[00:52] <callmepk> morning
[01:29] <duflu> Morning callmepk 
[01:30] <callmepk> morning duflu 
[05:20] <KGB-1> gobject-introspection debian/master Janitor * [update] merge request !7: Apply hints suggested by the multi-arch hinter * https://deb.li/3yxUR
[05:21] <KGB-1> gobject-introspection debian/master Janitor * [update] merge request !7: Apply hints suggested by the multi-arch hinter * https://deb.li/3yxUR
[06:08] <doko> is robert_ancell online?
[06:17] <duflu> It's Friday night for him so unlikely
[06:32] <doko> k, didn't see him yesterday either
[07:18] <oSoMoN> good morning desktoppers
[07:21] <duflu> Morning oSoMoN 
[07:22] <oSoMoN> good afternoon duflu 
[08:04] <didrocks> good morning
[08:09] <duflu> Morning didrocks 
[08:17] <didrocks> hey duflu 
[08:29] <seb128> goood morning desktopers
[08:30] <duflu> Hi seb128 
[08:31] <seb128> hey duflu , are you feeling better today?
[08:31] <duflu> seb128, going well other than mild food poisoning :/
[08:31] <duflu> seb128, how are you? Do you think we should do the meeting today or not?
[08:32] <duflu> I'm deep in some difficult problems so would appreciate the extra time
[08:33] <seb128> :-( on the food poisoning
[08:33] <seb128> duflu, I don't think it's mandatory, if you are in the middle of work you want to finish I would suggest you just keep doing that
[08:34] <seb128> technically I'm my friday off but I was away most of the morning yesterday so I will probably do another half day today, I might join but I'm not decided myself
[08:34] <seb128> oh, and I'm alright
[08:35] <seb128> it's friday and sunny and my stomach feels better :)
[08:37] <duflu> \o/
[08:43] <didrocks> hey seb128, ready for a good week-end it seems :)
[08:46] <seb128> didrocks, hey, indeed! you?
[08:46] <seb128> jamesh, hey, do you know if bug #1902915 was already discussed somewhere?
[08:46]  * jamesh looks
[08:47] <seb128> jamesh, basically we got a report that thunderbird was displaying no fileselector, it turned you that the system didn't have the gtk portal installed
[08:47] <seb128> jamesh, it feels like snapd should offer to install it or something in those cases
[08:48] <seb128> since we can't really garanty the portals are going to be installed, and some snaps in practice aren't going to be functional without
[08:48] <didrocks> seb128: I’m good thanks :) removing one road block after another, so feels progress !
[08:49] <seb128> didrocks, great :)
[08:49] <jamesh> seb128: There has been push-back against making it a dependency of the snapd deb, as portals won't be necessary on server systems.  There isn't currently any code in snapd for prompting to install debs or rpms
[08:49] <marcustomlinson> morning desktoppers
[08:50] <seb128> jamesh, right, I don't think depends would be right as you said
[08:50] <jamesh> and recommends/suggests don't guarantee it will be installed either
[08:51] <seb128> jamesh, do you know if flatpak handle those situations any better?
[08:51] <seb128> right
[08:51] <seb128> I don't really see a way out of installing on demand
[08:51] <seb128> or at least displaying a dialog saying that the snap isn't going to work without the portal
[08:51] <jamesh> seb128: flatpak has Recommends: xdg-desktop-portal 
[08:52] <seb128> well, Recommends doesn't guarantee it's installed as you said
[08:52] <seb128> I meant rather on the software side, do they do anything smart when the portal is missing?
[08:52] <jamesh> the decision's a bit easier there, since they're not covering system daemons
[08:52] <seb128> or are flatpak just randomnly not working?
[08:53] <jamesh> I'm not sure.  And I don't know whether it would catch the case of xdg-desktop-portal installed without a backend like x-d-p-gtk
[08:54] <seb128> well, recommends are not depends
[08:54] <seb128> some distros don't install those by default
[08:54] <seb128> some users change their apt config, I mean there are going to be similar cases
[08:54] <seb128> anyway it doesn't help us much with the snap case, I was just curious to know what they were doing
[08:56] <seb128> jamesh, would it be possible/make sense to have something in the gnome extension that checks if the dbus name is owned and display a warning if it's not?
