17] <mzanetti> or spending the efforts to make unity7 and unity8 play along nicely
[09:18] <mzanetti> or come up with another path, where so far we didn't have good ideas
[09:18] <Saviq> we can't spend the time on the latter, we need a custom key (at least temporarily)
[09:18] <mzanetti> I tend to agree
[09:18] <mzanetti> so I'll add the "items" key in the existing schema, ok?
[09:19] <Saviq> k
[09:19] <mzanetti> larsu: but hey, since you're around, QGSettings crashes if trying to read/write an invalid key
[09:19] <mzanetti> larsu: while the doc says it would print a warning
[09:24] <larsu> mzanetti: are you using it from qml or c++?
[09:24] <mzanetti> larsu: c++
[09:24]  * asac posted a gdb output for bug 1360593
[09:24] <asac> Saviq: ^^ anything else you want from this state?
[09:25] <larsu> mzanetti: it only prints a warning in qml
[09:25] <mzanetti> larsu: not sure I understand :)
[09:26] <larsu> mzanetti: qml is much more dynamic and it is convention to not crash on errors there
[09:26] <larsu> mzanetti: not so much for c++. You should never put unknown values into qgsettings::get
[09:26] <mzanetti> larsu: I'd say nothing should crash, regardless of the language
[09:26] <Saviq> asac, pkill -SIGSEGV unity8
[09:26] <larsu> s/values/keys
[09:26] <asac> Saviq: without debugger attached?
[09:26] <larsu> mzanetti: you should not use c++ then...
[09:26] <asac> e.g. just like this?
[09:26] <Saviq> asac, without
[09:27] <mzanetti> larsu: no... thats just silly talk
[09:27] <Saviq> asac, this should end up in a .crash file for unity8
[09:27] <larsu> mzanetti: why?
[09:27] <mzanetti> larsu: because it just increases the risk of mistakes
[09:27] <asac> Saviq: it didnt create a new one for unity8 ... only for unity8-dash i got a crash now
[09:28] <asac> -rw-r-----  1 phablet whoopsie 1395979 Aug 26 11:27 _usr_bin_unity8-dash.32011.crash
[09:28] <mzanetti> larsu: if its starting with Q its not supposed to crash :)
[09:28] <asac> -rw-r-----  1 phablet whoopsie 9041951 Aug 25 14:09 _usr_bin_unity8.32011.crash
[09:28] <asac> Saviq: guess the -dash is fine?
[09:28]  * asac finds it interesting that it has the same PID :)
[09:28] <Saviq> asac, the -dash is just fallout, uninteresting
[09:28] <larsu> mzanetti: not really. What do you propose should happen when you give ::get() a non-existant key?
[09:28] <mzanetti> QVariant()
[09:28] <Saviq> asac, that's UID, not PID ;)
[09:28] <asac> Saviq: no new crash file produced
[09:28] <larsu> mzanetti: do you want to check _every_ invocation for empty variants?
[09:28] <asac> Saviq: oh :)
[09:28] <asac> hehe
[09:28] <Saviq> asac, yeah, fallout of you killing unity8 I mean
[09:29] <Saviq> asac, that's why unity8-dash crashed
[09:29] <asac> Saviq: right, but i didnt get an updated unity8 one
[09:29] <mzanetti> larsu: on my end? no... why would I?
[09:29] <Saviq> asac, yeah, so nothing more you can give us
[09:29] <asac> too bad
[09:29] <asac> guess next time i should delete the directory first
[09:29] <mzanetti> larsu: if the key doesn't exist, I'll get a QVariant(), which means there are no default items in the launcher (in this example)
[09:29] <larsu> mzanetti: because you might get an empty one. Now you always get one of the corrrect type
[09:29] <Saviq> asac, shouldn't have been needed, if .uploaded was there apport would overwrite
[09:29] <larsu> mzanetti: no, this is not how it works
[09:30] <larsu> mzanetti: the key always exists. It it's empty, you get an empty list
[09:30] <mzanetti> larsu: this is how it works throughout the Qt libraries I'd say
[09:30] <asac> Saviq: there only is .upload
[09:30] <larsu> mzanetti: I don't understand. A qt library would return an empty variant instead of an empty list to signify "no items"!?
[09:30] <asac> guess i had a crash that wasnt uploaded yet, so its it didnt overwrite?
[09:30] <Saviq> asac, yeah
[09:30] <mzanetti> larsu: you always have bool contains()
[09:31] <Saviq> asac, apport bailed out to not overwrite an old report
[09:31]  * asac checks out why whoospie claims i am offline
[09:31] <mzanetti> larsu: if you want to know if its there, use that ^^
[09:31] <asac> how awful
[09:31]  * asac will remember for nexttime
[09:31] <mzanetti> larsu: otherwise, if you don't care, just use it, you'll get a value or not
[09:31] <larsu> mzanetti: I still don't understand. Where is this bool contains()?
[09:31] <larsu> it's not on qvariant...
[09:31] <mzanetti> larsu: no, QSettings, QList...
[09:32] <mzanetti> larsu: additionally get methods look more like get(key, default), where you'd get the default if key is not in there
[09:32] <mzanetti> larsu: like QVariant get(cosnt QString &key, const QVariant &default)
[09:32] <larsu> mzanetti: ah, got it. My point is, the case you're describing doesn't exist. You always know at compile-time which keys exist and which don't
[09:32] <mzanetti> but *never* crash
[09:32] <larsu> mzanetti: a contains() doesn't make any sense
[09:33] <mzanetti> why not... of course it does
[09:33] <larsu> mzanetti: give me an example.
[09:33] <larsu> you have a schema file, which key would you want to look up?
[09:34] <mzanetti> well, take the launcher
[09:34] <larsu> that's like asking whether qvariant has a method called "contains". You know it's not there, why bother asking
[09:34] <mzanetti> I don't know.. well, I maybe do in the gsettings case... but still its very unQool to crash/abort
[09:35] <larsu> the alternative is worse
[09:35] <larsu> in which you'd need to check every invocation needlessly
[09:35] <mzanetti> no, you don't
[09:35] <larsu> yes, you do...
[09:35] <tsdgeos> no, the alternative is return a proper default value
[09:35] <tsdgeos> which is what sane APIs do
[09:35] <mzanetti> ^
[09:35] <tsdgeos> nor tear down an app from a library
[09:35] <tsdgeos> that's evil
[09:36] <larsu> tsdgeos: the proper default value would be an empty variant
[09:36] <mzanetti> yes
[09:36] <larsu> which you'd need to check for emptiness
[09:36] <mzanetti> no you don't
[09:36] <mzanetti> you just use it
[09:37] <larsu> and then your program behaves weirdly...
[09:37] <mzanetti> or, if you really need it to contain something, then your get() call supplies the default you expect if key is not there
[09:37] <mzanetti> but it doesn't crash!
[09:37] <larsu> you still don't get my point
[09:37] <larsu> the key is _never_ not there
[09:37] <mzanetti> I guess I do get your point... but I just don't agree with it
[09:38] <anpok> data Maybe : Just a | Nothing
[09:38] <mzanetti> but ok... so if this is what its meant to be... I thought it would be a bug
[09:39] <larsu> do you check the return value of malloc() for NULL? Do you check whether qt's moc files where generated correctly?
[09:39] <larsu> this is the same kind of thing
[09:39]  * larsu thinks qt should abort() when QObject::connect() fails
[09:40] <larsu> but it doesn't afaik
[09:40] <anpok> the library should not
[09:40] <larsu> anpok: why not?
[09:40] <anpok> it should invoke some sort of error handling
[09:40] <anpok> and let the user decide what to do about
[09:40] <larsu> that's what it does. It prints errors which never get fixed
[09:40] <anpok> throw and clean up  properly
[09:40] <larsu> the user can't decide anything
[09:40] <larsu> this is a programmer error
[09:40] <anpok> or write a funny number to *0
[09:41] <mzanetti> larsu: well, it returns a bool
[09:41] <larsu> mzanetti: nobody checks for that...
