[opensuse-gnome] Re: [obs submit-request 37739] GNOME:Apps/pidgin: declined by MBoman
On Monday 03 May 2010 15:02:53 mboman@novell.com wrote:
State of submit-request #37739 was changed by MBoman:
new -> declined
Comment: Untested and not approved
Magnus, I tested it myself successfully. ;) What do you mean with not approved? Since empathy will be (correct?) the default for 11.3, I'd like to discuss the topic with the complete team. What does this mean for moving forward? As band-aid, we could add something to the release notes to point out to users the problems with empathy on Groupwise.
https://build.opensuse.org/request/diff/37739
Source project: home:a_jaeger:branches:openSUSE:Factory package: pidgin revision: 2
Target: project: GNOME:Apps package: pidgin
Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{novell.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Andreas Jaeger <aj@novell.com> wrote:
On Monday 03 May 2010 15:02:53 mboman@novell.com wrote:
State of submit-request #37739 was changed by MBoman:
new -> declined
Comment: Untested and not approved
Magnus, I tested it myself successfully. ;) What do you mean with not approved?
Since empathy will be (correct?) the default for 11.3, I'd like to discuss the topic with the complete team. What does this mean for moving forward?
As band-aid, we could add something to the release notes to point out to users the problems with empathy on Groupwise.
Is there an openSUSE bug filed for this? I have some comments I'd like to attach regarding various related upstream plans (the first step of which is not too different from Andreas' patch). Sandy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 08:39 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Andreas Jaeger <aj@novell.com> wrote:
On Monday 03 May 2010 15:02:53 mboman@novell.com wrote:
State of submit-request #37739 was changed by MBoman:
new -> declined
Comment: Untested and not approved
Magnus, I tested it myself successfully. ;) What do you mean with not approved?
Since empathy will be (correct?) the default for 11.3, I'd like to discuss the topic with the complete team. What does this mean for moving forward?
As band-aid, we could add something to the release notes to point out to users the problems with empathy on Groupwise.
Is there an openSUSE bug filed for this? I have some comments I'd like to attach regarding various related upstream plans (the first step of which is not too different from Andreas' patch).
Don't know if there is. We discussed this on IRC and I created the patch after looking at the code. Feel free to send it upstream and see what they say. What we really would like to have is an "endorsement" that the preference key will not be used for anything else in the future, or that they tell us the name of the key they'd prefer. Cheers, Magnus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Magnus Boman <captain.magnus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 08:39 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Andreas Jaeger <aj@novell.com> wrote:
On Monday 03 May 2010 15:02:53 mboman@novell.com wrote:
State of submit-request #37739 was changed by MBoman:
new -> declined
Comment: Untested and not approved
Magnus, I tested it myself successfully. ;) What do you mean with not approved?
Since empathy will be (correct?) the default for 11.3, I'd like to discuss the topic with the complete team. What does this mean for moving forward?
As band-aid, we could add something to the release notes to point out to users the problems with empathy on Groupwise.
Is there an openSUSE bug filed for this? I have some comments I'd like to attach regarding various related upstream plans (the first step of which is not too different from Andreas' patch).
Don't know if there is. We discussed this on IRC and I created the patch after looking at the code. Feel free to send it upstream and see what they say. What we really would like to have is an "endorsement" that the preference key will not be used for anything else in the future, or that they tell us the name of the key they'd prefer.
The GConf key isn't the way they want to do it; that's the only difference. Here's something I wrote up for an internal bug a couple of weeks ago: <quote> I've just talked with upstream telepathy and pidgin folks. In the short term, they intend to modify the libpurple API to allow consumers (like telepathy-haze) to specify that they are willing to accept bad/unknown certificates. Then an ignore-ssl-errors parameter would be added to haze (just like gabble has). In the medium term, Eitan Isaacson is working on d-bus API for cert verification, and once complete it would make sense to hook haze up to that API. Will Thompson, the maintainer of telepathy-haze (and an upstream pidgin developer) has an old, unfinished pidgin branch implementing part of the "short-term" work: http://git.collabora.co.uk/?p=user/wjt/pidgin.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/ce... Nobody is currently working on this; Will has said he'd be very glad for any help finishing it up. In the meantime, the quickest fix I can think of for [openSUSE 11.3] that is not too different from the upstream plan is to add the minimal API to libpurple in a way that doesn't break pidgin or finch, add the ignore-ssl-errors parameter to haze, and make it the default in [openSUSE]. </quote> I was hoping to have time to work on this but some priorities shifted and I didn't have the time. I'd like to get back to it but I don't know when that might happen. Anyway, that is what I gleaned from talking to the relevant upstreams. Hope this is helpful, Sandy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 13:49 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Magnus Boman <captain.magnus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 08:39 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Andreas Jaeger <aj@novell.com> wrote:
On Monday 03 May 2010 15:02:53 mboman@novell.com wrote:
State of submit-request #37739 was changed by MBoman:
new -> declined
Comment: Untested and not approved
Magnus, I tested it myself successfully. ;) What do you mean with not approved?
