1 14:34:44 <API> #startmeeting
   2 14:34:44 <tota11y> Meeting started Thu Apr 28 14:34:44 2011 UTC.  The chair is API. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
   3 14:34:44 <tota11y> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
   4 14:35:08 <API> #topic Aline
   5 14:35:23 <API> well, this is just
   6 14:35:27 <API> share that Aline
   7 14:35:38 <API> was accepted on the Women
   8 14:35:41 <API> outreach program
   9 14:35:47 <API> she will work on
  10 14:35:49 <API> documentation
  11 14:36:02 <API> as some already know, she started with accerciser
  12 14:36:22 <API> joanie, will be her co-mentor
  13 14:36:25 <API> additionally
  14 14:36:33 <API> Meg Ford was also accepted
  15 14:36:42 <API> and will work also on a11y stuff
  16 14:36:45 <API> specifically
  17 14:36:49 <API> art a11y
  18 14:36:52 <API> on the themes
  19 14:36:56 <API> joanie, something else?
  20 14:36:58 <joanie> David Bolter of Mozilla being the other co-mentor.
  21 14:37:08 <aleiva> great
  22 14:37:25 <joanie> But everyone should feel free to pitch in
  23 14:37:35 <joanie> Aline also has some coding ideas
  24 14:37:44 <API> yes this is good
  25 14:37:46 <API> as we said
  26 14:37:46 <joanie> ATK implementation/custom widget, etc
  27 14:37:56 <API> if she is trying to do something
  28 14:38:01 <API> using the atk doc
  29 14:38:02 <joanie> which is more the area of expertise of those who are not me ;-)
  30 14:38:06 <API> or the a11y doc in general
  31 14:38:16 <API> if she is not able to do that, means that the doc is incomplete
  32 14:38:25 <API> is a good test-case for the documentation
  33 14:38:25 <joanie> (or wrong)
  34 14:38:49 <API> ok, so, using meetboot
  35 14:38:58 <API> btw: this is the first meeting trying to use it
  36 14:39:08 <joanie> #action Joanie will follow up with Aline to see what the next steps are
  37 14:39:16 <API> #info Aline was accepted on the Women Outreach Program
  38 14:39:34 <API> #info Meg Ford was also accepted
  39 14:39:45 <alibezz> Hi everybody
  40 14:39:48 <alibezz> Sorry I'm late
  41 14:39:50 <API> #info both will work on a11y  stuff (documentation, art)
  42 14:39:58 <API> alibezz, we are finishing your point ;)
  43 14:40:14 <API> but basically is reporting that you and Meg Ford were accepten on the WOP
  44 14:40:21 <API> and will work on a11y related tasks
  45 14:40:23 <clown> hi alibezz
  46 14:40:30 <API> alibezz, do you want to add something?
  47 14:41:08 <joanie> For the record....
  48 14:41:25 <joanie> #agreed The team is thrilled to have Aline
  49 14:41:47 <aleiva> h
  50 14:42:00 <aleiva> ups sorry
  51 14:42:45 <API> alibezz, ?
  52 14:43:10 <alibezz> I'm glad to work with you all
  53 14:43:22 <joanie> :-)
  54 14:43:31 <API> ;), ok thanks
  55 14:43:35 <alibezz> is Meg Ford also working with arts, isn't it?
  56 14:43:43 <API> alibezz, yes
  57 14:43:47 <API> she will work to
  58 14:43:51 <API> improve the a11y themes
  59 14:44:13 <alibezz> is she here?
  60 14:44:29 * API looking people connected
  61 14:44:30 <API> hmm
  62 14:44:31 <API> no
  63 14:44:47 <joanie> And she's not been in touch with us directly (to my knowledge)
  64 14:45:11 <API> well, I guess that this would happen eventually
  65 14:45:17 <alibezz> oh
  66 14:45:21 <API> anyway, she already have an mentor
  67 14:45:27 <alibezz> is David here?
  68 14:45:34 <API> alibezz, no
  69 14:45:35 <alibezz> My other mentor:)
  70 14:45:38 <alibezz> oh ok
  71 14:45:51 <clown> nope.  I could ask him to join (he's in #accessibility on mozilla's irc serve).
  72 14:45:56 <alibezz> sorry I'm late... Guess I lost my own point
  73 14:46:14 <API> alibezz, no problem
  74 14:46:16 <API> soo
  75 14:46:24 <API> anyother question or comment?
  76 14:46:31 <API> can we move to next point?
