18:59:48 <GeKo> #startmeeting tor-browser 18:59:48 <MeetBot> Meeting started Tue Apr 3 18:59:48 2018 UTC. The chair is GeKo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:59:48 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 18:59:52 <GeKo> hi all! 18:59:53 <arthuredelstein> hi everyone 19:00:06 <mcs> hi 19:00:06 <boklm> hi 19:00:16 <antonela> o/ 19:00:19 <igt0> ! 19:00:19 <GeKo> it's a bit unusual to have the meeting today at this time but i hope everyone could/can make it though 19:00:25 <isabela> vixe maria 19:00:27 <isabela> o/ 19:00:33 <GeKo> if you have not done so yet, please fill in your items onto the pad 19:00:40 <GeKo> https://storm.torproject.org/shared/tHoN4Ii7rLSjPE0OP4gydX4cMGadsXmRQNc-6lwru0N 19:01:15 <GeKo> if you have already, please read over the items and mark those bold you want to have discussed/discuss 19:01:48 <Riastradh> Hi! 19:01:59 <GeKo> o/ 19:03:11 <Riastradh> Just thought I'd let you folks know that Brave is planning to put out our first beta with Tor support in private tabs in a couple weeks. 19:03:27 <GeKo> sounds good! 19:03:39 <Riastradh> Happy to talk about it, or write something into your pad, or answer any questions you folks have, if you want to use any of your time in this meeting for that. 19:03:41 <GeKo> where can one read about how this is designed and supposed to work? 19:04:25 <Riastradh> The current public-facing documentation draft is this: https://github.com/brave/browser-laptop/wiki/Brave-Tor-Support#tor-faq 19:04:34 <Riastradh> (Just the Tor FAQ section; the rest of it above that section is out of date.) 19:05:33 <sysrqb> . 19:05:40 <Riastradh> The quick summary is that we're providing a single toggle switch to use Tor for all private tabs, with the goal of thwarting the vast majority of easy IP-based tracking and a few related things -- a much more modest goal than the Tor Browser aims for, for a broader audience. 19:06:45 <Riastradh> We have a Github `project' tracking Tor-related issues, but apparently Github projects suck and we can't make them public or something. 19:07:03 <GeKo> ok, thanks. 19:07:14 <Riastradh> We don't have a build that's easy for anyone to try yet, but working on that this week. 19:07:35 <GeKo> alright. looking at the pad it seems tjr is up first 19:08:00 <GeKo> tjr: the canvas thing seems interesting 19:08:24 <GeKo> the other two i don't think so 19:08:40 <GeKo> although i am not sure what's up with the local ip address leak 19:08:57 <GeKo> i mean we disable webrtc during compile time 19:09:52 <arthuredelstein> ideally we would like to re-enable webrtc if it could be made "safe" 19:10:13 <arthuredelstein> though I don't know if that's possible or not 19:10:16 <GeKo> yes, but that's not a thing for esr60 19:10:38 <arthuredelstein> oh, sorry, makes sense 19:11:17 <GeKo> okay, maybe tjr chimes in later on, sysrqb you are up 19:11:31 <GeKo> so 19:11:49 <GeKo> we are blocked on arthur getting the rebase done 19:12:00 <GeKo> once that is done and the branch is reviewed and we are got 19:12:02 <GeKo> *good 19:12:19 <GeKo> there will be a new alpha branch available 19:12:40 <sysrqb> okay, what happens after android moves to FF62 (?) and desktop stays on ESR? 19:12:56 <sysrqb> maybe this is a little too far ahead, and not something we should worry about right now 19:13:02 <GeKo> we need a new branch for mobile alpha tracking that one 19:13:08 <sysrqb> okay 19:13:10 <GeKo> no, not really 19:13:36 <GeKo> but i think it might be easier to rebase the thing arthur is coming up with onto fx62 19:13:44 <GeKo> than doing the rebase for mobile in parallel 19:14:04 <GeKo> does that make sense? 19:14:11 <sysrqb> okay, makes sense 19:14:17 <arthuredelstein> i think that makes sense 19:14:27 <GeKo> good 19:14:28 <sysrqb> and review process for mobile specific-patches is igt0 and i review, and then you do a higher-level review and merge? 