13:00:30 <stickster> #startmeeting Workstation WG 13:00:30 <zodbot> Meeting started Mon Oct 23 13:00:30 2017 UTC. The chair is stickster. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 13:00:30 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 13:00:30 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'workstation_wg' 13:00:33 <stickster> #meetingname workstation 13:00:33 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'workstation' 13:00:35 <stickster> #topic Roll call 13:00:37 <stickster> .hello pfrields 13:00:38 <zodbot> stickster: pfrields 'Paul W. Frields' <stickster@gmail.com> 13:00:46 <mcatanzaro> .hello catanzaro 13:00:49 <zodbot> mcatanzaro: catanzaro 'Michael Catanzaro' <mcatanzaro@gnome.org> 13:01:04 <stickster> cschalle: juhp: ryanlerch: howdy guys 13:01:14 <stickster> #chair mcatanzaro cschalle juhp ryanlerch 13:01:14 <zodbot> Current chairs: cschalle juhp mcatanzaro ryanlerch stickster 13:01:25 * cschalle hi 13:01:32 * stickster gives a minute or two to see if others get here 13:02:05 <ryanlerch> .hello ryanlerch 13:02:06 <zodbot> ryanlerch: ryanlerch 'Ryan Lerch' <rlerch@redhat.com> 13:02:19 <juhp_> .hello petersen 13:02:20 <zodbot> juhp_: petersen 'Jens Petersen' <petersen@redhat.com> 13:03:26 <stickster> OK, that's at least quorum :-) Here's our current agenda link: 13:03:29 <stickster> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issues?status=Open&tags=meeting 13:03:44 <stickster> We should probably try to cut that down, I think a few of these things are resolved and just haven't been cleaned up 13:03:58 <stickster> #topic Colo(u)r emoji 13:04:06 <stickster> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/30 13:04:49 <cschalle> ok, so this is an issue of not including the correct font in the comps group? 13:05:01 <juhp_> ryanlerch: noto color emoji are in current F27 Live 13:05:22 <stickster> I found https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/blob/master/f/comps-f27.xml.in#_6603 -- which says that google-noto-emoji-fonts are being included in Workstation (and Live) at this point -- that's a required package in the @workstation comps group 13:05:48 <stickster> Oh wait, it's not the *color* font 13:05:53 <stickster> ^ ryanlerch is that the issue? 13:05:53 <juhp_> I think it would be good to add google-noto-emoji*-fonts to comps though 13:05:58 <otaylor> .hello otaylor 13:05:59 <zodbot> otaylor: otaylor 'Owen Taylor' <otaylor@redhat.com> 13:06:00 <juhp_> it is now afaik 13:06:07 <otaylor> sorry to be late! 13:06:19 <stickster> #chair otaylor 13:06:19 <zodbot> Current chairs: cschalle juhp mcatanzaro otaylor ryanlerch stickster 13:06:31 <ryanlerch> stickster: i assume so -- i just did a fresh install of beta today, and noticed that the emoji werent colour 13:06:44 <hadess> hey 13:07:16 <mcatanzaro> I summoned hadess because mclasen is not here. They are our color emoji experts. 13:07:22 <ryanlerch> didnt get a chance to dig deeper, so just filed this one so people smarter then me could confirm my assumtion that is was because the packages wernt being included 13:07:54 <juhp_> ryanlerch: I installed nightly the other day 13:08:17 <stickster> Should we have these included in @workstation, or @fonts? 13:08:25 <mcatanzaro> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/blob/master/f/comps-f27.xml.in#_6603 13:08:43 <juhp_> I suggest @fonts 13:09:07 <hadess> can anyone fill me in with what we're discussing? 13:09:15 <mcatanzaro> stickster: It's already in workstation-product, which is the right place for Workstation-specific stuff, but fonts would probably be a better place I guess. 