16:01:11 <morganava> #startmeeting Applications Team Weekly Meeting 2025-03-03
16:01:11 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Mar  3 16:01:11 2025 UTC.  The chair is morganava. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:01:11 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:02:20 <morganava> our weekly pad as usual -> https://pad.riseup.net/p/tor-tbb-keep
16:02:29 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> hi!
16:04:02 <boklm> bonjour!
16:04:06 <morganava> last week we got most of the way through the 14.5a4 rebase tutorial before realising we'd resolved some conflicts incorrectly before retiring for the weekend
16:04:35 <morganava> clairehurst: do you want to get back to that after our connect-assit sync later today?
16:05:01 <clairehurst> Yeah that would be good
16:05:20 <morganava> PieroV: ooks like you've a discussion point re go 1.22.x
16:05:25 <morganava> looks like*
16:05:37 <PieroV> Yes, that time of the year has come
16:05:52 <PieroV> And Go released a new series
16:05:53 <morganava> remind me, which version are our various channels on?
16:05:58 <PieroV> And .22 is EOL
16:06:10 <PieroV> I don't remember which one legacy is on
16:06:25 <PieroV> But we're on 1.22 on 14.0 and main
16:06:27 <morganava> well legacy's is dead and not updating regardless
16:06:40 <PieroV> Because Go 1.23 requires macOS 11
16:06:56 <PieroV> So, I guess we'll have to do a target-dependent version
16:07:13 <PieroV> Which is annoying but feasible
16:07:38 <PieroV> Are we targeting 14.5 for that and staying on 1.22 for release?
16:07:42 <morganava> (and esr128 currently only requiers macoS 10.15)
16:07:49 <PieroV> Or maybe are we even considering 1.24?
16:08:01 <PieroV> Or 1.23 for 14.5 and then 1.24 for 15.0?
16:08:12 <PieroV> Maybe we can also ask AC folks for a suggestion
16:09:35 <morganava> does Go 1.24 have a newer than macOS 11 requirement?
16:09:43 <PieroV> Good q!
16:09:47 <PieroV> I didn't think about this
16:09:57 <dan_b> AC folks?
16:10:05 <PieroV> Anticensorship
16:10:12 <boklm> https://github.com/golang/go/issues/69839
16:10:15 <dan_b> aaah
16:10:22 <boklm> "end support for macOS 11 in Go 1.25"
16:10:35 <morganava> thx boklm :)
16:10:42 <PieroV> Just found that as well :)
16:11:38 <morganava> welp
16:12:04 <morganava> it looks like Firefox 135 at least still only requires 10.15
16:12:45 <morganava> so our choices (long-term) are either bump the min version for Tor Browser on macOS, or use old Go on that platform
16:13:16 <morganava> in the short-term let's make a carve-out for macOS's Go in main and maint-14.0
16:13:30 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> Alternate choice I suppose would be to use gccgo, which probably works fine on older targets? But that might be disruptive to the build system.
16:13:53 <PieroV> The ~~third~~ fourth option is also to wait a little bit on maint-14.0 and keep 1.22 there
16:14:21 <morganava> yeah, i'm fine with that
16:15:03 <ma1> that would work out of the box since we temporarily disabled go updates on maint
16:15:15 <morganava> how long do we have for Go 1.24, another year?
16:15:32 <PieroV> Yes
16:17:02 <morganava> jeremy: i'd be willing to bet Snowflake/WebRTC isn't supported/tested in gccgo
16:17:08 <morganava> but i'd love to be proven wrong :p
16:17:28 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> morganava: do I detect that you're trying to get me to QA-test that? :P
16:17:39 <morganava> just planting seeds lol
16:18:03 <morganava> but this is a long-term problem that we keep running into it seems
16:18:14 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> (if it doesn't work in gccgo, that seems useful to fix. I would love to get that to happen but I'm not sure how much time I could put into that short-term)
16:18:20 <PieroV> If I get it correctly, gccgo needs GCC
16:18:22 <morganava> (the problem being the disparity of min-version requriement s between Firefox and Go)
16:18:26 <PieroV> But we have GCC only on Linux
16:18:29 <dan_b> google/go pulling up the OS version supported ladder rather quickly?
