**** BEGIN LOGGING AT Sun May 27 03:00:02 2018 May 27 16:52:26 I'm here! May 27 16:52:35 Morning May 27 16:52:54 hay May 27 16:54:24 Agenda: https://forums.webosnation.com/webos-events/331758-webos-user-s-online-meet-up-6.html#post3453260 May 27 17:01:34 morning May 27 17:01:59 Welcome all. The usual business is to give a brief webOS-related biography of yourself if you are new. If you've been here before. Just say Hello. May 27 17:02:08 Hi ivozn May 27 17:02:12 +n May 27 17:02:54 hi! May 27 17:03:07 3 of us? I expect maybe a few more will pop up. May 27 17:03:40 That first bit was: 1. Attendees & Introductions of new attendees. May 27 17:05:07 I've been busy (on other things) so I have to again put my hands up and say I've not got anything much done. I'm hoping things will quiet down in a couple of weeks May 27 17:05:33 If that's true for us all, then I guess we can get through this quick! ;-) May 27 17:06:10 I'm going to skip straight to progress reports if there are no objections. May 27 17:06:55 no objection May 27 17:07:03 4. Progress reports. May 27 17:07:05 4.1. New browser (for TP only). (nizovn) May 27 17:07:17 http://forums.webosnation.com/hp-touchpad/331764-tp-qupzilla.html May 27 17:07:27 qt upgraded to 5.9.5, qupzilla upgraded to 2.2.6, fixed bug with unresponsive tabs after closing popup menu (sometimes) May 27 17:07:51 new version is available in my github preware feed May 27 17:07:55 Oh, excellent. Still making progress. May 27 17:08:20 I tried to install right after the last meeting, but I couldn't get it to work May 27 17:08:36 I tried again this morning - still no go. May 27 17:08:52 strange.. May 27 17:09:10 I know Mazzinia was testing, so maybe it's just me. May 27 17:09:11 maybe wrong feed's url May 27 17:09:27 Should it be set as compressed? May 27 17:09:35 (I tried both) May 27 17:09:43 both should work May 27 17:10:31 It must be something at my end. I'll look into it further. Did you get any response from pivotCE? May 27 17:10:45 no, still no reply May 27 17:10:59 I will follow this up with the admin. May 27 17:11:05 thanks! May 27 17:11:45 Should we now call this Falkon? Our are you still using the original code? May 27 17:12:09 this is the last version, next will be falkon May 27 17:12:45 but i want to make something on qt5 sdk first May 27 17:12:50 OK. May 27 17:13:09 Sounds good. Shall we move on to get to that bit of the agenda? :-) May 27 17:13:21 we can May 27 17:13:38 i didn't started it yet.. May 27 17:13:41 4.2. Legacy browser patch. (Misj, Shuswap) May 27 17:13:51 Anything on this Misj? May 27 17:14:23 http://forums.webosnation.com/webos-patches/331780-patch-browser-touchpad-smart-url-cleaner.html May 27 17:14:59 No, sorry. I've been 'playing' with something else. May 27 17:15:27 OK. I'm going to skip 4.3 as they aren't here May 27 17:15:53 I might get access to a Veer in the somewhat near future. maybe It'll help me focus on this again:) May 27 17:15:57 Misj: Anything on 4.4. Updated location service. (Misj, mazzinia) May 27 17:16:36 Not from my end. Maybe Mazz is working on it. May 27 17:16:39 OK. May 27 17:17:17 Any reason why we can't skip straight the 4.10? May 27 17:18:07 ... May 27 17:18:10 OK May 27 17:18:10 i don't have complete conception on how it should work yet May 27 17:18:16 4.10. webOS Qt5 SDK. May 27 17:18:34 nizovn: You mean the SDK? May 27 17:18:38 but the idea that qt apps should work without modifing code May 27 17:18:40 yes May 27 17:19:46 Is it some kind of webOS specific translator or filter for commands? May 27 17:20:08 So all code is written to work with webOS? May 27 17:21:04 for now i think to write webos service which would setup necessary environment for qt apps in webos May 27 17:21:09 I mean that I assume there are already Qt development tools, so what is specific to a webOS dev kit? May 27 17:21:28 Like.. a layer? May 27 17:21:35 ..or interface? May 27 17:21:56 i think about ls2 service May 27 17:22:41 for now any app should use some hacks to use qt libs May 27 17:23:08 because of jailer May 27 17:23:23 nizovn: OK. Is there help you need or.... I know PC-world was looking at the code. I guess a thread if you want collaborators? May 27 17:23:37 so sdk could make this automatically, which a bit safer May 27 17:24:09 well, i have nothing yet to collaborate on.. May 27 17:24:23 any help is welcomed of course May 27 17:24:44 Is there anything in the LuneOS project that is useful - perhaps as a basis for the webOS SDK? May 27 17:25:38 not sure, there were plans to create luneos sdk, but seems it's low priority May 27 17:26:04 An SDK that could work for both would be good if it is possible. May 27 17:26:23 yes, would be good in general May 27 17:26:24 I don't know how far the codebase