13:09:30 <cschalle> I have a F27 upgraded machine and here I see the package google-noto-emoji-color-fonts-20170928-1.fc27.noarch (I did not elect to install it) 13:09:34 <juhp_> hadess: https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/30 13:09:36 <stickster> mcatanzaro: the color fonts aren't in there, just the standard emoji font. 13:09:55 <juhp_> cschalle: yes I think ibus-typing-booster pulls it in 13:09:57 <mcatanzaro> Aaah 13:10:06 <cschalle> ah ok 13:10:08 <hadess> eosrei-emojione-fonts is dragged in by (/me looks) 13:10:09 <juhp_> they are now afaik 13:10:11 <stickster> ha, interesing 13:10:25 <mcatanzaro> So the problem apparently is that we have some Google Noto Emoji fonts, but not the color fonts (right?) <-- hadess 13:10:36 <juhp_> I think we should list them explicitly instead though 13:10:49 <mcatanzaro> But I think hadess wants Emoji One instead. 13:10:53 <hadess> no, the eosrei-emojione-fonts is already dragged in, i'm checking by which package (the same that drags cantarell) 13:10:54 <mcatanzaro> (Why?) 13:11:14 <mcatanzaro> hadess: Apparently something is not working on the lives. 13:11:20 <juhp_> Noto has better Unicode coverage 13:11:35 <mcatanzaro> "Not sure if this has been fixed, but i recently installed a Fresh Fedora 27 Beta, and the colour emoji were not working. As far as i can tell, neither the Noto Colour Emoji (google-noto-emoji-color-fonts) or the EmojiOne packages (eosrei-emojione-fonts) are installed by default in Workstation Beta." 13:11:47 <hadess> it's in gnome-themes-standard: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/gnome-themes-standard.git/tree/gnome-themes-standard.spec#n21 13:11:52 * ryanlerch only tested on the beta, but neither noto-color or the emojione package was there. 13:12:22 <hadess> and done in f27 as well: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/gnome-themes-standard.git/commit/?h=f27&id=a03dbaf54977fdbdc42f2e7ba2b83521e4d0ab3f 13:12:50 <hadess> it's stuck in updates-testing apparently 13:12:58 <mcatanzaro> It was added as a requires to gnome-themes-standard on September 11, but beta freeze was September 5 13:13:16 * juhp_ boots up Fedora-Workstation-Live-x86_64-27-20171017 13:13:26 <mcatanzaro> So it's expected it didn't make it into beta, but it should have been flushed into stable after beta... if it's still stuck in updates-testing we'll need a freeze exception 13:13:51 <juhp_> Well updates will bring it in, no? 13:14:10 <mcatanzaro> This is one of those things that would be good to have by default IMO. 13:14:16 <mcatanzaro> I mean, on the lives. 13:14:43 <ryanlerch> mcatanzaro: +1 -- it is something we advertised even in the beta release announcement 13:14:54 <hadess> it has +9 of karma but never made it to stable because of those warnings: https://taskotron.fedoraproject.org/artifacts/all/48e4df98-970c-11e7-8df6-525400817a8f/task_output/gnome-themes-standard-3.22.3-5.fc27.log 13:14:59 <hadess> it's pushed to stable now 13:15:53 <kparal> (rpmlint warnings don't disable karma autopush) 13:16:09 <mcatanzaro> "Bodhi is disabling automatic push to stable due to negative karma. The maintainer may push manually if they determine that the issue is not severe." 13:16:27 <kparal> mcatanzaro: please give me a bodhi link 13:16:29 <mcatanzaro> #link https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnome-themes-standard-3.22.3-5.fc27#comment-659428 13:16:35 <juhp_> Beta is already a bit old anyway 13:16:41 <hadess> mcatanzaro: the negative karma is from a silly automated test 13:16:43 <mcatanzaro> pwalter has a point, this is the sort of thing we normally put in comps 13:16:57 <mcatanzaro> "pwalter: This should go to comps, and not be a hard dep here" 13:17:06 <kparal> must have been a different failure. I'll file a RFE for bodhi to announce which test case failed 13:17:11 <mcatanzaro> The negative karma is from pwalter :) 13:17:32 <mcatanzaro> The problem with comps is that will do nothing for upgrades 13:17:56 <hadess> urgh 13:18:00 <kparal> ok, so not a taskotron issue after all. it was manual negative karma 13:18:03 <mcatanzaro> So what we normally do is put it in comps, add a Requires somewhere minimally-inappropriate, and make a note to remove the Requires after a year or two. 13:18:40 <mcatanzaro> We should probably add it to the @fonts group in comps as well. But then that begs the question: why have both Noto and Emoji One in comps? 