[08:59:27] <rwaldron> 1 minute early
[08:59:33] <rwaldron> is this thing on?
[09:00:53] <kswedberg> testing 1. 2. 3. yep!
[09:01:23] <timmywil> hi!
[09:02:12] <kswedberg> DaveMethvin: you know what would make for a great post on blog.jquery.com? "Why it's silly for now to consider pulling support for IE6 in jQuery core"
[09:02:22] <kswedberg> wanna write it? :)
[09:02:26] <DaveMethvin> yeah,
[09:02:33] <DaveMethvin> i have a coupla notes in the agenda
[09:02:41] <DaveMethvin> wanted to address some of the suggestions
[09:02:50] <kswedberg> rock. I check out agenda now.
[09:02:57] <DaveMethvin> oh yeah its meetin time!
[09:03:26] <rwaldron> where's ajpiano?
[09:03:36] <rwaldron> gnarf?
[09:03:37] <ajpiano>  /me ziplines
[09:03:41] <DaveMethvin> with waldo and matt lauer i guess
[09:03:43] <rwaldron> hey jrburke!
[09:04:09] <jrburke> Hi rwaldron!
[09:04:27] <rwaldron> Ok, everyone sitting?
[09:04:30] <DaveMethvin> ok, so 1.7.1 ... do we want to do one?
[09:04:41] <rwaldron> (assumed, if not for those weirdos that do standing desks)
[09:04:49] <rwaldron> DaveMethvin yes please.
[09:05:04] <DaveMethvin> we have most of the bugs closed except for the big ones
[09:05:12] <rwaldron> html5 fixes need to hit the streets
[09:05:14] <DaveMethvin> i finally got the event fails on swarm fixed last nigth
[09:05:18] <rwaldron> nice
[09:05:25] <DaveMethvin> so you can see what's left
[09:05:32] <timmywil> I'm still adjusting support.js
[09:05:36] <DaveMethvin> the big one is support.js, yeah
[09:05:40] <rwaldron> I think no rush on that?
[09:05:42] <DaveMethvin> "adjusting" i like thta
[09:05:49] <rwaldron> timmywil you should be able to take time
[09:05:55] <rwaldron> that's pretty important
[09:06:08] <rwaldron> I know you're like val kilmer in real genious and all
[09:06:17] <timmywil> haha
[09:06:39] <DaveMethvin> that blackberry thing may go away when support is rejiggered
[09:06:45] <rwaldron> DaveMethvin re: that first on... 10006
[09:06:46] * DaveMethvin crosses fingers
[09:06:49] <rwaldron> one*
[09:06:53] <rwaldron> I have a PR in the queue
[09:07:05] <rwaldron> 10416 is a shit show
[09:07:19] <rwaldron> timmywil and I tried to fix it during dev days
[09:07:27] <rwaldron> only to break something else
[09:07:33] <rwaldron> (unknowingly)
[09:07:38] <DaveMethvin> so...should we leave it broken for 1.7.1?
[09:07:45] <timmywil> ?10416
[09:07:46] <bot-t1> [#10416] defaultDisplay returns block instead of table-row for a tr in FF (assigned bug) - http://jqbug.com/10416
[09:07:50] <rwaldron> well, it's not really broken"
[09:07:53] <rwaldron> it is
[09:07:56] <rwaldron> but it's edge case
[09:08:04] <DaveMethvin> isn't it all
[09:08:54] <DaveMethvin> yeah it's definitely not a mainstream prob
[09:09:02] <rwaldron> and while we have jrburke here, we should settle docs#10687
[09:09:04] <bot-t1> [#10687] jQuery calls the AMD define() global function too early (assigned bug) - http://jqbug.com/10687
[09:09:13] <rwaldron> i think it mostly is settled
[09:09:24] <rwaldron> but it's not closed, so we should shoot for that
[09:09:36] <timmywil> oh, we can land that
[09:09:40] <timmywil> i meant to the other day
[09:09:44] <rwaldron> awesome
[09:09:53] <timmywil> i'll do that now
[09:10:00] <rwaldron> lets destroy the PR queue?
