16:01:02 <sysrqb> #startmeeting Tor Browser Fenix UI Sync 16:01:02 <MeetBot> Meeting started Tue Aug 4 16:01:02 2020 UTC. The chair is sysrqb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:01:02 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:01:23 <antonela> :) 16:01:28 * sysrqb doesn't remember what we called this meeting previously 16:01:36 <antonela> how are you? i saw geko's comments on some tba tickets 16:01:43 <antonela> wanted to go over them this week 16:01:56 <sysrqb> that sounds good to me 16:02:19 <antonela> my plans for august is finish my UI side of things, so then we can leave some time aside for reviewing the implementation 16:02:46 <antonela> given the funding issues, im not sure if we should stop with this? or continue? i think we will learn more tomorrow 16:03:00 <sysrqb> i began working on changes for https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/fenix/-/issues/34407 and https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/fenix/-/issues/34403 16:03:22 <antonela> in any case, my part is close to be done so i will finish and save it for when the implementation happens 16:03:23 <antonela> very nice 16:03:44 <antonela> how is your plan with those? do we have a timeline for minor releases? 16:04:05 <antonela> can we have iterations between point releases? 16:04:45 <sysrqb> i would like a test build by the end of this week including those issues 16:05:06 <sysrqb> we likely won't have an official nightly build available until mid-august 16:05:48 <antonela> seems good to me 16:05:54 <antonela> test builds are also useful 16:05:56 <sysrqb> ahf and i discussed creating an f-droid repo for nightly fenix builds 16:06:07 <sysrqb> and i think we can get that easily 16:06:24 <sysrqb> the configuration is much simpler than i expected 16:06:25 <antonela> did you have time to check the store release flow? 16:06:26 <antonela> oh very nice 16:06:38 <antonela> that makes things easier 16:06:53 <sysrqb> yes, i looked at the google play release flow 16:07:14 <sysrqb> i thinki can begin using that later this month 16:07:52 <antonela> oh cool 16:08:06 <antonela> im excited to learn how we can manage the pool of users there 16:08:17 <antonela> if is by invite or how, but im happy to learn 16:08:34 <sysrqb> there are three groups 16:08:48 <sysrqb> "internal", "alpha", and "beta" test groups 16:09:11 <antonela> what is the difference between internal and beta? 16:09:14 <sysrqb> if i remember correctly, internal and alpha require invites, and beta is opt-in without needing aninvitiation 16:09:22 <antonela> beautiful 16:09:43 <antonela> that sounds exciting :) 16:09:56 <sysrqb> i believe "internal" is for a very small test group (an internal team) 16:10:04 <antonela> right 16:10:10 <sysrqb> and alpha is for when you want to expand outside that group 16:10:20 <sysrqb> so, i think there is no difference, except whatever we want 16:10:48 <antonela> perfect, we just need to pick a workflow and attach to it :) 16:10:52 <antonela> is good 16:11:04 <sysrqb> https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/3131213?hl=en 16:11:14 <antonela> for the nightly in august, what do you plan to achieve? 16:11:44 <sysrqb> i guess they renamed them as "internal", "closed", and "open" 16:11:46 <antonela> enlightening 16:11:56 <sysrqb> :) 16:12:21 <antonela> how this get connected with the f-droid flow? 16:12:22 <sysrqb> i'm hoping for quick feedback 16:12:23 <antonela> what im missing? 16:12:49 <sysrqb> i think there are different audiences for f-droid and google play 16:12:55 <antonela> nono, i mean 16:13:15 <antonela> you have the nightly automagic build in f-droid 16:13:23 <sysrqb> si 16:14:00 <antonela> then you hand pick a build to publish in gplay and we run the testing flow 16:14:25 <antonela> is it the workflow? 16:15:07 <sysrqb> for google play, we'll need official alpha builds 16:15:18 <sysrqb> because it will install over the current tor browser app 16:15:57 <antonela> i see 16:16:24 <sysrqb> so, we will need to go through the usual release process for that 16:16:38 <sysrqb> we're planning desktop alpha releases every two weeks until the end of september 16:17:09 <antonela> that is why the other options are interesting, because they become obsolete after certain time and you cannot open it anymore (preventing us from insecure installings) 16:17:11 <sysrqb> so when the android build is ready for testing, we may include fenix as part of that process 16:17:18 <antonela> oh good to know 16:17:45 <antonela> i wish to learn if we have a list of what is going to be included in each alpha, i think we dont have it now 16:18:11 <sysrqb> on desktop or android or both? :) 16:18:34 <antonela> i wish both 16:18:36 <antonela> :) 16:19:00 <antonela> dont know, maybe it helps for estimations 16:19:23 <antonela> anyways, i can discuss it with gaba when she is back from vacs 16:20:09 <sysrqb> i think we can try creating a list for the next one or two alpha releases 16:20:23 <sysrqb> planning into the future more than that is difficult 16:21:03 <sysrqb> but i think we can create a short-term roadmap 16:21:07 <antonela> yep, good idea 16:21:24 <antonela> maybe during the next release meeting? 