has diverged now. May 27 17:26:39 Perhaps it is tto different May 27 17:27:32 i think LuneOS is needed only so that developers didn't compile whole OS just for their app May 27 17:27:42 *LuneOS SDK May 27 17:28:12 LuneOS doesn't require any hacks, qt apps should work very well May 27 17:28:25 I saw Tofe's architecture diagrams and there is LS2 there. May 27 17:29:30 yes, ls2 is a important May 27 17:29:46 .. -a May 27 17:30:57 nizovn: So the SDK is essentially an environment that mimics the OS so that a developer can code and app that will work properly on that OS? May 27 17:31:14 and -> an May 27 17:31:30 basically yes, it May 27 17:31:57 's a lot of tools such as cross-compilator and libraries May 27 17:33:06 OK, well this stuff is a bit beyond me, but announcing something on a thread might get a bit of interest. Would there be any use for webOS OSE? Perhaps those devs would be interested? May 27 17:33:09 it not mimics, just give possibility to compile app for target devices on PC May 27 17:33:48 I understand - it's not an emulator, more like a code checker for the particular OS May 27 17:34:10 i heard webOS OSE has plans for qt sdk as well May 27 17:35:29 A joint project across legacy webOS, LuneOS and OSE is a good ideas - there must at least be some 'base' of code in common. May 27 17:36:30 but my work wouldn't be useful for them as it would be a set of hacks to make apps to work on webOS having it's specifics May 27 17:38:04 SDK may be considered as some layer which makes qt apps work on some platform May 27 17:38:05 Right, but I'm thinking wondering if some of their SDK could form a base for your one and if there is some commonality, it might attract OSE developers to Legacy or LuneOS May 27 17:38:13 so in general any OS has it's own SDK May 27 17:38:33 (this really isn't my field, but I find it interesting to read) May 27 17:39:12 OSE and LuneOS use yocto, and in theory can it can generate SDK for them May 27 17:39:46 ^ it's the best way for them, but on webOS we can't use yocto tools.. May 27 17:40:47 nozovn: OK. So it really is a matter of hacking what already exists for other platforms to work specifically on legacy webOS. May 27 17:41:11 *nizovn May 27 17:41:34 well, it hacking only on webOS due to jailer May 27 17:42:18 i think SDK can be divided into two parts: PC's and device's part May 27 17:43:15 PC's part is a set of tools for compilation without need to compile whole OS to get required libraries May 27 17:44:21 device's part - is needed only for legacy webOS due to jailer, which runs on devices and makes required environment to launch apps May 27 17:46:13 OK. I won't make you explain jailer - I'll look it up! ;-) I take it as limited environment or container for the app. May 27 17:46:35 yes May 27 17:46:44 you are right May 27 17:47:18 Thanks! One day, maybe I will truly understand these things! ;-) May 27 17:48:22 Good luck with this project. It makes me tempted to raise another matter, but we should move on. May 27 17:48:23 It's basically the 'secure' environment apps are run in. May 27 17:49:30 OK. so... May 27 17:49:31 5. Discussion of other items. May 27 17:49:36 there is more to say about it, but that's the (minimal) basic gist May 27 17:49:55 i think you will understand it fully without my bad explanations if you will try to compile qt app in future sdk May 27 17:50:05 sorry for slow typing.. May 27 17:50:49 nizovn: There's nothing to apologise for. My typing has many errors. It is better to get it right! May 27 17:52:01 Does any one want to discuss any of section 5? I can post the headings. I'm not sure if there is anything to add, but if anyone has anything we can do that. May 27 17:53:06 The forums have been very quiet and stopped working at one point in the last month, but I'm not sure if there is anything new of interest. May 27 17:53:11 5.1. Device back up options. May 27 17:54:42 There was definitely a possible test candidate. My device are not in good shape, so i really need to do some back up tests an see if I can 'refresh' maybe the old Pre2 May 27 17:54:51 5.2. webOS Vulnerabilities and Fixes. May 27 17:55:23 I don't think there are any notable new vulnerabilities and I've seen no new fixes. May 27 17:57:06 I'm a bit surprised there is not more interest in this area. The was a post by a former webOS guy about the type of app store that would be needed by a new OS offering and I posted it to the forum as it agreed with my thoughts. May 27 17:57:53 Oh, I skipped the heading! the above is relevant to: 5.3. App stores discussion. May 27 17:58:38 it was an interesting read. I'm just skeptical anyone would ever set it up... May 27 17:59:24 ...but my skepticism shouldn't stop anyone from trying May 27 18:00:00 