[09:41] <larsu> because that would be madness
[09:41] <mzanetti> larsu: I do when its needed
[09:41] <mzanetti> no. crashing is madness
[09:41] <larsu> mzanetti: are there dynamic signals/slots?
[09:41] <tsdgeos> larsu: there are
[09:41] <mzanetti> yes
[09:41] <larsu> oh, neat
[09:41] <larsu> there are no dynamic gsettings keys, so we don't need that ;)
[09:41] <mzanetti> and also the objects might be dynamic
[09:42] <mzanetti> but still we shouldn't crash
[09:42] <tsdgeos> larsu: so you prefer a user not being able to use an application at all to it maybe sometimes misbehaving because a corner case connect failed?
[09:42] <tsdgeos> nah
[09:42] <larsu> tsdgeos: of course
[09:42] <tsdgeos> larsu: your users must love  you :D
[09:42] <tsdgeos> honestly i prefer a 99% working app than a 0% working app
[09:43] <mzanetti> +1
[09:43] <larsu> tsdgeos: have you seen the amounts of warnings in ~/.cache/upstart? Nobody ever fixes those because they're not visible enough
[09:43] <larsu> tsdgeos: turns out, this is rarely a problem in practice
[09:43] <larsu> these things tend to get noticed quickly
[09:43] <larsu> especially with tests
[09:46] <tsdgeos> useless discussion anyway, it's not like anyone's going to change their minds
[09:46] <tsdgeos> let's have it with a beer next time we meet
[09:46]  * larsu is looking forward to that ;)
[09:48] <Saviq> oh my
[09:49] <Saviq> Cimi, can you merge trunk int scope settings?
[09:49] <Cimi> Saviq, k
[09:49] <Saviq> Cimi, or actually
[09:49] <Cimi> Saviq, currently adding semicolons everywhere xD
[09:50] <Saviq> Cimi, oh yeah, do merge trunk, I need to merge it everywhere else, too...
[09:50] <Cimi> will do
[09:52] <mzanetti> larsu: but in any case, no matter which one is the more "correct" thing to do, if it starts with Q, a user of it doesn't expect it to abort - ever
[09:53] <Cimi> Saviq, for the settingsmodel mock, I used the mock of the backend
[09:56] <Saviq> Cimi, I know, I saw that
[09:57] <Cimi> Saviq, so if it's wrong, we should probably also fix it there :)
[09:57] <Saviq> Cimi, it's not wrong
[09:57] <Saviq> Cimi, it's just different style
[09:57] <Saviq> Cimi, we're closer to Qt style, they're not
[09:58] <larsu> mzanetti: ya, fair enough. I might change it based on that argument.
[09:58] <Saviq> Cimi, but yeah, I know it's a stupid thing to complain about, which is why I won't enforce it
[09:58] <Saviq> Cimi, not before I get astyle to do what we want
[09:59] <Saviq> tsdgeos, looks like you forgot a prereq
[10:00] <tsdgeos> Saviq: F5
[10:00] <Saviq> tsdgeos, ;)
[10:00] <Saviq> tsdgeos, you can't pull emails out from my inbox this way though :P
[10:01] <tsdgeos> Saviq: yeah well, the code should not be there, it's not a missing prereq, just a wrong initial branch
[10:01] <Saviq> tsdgeos, ah ok
[10:11] <Cimi> Saviq, the meh in my onLoadedChanged: if (loaded) genericScopeView.scope = scopes.getScope(2);
[10:11] <Cimi> Saviq, is for, remove that or just "meh"
[10:18] <Saviq> Cimi, I'd rather you didn't check it in with that branch, but meh :P
[10:26] <Cimi> Saviq, I did not understand "You should have a test that verifies initial value when != 0."
[10:26] <Saviq> Cimi, same that a comment I did above
[10:26] <Saviq> Cimi, your initial value for the selector is 1
[10:27] <Saviq> Cimi, you need to verify that the selector indeed displays the option with index 1
[10:27] <Saviq> Cimi, in the mock I mean, it's 1, so "Second" should be displayed when you open the panel
[10:27] <Saviq> Cimi, but it doesn't seem to be the case
[10:27] <Cimi> nope
[10:28] <Cimi> I didn't change the selected index indeed
[10:31] <Cimi> Saviq, not sure where the value is stored though
[10:31] <Saviq> Cimi, wdym? in the "value" member of the Data struct in the settings model
[10:31] <Cimi> Saviq, I did that in Component.onCompleted and onModelChanged
[10:31] <Cimi> Saviq, undefined
[10:32] <Cimi> ListItem.ItemSelector does not have count
[10:33] <Cimi> I confirm widgetData.value seems null
[10:33] <Saviq> solve it
[10:33] <Cimi> ok
[10:33] <Saviq> but write a test first
[10:41] <Cimi> Saviq, onSelectedIndexChanged of ListItem.ItemSelector seems to get called
[10:41] <Cimi> while loading the component
[10:41] <Cimi> thus triggering the updated signal
[10:41] <Saviq> Cimi, to 0 I assume?
[10:42] <Cimi> to 1
[10:42] <Cimi> no to 0 indeed
[10:43] <Cimi> something, probably internal, trigers that
[10:53] <Cimi> Saviq, any idea when shall I set the selectedIndex?
[10:54] <Saviq> Cimi, talk to #sdk
[11:16] <facundobatista> Holas
[11:16] <Saviq> Cimi, ok, I pushed #CCFFFFFF into alt nav, please have a look if we want to change that value, but let's leave it flat for now
[11:24] <Cimi> Saviq, is this only in case of an image right?
[11:24] <Saviq> Cimi, no, it's also in case of flat or gradient background
[11:24] <Cimi> Saviq, no then
[11:25] <Cimi> Saviq, the current solution was better
[11:25] <Saviq> Cimi, but I don't want to dig out the values from the background if I can help it
[11:25] <Saviq> Cimi, the current solution is still there
[11:25] <Cimi> so I don't understand
[11:25] <Cimi> the code we did was taking the bg color
[11:25] <Saviq> Cimi, alt nav just introduces a background where there wasn't one before
[11:26] <Saviq> Cimi, the navigation buttons were transparent (and that's what looks fine in header customizations)
[11:26] <Cimi> I see
[11:26] <Saviq> Cimi, now they have a solid, gradient or image background
[11:26] <Cimi> so it will look quite ugly
[11:26] <Saviq> ok I have one more temporary idea
[11:26] <Cimi> more pressure for me doing the shader
[11:36] <Cimi> Saviq, I don't want to compromise the visuals we had for the 5% someone uses a weird image as bg
[11:36] <Saviq> Cimi, it's not exactly like that, but I've a fix
[11:44] <Cimi> Saviq, this seems to work http://paste.ubuntu.com/8149278/
[11:45] <Saviq> Cimi, you don't need the onInitialValueChanged, and it's a loop btw
[11:45] <Saviq> Cimi, in onSelectedIndexChanged you want to reset initialValue
[11:47] <Saviq> Cimi, ok pushed a fix to alt nav
[11:47] <Saviq> Cimi, just check out tryDash
[11:47] <Cimi> Saviq, onSelectedIndexChanged, initialValue is still 0
[11:48] <Cimi> Saviq, so I need onInitialValueChanged
[11:48] <Saviq> Cimi, then set it before you set the model in onLoaded
[11:48] <Saviq> Cimi, it will have to be there already
[11:49] <Saviq> Cimi, if the binding causes the delay, don't use a binding, initialValue should never change in that case anyway, you got it in a "static" object
[11:58] <Cimi> Saviq, so I should now add initialValue for all the settings?