[09:10:36] <DaveMethvin> yep, looks like we are in pretty good shape, but before we leave....
[09:10:38] <DaveMethvin> WHEN?
[09:10:44] <DaveMethvin> we need an RC1 and a final
[09:10:48] <DaveMethvin> and next week is turkey
[09:10:50] <jaubourg> plop
[09:10:52] <rwaldron> RC1 today?
[09:10:56] <rwaldron> jaubourg hugz
[09:11:00] <DaveMethvin> mention turkey and who shows up?
[09:11:02] <DaveMethvin> :P
[09:11:04] <jaubourg> hey everyone
[09:11:20] <rwaldron> DaveMethvin lots of devs will be bored over the holidays and playing with code
[09:11:24] <rwaldron> I know I do
[09:11:33] <rwaldron> so I say RC1 today
[09:11:40] <rwaldron> 1.7.1 next monday
[09:11:52] <DaveMethvin> so which bugs are going to be closed on the list, and which pushed?
[09:11:52] * rwaldron shrugs?
[09:12:08] <rwaldron> this list: http://bugs.jquery.com/query?milestone=1.7.1&col=id&col=summary&col=owner&col=status&order=status
[09:12:08] <rwaldron> ?
[09:12:20] <DaveMethvin> the one in the agenda, yeah
[09:12:54] <rwaldron> like I said, we can close 10006, there is a patch in the queue
[09:12:59] <rwaldron> 10416: push
[09:13:00] <DaveMethvin> so how about rc1 tomorrow, and if all goes well final on Friday? we need to give ppl a chance to test the rc
[09:13:14] <DaveMethvin> otherwise we might as well go straight to release
[09:13:21] <DaveMethvin> but that seems kind of lame
[09:13:24] <rwaldron> sounds good
[09:13:46] <rwaldron> (my schedule gave an entire week though :P )
[09:13:48] <jaubourg> yeah, +1
[09:14:18] <rwaldron> i pushed out 3 tickets
[09:14:25] <rwaldron> to give timmywil time on the support stuff
[09:14:26] <DaveMethvin> well we can make final on Monday
[09:14:28] <rwaldron> no reason to rush it
[09:14:44] <DaveMethvin> agreed on no rush
[09:15:05] <rwaldron> blackberry, also agree with you DaveMethvin
[09:15:08] <DaveMethvin> so, rc1 tomorrow?
[09:15:08] <rwaldron> let it simmer
[09:15:11] <jaubourg> well, the support stuff is about going back to 1.5.x-ondocready-style isn't it?
[09:15:14] <rwaldron> might go away
[09:15:20] <DaveMethvin> jaubourg: i think it may
[09:15:30] <jaubourg> yeah, thank you IE once again
[09:15:39] <jaubourg> sorry for the mess
[09:15:47] <DaveMethvin> and as far as $.support values go, i think we should underdocument them
[09:15:59] <rwaldron> nice, timmywil just landed the patch from jrburke for 10687
[09:16:14] <jrburke> Thanks timmywil!
[09:16:15] <jaubourg> Dave: def
[09:16:24] <DaveMethvin> way too messy to expect us to support stuff we no longer need, or keep to a promise it will be available before .ready()
[09:16:28] <timmywil> jrburke: no thank you
[09:16:29] <rwaldron> DaveMethvin all that remains is your docs#10699
[09:16:31] <bot-t1> [#10699] Calling stopPropagation() before trigger() doesn't call handlers on element (assigned bug) - http://jqbug.com/10699
[09:16:46] <DaveMethvin> i'm talking with that guy, he's doing some advanced stuff
[09:17:01] <DaveMethvin> we'll either make it work the old way or come up with a better :) way
[09:17:30] <DaveMethvin> ok so rc1 tomorrow, final friday?
