18:29:46 <sysrqb> #startmeeting Tor Browser Team Meeting, 13 January 2020
18:29:46 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Jan 13 18:29:46 2020 UTC.  The chair is sysrqb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:29:46 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
18:29:55 <sysrqb> Hello, it is a Monday again!
18:30:07 <sysrqb> welcome one and all
18:30:15 <boklm> hi!
18:30:21 <acat> hi!
18:30:27 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> hello!
18:30:35 <mcs> hi
18:30:53 <sisbell> hi
18:31:14 <pospeselr> hii
18:31:26 <antonela> hello o/
18:31:33 <sysrqb> okay, good people are here
18:31:40 * antonela thanks for your kind words at the ml Jeremy_Rand_Talos :)
18:31:54 <mcs> +1
18:32:15 * tjr is here but doesn't have an update he doesn't think...
18:33:14 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> antonela, thanks, anytime :)
18:35:24 <sysrqb> ok, okay
18:36:14 <sysrqb> pospeselr: it sounds like you made some progress on the site-specific settings
18:36:50 <pospeselr> yeah a bit
18:36:59 <sysrqb> i still worry about using umatrix without a thorough audit,
18:37:08 <sysrqb> but it's still worth understanding what's out there
18:38:27 <pospeselr> well, alternatively we could always rip out the pieces of noscript/umatrix and reimplement in tor browser natively
18:38:47 <pospeselr> put the functionality  behinda pref, so users who want to can use those heavy weight solutions instead
18:39:33 <pospeselr> but you know, then we would own that functionality which has upsides and downsides
18:39:38 <pili> hi, sorry, I'm around now
18:39:40 <mcs> this sounds like an area where a Tor Browser proposal would be helpful (eventually)
18:39:47 <sysrqb> +1
18:40:14 <sysrqb> yes. we should also discuss something like this with thie moz uplift team
18:40:22 <sysrqb> before we go ahead and reimplement something like this
18:40:34 <sysrqb> i don't want to carry patches like that indefinitely
18:40:41 <pospeselr> we've a meeting scheduled this week, I can always stick that on the agenda
18:40:54 <sysrqb> that'd be really good, yes please
18:41:01 <pospeselr> though iirc ethan is still out until the 22nd
18:41:54 <sysrqb> if not this week, then next week is fine
18:41:56 <pospeselr> so basically: hey mozilla folks we would like to integrate no-script/umatrix like functionality into Tor Browser, can we get some support on getting these things uplifted?
18:42:09 <sysrqb> i think we still have a sizeable amount of work ahead of us
18:42:10 <antonela> we can talk with arthuredelstein about it too
18:42:17 <pospeselr> or rather, if we were to got his route, is this something that could be uplifted
18:42:23 <sysrqb> pospeselr: yeah
18:42:26 <sysrqb> exactly
18:42:26 <antonela> (tomorrow during the moz meeting)
18:42:27 <pospeselr> yeah true, arthur is around
18:43:23 <tjr> I think the outcome of the discussion in the meeting might be "errr..... maybe?"  :)
18:43:32 <sysrqb> thanks tom :)
18:43:36 <mcs> that kind of functionality requires constant maintenance as websites make changes and Mozilla makes changes
18:43:39 <pospeselr> yeah that's what I would expect :3
18:43:42 <tjr> Maybe Arthur knows more than me but I think the answer from Tim and Gary will be "We can't work on it until we're allowed to"
18:44:05 <tjr> I wonder if Ehsan may have ideas about content block directions where this might dovetail...
18:44:33 <tjr> I am unlikely to be much help at uplifting something this big
18:45:02 <sysrqb> i can talk with Ehsan at all-hands, too
18:45:17 <pospeselr> ah yeah that's in like 2 weeks
18:45:25 <sysrqb> i'd just prefer some coordination on something like this
18:45:36 <sysrqb> pospeselr: yeah
18:45:37 <tjr> (Unrelated to everything, Matt, I want me and you to have a little working session on the UniGL stuff at All Hands too)
18:45:52 <sysrqb> good idea
18:46:08 <sysrqb> i'll look over that before
18:46:17 <pospeselr> https://yinzhicao.org/unigl/unigl.pdf ?
18:46:43 <tjr> And https://github.com/UniGL/addon
18:47:59 <sysrqb> okay, i'm going to move on
18:48:26 <sysrqb> i forgot that I wanted to thank everyone for their help last week with getting out three releases (!)
18:48:59 <sysrqb> that took a lot of time and coordination
18:49:46 <sysrqb> but, especially with GeKo's help, we got the chemspill update out for stable within a day
18:51:14 * Jeremy_Rand_Talos was not envying you guys while you were dealing with those releases...