  77 14:46:34 * joanie nods
  78 14:46:40 <aleiva> +1
  79 14:46:47 <clown> +1
  80 14:47:01 <API> #item ATK Hackfest
  81 14:47:08 <API> ups
  82 14:47:09 <joanie> #topic ATK Hackfest
  83 14:47:13 <API> thanks
  84 14:47:21 <API> well, it is really near!
  85 14:47:30 <API> I will write a post about that
  86 14:47:32 <API> and again
  87 14:47:40 <API> please people, update the wiki
  88 14:47:43 <API> and do your homework
  89 14:47:54 <API> mgorse was doing a good work today
  90 14:47:59 <API> reviewing some of the bugs
  91 14:48:04 <joanie> +1
  92 14:48:14 <API> #action update wiki
  93 14:48:26 <joanie> API need to add a name
  94 14:48:27 <joanie> I think
  95 14:48:32 <API> #action do the homework: review atk bugzilla
  96 14:49:04 <API> hmm
  97 14:49:07 <API> somethink like
  98 14:49:11 <joanie> #action Joanie will coordinate with API on drafting a schedule
  99 14:49:35 <API> and in the case that it is a general thing?
 100 14:49:41 <joanie> dunno
 101 14:49:45 <joanie> but we shall see shortly
 102 14:49:45 <aleiva> add tota11y
 103 14:49:46 <fer> All?
 104 14:49:56 <joanie> +1 aleiva
 105 14:50:07 <API> joanie, btw, nicknames are case sensitive
 106 14:50:35 <API> anyway, we can hack the minutes later
 107 14:50:35 <joanie> not sure if they are for the bot but yeah
 108 14:50:40 <API> so about this topic
 109 14:50:48 <API> any question, doubt, etc?
 110 14:50:54 <API> ah, btw
 111 14:50:55 <joanie> panic?
 112 14:50:58 <API> about theopen day
 113 14:51:07 <API> fer aleiva msanchez and me
 114 14:51:23 <API> remember that you are volunteers for that
 115 14:51:32 <joanie> #action aleiva will prepare his presentation on Orca soon.
 116 14:51:33 <fer> yup, I need to ping msanchez
 117 14:51:37 <joanie> ;-)
 118 14:51:43 <API> #action API will sent the schedule for the open day
 119 14:51:50 <API> and last information
 120 14:52:07 <API> remember that this open day
 121 14:52:17 <API> will have the benefict that a local LUG
 122 14:52:28 <API> GPUL would donate some money to the hackfest
 123 14:52:45 <API> so most of the lunches will be covered by this
 124 14:52:51 <API> so again
 125 14:52:55 <API> anything else?
 126 14:52:58 <API> doubts, questions?
 127 14:53:25 <aleiva> only
 128 14:53:38 <aleiva> I leave that afternoon as wiki said
 129 14:53:53 <aleiva> add my talk first or second
 130 14:53:58 <API> yes, np
 131 14:53:59 <aleiva> thanks ;)
 132 14:54:03 <API> it would be better if the second
 133 14:54:12 <API> in order to make the "introduction to gnome accessibility"
 134 14:54:17 <API> before "orca is cool"
 135 14:54:21 <joanie> +1
 136 14:54:22 <aleiva> perfect
 137 14:54:24 <API> so if it is second
 138 14:54:30 <API> that introduction will be short
 139 14:54:45 <API> so lets move
 140 14:54:48 <API> #topic Testing
 141 14:55:04 <API> joanie, I guess that you added this topic
 142 14:55:13 <joanie> Yeah, for a few reasons
 143 14:55:34 <joanie> One is just that I really want us to have an accessible 3.0.2 release
 144 14:55:40 <joanie> as accessible as it can be anyway
 145 14:55:56 <joanie> so even though we always say it, and all know it needs doing
 146 14:56:09 <joanie> we really, really need to be actively testing this stuff
 147 14:56:31 <joanie> filing bugs, harassing people outside of the team whose fixes (or approvals of patches) we require
 148 14:56:34 <joanie> etc.
 149 14:56:37 <API> jhernandez|eee, you have just arrived and the best moment
 150 14:56:46 <API> it is planned a new spin for the a11y distro?
