07:10 <@API> well 10 minutes over time 07:10 <@API> just enough waiting for people, so lets start 07:10 <@API> 1. Status of current Action Items 07:11 <@API> Mike will remove the --enable-relocate option from AT-SPI2. 07:11 <@API> Question: Should a bug be filed about doing the same for AT-SPI? 07:11 <@API> mgorse, ? 07:11 < mgorse> API: Good point; some sort of bug should be filed at least 07:12 < mgorse> since relocate in at-spi is currently off in git, since we wanted that for 1.32.0 07:12 ::: tbsaunde [~tbsaunde@GHC25.GHC.ANDREW.CMU.EDU] joined #a11y-meeting 07:12 < mgorse> I think that making it always relocate would make sense 07:13 <@API> mgorse, and about at-spi2? 07:13 <@API> I mean, was it removed or at least 07:13 <@API> a bug created (if not used the gtk_path one)? 07:13 < mgorse> well, either that or just not have the option. I guess either way could work really 07:14 < mgorse> So far I've removed the option from AT-SPI2, although I haven't removed the code to support for AT-SPI1 from being relocated 07:14 <@API> ok, so I guess that the update in this point is 07:14 <@API> at-spi2 relocate was removed 07:14 <@API> what to do on at-spi1 is still pending 07:14 <@API> right? 07:14 < mgorse> yeah 07:15 <@API> ok, thanks 07:15 <@joanie> Are we going to determine it now? 07:15 <@API> well, mike said 07:15 <@API> <mgorse> API: Good point; some sort of bug should be filed at leas 07:16 < mgorse> Come to think of it, people don't seem to be using the option and/or have problems trying to use it, so maybe removing the option altogether makes sense after all 07:16 <@API> so I guess that the action here is create the bug, and then decide 07:16 >>> joanie jots down the action 07:16 <@joanie> mgorse: you'll take care of that? 07:16 < mgorse> yeah 07:16 <@joanie> Thanks! 07:16 <@API> ok, so next action to review 07:16 <@API> Joanie will put LibreOffice on her to-do list. In particular: 07:17 <@API> well, this is somewhat vague 07:17 <@joanie> http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/msg05025.html 07:17 <@API> so I guess that yes, libreoffice is in the todo 07:17 <@API> joanie TODO I mean 07:17 <@joanie> So that's my asking what the deal is 07:17 <@joanie> a couple of responses of interest 07:17 <@joanie> http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/msg05034.html 07:18 <@joanie> Vague, but it sounds like they'll take fixes from OOo 07:18 <@joanie> And Michael Meeks responded once or twice 07:18 <@joanie> and the response I'm looking for I'm not seeing 07:18 <@joanie> one moment 07:18 <@joanie> http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/msg05040.html 07:19 <@joanie> I had no idea he was the author of 50% of the atk bridge in vcl 07:19 <@joanie> so that's pretty cool 07:19 <@joanie> though he did get in another push for "submit patches" ;-) 07:19 <@joanie> I've since subscribed to the dev list 07:19 <@joanie> I may try to hack a solution for the bug I filed back in november 07:19 <@API> authour of the atk bridge in vcl? 07:20 <@API> vcl? 07:20 <@joanie> not so much because I have spare time 07:20 <@joanie> OOo toolkit 07:20 <@joanie> Clutter is to Cally as OOo/LO is to VCL 07:20 <@joanie> well, VCL ain't a11y 07:20 <@joanie> but ... 