18:51:23 <sysrqb> this reminds me. i want to make sure we have a list of downstream projects we should notify about upcoming releases
18:51:41 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> (But kudos for getting them released quickly)
18:51:50 <sysrqb> we notified tails last week, but i wonder who else was surprised by it
18:52:39 <sysrqb> in any case, i'll add a to do item for myself
18:52:43 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> Hmm, is Whonix in a position where they'd need to be aware of that stuff?
18:53:03 <boklm> I think we need to notify _hc when we publish the release, for the fdroid upload
18:53:19 <sysrqb> boklm: yeah, i need to start doing that
18:53:29 <sysrqb> Jeremy_Rand_Talos: yes, they are another project i thought about
18:53:47 <sysrqb> but i don't know how they should be contacted
18:54:27 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> Regarding contacting Whonix, I guess their forum or emailing Patrick would be candidate contact methods
18:55:09 <mcs> should we have a closed (or open?) email list for the notification?
18:55:19 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> (I've emailed Patrick before and he typically responds promptly)
18:55:21 <sysrqb> could be. a forum is not acceptable, but i'm guessing there is an email address i can use
18:55:32 <antonela> tor-releases exists?
18:56:02 <sysrqb> i just don't want to leak an upcoming chemspill publically before mozilla announces it
18:56:36 <sysrqb> but there are a few projects who need advanced warning about an update so they can be ready
18:57:05 <sysrqb> but i'll figure out who should be contacted
18:57:21 <sysrqb> okay, Jeremy_Rand_Talos
18:57:22 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> Pretty sure Patrick's email address is public knowledge, I can double check and give it to you if it's public.  (Also pretty sure his PGP pubkey is public knowledge.)
18:57:36 <sysrqb> it probably is
18:57:41 <sysrqb> for the namecoin integratoin
18:57:46 <sysrqb> did we announce that anywhere?
18:57:50 <boklm> sysrqb: can you add me in CC for the tails/others email (for better coordination)?
18:58:09 <sysrqb> boklm: sure! i'll do that in the future
18:58:18 <boklm> thanks
18:59:02 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sysrqb, AFAIK Tor didn't announce anything.  I asked GeKo if he wanted to do a blogpost or something to conincide with the merge, and IIRC the response was "nothing is planned at this time".  So the only announcement so far has been my 36C3 talk+workshop.
18:59:03 <sysrqb> i pinged people indiviudally for this last release
18:59:21 <sysrqb> Jeremy_Rand_Talos: okay
18:59:36 <sysrqb> do you want to write an email to tor-talk@ ?
19:00:06 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sysrqb, I think it would be helpful for someone to announce something, somewhere, in a Tor-focused venue, so that we can get more people testing it.  Emailing tor-talk seems reasonable.
19:00:37 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sysrqb, Should I ask people to give feedback in tor-talk, or is there another place that's better suited for feedback?
19:00:58 <sysrqb> we're walking a fine line between "we merged something as an experiment" and "Tor endorses namecoin as an onion naming service"
19:01:37 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sysrqb, right, it's important to be careful about how we word this so that people don't get the impression that this is something that Tor is endorsing for end users at this time.
19:01:42 <sysrqb> (and we want to be clear that this is only for experimentation)
19:01:55 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sysrqb, I think I did a pretty good job of emphasizing this in my 36C3 talk/workshop FWIW
19:02:28 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sysrqb, would you like to review the thing I post to tor-talk before I send it, so that we can be sure the wording is appropriate?
19:02:29 <sysrqb> i think feedback should go wherever it's easy to track it and follow up on questions
19:02:40 <sysrqb> sure, i can help with that
19:02:56 <sysrqb> i don't have time to keep track of a mailing list thread of feedback
19:03:23 <sysrqb> but if you feel comfortable with that, then that's fine with me
19:03:33 <sysrqb> trac tickets are another option
19:03:44 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sysrqb, yeah, so I think there are 2 categories of feedback.  (1) I found a bug, can you fix it.  (2) It works great, no bugs to report.  These might be best placed in different locations.
19:03:45 <sysrqb> as long as they're tagged with a 'namecoin' keyword, or something like that
19:04:15 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> If it's a bug report, then filing a Trac ticket (or a GitHub ticket on a Namecoin repo) might both be fine.
19:04:27 <sysrqb> yeah
19:04:38 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> But if it's positive feedback with no bugs, then it seems like an issue tracker may not be ideal
19:04:59 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> But at the same time, we want the Namecoin and Tor people to be able to gauge how many users are having success vs running into bugs
19:05:42 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> So yeah, I'm honestly not sure how we should do this
19:05:51 <sysrqb> right, we don't want 20 works-for-me tickets
19:07:15 <mcs> maybe this feature has been publicized more, wait a while and ping tor-talk again? (that risks a “me too” email thread of course)
19:07:18 <sysrqb> let's think about this some more, and we can include instructions in the tor-talk@ email
19:07:29 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> I think I'm fine with keeping an eye on the tor-talk mailing list for positive feedback, and I'm fine with directing bug reports to the Trac.