16:21:48 <sysrqb> yes, we can discuss it 16:21:55 <sysrqb> in 1.5 hours 16:23:25 <antonela> do you want us to start a draft 16:23:32 <antonela> and then we just discuss the draft? 16:23:36 <antonela> i mean, i can help 16:24:29 <sysrqb> i need input from GeKo and acat 16:24:46 <sysrqb> they have a better understanding of the desktop status than I do 16:25:24 <antonela> right, better to plan all together then 16:25:27 <antonela> oki 16:25:32 <antonela> i dont have too much else for today 16:25:39 <antonela> happy to see your progress :) 16:26:54 <sysrqb> yes, soon (i hope) :) 16:26:57 <sysrqb> i wonder about https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/fenix/-/issues/34405 16:27:02 <antonela> yes 16:27:18 <sysrqb> we should make a decision about what we are doing 16:27:23 <sysrqb> for s58 16:27:25 <antonela> right 16:28:08 <sysrqb> i really really really want to implement https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/tor-browser/-/issues/29590 16:28:09 <antonela> do you prefer to keep our current flow? 16:28:18 <sysrqb> no. 16:28:41 <sysrqb> but i am very concerned about the amount of time we have before we must consider this "stable" 16:28:50 <antonela> right 16:29:10 <antonela> i wonder if we can connect directly and show a net settings screen to boostrap with bridges of needed 16:29:25 <antonela> *if 16:30:32 <sysrqb> hrmmmmm 16:31:07 <sysrqb> i worry that is different behavior from the current version 16:31:23 <sysrqb> and maybe it is surprising for some people 16:31:41 <sysrqb> but 16:32:10 <antonela> could be, we can explain / ask for consent at the first use? not sure tho 16:32:14 <sysrqb> if the app is upgraded from fennec to fenix, then the app should continue using the configured bridges 16:32:43 <sysrqb> but, we know many users uninstall the app, and then reinstall later 16:32:56 <sysrqb> so we shouldn't assume the app remembers the correct configuration 16:33:13 <sysrqb> yeah, maybe we promot at the first run 16:33:25 <sysrqb> and we save a preference for automatically connecting 16:33:38 <antonela> using configured bridges seems smart just if those bridges still actually available/work 16:33:57 <sysrqb> yeah 16:34:02 <antonela> okey, i like it as an intermediate step 16:34:22 <antonela> lets say we launch 10 16:34:24 <antonela> ay 16:34:39 <antonela> 10.0 with a first run check 16:34:40 <antonela> and 10 16:34:59 <antonela> and for 10.5 it will connect directly 16:35:18 <antonela> (my mechanical numbers keyboard is tricky :) 16:35:28 <sysrqb> :D 16:36:04 <antonela> for 10.5 we can have an small reachability test in place (i hope) 16:36:45 <antonela> which we probably want to deploy tentatively in 10.0 so we can see if it actually works 16:37:42 <sysrqb> yeah, we can think about that 16:37:48 <sysrqb> so https://marvelapp.com/prototype/783fhfb/screen/70989413 16:37:56 <sysrqb> that screen shows at first-run 16:38:13 <sysrqb> and has an option for automatically connecting in the future, yes? 16:38:38 <sysrqb> and https://marvelapp.com/prototype/783fhfb/screen/70989412 16:38:52 <sysrqb> we show this screen while tor bootstraps? 16:39:19 <sysrqb> where should we show progress? in the url bar? 16:40:00 <sysrqb> if you don't know yet, then you have some time 16:40:26 <sysrqb> i won't begin working on this until end of next week, at the easliest 16:40:46 <sysrqb> :) 16:42:26 <antonela> so, the current fenix has a gradient kind of progress bar for loading 16:42:41 <antonela> i was thinking we can use it for boostrapping + disable the url bar 16:42:49 <sysrqb> yep 16:42:55 <sysrqb> me too 16:43:16 <antonela> we can have a less pink but more blue-green gradient 16:43:18 <antonela> this is a detail 16:43:32 <antonela> i'll update that ticket with this intermediate step we've been discussing 16:43:46 <sysrqb> excellent 16:43:54 <sysrqb> this sounds good to me 16:43:58 <antonela> i think we can have an opt-in automatic connection on first timers and then we can re arrange that first screen 16:44:05 <antonela> super 16:44:14 <sysrqb> yep 16:44:18 <antonela> and it sets some steps for desktop as well :) 16:44:32 <sysrqb> yep ) 16:44:35 <sysrqb> :) 16:45:20 <sysrqb> okay, i think that is all i wanted to talk about today 16:45:34 <sysrqb> anything you want to discuss? 16:47:09 <antonela> no, i think this is progress :) 16:47:12 <antonela> thank you!!! 16:47:30 <sysrqb> great. thanks! 16:47:33 <sysrqb> :) 16:47:39 <sysrqb> i'll close this meeting 16:47:45 <sysrqb> #endmeeting