16:00:26 <API> #startmeeting
16:00:26 <tota11y> Meeting started Thu Nov 14 16:00:26 2013 CET.  The chair is API. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:26 <tota11y> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:37 <API> #topic 5 minutes of margin
16:01:48 * clown waves
16:05:59 <API> #topic Progress towards 3.12
16:06:24 <API> #info is preparing a email about changes on clutter/ATK in order to get gnome-shell working on wayland
16:06:31 <API> s/is/API is
16:06:48 <API> #info API also has in his TODO reactivate wayland discussion threads
16:06:59 <clown> changes that are done? or changes that are needed?
16:07:11 <API> #info API has been this week on the GNOME 3.10.2 release, so he was busy
16:07:30 <API> note that GNOME 3.10.2 release means at least test that all modules on GNOME 3.10.2 compiles
16:07:36 <API> so is compiling ALL gnome
16:07:57 <API> clown, well, is the old problem of having two toolkits
16:08:05 <API> and atk being designed for one
16:08:25 <API> in summary, for gnome-shell you need to ensure that the atkutil implementation loaded
16:08:28 <API> is clutter one
16:08:42 <API> but gnome-shell also call gtk_init for some gtk stuff (I think that themes)
16:09:01 <API> with X, clutter_init is called after gtk_init, so overriding AtkUtil
16:09:12 <API> on wayland, for any unknown reasons, is not happening that way
16:09:26 <API> so gtk AtkUtil is the one "winning", so stuff doesn't work
16:09:45 <API> in short my API proposal will be get a way to say "I want this implementation!"
16:09:52 <API> and add a call on gnome-shell
16:10:12 <API> I hope that explanation answer your question
16:10:32 <clown> thanks for the summary.  I infer that the changes are being discussed.
16:11:29 <API> clown, not discussion yet ;)
16:11:31 <API> is what Im saying
16:11:41 <API> I need to send a email with a proposal
16:11:45 <API> to start the discussion
16:11:51 <API> busy with the 3.10.2 release
16:12:08 <clown> right:  you are going to start the discussion with that email:  "… is preparing a email about changes on clutter/ATK …"
16:12:21 <API> yep
16:12:29 <clown> we are on the same page!
16:12:31 <API> and having said so, I finished my part on this 3.12 update
16:12:32 <API> next?
16:12:38 <joanie> me
16:12:51 <joanie> #info Joanie has completed the switch over to not use focus: events.
16:13:13 <joanie> #info There are four bugs in which those events are still required, so she is hacking around that and will file bugs.
16:13:29 <joanie> #info Joanie is still refactoring/rewriting all of Orca (performance, etc.).
16:13:38 <joanie> #info Joanie will test Benjamin's patch soon.
16:13:40 <joanie> (done)
16:14:21 <API> about that, joanie did we mention last week that we asked Firefox to update?
16:14:30 <joanie> yes
16:14:42 <API> ok, in any case, if someone wants a summary:
16:14:44 <joanie> but you could provide a status update
16:15:14 <API> #info implementors status about deprecated focus stuff:
16:15:30 <API> #info gtk: pending to test Benjamin patch
16:15:47 <API> #info webkitgtk: we will deal with it when gtk gets solved
16:16:21 <API> #info firefox: opened a bug last week. They are not using the tracking stuff, but seems that will keep sending object:focus event, because are worried about old versions of orca
16:16:41 <API> #info clutter (so gnome-shell): not using at all those deprecated methods
16:16:44 <API> done
16:16:46 <clown> joanie:  when you say "has completed the switch over to not use focus: events", is that confined to  GTK? (or to all of gnome?  :-) )
16:17:04 <joanie> all of Orca
16:17:12 <joanie> Orca ignores focus: events now
16:17:15 <joanie> with 4 exceptions
16:17:24 <clown> but GTK still works that way?
16:17:34 <joanie> we have object:state-changed:focused
16:17:35 <joanie> and
16:17:36 <clown> still sends focus events (that are ignored by orca)?
