Attachment '20120628_log.txt'

Download

   1 16:06:41 <API> #startmeeting
   2 16:06:41 <tota11y> Meeting started Thu Jun 28 16:06:41 2012 CET.  The chair is API. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
   3 16:06:41 <tota11y> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
   4 16:06:51 <API> #topic GNOME 3.6
   5 16:07:19 <API> #info 3.5.3 will be the first release with the bridge as a library
   6 16:07:35 <API> #info I sent a mail to different lists and persons warning about it
   7 16:07:36 <clown> the ATK bridge?
   8 16:07:59 <API> well we talked about that in previous meeting
   9 16:08:04 <API> so background:
  10 16:08:20 <API> initially we proposed a feature of accessibility on by default
  11 16:08:41 <API> the implementation proposed was just set 'toolkit-accessibility' gsetting default value to true
  12 16:08:50 <API> but that didn't convince some people
  13 16:09:11 <API> ie: that would also activate a11y for gtk2 apps, that didn't do any work recently
  14 16:09:14 <API> so, right now
  15 16:09:31 <API> it was implemented by forgetting to load the atk bridge as a module
  16 16:09:42 <API> and use the atk-bridge as a library
  17 16:09:47 <API> and call a xx_init method
  18 16:10:01 <API> gnome-shell and gtk3 apps seems to work fine
  19 16:10:09 <API> lets see what happens with older apps
  20 16:10:25 <API> well, and those infos and that explanation is what I had for this topic
  21 16:10:27 <API> others?
  22 16:10:30 <API> joanie, ?
  23 16:10:42 <clown> regarding the bridge...
  24 16:10:50 <clown> and this may be too much detail, but
  25 16:11:13 <clown> I just updated my development machine to 3.5.3 + yesterday, and when I starte gnome shell  I get:
  26 16:11:30 <clown> " Gtk-Message: Not loading module "atk-bridge": The functionality is provided by GTK natively. Please try to not load it."
  27 16:11:34 <clown> Is this related?
  28 16:11:40 <API> yes is related
  29 16:11:52 <API> it is because the module are still listed
  30 16:12:08 <API> and it is still listed due gtk2 apps
  31 16:12:12 <API> hmm
  32 16:12:18 <API> probably it would be good to talk about it
  33 16:12:27 <mgorse> There's an open bug to remove the gtk 3 module
  34 16:12:29 <API> as that message will appear for gnome-shell and any gtk3 app
  35 16:12:29 <clown> It might be my focus tracking code, but I have yet to diagnose it that far.
  36 16:12:31 <joanie> we have a bug
  37 16:12:38 <joanie> clown: no
  38 16:12:48 * joanie looks for bug
  39 16:12:51 <API> mgorse, yes, but at-spi2-atk desktop file will still list the bridge as a module to be loaded
  40 16:12:52 * clown waits
  41 16:13:02 <API> at that it is still required due gtk2
  42 16:13:09 <joanie> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678315
  43 16:13:09 <tota11y> 04Bug 678315: normal, Normal, ---, liyuan, UNCONFIRMED, Remove the bridge module for Gtk+ 3
  44 16:13:16 <API> so that message will be there, no matters if we remove the gtk3 module
  45 16:13:20 * clown looks
  46 16:14:27 <API> #action API will mention that warning to bastien, matthias and others, as he thinks that it will be there for any gtk3 app, no matter if we remove or not atk-brige gtk3 module
  47 16:14:56 <joanie> API I don't follow you?
  48 16:15:03 <joanie> that's not a ?
  49 16:15:27 <API> well, gtk3 tries to load modules
  50 16:15:29 <joanie> i.e. if you delete the module the warning goes away
  51 16:15:36 <joanie> if you apply the patch the warning goes away
  52 16:15:58 <joanie> so what do you mean by "remove or not atk-bridge"
  53 16:16:10 * API looking
  54 16:16:44 <API> hmm, I thought that not
  55 16:16:45 <joanie> part of my original concern and subsequent doubts were related to Orca users pulling at-spi2-atk but not gnome-shell, gtk3, etc.
