**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Mon Nov 09 02:59:59 2015 Nov 09 07:45:55 Morning Nov 09 08:11:38 morning Nov 09 08:25:13 morphis: ping Nov 09 08:25:20 Herrie|Veer: pong Nov 09 08:25:51 Have you seen nizovn's PR's for qtlocation plugin? Nov 09 08:31:37 This also unleashed a discussion on generic permissions management for apps. Any suggestions/ideas in this regard? Nov 09 10:33:13 Herrie: generic permission management? Nov 09 10:42:23 sort of a database of allowed/refused permissions for different kinds (geolocation, network, notification...), if I understood all well the current state of thought Nov 09 10:49:54 interesting Nov 09 10:50:07 is there a proposal somewhere? Nov 09 11:39:08 I don't think so, just a live discussion here afaik Nov 09 13:02:31 morphis: nothing concrete yet, but it's something we'd need to have eventually. Imho it makes sense to have a service that does it centrally so we don't need to take care of it in each app specifically. Nov 09 13:03:02 I.e. org.webosports.permissions or something and then have that manage a db8 kind Nov 09 13:03:10 Herrie|Veer: something like https://github.com/webOS-ports/media-permission-service? Nov 09 13:05:02 morphis: Yeah but then more generic. I.e. it stores which app has "permanent" access to access geolocation (so you don't need to approve it every time it runs Maps for example). Same for which apps might access camera & mic, contacts etc Nov 09 13:05:15 ok Nov 09 13:05:29 would be good to have that written down somewhere Nov 09 13:06:20 morphis: Yeah and we'd need an UI where user could review and revoke this anytime when needed as well I guess. Shouldn't be rocket science to implement I guess :) Nov 09 13:09:49 right Nov 09 13:10:59 Can you review nizovn's PR's as they are to see if you're happy with it and we'll write something up about permissions in the wiki Nov 09 13:11:40 It's in meta-webos-ports Nov 09 13:26:04 Her’e my take on Permissions: http://webos-ports.org/wiki/Permission_Service Nov 09 13:39:08 DougReeder: That's pretty much what I had in mind too :) Nov 09 13:42:47 Great! Nov 09 13:43:01 I’m off to work - might be able to get on IRC there. Nov 09 16:43:15 Herrie|Veer: It would be nice if services could register that they want to be gated by this permission service, rather than having everything defined up front. Might have services that should be gated be distributed through Preware, for example. My cast service could benefit from it, too. Nov 09 16:49:50 Andolamin: Not sure what you mean? Nov 09 16:50:48 I assume it would tie into LS2 permissions, so if the app tried to make a call to the particular service the permission "gate" would intercept to verify that the app had permissions and prompt the user if necessary Nov 09 16:51:50 I think it would be great if a service could "request" that it be guarded by the gate. Just provide a description of the permission, then any time an app/service tries to access it the same steps would kick in Nov 09 16:51:57 Andolamin: Yeah but it would do that for every app anyway, so I'm not really sure what you try to accomplish by pre-registring Nov 09 16:53:13 No, I mean services, not apps. Right now we're thinking Geolocation, Camera, Mic, Contacts, etc for permission types that would guard their respective services. Nov 09 16:54:50 I'm proposing that I could have a service that a user could download through Preware that would expose a Cast permission. Then, when an app tries to cast something to a webOS TV or Chromecast the user would get the same type of prompt asking to grant that app permission. Nov 09 16:55:37 Ah OK so you want the types of permission to be flexible so more can be added. That makes sense Nov 09 16:55:44 Right Nov 09 16:56:01 Separately, I do think it would be nice to be able to "pre-authenticate" apps. Nov 09 16:57:00 The system contacts app should have baked in permission to contacts, for example. Same with the Camera app for the camera. The Photos & Videos app could have automatic access to the Cast service. Nov 09 16:57:24 Maybe when the service registers it's permission it could provide a list of ids that are pre-authenticated? Nov 09 16:57:48 Or maybe just org.webosports.* ids always have access Nov 09 16:57:57 Andolamin: Yeah that shouldn't be hard to accomplish. Nov 09 16:59:03 Andolamin: How did your Node upgrade hackathon go? Nov 09 17:12:51 Eh, the Node upgrade was just a nice-to-have for the hackathon. Got stalled on day one with some V8 method signatures that had been changed and decided to not use up all my time trying to fix a problem that may have just revealed more problems deeper in and just transpiled the code. Nov 09 17:36:27 Ah ok Nov 09 19:15:50 Tofe: Any luck with the relaunch/App Menu problem? Nov 09 19:19:13 no, still no real clue why nothing happens Nov 09 19:26:08 Tofe: Might be an idea to first fix the LNC issue and then it might give further clues as to what to fix? Or you cannot find the issue in LNC? Nov 09 19:31:17 I didn't look for it yet :p Nov 09 19:32:02 you mean, the card stays carded even when a relaunch is sent to it? Nov 09 19:50:40 Yeah Nov 09 19:51:38 Ah, well, that shouldn't really be a problem to fix Nov 09 20:48:49 hop. Nov 09 21:45:46 Tofe: Looking good ;) Nov 09 21:46:03 All merged, merged nizovn's PR's too, will kick off some nightlies Nov 10 01:41:52 Andolamin, Herrie, a service that used the Permission service wouldn’t need to also use ls2. The service itself could call the Permission service. Nov 10 01:56:20 Herrie, Andolamin, the “privlege” field (as I’ve called it) would be defined by the service, and a service could define as many as it wished - no need to pre-declare them. Nov 10 01:58:29 I agree that certain built-in apps should not require the user to grant permissions to. It might be enought to simply pre-populate the Permission DB. Nov 10 02:01:16 My thinking is that the Cast service doesn’t need to use the Permission service - just like an input of type “file” doesn’t need a permission. When the user chooses to Cast an album, he implicily gives permission. Nov 10 02:02:23 Also, the People Picker doesn’t need to use the Permission service - by selecting a contact, the user implicily gives permission. Nov 10 02:03:20 Whereas an app that wants to scan the whole contact database would be mediated by the Permission service. Nov 10 02:33:09 DougReeder: My concern is that an app could make the cast service LS2 calls without user interaction. If we're not too worried about that then it's fine with me to assume permission. **** ENDING LOGGING AT Tue Nov 10 02:59:59 2015