[14:22] <mterry> mzanetti: I'm looking at unity8's usageMode calculation -- is there a reason it compares current pointer count against the last pointer count?  (I'm thinking of the case where you connect a mouse to your phone, then connect your TV to your phone -- looks like we'd stay in Staged mode then.  If we get rid of that, we could have a real simple Binding that just
[14:22] <mterry> checks if we are big enough and have a pointer -> Windowed, else Staged.  And not even bother looking at current value of usageMode either.
[14:22] <mzanetti> mterry, yes, there is a reason :)
[14:23] <mterry> I figured :)
[14:23] <mzanetti> it's designed that way
[14:23] <mzanetti> mterry, mainly: if the user manually switches to something, then this makes a difference on when the automatism kicks in again
[14:23] <mterry> mzanetti: I thought we didn't support manually switching that anymore
[14:24] <mzanetti> huh?
[14:24] <mterry> mzanetti: I thought we went from that being an actual setting to that just being a cache location for where u8 stores its current mode
[14:24] <mzanetti> mterry, no... there is a switch in the system indicator
[14:24] <mterry> mzanetti: oh right, we do have that
[14:25] <mzanetti> (which I think should eventually be moved to the display indicator but that's a different story)
[14:25] <mzanetti> but in any case, that switch is here to stay
[14:25] <mzanetti> mterry, that said, that whole logic still has a looooooong way to go
[14:26] <mterry> mzanetti: yeah I think my case above is still a bug?  Looking at code anyway, maybe I'm missing something.  But I feel like this could be simpler.  (I'm hitting what might be a race condition on startup with the snap and its gsettings that this logic is choking on)
[14:27] <mterry> mzanetti: I'll continue testing and see if there's a way to fix that makes it easier to read too, I feel like this is not the first time I've asked you that question above  ;)
[14:27] <mzanetti> indeed
[14:27] <mzanetti> mterry, I'd need to look into it myself again
[14:28] <mzanetti> also dig out the reasons design gave me for this
[14:28] <mzanetti> but in any case, right now it behaves as specced
[14:28] <mzanetti> Saviq, can we haz this in the pre OTA-14 silo? https://code.launchpad.net/~mzanetti/unity8/spread-blur/+merge/309335
[14:29] <ltinkl> Saviq, and this? ;) https://code.launchpad.net/~lukas-kde/unity8/superKeyPressFix/+merge/307977
[14:30] <mzanetti> ltinkl, hey, I got a mail from design that they reviewed the spread again, now that it's landed and sent me a mail with a list of things to fix. Mind reviewing this branch: lp:~mzanetti/unity8/spread-fixes
[14:31] <ltinkl> mzanetti, sure
[14:31] <ltinkl> mzanetti, got an MP?
[14:31] <mzanetti> preparing as we speek
[14:31] <mzanetti> speak
[14:32] <ltinkl> mzanetti, cool, mind forwarding that email?
[14:32] <mzanetti> ltinkl, mp: https://code.launchpad.net/~mzanetti/unity8/spread-fixes/+merge/310187
[14:33] <mzanetti> ltinkl, mail should be in your inbox
[14:33] <ltinkl> mzanetti, thx, does this also contain the short Alt-TAB fix?
[14:33] <mzanetti> ltinkl, note that 2 points from that mail are not fixed yet. One I can't repro, the other seems to tricky to do in a rush
[14:33] <mzanetti> ltinkl, hmm... I have submitted that in some other MP, haven't I?
[14:34] <ltinkl> mzanetti, yeah maybe... getting lost in those many MPs :)
[14:34] <mzanetti> ltinkl, that one https://code.launchpad.net/~mzanetti/unity8/delay-alt+tab/+merge/309339
[14:34] <mzanetti> ltinkl, you happroved already
[14:35] <ltinkl> mzanetti, yup yup
[14:36] <Saviq> hmm didn't think to have a silo with those, but maybe we should indeed
[14:41] <ltinkl> Saviq, yeah, something for generic u8 fixes (we have accumulated quite some over the time)
[14:58] <Saviq> testing 2106, might just pile on there
[15:27] <Saviq> nope, test fails there too
[15:31] <ltinkl> Trevinho, rebuilding 2106 again? :)
[15:32] <Trevinho> ltinkl: oh, did you do that already?
[15:32] <ltinkl> Trevinho, Saviq did
[15:32] <Trevinho> ltinkl: yeah, in fact I checked the autdit log but didn't see that
[15:33] <Trevinho> ltinkl: while I was curious why there was no complain about new commits
[15:33] <Trevinho> ltinkl: cancelled though
[15:33] <ltinkl> Trevinho, there had been, before Saviq rebuilt it
[15:33] <Trevinho> ltinkl: good, I'll wait before approving it again then
[16:50] <mterry> @unity this isn't in u8 code proper, but can someone review https://code.launchpad.net/~mterry/unity8-desktop-session/accountsservice/+merge/310005 ? (needed for snapped unity8 to see AS currently)