18:59:14 <GeKo> #startmeeting tor browser 18:59:14 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Jan 29 18:59:14 2018 UTC. The chair is GeKo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:59:14 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 18:59:20 <GeKo> hi all! 18:59:46 <pospeselr> hello! 18:59:47 <igt0> :) 18:59:52 <boklm> hi! 19:00:05 <isabela> o/ 19:00:08 <GeKo> the pad is , asusual, here: https://storm.torproject.org/shared/tHoN4Ii7rLSjPE0OP4gydX4cMGadsXmRQNc-6lwru0N 19:01:24 <arthuredelstein> hi everyone! 19:01:31 <sysrqb> o/ 19:03:18 * mcs is reading the pad 19:03:47 <GeKo> sysrqb: https://gitweb.torproject.org/tor-browser-spec.git/plain/position-papers/HTTP3/HTTP3.pdf might interest you 19:04:50 <GeKo> mike and i have been at the http/2 workshop two years ago and talked about that there 19:05:01 <sysrqb> GeKo: Neat! Yes, that does look interesting, thanks! 19:05:41 <sysrqb> I'll read it this week/weekend 19:05:52 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: see this link as well in case you have not done yet 19:06:08 <GeKo> okay, let's get started 19:06:43 <arthuredelstein> thanks! 19:07:21 <GeKo> tjr: what#s your plan for fixing win64 things for esr60? 19:08:18 <tjr> I don't have one :) Specifically, I don't have a mingw w64 build in try; so I can't test a patch to tell if it fixes that build. but if you have a patch, I can make sure it doesn't fix any other builds and try and probably get it landed 19:08:37 <tjr> I would like to try and get an x64 build into taskcluster 'soon' but I don't think it will be there by 60 19:08:49 <GeKo> ok. well, we only have a backout at the moment :) 19:08:55 <GeKo> which means no proper patch 19:09:26 <tjr> You're backing out https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1269251 and it fixes it? 19:09:52 <GeKo> yes 19:10:23 <GeKo> i'll try to poke folks then and/or come up with an patch onmy own 19:10:30 <GeKo> not sure if i get to it though 19:10:44 <tjr> Ok. I don't understand why that fixes it, but it would probably be not-that-difficult to fix that up and land it. (e.g. only enable stl wrappers on darwin, android, windows, and mingw x86) 19:11:16 <tjr> Well, it might get pushback on landing if there's no solid explanation for whay it fixes it.... 19:11:32 <GeKo> okay, tjr re your question about #19212 19:11:38 <GeKo> yeah 19:11:41 <GeKo> err 19:11:43 <GeKo> #19121 19:12:51 <GeKo> tjr: let me recheck this piece and come with a proper argument back 19:12:59 <tjr> okay :) 19:13:17 <GeKo> i feel the more i think about it i get the feeling the details are missing :) 19:13:17 <tjr> I mean if you get update.xml from a .onion but the mar files from a cdn it makes plenty of sense 19:13:41 <GeKo> yeah, but that has not been our argument back then iirc 19:13:46 <tjr> Even from different onions it kind of makes sense (can compromise one onion but not the other... especially if they're hsoted differently...) 19:13:49 <tjr> ah ok 19:14:03 <GeKo> but it's a good one 19:14:07 <tjr> anyway, i was just curious from a "This looks like it may be difficult to maintain going forward perspective) 19:14:18 <GeKo> true 19:16:20 <GeKo> igt0: i think i agree with tjr 19:17:10 <GeKo> FORTIFY_SOURCE would be nice to have on android but should not be a huge prio right now 19:17:19 <GeKo> igt0: another thing that came to mind: 19:17:59 <GeKo> could you update your torbutton proposal to incorporate the feedback we got so far? 19:18:15 <GeKo> that would make sure everyone is on the same page and we reason about the same document 19:18:26 <igt0> yep! 19:18:30 <GeKo> fwiw: i am about to add proposals to the tor-browser-spec repo 19:18:44 <GeKo> following loosely the network team way 19:18:59 <sysrqb> cool 19:19:03 <sysrqb> sgtm 19:19:10 <GeKo> so we have some kind of collective memory about our major changes 19:19:31 <sysrqb> I know there was a discuss with nickm a year or two ago about whether non-tor props should be included in tor-spec 19:19:45 <GeKo> tjr: thanks for moving sysrqb's try access forward 19:19:47 <tjr> np 19:20:06 <sysrqb> i vaguely remember deciding that we can add any proposals into torspec 19:20:12 <GeKo> sysrqb: well, i think we should have them on our spec repo, so not having them there is fine 19:20:33 <GeKo> boklm: so, we are done with the fpcentral stuff? yay! 19:20:41 <sysrqb> yeah, keeping tow browser spec and proposals separate it perfectly good 19:20:47 <sysrqb> *tor browser 19:20:49 <GeKo> boklm: do we have some next plans for it at the moment 19:21:27 <GeKo> i guess it would be good to talk to mozilla folks in rome about how we could leverage fpcentral 19:21:33 <GeKo> tjr: ^ 19:21:45 <boklm> GeKo: yes. 19:21:47 <GeKo> i can imagine that could be a good session 19:21:53 <tjr> Yea. Englehardt in particular 19:21:57 <GeKo> yep 19:22:30 <GeKo> okay, isabela: 19:22:43 <GeKo> so this works for me, sorry for me messing up timezones 19:23:08 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: is 1900UTC on Wed for you okay as well to meet with UX folks? 19:23:30 <arthuredelstein> yup, fine! 19:24:20 <sysrqb> tjr, arthuredelstein: thanks for the try info 19:24:58 <arthuredelstein> np! 19:25:02 <GeKo> do we have anything else before we move to discussion time? 19:25:07 <arthuredelstein> boklm: What's the URL for fpcentral? 19:25:34 <boklm> arthuredelstein: https://fpcentral.tbb.torproject.org/ 19:25:54 <arthuredelstein> thanks! 19:26:15 <GeKo> okay patch uplift plan 19:26:28 <GeKo> thanks to arthur and all the other folks that helped with it 19:26:31 <GeKo> really nice 19:26:42 <GeKo> https://torpat.ch/ is the current state 19:28:20 <sysrqb> arthuredelstein: nice domain name, btw 19:28:30 <isabela> boklm: fpcentral is pretty cool 19:28:39 <sysrqb> +1 19:28:46 <arthuredelstein> +1 19:28:57 * sysrqb will play with fpcentral later 19:29:18 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: we have essentially 4 patches, now 5 from our current patch set we want to get upstreamed in the coming weeks for ESR 60? 19:29:36 <GeKo> (the sandbox ones are almost upstreamed it seems) 19:30:13 <arthuredelstein> yes, I think that's right. But I think it also makes sense to add more to the list 19:31:08 <arthuredelstein> I think it makes sense to put as many patches up for review as possible, and see which ones get accepted 19:31:20 <GeKo> that would be my idea, too, yes 19:32:00 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: i am curious what made #21569 a P3 thing? 19:32:30 <GeKo> oh, and while i think about it would it make sense trying to fix up #22343 and get that one into esr 60 as well? 19:32:47 <arthuredelstein> Actually, I think that's an old priority. We should bump 21569 to P1. 19:32:57 <GeKo> i agree 19:33:00 <arthuredelstein> Yes to 22343. I will open a ticket. 19:33:22 <arthuredelstein> on bugzilla 19:33:32 <GeKo> i fear if we wait for #22343 after esr 60 we'll have to reinvest a lot of time again 19:33:34 <GeKo> thanks. 19:33:49 <GeKo> apart from that it looks fine to me, again, nice work! 19:34:17 <sysrqb> are untriaged tickets possible-uplift? or is someone else considering those? 19:34:33 <sysrqb> (i dont have a particular opinion, just curious) 19:34:37 <GeKo> i hope i got them all out of this state with my mail today :) 19:34:50 <sysrqb> ah, gotcha, i havent read it yet 19:34:54 <sysrqb> sounds good, thanks 19:34:54 <arthuredelstein> GeKo: Thanks for your email with additional items -- I'll fix those today. 19:35:00 <GeKo> sure 19:35:17 <arthuredelstein> there are a couple which are no-uplift-for-now, which should maybe be a new color :P 19:35:38 <GeKo> heh 19:35:46 <arthuredelstein> distinct from no-uplift-never-ever 19:36:00 <GeKo> it's basically "no uplift but i am not sure about later yet" 19:36:18 <GeKo> maybe 19:36:31 <arthuredelstein> makes sense. Regardless we should keep reviewing all patches occasionally 19:36:36 <arthuredelstein> er all bugs 19:37:15 <sysrqb> what's the color between purple and yellow on the color? orange? 