[11:58] <Cimi> I am not sure this will work though
[11:58] <Saviq> Cimi, no
[11:58] <Cimi> feels racy
[11:58] <Cimi> asking for troubles
[11:59] <Saviq> Cimi, in this case if (hasOwnProperty('initialValue')) makes sense
[11:59] <Saviq> Cimi, in the factory
[11:59] <Saviq> Cimi, and just set the initial value *before* you set the data
[11:59] <Saviq> Cimi, that's not racy then, because initialValue is *set* before selectedIndex can change, because there's no model
[12:05] <larsu> any idea why ubuntu-ui-toolkit's tests might fail on Jenkins but not for me? It seems that it can't load the image provider: https://jenkins.qa.ubuntu.com/job/generic-mediumtests-builder-utopic-amd64/3388/console
[12:05] <Saviq> mzanetti, can I ask you for https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/scope-favoriting/+merge/232109 please
[12:05] <larsu> in tst_headActions.qml
[12:06] <Saviq> larsu, best talk in #sdk on canonical's irc or #ubuntu-app-devel
[12:06] <larsu> k, thanks
[12:11] <Saviq> dednick, hey, anything I can help re: prompts inception?
[12:13] <dednick> Saviq: hey. i just replied to kevins email. It's still in progress.
[12:13] <Saviq> dednick, ok, lemme know if you need anything
[12:13] <dednick> I'm about to start testing what i've odne
[12:14] <Saviq> and lol on getting an email from your manager with http://memegenerator.net/instance/53651480
[12:14] <dednick> Saviq: hehe, yeah.
[12:16] <Cimi> Saviq, here we go http://paste.ubuntu.com/8149484/
[12:16] <dednick> oh yay. unity-api has changed...
[12:19] <Saviq> Cimi, aaand why the tmpValue?
[12:19] <Saviq> Cimi, why can't you just do selectedIndex = initivalValue; initialValue = -1?
[12:24] <Cimi> Saviq, because changing selectedIndex will trigger another onSelectedIndexChanged?
[12:25] <Saviq> Cimi, ok, right
[12:25] <Saviq> Cimi, this is all nasty and loopy, but yeah I think there's nothing better
[12:25] <Cimi> Saviq, I was not sure onPropertyChanged ends before processing other events
[12:26] <Saviq> Cimi, no, you're right, you need to make sure that the loop will be broken at next iteration
[12:27] <Saviq> Cimi, and the way to do that is to make sure the condition doesn't let it through
[12:27] <Cimi> yeah
[12:27] <Saviq> Cimi, one thing you could do is only trigger updated() if value actually changed
[12:28] <Saviq> Cimi, otherwise you'll end up emitting updated() on startup with the initial value
[12:28] <Cimi> Saviq, there's a return though
[12:28] <Cimi> but yeah maybe
[12:28] <Cimi> you're right
[12:28] <Saviq> Cimi, not maybe
[12:28] <Saviq> Cimi, selectedIndex = tmpValue
[12:28] <Saviq> will cause another run through onSelectedIndexChanged
[12:29] <Saviq> and will emit updated(selectedIndex)
[12:29] <Saviq> even though it's equal to model.value still
[12:29] <Cimi> Saviq, it does not get emitted if is 0
[12:29] <Cimi> but if it's 1... let me think
[12:30] <Saviq> Cimi, say on startup initialValue is 1
[12:30] <Saviq> Cimi, you go:
[12:30] <Saviq> selectedIndexChanged(0)
[12:30] <Saviq> because the model got set
[12:30] <Cimi> Saviq, channel #Cimi for live debugging :D
[12:30] <Cimi> ahah
[12:30] <Saviq> inside you go selectedIndex = tmpValue
[12:30] <Saviq> which emits selectedIndexChanged(1)
[12:30] <Saviq> and then you end up emitting updated(1)
[12:31] <Saviq> because it's neither 0 or initialIndex is >= 0
[12:31] <Cimi> if selectedIndex != widgetData.value then
[12:31] <Saviq> so return never happens
[12:31] <Saviq> yes
[12:31] <Saviq> Cimi, but that you might do in the factory
[12:31] <Saviq> Cimi, otherwise you'd need it in all the widgets, not worth it
[12:52] <Saviq> tsdgeos, when rebulding ci, make sure to bump revision
[12:52] <tsdgeos> yeah :/
[12:52] <tsdgeos> sorries
[12:53] <Saviq> nw, just restarted with the new r
[12:54] <tsdgeos> was trying to get all approved MR to be also approved by CI
[12:54] <Saviq> yeah, good idea
[12:54] <Saviq> I'll have another look through once the current set completes
[12:59] <Saviq> actually started them already
[13:52] <karni> Hey guys, got a question, not unity related but I think devs here will answer it best -- I want to refactor out some code to a .js file, but it requires access to import Telegram 0.1 -- is there a way to do that? (basically, I need visibility of an enum exposed from C++ via qml plugin)
[13:54] <tsdgeos> don't think that's "correct"
[13:54] <tsdgeos> i mean if you need QML stuff then it's not JS anymore, no?
[14:00] <dandrader> lifecycle got merged! \o/
[14:00] <tedg> zbenjamin, Did the URL dispatcher branch work for you?
[14:01] <zbenjamin> tedg: hey, i did not realize it is finished
[14:01] <dandrader> dednick, time to rebase your stuff. I'm pretty sure there will be big conflicts
[14:02] <tedg> zbenjamin, Ah, I mentioned it to Saviq last night. He must be hiding it to show his immense power. ;-)
[14:02] <zbenjamin> tedg: most likely ;)
[14:02] <tedg> zbenjamin, Yes, I expect it to work, but wanted to make sure it was all the same names, etc.
[14:02] <Saviq> zbenjamin, you're even subscribed to the bug :)
[14:02] <Saviq> zbenjamin, bug #1361349
[14:03]  * zbenjamin hides
[14:03] <tedg> Again Saviq shows strength as he lords over #ubuntu-unity!
[14:04] <zbenjamin> lol
[14:04] <zbenjamin> tedg: is there some archive i can pull the package from ? or do i need to build it myself?
[14:05] <dednick> dandrader: ya. i've been busy with it for awhile now :)
[14:06] <tedg> zbenjamin, I *think* that Jenkins will build it in a few, but it's also quick to build.
[14:06] <zbenjamin> tedg: not if you need to setup a builder chroot before ,)
[14:07] <tedg> Heh, just build it on the device.
[14:07] <zbenjamin> true
[14:13] <dandrader> dednick, I feell your pain. had to do it before
[14:13] <Cimi> Saviq, I pushed without the initialValue test
[14:16] <Saviq> Cimi, String(factory.source) not +
[14:16] <Cimi> ok
[14:17] <Cimi> Saviq, also, the change on the loading of the settingspage is by your request
[14:17] <Cimi> Saviq, when you asked me to wait onLoaded for open = true
[14:17] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah I know
[14:17] <Saviq> Cimi, it even makes sense probably
[14:18] <mzanetti> mterry: hey
[14:18] <mterry> mzanetti, hello!
[14:18] <Saviq> Cimi, although we could only delay a fade in or something
[14:18] <Saviq> Cimi, but it's fine for now
[14:18] <mzanetti> mterry: I've got bad news for you :)
[14:18] <zbenjamin> tedg: do i need to create a url-dispatcher file with that patch at all?
