17:30:26 <sysrqb> #startmeeting Tor Browser Meeting 2019-09-16
17:30:26 <MeetBot> Meeting started Mon Sep 16 17:30:26 2019 UTC.  The chair is sysrqb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:30:26 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
17:30:32 <sysrqb> Hello everyone!
17:30:44 <sisbell> hi
17:30:48 <_hc> hello!
17:30:49 <_hc> I made it!
17:30:52 <acat> hi
17:30:55 <boklm> hi!
17:30:58 <sysrqb> GeKo decided I can try running this meeting :)
17:31:26 <sysrqb> _hc welcome welcome
17:31:46 <antonela> o/
17:31:48 <GeKo> o/
17:32:22 <mcs> hi
17:33:02 <sysrqb> the usual pad - https://storm.torproject.org/shared/tHoN4Ii7rLSjPE0OP4gydX4cMGadsXmRQNc-6lwru0N
17:34:00 <pili> hi, only 50% here for now... sorry
17:34:47 * tjr is in a meeting so is not paying attention much
17:35:07 <sysrqb> okay, seems we're missing sisbell and pospeselr ?
17:35:20 <sisbell> I just added it, so try refreshing
17:35:33 <sysrqb> great, i see it now, than
17:35:35 <sysrqb> thanks
17:35:58 <sysrqb> Okay, GeKo, i think you're up first :)
17:36:10 <GeKo> okay
17:36:36 <GeKo> i was wondering whether anyone has opinions about how to proceed
17:36:45 <GeKo> with making tor browser working for macos 10.15
17:37:07 <GeKo> it think i  have a signing setup ready if need be
17:37:23 <GeKo> and we should get out new osx bundles
17:37:35 <GeKo> before catalina goes life
17:37:42 <GeKo> live
17:37:52 <GeKo> which is supposedly to be in october
17:37:57 <mcs> Unfortunately, while Apple switched the release date for macOS 10.15 Catalina from September to October they did not give a specific date (not surprising).
17:38:08 <GeKo> yeah
17:38:17 <GeKo> we still need to backport one patch
17:38:29 <GeKo> so, mozilla does not want to support esr60 here
17:38:51 <GeKo> and without the patch the browser is essentially unusable on macOs 10.15
17:38:57 <GeKo> it crashes quickly
17:39:06 <GeKo> so we might be on our own here
17:39:24 <boklm> on esr60?
17:39:25 <GeKo> however, it seems we could easily release new alpha bundles with it
17:39:31 <GeKo> yes
17:39:35 <sysrqb> this is until we release 9.0?
17:39:38 <sysrqb> (stable)
17:39:41 <GeKo> yes
17:39:53 <GeKo> as catalina is probably getting out earlier
17:40:06 <mcs> Should we wait and include it in our end-of-September alpha?
17:40:21 <GeKo> yeah, that's one option
17:40:39 <GeKo> then there might be a 68.1.2 point release
17:40:53 <GeKo> i mean mozilla wants to get this fixed as well
17:41:02 <GeKo> for esr68 before oct i guess
17:41:12 <GeKo> so, maybe we wait for that one here
17:41:21 <GeKo> depending on which comes earlier
17:41:21 <brade> sounds good to me
17:41:30 <GeKo> okay,
17:41:58 <GeKo> so we test the macos compat either in our planned alpha
17:42:14 <GeKo> or in an alpha beased on 68.1.2esr depending on what comes earlier=
17:42:16 <GeKo> ?
17:42:28 <GeKo> hoping that we still have enough time to react for stable?
17:43:12 <sysrqb> and we backport the needed patch(es) for the next release?
17:43:17 <sysrqb> for stable
17:43:24 <GeKo> yes
17:43:31 <sysrqb> okay
17:43:38 <GeKo> the alternative to that plan would be
17:43:46 <GeKo> we get an alpha release just for macos out asap
17:43:56 <GeKo> to test the macos signing and 10.15 compat
17:44:08 <GeKo> and get, say, 8.5.7 outnext week
17:44:22 <GeKo> just for macos with just the signing related patch
17:44:35 <GeKo> (that goes for both alpha and stable)
17:44:51 <GeKo> that would get us rid of the lingering notarization problem
17:44:54 <sysrqb> i guess it depends on availability, given mcs and brade are afk next week
17:45:02 <GeKo> but it costs us additional releases
17:45:29 <mcs> Maybe we can find someone else who has a 10.15 set up? But I am not sure who.
17:45:32 <GeKo> which means additional resources get away from esr68 transition work
17:45:39 <boklm> do people usually upgrade quickly to the next macos release?