 151 14:57:11 <jhernandez|eee> of course, this week we're going to have the fouth one
 152 14:57:38 <jhernandez|eee> so
 153 14:58:06 <jhernandez|eee> I'll need all updated tarballs
 154 14:58:38 <jhernandez|eee> that's all
 155 14:58:54 <API> jhernandez|eee, well a question
 156 14:58:57 <API> for example
 157 14:58:58 <API> in my case
 158 14:59:04 <API> all the patches included on the
 159 14:59:10 <API> custom gnome shell
 160 14:59:14 <API> were committed on master
 161 14:59:20 <jhernandez|eee> nice!
 162 14:59:22 <joanie> woo hoo!
 163 14:59:23 <API> but was after the 3.0.1 release
 164 14:59:27 <clown> congrats!
 165 14:59:29 <API> so it wouldn't be there
 166 14:59:35 <API> until 3.0.2 release
 167 14:59:36 <API> sooo
 168 14:59:47 <joanie> so tarball is still needed
 169 14:59:47 <API> as the plan is testing all the stuff for 3.0.2
 170 14:59:55 <API> I guess that I should keep that tarball
 171 15:00:01 <API> right?
 172 15:00:07 <joanie> API could you roll a new one
 173 15:00:08 * API joanie thinks that yes
 174 15:00:14 <API> joanie, a new one?
 175 15:00:16 <API> ah
 176 15:00:24 <API> a 3.0.1 but with the patches?
 177 15:00:25 <joanie> because I think other keyboard related stuff went in
 178 15:00:32 <API> really?
 179 15:00:35 <API> well, not sure
 180 15:00:39 <API> but just in case
 181 15:00:41 <joanie> some of my bugs were closed as dupes
 182 15:00:48 <API> ah ok
 183 15:00:50 <joanie> with commits being present
 184 15:00:54 <joanie> prior to your work
 185 15:01:04 <API> well, so trying to use this meetboot thing
 186 15:01:09 <jhernandez|eee> of course, if the other commmits don't have a11y-related patches, o
 187 15:01:10 <jhernandez|eee> ok
 188 15:01:24 <API> #info we really need to test stuff towards 3.0.2 release
 189 15:01:41 <API> #action jhernandez|eee will create a new spin soon
 190 15:01:52 <API> #action people should update their tarballs
 191 15:02:03 <joanie> #action joanie will create a new Orca tarball
 192 15:02:14 <joanie> #action API will create a new gnome-shell tarball
 193 15:02:18 <API> joanie, I think that you are still "people"
 194 15:02:19 <jhernandez|eee> API: but, I'll considering if some module has a strong depend on gnome-shell 3.0.2 (i think is not the case) it could be a problem
 195 15:02:22 <API> ;)
 196 15:02:29 <joanie> I'm not convinced 'people' is gonna work
 197 15:02:31 <API> jhernandez|eee, hmmm
 198 15:02:36 <API> well, but that spin
 199 15:02:45 <API> is a spin to test things before the testing distro
 200 15:02:56 <jhernandez|eee> yes
 201 15:02:57 <API> so that wouldn't include any dependency to any 3.0.2 release
 202 15:02:58 <API> right?
 203 15:03:06 <jhernandez|eee> right!
 204 15:03:10 <API> ok
 205 15:03:16 <jhernandez|eee> s/3.0.2/3.0.1/
 206 15:03:22 <jhernandez|eee> sorry for confusing
 207 15:03:24 <API> well, so anohter question, comment, information, suggestion?
 208 15:03:24 <jhernandez|eee> :s
 209 15:03:26 <API> jhernandez|eee, np
 210 15:03:30 <jhernandez|eee> ok
 211 15:03:57 <API> well, so anohter question, comment, information, suggestion?
 212 15:04:04 * joanie notes the next topic might be redundant
 213 15:04:39 * API checking
 214 15:04:55 <API> #topic GNOME 3.0.2
 215 15:05:02 <API> #info already discussed on previous topic
 216 15:05:05 <API> ;)
 217 15:05:08 <joanie> :-)
 218 15:05:11 <API> joanie, do you want to add something?
