16:15:31 <API> #startmeeting
16:15:31 <tota11y> Meeting started Thu Oct 11 16:15:31 2012 CET.  The chair is API. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:15:31 <tota11y> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:15:55 <API> #topic Boston Summit Recap
16:16:43 <API> #info 6-7-8 of October was last Boston Summit, this time on Boston
16:17:18 <API> #info some good summaries from matthias clasen and colin walters
16:17:40 * API has problems with net, not able to get the links, I will paste them later
16:17:59 <API> blog.verbum.org/2012/10/07/gnome-summit-2012-friday-saturday/
16:18:05 <API> blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2012/10/08/gnome-summit-sunday/
16:18:10 <API> http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2012/10/08/boston-gnome-summit-monday/
16:18:32 <API> #info specifically about a11y, I gave a little presentation about a11y the first day
16:19:08 <API> #info but, imho, the most important news related with a11y was during the gtk session on Saturday, when we agreed to made public
16:19:39 <API> #info some headers of the gtk implementation of ATK, so third-party apps, like evince or evolution, could extend them
16:19:47 <joanie> yay!
16:19:53 <API> and this was my recap of boston summit
16:20:04 <API> any other?
16:20:11 <API> joanie, and mgorse were also there
16:20:30 <joanie> but I was only there for 2 days and doing Board and other non-a11y tasks.
16:22:04 <clown> I'm still skimming the blogs, but was Clutter discussed at the summit?  Anything new?
16:22:18 <API> clown, not about clutter directly
16:22:30 <API> I mean that in the gtk session, benjamin discussed some internal changes
16:22:51 <API> that gtk is doing for that hypothetical future with a gtk integrating clutter
16:23:02 <API> something like gtk using clutter to draw
16:23:10 <API> but specifically about clutter, no
16:23:24 <API> Emmanuele was not there
16:23:43 <clown> thanks for the info, API.
16:23:54 <API> anyway, looking at tweets and posts, it seems that Emmanuele was busy during the same days towards clutter 2.0 or something
16:24:06 * API probably will need to do a review of that or something
16:24:32 <API> so, anything else here? questions doubts?
16:24:39 <clown> I should look again at clutter development, because I saw something back in the spring about dumping clones.
16:25:06 * joanie shakes that image from her brain
16:25:33 <API> hmm, true, now that you mention that
16:25:37 <clown> clones, not clowns!
16:25:46 <API> I think that they were planning to dump clutter-clone
16:25:58 <API> I assume that most of the magnifier is a big clone
16:26:02 <clown> yup
16:26:17 <clown> there is a group actor in gs called "uiGroup".
16:26:19 * joanie realizes she knows absolutely nothing about clutter
16:26:53 <clown> the magnifier works by making a clutter clone of uiGroup, and then modifying the clone (magnify, add color effects, etc.)
16:27:37 <API> well, if you confirm that clutter-clone is about to be deprecated, probably it would be a good idea if you ask ebassi about his replacement
16:28:04 <API> anyway, this is somewhat off-topic (although worthy to be mentioned)
16:28:14 <API> any other question is this "boston summit" topic?
16:28:22 <clown> well, "dumping" is probably an exaggeration; replacing it with something that works better is probably what they are intending.  I'm pretty sure there are other places in gs where clones are used.
16:28:40 <clown> but, I should track that development.
16:28:52 * clown needs more time.  where can I borrow some from?
16:29:20 <clown> no more questions from me.
16:29:48 <API> ok, lets move, and use misc time to be borrow time
16:30:05 <API> #topic Grace Hopper Conference Open Source Day Recap
16:30:09 <API> joanie?
16:30:13 * joanie pretyped
16:30:14 <joanie> :)
16:30:21 <joanie> so I will paste and pause for reading
16:30:30 <joanie> #info After the Grace Hopper Conference, there was a Grace Hopper Open Source Day, the goal of which was to get women involved in Open Source through projects with "humanitarian" aspects.
