18:00:15 <pili> #startmeeting tor-browser-release 09/25
18:00:15 <MeetBot> Meeting started Wed Sep 25 18:00:15 2019 UTC.  The chair is pili. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:15 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
18:00:17 <antonela> hello!
18:00:27 <pili> Hi antonela
18:00:30 <GeKo> hi
18:00:37 <pili> Hi GeKo
18:00:46 <pili> Who else is around?
18:00:55 <ggus> more or less o/
18:01:10 <pili> Here’s the pad again: https://storm.torproject.org/grain/t4KMb9WcMFae3DMWBGvjPk
18:01:23 <sysrqb> o/
18:01:26 <pili> Please add any discussion points or requests
18:01:53 <antonela> nice we have release points + dates \o/
18:02:04 <sysrqb> :)
18:02:13 <sysrqb> hrm
18:02:17 <GeKo> pili: You do not have permission to access this grain.
18:02:19 <sysrqb> "You do not have permission to access this grain."
18:02:24 <GeKo> heh
18:02:25 <sysrqb> heh.
18:02:28 <sysrqb> :)
18:02:28 <GeKo> heh
18:02:30 <pili> Oh
18:02:32 <GeKo> :)
18:02:33 <sysrqb> oh no.
18:02:34 <pili> One sec
18:03:20 <pili> https://storm.torproject.org/shared/GsECKaqdAboytLec71wvXI-YIXx0T4-kjubdjOiIQO6
18:03:49 <pili> Is that better?
18:04:30 <GeKo> yes
18:04:31 <GeKo> thx
18:07:37 <boklm> hi
18:07:44 <pili> Ok, I see no discussion points so far
18:07:58 <pili> Maybe we move on to the requests?
18:08:15 <pili> Who’s brought the first one?
18:08:20 <pili> Hi boklm
18:08:58 <sysrqb> antonela: are those yours?
18:09:05 <antonela> yes
18:09:10 <sysrqb> #31768
18:09:26 <antonela> i talked with dunqan today, he will work on the onboarding part of it
18:10:05 <ggus> newbie question: where i can see all the ui/ux modifications that we're going to have on tb-9?
18:10:06 <antonela> yes, we can have it ready next week, so aiming for 9.0a8 seems reasonable, is good?
18:10:23 <pili> That’s great, who does he need to coordinate with for this?
18:10:38 <antonela> me? :)
18:10:38 <GeKo> antonela: yes
18:10:59 <antonela> cool, thanks
18:11:18 <pili> I meant from browser dev team side :)
18:11:27 <pili> But if no one that’s fine
18:11:34 <antonela> we have pospeselr in the loop, too
18:11:43 <GeKo> depending on how fast we are with those two items we might even do the next alpha earlier
18:11:48 <GeKo> (that is 9.0a8)
18:11:51 <pili> I just want to make sure he knows where to go if he needs help
18:12:02 <GeKo> as it would give us  more testing time for them
18:12:19 <antonela> okey, cool
18:12:36 <pili> Ok
18:13:05 <antonela> and, i know we have new identity for this major release but i feel that i don't have all the information i should before put an icon at the toolbar. is ok if we have the new identity review for 9.5?
18:13:31 <GeKo> no, we need it in 9.0
18:13:43 <GeKo> as we don't have an easy way of accessing it otherwise
18:13:56 <GeKo> given that we don't have the onion button anymore
18:13:59 <pili> Ok, let’s discuss what is needed then
18:14:01 <GeKo> what is missing?
18:14:16 <antonela> we have the hamburger menu?
18:15:14 <antonela> i mean, someone set 0.5 points to that ticket and seems fine if the title of the ticket is "add an icon at a toolbar" -- seems not enough if the problem we are trying to solve is users' confusion between new circuit, new tab, new window and new identity
18:15:49 <GeKo> could you rephrase that?
18:16:20 <GeKo> all the ticket is supposed to do is to add an icon to the toolbar which gives easy access to what we had in the onion menu
18:16:31 <pili> I think antonela is looking for a better more intuitive solution for users than just moving the button
18:17:16 <antonela> Yes. The ticket was estimated in 0.5 points, which seems good if the scope of the ticket is simply add an icon at the toolbar. I can do it. What i'm trying with this ticket is improving the feature, by improving i mean making it easier for users to understand when to use it
18:17:36 <pili> And maybe that is something we can do for 9.5
18:18:02 <GeKo> *that* is something we can do for 9.5, yes
18:18:24 <GeKo> i still think we should expose the option directly on the toolbar as a first step
18:18:33 <GeKo> because it is important that it is not buried in a mneu
18:18:36 <GeKo> *menu
18:18:45 <GeKo> be it behind the onion the hamburger etc.
18:18:54 <GeKo> *hamburger menu
18:19:09 <antonela> okey, i can do that. rn we have a kind of reload icon at the hamburger menu, which is _fine_
18:19:50 <sysrqb> it seems like we need to teach people that they should now use that menu option
18:20:30 <sysrqb> but that is something we can add in 9.5,yes?
18:20:31 <GeKo> yes, that would probably be another part for the new onbaording experience
18:20:40 <antonela> we will need to instruct users about this change, yes
18:21:17 <sysrqb> and i can see showing a dialog the first time the onion button is clicked, telling them again they should use the menu option
18:21:25 <sysrqb> yeah
18:21:32 <GeKo> it's like the bridge ui redoing in the browser
18:21:35 <sysrqb> but it seems for 9.0 we shouldn't change it too drastically
18:21:50 <GeKo> away from the onion icon into the ui directly
18:22:03 <GeKo> which is accompanied by an onboarding update
18:22:06 <sysrqb> ah, right.