I'm wondering if some one started a general 'back end' service and allowed various projects to create interfaces to it, it could provide support and stimulus for all the different projects. May 27 18:00:43 Misj: I agree, because it would have to be a business, not a 'tinkering' project. It would have to be paid for. May 27 18:01:18 exactly. Only then it would be viable. May 27 18:01:19 Users of many OSS projects might be enough to make it a viable if small business May 27 18:03:33 But I suspect the back end software would be already available. It could be done by hiring server space, deploying and adding a payment system. Then the work would be to partner with various projects to move app file to devices or back up files to servers. May 27 18:04:15 I suppose github is one possible entity that could offer such a service. May 27 18:04:29 Anyway, let's move on! May 27 18:04:45 5.4. LG's webOS Open Source Edition May 27 18:05:27 I haven't looked lately. It doesn't seem very busy on the forum, but some things are going on. Does any one have any news or views on OSE? May 27 18:06:06 In think we need Herry for this. May 27 18:07:15 I know there is contact with LuneOS and we shall hopefully find out soon if there is big news or not, depending on how far they agree to work together. May 27 18:07:46 i know only that there will be meeting between LuseOS and LG guys May 27 18:08:14 Yes. May 27 18:09:26 Let's round things up. May 27 18:10:00 6. Any other business. May 27 18:11:11 the Museum went live (about time!) :) May 27 18:12:18 Oh, yes. I'll have to take another look - it should have been on the agenda! May 27 18:12:30 How much user set up is required? May 27 18:13:06 I'm just thinking a quick guide to use could go up on pivotCE if you want. May 27 18:13:24 the hosts file for images and a connection to the ftp should you want that. May 27 18:13:39 I think Alan was willing to write that. May 27 18:13:53 Oh great! May 27 18:16:25 He'll probably want to reorganize the ftp a bit first though. but that's up to him May 27 18:16:55 I'm just going to put this out there: We've already been told that porting LuneOS to old webOS devices (except for the TP) is difficult mainly because of memory space. But I'm wondering how far it would be possible to maybe create a hybrid of webOS and LuneOS? Is that something worth discussing for next time. What I mean is in addition to a service pack, could we replace entire parts of the OS with modern versions? May 27 18:17:45 Accepting of course that maybe no one has time for that! May 27 18:18:14 that would require updating the webkit core...don't know how feasable that is. May 27 18:18:33 But I wonder if, say a new kernel could be compiled and new services on top (like Qt5). May 27 18:19:36 Yes. I don't know enough to guess. I'm just thinking that it could reduce the number of hacks and patches needed... May 27 18:19:37 i think getting new kernel is complex task, and some drivers may stop work May 27 18:20:29 i had same idea some time ago: something like ubuntu chroot, but LuneOS May 27 18:20:59 Yes. I don't know how far the uberkernels were significantly different or if they were just tweaked, but I assume that code must be open. May 27 18:21:17 nizovn: But that was for Android in a card May 27 18:21:53 so i just chrooted into LuneOS partition on TP and basic qt app was working May 27 18:22:32 Preemptive: it's another idea :P May 27 18:22:37 Nizovn: Oh, I see - add LuneOS to webOS. I meant more of a system upgrade May 27 18:23:32 It it worth discussing at the next meeting? Or is it not really possible? May 27 18:23:57 I realise it's probably not practical...! May 27 18:24:29 i think e.g. drivers for phone calls/camera will stop working May 27 18:24:50 they are all closed it seems May 27 18:25:35 but we can discuss it of course May 27 18:25:44 nizovn: But can the newer kernel be modified to work with the old drivers? Or are those modifications also closed? May 27 18:26:23 OK, maybe I'll post a thread and see how bad an idea it is. If it's not impossible, we could discuss it nest time. May 27 18:26:48 Let's get on... May 27 18:26:50 7. Date of next meeting. May 27 18:27:42 In a month time? May 27 18:27:58 last Sunday of June...? May 27 18:28:52 24th? Yes, that's probably best for me. May 27 18:29:07 ok for me May 27 18:29:33 OK. Great 24th. If anyone wants to change the time, type now! ;-) May 27 18:30:48 ... May 27 18:31:01 OK thanks to you both for being here. We were at least able to discuss 2 or 3 things in depth. May 27 18:31:19 Enjoy the rest of your day! See you next time! May 27 18:31:23 see ya all May 27 18:31:27 bye! May 27 18:31:34 Misj: Bye May 27 18:31:42 nizovn: Bye **** ENDING LOGGING AT Mon May 28 03:00:03 2018