[09:17:37] <DaveMethvin> or do we need to make final Monday?
[09:17:55] <jaubourg> final Monday is close enough imo
[09:17:59] <timmywil> shoot for friday for now
[09:18:03] <rwaldron> yeah
[09:18:04] <jaubourg> let's give the week-end to people
[09:18:07] <rwaldron> timmywil +1
[09:18:11] <DaveMethvin> yeah and we'll make monday at that rate :)
[09:18:13] <DaveMethvin> sounds good
[09:18:21] <rwaldron> shoot for it, but ok to go til monday if we have to
[09:18:38] <DaveMethvin> yeah if we find bugs we can use the weekend for more testing
[09:18:47] <DaveMethvin> ok on to the pull requests
[09:18:54] <rwaldron> kill kill kill
[09:19:07] <DaveMethvin> in -dev we were just talking about the pulls
[09:19:25] <DaveMethvin> there is an overhead to each pr ... reviewing each, comment, testing, etc
[09:19:35] <rwaldron> I don't mind reviewing
[09:19:44] <rwaldron> I understand that is not the case for everyone
[09:19:47] <DaveMethvin> so it's kind of annoying to have lots of little low-value prs when there are bugs to fix
[09:19:54] <jaubourg> I saw a trend of opening a ticket just for the sake of having a pull request considered... which I find kinda lame honestly
[09:20:09] <DaveMethvin> jaubourg: i'd prefer they came and asked us about it in -dev
[09:20:16] <rwaldron> jaubourg yeah agreed.
[09:20:18] <timmywil> rwaldron: thanks for that pull.  do we need to remove the test on this line? https://github.com/rwldrn/jquery/blob/327ba381c3bbcb7af71635e0ca2ec9dad913edd1/test/unit/attributes.js#L484
[09:20:21] <rwaldron> glad I'm not the only one
[09:20:23] <jaubourg> tickets should be to discuss about the issue and see if a pr is warranted
[09:20:35] <DaveMethvin> so let's review the current prs and see how they fare against that
[09:20:37] <rwaldron> timmywil eh, I'm not opposed to it
[09:20:54] <rwaldron> it _does_ test the condition
[09:21:08] <rwaldron> but for like... shit that is really RTFM
[09:21:09] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/598
[09:21:10] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by Orkel (1d, 8h ago): Removing duplicate code
[09:21:20] <DaveMethvin> This doesn't do much for me
[09:21:32] <timmywil> oh, you left the typeof check, i see
[09:21:37] <jaubourg> would need to see the actual gzipped gain
[09:21:40] <timmywil> that's why it still works
[09:21:44] <jaubourg> like mike commented
[09:21:44] <rwaldron> timmywil i can live without
[09:21:50] <rwaldron> if you think we can ditch it
[09:21:55] <timmywil> DaveMethvin: agreed
[09:21:59] <rwaldron> i will pull that out and push the patch
[09:22:22] <rwaldron> and tell em "here are the docs, bro"
[09:22:24] <DaveMethvin> should we be asking ppl for the +/- gzip size and more perf comparisons for these kind of pulls?
[09:22:27] <timmywil> rwaldron: yea, I'm ok with saying that removeAttr only accepts a string
[09:22:34] <DaveMethvin> i don't want to have to pull the branch just to run make and find that out
[09:22:36] <rwaldron> great
[09:22:39] <rwaldron> i'll rip it out
[09:22:40] <jaubourg> DaveMethvin: definitely
[09:22:46] <rwaldron> timmywil 60seconds...