[14:18] <zbenjamin> tedg: or will it just work
[14:18] <mzanetti> mterry: in my efforts to rework the launcher plugin, I stripped out all the accountsservice stuff
[14:18] <mzanetti> mterry: but there's also good news for you
[14:19] <mterry> mzanetti, :(
[14:19] <mzanetti> mterry: you'll get a separate launcher plugin that only reads stuff from accountsservice
[14:19] <Saviq> Cimi, the initial value test should be easy
[14:19] <mzanetti> mterry: this mix of dconf and AS was keeping to bring up issues
[14:19] <mzanetti> mterry: so the idea is this:
[14:20] <Cimi> Saviq, it is not
[14:20] <mzanetti> mterry: the launcher plugin loaded in the session only works on dconf, has the interfaces for count emblems and whatnot
[14:20] <Cimi> Saviq, because here the model is static
[14:20] <Cimi> Saviq, so at launch it doesn't trigger the onSelectedIndexChanged
[14:20] <Cimi> that is triggered with the mocks
[14:21] <mzanetti> mterry: it will also live-sync *all* its state changes (including recent apps, non-pinned ones) over to AS somehow in a future commit
[14:21]  * tsdgeos shakes fist against UbuntuShape
[14:21] <Saviq> Cimi, just set the model in init
[14:21] <tsdgeos> somehow it's eating the sourceChanged signal of Image
[14:21] <Saviq> Cimi, instead of binding it
[14:21] <mzanetti> mterry: and the greeter just loads another launcher plguin that only reads that AS state
[14:21] <mzanetti> mterry: basically being a read-only copy of the session one
[14:21] <mzanetti> mterry: so the question is: does this work for you or am I missing a use case?
[14:21] <Cimi> Saviq, ok
[14:21] <mzanetti> tsdgeos: I reported a bug for that long time ago
[14:22] <Cimi> Saviq, haven't thought of that
[14:22] <tsdgeos> mzanetti: sigh
[14:22] <tsdgeos> i spent almost one our of my time tracking this stuff
[14:22] <tsdgeos> mzanetti: can you try to find the bug number
[14:22] <Saviq> mterry, to sum up what mzanetti said, I feel like all the greeter backends should be "views" onto the session, falling back to values stored in AS or some defaults
[14:22] <tsdgeos> so i can go there and tell them they own me some life time?
[14:22] <mzanetti> tsdgeos: here's one https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/+bug/1194778
[14:23] <Cimi> Saviq, actually no
[14:23] <Cimi> Saviq, I tried that before
[14:23] <mterry> mzanetti, that should be fine, greeter only needs read access
[14:23] <Cimi> Saviq, setting widgetData to undefined
[14:23] <mterry> mzanetti, so the AS code isn't written though?
[14:23] <Cimi> still no luck
[14:24] <Cimi> Saviq, anyway, I was thinking of crashing in bed, I have fever today :\
[14:24] <mzanetti> mterry: no, it isn't
[14:24] <Saviq> Cimi, I can't see how selectedIndex wouldn't change, it should be -1 on startup, then change to 0 on model change, then to 1 for the initialValue
[14:24] <Saviq> Cimi, oh ok
[14:24] <mzanetti> mterry: I figured we'd only actually use it in split greeter szenario
[14:24] <mzanetti> mterry: is that correct?
[14:24] <Cimi> Saviq, the testCase waits for the rendering
[14:24] <mterry> mzanetti, yeah makes sense, just means I'll have to figure that out in future
[14:25] <Cimi> when: windowShown I believe
[14:25] <mzanetti> mterry: well, not saying you have to write all this
[14:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, not sure if it's a Hungarian thing, but we also need something in the privacy mode for in-session greeter
[14:25] <mterry> mzanetti, sure
[14:25] <mzanetti> Saviq: Hungarian thing?
[14:25] <Saviq> mzanetti, szenario
[14:26] <mzanetti> still not following what hungary has to do with this :D but yeah, I guess we might want something
[14:27] <Saviq> mzanetti, Hungarian has a lot of "sz" (well, Polish, too, but we actually pronounce the s and sz opposite to how HU do)
[14:27] <anpok> szEnario?
[14:27] <Saviq> aaanyway
[14:27] <anpok> ah not hungarin notation
[14:29] <mzanetti> Saviq: ah... I think its a german thing :D
[14:29] <Saviq> is 'szenario' a real DE word?
[14:30] <mzanetti> yes, well, uppercase
[14:30] <mzanetti> obviously :D
[14:30] <Cimi> Saviq, weirdly enough, http://paste.ubuntu.com/8150359/
[14:31] <Cimi> Saviq, make tryScopeSettingList does not switch to initialValue 2 here
[14:31] <Cimi> the onSelectedIndexChanged is not called through tests
[14:31] <Saviq> Cimi, because it doesn't have a model
[14:31] <Saviq> Cimi, in try* it's just empty, so no signals emitted
[14:31] <Cimi> Saviq, the model is widgetData.properties
[14:32] <Cimi> Saviq, I put debug in ScopeSettingList.qml
[14:32] <Saviq> Cimi, it might be too early if it's bound
[14:32] <Saviq> Cimi, if you do not bind widgetData but only do it in init() and reset back to null in cleanup()
[14:33] <Saviq> Cimi, I can't imagine how there could be no Changed
[14:33] <Saviq> Cimi, unless the selector is not even using ListView
[14:33] <Cimi> Saviq, in that case works
[14:34] <Cimi> Saviq, but breaks trySetting
[14:34] <Saviq> Cimi, we don't need try* to work everywhere
[14:34] <Saviq> Cimi, it's enough if it works in tryScopeSettings, not in all the widgets separately
[14:38] <Cimi> Saviq, as well as adding warnings
[14:43] <zbenjamin> Saviq: what would be a url for any scope? just to try if it works
[14:43] <Saviq> zbenjamin, scope://clickscope for example
[14:43] <Saviq> zbenjamin, basically scope://$scopeid
[14:44] <zbenjamin> ** (process:6108): WARNING **: Unable to dispatch url 'scope://clickscope':GDBus.Error:com.canonical.URLDispatcher.BadURL: URL 'scope://clickscope' is not handleable by the URL Dispatcher
[14:44] <zbenjamin> hmm
[14:44] <Saviq> zbenjamin, you still need the unity8.url-dispatcher file installed
[14:44] <Saviq> zbenjamin, you might wanna restart url-dispatcher too
[14:45] <zbenjamin> Saviq: how to restart it?
[14:45] <Saviq> zbenjamin, "restart url-dispatcher" ;)
[14:45]  * zbenjamin does a reboot
[14:46] <Saviq> zbenjamin, as phablet
[14:47] <zbenjamin> Saviq: still the same error
[14:47] <Cimi> Saviq, ok done sth
[14:47] <Saviq> zbenjamin, let me check it out locally
[14:48] <Cimi> Saviq, prefixed the initialValue test with 0, and moved the initialization of widgetData in initTestCase
[14:49] <Saviq> Cimi, ugh
[14:49] <Saviq> Cimi, I'm not gonna approve a test with 0 prefixed :P
[14:49] <Cimi> Saviq, well let me remove the test then
[14:49] <Saviq> Cimi, if you want a fresh state of the widget, create it on the fly
[14:49] <Saviq> Cimi, even leave the original one around, just in that test create one dynamically and use that
[14:50]  * Cimi tries
[14:50] <Saviq> Cimi, http://qt-project.org/doc/qt-5/qtqml-javascript-dynamicobjectcreation.html
[14:51] <Cimi> Saviq, easier, I can create another one just to test the init
[14:51] <Cimi> Saviq, just next to the normal one
[14:51] <Saviq> Cimi, sure, that too
[14:52] <Saviq> Cimi, but if resetting widgetData to null does not reset the element to the original state, that's something fishy there too
[14:52] <Cimi> Saviq, it does reset
[14:52] <Cimi> Saviq, thus breaks all tests later
[14:52] <Cimi> I prefer this way
[14:52] <Cimi> simpler
[14:53] <Saviq> Cimi, I don't understand
[14:53] <Cimi> neither I do
[14:53] <Cimi> :)
[14:53] <Saviq> Cimi, if in cleanup() you set to null, that resets, and in init() you set to the appropriate data, and it works, why do you need two?
[14:54] <Cimi> Saviq, it resets all the times I run the other tests
[14:54] <Cimi> Saviq, so in the case of the test for index 0, spy.count accumulates all the model changes signals
[14:54] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, and?
[14:54] <Saviq> Cimi, don't you have a spy.clear()?