16:30:34 <joanie> #info Joanie presented a full day on GNOME Accessibility. She didn't get a head count, but she is guessing that more than 15, but less than 20 joined her group.
16:30:37 <joanie> #info The task was to triage a bunch of open bugs filed against Orca.
16:30:39 <joanie> #info Joanie started with a presentation (basically the same one she gave to Andre Klapper at the GUADEC A11yCamp)
16:30:43 <joanie> #info But unlike A11yCamp, the women then spent the rest of the day (9:30 - 2:30ish) actually applying what they learned during the preso.
16:30:45 <joanie> #info They got approximately 10 bugs fully triaged using Orca, Accerciser, and self-created Python event listeners, identifying where the bug really is.
16:30:48 <joanie> #info Some have indicated interest in starting/joining an a11y division of the GNOME Bugsquad.
16:30:51 <joanie> #info Joanie's conclusion is that it went (surprisingly) well. And she'll probably go next year if invited.
16:30:54 <joanie> (done)
16:33:30 <API> well I assume that was enought time to read ;)
16:33:47 <API> so, questions, doubts, suggestions, any "good job joanie" around?
16:34:26 <clown> good job joanie!
16:34:29 <joanie> heh
16:34:33 <joanie> thanks
16:35:07 * clown due to name completion, that almost came out "good job jhernandez_"...
16:35:48 <API> well, so it seems that there are not questions from the people about this
16:35:50 <API> so
16:35:50 <API> moving?
16:35:56 * joanie nods
16:36:01 <clown> yes
16:36:30 <API> #topic FoG Fund Use Update
16:36:33 <API> joanie, ?
16:36:44 <joanie> ok
16:37:05 <joanie> #info Joanie and Piñeiro wrote up a priority list of document-related project tasks for Bastien
16:37:21 <joanie> #info including the history of and need for each area
16:37:48 <joanie> #info They asked Bastien and the Board (implied not counting Joanie) to provide feedback on which of the areas they would like addressed.
16:38:16 <joanie> #info They also mentioned that Joseph was working on a description of the caret and focus tracking work and would be submitting that soon.
16:38:19 <joanie> (done)
16:38:27 <API> so
16:38:39 <API> questions, doubts, comments?
16:38:47 * jhernandez_ has a question
16:38:53 <API> jhernandez_, show
16:38:56 <API> s/show/shot
16:39:01 <joanie> shoot
16:39:05 <joanie> shot is past tense
16:39:25 <jhernandez_> maybe I missed something, but is there a place where this "priority list of document-related project tasks for Bastien"?
16:39:26 <API> s/"s/show/shot"/"s/show/shoot"
16:39:31 <jhernandez_> :]
16:39:42 <joanie> jhernandez_: we discussed this at previous meetings
16:39:44 <API> jhernandez_, on one of our previous meetings
16:39:49 <jhernandez_> ok ok
16:39:51 <joanie> not just one
16:39:51 <API> we have a kind of brainstorming
16:39:55 <API> with stuff we would like to have
16:40:13 <API> so that email is that brainstorming(s) but coherently written
16:40:19 <jhernandez_> API: yes, I reviewed latest meeting logs
16:40:19 <joanie> exactly
16:40:22 <API> and with some extra info
16:40:50 <jhernandez_> API and joanie: ok, thanks
16:40:51 <API> extra info in the sense of explaining current status
16:41:12 <API> here at #a11y-meeting we are aware of the context, but for that mail we added some context
16:41:15 <jhernandez_> API: makes sense
16:41:23 <API> good to know ;)
16:41:42 <jhernandez_> (done)
16:41:44 <jhernandez_> :]
16:42:37 <API> soo
16:42:44 <API> questions, doubts? moving?
