[14:18] <elopio> jfunk: when do you want to meet today to catch up with what we are doing here?
[14:19] <jfunk> can do right after the refinement meeting
[14:19] <jfunk> in 40
[14:19] <jfunk> elopio: ^
[14:19] <elopio> jfunk: I will be in the training.
[14:20] <jfunk> elopio: ok, put something on my cal
[14:20] <jfunk> can do it tmw too
[14:39] <artmello> hey, we are facing some issues with AP tests for gallery-app. We are proposing an MR to sort that out but we would like someone from qa to review it first
[14:39] <artmello> since a couple of them seem to be unreliable after all
[14:43] <artmello> ping ubuntu-qa
[14:43] <fgimenez> artmello, you can add canonical-platform-qa as reviewer
[14:44] <artmello> fgimenez: ok, thx
[15:16] <elopio> fgimenez: can you take care of the review as one of the vanguard task? Or will it take more time than that?
[15:19] <fgimenez> elopio, yes, i'm setting up the branch for testing, i'll ping the vanguard if i don't finish with it before my eod
[15:19] <elopio> cool, thanks.
[16:46] <balloons> elopio, I'd like to talk about documenting the various autopilot helpers for system services on touch. Things like location, online services, accounts,  etc. I know there has been a good amount of work on making these less painful.
[17:11] <elopio> balloons: right, we need to talk. There are not many yet, but there will be.
[17:11] <elopio> balloons: can you schedule a meeting next week?
[17:14] <balloons> elopio, sure. I'll invite you and feel free to pass it along to whomever else
[17:15] <elopio> ok
[22:23] <elopio> veebers: did you check if the test was skipped?
[22:23] <elopio> I think dobey mentioned about a testtools bug that would run the tests even if the class had the skip annotation.
[22:24] <veebers> elopio: I tested with a dummy test locally to make sure decorating the class worked (it did for me).
[22:24] <veebers> I'm pretty confident that it skips the test when I run it, I'll double check though
[22:24] <elopio> veebers: ok. I prefer your version.
[22:24] <elopio> I told brendand to raise the exception, and he didn't fully agree with that.
[22:26] <brendand> elopio, :)
[22:26] <elopio> brendand: please review veebers' branch tomorrow, to see if you like it too.
[22:27] <elopio> veebers: 8+    """Return if the sim in the provided slot number is locked.
[22:27] <elopio> I think that should be: Return True if...
[22:27] <veebers> Right, I raise an exception because the method returns bool if the passed sim is locked or not, if the sim is not there that is an exception to the 'locked' or 'unlocked' states
[22:27] <veebers> elopio: good catch, will fix
[22:31] <veebers> elopio: to recap, you mentioned in the standup that you spoke w/ federico re: what was required for the 'click not visible dash item'? Specifically there is more to add to the link MP.
[22:31] <elopio> veebers: yes, I already updated the mp
[22:31] <elopio> and left a comment about updating it to use grid units.
[22:34] <veebers> elopio: ah cool thanks
[22:37] <veebers> elopio: does it need the method 'swipe_to_top' added?
[22:37] <veebers> or am I being dumb and it's already there
[22:37] <elopio> veebers: it's not already there, but it's not related to the non-visible item
[22:37] <elopio> so I would prefer it to come as part of the MPs that the unity team will do.
[22:38] <elopio> veebers: that swipe to top is for the uninstall test.
[22:38] <veebers> elopio: so that means that we can't remove GenericScopeView from the sanity suite as it still has functionality that we require that's not upstream?
[22:38] <elopio> veebers: that's right.
[22:38] <elopio> or if you prefer, I can make a quick MP for only swipe_to_top.
[22:39] <veebers> elopio, brendand: ^^ so in a nutshell we can't remove the odd inheritence because we're not putting everything upstream
[22:39] <veebers> elopio: I see that we also have 'click_scope_item' in GenericScopeView too :-)
[22:40] <brendand> elopio, veebers - hmmm did we forget a helper??
[22:44] <veebers> brendand: I'm hoping to clarify. To get rid of the inheritance we have for the ClickScope, everything in dash.GenericScopeView needs to be upstream. Currently we don't have an MP that includes it all (or a collection of MPs that do that)
[22:45] <brendand> veebers, do we know what's missing? is it just one function?
[22:47] <veebers> There are 3 methods we've touched. open_preview is sorted (thanks to elopio) click_scope_item and swipe_to_top remain. elopio has suggested to make MPs for one of those 2, perhaps another for the last
[22:50] <veebers> brendand: ultimately the MP for 'remove the inheritence from sanity suite' is pretty straight forward, assuming the push upstream happens
[22:53] <brendand> veebers, something that's playing on my mind now, is that i've just noticed that the method 'go_to_store' is not in the GenericScopeView in ubuntu_sanity_tests, which means it already is upstream
[22:53] <brendand> veebers, so maybe these issues had nothing to do with inheritance at all? or am i missing something?
[23:02] <veebers> brendand: the inheritance issue we see is due to unityclickscope.ClickScope inheriting from (upstream) ClickScope and (sanity suite) GenericScopeView. If we update the upstream GenericScopeView then there is no need for our ones and the multi-inheritance goes away
[23:03] <brendand> veebers, ah so it's only multiple inheritance that causes a problem. i missed that detail
[23:15] <veebers> ah right, yeah :-)