Since empathy will be (correct?) the default for 11.3, I'd like to discuss the topic with the complete team. What does this mean for moving forward?
As band-aid, we could add something to the release notes to point out to users the problems with empathy on Groupwise.
Is there an openSUSE bug filed for this? I have some comments I'd like to attach regarding various related upstream plans (the first step of which is not too different from Andreas' patch).
Don't know if there is. We discussed this on IRC and I created the patch after looking at the code. Feel free to send it upstream and see what they say. What we really would like to have is an "endorsement" that the preference key will not be used for anything else in the future, or that they tell us the name of the key they'd prefer.
The GConf key isn't the way they want to do it; that's the only difference. Here's something I wrote up for an internal bug a couple of weeks ago:
I don't implement a gconf key in my patch [1].
<quote> I've just talked with upstream telepathy and pidgin folks.
In the short term, they intend to modify the libpurple API to allow consumers (like telepathy-haze) to specify that they are willing to accept bad/unknown certificates. Then an ignore-ssl-errors parameter would be added to haze (just like gabble has).
So if we use ignore-ssl-errors instead of verify_certificates, we should be safe? Cheers, Magnus [1] https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=prefs-verify-certificate.p... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Magnus Boman <captain.magnus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 13:49 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Magnus Boman <captain.magnus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 08:39 -0700, Sandy Armstrong wrote:
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Andreas Jaeger <aj@novell.com> wrote:
On Monday 03 May 2010 15:02:53 mboman@novell.com wrote:
State of submit-request #37739 was changed by MBoman:
new -> declined
Comment: Untested and not approved
Magnus, I tested it myself successfully. ;) What do you mean with not approved?
Since empathy will be (correct?) the default for 11.3, I'd like to discuss the topic with the complete team. What does this mean for moving forward?
As band-aid, we could add something to the release notes to point out to users the problems with empathy on Groupwise.
Is there an openSUSE bug filed for this? I have some comments I'd like to attach regarding various related upstream plans (the first step of which is not too different from Andreas' patch).
Don't know if there is. We discussed this on IRC and I created the patch after looking at the code. Feel free to send it upstream and see what they say. What we really would like to have is an "endorsement" that the preference key will not be used for anything else in the future, or that they tell us the name of the key they'd prefer.
The GConf key isn't the way they want to do it; that's the only difference. Here's something I wrote up for an internal bug a couple of weeks ago:
I don't implement a gconf key in my patch [1].
Ah, sorry, the prefs call made it look like a gconf key.
<quote> I've just talked with upstream telepathy and pidgin folks.
In the short term, they intend to modify the libpurple API to allow consumers (like telepathy-haze) to specify that they are willing to accept bad/unknown certificates. Then an ignore-ssl-errors parameter would be added to haze (just like gabble has).
So if we use ignore-ssl-errors instead of verify_certificates, we should be safe?
Well, if you look at the git branch I linked earlier you'd see that it's done by adding API to libpurple. Then telepathy-haze would would be the one to have an ignore-ssl-errors switch, which would determine whether or not it told libpurple to ignore the errors. I don't know what you'd have to do to be "safe" with the preferences approach, sorry. Sandy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 15:51 +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Monday 03 May 2010 15:02:53 mboman@novell.com wrote:
State of submit-request #37739 was changed by MBoman:
new -> declined
Comment: Untested and not approved
Magnus, I tested it myself successfully. ;) What do you mean with not approved?
I also tested it and it worked. But I never tested it without adding the preference setting. If the certificate auto accepts even without having it in there, the patch needs to be updated to check for that.
Since empathy will be (correct?) the default for 11.3, I'd like to discuss the topic with the complete team. What does this mean for moving forward?
I wouldn't mind having it in as well but I discussed this with the GNOME CORE team and I didn't get approval for it. Cheers, Magnus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-gnome+help@opensuse.org
participants (3)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
Magnus Boman -
Sandy Armstrong