16:17:41 <joanie> object:state-changed:selected
16:17:42 <joanie> etc.
16:17:49 <joanie> yes, the events are being emitted by toolkits
16:17:56 <clown> gotcha
16:17:56 <joanie> Orca just ignores them
16:18:16 <clown> and, for completeness, AT-SPI is still emitting focus evetns.
16:18:17 <clown> ?
16:18:28 <joanie> yes
16:18:33 <API> at-spi will forward
16:18:35 <clown> okay, thansk.
16:18:39 <joanie> or otherwise Orca wouldn't see them ;)
16:18:41 <clown> *thanks, even.
16:18:42 <API> whatever cames from atk implementors
16:19:01 <API> so if firefox send it, at-spi will forward it, but as joanie said, will be ignored
16:19:05 <clown> right API.  My questions should have been that ATK still emits focus events.
16:19:22 <API> well, ATK have it as deprecated
16:19:40 <API> so is not ATK itself, but ATK implementors the one deciding to still using a deprecated method
16:19:42 <clown> so, some time in the future, it won't emit focus events.
16:19:43 <API> having said so
16:19:50 <API> clown, I hope so ;)
16:20:11 <clown> :-)
16:20:42 <API> so, anyone else want to say something about this topic?
16:20:44 <API> mgorse, ?
16:20:51 <mgorse> ok
16:21:56 <mgorse> #info mgorse has a set of (uncommitted) patches that allow attributes to be sent with events, so that a D-Bus call doesn't need to be made every time Orca looks at the attributes in response to an event. The infrastructure should be useful for wider things. Still a TODO to write the list again.
16:22:10 <mgorse> done, I think
16:22:31 <API> mgorse, ok, thanks
16:23:03 <API> so, moving to next topic?
16:23:13 <clown> fine with me.
16:23:21 <mgorse> ok
16:23:52 <API> oh a wild new topic appears
16:23:57 <clown> lol
16:24:01 <clown> wild??
16:24:16 <API> well, I was just using a meme
16:24:18 <API> in anycase
16:24:22 <API> #topic OPW
16:24:31 <clown> sorry to bring this up again… but
16:24:33 <API> clown, ?
16:25:27 <clown> #info Joseph was contacted by Sriram asking (1) if there is any a11y project that Gayathri could apply for for next year, and (2) is there any small work she could do now to gain experience.
16:25:34 <clown> #Info Joanie was CC'ed on the email.
16:25:54 <clown> #info I replied that "next year" is to far in the future for me to commit to anything.
16:26:10 <clown> #info But I would bring the issue up here at this meeting.
16:26:17 <clown> done, questions.
16:27:03 <API> hmm, I have the feeling that we made a even further update on the opw page
16:27:06 <API> about accessibility
16:27:09 <mgorse> I feel like it's always a challenge since, like I remember someone saying a long time ago, easy bugs tend to get fixed quickly because they're easy, and the things that languish are harder things, because they're hard. I wish I could think of a solution.
16:27:18 <API> and that was proposed as "small work to gain experience"
16:27:25 <API> was looking at apps key-nav
16:27:26 <API> jjmaring?
16:27:30 <API> ups, he is not here
16:27:31 <mgorse> yeah
16:27:36 <API> joanie, ?
16:27:52 <joanie> what?
16:27:53 <joanie> :)
16:28:02 <joanie> about the opw page update I made?
16:28:32 <clown> Oh, one other thing in the email.
16:28:51 <clown> #info Gayathri is interested in testing work.
16:28:59 <API> testing what?
16:29:05 <joanie> work
16:29:10 <joanie> (sorry)
16:29:15 <clown> #info quote:  "she prefers to do something in testing".
16:29:24 <clown> sorry, it's not more specific than that, API.
16:29:55 <API> so that means that this point is over?
