[14:09] <attente> greyback: hey, how are you?
[14:10] <greyback> attente: hey, I'm ok, you?
[14:10] <attente> i'm alright :)
[14:11] <attente> just wanted to follow up because i'm not sure what the plan is for u8 to start using miral
[14:11] <attente> do you know when it would be ready? or how it's coming along?
[14:18] <greyback> attente: sure, the work is progressing. We've a silo (2160) with miral-based unity8, but working to add full child window support still
[14:19] <greyback> attente: once we have child window support in that silo, I can ping you
[14:19] <attente> greyback: great, thanks!
[16:14] <mterry> tsdgeos: so is the claim is that the snap icons would load if they remade the packages with current snapcraft?
[16:17] <tsdgeos> mterry: either current or "next world amazing"
[16:17] <tsdgeos> didn't really understand tedg's comment
[17:45] <pstolowski> mterry, ping
[18:32] <mterry> tedg: ^ so if we remake these snaps whose icons aren't loading with the current snapcraft, is the claim that they would have working icons again?  (because current snapcraft does the right thing?)
[19:34] <tedg> mterry: They have to not have the paths hardcoded in their desktop files, so just rerunning isn't the answer.
[19:34] <tedg> mterry: Some folks have quite literally put the full path in their desktop files.
[19:34] <tedg> Which is really, really wrong.
[19:40] <mterry> tedg: ok... But you're saying this is an upstream .desktop packaging bug, not something we need to fix in our snap?
[19:40]  * mterry wants to see a snap do it right, so he can see the icon show up
[19:43] <tedg> mterry: Yes
[19:44] <tedg> mterry: It's impossible to do right until snapcraft gets support for declarative files.
[19:44] <mterry> tedg: do you know of any published snap I could install to see it actually working end to end, just for my own sanity?
[19:44] <mterry> bummer...
[19:44] <tedg> mterry: Right now you have to put the files in the meta/gui/ directory with crazy paths because they don't get evaluated correctly in any context.
[19:45] <tedg> So, to be clear, I understand why upstreams put absolute paths in. It was the only way to "fix" the bug.
[19:47] <mterry> tedg: is there a snapcraft bug to link to here?
[19:48] <tedg> mterry: This is the old one, but I'm not sure if it's what they're currently using for planning. bug 1588359
[19:48] <ubot5`> bug 1588359 in Snapcraft "No way to add setup files at build time" [Undecided,Triaged] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1588359
[19:52] <mterry> tedg: so maybe I should just retarget bug 1639952 to snapcraft?  Let snappy folks worry that side of things
[19:52] <ubot5`> bug 1639952 in ubuntu-app-launch (Ubuntu) "When running in unity8 desktop snap, icons aren't found" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1639952
[19:57] <tedg> mterry: Works for me, it may start a discussion if nothing else :-)