  56 16:17:08 <joanie> we now have a branch for at-spi2-atk
  57 16:17:13 <joanie> mike has warned Orca users
  58 16:17:16 <API> joanie, I think that mgorse send a mail about that
  59 16:17:19 <joanie> yup
  60 16:17:30 <joanie> and we now have a branch we didn't have before
  61 16:17:56 <joanie> which might need a mail too. Just because users don't always pay attention.
  62 16:18:15 <joanie> so I guess that's a long way of saying, I have less concerns now
  63 16:18:19 <API> which branch?
  64 16:18:22 <API> that python3 branch?
  65 16:18:27 <joanie> should we commit it
  66 16:18:29 <joanie> no
  67 16:18:37 <joanie> at-spi2-atk for gnome-3-4
  68 16:18:49 <joanie> that just happened yesterday I think
  69 16:18:52 <joanie> or Tuesday
  70 16:18:56 <joanie> days are blending
  71 16:19:15 <API> well, but that branch is for gnome 3.4.X
  72 16:19:25 <API> after all we are right now on the topic GNOME 3.6 :P
  73 16:19:29 <joanie> right
  74 16:19:35 <joanie> you missed my point
  75 16:19:49 <joanie> Orca users who are not using GNOME 3.6 stil pull at-spi2-atk
  76 16:20:02 <joanie> because they want features and fixes
  77 16:20:13 <joanie> including this patch would be one more source of breakage
  78 16:20:23 <joanie> now we have a branch we can point Orca users to
  79 16:20:31 <joanie> suitable for GNOME 3.4
  80 16:20:43 <joanie> if they still pull master, they suck and it's not our fault
  81 16:20:45 <joanie> ;)
  82 16:20:56 <API> ok
  83 16:20:59 <joanie> therefore, I'm not so worried about my patch for bug 678315
  84 16:20:59 <tota11y> 04Bug https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678315 normal, Normal, ---, liyuan, UNCONFIRMED, Remove the bridge module for Gtk+ 3
  85 16:21:03 <API> so, for meeting sake
  86 16:21:12 <joanie> so are there other concerns about that patch
  87 16:21:20 <API> could you summarize that concerns, and an action for that mail to orca users?
  88 16:21:28 <API> summarize == #info
  89 16:21:38 <joanie> do we have an answer to my question?
  90 16:21:42 <joanie> but sure
  91 16:22:13 <joanie> #info Joanie has fewer concerns about her patch for bug 678315 now that there is a gnome-3-4 branch for at-spi2-atk
  92 16:22:26 <joanie> #action Joanie will announce this branch to the Orca users on the Orca list
  93 16:22:41 <joanie> #info Joanie still doesn't know if the patch is fully safe
  94 16:22:58 <joanie> #info Joanie will not commit that patch until others of commented and answered her questions. :)
  95 16:23:01 <joanie> done
  96 16:23:04 <mgorse> It will probably break Unity until Unity is patched, though I'm not sure if that's something to be concerned about
  97 16:23:12 <joanie> Unity!
  98 16:23:19 <API> mgorse, as gnome_accessibility_module_init
  99 16:23:21 <API> was removed
 100 16:23:25 <API> Unity is already broken
 101 16:23:31 <joanie> hahah
 102 16:24:06 <API> so a patch is required with or without that gtk3 module
 103 16:24:15 <joanie> API info please
 104 16:25:19 <API> #info as gnome_accessibility_module_init was removed, any apps that were using at-spi2-atk gtk 3 (like unity) will require to modify his initialization code, with or without gtk3 module
 105 16:25:30 <mgorse> and I should probably prepare a patch to make the bridge into an object. I'm hesitant to advise Luke when I don't know if the API is going to change again
 106 16:25:52 <API> #info anyway, as all modules are porting to that, the recommended is use the library
 107 16:26:10 <API> mgorse, I don't think that the xx_init method API needs to change
 108 16:26:39 <API> you can keep it in that way, without modifying what returns
 109 16:26:46 <API> if you want the bridge
 110 16:26:53 <API> you could add a new method
 111 16:27:11 <API> because, as far as I see, the bridge will be a singleton, right?