 219 15:05:20 <joanie> nope, I'm set
 220 15:05:22 <joanie> thanks
 221 15:05:39 <API> well, we are doing it in a really good time
 222 15:05:47 <API> so lets go to the next
 223 15:05:58 <API> #topic CSPI vs libatspi
 224 15:06:03 <API> I added this topic today
 225 15:06:17 <API> mostly because the chatting we have yesterday mgorse and tbsaunde
 226 15:06:19 <API> on #a11y
 227 15:06:33 <API> I thought
 228 15:06:34 <API> wrongly
 229 15:06:42 <API> that the core C library used by pyatspi2
 230 15:06:47 <API> using gobject introspection
 231 15:07:04 <API> has the purpose to be used just internally
 232 15:07:16 <API> but mgorse and tbsaunde told me yesterday that it would be possible to use it
 233 15:07:19 <API> on a C program
 234 15:07:35 <API> although mgorse said that the C library was not exactly CSPI
 235 15:07:36 <API> so
 236 15:07:39 <API> mgorse, one question
 237 15:07:56 <API> if you want to create a AT using C
 238 15:08:05 <API> and you use libatspi
 239 15:08:17 <API> there is something that you can't do that you can do with pytaspi2?
 240 15:08:35 <API> does libatspi lacks any functionality
 241 15:08:47 <mgorse> Hmm   findDescendant is the one thing I can think of off-hand
 242 15:08:48 * API in related news, not sure if this is the proper name for that library
 243 15:09:00 <mgorse> which was the case with cspi as well
 244 15:09:13 <API> well, I'm asking that
 245 15:09:17 <API> because if this is the case
 246 15:09:26 <mgorse> that has to be implemented in pyatspi I think, and libatspi doesn't have an equivalent
 247 15:09:39 <tbsaunde> API: well, that's what the .so is named so I'd say its the right name ;)
 248 15:09:42 <API> there is any reason to keep talking about CSPI?
 249 15:10:00 <API> why can say that CSPI is obsolete and the new C API is libatspi?
 250 15:10:09 <API> tbsaunde, thanks ;)
 251 15:10:58 <mgorse> API: I think that makes sense. Someone could write a compatibility layer, but I don't have plans to do that myself, and the only reason would be for compatibility with apps using cspi, but those apps could be ported to libatspi if someone wanted to
 252 15:11:15 <API> mgorse, well, not sure if makes sense a compatibility layer
 253 15:11:17 <API> I mean
 254 15:11:24 <API> if someone is interested to
 255 15:11:34 <API> create a AT program use C
 256 15:11:40 <API> if it was already using CSPI
 257 15:11:48 <API> it would be just move to a new API
 258 15:11:49 <API> after all
 259 15:11:57 <API> Orca in the past also needed to do that
 260 15:12:05 <mgorse> yeah
 261 15:12:08 <API> due the at-spi1 python bindings
 262 15:12:24 <API> on that "old times" with different python bindings
 263 15:12:30 <API> soo
 264 15:12:49 <API> for example, we could suggest that in order to integrate dasher on gnome 3
 265 15:12:59 <API> he can move from CSPI to libatspi
 266 15:13:04 <API> mgorse, what do you think?
 267 15:13:20 <mgorse> yeah, that should work
 268 15:13:42 <API> ok, and in the same way
 269 15:13:43 <API> this
 270 15:13:45 <API> https://live.gnome.org/Accessibility/ThreePointTwo/RelatedProjects#CSPI
 271 15:13:48 <API> can be removed
 272 15:13:55 <API> and the final conclusion is:
 273 15:13:56 * joanie nods
 274 15:14:08 <API> "CSPI is dead, migrate to libatspi"
 275 15:14:53 <joanie> question: Is Patrick still working on Dasher?
 276 15:15:32 <mgorse> joanie: Good question. He had plans to when I saw him at AEGIS
 277 15:15:49 <API> he was also on FOXDEM
 278 15:15:51 <API> ups
 279 15:15:52 <API> FOSDEM
 280 15:15:56 <API> but I forgot to ask
 281 15:16:00 <mgorse> I should send him an email--he might not know about libatspi for instance
 282 15:16:17 <API> mgorse, I had the plan to send that to the list
 283 15:16:18 <mgorse> I haven't seen him on IRC in a long time
 284 15:16:28 <API> so I can add him on CC
 285 15:16:30 <API> mgorse, btw
 286 15:16:34 <mgorse> ok
 287 15:16:42 <API> this meas that it would be good to add libatspi documentation
 288 15:16:45 <joanie> Someone has an ai, but who?