07:20 <@API> ah ok 07:20 <@joanie> Firefox is to Gecko as OOo/LO is to VCL 07:20 <@joanie> that's more accurate 07:20 <@joanie> sorry, 07:00 07:21 <@API> well, he said that, and it is awesome 07:21 <@joanie> anyhoo, I plan to stick around, raise bugs more publicly 07:21 <@API> but you question is more about 07:21 <@joanie> and stay on Michael's radar 07:21 <@API> "will someone work on that" 07:21 <@joanie> ;-) 07:21 <@API> that 07:21 <@API> "have someone experience on?" 07:22 <@API> but anyway, I guess that this means that the action item is going well 07:22 <@joanie> I'm thinking I'll respond to him saying "awesome, can someone look at this crasher bug I filed in Nov since I'm crazy-busy" 07:22 <@API> at least on the part of getting information 07:22 <@joanie> lol 07:22 <@joanie> yeah 07:23 <@joanie> I'm still on it action-item wize 07:23 <@API> so next action item: 07:24 <@API> We should add organized testing to the GNOME Accessibility Team's roadmap with the aim of it being like the Fedora Testing Days in terms of the approach. 07:24 <@API> I guess that in this case his status is 07:24 <@joanie> Oh I forgot about that (in prepping for this meeting) 07:24 <@API> zero 07:24 <@joanie> But I did it 07:24 <@joanie> wtf 07:24 <@API> awesome 07:24 <@joanie> lemme find the link 07:24 <@joanie> http://live.gnome.org/Accessibility/Roadmap#Implement_.22Testing_Days.22_for_GNOME_Accessibility 07:25 <@joanie> Little faith in me you have API :-P 07:25 <@API> nothing personal, is just little faith in the human being in genera 07:25 <@API> l 07:25 <@joanie> lol 07:26 <@API> in fact as this was suggested by fer 07:26 <@API> I though that implicitly was a "fer task" 07:26 <@joanie> But I was the one who said "let's put it on the roadmap" 07:26 <@joanie> So I assumed it was mine 07:26 <@joanie> anyhoo, it's fricken done 07:26 <@API> well, yes now it is on the roadmap 07:26 <@joanie> that was the AI 07:27 <@joanie> ;-) 07:27 <@API> my question was more like "have someone volunteer to work on it"? 07:27 <@joanie> someone else (like Fer) can take that on 07:27 <@joanie> I don't see it in my future personally 07:27 <@joanie> even after gnome3, I plan to take on Student contributors 07:27 <@joanie> so I anticipate continuing to be swamped 07:28 <@joanie> (hey! Maybe students can get involved with testing!) 07:28 <@joanie> but topic for another time and meeting 07:28 <@API> I agree 07:29 <@API> going fast on the "rolled over" section at the meeting agenda 07:29 <@API> yes, I still have pending send a general mail about the atk hackfest 07:29 >>> joanie laughs and accuses API of being a human being 07:29 <@API> that would be also a reminder to the next point "people who needs funding should start to ping the travel committe" 07:29 <@joanie> I need to do that myself 07:30 <@joanie> and CSUN 07:30 <@API> Joanie will investigate who controls the GNOME a11y paypal donations account and draft a page for the wiki. 07:30 <@joanie> Yeah 07:30 <@API> and this is "in progress" mode 07:30 <@joanie> so on that.... 07:30 <@API> AFAIK 07:30 <@joanie> I had emailed Brian Cameron and Germán with some basic questions and to get the "go ahead". 07:30 <@joanie> I honestly figured I'd be given both the answers and the go-ahead. Instead I was told that Board needs to discuss it. 07:30 <@joanie> <snark>Proving once again that we have little actual authority/control of our own destiny.</snark> 07:31 <@joanie> So I've emailed the board-list and am now waiting to hear back. 07:31 <@joanie> btw 07:31 <@joanie> you skipped one of your AIs 07:31 <@joanie> Funding for Atk Hackfest? 07:32 <@API> ah, well yes 07:32 <@API> you mentioned that because you started to talk about the Board? 07:32 <@API> in this case I think that it doesn't make sense 07:32 <@joanie> huh? 07:33 <@API> after all, the Foundation approved a a11y budget 07:33 <@API> that include a hackfest 07:33 <@API> so I think that we shouldn't ask them more money 07:33 <@joanie> (I mentioned it because you skipped it) 07:33 <@API> ah ok 07:33 <@API> well, yes, but not on purpose 07:33 <@API> sooo 07:33 <@API> Foundation discarded 07:33 <@joanie> I know 07:33 <@joanie> but.... 07:33 <@joanie> hold on 07:34 <@joanie> I thought that action item was about OTHER sources 07:34 <@API> I have been talking with a student group here in Coruña 07:34 <@joanie> like that local user group 07:34 <@joanie> exactly 07:34 <@API> they are receptive, although the thing is somewhat stopped 07:34 <@API> I will talk with them again 07:34 <@joanie> cool 07:34 <@joanie> and to be sure (related item) 07:34 <@joanie> The dates are set in stone? 