[09:23:12] <timmywil> DaveMethvin: would help us out yea
[09:23:44] <rwaldron> timmywil dunzo
[09:24:36] <DaveMethvin> ok 598 closed
[09:24:42] <timmywil> word
[09:24:45] <rwaldron> I tweeted @github once that they should have a "customizable pre Pull Request message" thing
[09:24:48] <DaveMethvin> are you landing 600 timmywil rwaldron
[09:24:55] <timmywil> yea
[09:25:29] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/596
[09:25:30] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by Orkel (1d, 10h ago): attr() and prop() speed optimization
[09:25:35] <DaveMethvin> another closer if you ask me
[09:25:43] <rwaldron> agreed
[09:26:04] <rwaldron> If it had been a ticket first
[09:26:10] <rwaldron> maybe different story?
[09:26:12] <DaveMethvin> the little part of eliminating "in" may be useful but a perf test would be helpful to know
[09:26:25] <rwaldron> there is one
[09:26:32] <rwaldron> http://jsperf.com/jquery-attributes-optimization
[09:26:57] <rwaldron> I think I change my mind
[09:27:03] <rwaldron> the "in" change is good
[09:27:38] <timmywil> agreed
[09:27:42] <timmywil> I'm ok with some of those
[09:27:47] <timmywil> but definitely not all of the typeofs
[09:28:00] <jaubourg> I'd rather have people submit code reviews if they feel inclined to be zealous about some code in jquery or micro-optimization
[09:28:19] <jaubourg> like some stuff we agree, other we disagree and a PR is not the right format for this
[09:28:23] <DaveMethvin> jaubourg: yeah i agree, it's just too tedious to deal with prs for little stuff
[09:28:45] <rwaldron> node.js had a problem for awhile...
[09:28:50] <rwaldron> everyone wanted 15 seconds
[09:28:59] <DaveMethvin> rwaldron: the in change barely moves the needle for anything but ff6
[09:29:03] <jaubourg> maybe have someone review those PRs, compile a doc and then we can discuss what changes to apply next meeting, then just thank the guys involved in the commit msg?
[09:29:04] <rwaldron> ryah was getting PRs for one word typo patches
[09:29:58] <timmywil> close it
[09:30:21] <jaubourg> problem is we'll close all of them because they're not right while there may be good hidden stuff in there :/
[09:30:32] <rwaldron> DaveMethvin hm. browserscope doesnt load for me
[09:30:37] * rwaldron shrugs
[09:30:57] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/595
[09:30:58] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by dcherman (2d, 13h ago): Reorder build file
[09:31:16] <DaveMethvin> this could be useful
[09:31:38] <DaveMethvin> should we try to land it now, or wait for 1.8 though?
[09:31:52] <DaveMethvin> i am thinking the optimal layout may change as we do rewrites
[09:31:54] <rwaldron> the impact of "in" is usually more noticeable when it's used on objects with deep prototypes, when the lookup has to go really high
[09:31:56] <jaubourg> interesting stuff, we could land this at any point though we need to test against the built file
[09:32:29] <rwaldron> DaveMethvin i think we should hold off, I'm concerned that there were failing tests, by OPs admission
[09:32:33] <timmywil> there, we shaved 6 bytes
[09:32:33] <rwaldron> that dont fail for others
[09:32:36] <jaubourg> I'd love to have a single location for inclusion order
[09:32:57] <jaubourg> so that we can have it transparently propagated to test files too
[09:33:02] <DaveMethvin> ok, so instead of keeping the pr open should we just say we like it and have it refiled later?
[09:33:07] <rwaldron> yeah
[09:33:11] <jaubourg> yeah
[09:33:14] <rwaldron> do we have a ticket for that?