 112 16:27:12 <joanie> so if Unity is already broken.... What other issues w.r.t. the patch to remove the bridge?
 113 16:27:25 <joanie> not bridge
 114 16:27:29 <joanie> gtk3 module
 115 16:27:46 <API> I can't think in any other
 116 16:27:56 <joanie> mgorse: can you?
 117 16:27:57 <API> anyway, that seems too much detail for the #a11y meeting
 118 16:28:05 <joanie> not
 119 16:28:07 <joanie> because
 120 16:28:38 <joanie> I am not applying that patch
 121 16:28:43 <mgorse> I can't think of any, but I gues "what issues are there that none of us can fporesee?" is the real question
 122 16:28:45 <joanie> until we reach a decision
 123 16:29:04 <joanie> so do I commit the patch or not?
 124 16:29:12 <API> but we don't need to apply that patch/reach a decision about that patch during this meeting
 125 16:29:18 <joanie> ok
 126 16:30:11 <API> mgorse, joanie lets try to decide that off-meeting, as it is already past 30
 127 16:30:27 <API> anything else, any other one wants to add something in this topic?
 128 16:30:37 <clown> just a note, API
 129 16:31:02 <clown> #info Joseph has some preliminary code for the focus/caret tracker in gnome-shell
 130 16:31:15 <joanie> yay!
 131 16:31:20 <clown> #info very flakey at the moment, and needs lots of debugging.
 132 16:31:30 <clown> done — questions?
 133 16:31:35 <API> flakey == crashes or bad behaviour?
 134 16:32:03 <clown> sometimes crashes, but I find it very difficult when running GS whether it's my code or something else.
 135 16:32:12 <clown> and bad behaviour
 136 16:32:44 <clown> I don't always get the bounding rect of the focussed component.
 137 16:32:49 <clown> I'm trying to see why.
 138 16:32:51 <API> so your GS also crashes without that code?
 139 16:32:59 <clown> sometimes
 140 16:33:22 <clown> and almost never is there a stack trace or error message.  it just gives up the ghost.
 141 16:34:06 <API> well, in that cases
 142 16:34:06 * jjmarin thinks clown has a computer with not very well supported graphic card
 143 16:34:15 * clown checks...
 144 16:34:38 <API> running gnome-shell on gdb is an option ..
 145 16:34:39 <clown> AMD Radeon.
 146 16:34:56 <API> but as I said, too many details for the a11y meeting
 147 16:34:59 <API> so other question
 148 16:35:02 <clown> yeah, good idea.
 149 16:35:12 <API> how feasible do you see to have this for gnome 3.6?
 150 16:35:26 <clown> API, freeze date?
 151 16:35:28 <API> I suppose that in this case another ping pong effect are unlikely
 152 16:35:42 * API looking
 153 16:35:54 <clown> If there is any ping pong effect, it might be: "don't write this in JavaScript; you should do it in C".
 154 16:35:57 <API> ui freeze = 20 august
 155 16:36:09 <API> hard code freeze = 17 sep
 156 16:36:16 <clown> That means I have a month and a week. Hmmm...
 157 16:36:31 <clown> since I go on vacation for two week in mid august.
 158 16:36:34 <API> clown, but always in the same project right?
 159 16:37:05 <clown> API, not sure.  It might be very useful to have focus/caret tracking as an atspi "utility".
 160 16:37:16 <API> well, yes
 161 16:37:18 <clown> then any other process can use it.
 162 16:37:21 <clown> not just gnome shell.
 163 16:37:23 <API> but that seems more complex and long term
 164 16:37:33 <API> I guess that having it first on gnome-shell
 165 16:37:38 <API> as a prototype
 166 16:37:39 <clown> right.  make it work in gnome shell first, and migrate to a more universal location.
