18:00:22 #startmeeting tor browser 18:00:22 Meeting started Tue May 30 18:00:22 2017 UTC. The chair is GeKo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:22 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 18:00:44 a bit unusual but due to a holiday in the us yesterday we have the tor browser meeting today 18:01:01 who is here for a status update? 18:01:03 hi 18:01:27 hi 18:02:01 arthuredelstein: ^ (ping for the unusual meeting time) 18:02:10 okay, i can go first today i guess 18:02:27 hi all! 18:02:30 i worked mainly on getting tor browser more into a releaseable shape over the week 18:02:48 i reviewed a bunch of tickets (e.g. #22283, #21431, #22320) 18:03:07 and worked on many more (#21779, #16404, #21684, #21861, 21862, #21972, #22362, #21689) 18:03:50 we got the tbb-7.0-must ticket number down a lot and it seems that will continue in the next few days :) 18:03:56 (at least i hope) 18:04:43 i triaged the incoming tickets and it seems thes switch to esr52 is solving some of them at least 18:04:53 as far as i can see we got no release blockers that way 18:05:32 this week i plan to work on getting a bunch of loose ends for the 7.0 release solved 18:06:00 then i got so annoyed by the about:cache dialog that i plan to fix at least #16485 18:06:33 and then release and tbb team admin work is on my agenda 18:06:45 that's it form me 18:06:49 *from 18:07:45 * arthuredelstein can go 18:07:57 This past week I wrote patches for #22320, #22452, and #22415 18:08:07 I also worked on #22343 and have most of a patch ready. 18:08:22 I investigated the debug assert in my patch for #22327 but unfortunately haven't solved it yet. 18:08:44 I also made an emergency patch for the TBB download page (#22357). 18:08:56 That's it for me. 18:09:29 what's the plan for the week to come? 18:10:09 Oh yes -- finish up #22343 and #22327 and continue to work on tbb-7.0-must tickets :) 18:10:37 * boklm can go next (assuming my internet connection from inside a train does not stop working in the middle) 18:10:52 This past week I worked on a patch for #22361 (I will post it after my test build finish to confirm it fixes the problem), fixed #22444, worked on #21982, and took some days off 18:11:08 This week I'm planning to work on #21982 (including running it on OSX), #22003, #22328, try to test the patch on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/1365047, and work on the panopticlick setup 18:11:17 That's it for me 18:12:24 * mcs will give a report next 18:12:38 Last week, Kathy and I helped with triage, e.g. #22282. 18:12:44 We also helped with #21779 and reviewed some Tor Browser 7.0 patches. 18:12:52 We created patches for #21431 and #22283. 18:12:59 We spent some time on #14205 but did not finish that task. 18:13:06 Also, we spent a little time looking at the FTP and pdfjs problems reported in #21766. 18:13:12 And we responded in https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1330876 (uplift for our #6786). 18:13:18 This week, we will follow up in that Mozilla bug, we will continue working on #14205 as well as #21766, and we will help with other tbb-7.0-must tickets. 18:13:24 Also, we will spend some time preparing for a Tor Launcher automation meeting that is scheduled for later this week. 18:13:29 That’s all for now. 18:14:27 okay. so, i really, really would like to see at least the pdf part for #21766 fixed for 7.0 18:14:40 but i am probably not alone :) 18:14:43 GeKo: We will see what we can do :) 18:15:08 anyone else here for a status update? 18:16:20 okay, let's move on to the discussion time then 18:16:50 i have only the 7.0 release item on my list. let's start with that one 18:17:24 my current plan is to get the building going on thursday this week 18:17:43 then have a rc ready on friday for qa over the weekend and on monday 18:18:09 on monday is signing business etc. and we could release tor browser on tuesday in a week 18:18:58 which means we have two days left for patches (or on if we are in europe) 18:19:43 arthuredelstein: i hope that's not too tight for #22327 18:21:25 does that sound like a plan we should choose? 18:23:23 anything else we should discuss today? 18:23:30 GeKo: I'll focus on #22327 to try to get it fixed. 18:23:34 It sounds like a good plan to me, even if we all wish we had more time. 18:23:49 it sounds like a good plan to me too 18:23:52 I also think it sounds good 18:24:05 hi everyone! I am iry 18:24:19 Does it make sense to do an updater test before the release goes live? We would need at least one signed mar file to do rhat though. 