[14:55] <Saviq> Cimi, you should, in cleanup(), too
[14:55] <Saviq> Cimi, and wait() already verifies there was one emit of that signal
[14:55] <Cimi> Saviq, I have, but in init when I set the model
[14:55] <Cimi> the signal seems emitted
[14:55] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, that's expected is it not?
[14:56] <Cimi> yes
[14:56] <Saviq> Cimi, so I still don't get why do we need two widgets
[14:56] <Cimi> Saviq, pushed
[14:57] <Cimi> Saviq, because it works fine, supports make try, does not clutter the screen with qml warnings
[14:58] <Cimi> Saviq, I think the solution I just pushed is clean and fine... I take an aspirin and try to get better now
[14:58] <Cimi> I have fever since this morning...
[15:01] <Cimi> Saviq, trying alt_nav before
[15:03] <Saviq> Wellark, what's ETA of Ubuntu.Connectivity 1.0?
[15:03] <Wellark> Saviq: it's in the utopic archive
[15:03] <Saviq> Wellark, separate package?
[15:03] <Wellark> and docs have been published under developer.ubuntu.com
[15:03] <Saviq> tsdgeos, ↑
[15:04] <Saviq> qml-module-ubuntu-connectivity
[15:04] <Wellark> Saviq: the qml API is in "qml-module-ubuntu-connectivity"
[15:04] <Wellark> Saviq: did the rename land?
[15:04] <Saviq> Wellark, in utopic, yes, is in silo 4 for rtm
[15:04] <Wellark> otherwise unity8 will explode if somebody installs that package
[15:04] <Wellark> good.
[15:04] <tsdgeos> :D
[15:05] <Wellark> tsdgeos: where do you need it?
[15:05] <tsdgeos> Wellark: to see if we want to preload more icons in the dash or just the ones we're showing
[15:05] <Wellark> tsdgeos: ok. cool
[15:06] <Wellark> tsdgeos: http://developer.ubuntu.com/api/qml/sdk-14.10/Ubuntu.Connectivity.NetworkingStatus/
[15:06] <tsdgeos> yep, saw it
[15:07] <Wellark> ok. go crazy!
[15:07] <tsdgeos> Wellark: do you have any idea what urfkill is, your package needs it and i removed it not much ago because it kept segfaulting like every 4 minutes and killing my connection
[15:07] <Wellark> if you break it, you get to keep both pieces
[15:07] <dandrader> any gmock expert around?
[15:07] <Wellark> tsdgeos: urfkill is the daemon which takes care of FlightMode for us.
[15:08] <Wellark> and other radio control
[15:08] <Saviq> dandrader, mir folk probably know best
[15:08] <Saviq> dandrader, or you can hit up tvoss directly :)
[15:08] <dandrader> right
[15:08] <tsdgeos> Wellark: well, let's see if the infinite loop segfaulting got fixed
[15:08] <tvoss> dandrader, what do you need?
[15:08] <zbenjamin> ls
[15:08] <Wellark> tsdgeos: if not, file a bug against urfkill
[15:08] <tsdgeos> i did
[15:09] <tsdgeos> it was duplicated against one of those private bugs
[15:09] <tsdgeos> so i lost all hope of tracking it
[15:09] <Cimi> Saviq, tried alt nav
[15:09] <Cimi> Saviq, I see some overlapping pixels in the middle
[15:09] <Cimi> Saviq, could be the separator
[15:09] <Cimi> vertical one
[15:10] <tsdgeos> Wellark: hmmmm
[15:10] <Saviq> tedg, http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/8150697/ not looking good does it?
[15:10] <tsdgeos> Wellark: how expensive is a NetworkingStatus ? probably i only want one, right?
[15:10] <Wellark> tsdgeos: try this also: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/urfkill/+bug/1295387
[15:11] <Wellark> tsdgeos: that key is under /etc/urfkill/urfkill.conf
[15:11] <Wellark> tsdgeos: well, it's not that expensive
[15:11] <dandrader> tvoss, asked in #ubuntu-mir
[15:12] <Wellark> it basically just adds two signal handlers to the QDBusConnection::sessionBus()
[15:12] <tsdgeos> Wellark: so i set that to false will disable the thing?
[15:12] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah, shall I offset it by 1dp from the top?
[15:13] <Wellark> tsdgeos: that did at least fix 100% cpu usage on my system
[15:13] <tedg> Saviq, Well, I'm sending what I expect to send :-)
[15:13] <tsdgeos> Wellark: ok, let's see
[15:13] <Saviq> tedg, yeah that I know, but we're not receiving it....
[15:13] <tedg> Saviq, Can you grab the introspection on the connection?
[15:13] <Saviq> tedg, how do I?
[15:14] <Saviq> tedg, if I do
[15:14] <tedg> Saviq, gdbus introspect --session --dest com.canonical.UnityDash --object-path / --recurse
[15:14] <Cimi> Saviq, the vertical separator, seems likle
[15:14] <Saviq> tedg, http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/8150722/
[15:15] <Saviq> tedg, http://paste.ubuntu.com/8150724/
[15:15] <tedg> Saviq, Hmm, yeah, really not there.
[15:16] <tedg> Saviq, Not sure on that one, its a UriHandler thing in QML.
[15:16] <Saviq> tedg, well, yeah, I got it, and it's a singleton so always there :/
[15:16] <Saviq> tedg, ok, will have to dig on our side
[15:17] <Saviq> Cimi, fixed
[15:22] <Cimi> Saviq, better
[15:22] <Cimi> Saviq, do we have a design approval on that separator?
[15:22] <Cimi> why is it 2 pixels wide?
[15:22] <Saviq> Cimi, because separators are meant to be 2dp
[15:23] <tedg> Saviq, So, did it work?
[15:23]  * tedg can't take this level of stress
[15:23] <Saviq> tedg, seems better, yes
[15:23] <Cimi> Saviq, usually are 2dp because they were composed by a dark and a white line
[15:23] <tedg> :-)
[15:23] <tedg> Woot!
[15:23] <Saviq> tedg, didn't *work* work yet
[15:23] <Cimi> Saviq, not solid 2px
[15:23] <Saviq> Cimi, if only we had a separator in the sdk
[15:23] <Saviq> Cimi, that can be used in situations like this
[15:24] <Saviq> Cimi, and visual design for that matter
[15:24] <Cimi> Saviq, try 1px on your machine and let me know how you like it
[15:27] <Cimi> Saviq, dp(1) and opacity 0.2 imho
[15:27] <Saviq> tedg, zbenjamin \o/
[15:27] <zbenjamin> Saviq: got it working???
[15:30] <Saviq> zbenjamin, yeah, got a small fix for your branch
[15:30] <Saviq> tedg, how do I set an env var in an upstart job?
[15:31] <Saviq> export APP_ID?
[15:31] <Saviq> no :/
[15:32] <Saviq> env APP_ID=unity8-dash doesn't seem to cut it :|
[15:35] <Saviq> zbenjamin, http://paste.ubuntu.com/8150874/
[15:41] <Saviq> Wellark, any reason why the network status thing isn't a singleton?
[15:41] <tedg> Saviq, You should just have to have env to define it and export to put it into the env.
[15:42] <Saviq> tedg, yeah, it works, no need for export even, not sure why list-env doesn't show it though
[15:42] <zbenjamin> Saviq: https://code.launchpad.net/~zeller-benjamin/unity8/scope-url/+merge/231749
[15:42] <Wellark> Saviq: no reason
[15:42] <Wellark> Saviq: I thought about it
[15:42] <Wellark> but then again normal apps would anyway create just one of them
[15:43] <Saviq> Wellark, not a reason to not make it a singleton
[15:43] <Saviq> Wellark, because they will create multiple of them if they can
[15:43] <Saviq> Wellark, and trying to not do it is a pain because you need to pass it around
[15:43] <Saviq> Wellark, it really should be a singleton
[15:44] <zbenjamin> Saviq: added your patch to my MR
[15:44] <zbenjamin> Saviq: i need to run now, anything else before i log out?