16:42:59 <joanie> api it is clown's turn
16:43:06 <joanie> as he added something to the agenda
16:43:14 <joanie> and is the "other half" of the proposals
16:43:34 <clown> #info Joseph has updated the old focus tracking proposal to represent the current state of affairs
16:43:50 <clown> #info the latest proposal is still a "draft", but it is close
16:44:04 <clown> #info it is here: https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Magnification/DraftFocusTrackingProposal
16:44:19 <API> wow, seems good
16:44:25 <API> although probably too technical detailed
16:44:30 <API> for the board
16:44:38 <API> me talking about the last part at least
16:44:48 <clown> There are a couple of questions in there that need to be resolved before it is final.  But beyond that, questions? doubts? etc?
16:45:05 <API> although we could send to the board the summary with a "for further details see wiki"
16:45:07 <joanie> clown: nice!
16:45:22 <clown> API, joanie thanks.
16:45:30 <joanie> clown: pending questions are fine
16:45:59 <clown> joanie:  you mean that you have them and they are okay?  Or, in general, it's okay to have pending questions?
16:46:06 <clown> "you have found them"
16:46:15 <joanie> the latter
16:46:20 <clown> okay.
16:46:34 <joanie> because if we have learned anything in previous years with the Board
16:46:56 <joanie> it is that no matter how well we think something out
16:47:06 <joanie> they will have their own questions and very different opinions
16:47:12 <joanie> and that things take a LONG time to move forward
16:47:38 <joanie> I think it is better to say that "some things need investigating still" and get them started on thinking/discussing
16:48:07 <joanie> ya know?
16:48:07 <clown> okay.
16:48:14 <clown> right, eh?
16:48:24 <joanie> but glancing over this, it looks good
16:48:43 <API> so, clown anything else?
16:48:57 <clown> minor adminstrative question:
16:49:05 <clown> where should this proposal live?
16:49:19 <clown> The old one was associated with a marketing and funding page.
16:49:27 <joanie> clown: in a nice walk-up flat on the lower east side
16:49:33 <joanie> sorry
16:49:34 <clown> I want that one to disappear, and this one to replace it.
16:49:42 <clown> joanie:  lol
16:49:48 <joanie> clown: which link?
16:49:51 <joanie> for the old one
16:50:00 * clown wishes jjmarin was here...
16:50:11 <joanie> we can change it ourselves
16:50:13 <API> probably it would be good not to replace
16:50:18 <API> but mark the other proposal as
16:50:19 <joanie> deprecate
16:50:23 <API> well, deprecate or something
16:50:43 <clown> well something, since I don't want people referencing the wrong one.
16:50:44 <joanie> tell you what, let's move on while I hunt around for the old
16:50:52 <clown> joanie:  find with me.
16:50:55 <joanie> then we can talk at misc time
16:51:28 <clown> So, API, regarding it being too technical, do you want me to make changes, or you and joanie are just going to grab the summary for the board?
16:51:35 <API> clown, no it is good
16:51:45 <API> as I said, we can send to the board the summary
16:51:47 <joanie> Bastien likes technical I think
16:51:51 <API> and "for technical details see this lin"
16:52:05 <API> joanie, yes, thats the reason I'm saying is good to have
16:52:08 <API> s/lin/link
16:52:23 <API> so, moving?
16:52:37 <clown> for technical details, go to the nice walk-up on the lower east side ?
16:52:52 <clown> fine with me to move.
16:54:00 <API> ok
16:54:02 <API> so
16:54:12 <API> #topic Marketing and Fundraising
16:54:15 <API> jjmarin is not here
16:54:29 <API> so probably we should skip this (and after all, we have just 5 minutes left)
16:55:16 <API> no one says anything, so
16:55:22 <API> #topic Miscellaneous time
16:55:32 <API> clown, I think that you asked before for some time to borrow
16:55:34 * joanie wonders if this is the "offending" page
16:55:38 <joanie> https://live.gnome.org/Accessibility/Marketing/Biddings
16:55:39 <API> so, the floor is yours
16:55:58 <joanie> API I think he meant that as an expression (he needs more time in life; not this meeting)
16:56:00 <clown> two things then.  let's deal with joanie's question.