[08:56] <seb128> warning if zenity type of graphical warning 'your snap might not be functionnal without portals, we recommend you install xdg-desktop-portal'
[08:56] <jamesh> seb128: the name will still be available if you remove xdg-desktop-portal-gtk
[08:57] <jamesh> just some of the APIs will no longer be available (like the file selector)
[08:57] <seb128> I wonder if that user had xdg-desktop-portal
[08:57] <seb128> I expect he probably had none of the portals
[08:57] <jamesh> the bug says "remove xdg-desktop-portal-gtk", which probably means it is still installed
[08:58] <seb128> no, that's me who edited the description
[08:58] <seb128> the initial report was
[08:58] <seb128> 'installed thunderbird, clicking add attachement -> no fileselector'
[08:58] <seb128> I asked if he had xdg-desktop-portal-gtk and he said no, installed it and it works now
[08:58] <seb128> I didn't think about asking if xdg-desktop-portal was installed
[08:59] <jamesh> fair enough.  That probably caused xdg-desktop-portal to be installed too
[08:59] <seb128> right
[08:59] <seb128> in any case we could have cases where those are missing, would be nice to handle that better
[08:59] <seb128> like people starting from a minimal install or a flavor not recommending portals
[09:00] <jamesh> I don't see anything obvious doing a Github code search of the flatpak repo.  
[09:00] <Laney> yo
[09:01]  * jamesh wonders what the Fedora packages look like
[09:01] <seb128> Laney, hey, happy friday! how are you?
[09:01] <seb128> jamesh, I'm probably going to start by suggesting we do the 'check dbus, display warning if missing' thing in the gnome extension
[09:02] <jamesh> seb128: looks like Fedora used to use Requires: but downgraded to Recommends: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/flatpak/blob/master/f/flatpak.spec#_67
[09:02] <seb128> it's not great but better than nothing and should be easy enough to do
[09:02] <jamesh> seb128: I thought the code in GTK fell back to an in-process file selector if the portal file selector wasn't available
[09:03] <jamesh> I'd have to double check that
[09:04] <seb128> it does seem to do that
[09:05] <seb128> I removed the portals and tried with the portal-test
[09:07] <seb128> ah, I forgot to stop the active ones
[09:07] <seb128> if I remove -gtk it fails
[09:07] <seb128> (portal-test:30804): Gtk-WARNING **: 10:06:59.005: Can't open portal file chooser: GDBus.Error:org.freedesktop.DBus.Error.UnknownMethod: No such interface “org.freedesktop.portal.FileChooser” on object at path /org/freedesktop/portal/desktop
[09:07] <seb128> and no fileselector displayed at all
[09:19] <GunnarHj> Hi Laney, it looks to me as if this patch can be dropped:
[09:19] <GunnarHj> https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/vte2.91/-/blob/ubuntu/master/debian/patches/0001-Add-the-style-context-provider-with-FALLBACK-priorit.patch
[09:19] <GunnarHj> but your confirmation would be valuable.
[09:20] <Laney> hi seb128 
[09:20] <Laney> doing good, you?
[09:20] <Laney> hi GunnarHj 
[09:20] <Laney> what makes you think that?
[09:20] <seb128> I'm alright! sunny friday
[09:20] <GunnarHj> Laney: New upstream code, similar to the patch.
[09:21] <GunnarHj> (but not identical)
[09:22] <didrocks> hey Laney
[09:23] <luna_> hey 
[09:27] <Laney> GunnarHj: Basically you can if you want to risk breaking the rules in Ambiance and Radiance which rely/relied on this, or check they still work with this new thing, or maybe they got broken already and nobody noticed or cared
[09:27] <Laney> moin didrocks and luna_ 
[09:29] <GunnarHj> Laney: Seems easiest to drop it and see what happens for now (apparently it doesn't apply any longer). And revisit if some issue shows up.
[09:30] <GunnarHj> Laney: Is that ok with you?
[09:30] <Laney> That wasn't any of the options I presented
[09:31] <Laney> If you want to drop it, do it knowingly and actively IMO
[09:31] <Laney> Like: we are breaking this rule in light-themes, and I've decided that is fine to do
[09:32] <GunnarHj> Laney: TBH I don't even know what to look for. Playing with vte2.91 with the goal to be able to upgrade gnome-terminal...
[09:34] <GunnarHj> Laney: Would it be an option to keep the additional stuff on top of the new code?
[09:35] <GunnarHj> Laney: Or would the patch need to be rewritten completely?