[15:45] <Saviq> zbenjamin, no, is good, thanks, might need to take it over from you to add testing
[15:45] <Saviq> zbenjamin, but other than that it's good, thanks
[15:46] <zbenjamin> Saviq: sure , go for it :)
[15:46] <Wellark> Saviq: it will be a singleton
[15:46] <Wellark> tsdgeos is working on it
[15:47] <Saviq> Wellark, yeah, I know, ;)
[15:48] <Cimi> Saviq, Houston we have a bug
[15:48]  * Wellark heils to our unity8 puppet master Saviq 
[15:49] <Cimi> Saviq, the divider highlight/inset need to be disabled when activating (animating) the inner page header
[15:49] <Cimi> Saviq, to reproduce, try a search - I recommend trying searching in The Weather Channel scope, you can clearly see the lines at the bottom of the second header
[15:50] <Cimi> might be fixable with a visible flag
[15:50] <Saviq> Cimi, need to check
[15:50] <Saviq> Cimi, comment on MP please, tomorrow
[15:50] <Cimi> ok
[15:51] <Cimi> tomorrow is http://nationalburgerday.co.uk btw
[15:51] <Cimi> :D
[15:54] <tedg> Cimi, Are you taking the day off? "personal day" ;-)
[15:54] <Cimi> tedg, hah
[15:54] <Cimi> tedg, I might take the afternoon off if I decide to go double at lunch :D
[15:55] <tedg> Heh
[15:55] <Cimi> tedg, last year I had a double hamburger at lunch and my afternoon was one of the most unproductive ever :D
[15:56] <tedg> Hmm, clearly we need Saviq to approve all Cimi's lunch choices. Cimi, text him a photo and he can give a thumbs up/down.
[16:00] <tsdgeos> Wellark: https://code.launchpad.net/~aacid/connectivity-api/networking_status_singleton/+merge/232248
[16:08] <Wellark> tsdgeos: cool
[16:08] <Wellark> tsdgeos: don't you have to parent the singleton the the engine?
[16:08] <Wellark> in networkingStatusSingletonProvide
[16:08] <Wellark> ()
[16:10] <tsdgeos> Wellark: i think not
[16:10] <tsdgeos> i mean it works without doing it
[16:10] <tsdgeos> what would that give me?
[16:10] <tsdgeos> maybe deletion on engine deletion
[16:10] <Wellark> tsdgeos: yep :)
[16:10] <tsdgeos> can do that if you prefer
[16:11] <Wellark> tsdgeos: please check the Qt documentation about what it says about this matter
[16:11] <tsdgeos> Wellark: done
[16:11] <Wellark> is the singleton automatically parented to the QmlEngine or not
[16:11] <tsdgeos> i did, it's pretty ambiguous
[16:11] <Wellark> ok.
[16:11] <Wellark> parenting it to the engine is not a bad thing anyway
[16:12] <Wellark> as if I remember correctly the signletons are created once per QmlEngine instance
[16:12] <tsdgeos> yeah
[16:12] <tsdgeos> "NOTE: A QObject singleton type instance returned from a singleton type provider is owned by the QML engine. For this reason, the singleton type provider function should not be implemented as a singleton factory.
[16:12] <tsdgeos> "
[16:12] <tsdgeos> i mean it's not needed it seems
[16:12] <tsdgeos> but it won't hurt either AFAICS
[16:12] <Wellark> tsdgeos: yep.
[16:12] <Wellark> tsdgeos: thanks!
[16:12] <Wellark> tsdgeos: Approved
[16:12] <Wellark> tsdgeos: now, get a silo :)
[16:13] <tsdgeos> he he
[16:13] <tsdgeos> i'm not a lander
[16:14] <Wellark> as this is an API break I would like to get it landed ASAP
[16:14] <Wellark> thostr_: --^
[16:14] <tsdgeos> +1
[16:14] <Wellark> thostr_: https://code.launchpad.net/~aacid/connectivity-api/networking_status_singleton/+merge/232248
[16:14] <tsdgeos> Wellark: have to go now, tty tomorrow
[16:14] <Wellark> after that lands we can send a public email to announce the API
[16:22] <Saviq> @unity guess what... strip tags please...
[16:23] <dandrader> Saviq, do you know which merge brought it?
[16:24] <Saviq> dandrader, lemme check
[16:26] <Saviq> dandrader, last branch committed to trunk that has them was lp:~aacid/unity8/expandable_model_not_array
[16:27] <dandrader> Saviq, you mean the first
[16:27] <dandrader> top to bottom
[16:27] <Saviq> dandrader, that's still the last, timewise :)
[16:30] <mzanetti> Saviq: we should do something like with the last one in the standup :D
[16:30] <Saviq> ;)
[16:30] <mzanetti> 5 pushups per wrong tag :D
[16:30] <Saviq> whoever reintroduces tags gets to do notes for a week
[16:30] <mzanetti> doesn't work
[16:31] <mzanetti> causes all others to be late at the standup
[16:31] <mzanetti> for a week
[16:31] <Saviq> ;)
[16:31] <mzanetti> (including me)
[16:31] <Saviq> mzanetti, https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/passcode-not-pin/+merge/232258
[16:31] <Saviq> ah grr
[16:31] <Saviq> need to resubmit
[16:32] <Cimi> Saviq, I tried adding a behaviour
[16:32] <Cimi> Saviq, it does not work
[16:32] <Saviq> Cimi, weren't you going to bed?
[16:32] <mzanetti> ah ok...
[16:32] <Cimi> ENOCONTEXT
[16:32] <Cimi> Saviq, behaviour on the setting list
[16:32] <Saviq> mzanetti, https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/passcode-not-pin/+merge/232261
[16:32] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah I know
[16:32] <Cimi> Saviq, I was, took aspirin, feeling better
[16:33] <Cimi> and my homemade cold brewed coffee
[16:35] <Saviq> Cimi, what was the problem with alt nav again?
[16:35] <mzanetti> Saviq: where did you find the PIN actually?
[16:36] <mzanetti> Saviq: IIRC you made me change this last minute :)
[16:36] <Saviq> mzanetti, *to* PIN
[16:36] <mzanetti> yes
[16:36] <Saviq> mzanetti, because that's what kemmko told me to
[16:36] <mzanetti> ah ok
[16:36] <Saviq> mzanetti, I put the phone in her hands
[16:36] <Saviq> mzanetti, and got "this should say PIN"; "you sure?" "yes"
[16:36] <Saviq> pffrreet
[16:36] <mzanetti> ack
[16:37] <mzanetti> just wanted to know if there's a document still specifying the old one
[16:38] <Saviq> Cimi, ah you mean the line going through the screen? that's not from the divider actually, and totally not an alt nav bug
[16:40] <Saviq> Cimi, that's separatorBottom
[16:40] <Saviq> according to my qml debugging foo
[16:40] <Saviq> fu rather
[16:41] <Saviq> even though I set it to ""
[16:41] <Saviq> I wonder if it's still added to the height or something
[16:46] <Cimi> Saviq, you saw the bright line 2gu under the search box?
[16:46] <Cimi> Saviq, I meant that line
[16:46] <Saviq> Cimi, yes, that's SDK's bottomBorder
[16:47] <Saviq> Cimi, visible even though I reset separatorBottomSource
[16:47] <Cimi> Saviq, ugly - ok
[16:47] <Cimi> Saviq, one day we probably want to use a loader for the content here
[16:49] <Saviq> Cimi, which content?
[16:49] <Saviq> Cimi, bottomItem?
[16:49] <Saviq> Cimi, probably, yeah
[16:52] <Cimi> Saviq, no, the whole container
[16:52] <Saviq> Cimi, which one
[16:54] <Cimi> Saviq, to recap, the bottomBorder is inside PageHeadStyle?
