18:29:35 #startmeeting tor-browser 2/11 18:29:35 Meeting started Mon Feb 11 18:29:35 2019 UTC. The chair is GeKo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:29:35 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 18:29:44 hi all! 18:29:47 hello 18:29:50 let's do our weekly meeting 18:30:08 hi 18:30:17 the pad is as usual at https://storm.torproject.org/shared/tHoN4Ii7rLSjPE0OP4gydX4cMGadsXmRQNc-6lwru0N 18:30:29 please enter your pieces and mark those bold we should talk about 18:33:00 hi 18:33:05 sorry, still getting used to new time :) 18:33:58 pili: you are not that late :) 18:34:13 So perhaps I will go first since I have the first bold :) 18:34:20 o/ 18:34:22 please do 18:34:58 o/ 18:34:59 GeKo: I don't see a way to do that. In Mozilla's build infrastructure, mozconfig changes like that occur well after the toolchain is built. 18:35:48 In Tor's you could read the mozconfig ahead of time I suppose, and change the toolchain build (introducing a dependency for the toolchain on the mozconfig...) 18:36:17 hm 18:36:36 But I can't really make that change for Mozilla's infrastructure. I think I could make it so our debug builds used a different toolchain that included the flags and the opt build didn't... 18:36:50 But then when you debugged the opt build you wouldn't have symbols for the runtime 18:37:21 i did not read https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-esr60/rev/434bde49b9c8 as a toolchain changes 18:37:23 It seems like there should be a way to generate a separate pdb for the runtime that you build every time but don't package.... 18:37:51 but maybe i was wrong here 18:37:55 Oh you mean those flags on the build, not the toolchain! 18:37:59 yes 18:38:04 those are breaking us 18:38:20 no worries about the toolchain you build 18:38:27 How are they breaking things? 18:38:29 i took those flags out in our case 18:38:42 i can't link libxull due to out of memory errors 18:38:52 xul.dll fwiw 18:38:53 Oh, on the x86 build 18:38:58 yes 18:39:14 we _could_ try doing the cross-compilation from 64bit -> 32bit 18:39:17 while we are at it 18:39:32 but, dunno. sounds like extra fun 18:39:51 but even then 18:39:57 Are we building the x86 build on a x86 host? 18:40:02 yes 18:40:13 Oh; and that's got a 4GB memory limit? 18:40:18 yes 18:41:05 Ew... 18:41:18 So --enable-debug implies --enable-debug symbols; so putting it behind enable-debug-symbols won't really help 18:41:39 well, then begin --enable-debug 18:41:48 that's fine too 18:42:09 Sorry what do you mean by "then begin"? 18:42:24 *behind 18:42:26 sorry 18:42:44 because right now i get the linking error with "--disable-debug" 18:43:04 i used the same mozconfig as we ship (modulo stylo enabling etc.) 18:43:38 and backing out your patch "fixed" the out-of-memory linking error 18:44:25 Ah okay. Alright let's move on, and I will figure out the incantation here that is needed 18:44:32 thx 18:44:51 pili: you are up 18:44:55 hi 18:45:22 just an announcement that I'll be travelling next week in India as part of the S9 outreach 18:45:33 so I'll be online slightly earlier 18:45:42 and will probably have to skip this meeting next week 18:45:46 but we'll see :) 18:45:59 also, I'll need a custom build at some point ;) 18:46:08 pospeselr: ^ 18:46:09 :) 18:46:41 pili: exciting! I hope it goes well! 18:46:47 I'll try to get that to you tomorrow-ish 18:46:53 thanks! I'm looking forward to it 18:48:19 I'll try to not to disappoint :) 18:48:36 pili brought up our meeting next week 18:48:48 i guess we can just talk about that topic now 18:49:07 i'll be afk next week (and starting from tomorrow afternoon-sh) 18:49:16 and pili is in india 18:49:18 thanks pospeselr tomorrow is fine, I have time 18:49:29 and there is a holiday in the US next monday (iirc) 18:49:43 so, i guess we skip the next week's meeting? 18:49:53 and come together on the 25th 18:50:00 at the usual time? 18:50:08 sure 18:50:09 does that sound right? 18:50:09 Sounds good to me. 18:50:11 works for me 18:50:13 ok 18:50:48 +1 18:51:22 GeKo: Try --disable-debug with --enable-debug-symbols="" (the ="" is necessary, you can't use --disable-debug-symbols) 18:51:22 sisbell: does that work for you, too? 18:51:34 tjr: ack 18:51:40 ok 18:52:03 sure, it works fine 18:52:09 okay, great 18:52:21 anything else wrt status updates? 18:52:51 fwiw: i'll drop everything non-critical in the next few weeks to help with tba stuff until we have it ready for stable release 18:53:35 should we plan on another release after you return? 18:53:45 or do you think it's too late for another alpha? 18:54:39 it's a pity that i have to start more or less with vacations 18:54:51 but that's life :) 18:54:54 sysrqb: what do you mean 18:54:55 ? 18:55:03 vacation is important :) 18:55:17 yeah, among many things :) 18:55:21 do you think we can squeeze in another alpha release before the 8.5 becomes stable? 18:55:37 or are we at the point where the next TBA releaes will be the first stable? 18:55:46 oh, yes i guess even two 18:56:07 okay, great :) 18:56:09 i think we should try to get the important tba-a3 things into a release we planned after i am back 18:56:29 that's at least the circuit display, topl, and the ux stuff you have been working on 18:56:37 okay, that sounds good 18:56:54 then we have the regular bugfix release on 3/19 18:57:05 which would be another alpha 18:57:18 and hopefully then at the end of march we do the 8.5 thing 18:57:37 that timeline sounds good to me 18:57:45 as an announcement: i'll start tagging tbb-8.5 tickets once i am back 18:58:02 so that we get an overview about possible blockers and can prioritize 18:58:21 alright 18:58:29 discussion-time 18:58:55 do we feel we should talk about the vision meeting we had on friday? 