19:14:38 <arthuredelstein> Would be great if someone can help me with the mobile patches for rebasing to ESR60 19:14:47 <sysrqb> of course :) 19:14:51 <GeKo> sysrqb: we could start with that process 19:14:55 <arthuredelstein> :) 19:15:00 <sysrqb> okay 19:15:14 <GeKo> yes, please split that work and involve sysrqb and igt0 where needed 19:15:19 <sysrqb> sounds good, thanks 19:15:31 <GeKo> that way we might get faster to a reviewed branch we can use further 19:15:49 <arthuredelstein> I haven't looked at the mobile patches yet, so if you'd like to start with those now that is probably the most efficient 19:16:41 <arthuredelstein> (sysrqb and igt0) 19:16:47 <sysrqb> yeah, on my list for this week 19:16:55 <GeKo> great 19:16:57 <sysrqb> i can split with igt0, too 19:17:15 <igt0> +1 :) 19:17:47 <GeKo> okay, let's move on to pospeselr's fun bug 19:17:54 <pospeselr> haha 19:18:05 <pospeselr> so any ideas? 19:18:16 <GeKo> talking to jld? 19:18:24 <GeKo> does he have any ideas? 19:18:48 <pospeselr> i'll hit him up after the meeting 19:19:10 <GeKo> usually in #boxing on the moz irc network 19:19:20 <GeKo> so, that's my only idea i h ave right now 19:19:36 <igt0> what *bsd does? since the /proc is not mounted by default 19:20:00 <pospeselr> the bsd section of the code also makes a call to the same pthreads API 19:20:10 <pospeselr> which presumably routes to some syscall BSD has that linux does not 19:20:39 * mcs just added a question for arthuredelstein to the pad 19:20:51 <Riastradh> What does *BSD do for what? I know a thing or two about BSD. 19:21:11 <pospeselr> getting the stack base address and size 19:21:23 <pospeselr> for the current thread 19:21:43 <pospeselr> specifically this API: pthread_getattr_np() 19:22:59 <Riastradh> Ah. Hm. NetBSD just has pthread_getattr_np to begin with. Not sure about the other BSDs off the top of my head. The pthread_t structure just has a pointer to the stack base as a member. 19:23:26 <pospeselr> yeah, same in Linux 19:23:40 <pospeselr> but it populates that struct by parsing /proc/self/maps :( 19:24:49 <GeKo> ok. let's try figuring something out after you talked to jld and other moz folks 19:24:58 <pospeselr> yep that's the next logical step 19:25:01 <GeKo> i hope that helps already :) 19:25:25 <GeKo> alright, isabela you are up 19:26:40 <isabela> ok 19:26:46 <isabela> arthuredelstein: main question for you 19:27:13 <isabela> i would like to work on that pick a country UI just as a test first 19:27:22 <isabela> have a few versions and test them before having it part of a release 19:27:24 <isabela> if its ok 19:28:02 <arthuredelstein> What kind of test do you have in mind? 19:28:10 <isabela> (this is an item in september) 19:28:28 <arthuredelstein> Like a wireframe test, or a special build, or? 19:28:41 <isabela> arthuredelstein: i was thinking of having builds with different UIs we can test with people (via sponsor9 testing program) 19:28:56 <isabela> this can be something user research coordinator can help organize 19:29:40 <arthuredelstein> That sounds cool to me! :) I guess I tend to lean toward trying to get MVPs out, but this is quite a challenging project, so I can imagine some early tests might be useful 19:29:51 <isabela> yes 19:30:05 <isabela> i think we could have one that is not part of a release where we send to specific ppl to test etc 19:30:20 <arthuredelstein> another way of splitting up the project could be by country 19:30:25 <isabela> that is what i am suggesting :) can be a mvp but not a build part of a release 19:31:06 <arthuredelstein> yeah, sounds great I think. But others here may have an opinion too :) 19:31:28 <mcs> I think I am missing some context. Is this related to the recent grant proposal or ? 