 289 15:16:50 <API> on the gnome developers page
 290 15:16:54 <API> me
 291 15:16:57 <API> joanie, hold on
 292 15:17:06 * joanie apologizes
 293 15:17:06 <API> we will write all that meetboot stuff at the end
 294 15:17:17 <mgorse> API: I thought it was already there, but I haven't looked in depth at it
 295 15:17:25 <API> mgorse, ok
 296 15:17:31 <API> so lets now conclude this
 297 15:17:49 <API> #info libatspi provides access to any AT program based on C
 298 15:18:00 <API> #info you can do most of the things that you can already do with pyatspi2
 299 15:18:41 <API> #agreed instead of provide a CSPI compatible with at-spi2, people should use/migrate to libatspi
 300 15:18:55 <API> #action API will update the wiki removing CSPI as a issue
 301 15:19:12 <API> #action API will send a mail about this agreement on the list, including patrick on CC
 302 15:19:30 <API> #action API documentation page should be reviewed
 303 15:19:32 <API> anything else?
 304 15:19:44 <clown> somewhat tangential:
 305 15:19:54 <clown> anyone know what to use if writing an AT in javascript?
 306 15:20:27 <clown> c -> libatspi; python -> pyatspi2;  javascript -> ?
 307 15:20:51 <clown> and, it's possible there is no answer...
 308 15:20:59 <API> hmm
 309 15:21:02 <aleiva> js using gtk or js for the web?
 310 15:21:12 <API> mgorse, as pyatspi2 is based on gobject introspection
 311 15:21:18 <clown> js using gtk (or embedded inside gnome-shell)
 312 15:21:24 <API> I guess that there are a gir file and so on
 313 15:21:25 <API> right?
 314 15:21:34 <clown> API, there should be. good point.
 315 15:21:48 <mgorse> Hmm. Does Javascript support gobject-introspection? If so, then in theory you can use the libatspi typelib somehow, but I don't think anyone has tried so far
 316 15:22:00 <clown> mgorse, it does.
 317 15:22:06 <clown> gjs does, that is.
 318 15:22:06 <API> I mean that I could call atk methods using javascript on gnomeshell
 319 15:22:10 <API> mgorse, yes
 320 15:22:15 <aleiva> mgorse in theory you can
 321 15:22:18 <API> this is how gnome shell does
 322 15:22:27 <API> I mean that gnome-shell ui is written in javascript
 323 15:22:34 <API> and they call gtk, clutter, st calls
 324 15:22:38 <aleiva> you can use looking glass in gs
 325 15:22:41 <API> I was also being able to call atk
 326 15:22:50 <API> with some issues, but able to
 327 15:22:51 <aleiva> to test it fastly
 328 15:23:01 <clown> API, yep.  gs-mag does very simlilar things, but I've yet to actually try to hit the atspi layer.
 329 15:23:05 <API> mgorse, so if there is a gir file for libatspi
 330 15:23:16 <clown> similar things to what gnome-shell does.
 331 15:23:21 <API> I guess that you can do that
 332 15:23:38 <API> clown, so you would like to call libatspi methods on your gs-mag code?
 333 15:24:02 <clown> API,  I'm thinking about the bug that joanie filed
 334 15:24:08 <API> well, as mgorse said that it is possible
 335 15:24:12 <clown> for doing focus tracking in gs-mag
 336 15:24:30 <API> clown, would you like to test if calling at-spi2 via libatspi
 337 15:24:33 <clown> and which Dan suggested doing focus traking in gnome-shell itself.
 338 15:24:34 <API> with javascript is feasible?
 339 15:24:49 <API> clown, Im thinking on a new action item
 340 15:24:54 <API> and Im searching a volunteer ;)
 341 15:24:56 <clown> yes essentially.
 342 15:25:12 <clown> but my thinking is based on an assumption
 343 15:25:24 <API> #action clown will investigate if it is feasible to call libatspi using javascript (ie: on gnome-shell)
 344 15:25:26 <clown> that focus tracking needs to use atspi to track, well, focus events.
 345 15:25:38 <API> will the action is just "investigate", so no pressure ;)
 346 15:25:53 <API> can we conclude this topic then?
 347 15:25:53 * clown new mantra:  no pressure, no pressure...
 348 15:26:06 <API> #topic miscellaneous time
 349 15:26:11 <API> I see some new faces on the meeting
 350 15:26:13 <API> in summary
 351 15:26:20 <API> we usually use the last minutes of the meeting
 352 15:26:30 <API> just in case someone want to ask, report
 353 15:26:34 <API> something *short*
 354 15:26:37 <API> not included on the agenda
 355 15:26:49 <API> so, anyone wants to add something on this miscellaneous time?
 356 15:27:19 <clown> API, I looked at the agenda earlier in the week, and saw something about you reporting from the release team?  Just curious...