17:45:54 <GeKo> dunno
17:45:55 <pili> I don't have 10.15 yet
17:46:04 <pili> I could upgrade if necessary though
17:46:14 <GeKo> i mean we already had a bunch of reports that stable was broken on early macos *betas*
17:46:33 <mcs> pili: It is still in beta test, which means enrolling in Apple’s beta test program to get the OS
17:46:36 <GeKo> so i don't want to be on anything here
17:46:42 <GeKo> *bet
17:46:47 <pili> ah
17:46:48 <pili> hmm, I think I'm good ;)
17:47:17 <GeKo> especially as i still don't know what happens if users upgrade but still have an unnotarized tor browser around
17:47:18 <mcs> I would expect a lot of people to upgrade to 10.15 as soon as Apple releases it. I am not sure how many “a lot” is though.
17:47:23 <GeKo> does that one suddenly break?
17:47:28 <GeKo> yeah
17:47:43 <GeKo> i think "a  lot" is enough that we should care hee
17:47:44 <boklm> so if we don't add support to esr60, we'll have no stable release available there between 0 and 22 days?
17:47:48 <GeKo> *here
17:48:06 <mcs> I don’t think the old one will break but I am not 100% sure (and Apple could even change something before the final 10.15 release).
17:48:17 <GeKo> boklm: what do you mean?
17:49:19 <boklm> depending when they release 10.15 in october, there will be between 0 and 22 days until the 9.0 release
17:49:39 <sysrqb> GeKo: how much time is involved with backporting the patches?
17:50:07 <GeKo> it's just one we need
17:50:23 <GeKo> it's not large
17:50:32 <GeKo> but it does not apply cleanly
17:50:39 <GeKo> that's all i know for sure
17:50:45 <sysrqb> okay
17:50:55 <GeKo> but i'd assume it at most a couple of hours
17:51:06 <GeKo> including testing that we not messed up
17:51:30 <GeKo> boklm: yes
17:51:48 <sysrqb> it sounds like we should plan on a release next week or the following week - depending on our ability to test it
17:52:03 <GeKo> i think betting on no esr60 release anymore is not smart
17:52:17 <GeKo> sysrqb: you mean for an alpha?
17:52:57 <sysrqb> yes, plus backporting the patch and included it in the next 60esr-based relesae
17:53:11 <GeKo> okay
17:53:24 <GeKo> so, this is essentially option one we discussed aboev
17:53:25 <sysrqb> but it seems like those will be different release,
17:53:26 <GeKo> sounds good
17:53:31 <GeKo> yes
17:53:55 <GeKo> i'll monitor the esr68 branch closely and probably ask mozilla folks about a point release for esr68
17:54:00 <GeKo> so we have better planning here
17:54:04 <sysrqb> sounds good
17:54:05 <GeKo> okay
17:54:16 <GeKo> that's it from me for the group
17:54:25 <sysrqb> as for #31010, i'll chat with acat about that
17:54:54 <sysrqb> msc, brade: you saw GeKo had a question for you?
17:55:00 <sysrqb> we don't need to discuss it here, though
17:55:13 <GeKo> okay, let me know whee we are
17:55:20 <GeKo> i might give some pieces a second review
17:55:25 <GeKo> i am not sure yet
17:55:42 <sysrqb> sisbell: did you want to discuss that? #31564
17:56:02 <sysrqb> GeKo: okay, i'll take whatever you give me :)
17:56:33 <sisbell> Yes. I implemented it and verified checksums match on my machine but I just need verification across some different machines to see if checksums match
17:56:59 <GeKo> i can help with that this week
17:57:00 <sisbell> that's basically it
17:57:04 <GeKo> when i review and test you branch
17:57:22 <sisbell> GeKo: sounds good, thanks
17:57:33 <mcs> sysrqb,GeKo: I answered your question on the pad.
17:57:44 <GeKo> sisbell: could you start with the x86_64 patches?
17:57:47 <sysrqb> sisbell: do you think you'll have time for #31192 this week?
17:57:53 <sysrqb> heh, beat me to it
17:57:53 <GeKo> heh
17:58:04 <GeKo> yeah, that's pretty important
17:58:11 <sisbell> Sure, I'm lite on issues now so I'll start on that one
17:58:14 <GeKo> and we should get an alpha at least to test it
17:58:25 <sysrqb> i didn't realize it, but Android/Google Play basically uninstall Tor Browser on x86 devices
17:58:37 <sysrqb> because we didn't ship updates for it
17:58:52 <sisbell> Google knows best
17:58:53 <sysrqb> so, that's not good
18:00:24 <sysrqb> okay, does anyone want to discuss anything else related to weekly updates?
18:00:44 <GeKo> sysrqb: i think acat had something?
18:00:57 <GeKo> at least it's highlighted there
18:01:04 <GeKo> (not sure who did that, though)
18:01:19 <sysrqb> ah, for pospeselr ?