18:24:47 (and if the old updater is broken we cannot fix it but at least we would know) 18:25:22 mcs: sounds good. i'll make one available. for osx? 18:25:47 (i actually thought you'll spend your monday to test the heck out of our updater :) ) 18:25:52 Anything up to all 3 platforms would be great :) 18:26:24 ha, sure :) 18:26:48 iry: hi, welcome! 18:27:06 Hi Geko I will be working on a python-clone of Tor launcher, but I have not found the best way to keep up with the development progress of the Tor launcher 18:27:27 mcs just said there will be an automation meeting this week 18:27:44 yes, probably on friday 18:27:51 her in this channel 18:27:56 Great 18:27:59 but the time is not exactly set yet 18:28:10 likely candidates are 1500 UTC or 1800 UTC 18:28:37 Got you! 18:29:19 and it seems mozilla will drop the support of the Tor launcher 18:29:35 so I am wondering what's the plan for TBB team? 18:29:53 iry: Do you mean because of WebExtensions? 18:30:07 yes 18:30:26 we can work around that for the time being 18:30:49 let me find you the comment and the ticket 18:31:25 #17248, comment 16 18:31:58 do we have other discussion items for today? 18:32:07 A related issue is something I was discussing with Yawning a couple of days ago, as a result of his email thread on tbb-dev. 18:32:31 He's wondering how the tor-launcher automation fits in with sandboxing. 18:32:53 That is, his sandbox approach probably requires a separate-process tor-launcher. 18:33:51 So the question is whether the new UI should be developed in the same JS extension or as a new separate program using QT or similar. 18:34:57 Or possibly iry's python-based project would be a way to do it. 18:35:54 Anyway I don't have an opinion, but it seems like a valid question. 18:36:26 hm. so the ui for tor launcher won't be radically different with the automation 18:36:46 there will be some dialogs moved/adapted but that's probably it 18:37:29 I think sandboxing may drive us to a different (non XUL) solution but we do not understand all of the requirements yet (basically what GeKo said in that tbb-dev email thread). 18:37:32 And where will the code for the automation itself live? Inside tor-launcher JS or in tor? 18:37:38 there will be more effort needed under the hood to get the automation part going properly 18:38:56 i think the main part will live in tor-launcher for the time being 18:39:32 i doubt we will have the pieces for the new archtiecture ready to start with that one and get the deliverables done until later this year 18:39:58 oh, "until" is probably wwrong 18:40:00 *wrong 18:40:18 what i meant was we have deliverables to do and the automation is part of those 18:40:29 and we have time to november 18:40:48 If we also try to re-write in QT we will probably fail to deliver on time (that’s my guess anyway). 18:40:55 (nit that I like QT) 18:41:00 s/nit/not/ 18:41:15 yeah, that's what i meant 18:41:30 Right. I think Yawning's concern was about duplicated effort. And also maybe delaying adoption of the sandbox. 18:42:03 well, yes, but this kind of duplicated effort can't be avoided it seems to me, alas 18:42:20 Because of the deliverables schedule? 18:42:29 yes 18:42:52 the adoption of the sandbox is probably not delayed due to the automation effort 18:43:11 i mean we don't have anybody working on the sandboxing stuff right now 18:43:30 nor do we have the money for that at the moment i think 18:43:56 so what we need is a plan first, then break that one down to pieces 18:44:08 we can use to apply for money with 18:44:28 at least that's how i see it currently 18:44:42 I think we should try to find time to work on the plan (and then ask for money or shift priorities or whatever). I think that is what everyone is saying. 18:44:53 ah, yes. 18:44:57 :) 18:45:33 I see. I guess I'm not clear on how flexible or inflexible the TBB budget is, but it does seem like we should try ASAP to find time or budget for sandboxing. 18:46:08 yes, i agree but step zero is getting the big picture for all 4 platforms right 18:46:30 (or in a shape as good as possible with the knowledge we have right now= 18:46:32 ) 18:46:54 we could even think about getting that part funded as well 18:47:27 as it probably requires quite some work 18:48:09 i'll bring that up on the vegas meeting on thursday again 18:48:32 we might find some smart way to speed this process up 18:49:09 but i doubt that we can avoid the duplicated effort you spoke about 18:49:09 GeKo: Thanks in advance for raising the issue. 18:49:26 sure 18:49:46 do we have something else for today to discuss? 18:49:56 thanks for the discussion 18:51:43 sorry that I was accidentally disconnected. Did anyone say something? 18:52:17 okay. thanks for the meeting then and another happy tor browser fighting week *baf* 18:52:27 #endmeeting