[09:36] <Laney> I dunno, I'll have to look
[09:36] <Laney> to test: open a Unity session (or use Ambiance)
[09:36] <Laney> open gnome-terminal and check how it looks, upgrade vte2.91 and check again
[09:36] <Laney> you can see what the rules are about in gtk-3.20/apps/gnome-terminal.css
[09:39] <GunnarHj> Laney: I just built it locally without the patch. Will check out what gnome-terminal and Unity look like.
[09:49] <GunnarHj> Laney: See nothing weird in gnome-terminal or Unity.
[10:00] <Laney> Weird no, but different?
[10:00] <Laney> Scrollbars OK? Transparency OK?
[10:02] <Laney> I expect the terminal will work, but it might lose the theming that we were applying there
[10:06] <GunnarHj> Laney: I don't think I'm the right person to evaluate that. Looks the about the same to me, but I don't have the sense for details which would be needed. How about letting me upload to hirsute and then others can easily check it out. (Or I can upload to a PPA.)
[10:17] <Laney> GunnarHj: Here: https://people.canonical.com/~laney/weird-things/terminal-groovy-unity.png
[10:17] <Laney> See how the terminal is transparent a bit, and how the scrollbar looks - that's what I think is made to work by this patch.
[10:18] <Laney> (making that transparency happen by default - you can always go change it in the preferences)
[10:18] <Laney> so check that you can see this, and then how it looks in that respect after upgrading
[10:18] <Laney> If it goes away, then you broke it, and then you can decide if that's something you want to do with your eyes open. :-)
[10:21] <Laney> (I think it's probably OK to do that though, just that we should do it knowingly)
[10:32] <GunnarHj> Laney: Thanks for the screenshot! Hmm.. I think the transparency is gone and the scoll thing is not orange unless active. So things did change. But personally I usually don't notice such things, while others might be very upset. ;)
[11:01] <GunnarHj> Laney: OTOH I see no difference when going back to the -release version. Just uploaded to PPA:
[11:01] <GunnarHj> https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj/+archive/ubuntu/vte2.91
[11:01] <GunnarHj> Please install from there and let me know what you think. (I'll be AFK for an hour or so now.)
[11:17] <Laney> GunnarHj: It breaks the default background colour. Under Unity it becomes white and under GNOME Shell it becomes black.
[11:22] <Laney> I think the new version breaks how Yaru is trying to set colours on the terminal too.
[11:32] <Laney> The background-color and color entries in style_provider should be moved to fallback_style_provider for us I think. And it seems likely that we will need to keep this patch even though upstream has dropped it for 0.63. For us the background colour isn't the same as @text_view_bg but AFAICT they aren't interested in that scenario so we need to keep it downstream (maybe it'd be fine in Debian though).
[11:41] <GunnarHj> Laney: Ok, I'll make an attempt to refresh it then.
[11:45] <Laney> Alright. Show me it if you want and I'll check it out. Thanks!
[12:56] <GunnarHj> Laney: I uploaded to the PPA again, this time with the refreshed patch:
[12:56] <GunnarHj> https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj/+archive/ubuntu/vte2.91
[12:56] <GunnarHj> I still see no difference, so please confirm that this looks right.
[12:57] <Laney> Why are you seeing no difference?
[12:57] <Laney> Try with a clean user or something.
[12:57] <GunnarHj> No idea.
[12:58] <Laney> The background goes from purple to black (or white), it should be quite obvious
[12:58] <GunnarHj> Yeah, maybe clean user..
[13:09] <Laney> GunnarHj: It looks a bit wrong to me though - what I would expect to see now (with this fallback_style_provider) is something looking like this: https://paste.ubuntu.com/p/jn5HTxZPWJ/
[13:11] <Laney> It's probably a new patch now though with a description something like "Allow background-color and color to be customised via the theme on VteTerminal widgets\n\nYaru and Ambiance/Radiance need this. Move the CSS rules to the fallback style class so that they can be overridden."
[13:16] <GunnarHj> Laney: Now I'm confused. Probably better you fix the patch yourself.
[13:19] <GunnarHj> Laney: Btw, fresh user didn't help. Can it be that I'm using NVIDIA?
[13:20] <Laney> No
[13:21] <GunnarHj> Ok. (Hope that was only your answer to the question.)
[13:24] <Laney> Fine, I'll do the merge
[13:24] <Laney> feel like you lured me into doing this :P
[13:25] <GunnarHj> Laney: I can upload what I have and leave the refreshing to you.