18:59:08 andy questions? concerns? comments? 18:59:20 tjr: thanks for writing that document up! 18:59:51 yeah it's a pretty good overview 18:59:53 i appreciated having that discussion 19:00:02 I think Arthur will have additional opinions; I just jotted things down this morning 19:01:28 okay. i think the main discussion will happen on tor-project (i hope so at least) 19:01:49 feel free to add your input. it's about your job :) 19:02:08 I personally think that user safety really ought to be our number 1 concern 19:02:53 like, in a future where tor is integrated properly into Firefox and Brave and what-not, I don't really see what the point is for Tor Browser trying to also fill that space 19:03:14 of a 'functioning' browser that most consumers want (saved bookmarks, cookies, history, etc) 19:03:56 what do you mean? 19:04:06 imho, we should feel free to veer back towards a super security focused tool for whistleblowers and activists and what not 19:04:17 okay 19:04:18 in a world where usable alternatives exist 19:04:21 im a pragmatic person and i don't think we should aim to compete with Chrome. We are not even a for-profit org. Instead, we can focus on being the most secure and usable browser around. It is about to enable users to choice. 19:04:32 The further we veer in that direction, the more 'Tor browser' becomes an indicator of 'person of interest' 19:04:48 Although I do generally agree with you I think; just playing devil's advocate 19:04:54 well, that person of interest could be a simply citizen 19:06:07 sure, and if they are concerned about the sort of threat models that don't get you killed, I think we should encourage those users to use future Super Private Browsing Mode enabled FF or Brave 19:06:08 it's particularly difficult because people like simplicity, they want one browser that can do everything, and it knows when it should protect them and how 19:07:24 but Super Private Browsing Mode in FF or Brave don't keep history and cookies either? 19:07:42 correct :/ 19:07:46 true 19:08:30 sorry, I was kind assuming that tor would eventually be enabled in general browsing mode in these browsers 19:08:58 I guess the question is also whether we trust others to do it well enough :) 19:08:59 i think that's not an unreasonable goal for the future 19:09:17 yeah 19:09:44 pospeselr: I think if FF ships Tor we can expect it will only be enabled in a Super Private Browsing Mode that does not retain history 19:09:47 yeah, i think it's too early to tell what the future will hold in that regard 19:10:11 okay, tor-project is your friend and i am happy to read how the discussion went once i am back :) 19:10:32 I need to think more about how contextual identities come into play in all this (putting aside "reboot on Tails for your other 'you'" for a moment). 19:10:58 okay, let's move on to the hiring topic 19:11:25 for the anticensorship team we did something new in the sense that folks from different teams were involved 19:11:50 one goal was here to start thinking about a unified hiring process across team boundaries 19:12:06 i wonder what we think for the tor browser hiring we are currently doing 19:12:26 do we think it would be helpful to have folks from other teams helping here? 19:12:50 or would that just be a distraction/make the whole process more complicated/etc.? 19:13:02 im happy to collaborate 19:13:27 thanks :) 19:13:51 I think the anti-censorship team hiring process was unique because that team didn't exist, so it relied on existing teams 19:13:56 the anticensorship hiring took too long i think, maybe we can reduce that fud time for prospects 19:14:08 that being said, i think it may be helpful having the perspective of someone on another team 19:14:11 +1 for reducing time 19:14:11 sysrqb: yep, that's an important point 19:14:12 One way that has worked rather fine at Tails is to involve 1 person (so far) from other teams at later stages (like interviewing the short list) but not earlier. 19:14:29 +1 to involving a few people from other teams (but not everyone) 19:14:38 * mcs is also concerned about speed 19:15:07 intrigeri: ah, that's good to know, thanks 19:15:09 mcs: you mean not everyone from other teams? or not everyone from the browser team? 19:15:40 I mean it might be too much to openly invite everyone from other teams. Ask a few people instead. 19:15:51 We should include all of the browser team people 19:16:01 yeah, sounds good 19:16:55 okay, i think a bit more about it but i like intrigeri's idea i think 19:17:21 yeah same 19:17:24 It is also valuable to have a schedule/timeline for the process (and try to stick to it). 19:17:34 that's true 19:17:37 and a good point 19:17:56 i actually brought that hiring question up last week in the vegas meeting 19:18:35 and erin will get back to us with basic policies and some framework if i understood correctly 19:18:48 so, we'll take it from there i guess 19:18:49 i got that too 19:18:55 thanks 19:19:06 that's useful feedback 19:19:14 do we have anything else for discussion today? 19:19:39 im groot 19:19:47 :) 19:19:50 lol 19:20:32 great. then let's call it 19:20:34 *baf* 19:20:46 (thanks all) 19:20:49 #endmeeting