19:37:27 <sysrqb> err, color wheel 19:37:31 <sysrqb> :) 19:37:41 <GeKo> okay, anything else for the triage work? 19:38:26 <GeKo> does not seem to be the case 19:38:36 <GeKo> then sessions at he rome meeting 19:38:46 <GeKo> we don't need to have the final session list today 19:39:04 <GeKo> so keep brainstorming this week and we can talk about it more next week 19:39:26 <GeKo> but we should think about team sessions at any rate 19:39:43 <GeKo> so, one that is definitely going to happen is roadmapping for the next six months 19:40:03 <GeKo> then i think it would be neat to have something for fingerprinting in particular and 19:40:14 <GeKo> how to move forward in that area in the longer run 19:40:31 <GeKo> mabye with reference to our fpcentral work, we'll see 19:40:57 <GeKo> isabela: what about a meeting with the ux team? 19:41:48 <arthuredelstein> We'll want a meeting with any Mozilla folks there regarding Fusion. 19:41:56 <GeKo> it might be useful to map out the work in the coming six months 19:42:00 <GeKo> yes 19:42:19 <GeKo> so, that might already be four meetings 19:42:36 <mcs> maybe it will occur naturally as the Android effort accelerates, but we could consider having a desktop/Android info sharing session (e.g., discuss what challenges are unique to each platform) 19:42:47 <mcs> (not that I want to add too many sessions :) 19:43:05 <isabela> for the meeting day? 19:43:08 <isabela> in rome? 19:43:09 <GeKo> yes 19:43:11 <GeKo> yes 19:43:26 <isabela> yes, my goal is to have us (ux) free to hang out with other teams that day 19:43:50 <sysrqb> mcs: yes, that'll probably be a good diea 19:44:00 <isabela> me antonela and hiro will be in valencia just days before rome, so we might do our stuff before the official meeting day and have ourselves available to meet with tb team 19:44:27 <GeKo> sounds good! 19:44:29 <isabela> we want for sure to sync with mobile/android on migrating the new work we are doing for desktop 19:44:49 <isabela> so yes, book us! 19:44:50 <isabela> hehe 19:44:51 <GeKo> that could easily be part of that meeting 19:45:01 * GeKo ux team booked, check 19:45:08 <isabela> hehe 19:45:11 <arthuredelstein> Maybe we want to have a discussion with ooni folks regarding how they can help tor launcher? 19:45:18 <arthuredelstein> Not necessarily a full team meeting though. 19:45:42 <isabela> yes 19:45:47 <isabela> that would be good too 19:45:48 <GeKo> arthuredelstein: agreed to both 19:46:37 <isabela> is the team thinking of doing some retrospective session too? 19:46:42 <isabela> or tb does not do that :P 19:46:50 <GeKo> hah 19:47:03 <GeKo> i have been thinking to do that but am still struggeling 19:47:12 * isabela can help 19:47:12 <GeKo> given all the other meetings we want to have as well 19:47:20 <GeKo> gimme more time :) 19:47:24 <isabela> ok 19:47:39 <GeKo> i'll think about it this week 19:47:54 <isabela> ok 19:48:58 <GeKo> okay, please keep thinking about possible session ideas for the meeting days you think we should have 19:49:13 <GeKo> we'll make the final desicion next week 19:49:26 <GeKo> anything else for today? 19:50:06 <arthuredelstein> a subject I'd like to talk about at the meeting is performance. Again not necessarily a full session. 19:50:38 <sysrqb> heh 19:50:38 <arthuredelstein> Also some parts of that are network team. 19:50:44 <GeKo> yeah, i think that would be a good item for the open days 19:51:08 <GeKo> as i guess we might want to have some sessions there as well 19:51:13 <igt0> arthuredelstein, I also would love to hear about the browser instrumentation. Specially after struggling with the Browser(JS) side. 19:51:24 <GeKo> i could see fitting the ooni idea you had there as well 19:51:43 <arthuredelstein> the reason I harp on performance is that *all* my non-techie friends who have tried tor browser tell me "it's too slow" 19:51:55 <sysrqb> igt0: did you see details about requesting access to Moz Try servers? 19:52:21 <arthuredelstein> igt0: yeah, that would be great. what type of instrumentation do you have in mind? 19:52:30 <igt0> sysrqb, yep! and thanks! 19:52:38 <sysrqb> cool, just wanted to make sure :) 19:53:43 <igt0> arthuredelstein, right now, in the android side at least, if we make changes in the browser/ or mobile/ (JS part) it is painful to debug. By the amount of print logs in the code, I think people are using them instead of a debugger/repl or something like that 19:53:55 <GeKo> okay, thanks all for the meeting *baf* 19:53:58 <GeKo> #endmeeting