07:34 <@API> as far as I remember that means some hundreds euros 07:35 <@joanie> I can purchase tickets 07:35 <@API> well, yes, we already concluded that 07:35 <@joanie> hundreds of Euros won't hurt 07:35 <@joanie> I'm just triple-checking 07:35 <@API> from now 07:35 <@API> if someone can't go to the hackfest 07:35 <@API> that would be classified 07:35 <@API> as "unexpected" 07:36 >>> joanie nods 07:36 <@API> joanie, you were thinking in other sources of money? 07:36 <@joanie> I don't have any specific sources in mind 07:36 <@joanie> I was merely confused when your answer was to not ask the Foundation 07:36 <@joanie> since I didn't think that was the point of the AI 07:38 <@API> ok 07:38 <@API> so item reviewed 07:38 <@API> forty minutes over time, and we just reviewed past actions 07:38 <@joanie> Q4s 07:39 <@API> it is like live on the past... 07:39 <@joanie> lol 07:39 <@API> argh 07:39 <@API> yeah 07:39 <@API> I also need to do the Q4 thingie ... 07:39 <@joanie> as do I 07:39 <@API> someone knows the deadline? 07:39 <@joanie> we're not the only people late 07:39 <@joanie> hold on 07:39 <@joanie> it was a long time ago officially 07:39 <@joanie> but.... 07:39 <@joanie> http://live.gnome.org/action/subscribe/GnomeMarketing/QuarterlyReports/2010/Q4 07:40 <@joanie> My typical behavior is to panic once Brian Cameron submits his Board report 07:40 < mgorse> right. I need to do that, too. Keep forgetting. 07:40 <@joanie> because it's not a Q4 without a Board report 07:40 <@joanie> (even though it's not in the bulleted list) 07:40 <@joanie> So until there's a Board report, the threat level is Orange 07:40 <@joanie> BUT 07:40 <@joanie> I plan to write the Orca Q4 this weekend 07:41 <@joanie> if you all could do the same 07:41 <@joanie> then I will draft our team summary 07:41 <@joanie> and get API's review 07:41 <@API> well, I guess that it is worth 07:41 <@joanie> it would be nice to have this done by Monday or Tuesday 07:41 <@API> to send a mail to the list 07:41 <@joanie> Well, three of the key reports which are missing 07:41 <@joanie> belong to us 07:41 <@joanie> ;-) 07:41 <@joanie> actually, and a fourth 07:42 <@joanie> danigm: Evince a11y report please 07:42 <@joanie> ;-) 07:42 <@joanie> there 07:43 < danigm> joanie: ... 07:43 <@joanie> yessir? 07:43 < danigm> ok, I'll do it 07:43 <@joanie> super thanks!! 07:43 <@API> well, just 15 minutes till the end 07:43 <@API> lets finish the past actions items 07:45 <@API> 3 .Who is testing the GNOME 3.0 stack? 07:45 <@API> well I added that item 07:45 <@API> and I know that it is really related with the other testing thing 07:45 <@API> but this is not focused to a formal testing 07:45 <@joanie> Well, it is and it's not. We all should be testing 07:45 <@API> and more to 07:45 <@API> are we testing GNOME 3.0? 07:46 <@API> although probably the problem is that right now it is hard to get a "pure" GNOME 3.0 environment 07:46 <@joanie> Yeah 07:47 <@joanie> I'm finding that even with things like introspection 07:47 <@joanie> I seem to have things conflicting 07:47 <@joanie> so the Orca introspection work is largely theoretical 07:47 <@joanie> (i.e. officially it *should* work. I hope it does.) 07:47 <@joanie> :-/ 07:48 <@API> that means that you are working on the introspection move for orca? 07:48 <@joanie> oh hell, yeah 07:48 <@joanie> ;-) 07:48 <@joanie> I'm totally separating out the gui 07:48 <@joanie> with wrappers 07:48 <@joanie> we will support both pygtk and pygi 07:48 <@joanie> gtk2 and gtk3 07:48 <@joanie> and I'm even going to at a proof-of-concept Qt4 wrapper 07:49 <@joanie> it's pretty cool 07:49 <@API> awesome 07:49 <@joanie> it's also why I'm behind on my AIs (she says bringing focus back to the topics) 07:49 <@joanie> ;-) 07:49 <@API> I think that this is included on "Other GNOME 3.0 updates " 07:49 <@joanie> oh yay! 07:49 <@joanie> :-) 07:49 <@API> so going on with that ... 