18:01:22 <acat> just asking pospeselr if it's fine to take #31303
18:01:22 <pospeselr> acat: please feel free
18:01:24 <pospeselr> yeah
18:01:25 <acat> ok
18:01:37 <sysrqb> okay, good good
18:01:42 <sysrqb> anything else?
18:02:00 <sysrqb> okay, moving on to discussions
18:02:03 <sysrqb> acat:
18:02:27 <acat> so, i think now on esr60 there is no way to change the newtab page from blank to sth else
18:02:59 <acat> but now in esr68 it's possible to choose in about:preferences between blank and "Firefox Home", which is Firefox default new tab page
18:03:51 <acat> so i wanted to ask opinions on whether it's a good idea to allow that or not (because i think it's easier for us not to :) )
18:04:57 <mcs> So the problem is that Firefox Home relies on phoning home to Mozilla to load things on the page or ?
18:05:05 <antonela> is #31575 the relevant ticket?
18:05:25 <acat> that's the technical problem yes, and i think it's not easy to disable these requests without patching
18:05:59 <sysrqb> is the default about:home in 68?
18:06:04 <acat> but also there's the perspective of product/UX, do we want to allow "Firefox Home", given that the browser is not Firefox, but Tor Browser?
18:06:49 <mcs> From a UX perspective, to me it makes more sense to replace the Firefox Home option with about:tor
18:07:00 <antonela> yes, we don't, specially during end of year fundraising campaign
18:07:01 <sysrqb> that was my thought, too
18:07:15 <antonela> mcs +1
18:07:16 <sysrqb> (re: using about:tor)
18:07:40 <pospeselr> mcs +1 from me too
18:07:47 <acat> i also think it makes sense
18:07:59 <mcs> I still want a way to have about:blank of course :)
18:08:05 <pospeselr> i dunno that 1 trac user was pretty mad about it when i suggested it
18:08:13 <sysrqb> does that seem like an easy patch? or is it complicated?
18:08:13 <boklm> blank page seems also fine to me
18:08:27 <sysrqb> as in, maybe we start off with changing the default to about:blank
18:08:44 <acat> ah wait, but are we talking about setting it as default? or about:blank as default with the option of changing to about:tor?
18:08:59 <mcs> There are two issues: (1) the default new tab page and (2) what options do we expose in the UI
18:09:32 <antonela> mcs, right. For (1) we aim for about:tor
18:10:09 <antonela> for (2) about:tor or about:blank are the options?
18:10:27 <antonela> i can comment on a ticket, if a ticket exists
18:10:28 <GeKo> new tab rght now is about:blank
18:10:36 <antonela> yes
18:10:47 <GeKo> i actually like that more than about:tor
18:11:07 <antonela> whhy?
18:11:12 <antonela> oops, why?
18:11:22 <GeKo> hard to say
18:11:27 <antonela> :)
18:11:39 <GeKo> i guess because it does not distract me when i just want to open a new tab
18:11:40 <mcs> about:blank loads super fast and about:tor adds no value when I am opening a new tab (at least for me)
18:11:43 <GeKo> and load a url
18:11:49 <boklm> on a slow/loaded computer, about:tor takes some time to load
18:11:50 <antonela> both firefox and chrome has a new tab no blank, but then about:firefox or about:chrome is not a thing
18:12:06 <GeKo> mcs: brade: that#s a good point
18:12:20 <GeKo> *that's
18:12:53 <GeKo> what's the value of seeing about:tor every time when we open a new tab?
18:12:54 <pili> I agree that about:blank when you open a new tab is less distracting (just to add an additional data point... :) )
18:13:19 <GeKo> i think it's a good welcome page
18:13:31 <GeKo> but that's different from the new tab scenario
18:13:39 <sysrqb> i wonder why Mozilla decided to change it
18:13:44 <sysrqb> maybe we can learn from them
18:13:55 <sysrqb> acat: can you find the ticket where they made that decision?
18:14:00 <antonela> im good with it, that is why we have an about:blank on new tabs nowadays
18:14:03 <boklm> the one from mozilla has not text and only a search box, so less distracting than about:tor
18:14:06 <sysrqb> maybe they didn't document it in the ticket, too
18:14:34 <sysrqb> okay, this seems like a more general product decision
18:14:43 <sysrqb> can we start with about:blank as the default
18:14:56 <sysrqb> and decide if we want about:tor (or something else) in the future?
18:14:57 <pili> sysrqb: +1
18:15:23 <antonela> Tor Browser *currently* have an about:blank in new tabs
18:15:35 <GeKo> not in  esr68
18:15:43 <GeKo> i mean the alpha
18:16:03 <GeKo> but, yes, sounds good to me
18:16:07 <acat> +1, and for the other part, replacing "Firefox Home" option with "about:tor" in about:preferences UI?