13:18:42 <hadess> cantarell is a hard req for that package, it made sense to require the emoji font at the place 13:18:53 <mcatanzaro> hadess: I guess it's OK. I don't care too much.... 13:19:19 <hadess> the noto vs emoji one discussion already happened downstream on the fontconfig list 13:19:57 <mcatanzaro> hadess: So should we remove the Noto fonts from comps? 13:20:27 <hadess> is the noto font installed by default in workstation? because it shouldn't be 13:20:52 <mcatanzaro> hadess: The non-color Noto Emoji is in @workstation-product 13:20:58 <hadess> that's fine 13:20:59 <stickster> google-noto-emoji-fonts is, yes 13:21:08 <juhp_> hadess: well some people disagree about that 13:21:15 <hadess> juhp_: about what? 13:21:16 <mcatanzaro> OK, so it's fine to have the non-color version, you just don't want the color version... (weird?) 13:21:25 <juhp_> or why shouldn't it be? 13:21:37 <juhp_> mcatanzaro: right 13:21:55 <juhp_> hadess: Noto has better Unicode coverage 13:22:29 <juhp_> qemu keeps crashing on me :( 13:22:36 <hadess> juhp_: it's also used by other OSes/desktop environments 13:22:37 <stickster> 🤨 13:22:46 <stickster> heh, so meta 13:23:00 <hadess> juhp_: if the kde or other variants want to default to noto, it just need to be installed 13:23:28 <hadess> the gnome upstream made the decision to use emoji one, and hopefully emoji two in the future 13:23:43 <juhp_> hadess: it doesn't mean Fedora has to follow 13:24:00 <hadess> juhp_: given that it's the same people doing the work, i'd hope so at least 13:24:35 <juhp_> hadess: what is wrong with Noto emoji? 13:24:48 <stickster> I don't want to re-litigate the rationale here, but can someone summarize why one over the other for those who haven't been on those other lists/discussions? 13:24:49 <hadess> it's android's default font 13:25:00 <juhp_> so what? 13:25:22 <hadess> it's part of the visual design, which makes android identifiable 13:25:43 <hadess> so goes contrary to making gnome and distributions based on it recognisable 13:25:48 <juhp_> I see 13:26:15 <cschalle> hadess, on the other hand it feels wrong to use a less complete font to stand out, as it might make you stand out for the wrong reason 13:26:42 <hadess> cschalle: cantarell was less complete for how long? and it still falls back 13:27:08 <stickster> what does "falls back" mean in the case of emoji and/or Unicode here? 13:27:21 <cschalle> hadess, and we have had a million discussions about ditching cantarell for that exact reason 13:27:37 <juhp_> cschalle: I agree 13:27:49 <hadess> i would say we can revisit in a year's time if we didn't manage to get traction with emoji two builds, which are going to have better coverage than emoji one 13:28:08 <juhp_> Unicode is a moving target 13:28:30 <ryanlerch> note too that going forward emojione is no longer freely licenced anymore... 13:28:38 <juhp_> right 13:28:44 <hadess> ryanlerch: which is why we want to move to emoji two 13:29:46 <cschalle> can someone tell me how big the coverage gap is? are we talking 2 emojis or 200? 