 167 16:37:43 <clown> later
 168 16:37:46 <API> and also having it on compiz
 169 16:38:07 <API> will give ideas of how to implement it in a general way
 170 16:38:07 <clown> and unity!  ;-)
 171 16:38:16 <joanie> :)
 172 16:38:25 <API> well unity uses compiz
 173 16:38:41 <API> in theory unity should already being able to do that
 174 16:39:10 <clown> well, compiz may itself do this.  not sure.
 175 16:39:12 <jjmarin> compiz is only maintained by Canonical because Unity, AFAIK
 176 16:39:30 <API> clown, aleiva made a equivalent work to yours for eZoom
 177 16:39:37 <clown> or, beacuse not gnome shell on ubuntu.
 178 16:39:39 <API> some months ago
 179 16:39:43 <API> thats the reason I said
 180 16:39:54 <API> "now that it is in two places"
 181 16:39:57 <API> gnome-shell and compiz,
 182 16:40:07 <API> that could give a good idea of how to implement it in a general way
 183 16:40:11 * clown makes note:  look at alieva's focus tracking code, and steal as much of it as possible...
 184 16:40:20 <joanie> :)
 185 16:40:24 <clown> right API.
 186 16:40:34 <API> anyway, as I said
 187 16:40:44 <API> too many details, and already 40 minutes with first topic
 188 16:40:45 <API> so
 189 16:40:55 <API> moving on? or more GNOME 3.6 stuff?
 190 16:41:46 <jjmarin> clown: https://github.com/gloob/gloob-Ezoom-fork
 191 16:41:53 <joanie> we can move on
 192 16:41:55 <clown> thanks jjmarin!
 193 16:42:00 <joanie> I see this being a weekly topic
 194 16:42:06 <joanie> too much in the air
 195 16:42:13 <API> jjmarin, anyway, afaik, that work was merged with ezoom
 196 16:42:23 <API> so not sure if that it is the more recent thing
 197 16:42:24 <jjmarin> ah, ok
 198 16:42:24 <clown> as for being ready for 3.6, let me see how the next week proceeds, API.
 199 16:42:33 <API> clown, ok thanks
 200 16:42:36 <API> so moving on then
 201 16:42:47 <API> #topic GUADEC BoF planning
 202 16:42:49 <API> joanie, ?
 203 16:42:56 * joanie goes quickly
 204 16:43:20 <joanie> #info Joanie, Piñeiro, and Juanjo need to plan and publicize the BoF.
 205 16:43:30 <joanie> #info outside of this meeting :P
 206 16:43:33 <joanie> done
 207 16:43:42 <jjmarin> ok !
 208 16:44:23 <API> that was quick
 209 16:44:27 <API> questions doubts?
 210 16:45:35 <API> seems that no
 211 16:45:49 <API> #topic Marketing and Fundraising
 212 16:45:52 <API> jjmarin, ?
 213 16:45:58 <jjmarin> #info the FoG a11y counter hasn't been updated by now, but it is supposed to be update soon
 214 16:47:03 <jjmarin> #info No info by now about the OFL common FLOSS organization a11y booth/activities. Karen keeps working to get an answer
 215 16:47:10 <jjmarin> done !
 216 16:47:22 <jjmarin> questions and suggestions ?
 217 16:47:40 <API> jjmarin, just a question
 218 16:47:41 <jjmarin> s/and/or/
 219 16:47:53 <API> about how "quick" that money was got
 220 16:48:01 <API> did you talk about that on marketing?
 221 16:48:07 <API> how the marketing people felt about that
 222 16:48:10 <API> ?
 223 16:48:17 <API> too slow, normal, fast?
 224 16:48:20 <jjmarin> lately the money is getting very slow
 225 16:48:43 <jjmarin> that's because we tried to publicited lately
 226 16:49:05 <jjmarin> but it's only getting a little bit better (from stalled to slow)
 227 16:49:23 <joanie> it would be interesting to know how much of that is a11y versus how much is the economy
 228 16:49:38 <joanie> my personal charitable giving has gone down
 229 16:49:49 <API> well, for example
 230 16:49:58 <API> in the case of the sysadmin fog campaign
 231 16:50:16 <API> how many time they required to get that money (and how much money)?