18:16:13 <GeKo> which i guess leaves (2)
18:16:25 <antonela> right
18:16:26 <GeKo> yeah, that sounds good to me
18:16:30 <sysrqb> acat: do you have an estimate for how much time that'll require?
18:16:32 <antonela> wfm too
18:16:35 <sysrqb> for writing the patch?
18:16:48 <acat> should be easy
18:17:29 <sysrqb> do you think 1 day or less?
18:18:01 <acat> #31575 already has a patch to not initialize firefox's about:tab, so we just need to change the UI
18:18:09 <acat> i think so
18:18:16 <acat> less than 1 day
18:18:30 <sysrqb> GeKo, mcs, brade: do you think that's worth it?
18:18:49 <mcs> I do
18:18:54 <GeKo> yep
18:19:04 <sysrqb> okay, great, then acat, let's do it
18:19:20 <acat> good
18:19:33 <sysrqb> anything else on this topic?
18:20:02 <sysrqb> pili: you're up
18:20:07 <antonela> current alpha has not about:tor at the start, that ticket contemplates it? https://share.riseup.net/#mQosCzYOqMkrEq6ljasMHA
18:20:49 <pili> yup, just a few things
18:21:01 <pili> first about the Bug Smash Fund, we raised money for it during last month and now we should spend it :)
18:21:14 <sysrqb> antonela: we can discuss after the meeting
18:21:25 <pili> so if you see any bugs that fall outside of sponsor work that we need to fix, please add the "BugSmashFund" keyword in trac
18:21:25 <acat> (antonela: that's the first time i've seen that page...)
18:21:26 <GeKo> antonela: huh
18:21:30 <GeKo> me too
18:21:32 <GeKo> :)
18:21:35 <pili> I see pospeselr has already added some, thanks!
18:21:43 <antonela> sysrqb: good good
18:22:02 * antonela is fast taking screenshots :)
18:22:07 <pospeselr> :D
18:23:00 <antonela> pili: re BugSmashFund, do you already have a query of tbb tickets without label?
18:23:15 <pili> antonela: nope but I could make one up :)
18:23:38 <antonela> pili, oki we can overlap those and ux-team ones and find some -- for tomorrow ux-team meeting
18:23:47 <sysrqb> pili: i'm guessing any tickets that don't currently have a sponsor assigned are available for this?
18:23:57 <sysrqb> (as long as they're related to smashing bugs)
18:23:58 <pili> antonela: sounds good, I'll put it on my list :)
18:24:02 <antonela> thanks!
18:24:03 <pili> sysrqb:yup
18:24:16 <sysrqb> sounds good
18:24:42 <sysrqb> okay, any other questions about this?
18:25:31 <antonela> groot here
18:25:34 <pili> my other point is a gentle reminder to update the actual points fields once a ticket is closed in trac to reflect (more or less) how long it took to fix
18:25:49 <pili> and if you forget I will be very annoying for a few weeks and remind you :)
18:26:09 <sysrqb> ha.
18:26:20 <sysrqb> we wouldn't want that :)
18:26:37 <sysrqb> okay, antonela
18:27:11 <antonela> can we have pospeselr's patch in some alpha? is a huge change and i'd like to have community feedback on it :)
18:27:21 <GeKo> yes, the next
18:27:27 <antonela> we are talking about #31286
18:27:31 <antonela> GeKo: awesome, thanks!
18:27:52 <pospeselr> hoo boy, not looking forward to that rebase
18:28:00 <antonela> i know LOL
18:28:05 <GeKo> you should start soon :)
18:28:23 <GeKo> given that esr68.1.2 might be around earlier than expected
18:28:31 <pospeselr> ugh i know
18:28:38 <sysrqb> heh
18:28:42 <pospeselr> ok, I'll see about getting that done asap
18:28:51 <mcs> r.e. the screenshot Antonela posted, I have not seen that page either but the fix we made for #31457 should cause it to not be shown
18:29:13 <GeKo> yeah
18:29:14 <mcs> (I base that statement on a quick reading of code)
18:29:27 <GeKo> that's been my assumtion, too
18:29:58 * antonela is running 9.0a6
18:30:05 <sysrqb> okay. _hc did you have anything for this meeting?
18:30:10 <sysrqb> or just sitting in today?
18:30:37 <sysrqb> anyone have anything else they want to say before we finish this meeting?
18:30:48 <antonela> mcs, GeKo, indeed seems related with profiles https://share.riseup.net/#OUfk5aSKoftJqy3JfJx1Lw
18:31:12 <GeKo> i am fine, thanks
18:31:38 <sysrqb> great. have a good week everyone
18:31:45 <sysrqb> #endmeeting