07:49 <@joanie> thanks for the slack cutting 07:50 <@API> other gnome 3 updates related with orca? 07:50 <@joanie> Well, we're doing tons of stuff 07:50 <@joanie> but official gnome-3 specific.... I think that introspection work is the key 07:51 <@joanie> WebKitGtk support is coming along nicely too 07:51 <@joanie> I've been testing with Yelp 3. 07:51 <@joanie> we need a few more fixes (which I think just got committed by Mario) 07:51 <@joanie> and I pinged you yesterday about that shell selection stuff 07:52 <@API> yeah ..... slot time, slot time 07:52 <@API> sorry 07:53 <@API> well, mgorse any gnome 3 related update? 07:54 < mgorse> Not really other than having fixed the bugs that some RH people found (ie, the relocate bit and another crasher) since the las tAAT-SPI release 07:54 <@API> ok, thanks 07:55 <@API> danigm, ? 07:56 < danigm> API: what? 07:56 <@API> danigm, any gnome 3 related update from your side? 07:58 < danigm> nope, I found a bug in gailtextbuffer just after gtk3 release and send a patch, but I don't know if it's "gnome 3" related 07:58 <@joanie> danigm: well, what about caret navigation 07:59 <@joanie> i.e. your evince work 07:59 <@joanie> that's gnome 3 07:59 <@joanie> :-) 07:59 < danigm> joanie: waiting for patch revision 07:59 < danigm> patchs are sended 07:59 <@API> ok, thanks 08:00 <@API> well, so to finish the meeting 08:00 <@API> and on miscellaneous time 08:00 <@API> Lets define "Miscellaneous Time" 08:00 <@API> this is just a little complaint from my side 08:00 <@API> a reminder in fact 08:00 <@API> a reminder to the people 08:00 <@API> as all are invited to add items to the meeting 08:00 <@API> I have the feeling that a lot of people 08:00 <@API> avoid that 08:01 <@joanie> well, after writing the minutes from last week in which miscellaneous time was a 30 minute long discussion, it's a complaint I share. 08:01 <@API> and just start to talk 08:01 <@API> on miscellaneous time 08:01 <@API> hmm 08:01 <@API> joanie, 08:01 <@API> I had the feeling that in the last meeting 08:01 <@API> was 30 minute longer because the last "official" item on the meeting 08:01 >>> API checking 08:01 <@joanie> well, it was added 08:01 <@joanie> but at the last minute 08:02 <@joanie> as a "if we have time" 08:02 <@joanie> so I guess it's related to the issue, but not the same 08:02 <@joanie> i.e. if your topic is important 08:02 <@API> you are talking about the aria or the testing item= 08:02 <@API> ? 08:02 <@joanie> don't say it's not and downplay it 08:02 <@joanie> yup 08:02 <@API> yup? 08:02 <@API> you are talking about the aria or the testing item? 08:02 <@joanie> yes 08:02 <@joanie> to the aria 08:03 <@joanie> aka the discussion that went on for 30 minutes 08:03 <@API> well, in summary 08:03 <@API> miscellaneous time 08:03 <@API> if just for last and *short* items 08:03 <@API> not included on the agenda 08:04 <@API> if anyone want 08:04 <@API> a real item 08:04 <@API> please edit the agenda during the week 08:04 <@API> well, and now 08:04 <@API> after this comment 08:04 <@API> lets start the real miscellaneous time 08:04 >>> joanie laughs 08:04 <@API> someone want to add something to the meeting? 08:08 <@API> well, 5 minutes are just enough 08:08 <@API> meeting over!