16:29:59 <API> in any case, as  I said
16:30:05 <API> opw page was updated again
16:30:13 <API> so if someone ask for a task to get experience
16:30:27 <API> the answer would be
16:30:29 * API looking
16:30:35 <clown> well, I have to reply to Sriram.  GIven what was said here, I guess I say:  there is nothing to be done now.
16:31:25 <API> "test keynav for different gnome apps, if it is failing, put in contact with his maintainer"
16:31:36 <API> so with that sentence and your sentence, moving to next topic?
16:31:49 <clown> one more question:
16:32:09 <clown> If I include "test keynav", whom should I refer her to?
16:32:16 <clown> Who is responsible for keynav?
16:32:22 <joanie> the app that is broken
16:32:29 <joanie> if notes is broken, then the notes maintainer
16:32:36 <joanie> if music is broken, then the music maintainer
16:32:58 <clown> does anyone know, off hand, who the keynav maintainer is?
16:33:06 <joanie> there is no keynav maintainer
16:33:13 <joanie> there are app maintainers
16:33:17 <joanie> so the suggestion is:
16:33:24 <joanie> pick an app, any app you want
16:33:34 <joanie> can you use all its features without the mouse
16:33:39 <joanie> if the answer is no, fix that
16:33:48 <joanie> your mentor will be the maintainer of the broken app
16:34:26 <clown> I see.  I was mis-interpretting things, and thinking that key-nav is an app.  Okay, gotcha.
16:35:00 <clown> I have a way forward, thanks.
16:35:30 <API> sooo
16:35:32 <API> moovinggg
16:35:38 <joanie> yessssssssss
16:35:45 <API> #topic w3c updates
16:35:47 * clown hopes that after he answers this OPW question, that will be the end of it.
16:35:48 <API> clown, ?
16:36:00 <API> #topic OPW
16:36:08 <API> clown, sorry I thought that was over
16:36:11 <API> which questoin?
16:36:24 <joanie> communication breakdown
16:36:32 <clown> the question that Sriram asked in the email he sent to joanie and I.
16:36:46 <clown> Yes, we are done with the OPW topic.
16:37:00 <API> #topic W3C
16:37:02 <API> (again)
16:37:03 <API> so clown?
16:37:11 <clown> #info There is a meeting of all the W3C working groups in China this past week.
16:37:35 <clown> #info Joseph did not attend, so doesn't have any news. :-)
16:37:37 <clown> done.
16:38:48 * joanie hums
16:38:57 * clown whistles
16:39:13 <API> clown, meeting about .....
16:39:24 <API> I mean, does that meeting has a purpose at all?
16:39:27 <API> just being friendly?
16:39:35 <joanie> :)
16:40:09 <clown> It's a chance for (1) working group members to meet face-to-face, and (2) working groups to meet with other working groups to discuss overlapping issues.
16:40:55 <clown> Most of the time, the groups meet weekly but by teleconference.  And, only deal with their group's issues.
16:41:06 <clown> This is a chance to get a broader perspective on things.
16:41:24 <clown> and, a chance to be friendly :-)
16:41:47 <API> ok
16:41:52 <API> I guess that after the meeting
16:42:01 <API> they will send a kind of conclusions summary or something
16:42:46 <clown> I'll look and see if something like that comes out of the meeting.
16:43:27 <API> ok
16:43:35 <API> so questions, doubts, thoughtS?
16:43:45 <clown> #info  Page that describes the meetings;  http://www.w3.org/2013/11/TPAC/
16:44:59 <API> so, thanks
16:45:03 <API> so moving?
16:45:13 <clown> +1
16:46:05 <API> I will skip
16:46:10 <API> marketing as jjmarin is not here
16:46:17 <API> #topic miscellaneous time
16:46:25 <API> something not scheduled (and short) to raise?
16:47:17 * clown crickets
16:48:04 * API catches the indirect
16:48:08 <API> so closing meeting
16:48:10 <API> #endmeeting