14:00 <popey> #startmeeting Docviewer meeting 14:00 <meetingology> Meeting started Thu Apr 16 14:00:12 2015 UTC. The chair is popey. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.ubuntu.com/meetingology. 14:00 <meetingology> 14:00 <meetingology> Available commands: action commands idea info link nick 14:00 <popey> How are you? 14:00 <sverzegnassi> a bit of allergy, but is ok! 14:01 <popey> Aww 14:01 <popey> Stay indoors! Don't go out into the big blue room! 14:01 <popey> Too many plants (and zombies) out there! 14:01 <popey> I have a couple of pieces of news. 14:02 <popey> 1. JMulholland (who is afk in another meeting) is a UX designer in Canonical and is assigned to core apps. 14:02 <popey> So, if you have any design bugs / issues, add a task for "ubuntu-ux" and we can ping him for feedback. 14:03 <sverzegnassi> that's great! 14:03 <popey> Yeah! 14:03 <popey> So feel free to throw things at him. 14:03 <sverzegnassi> haha, I'll do 14:03 <popey> 2. I've asked for us to re-evaluate going in the default image again. 14:04 <sverzegnassi> when will we get a response? 14:04 <popey> Well. 14:04 <popey> Two things need to happen, QA review. 14:04 <popey> And review from product management 14:04 <popey> now, I wanted to check with you first 14:05 <popey> to see if there's anything you wanted to land before we do that? 14:05 <popey> Or should we do the review now, and see what feedback we get? 14:05 <sverzegnassi> heh, there are 5 branches atm that should be merged before any review 14:06 <popey> Good, glad I asked :) 14:06 <sverzegnassi> I've spent this week (and i'd like to spend the next one too) in fixing all the small things in the code 14:06 <popey> the store currently has r121 14:06 <popey> Ok. 14:07 <popey> There will be an OTA going out later today, to the base image. The next OTA will almost 99.9% be vivid based. 14:07 <popey> (just in case you were considering anything that required vivid) 14:07 <sverzegnassi> no, atm there's nothing that requires vivid 14:08 <popey> ok. 14:09 <popey> So I will wait to submit for review. 14:09 <sverzegnassi> yeah, i think that we could wait for the next meeting 14:11 <popey> Ok. Good. 14:11 <popey> Ok, anything specific we need to discuss? 14:11 <sverzegnassi> I'd need to ask to kenvandine a thing about content-hub 14:12 <sverzegnassi> Is it possible to use a ContentPeerPicker together with a C++ importer? 14:12 <sverzegnassi> I tried and it works, but the ContentPeerPicker shows docviewer itself as source 14:14 * popey pokes kenvandine 14:14 <kenvandine> i don't think we want to encourage the use of the c++ API 14:14 <kenvandine> it could require app rebuilds, etc 14:15 <sverzegnassi> oops... in docviewer we already use it 14:15 <kenvandine> sverzegnassi, do you need the c++ api? 14:15 <kenvandine> i'd rather you importer use QML then hand it off to your own c++ binding to deal with files 14:15 <kenvandine> s/you/your 14:16 <sverzegnassi> heh, i had to do a massive refactor of the code, and there are some issue while handling command-line arguments 14:17 <sverzegnassi> the fastest solution was to reuse part of the code of the gallery-app 14:18 <sverzegnassi> *there was 14:18 <kenvandine> ah 14:18 <kenvandine> i think they've porter gallery-app to use the QML api :) 14:18 <kenvandine> gallery-app using the c++ API is one of the reasons we decided not to support that api for click apps 14:19 <kenvandine> s/porter/ported/ 14:20 <kenvandine> sverzegnassi, also note the QML api has some conveniences that the c++ doesn't have 14:21 <sverzegnassi> ok, so in a short future should we revert using QML API? I mean, I seriously prefer C++ API than QML one 14:23 <kenvandine> sverzegnassi, i'd really prefer it, and i think you'd be better off 14:24 <kenvandine> sverzegnassi, it was pretty painful for gallery-app 14:24 <kenvandine> sverzegnassi, the c++ isn't defined as part of the platform, so not a guaranteed API 14:25 <sverzegnassi> ok, I don't know much of the gallery-app story, so I need to trust you :) 14:25 <kenvandine> sverzegnassi, btw, there is a bug filed to prevent the peer picker from showing itself 14:26 <sverzegnassi> no, I was just testing on a local branch on my PC, i did not file any bug yet 14:26 <kenvandine> there is a bug filed already 14:26 <sverzegnassi> huh, ok :P 14:27 <kenvandine> about the peer picker showing the current running app in the peer model 14:27 <kenvandine> it should be filtered out 14:27 <kenvandine> you don't want to import from yourself :) 14:28 <sverzegnassi> I'll do, thank you for the answers! :D 14:29 <kenvandine> sverzegnassi, anytime! 14:29 <popey> Thanks kenvandine :) 14:29 <popey> sverzegnassi: anything else? 14:30 <sverzegnassi> yes, I have one question. What about autopilot/unit tests? I mean, when we will get a QA review, what will happen with the missing autopilot tests? 14:31 <popey> Well, we should have some. 14:31 <popey> Obviously :) 14:31 <popey> We should file a bug for each test we need, and ask experts (like carla) if they can help write them 14:32 <balloons> sverzegnassi, did you need / wish for someone to have a look at the test suite you have or ? 14:32 <popey> not having tests is bad, but having them and them failing is worse 14:32 <sverzegnassi> ballons, these should have a priority on others we have in the list: 14:32 <sverzegnassi> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-docviewer-app/+bug/1428040 14:33 <sverzegnassi> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-docviewer-app/+bug/1418652 14:34 <sverzegnassi> anyway yes, if someone could have a look on it it would be great! 14:39 <popey> balloons: we're looking to include docviewer in the image, so makes sense for us to have some tests :) 14:41 <balloons> of course! Let's see if we can round up a volunteer to work with you 14:41 <popey> \o/ 14:41 <popey> thanks balloons 14:41 <balloons> I'll send along those 2 bugs as priority 14:41 <popey> sverzegnassi: I'll keep an eye out for more merges, and manually test accordingly. 14:42 <sverzegnassi> thank you balloons! 14:42 <sverzegnassi> popey, thanks! 14:43 <popey> Ok, lets wrap. 14:43 <popey> have a good weekend sverzegnassi 14:43 <popey> #endmeeting