[09:33:16] <DaveMethvin> also jaubourg's comment, that would be a good thing to see if we can do
[09:33:26] <rwaldron> so we can open up some running discussion
[09:33:38] <DaveMethvin> ?10770
[09:33:40] <bot-t1> [#10770] Investigate re-ordering build file (open enhancement) - http://jqbug.com/10770
[09:33:46] <jaubourg> all we need is to transform all our .html files in test with .php files
[09:33:50] <rwaldron> oh cool
[09:33:53] <jaubourg> I did that for another project of mine
[09:34:05] <timmywil> it needs an update.  I know we can't move callbacks and deferred from the top
[09:34:16] <rwaldron> yeah, that seemed weird
[09:34:58] <jaubourg> we may be able too if we rewrite some stuff here and there
[09:35:09] <timmywil> not if support has a doc ready
[09:35:09] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/575
[09:35:10] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by CharlieBlack (1w, 3d ago): event.metaKey returns false when ctrl key is down
[09:35:14] <jaubourg> wait, not with the ready event in support now :/
[09:35:19] <DaveMethvin> hmm, that shoudl be on the 1.7.1 list
[09:35:45] <rwaldron> are we skipping 581?
[09:35:56] <timmywil> dave and i still disagree on this issue
[09:36:14] <timmywil> i prefer the way it is to changing it back to the old way
[09:36:18] <DaveMethvin> well i don't know whose code to break
[09:36:23] <DaveMethvin> i like the current approach too
[09:36:35] <DaveMethvin> but at minimum it breaks the ui draggable stuff
[09:36:44] <DaveMethvin> and that's usually a bad sign
[09:36:47] <timmywil> the only fixall would be a platform sniff, which neither of us really like
[09:36:57] <DaveMethvin> agreed
[09:37:17] <DaveMethvin> i just moved this to 1.7.1 and need to circle back with scott_gonzalez to see what he thinks
[09:37:21] <timmywil> ui draggable depends on the metaKey?
[09:37:38] <DaveMethvin> yeah, it assumes it means ctrlKey on windows
[09:37:52] <DaveMethvin> which iit has for quite a while
[09:38:17] <DaveMethvin> would it hurt macs to have a check for   if (ctrlKey || metaKey )
[09:38:30] <DaveMethvin> depends on whether ctrlKey is being used for somethign else
[09:39:05] <timmywil> would it hurt for ie9 to do metaKey || ctrlKey?
[09:39:21] <DaveMethvin> yeah that's what i meant :P
[09:39:37] <DaveMethvin> since metaKey means nothing on windows afaict
[09:39:47] <timmywil> yea, it's just a copy of ctrl
[09:39:49] <DaveMethvin> it echoes ctrlKey for key events bu
[09:39:56] <DaveMethvin> but doesn't for mouseEvents
[09:40:03] <DaveMethvin> i dunno why
[09:40:17] <DaveMethvin> anyway i'll figure that out and leave this open as a reminder
[09:40:49] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/573
[09:40:50] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by jyli7 (1w, 3d ago): Boolean for slideToggle and fadeToggle, #10491
[09:41:05] <DaveMethvin> i don't like feature requests hanging out in the queue
[09:41:29] <DaveMethvin> what if we just close them and ask him to refile if it's voted into 1.8?
[09:41:41] <jaubourg> +1
[09:42:19] <timmywil> sure
[09:42:22] <DaveMethvin> done
[09:42:37] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/572
[09:42:37] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by bmar (1w, 3d ago): Fix for IE7: elem.getAttributes causes domain violation on iframe
[09:42:49] <DaveMethvin> i hate iframes
[09:43:00] <jaubourg> haha
[09:43:12] <jaubourg> I hate IE6-8
[09:43:25] <DaveMethvin> timmywil what you think?
[09:43:38] <timmywil> doesn't seem like the right fix
[09:43:50] <timmywil> and is there a test case?
[09:44:00] <jaubourg> my thought exactly about the test/use case
[09:44:47] <DaveMethvin> closed
[09:45:06] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/571
[09:45:07] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by rafBM (1w, 4d ago): Less crude .isWindow()
[09:45:14] <DaveMethvin> I like the idea, but it worries me
[09:46:13] <jaubourg> I actually really like this one
[09:46:16] <timmywil> we've had the same idea before.  i think we ran into issues with iframe windows
[09:46:24] <jaubourg> he uses ==
[09:46:36] <jaubourg> so it should work in IEs
[09:46:44] <DaveMethvin> right, he added a test case for iframe
[09:46:59] <timmywil> so he did
[09:47:14] <DaveMethvin> so it MUST work ... but i feel queasy about it anyway
[09:47:21] <timmywil> that could be great then
[09:47:33] <jaubourg> why the queasiness Dave?