18:22:08 <GeKo> sysrqb: yes
18:22:36 <antonela> okey, i'll include it in the onboarding update and i'll think about a better icon. All this should happen this week.
18:22:48 <GeKo> awesome , thanks
18:22:54 <pili> Great, thank you antonela
18:22:56 <antonela> for 9.5 we can go deeper and also having updates for tba too
18:23:05 <GeKo> yes, that would be good
18:23:11 <pili> Shall we move on to the next request?
18:23:16 <antonela> nice, thank you folks
18:24:05 <sysrqb> #31286
18:25:02 <sysrqb> which seems like we're just waiting on richard rebasing it?
18:25:35 <GeKo> there are some loose ends as i understand it
18:25:52 <GeKo> but it should be ready next week
18:27:06 <sysrqb> so we should get this into 9.0a8
18:27:11 <GeKo> yes
18:27:16 <pili> Ok, was the request here to make sure that it gets included in the next release? :)
18:27:20 <sysrqb> unless there's something else we should discuss
18:27:33 <antonela> pili, yes :)
18:27:57 <pili> Ok, sounds like we can do that
18:28:26 <pili> #30767 ?
18:28:40 <sysrqb> arma bugged me about it yesterday
18:28:45 <sysrqb> so i'm adding it on the list
18:29:08 <GeKo> who is going to work on it?
18:29:36 <sysrqb> sisbell or me
18:29:53 <sysrqb> it's a bug in TOPL, it seems
18:29:58 <pili> Ok
18:30:10 <GeKo> okay, but we should have first all the other critical stuff done
18:30:15 <GeKo> like #31010
18:30:21 <sysrqb> yes
18:31:12 <sysrqb> but that should be done this week
18:31:13 <GeKo> good. i know it's been annoying
18:31:28 <GeKo> but it's not critical for 9.0
18:31:34 <GeKo> which means it could easily go into 9.0.1
18:31:41 <GeKo> or 9.0.2
18:33:48 <sysrqb> it's not the most critical ticket, but it's bad that thic bug still exists
18:34:02 <GeKo> yes, i agree
18:34:07 <pili> Yeah
18:34:32 <pili> I wonder how many android users it affects
18:34:54 <pili> The problem would be if we lose users because of it
18:35:17 <pili> Ok
18:35:20 <sysrqb> in general, anywhere where someone wants to use the app, but Tor and default bridges are blocked
18:35:31 <pili> Anything else to discuss with this one?
18:35:41 <sysrqb> which could be quite a lot of people
18:35:52 <pili> Maybe we can put it in the roadmap for November
18:36:07 <ggus> i received some emails on frontdesk about this
18:36:13 <ggus> users in iran, china
18:36:31 <pili> Right
18:37:07 <ggus> they have been using a hackish solution to use tor with obfs4 on mobile
18:38:27 <pili> Can they use orbot with tab for instead?
18:38:28 <sysrqb> okay, thanks ggus
18:38:32 <sysrqb> that's good to knoe
18:38:51 * antonela should go offline, will read the backlog later
18:39:04 <sysrqb> pili: "with tab for"?
18:39:11 <sysrqb> antonela: o/
18:39:20 <pili> Tba
18:39:26 <sysrqb> ah :)
18:39:39 <sysrqb> not at this time, we don't support it, unfortunately
18:39:42 <pili> Stupid autocorrect...
18:39:51 <ggus> like routing tba with orbot app?
18:40:02 <sysrqb> the app only uses its own tor
18:40:16 <sysrqb> you could do tor-over-tor, using orbot's vpn
18:40:23 <sysrqb> but that would be super sad
18:40:26 <ggus> yes
18:40:36 <sysrqb> :(
18:40:43 <sysrqb> yeah
18:40:48 <pili> Right
18:42:15 <sysrqb> okay, we can see when we can fix this
18:42:19 <sysrqb> maybe november
18:42:30 <sysrqb> if we don't have time earlier
18:42:34 <pili> Gro
18:42:40 <pili> Great
18:43:05 <pili> Ok
18:43:27 <pili> Anything else to discuss about this or anything else? :)
18:43:46 <sysrqb> none from me
18:44:10 <GeKo> nope
18:44:15 <ggus> there's a bug on TB-9.x menu on macOS, but i can't find the ticket
18:44:28 <GeKo> yeah
18:44:33 <ggus> some users reported in the last days
18:44:38 <GeKo> #31607
18:44:43 <GeKo> we are working on it
18:44:47 <GeKo> it is tricky, though
18:45:11 <GeKo> mcs/brade will pick it up when they are back
18:45:18 <ggus> do you think for the release is going to be fixed?
18:45:24 <GeKo> and we should have it fixed for 9.0a8 as well
18:45:25 * ggus bookmarks this ticket
18:45:31 <ggus> ah! ok :)
18:45:37 <GeKo> that's a blcoker for 9.0
18:45:40 <GeKo> *blocker
18:45:51 <GeKo> we should not release the next stable without it being solved
18:46:00 <pili> ggus: will you add it to the list of requests so we don’t forget
18:46:11 <pili> Although it sounds like we won’t
18:46:49 <ggus> ok
18:47:45 <pili> Thanks
18:47:54 <pili> What else people? :)
18:49:15 <pili> Everyone groot?
18:49:23 <sysrqb> iamgroot
18:49:51 <pili> Ok, let’s leave things there then
18:49:58 <pili> Thanks everyone!
18:50:05 <pili> #endmeeting