13:30:45 <juhp_> I emojione is Unicode 7 or 8? whereas Noto is 9 or 10 - I need to check - dozens I believe 13:30:52 <juhp_> I would need to check 13:30:58 <stickster> I see one person committing to EmojiTwo for some months now 13:31:07 <juhp_> I think * 13:31:25 * stickster looks at contribution data 13:32:42 <stickster> Well, not much diff with Noto, although I do see behdad in there too :-) 13:33:34 <juhp_> (Okay I stand corrected it is not F27 WS Live) 13:33:47 <juhp_> I guess some update pulled it in 13:33:54 <stickster> juhp_: EmojiTwo is aiming to cover Unicode 10 according to their site. 13:33:56 <hadess> juhp_: it will be in the next nightly 13:34:00 <juhp_> stickster: great 13:34:27 <stickster> So what do we need to decide/do here? 13:35:11 <mcatanzaro> "No further action required" I guess 13:35:13 <juhp_> Should we just follow upstream then? 13:35:24 <stickster> It sounds like the immediate issue of "have color emoji font in the WS" is covered thanks to the dep, but what about moving that elsewhere in a year? 13:35:35 <stickster> (i.e. after need to cover upgrades passes) 13:36:33 <mcatanzaro> Let's add it to either @fonts (affects everyone) or @workstation-product (affects only us) in comps, in case we ever decide to remove it from gnome-themes-standard? 13:36:36 <juhp_> I think we should like the default emoji fonts in @fonts 13:36:42 <otaylor> when discussions like this come up, /me can't wait for atomic workstation 13:37:06 <juhp_> s/like/list/ 13:37:08 <stickster> mcatanzaro: @fonts sounds right 13:37:22 <stickster> juhp_: Can you submit a PR for that to fedora-comps please? 13:37:26 <juhp_> okay 13:37:41 <stickster> Not sure whether we "need" this fixed in F27, but you should submit for master at least. 13:37:49 <juhp_> okay 13:38:09 <stickster> #info long discussion on temporary use of emojione vs. later emojitwo for better coverage 13:38:19 <cschalle> juhp_, and if we want to consider switching the default emoji font I suggest you file a separate working group ticket for that which includes some coverage statistics 13:38:26 <juhp_> right 13:38:34 <juhp_> Yes sounds good 13:38:35 <stickster> #info will need to revisit this ~F29 time to get rid of gnome-themes-standard dep on the font 13:38:50 <stickster> ^ should we file a Bugzilla for that and just let it sit? 13:38:58 <hadess> stickster: why is the dep a problem? installing noto will override it 13:39:25 <mcatanzaro> hadess: We are not generally fond of adding extra Requires to packages. (It could become a Recommends, for instance.) 13:39:53 <mcatanzaro> For now it's fine, since it's needed for upgrades (at least, I don't know if upgrades respect Recommends. probably not) 13:40:11 <stickster> I don't think it does 13:40:27 <mcatanzaro> But in a year or two, it would be nice if it was possible to have gnome-themes-standard and be able to remove the emoji font 13:40:53 <mcatanzaro> Anyway, I think we have made our preferences clear on that. Perhaps there are other items on the meeting agenda. :) 13:41:09 <hadess> i really don't see the point, but *shrug* 13:41:27 <stickster> #action juhp_ submit PR to add color font to @fonts in comps 13:42:15 <cschalle> hopefully next agenda item will be less emojitonal :) 13:42:18 <stickster> #topic lol 13:42:21 <stickster> #undo 13:42:21 <zodbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.items.Topic object at 0x27b87a10> 13:42:48 <stickster> #topic Update frequency policy 13:42:49 <stickster> #link https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/28 13:43:50 <stickster> I think mclasen left updates in this ticket -- and that our problem is mainly solved now by bodhi policy/process 13:44:28 <stickster> since there's still a daily check by gnome-software, there's no danger of truly urgent updates going many days extra without notifying the user 13:44:44 <cschalle> ok sounds like an easy ticket to resolve then :) 13:44:49 <stickster> while non-urgent updates will only be seen following bodhi's weekly, coordinated push 13:45:32 <stickster> mcatanzaro: ^ sound right? 