[09:47:35] <DaveMethvin> how about we land this early for 1.8 ... it's not fixing a bug anyone has complained about
[09:47:54] <DaveMethvin> just that there may be cases we havne't thought about and 1.7.1 wouldn't be a good time to find them
[09:48:10] <jaubourg> ok then, let's delay this to 1.8
[09:48:21] <jaubourg> but I actually really like the approach
[09:48:29] <DaveMethvin> i have a 1pm meeting so i'll need to go in about 5 minutes
[09:48:33] <DaveMethvin> yeah i like it too
[09:48:54] <timmywil> it'll be our one exception to ==
[09:49:08] <DaveMethvin> well that and ==null for null/undef
[09:49:29] <DaveMethvin> are there any prs here that shoudl definitely be closed?
[09:49:30] <jaubourg> yeah, silly IEs and window not being === to window
[09:49:31] <timmywil> true, but that is actually treated separately in jshint now
[09:49:41] <timmywil> not sure how to silence this one
[09:49:49] <timmywil> unless we turn em all off
[09:49:59] <timmywil> anyway, no biggie
[09:50:02] <jaubourg> where are we on switching to jshint btw?
[09:50:02] <DaveMethvin> jshint needs a per-line disable
[09:50:20] <timmywil> jaubourg: what do you mean? we already use it
[09:50:20] <DaveMethvin> jshint has a ticket and mikesherov said he'd do the work
[09:50:27] * jaubourg spanks himself
[09:50:35] <DaveMethvin> changing to detecting variables tho
[09:50:38] <timmywil> we need to change the options on it tho
[09:50:42] <timmywil> ^^
[09:50:42] <DaveMethvin> is that what you meant?  yeah
[09:50:43] <timmywil> yea
[09:50:49] <jaubourg> k, good
[09:51:09] <DaveMethvin> several of these are feature requests, like the traversing api
[09:51:20] <DaveMethvin> i don't think they will land in 1.8 unless they are a LOT faster
[09:53:03] <timmywil> looks like quite a bit of space added too
[09:53:16] <DaveMethvin> exactly
[09:53:22] <DaveMethvin> not the direction we want to go
[09:53:41] <DaveMethvin> and i would really like to see these proposals be able to show the speedup on real code snippets
[09:53:53] <DaveMethvin> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/538
[09:53:54] <socialhapy> ★ Pull request on jquery by Orkel (1m, 5d ago): Check for attribute before remove it
[09:53:54] <kswedberg> DaveMethvin: I thought there was supposed to be an effects overhaul for 1.8? is that (still) the case?
[09:54:11] <DaveMethvin> kswedberg: yes gnarf was leading that
[09:54:23] <DaveMethvin> but with an eye to making it smaller as well
[09:54:37] <DaveMethvin> i really have to go
[09:54:44] <kswedberg> ok. cool deal. just wasn't sure since the focus of 1.8 seemed to shift to making jQuery smaller
[09:55:30] <DaveMethvin> i had an agenda item on blog feedback, i think we do want to address the comments and i'll do a blog post before we open the call for 1.8 suggestions
[09:55:47] <jaubourg> DaveMethvin: k, I gotta go too
[09:56:00] <kswedberg> sounds good. you sould go DaveMethvin. :) everyone regroup in -dev?
[09:56:05] <DaveMethvin> ok, cya later this afternoon in -dev guys!
[09:56:17] <timmywil> kk
[09:56:52] <kswedberg> can someone mute this channel or whatever you IRC people do after a meeting?