17:59:25 <GeKo> #startmeeting tor-browser aug 13
17:59:25 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Aug 13 17:59:25 2018 UTC.  The chair is GeKo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:59:25 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:59:29 <GeKo> hi hi!
17:59:29 <sukhe> hi
17:59:30 <pospeselr> or evening!
17:59:38 <sisbell> hi
17:59:57 <boklm> hi!
18:00:13 <GeKo> the pad is at https://storm.torproject.org/shared/tHoN4Ii7rLSjPE0OP4gydX4cMGadsXmRQNc-6lwru0N please add your items and look over those of others in case they are marked as bold and you could help
18:00:34 <igt0> hello
18:00:36 <GeKo> (i just cut old entries in the hope it loads faster now for folks who had problems)
18:00:39 <mcs> hi
18:01:37 <sysrqb> o/
18:03:41 <arthuredelstein> hi everyone!
18:04:16 <arthuredelstein> yeah, cutting old entries sped it up a lot!
18:05:10 <GeKo> great
18:05:20 <GeKo> alright, let's get started
18:06:04 <GeKo> mcs: i think your item got solvedd, pospeselr thanks for stepping up
18:06:13 <pospeselr> np np
18:06:17 <mcs> pospeselr: Thanks!!!
18:06:28 <mcs> and yes, solved for now.
18:06:38 <pospeselr> hah
18:06:44 <pospeselr> s/solved/transfered/g
18:07:24 <GeKo> :)
18:07:28 <GeKo> pospeselr: you are up
18:07:43 <pospeselr> ok two things
18:08:29 <pospeselr> first up while learning way more about windows builds than I ever wanted to, i found that we're applying a few patches to firefox in rbm for windows builds
18:08:51 <pospeselr> why don't we apply ifdef'd versions to tor-browser directly?
18:09:41 <pospeselr> and if there's no good reason it'd make mingw incremental builds a bit easier if we did
18:09:54 <GeKo> so, for the first two that was just a clean revert and meant to be a temporary thing
18:09:56 <pospeselr> and secondly, is there anything we as a team want to get out of rustconf apart from my own personal fulfillment?
18:09:56 <sukhe> my understanding was that because these patches are "temporary"
18:10:01 <GeKo> yes
18:10:37 <GeKo> it felt those are not really patches we want to carry around but rather stopgaps for fixing the underlying bustage
18:10:50 <GeKo> which i imagined would happen rather soonish
18:10:51 <pospeselr> ah ok, do we have a ticket for the underlying issue?
18:11:04 <GeKo> yes
18:11:32 <sukhe> #26476 is for 1467041.patch
18:11:51 <sukhe> which is what tjr and I are working on (it's "closed" because the fix is in but the underlying issue remains)
18:12:07 <GeKo> that's actually for both of the moz patches and the moz bug is linked in it
18:12:26 <pospeselr> ok gotcha, good enough fo rme
18:12:47 <pospeselr> any thoughts on rustconf?
18:13:35 <arthuredelstein> pospeselr: There's been quite a bit of (still fairly hypothetical discussion) over whether we would want to implement a standalone tor-launcher.
18:13:48 <pospeselr> mmhm
18:13:53 <arthuredelstein> Maybe that would be in rust. So it would be interesting to think about ramifications
18:14:29 <arthuredelstein> Like how is the rust-qt bindings? And networking and whatever other things that would be relevant.
18:15:20 <arthuredelstein> Just a random thought :)
18:15:34 <sysrqb> right. I think that would likely happen in parallel with the sanboxing discussion
18:15:46 <sysrqb> at least, that was my thought/plan
18:15:50 <sysrqb> but i agree
18:15:54 <arthuredelstein> yes, the purpose would be for sandboxing
18:15:55 <pospeselr> makes sense
18:15:58 <pospeselr> right
18:17:48 <sisbell> servoshell project shows how to embed servo
18:18:18 <sisbell> https://github.com/paulrouget/servoshell
18:19:40 <GeKo> okay
18:19:53 <GeKo> assuming arthuredelstein does not have anything for the group i am up
18:20:04 <GeKo> so we planned to do releases this week
18:20:05 <arthuredelstein> I have a discussion at the top but we can do that then
18:20:24 <GeKo> sysrqb:  igt0: where are we at the  mobile side with things?
18:20:48 <mcs> arthuredelstein: Is it just me, or is your report in the pad empty?
18:20:59 <GeKo> do you feel we could get started with a build later this week?
18:21:11 <GeKo> mcs: you are not alone
18:21:17 <GeKo> boom!
18:21:31 <arthuredelstein> weird
18:21:48 <sysrqb> GeKo: i think we are getting very close, but we still have a few tickets that need work and lots of reviewing
18:21:52 <arthuredelstein> Apparently it didn't sync the first time I pasted it
18:22:02 <sukhe> I can see it?
18:22:13 <sysrqb> now it is trhere
18:22:16 <sukhe> ah
18:22:18 <sysrqb> *there
18:22:18 <arthuredelstein> I just pasted it again
18:22:40 <GeKo> sysrqb: i'll help with the reviewing, what are the blockers in your opinion?
18:22:55 <igt0> yep, we are almost in a good shape, however we have tickets to be reviewed.
18:23:18 <mcs> arthuredelstein: Looks good now.