 232 16:50:26 <jjmarin> well, I agree that  economical situation is a factor
 233 16:50:33 <mgorse> I'd guess you'd get a burst of donations as soon as it was announced, and then it would slow down
 234 16:50:34 <joanie> and what was the state of the economy
 235 16:50:55 <jjmarin> API it is supposed they want to start another campaign, but I haven't seen any move lately
 236 16:50:55 <joanie> and where did the bulk of the donations come from?
 237 16:51:26 * joanie notes that we really need to study this and adds it to her Board related to do list
 238 16:51:36 <API> jjmarin, no I was talking about the old one
 239 16:51:37 <jjmarin> mainly regular FoG donation I guess
 240 16:51:49 <jjmarin> no real data, I can ask
 241 16:51:52 <API> I mean that some years ago they created a fog campaing for sys-admin
 242 16:52:11 <API> so just wondering if a11y one was slower, faster or at the same pace
 243 16:53:08 <jjmarin> Is slower that the sys-admin campaing, but for that campaing several companies made donations
 244 16:53:31 <jjmarin> for the a11y campaing we only have personal donations
 245 16:53:45 <API> and now wondering why several companies were interested on a gnome sys-admin but not on a a11y fundraising :P
 246 16:53:52 <joanie> heh
 247 16:54:11 <API> it is funny that most companies always sees a11y as really important and part of their values
 248 16:54:17 <API> anyway, sorry for the random rant
 249 16:54:20 <joanie> s/sees/says/
 250 16:54:24 <API> more questions doubts on that topic?
 251 16:54:46 <API> joanie: says that see :P
 252 16:55:00 <jjmarin> Maybe I can ask Karen to ask for money to companies
 253 16:55:22 <jjmarin> for the a11y campaign
 254 16:55:45 <jjmarin> Do you think is good idea ?
 255 16:56:19 <API> I don't see why not, and I suppose that she already did
 256 16:57:30 <API> so, as we are almost finishing the meeting
 257 16:57:35 <API> and nobody is talking
 258 16:57:39 <jjmarin> #action Juanjo will talk with Karen about companies donation for the FoG a11y campaing
 259 16:57:44 <API> #topic miscellaneous time
 260 16:57:47 <jjmarin> s/with/to/
 261 16:58:05 <API> something not scheduled/planned that you want to share/ask?
 262 16:59:31 * clown *crickets*
 263 16:59:51 <jjmarin> it's not so hot today here
 264 17:00:12 <clown> it's supposed to go up to 32 here
 265 17:00:29 <jhernandez> jjmarin: here 35, 5 less than yesterday
 266 17:00:33 <jhernandez> :S
 267 17:00:38 <jjmarin> hehe
 268 17:00:57 <mgorse> Like 38 here today. I guess our weather is kind of like Sevilla, though
 269 17:01:12 <clown> currently, with humidex, it's already 30.
 270 17:01:25 <clown> 11:00am here...
 271 17:01:30 <jjmarin> lol
 272 17:01:43 <joanie> only 29 here today.
 273 17:01:49 <jjmarin> mgorse and jhernandez live in hell
 274 17:01:50 <jhernandez> mgorse: :O
 275 17:01:52 <clown> cool new hampshire.
 276 17:02:25 <jjmarin> 28 in Cadiz :-)
 277 17:02:51 <joanie> 22 in A Coruña
 278 17:03:09 <jjmarin> API wins !
 279 17:03:09 <joanie> I wish they'd let me move
 280 17:03:14 <API> really really interesting
 281 17:03:21 <API> :P
 282 17:03:27 <API> so lets finish the meeting
 283 17:03:30 <API> #endmeeting

Attached Files

To refer to attachments on a page, use attachment:filename, as shown below in the list of files. Do NOT use the URL of the [get] link, since this is subject to change and can break easily.
  • [get | view] (2012-07-04 21:36:17, 16.0 KB) [[attachment:20120628_log.txt]]

You are not allowed to attach a file to this page.