18:00:51 <sysrqb> #startmeeting Tor Browser Meeting 27 July 2020
18:00:51 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Jul 27 18:00:51 2020 UTC.  The chair is sysrqb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:51 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
18:01:09 <antonela> hello
18:01:24 <gaba> hi!
18:01:53 <gaba> pad is at http://kfahv6wfkbezjyg4r6mlhpmieydbebr5vkok5r34ya464gqz6c44bnyd.onion/p/tor-tbb-2020-keep
18:02:31 <sysrqb> o/
18:02:40 <acat> sorry, it seems Ctrl+Shift+C removes authorship colours, i did that unintentionally...
18:03:18 <gaba> no problem
18:03:34 * acat thinks that browser being able to capture key shortcuts can be problematic
18:04:05 <sysrqb> :)
18:05:59 <antonela> is a feature not a bug!
18:07:45 <ahf> acat: i had some website the other day that stole ctrl+f for searching, i didn't get what was happening until i was i had already closed the page thinking the browser had a bug
18:07:55 <acat> discourse? :)
18:08:03 <ahf> no, some webshop i think
18:08:22 <sysrqb> Google? :)
18:08:50 <sysrqb> (they're not only a webshop, but I know they do it, too)
18:09:01 <ahf> :o
18:10:42 <sysrqb> okay, let's get started
18:10:45 <acat> ahf: i think discourse (or similar) used to do it too
18:11:11 <gaba> ok
18:11:14 <sysrqb> ahf: you're on holiday for one week? or more?
18:11:17 <gaba> let's start?
18:11:27 <ahf> for 3!
18:11:35 <ahf> maybe only 2
18:11:42 <ahf> but right now i have in the calendar 3
18:11:50 <sysrqb> okay
18:11:56 <sysrqb> good to know :)
18:13:07 <sysrqb> okay. we have a release this week
18:13:26 <sysrqb> 9.5.3 and 10.0a4. publishing tomorrow
18:13:51 <sysrqb> they are very small updates, due to everything else we're working on for the migrations/transitions
18:14:12 <sysrqb> looking at the gitlab boards
18:14:17 <sysrqb> https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/applications/-/boards
18:15:24 <sysrqb> are there any ticket you know are blockers for releasing an alpha update based on esr78, but noone is planning on working on it this week?
18:15:33 <sysrqb> *tickets
18:16:00 <sysrqb> (and are all the issues you are working on shown on that board?)
18:16:30 <gaba> remember you can filter by your name
18:16:32 <gaba> in asignee
18:18:32 <sysrqb> afhare you working on any tor browser tasks that we should plan on you handing off before you leave?
18:18:39 <sysrqb> ahf
18:18:41 <ahf> yes
18:18:47 <sysrqb> maybe we should sync this week
18:19:00 <ahf> i think we should sync later this week with the tor integration work for fenix, at least so that branches are up
18:19:13 <sysrqb> sounds good to me
18:19:13 <sysrqb> thanks
18:19:16 <ahf> i really would like to do the sync of fenix github code to gitlab as well, such that we can do MR's there too
18:19:29 <ahf> i don't know if it's okay if i just take the whole repo and push up on GL or if we want to cherry pick something or what
18:19:39 <ahf> if i were to do it, i would just take a snapshot now and then we can rebase later
18:19:51 <ahf> but i have no idea how you guys prefer to work in that case
18:20:01 <sysrqb> i have a potential branch in my personal repo
18:20:22 <ahf> ohhh that we can use as the release branch?
18:20:27 <ahf> that would be perfect
18:20:36 <sysrqb> and i could only push that to the "official" gitlab repo we'll use
18:20:40 <sysrqb> yeah
18:20:55 <sysrqb> it's just based on a tag mozilla created for their most recent version
18:21:07 <sysrqb> but i think that is a good base on which we can work/modify the pap
18:21:22 <sysrqb> and then i can rebase our patches onto future branches
18:21:25 <ahf> let's do that then
18:21:27 <ahf> yeah
18:21:31 <ahf> that is perfect
18:21:33 <sysrqb> like we do with the other tor browser repo
18:21:51 <sysrqb> okay, we can discuss that after this meeting
18:22:04 <ahf> yep
18:22:30 <sysrqb> brade, mcs, acat: do any of you know about blockers we should prioritise for an esr78-based release?
18:22:39 <sysrqb> i see the macos updater issue
18:23:44 <mcs> I will need to look over the open issues and see if anything seems urgent.
18:23:59 <sysrqb> thanks, yes please
18:24:14 <sysrqb> i'd like to get out the first alpha around mid-august
18:24:17 <mcs> when do we plan to ship an esr78 based alpha?
18:24:29 <mcs> thx
18:24:32 <acat> me too. there's #33577 for example, not a sec issue, but i guess users would complain about that
18:24:50 <acat> since i assume now it's quite used
18:25:05 <acat> *used quite a lot
18:25:09 <mcs> that is something we could include in the release notes....