19:31:44 <GeKo> yes and no 19:31:49 <isabela> is related to the feature not the grant itself 19:32:03 <isabela> the one click solve all censorship problems feature 19:32:06 <GeKo> it was an idea that already came up before the grant proposal 19:32:33 <arthuredelstein> An important question is who might be implementing these test UIs as well. It seems like mcs and brade are perhaps the most natural choice. So their opinion is surely more important than mine :) 19:33:03 <isabela> oh ok 19:33:12 <isabela> i guess i saw your name near it somewhere 19:33:31 <isabela> at the roadmap actually 19:33:32 <isabela> :) 19:33:40 <mcs> I would like to see the goals written down for this feature but creating some UI prototypes for testing certainly could be done/ 19:33:41 <mcs> . 19:34:03 <isabela> mcs for the automation feature 19:34:26 <isabela> a big question is 'will we freak users out by asking their country info or trying to guess it?' 19:34:42 <isabela> this will be a research to see how to do that 19:35:06 <isabela> can be wireframes or it could be a build we try with an ui (that is not part of any release, just for the tests) 19:35:08 <GeKo> the bigger one is even "does it help to provide circumvention on a per country level?" 19:35:17 <isabela> that too 19:35:34 <mcs> That last question is more difficult to test, maybe. 19:35:46 <mcs> Or hard to know if you have acquired enough data points. 19:35:48 <arthuredelstein> that's partly a question for ooni, right? 19:35:50 <isabela> solving one question doesnt mean the feature will be done as its a feature that brings a lot of questions 19:35:52 <GeKo> yes 19:35:55 <isabela> so the grant proposal is to solve some of them 19:36:02 <igt0> GeKo, mcs yep, how do we measure it? 19:36:07 <isabela> this idea to test the ui for country selection is for another 19:36:08 <isabela> etc 19:36:50 <GeKo> igt0: without even getting fake data just for ooni probes, yes! 19:36:52 <sysrqb> i tihnk this is a step in the right direction, but it probably won't work as well as we hope it will 19:37:11 <GeKo> well, i have not much hope, so... :) 19:37:29 <GeKo> but, yes, we should look at it 19:37:34 <arthuredelstein> I seem to be the naive optimist here :) 19:37:47 <isabela> i believe in digging 19:37:48 <isabela> and learning 19:37:50 <antonela> im optimist too 19:37:58 <isabela> then i make a decision 19:37:59 <isabela> hehe 19:38:37 <GeKo> okay, let's move to the discussion parts i think 19:39:08 <GeKo> oh, boklm: please skip the work on #18867 for now 19:39:22 <GeKo> we should work on getting the test suites running first 19:39:29 <boklm> ok 19:39:41 <GeKo> i don't want to have another release cycle flying blind :) 19:39:53 <GeKo> okay, discussion time 19:40:18 <GeKo> isabela: do you want to say something about the all hands thing and the meeting tomorrow? 19:40:46 <GeKo> (or not just meeting tomorrow but general syncs with the ux team) 19:40:48 <isabela> circuit display 19:41:06 <isabela> security controls 19:41:11 <isabela> i will email the list 19:41:18 <isabela> every week we will rotate 19:41:43 <isabela> but april will be about TB mobile and desktop 19:41:53 <isabela> that is a lot on your roadmap that expect us to be done in april :) 19:42:03 <antonela> (and on ours) 19:42:05 <isabela> therefore quick feedback loops will be important 19:42:36 <isabela> that is why we are dedicating all wed's of april to TB team syncs 19:42:44 <GeKo> if you feel it's too much i am fine postponing stuff 19:42:57 <isabela> we do have some stuff to move to may if necessary 19:43:01 <isabela> that wont hurt your roadmap 19:43:04 <isabela> but we will yell :) 19:43:05 <GeKo> yep 19:43:06 <isabela> if we need to 19:43:13 <GeKo> please do 19:43:16 <isabela> :) 19:43:26 <Riastradh> pospeselr: FYI, privmsg about stack addr/size re #20283. 