[13:25] <GunnarHj> s/upload/push/
[13:25] <Laney> Ok
[13:28] <GunnarHj> Laney: Done. https://salsa.debian.org/gnome-team/vte2.91/-/tree/ubuntu/master
[13:45] <KGB-0> vte2.91 signed tags c18ea6d Iain Lane ubuntu/0.62.1-1ubuntu1 * vte2.91 Debian release 0.62.1-1ubuntu1 * https://deb.li/0goC
[13:45] <Laney> GunnarHj: There you go
[13:45] <KGB-0> vte2.91 ubuntu/master d251047 Iain Lane debian/patches/ 91_keep_fds.patch series Allow-background-color-and-color-on-VteTerminal-widgets-t.patch 0001-Add-the-style-context-provider-with-FALLBACK-priorit.patch * Fix CSS changes * https://deb.li/iiPrG
[13:45] <KGB-0> vte2.91 ubuntu/master 65d2028 Iain Lane debian/changelog * Update changelog * https://deb.li/j3il
[13:46] <KGB-0> vte2.91 ubuntu/master 1b87a2d Iain Lane debian/changelog * Finalise changelog * https://deb.li/3DPcI
[13:55] <GunnarHj> Laney: Great, thanks! (The "remaining changes" part has the old patch name, though.)
[14:30] <GunnarHj> Laney: Now I see the purple background in gnome-terminal at least. :)
[14:52] <Laney> You can fix that when you backport it to Debian. :-)
[14:54] <Laney> oh I see, it was your remaining change, not mine.
[15:11] <GunnarHj> Laney: I can add that patch in Debian if you like, but it doesn't motivate a separate upload, does it?
[15:12] <Laney> GunnarHj: Probably not
[16:01] <GunnarHj> Laney: As a member of ubuntu-desktop I thought I could upload gnome-terminal, but that seems not to be the case. Any chance you can sponsor the uploads to hirsute and groovy? (The repo is done.)
[16:02] <hellsworth> good morning desktopers!
[16:05] <GunnarHj> o/ hellsworth
[16:08] <hellsworth> hey there oSoMoN 
[16:09] <oSoMoN> good morning hellsworth :)
[16:23] <Laney> GunnarHj: We'll see if I can squeeze it in today
[16:23] <Laney> morning hellsworth 
[16:26] <GunnarHj> seb128: The reason why I needed to bother with hirsute too for the bug #1900729 groovy fix of gnome-terminal is simply the version string. So now I have prepared a hirsute merge and a groovy revert. I asked L_aney to sponsor, but he will probably not be too unhappy if you do that instead. :)
[16:38] <hellsworth> hey Laney GunnarHj 
[19:40] <seb128> GunnarHj, I don't understand the version string issue? a SRU can be version differently
[19:42] <GunnarHj> seb128: It's currently the same version in groovy and hirsute. So if we would upload to groovy only, the version string would be lower than the one in hirsute, which I suppose would make the archive admins (including you?) unhappy.
[19:43] <GunnarHj> seb128: But this is not a problem since I also proposed a merge with Debian for hirsute.
[19:43] <GunnarHj> s/lower/higher/
[19:45] <seb128> GunnarHj, that's not a problem if we have confidence the version is going to be higher before the end of the cycle
[19:45] <seb128> which isn't likely to be an issue there
[19:50] <GunnarHj> seb128: Ah, didn't know that. Thought it always needed to follow 'the rule'.
[19:51] <seb128> it's better but the SRU team is reasonable if you explain why it's not an issue
[19:51] <GunnarHj> Good to know going forward.
[19:52] <GunnarHj> seb128: But please feel free to still sponsor the hirsute merge. :)
[19:54] <seb128> right
[19:54] <seb128> it just needs uploading?
[19:57] <GunnarHj> seb128: Yes.
[20:29] <seb128> GunnarHj, Laney, g-t uploaded now
[20:31] <GunnarHj> seb128: Thanks, but I don't see it in the groovy queue.
[20:32] <seb128> GunnarHj, you said 'feel free to still sponsor the hirsute merge. :)'
[20:32] <seb128> which is what I did
[20:32] <seb128> so no it's not in groovy...
[20:34] <GunnarHj> seb128: Sorry, I meant *also*. groovy, i.e. bug #1900729, is the main goal. :)
[20:41] <seb128> GunnarHj, uploaded
[20:41] <GunnarHj> Thanks seb128!
[20:47] <seb128> GunnarHj, thank you for working on the fixes!
[20:49] <GunnarHj> seb128: N.p. It proved to be much more into it than anticipated, but that tends to be the normal...
[20:52] <seb128> :-)