18:25:13 <mcs> if necessary
18:25:43 <sysrqb> if we release alpha versions every two weeks until the end of September, then we have three opportunities to catch critical bugs
18:26:09 <sysrqb> acat: mcs: yeah, but if we can get it working, then all the better
18:26:33 <sysrqb> but i wouldn't prioritize that over other more important issues (of course)
18:27:29 <sysrqb> the UTor Browser Nightly is already based on esr78, in case anyone wants to begin playing around with it and finding bugs
18:27:48 <sysrqb> err, *Tor Browser Nightly
18:29:23 <sysrqb> i don't see any tickets in "Needs Review" for the migration without anyone assigned
18:29:50 <sysrqb> there are some MRs: https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/applications/-/merge_requests
18:30:38 <sysrqb> only https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/tor-browser/-/merge_requests/5 is missing an assignment
18:31:08 <sysrqb> acat: can you take that one?
18:31:32 <acat> sysrqb: sure
18:31:47 <sysrqb> thanks
18:32:25 <sysrqb> gaba: am i missing anything else before we move onto Discussions?
18:33:44 * sysrqb assumes not until gaba says otherwise
18:33:51 <gaba> i do not think so
18:33:56 <sysrqb> thanks
18:34:00 <gaba> you have reviews on?
18:34:02 <gaba> figure out
18:34:08 <gaba> acat has 9 reviews on his plate :)
18:34:40 <acat> oh. can i see that query? :)
18:34:42 <gaba> I mean, people are ok with the reviews they are assigned to
18:34:43 <gaba> https://gitlab.torproject.org/groups/tpo/applications/-/boards?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&assignee_username=acat
18:35:31 <acat> ok, i guess there are tickets with needs review which already have a MR with a needs review
18:35:47 <sysrqb> yeah
18:35:48 <acat> so i should remove the needs review label from those tickets i assume
18:36:09 <sysrqb> yes, i think we should only add Needs Review on MRs (now)
18:36:28 <gaba> ok
18:37:34 <sysrqb> should we move onto discussions?
18:38:27 <gaba> yes
18:38:56 <sysrqb> okay
18:40:05 <gaba> people can look at the pad posted in tor-internal with the draf of the blogpost
18:40:07 <sysrqb> as a follow up to the discussion topic from last week about what assumptions Tor Browser should make about connections with onion services
18:40:08 <gaba> draft*
18:40:13 <gaba> for the onion service connections one
18:40:34 <sysrqb> i'd like to write a blog post about that
18:40:44 <sysrqb> Alec published an advisory today:
18:40:53 <sysrqb> https://github.com/alecmuffett/eotk/blob/master/docs.d/security-advisories.d/001-torbrowser.md
18:41:03 <sysrqb> some of you probably already saw it and read it
18:41:50 <sysrqb> but if Tor Browser is not reverting the behavioral change being questioned here, then we should be clear about why the behavioral change is correct
18:41:59 <antonela> id like to discuss with comms if having a blogpost is the best way to deal with this issue
18:42:26 <antonela> anyways, having the technical background summarized is very helpful for any action we would take
18:42:28 <sysrqb> antonela: okay, please include me in that conversation if it's helpful
18:42:30 <gaba> And we should look at documentation and see what needs to be chagned on setting up onion services
18:42:40 <antonela> sysrqb: sure thing
18:42:57 <sysrqb> gaba: yes
18:43:19 <sysrqb> okay, that was topic #1
18:43:33 <sysrqb> topic #2 i mentioned earlier
18:43:57 <sysrqb> about prioritzing release blockers for esr78-based Tor Browser
18:44:20 <sysrqb> acat, mcs, brade: please ping me (or get my attention somehow) if ou find anything that I should look at
18:44:28 <sysrqb> *you
18:44:41 <mcs> will do
18:44:49 <sysrqb> thanks
18:44:50 <acat> ack
18:45:07 <sysrqb> topic #3 was from ahf
18:45:17 <sysrqb> i think that is resolved, yes?
18:45:17 <acat> re #1, is there something we can do?
18:45:18 <ahf> that one is resolved i think!
18:45:19 <ahf> yep
18:45:24 <sysrqb> great
18:45:32 <acat> maybe review the draft?
18:45:34 <sysrqb> acat: i'd like help with writing the blog post
18:45:38 <acat> ok
18:45:39 <sysrqb> yes, writing/reviewing
18:45:42 <acat> that's good
18:45:47 <sysrqb> pending comms decision
18:46:46 <acat> but independently of the decision, i also think it's good to have the technical arguments somewhere
18:46:58 <sysrqb> i ran through those discussion items a little fast, do any of you have questions/comments about them?
18:47:17 <sysrqb> acat: yes, having that would be good and is very important
18:47:24 <antonela> +1
18:48:17 <sysrqb> okay, if no one else has question/comments, then i'll close this meeting
18:48:26 <sysrqb> thanks everyone!
18:48:30 <acat> thanks
18:48:31 <mcs> thanks!
18:48:32 <ahf> thx folks o/
18:48:32 <Jeremy_Rand_Talos> thanks!
18:48:38 <sysrqb> #endmeeting