16:56:02 * clown looking
16:56:08 <joanie> or not
16:56:32 <clown> yes, joanie that was the old proposal.
16:56:38 <clown> you are a google master.
16:56:42 <joanie> okay I am going to see what links to it
16:56:47 <joanie> didn't google
16:56:50 <joanie> grepped logs
16:57:08 <joanie> in the meantime, please talk about whatever you were going to
16:57:09 <joanie> :)
16:57:24 <clown> while you do that, I don't think I mentioned this at the last meeting, but I added a feature request for 3.8.
16:57:34 <clown> #info Joseph added another feature for 3.8 -- tinting enchancement.
16:57:34 <clown> #info https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointSeven/Features/TintEnhancement
16:57:47 <clown> done — questions?
16:58:09 <API> clown, heh, it would be good to have suggested that before going to the summit as we talked about 3.7 planning
16:58:10 <API> ;)
16:58:22 * API remembers something, I also need the floor later
16:58:27 * API looking clown link
16:58:57 <clown> well, that was added on Sep 21.  I should have pinged everyone, though.
16:59:26 <mgorse> I need to leave. Sorry everyone.
16:59:29 <API> for me that feature makes sense
16:59:44 <mgorse> (I guess I'll just lurk)
16:59:45 <API> in fact I didn't understand why you didn't add that for 3.6
16:59:51 <API> clown, lack of time?
16:59:51 <clown> API, yes, and it just needs a preferences UI — all the functionality is already there.
17:00:03 <clown> API, yes.  I don't have enough of it.  Ever.
17:00:19 <clown> (hi mgorse).
17:01:12 <API> well, no more questions about that
17:01:14 <API> from my side
17:01:24 <API> something else to add on misc time?
17:01:28 <danigm> I saw that joanie ping the evince a11y bugs last week, and I want to finish these patches, but as API said in a mail we need changes in gtk+, so I want to ask what's the gtk+ a11y headers status and what can I do to make evince accessible.
17:01:28 <clown> API, also mclasen's issue with applying these effects only to the zoom region and not to the entire screen was a distraction.
17:01:43 <API> clown, yes I mentioned at boston summit
17:01:51 <API> that one thing to explore for 3.8
17:01:57 <API> is usability
17:02:01 <API> not only about the zoom thing
17:02:08 <API> I used as example Bryen mail
17:02:15 <clown> cool
17:02:23 <API> things splitted between tweak and universal access
17:02:24 <API> so about that
17:02:51 <API> #info on the Boston Summit API also briefly talked with Allan Day (designer) about Bryen mail, he suggested to created bugs about that
17:03:14 <API> #action API will create some usability-configurability related bugs, using as base Bryen mail
17:03:19 * API reading danigm comment
17:03:46 <API> danigm, we talked about that at the begining of the meeting
17:03:48 * API searching
17:04:12 <API> well, it would be easier and with better words on mclasen blog post
17:04:48 <API> danigm, http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2012/10/08/gnome-summit-sunday/
17:04:58 <API> so yes, for 3.8 those interfaces would be made public
17:05:09 <API> hmm, btw, I forgot to mention that, I created a bug about that
17:05:26 * API searching
17:05:47 <API> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=685827
17:05:47 <tota11y> 04Bug 685827: normal, Normal, ---, gtk-bugs, UNCONFIRMED, Current Gtk accessibility support doesn't allow extension
17:06:03 <API> ah, and matthias added a comment with "what it is needed to be done"
17:06:03 <API> nice
17:06:10 <danigm> ok
17:06:31 <API> so, more questions about what clown and danigm asked?