18:23:30 <arthuredelstein> thanks for letting me know! :)
18:23:55 <sysrqb> we need to deide how we create the new signing key and who controls it
18:24:16 <GeKo> yep
18:24:39 <sysrqb> and making a decision about tickets like #26826 is ncessary
18:24:41 <boklm> arthuredelstein: I don't see any discussion item at the top, except one about TBA strings file
18:24:47 <sysrqb> *necessary
18:24:54 <sysrqb> but i don't tihnk we have many blockers
18:25:23 <GeKo> yes, that's on my radar
18:25:34 <sysrqb> great, thanks
18:25:48 <sysrqb> igt0: any lockers you know about?
18:25:53 <GeKo> sysrqb: igt0: let's aim for friday this week to get the release going
18:25:53 <sysrqb> *blockers
18:26:02 <GeKo> and try to get the blockers and reviews solved by then
18:26:03 <sysrqb> okay, sgtm
18:26:04 <arthuredelstein> boklm: Yes, that's my discussion item
18:26:11 <boklm> arthuredelstein: ah, ok :)
18:26:14 <GeKo> sysrqb: i'll get back to you re the signing key
18:26:19 <sysrqb> kk
18:26:20 <GeKo> probably tomorrow
18:27:00 <GeKo> mcs: i thought abuot starting a desktop build on wed, how does that sound?
18:27:20 <GeKo> if we don't get the full onboarding done by then could we merge parts of it to test those?
18:27:22 <igt0> sysrqb, GeKo the more important ones are #26884, #25696 and #27111, the other ones can be done after the first build.
18:27:42 <GeKo> k
18:28:10 <GeKo> sysrqb: could you start reviewing the first two?
18:28:12 <mcs> GeKo: We should definitely merge what we have finished by then (for onboarding). We will see how far we get with #26962
18:28:25 <GeKo> okay.
18:29:05 <GeKo> i'd like to have some win64 updater patch in that release as well
18:29:21 <GeKo> so, in doubt #26962 should wait here
18:29:45 <sysrqb> GeKo: yep, i'll add it on my list
18:29:48 <mcs> I started a build to test jacek’s suggestion, but it failed. Maybe I need to add a #include.
18:29:55 <mcs> (for @26514)
18:29:58 <mcs> #26514
18:30:23 <GeKo> okay. i am fine using a clean patch for your current workaround
18:30:32 <mcs> OK
18:30:40 <GeKo> in case you don't get jacke's assumptionto work
18:30:44 <GeKo> *jacek's
18:31:08 <GeKo> so, my second item is i need help with reviews
18:31:39 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: can you grab #26456, #26655, #26628 and #26833
18:31:48 <arthuredelstein> Yup!
18:31:53 <GeKo> pospeselr: can you grab #24056
18:32:06 <pospeselr> can do
18:32:15 <GeKo> thanks
18:32:22 <GeKo> ideally today or tomorrow
18:32:28 <GeKo> so all of it can get into the alpha
18:32:45 <pospeselr> yeah np
18:33:09 <arthuredelstein> yes
18:33:14 <GeKo> sisbell: so, am i reading your update right that ther is just one diff?
18:33:21 <GeKo> if so that would be great news actually!
18:33:38 <GeKo> could you paste it on some ticket?
18:33:53 <sisbell> Its one file but that is a big file with lots of diffs
18:34:27 <GeKo> i see
18:34:43 <sisbell> I'm going through the build at each stage now to see if there is a diff in the build directory
18:34:50 <sisbell> So its a bit more work
18:35:06 <sysrqb> when i first began looking at this earlier, i saw libxul.so wasn't reproducible, but that was before building it with rbm
18:35:12 <sisbell> I'll open a ticket for tracking
18:35:14 <GeKo> do you have a branch for further review addressing boklm's comments?
18:35:21 <sysrqb> so i hope rbm removed some of the reproducible bits
18:36:55 <GeKo> sisbell: ^
18:37:50 <GeKo> okay, while waiting on that, anything else for the status updtes?
18:37:52 <sisbell> not yet
18:38:06 <sisbell> still working local
18:38:15 <GeKo> okay
18:38:57 <GeKo> discussion time then
18:39:12 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: you are up (assuming the item was yours)
18:40:00 <arthuredelstein> Yes, I was looking at translation.git with emmapeel and we noticed the tba-android_stringsdtd branch seems to be all Fennec strings (many of them quite old)
18:40:27 <sysrqb> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/25696#comment:23
18:41:11 <arthuredelstein> We were thinking it would be good to limit that branch to any strings needed by TBA that aren't already in Firefox or Tor Browser.
18:41:53 <sysrqb> yes
18:42:01 <GeKo> sounds good to me
18:42:09 <igt0> I think we can also have our own dtd file.
18:42:17 <sysrqb> i was hoping this would happen, but maybe emma missed my comment in the ticket
18:42:46 <arthuredelstein> igt0: Maybe that's the simplest approach, to have a separate dtd file just for anything new
18:43:25 <arthuredelstein> Or potentially we could just add TBA strings to our existing dtd files from torbutton if most of the strings are shared between desktop and mobile
18:44:07 <sysrqb> yeah, there was a brief discussion on #25696
18:44:17 <sysrqb> maybe you can add a comment there
18:44:21 <arthuredelstein> OK, will do. thanks
18:44:23 <sysrqb> or we should open a separae ticket for this
18:44:49 <arthuredelstein> good idea. I can do that
18:44:55 <sysrqb> cool, thanks
18:45:14 <GeKo> do we have anything else for discussion today?
18:46:21 <GeKo> thanks then, everybody! *baf*
18:46:24 <GeKo> #endmeeting