[16:54] <Saviq> Cimi, yes
[16:54] <Cimi> Saviq, we can use a different height for those
[16:54] <Cimi> Saviq, and clip :D
[16:54] <Saviq> Cimi, OR
[16:54] <Cimi> on movement
[16:54] <Saviq> Cimi, force SDK to fix it
[16:55] <Cimi> :D
[16:55] <Cimi> ok
[16:55] <Saviq> instead of working around it
[16:55] <Cimi> Saviq, I think the workaround is easier xD
[16:55] <Cimi> ahah
[16:55] <Cimi> Saviq, ok..
[16:55] <Saviq> Cimi, but has short legs
[16:56] <Saviq> Cimi, dude, are you reading what you're doing or not?
[16:56] <Saviq> (String())?
[16:56] <Cimi> Saviq, I had fever before
[16:56] <Cimi> might have done a mistake
[16:56] <Cimi> was feeling quite shite
[16:57] <Saviq> Cimi, excuses excuses
[16:57] <Saviq> ;P
[16:57] <Saviq> Cimi, FTR, I dislike scopeSettingFresh a lot
[16:57] <Saviq> Cimi, someone will try to use it in a different test for some reason later
[16:57] <Saviq> Cimi, and it will break
[16:57] <Cimi> Saviq, that's why we have reviews :)
[16:58] <Cimi> Saviq, we can stop them
[16:58] <Saviq> Cimi, we *really* don't need tryFoo to work for every value of Foo, it's better to have a bigger overview
[16:58] <Saviq> Cimi, in any case
[16:58] <Saviq> Cimi, the fact that you want tryFoo work does *not* preclude you creating a fresh object in the test
[16:58] <Saviq> Cimi, so please do that
[16:58] <Saviq> Cimi, remember to destroy it at the end of it
[16:58] <Cimi> Saviq, I think using a fresh component is better than messing with the model setting it to null and not
[16:59] <Saviq> Cimi, wrong, because that assumes all your components will be fresh
[16:59] <Saviq> Cimi, which in real life they don't have to be
[16:59] <Cimi> Saviq, but initialValue is indeed supposed to work just in a particular situation
[17:00] <Saviq> Cimi, so, in order of preference: make it work with the component you have already or create a fresh object for that test alone
[17:00] <Cimi> Saviq, so forcing to delete the model at the end of every test feels wrong to me too
[17:00] <Saviq> Cimi, well, that's a wrong feeling you have
[17:00] <Saviq> Cimi, the particular situation is that when the model is reset
[17:00] <Saviq> Cimi, and initialValue is set
[17:00] <Saviq> Cimi, it should set selectedIndex to initialValue, nothing else
[17:01] <Saviq> Cimi, never it should say that "it will only work when you first the model the first time ever"
[17:01] <Saviq> Cimi, that's doomed
[17:01] <Cimi> Saviq, well
[17:01] <Cimi> Saviq, initialValue will always set the selectedIndex to 2
[17:02] <Cimi> Saviq, messing up with tests that want to check where the index is
[17:03] <Cimi> Saviq, do we also want qml warnings because of null model?
[17:04] <Saviq> Cimi, if you have warnings like that, you'll have them on startup too
[17:04] <Saviq> Cimi, so not sure what's the argument here
[17:04] <Cimi> Saviq, not with the dual component
[17:04] <Cimi> or maybe yes
[17:04] <Saviq> Cimi, you will in real life
[17:05] <Saviq> Cimi, you might not get them in the test just because they're bound and simple
[17:05] <Saviq> Cimi, in real life the component will be loaded by the Loader, it will complain about the null, and only then will you set its model
[17:06] <Saviq> Cimi, that's why we have the foo ? foo.bar : null or whatever
[17:06] <Saviq> I've an idea about getting rid of those but mzanetti didn't like it, still need to convince 'im ;P
[17:06] <mzanetti> :D
[17:07] <mzanetti> Saviq: IIRC we got a vote of 2:1 between albert, you and me, no?
[17:07] <Saviq> mzanetti, Albert didn't really care ;P
[17:07] <Saviq> we ended up going "let's revisit this properly"
[17:07] <mzanetti> oh well...
[17:07] <mzanetti> yeah
[17:09]  * Cimi sales his vote...
[17:09] <Saviq> does wat?
[17:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, if you're away tomorrow, think you could still do the favorite review?
[17:10] <mzanetti> which is?
[17:10] <mzanetti> Saviq: ^
[17:10] <Saviq> lool
[17:10] <Saviq> https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/scope-favoriting/+merge/232109
[17:11] <Saviq> lool, sorry, that was a long lol :D
[17:11] <Saviq> mzanetti, if not, don't worry, I'll find a soul tomorrow
[17:12] <mzanetti> Saviq: ah right... yeah, can do it
[17:30] <dandrader> man, writing test code with google mock is like writing in a different programming language
[17:30] <mzanetti> heh
[17:37] <Saviq> :)
[17:49] <mzanetti> Saviq: https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/scope-favoriting/+merge/232109/comments/565784
[17:50] <mzanetti> Saviq: is there any trySomething I could use to test it?
[17:53] <Saviq> mzanetti, tryDash, but it won't actually remove from the favorites
[17:53] <Saviq> mzanetti, but new, working unity-scopes-shell almost migrated
[17:53] <Saviq> mzanetti, actually migrated, just upgrade
[17:53] <mzanetti> Saviq: make tryShell is segfaulting here with this branch :/
[17:54] <mzanetti> lemme try trunk
[17:54] <Saviq> interesting
[17:54] <Saviq> mzanetti, that'd be weird, btw, it doesn't even touch shell, everything happens in dash
[17:55] <mzanetti> Saviq: trunk works
[17:55] <mzanetti> really strange
[17:55] <Saviq> maybe one of the prereqs
[17:55] <Saviq> this does, after all, add settings and all kinds of stuff
[17:55] <Saviq> mzanetti, tryShell doesn't crash here btw
[17:55] <mzanetti> meh
[17:56] <mzanetti> Saviq: 100% repro
[17:57] <Saviq> Cimi, looks like you'll have to rebase scope settings on alt nav
[17:57] <Cimi> Saviq, why?
[17:58] <Saviq> Cimi, guess
[17:58] <Cimi> Saviq, because you postpone my reviews with semicolon requests? :D
[17:58] <Cimi> Saviq, I'm going to needfix yours! :P
[17:58] <Saviq> Cimi, do you want a slap next time I meet you?
[17:58] <Cimi> ahah
[17:58] <Saviq> Cimi, want me to show you all the non-semicolon review comments?
[17:59]  * mzanetti grabs pop corn
[17:59]  * Saviq tries to convince train to not conflict
[18:00] <Saviq> mzanetti, testShell passes, too, lemme look at the failed one
[18:00] <mzanetti> Saviq: why can't I drag up the dash overview when running dash app on desktop?
[18:00] <Saviq> -mousetouch
[18:00] <mzanetti> gnah
[18:00] <mzanetti> ofc
[18:00] <mzanetti> Saviq: ./run.sh should do that ;)
[18:01] <Cimi> Saviq, btw the fact that http://paste.ubuntu.com/8151986/ doesn't work is confusing
[18:01] <Saviq> mzanetti, lp:~saviq/unity8/tweak-runscript
[18:02] <Saviq> Cimi, well, does settingData actually have at least three items?
[18:02] <Cimi> Saviq, sure
[18:02] <Saviq> Cimi, but in any case it's not "confusing", it shows a problem with the widget
[18:03] <Cimi> ah I see now
[18:04] <Saviq> mzanetti, hah, the failure is interesting indeed, totally reversed behaviour somehow... must be something that merged before it...
[18:04] <Saviq> well, no, CI wouldn't get that...