17:06:43 <API> I also have something to add that I forgot
17:06:48 <API> to mention before
17:07:45 <API> nobody is asking for the scepter of the meeting, so I'm claiming it
17:08:01 <API> #info At the Boston Summit we also talked about one feature that affects #a11y
17:08:27 <API> #info the fallback mode
17:08:29 <API> https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointSeven/Features/DropOrFixFallbackMode
17:08:40 <API> #info Most of the people at the classroom
17:08:44 <jhernandez> heh
17:08:49 <jhernandez> xD
17:08:55 <API> #info in the two or three sesssions about that
17:09:17 <API> #info were more in favour to drop it, but they were worried about the backlash if that happened
17:09:31 <API> #info so the conclusion at the boston summit was that "there isn't any conclusion"
17:09:34 <API> :|
17:09:42 <API> so, questions, thoughts?
17:10:19 <API> although about the backlash, Allan Day offered the design team to be marked as the guilty one of that decision if other people were worried :P
17:11:03 <clown> so, for backlash against a11y developers, we can foward to Allan Day?  :-)
17:11:48 <jhernandez> no questions, tons of thoughts ...
17:11:52 <API> lets send any kind of backlash against Allan Day!
17:12:01 <API> today I didn't clean the dishes!
17:12:04 <API> is Allan Day fault
17:12:07 <joanie> hahaha
17:12:08 <API> anyway ...
17:12:11 <jhernandez> xDD
17:12:12 <API> jhernandez, thoughts
17:12:12 <joanie> I need more sleep
17:12:14 <API> then
17:12:17 <joanie> because of Allan
17:12:35 <clown> API, you need a better desigend interface for cleaning dishes.  a simple, clean one.
17:13:06 <jhernandez> thoughts, well, I'm agree with the fact that there aren't too many ppl using Fallback Mode
17:13:52 <API> jhernandez, ppl?
17:13:58 <jhernandez> people
17:14:03 <jhernandez> or users
17:14:42 <API> ah ok
17:15:30 <jhernandez> no options? no alternatives? will GNOME drop 2d support?
17:15:57 <jhernandez> weird!
17:16:57 <clown> jhernandez:  where does it say they are dropping 2d support?
17:16:59 <API> well, yes that was part of the "backlash fear" thing
17:17:02 <jhernandez> IMVHO, can designers think about getting the old GNOME 2d UX back to Fallback Mode?
17:17:24 <API> some people were suggesting to keep waiting to llvm drivers be more extended
17:17:29 <jhernandez> IMVHO, they should!
17:17:40 <API> getting the old GNOME 2d UX back to Fallback Mode?
17:17:41 <clown> you know, "GNOME 2d UX" sounds like a theme.
17:17:46 <API> I don't understand
17:17:50 <jhernandez> user experience
17:17:51 <jhernandez> yes
17:17:53 <jhernandez> gnome-panel
17:17:55 <API> fallback mode is basically gnome 2 interface
17:18:20 <API> well, but the problem is that gnome-panel is not well maintained right now
17:18:31 <jhernandez> don't know about mate, but is getting popularity
17:18:32 <API> and is something that I mentioned there
17:18:47 * jhernandez nods
17:18:57 <API> people seems to be interested but I didn't see anyone saying "I will keep maintaining gnome-panel"
17:19:08 * jhernandez nods
17:19:18 <API> and about mate ... well, right now is just a fork of gnome-shell, and well
17:19:28 <API> it is just a different UX
17:19:48 <API> and as is a gnome-shell fork, will still require hw acceleration
17:19:57 <API> not really related with keeping or not the fallback mode
17:20:01 <jhernandez> well no, mate is gnome-panel, maybe you're talking about cinnamon, right?
17:20:47 <API> hmm, true, I tend to mix both
17:21:34 <API> anyway, not sure if this is a discussion to have here, or now
17:21:43 <API> so as it is 20 minutes over meeting time
17:21:48 <API> anythin else to add?
17:21:49 <jhernandez> totally agree
17:21:51 <API> closing the meeting?
17:22:19 <jhernandez> go!
17:22:38 <clown> swing the gavel.  drop the scepter.
17:23:38 <API> #endmeeting