19:43:54 <GeKo> okay, we should start thinking about who from the browser team should/wants to be at the all hands meeting 19:44:06 <GeKo> isabela is organizing this year 19:44:11 <mcs> I may miss the UX sync this week (I am not 100% sure if I will be afk during that time or not) 19:44:13 <GeKo> and we basically have this week 19:44:30 * isabela needs names yes 19:44:31 <isabela> :) 19:44:41 <GeKo> so, please speak up here if you want to go, not to go 19:44:49 <arthuredelstein> I would like to go 19:44:50 <GeKo> or just ping isa later on 19:45:05 <isabela> 11-16 of june btw 19:45:07 <isabela> in sf 19:45:08 <GeKo> i guess having mobile folks at the all hands would be good 19:45:13 <isabela> yes 19:45:15 <isabela> i agree 19:45:19 <GeKo> and general some tor browser presence 19:45:34 <sysrqb> i can go 19:45:39 <GeKo> i won't come but we have plenty of people who could fill that spot 19:46:21 <mcs> Kathy and I cannot go anywhere during that part of June (family stuff here) 19:46:55 <GeKo> okay, final item is the roadmap 19:47:05 <GeKo> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1joFGDiHaqlorGeXhytKakiSnWY9TqTDv5XqmbT3FkX8/edit#gid=0 19:47:05 <isabela> ok 19:47:10 <isabela> sysrqb: noted 19:47:15 <isabela> arthuredelstein: noted 19:47:25 <pospeselr> isabela: I'm down to go to all-hands :) 19:47:31 <isabela> pospeselr: noted 19:47:32 <isabela> :) 19:47:33 <GeKo> i think we are mostly good 19:47:41 <GeKo> isa and i at least can live with it :) 19:47:50 <GeKo> but it is still not set in stone 19:47:51 <isabela> hahaha 19:48:08 <isabela> yes we should review it every week or something to make sure its real 19:48:09 <mcs> Kathy and I plan to review it this week. Of course we planned to do that last week too ;) 19:48:16 <GeKo> igt0: sysrqb: please look at the april items 19:48:17 <isabela> mcs: hehe 19:48:22 <isabela> story of my life 19:48:25 <GeKo> in particular the alpha blockers 19:48:35 <GeKo> that's the stuff to focus right now 19:48:59 <GeKo> so, torbutton and tor launcher integration are important, too, but 19:49:08 <sysrqb> i also began adding the items here: 19:49:10 <GeKo> looking at our planned alpha slightly on the back burner 19:49:11 <sysrqb> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/teams/ApplicationsTeam/TorBrowserAndroid/Roadmap#RomeRoadmap-2018 19:49:18 <sysrqb> yeah 19:49:25 <GeKo> oh, neat 19:49:28 <sysrqb> overall i think the items look good 19:50:07 <GeKo> i wonder whether we should use some color coding for things we already finished and those we started to work on? 19:50:25 <GeKo> our resident spreadsheet guru indicated such a thing 19:50:30 <sysrqb> yes, that is a good idea 19:50:31 <sysrqb> heh 19:50:34 <isabela> ha 19:51:00 <GeKo> okay, i'll use yellow for stuff we are currently working on and green for stuff we have already done 19:51:08 <GeKo> i'll skip red :) 19:51:33 <sysrqb> sounds good 19:51:57 <GeKo> sysrqb: good stuff that wiki page! 19:52:29 <GeKo> okay, any comments? anything else for today? 19:53:33 <igt0> GeKo, yep about the Review of play store stats 19:53:50 <isabela> i will get to yall soon 19:53:51 <igt0> how are we going to sync bugs reported in the play store and our trac system? 19:54:03 <isabela> i've been doing that for the sponsor and will have to do it this month for q1 report 19:54:22 <isabela> is this something you need soon or is ok to get done when i get it done for the report 19:54:25 <isabela> ? 19:54:56 <igt0> not now, i am asking because normally the users report bugs there instead of trac. 19:55:04 <isabela> true 19:55:15 <isabela> for more often then my reports 19:55:26 <isabela> one thing we can do is that the person who does the user advocate stuff 19:55:28 <sysrqb> i guess we should monitor those comments and we open tickets 19:55:39 <sysrqb> oh, good idea, that's true 19:55:39 <isabela> can help keeping an eye there 19:56:13 <igt0> cool beans! 19:56:58 <GeKo> alright, sounds good 19:57:28 <isabela> :) 19:57:30 <GeKo> okay, thanks for the meeting! and have a nice week everyone *baf* 19:57:33 <GeKo> #endmeeting