13:46:30 <mcatanzaro> Maybe? :) 13:46:51 <juhp_> Looks good 13:46:52 <mcatanzaro> I'll complain in the future if these daily "updates available" notifications don't go away 13:46:54 * stickster will close ticket since he thinks so. If something looks awry in the F27 release, we can revisit. 13:46:56 <otaylor> I think the only possible issue is that urgent issues will delay notification of the weekly push. Could be argued that that is *correct* - if you rebooted for a security update on monday, you probably would consider the Tuesday mass update to be an annoyance 13:47:22 <mcatanzaro> otaylor: Yes, but only if all the updates are actually pushed out on Monday... which is not what will happen now. 13:47:43 <otaylor> mcatanzaro: When you are doing that, can you check to see if they are system updates or flatpak nightly updates. 13:47:46 <mcatanzaro> I mean, on Monday only the security updates will go out 13:48:26 <mcatanzaro> otaylor: There are flatpak nightly updates every single day (which would be fine as long as it didn't bother me about them). I think there are also system updates usually, but not always. 13:48:42 <stickster> #action stickster close ticket 13:49:02 * stickster notes 7 min left before he has to go prep for a different meeting 13:49:04 <otaylor> mcatanzaro: what I'm saying is, let's not conflate the two things. gnome-software vs. flatpak nightly updates seems to be a purely upstream thing. 13:49:05 <mcatanzaro> +1 stickster, we can reopen the ticket if this is still a problem in a month or two 13:49:13 <stickster> agreed 13:50:05 <mcatanzaro> otaylor: If Software is notifying daily for flatpak notifications (as I suspect) then I would expect that to be fixed as part of this ticket. Maybe we shouldn't close this ticket, then. 13:50:10 <mcatanzaro> *for flatpak updates 13:51:08 <otaylor> mcatanzaro: I don't see why we need a workstation working group ticket for that... i'ts something to discuss with hughsie in bugzilla unless you think there's something that you think we might need to override as a matter of workstation policy 13:51:45 <mcatanzaro> otaylor: I think we should continue to use the Workstation meetings to track upstream issues that significantly affect our user experience. ;) 13:51:46 <stickster> also there's the question of whether Fedora will complement flatpak production and pass them through Bodhi? 13:52:06 <mcatanzaro> stickster: In that case, the updates would follow a schedule that we control, though. 13:52:14 <otaylor> mcatanzaro: but I think find it confusing if you are saying "I'm always getting update notifications, this is really annoying for our users" and the case is (as I suspect) limited to users that have nightly flatpaks installed 13:52:27 <stickster> which would presumably make them follow the same rules/policy that (hoepfully) fixes this 13:52:47 <stickster> If they're nightly flatpaks, I would think I as a user assumed to want a nightly firehose 13:53:04 <mcatanzaro> stickster: But not a nightly annoyance 13:53:19 <otaylor> stickster: flatpaks from Fedora builds will eventually follow the Bodhi pipeline (details tbd) 13:53:22 <stickster> one way to fix that: "don't ask me again" 13:53:26 <mcatanzaro> #action mcatanzaro to talk to hughsie about nightly flatpak update notifications 13:54:03 <stickster> I was going to try to get to the langpacks, juhp_, but running out of time. 13:54:11 <mcatanzaro> Let's leave the issue open, untag the meeting keyword; I'll post an update there based on the discussion with hughsie 13:54:37 <juhp_> stickster: it's okay I don't really have any updates there yet 13:54:54 <stickster> juhp_: OK, next time then? 13:54:58 <juhp_> yes 13:54:58 <stickster> mcatanzaro: done 13:55:09 <stickster> All right. I'm going to close out, then. 13:55:17 <stickster> Thanks for coming and for the good discussion, everyone. 13:55:21 <stickster> #endmeeting