 357 15:27:22 <webczat> will it be needed/worth to make other at-spi bindings for other languages?
 358 15:27:56 * clown suggests dealing with webczat's question first.
 359 15:28:25 <webczat> actually, gnome things are just python/c/js so...
 360 15:28:28 <clown> webczat:  at face value:  "yes"  :-)
 361 15:28:55 <clown> presumably there's something for Java (who uses Java anymore?)
 362 15:28:58 <mgorse> I made libatspi's method names like what seems to be standard for C libraries, but the original pyatspi's names were more Pythonic, so pyatspi has a lot of renaming for instance
 363 15:29:53 <webczat> clown: Many people don't like java, but others still use it.
 364 15:30:05 <mgorse> Someone could, ie, use  libatspi directly in Python using pygi (ie, "from gi.repositories import Atspi", ...)
 365 15:30:09 <clown> webczat:  I like java...
 366 15:30:31 <webczat> clown: i also do.
 367 15:30:39 <mgorse> s/repositories/repository/
 368 15:30:45 <tbsaunde> clown:  there are worse languages
 369 15:30:48 <API> clown, hmm, that was last week agenda
 370 15:31:04 <clown> oh, right, API.  Never mind.
 371 15:31:07 <webczat> but I didn't see any libatspi bindings to java. there is an atk wrapper for swing and java-access-bridge that is probably deprecated but that isn't it
 372 15:31:27 <API> webczat, summary
 373 15:31:35 <API> we are not too many people working on a11y
 374 15:31:38 <clown> tbsaunde:  "there are worse languages"  yep.  C++...
 375 15:31:43 <API> the good thing of the gobject introspection
 376 15:31:46 <API> based binding
 377 15:31:55 <API> is that we just need to create that on C
 378 15:31:57 <API> and "magically"
 379 15:32:08 <API> we will have python and javascript (we hope) bindings
 380 15:32:14 <API> java bindings would be awesome
 381 15:32:16 <API> but AFAIK
 382 15:32:21 <API> there is not one with time to do that
 383 15:32:23 <API> and AFAIK
 384 15:32:30 <API> right now
 385 15:32:41 <API> there aren't any JAVA bindings based on gobject introspection
 386 15:32:51 * clown looks to see if Peter Korn is around.  Nope.  I volunteer Peter for the Java bindings.
 387 15:32:52 <mgorse> Fwiw, I found a few bugs and memory leaks in pygobject while working on pyatspi, so there's no guarantee that there won't be similar for Javascript.
 388 15:33:08 <tbsaunde> API:  you could use jni, its an ffi for java
 389 15:33:26 <API> tbsaunde, well, I could
 390 15:33:27 <API> but sorry
 391 15:33:30 <webczat> yeah, java classes can load native libs
 392 15:33:33 <API> i don't have time to check that
 393 15:33:42 <API> and check if it is working
 394 15:33:43 <API> ie
 395 15:33:52 <API> we don't know anything
 396 15:33:55 <API> about the current state of JAW
 397 15:34:04 <API> so
 398 15:34:05 <tbsaunde> API:  yeah, not suggesting *you* do anything
 399 15:34:10 <API> tbsaunde, yes I know
 400 15:34:20 <API> but you I used *me* as a example
 401 15:34:32 <API> I mean that if someone wants to use Java
 402 15:34:36 <tbsaunde> API:  I mean if someone wanted to use libatspi from java they don't need gobject-introspection to do it, they just use jni
 403 15:34:45 <API> he should find the way to do that
 404 15:35:11 <API> tbsaunde, ok, good to know
 405 15:35:12 <API> anyway
 406 15:35:16 <API> webczat, about your question
 407 15:35:19 <API> "other bindings"
 408 15:35:41 <API> are you thinking just in Java, or do you have other languages in mind?
 409 15:36:20 <webczat> Actually I was just curious.
 410 15:36:48 <API> webczat, well again
 411 15:36:50 <API> in summary
 412 15:36:53 <API> yes it would be good
 413 15:36:59 <webczat> the only language I currently use is java tho.
 414 15:37:04 <API> but as right now gnome is focusin on C, python, and javascript
 415 15:37:10 <API> lets focus as well on them
 416 15:37:29 <API> well, soo
 417 15:37:35 <API> about 10 minutes over time
 418 15:37:52 <fer> he
 419 15:38:01 <API> so, I think that we can conclude the meeting
 420 15:38:13 <aleiva> thanks guys
 421 15:38:13 <API> #endmeeting