16:18:50 <PieroV> Cross compilation and GCC together sounds like headaches to me
16:18:56 <PieroV> dan_b: basically yes
16:19:01 <dan_b> yeah i hate it too
16:19:13 <morganava> dan_b:  more that Mozilla and Google don't pull the ladder at the same rate :p
16:19:25 <dan_b> cus i like go and this really is a thorn in the case for its side
16:19:33 <dan_b> LOL
16:19:42 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> PieroV: GCC cross-compilation is *also* on the list of things I want to spend some time improving but haven't had time
16:19:44 <morganava> or maybe the fact that a ladder exists is the bigger problem :p
16:19:56 <morganava> but anyway
16:20:08 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> Anyway it sounds like gccgo might be interesting to investigate but it's probably not a short-term solution
16:20:25 <boklm> is it clear if gccgo is more supported on older macOS?
16:20:36 <PieroV> Can we ask Goog to go slower?
16:21:11 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> boklm: I haven't looked for macOS but gccgo is well-known for not breaking platforms on Linux that Google's Go compiler breaks
16:21:36 <PieroV> Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]: what's the older Debian version Go works with?
16:21:43 <morganava> dan_b: re your question about UX survey; i believe 14.0.7 is built/being built now so there's no mad rush to get the survey done today or anything, but we will need it for 14.0.8 in ~4 weeks
16:21:43 <PieroV> We might have a problem also on Linux without realizing
16:22:23 <dan_b> morganava: oh! i thought i heard last week we were trying to spent a bunch of time thursday switching to that. have it like 80% done now fwiw.
16:22:42 <dan_b> but that's good to hear, cus i'm ALSO blocking clairehurst with the stage rewiring and reviewing her PRs
16:22:51 <dan_b> so that makes prioritizing that first easy
16:22:53 <dan_b> thanks!
16:22:58 <morganava> :p
16:23:10 <morganava> OH that reminds me
16:23:23 <boklm> https://go.dev/doc/install/gccgo doesn't mention support for a Go version newer than 1.18
16:23:24 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> PieroV: not sure I follow your question exactly, but Google's Go compiler broke support for all Linux/POWER platforms prior to POWER8 (this was quite a few years ago), whereas gccgo still works fine with them
16:23:29 <morganava> dan_b: can you create an issue w/ whatever problem sarah found over the weekend and post the patch plz and thank you
16:23:42 <morganava> in base-browser re DoH or w/e it was
16:24:24 <dan_b> morganava: yep! will work to get that landed today too!
16:24:27 <morganava> (back to Go) in practice Google 'dropping support' doesnt' necessarily mean new Go won't work
16:24:49 <morganava> there was some lag time before they finally broke Windows 7 for example
16:24:50 <Jeremy_Rand_Lab19[m]> right it usually just means that they won't do QA testing on it anymore
16:25:06 <morganava> but yeah we would need a comprehensive testing suite for the PTs to really leanon that :p
16:28:23 <morganava> ok, any other topics for today?
16:28:41 <PieroV> Nothing from me
16:29:10 <morganava> PieroV: is there an issue currently for the Go upgrade/migration?
16:29:21 <PieroV> morganava: we should check the one about 1.23
16:29:28 <PieroV> We already tried the migration and went back
16:29:48 <PieroV> https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/tor-browser-build/-/issues/41267
16:29:55 <PieroV> We had this one for which we rolled back
16:30:09 <PieroV> But I guess we should create a new one about 1.22 being EOL
16:30:25 <PieroV> Please assign it to me, as it'll need to address also relprep.py
16:31:02 <morganava> ok, I'll do that after this meeting
16:31:24 <morganava> have a good week everyone o/
16:31:27 <morganava> #endmeeting