[18:04] <mzanetti> Saviq: got tryShell to work again after a rebuild
[18:04] <Cimi> Saviq, onSelectedIndexChanged is already 0, so it doesn't change, I probably have to set to -1 after I put model to null
[18:05] <Cimi> SelectedIndex is 0 I mean, so it doesn't get called
[18:05] <Saviq> Cimi, thought ListView would do that, but maybe not indeed
[18:06] <Saviq> mzanetti, ah, that test run is old, there's one going on now
[18:06] <Saviq> mzanetti, with trunk merged
[18:06] <mzanetti> ah ok
[18:07] <Saviq> mzanetti, just please see if it passes locally for you
[18:07] <Saviq> ah got it to fail here after all
[18:07] <Saviq> ok so that needs fixin'
[18:07] <Saviq> stoopid
[18:08] <Cimi> wtf
[18:08] <Saviq> must be not ready yet, not registering the click
[18:08] <mzanetti> no, passing here
[18:09] <Cimi> Saviq, I set index to -1, change model, index is still -1
[18:09] <Cimi> Saviq, so I guess we need to do sth onModelChanged??
[18:09] <Saviq> mzanetti, yeah, mouseclick must not register
[18:09] <Cimi> it is easier to create this dynamic obj
[18:10] <Saviq> Cimi, I'd go and talk to sdk now, this feels weird, I don't think a ListView behaves like this, should reset selectedIndex to -1 when model invalid
[18:11] <Cimi> Saviq, I need to get this branch in before my friend's alt_nav branch gets merged
[18:11] <Cimi> don't tell anyone
[18:12] <mhall119> tvoss: ping
[18:12] <tvoss> mhall119, pong
[18:13] <mhall119> tvoss: hi, you mentioned a while back that you were going to write a tutorial on net-cpp, I'd like to publish that on developer.u.c, do you have an eta on when you might be able to write it?
[18:13] <tvoss> mhall119, beginning of next week is realistic
[18:13] <tvoss> mhall119, doxygen is fine for you, correct?
[18:14] <mhall119> so Sept. 3 maybe?
[18:14] <mhall119> tvoss: I'll be copy/pasting into Wordpress, so it doesn't matter so much as long as it's not heavily dependent on CSS to layout/positioning
[18:14] <mhall119> whichI don't think doxygen is
[18:14] <tvoss> mhall119, ack
[18:15] <Saviq> Cimi, it's in the same silo, listed after it, so ya know
[18:20] <Cimi> Saviq, http://paste.ubuntu.com/8152128/
[18:20] <Cimi> works
[18:21] <Saviq> Cimi, no need for the quick and components imports
[18:21] <Cimi> Saviq, quick yes
[18:21] <Cimi> Saviq, UC no
[18:21] <Cimi> Saviq, why no quick?
[18:22] <Saviq> Cimi, because you're not using anything from quick directly
[18:22] <Saviq> Cimi, the component itself imports it, that's enough
[18:22] <Cimi> ok
[18:22] <Cimi> thanks
[18:23] <Saviq> Cimi, actually no rebasing needed, I just needed to force order, and need to remerge yours into my favorites
[18:23] <Cimi> Saviq, I pushed
[18:32] <Cimi> Saviq, which silo to test everything btw?
[18:32] <Saviq> 17, but it's not built yet
[18:33] <Saviq> not the latest at least
[18:39] <Saviq> mzanetti, fwiw I think I fixed the test... apparently clicking on 0,0 wasn't reliable enough
[18:40] <mzanetti> hmm, interesting
[18:40] <mzanetti> ok
[18:41] <Saviq> Cimi, strip tags in your branch
[18:42] <Cimi> Saviq, 0.1.16 @_@
[18:42] <Cimi> when did that happened
[18:42] <Cimi> Saviq, dont btw
[18:42] <Saviq> Cimi, this one's constantly around
[18:42] <Cimi> done
[18:47] <Saviq> Cimi, please rebase yours on alt nav, there's no conflicts there
[18:47] <Saviq> Cimi, but mine has conflicts with the previous ones and we can't do more than one prereq
[19:57] <Cimi> Saviq, ok doin
[19:59] <mzanetti> Saviq: hey, everything ok with this? https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/scope-favoriting/+merge/232109
[19:59] <mzanetti> the diff seems larger than before
[20:00] <Cimi> Saviq, I just noticed you did another one
[20:00] <Cimi> Saviq, but I pushed already
[20:10] <Saviq> Cimi, too lates
[20:10] <Saviq> mzanetti, superseded by https://code.launchpad.net/~saviq/unity8/scope-favoriting/+merge/232298
[21:10] <Cimi> Saviq, 1dp size and 0.2 opacity for the separator :)
[21:11] <Saviq> Cimi, done
[21:11] <Cimi> Saviq, matthieu agrees should be smaller
[21:12] <Cimi> Saviq, we're debugging here :)
[21:12] <Saviq> rofl
[21:12] <Cimi> Saviq, also the asset of the overview
[21:12]  * Saviq just run tryDash @ GRID_UNIT_PX=1
[21:12] <Saviq> it worked!
[21:13] <Cimi> rofl
[21:13] <Saviq> Cimi, what asset?
[21:13] <Saviq> Cimi, the hint you mean?
[21:13] <Cimi> Saviq, the button
[21:13] <Cimi> Saviq, yeah
[21:13] <Saviq> Cimi, if you get a better one, file an MP, that's what I go
[21:13] <Saviq> t
[21:13] <Cimi> Saviq, also personally I am not a fan of this grey in overview
[21:13] <Cimi> Saviq, and the white button at the top to switch mode
[21:14] <Cimi> brrr
[21:14] <Saviq> Cimi, can you not talk to me about this?
[21:14] <Saviq> Cimi, anyway, overview just got the can
[21:14] <Saviq> Cimi, after user testing, so don't you worry there
[21:14] <Cimi> ahaha
[21:14] <cwayne1>  srsly
[21:14] <Saviq> it's only took like 2 weeks of Albert's work
[21:14] <Saviq> obviously it's a good use of his time
[21:15] <Cimi> Saviq, well I like it, just it needs refinements
[21:15] <cwayne1> wtf are we gonna have instead
[21:15] <Cimi> Saviq, I am not blaming his work!
[21:15] <Saviq> cwayne1, the next best thing
[21:15] <Saviq> Cimi, no, I mean that we could've *gasp* prototyped and tested it before handing off to implementation
[21:16] <Cimi> Saviq, you have an hint why scrolling vertically in overview skips frames?
[21:16] <Cimi> +2
[21:16] <Cimi> we will have new prototypers I hope
[21:16] <Saviq> Cimi, same as everywhere else in the dash? image loading / unloading?
[21:17] <Cimi> Saviq, really?
[21:17] <Saviq> although granted, it does look slower than everywhere else
[21:17] <Cimi> Saviq, it looks like it displays all images
[21:17] <Cimi> we need to benchmark that
[21:17] <Saviq> Cimi, yeah it's not as everywhere else in the dash, then no
[21:17] <Saviq> Cimi, no we don't, it's going away, we're not spending any significant time on it
[21:18] <Cimi> Saviq, away as seriously away?#
[21:18] <Saviq> Cimi, yes, it got the can
[21:18] <Cimi> Saviq, as going back to scopes scope?
[21:18] <Saviq> Cimi, no, going towards the next best thing
[21:18] <Cimi> Saviq, isn't RTM like in 2 days?
[21:18] <Saviq> Cimi, details
[21:18] <Cimi> hah
[21:20] <Cimi> Saviq, of course we won't prototype it
[21:20] <Cimi> the next big thing
[21:23] <Cimi> Saviq, can you make the alt nav separator 1dp and 0.2 opaque?
[21:23] <Saviq> Cimi, [23:11] <Saviq> Cimi, done
[21:24] <Cimi> Saviq, col thx
[21:26]  * Cimi -> bed
[21:26] <Cimi> o/