19:07:53 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> (Unless you guys have better ideas for that)
19:08:05 <sysrqb> okay, that's fine with me
19:08:45 <sysrqb> let's more on to pili's item
19:08:53 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> sounds good to me then.  I'll write up a draft of a tor-talk email, and I'll send it sysrqb's way for review before sending
19:09:11 <sysrqb> thanks
19:09:46 <pili> hi
19:10:40 <pili> so the first one is a suggestion to update actual points for a ticket more often
19:11:08 <pili> as people are working on them instead of at the end when a ticket is closed
19:11:09 <pili> would that work for people? :)
19:11:51 <sysrqb> this is especially helpful for multi-week and multi-month tickets
19:12:03 <pili> yup :)
19:12:18 <sysrqb> becaus, who remembers ho many hours they spent on a ticket two months ago?
19:12:25 <pili> a middle ground could be to do it when you send a ticket for review
19:12:26 <boklm> how often should we update this? for example each week before the meeting?
19:12:27 <sysrqb> *how
19:13:09 <pili> boklm: that would help yes
19:13:49 <boklm> ok
19:14:10 <sysrqb> hrm. i wonder if "points" should be updated, as well?
19:14:23 <sysrqb> as we work on a ticket, and get a better understanding of the amount of work involved
19:15:00 <sysrqb> becuase i'm not sure how useful a ticket showing "0.5 points" and "12 actual points" is
19:15:00 <boklm> if updated, should points include the work already done, or only the work remaining?
19:16:08 <sysrqb> but, maybe the difference between points and actual points shows us how bad we are at estimating work involved in a ticket
19:16:38 <pili> sysrqb: I think it's ok to have a large disparity between actual and estimate
19:16:41 <sysrqb> boklm: i guess i'm not sure which is more helpful
19:17:09 <pili> it help us to see which tickets are difficult to estimate
19:17:10 <sysrqb> pili: i guess i'd like a way of knowing how much more work is needed on a ticket
19:17:13 <pili> I think it's ok to just update actual, otherwise it might get more confusing
19:17:19 <pili> sysrqb: ah, good point
19:17:20 <sysrqb> as an estimate by the person working on it
19:17:39 <sysrqb> so, i guess i want a third field :)
19:17:53 <sysrqb> okay, we can think about this at another time
19:18:06 <sysrqb> i shouldn't derail the discussion on updating "actual points" periodically
19:18:11 <pili> hehe
19:18:55 <sysrqb> is everyone okay with doing this?
19:19:20 * boklm is ok
19:19:26 <pili> any alternative suggestions? do people find the estimates useful or is it just annoying overhead? :)
19:19:40 <mcs> sure, but I might need to be reminded :)
19:19:51 <acat> +1
19:20:33 <sysrqb> sending reminders are easy :)
19:20:40 <sysrqb> as long as we remember
19:21:09 <acat> :)
19:21:11 <pili> I can remind during the meeting :)
19:21:42 <sysrqb> we can add a "reminders" section at the top of the meeting pad
19:22:18 <sysrqb> okay, anything else before we move onto the discussions section?
19:23:05 <sysrqb> okay, pili, i think that's yours?
19:24:41 <pili> yup
19:25:17 <pili> anything from last year anyone would like me to highligh for the State of the Onion talk at FOSDEM?
19:25:24 <pili> from the Browser team?
19:25:39 <pili> Otherwise I'll go digging to remind myself of the highlights :D
19:26:27 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> I assume that the Namecoin experiment in Nightly is too early to be worth mentioning in that talk, but if by some chance my assumption is wrong, I wouldn't object to mentioning it.  (Might yield some useful feedback.)
19:26:30 <antonela> i have a wishlist pili, will share with you :)
19:26:42 <pili> yay, thanks antonela :)
19:26:45 <sysrqb> stable tor browser on android, snowflake on desktops,
19:27:09 <pili> Jeremy_Rand_Talos: thanks, I'll keep it in mind :)
19:27:25 <sysrqb> maybe general ui improvements on desktop
19:27:40 <pili> yup, that will be the UX portion from antonela I guess :D
19:27:49 <sysrqb> heh :)
19:28:00 <antonela> :)
19:29:15 <pili> ok, I think that's plenty
19:29:17 <pili> thank you :)
19:29:23 <sysrqb> okay, if anyone thinks of more items, then ping pili :)
19:29:47 <sysrqb> on that note, we reached the end of this meeting :)
19:29:59 <sysrqb> have a good week everyone!
19:30:04 <antonela> o/
19:30:06 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> Cheers!
19:30:07 <sysrqb> #endmeeting