[09:01:30] <scott_gonzalez> gnarf Dave_Stein jzaefferer kborchers_ mikesherov rxaviers tj_vantoll
[09:01:47] <mikesherov> YO
[09:01:54] <tj_vantoll> Hey
[09:01:59] * rxaviers here
[09:02:05] <mikesherov> UI ASSEMBLE
[09:02:40] <Dave_Stein> heyo
[09:04:24] <mikesherov> SO, I discovered the big bug with interactions and scrolling!
[09:04:35] <scott_gonzalez> mikesherov: Let's start with a mergeatron update.
[09:04:59] <mikesherov> Word. I have sitting in my local, a barely working version of it in SQLLite
[09:05:36] <scott_gonzalez> cool
[09:05:46] <mikesherov> I'm going to round out some rough edges and commit a bit later today, but I can say with confidence that barring any real disasters in my life, I'll have a version ready for deploy
[09:06:05] <scott_gonzalez> It doesn't look like the CLA verification is going to work out.
[09:06:15] <scott_gonzalez> The Google Docs API requires you to log in.
[09:06:29] <scott_gonzalez> It actually requires human intervention to use their API :-(
[09:06:43] <scott_gonzalez> At least for protected data, which the CLA info is.
[09:07:36] <mikesherov> ugh
[09:07:56] <mikesherov> well, I mean, we can still ghetto-automate
[09:08:15] <scott_gonzalez> Yeah, my only thought is to see if we can have a public spreadsheet with just name + email.
[09:08:37] <scott_gonzalez> Then we won't need any auth process.
[09:08:56] <mikesherov> scott_gonzalez: what we really need is just an author map
[09:09:08] <mikesherov> author name <email> -> psuedonym
[09:09:26] <mikesherov> and maps from github usernames to CLA'd people
[09:11:00] <scott_gonzalez> Ok, well let's see if we can come up with something that won't require accessing the private data.
[09:11:12] <scott_gonzalez> rxaviers: How's download builder coming?
[09:11:41] <rxaviers> scott_gonzalez, CI integration with DB is smooth now, it's building successfully
[09:12:22] <rxaviers> working on multi version. To be more precise, it's 64% done according to the plan (and so far I'm 13% faster than what I've estimated)
[09:12:38] <rxaviers> I plan to have a v0 of multi version by Mon
[09:12:45] <scott_gonzalez> great
[09:12:55] <scott_gonzalez> That's both server + client code?
[09:13:10] <rxaviers> Actually, right now, it's possible to pull the 'versions'  branch and run it
[09:13:11] <rxaviers> both
[09:13:43] <rxaviers> I've ticked what's complete here https://gist.github.com/4038528
[09:14:34] <rxaviers> One issue we may face is: figure out how to map: documentation vs. jQueryUI version
[09:15:50] <scott_gonzalez> So, this is actually not that bad to do.
[09:16:20] <scott_gonzalez> If it's the latest version (which we already said we need to be able to distinguish, e.g., by first index), then use master.
[09:16:31] <scott_gonzalez> For anything else, use major-minor.
[09:16:40] <rxaviers> some code has been pretty much refact: eg. I was handling all the file caching in the builder. Now, I've switched it to lib/release. So, every release instance handles its own files.
[09:17:29] <rxaviers> not refacted actually, let me correct myself. But, some api has changed slightly. It's better organized.
[09:18:34] <jzaefferer> rxaviers: can you open a code-review PR for the versions branch?
[09:18:44] <rxaviers> jzaefferer, yeap sure
[09:18:49] <jzaefferer> we still need to do a full code review at some point...
[09:19:48] <rxaviers> jzaefferer, lib/builder.js is cleaner now
[09:20:09] <rxaviers> code review is great
[09:20:45] <scott_gonzalez> Yup, it's still on my list...
[09:21:26] <scott_gonzalez> We still need to switch jqueryui.com to the new-css branch on web-base-template.
[09:21:35] <scott_gonzalez> jzaefferer: Have you looked into doing the same for QUnit?
[09:22:20] <scott_gonzalez> I haven't looked at new-css at all yet.
[09:24:25] <jzaefferer> me neither
[09:24:51] <scott_gonzalez> ok
[09:25:30] <scott_gonzalez> It's important to get other sites out, but I can't justify spending several full days on that right now.
[09:26:41] <scott_gonzalez> kborchers_: Are we still moving forward with progressbar or are we at a standstill?
[09:27:08] <jzaefferer> I'll work on dialog tomorrow, gotta go now
[09:27:46] <scott_gonzalez> Later jzaefferer
[09:30:16] <scott_gonzalez> I guess he's not here right now.
[09:30:21] <Dave_Stein> doesn't look that way
[09:30:24] <scott_gonzalez> I deleted all the files from SVN.
[09:30:31] <scott_gonzalez> So nobody should stumble on those anymore.
[09:30:41] <mikesherov> great
[09:31:11] <scott_gonzalez> We're done to 0 "new" tickets.
[09:31:20] <scott_gonzalez> 42 pending, 450 total.
[09:31:20] <mikesherov> Yes
[09:31:29] <scott_gonzalez> Good job mikesherov and tj_vantoll
[09:31:41] <mikesherov> And there's actually a good number of dupes still present
[09:31:55] <mikesherov> 1 thing we should do is retriage to find causal dupes
[09:32:07] <mikesherov> not just literal dupes
[09:32:14] <scott_gonzalez> That'd be good.
[09:32:20] <mikesherov> for example: http://bugs.jqueryui.com/ticket/3635#comment:3
[09:32:25] <mikesherov> fixes like 5 bugs
[09:33:44] <tj_vantoll> A re-triage is probably only necessary for the interactions and datepicker.
[09:33:51] <mikesherov> tj_vantoll: yes
[09:33:51] <tj_vantoll> So like 80% of the tickets :)
[09:33:54] <scott_gonzalez> heh
[09:34:03] <mikesherov> and the assumption there is that .position() is the same as .css('top') and .css('left')
[09:34:16] <mikesherov> which if fixed everywhere, fixes like 10 bugs
[09:35:10] <mikesherov> .position() accounts for scroll, and it's being used as a replacement for .css('top') and .css('left'), which correctly do not account for inner scroll
[09:35:22] <mikesherov> so, I'm going to land fixes for that, and then retriage
[09:35:24] <scott_gonzalez> Right, so let's get those fixed :-)
[09:36:31] <mikesherov> ok, will do
[09:37:35] <mikesherov> so, now is a good time as ever to say that I'm going to break milestone order
[09:37:46] <mikesherov> and go after cleaning up interactions until the rewrite
[09:38:42] <scott_gonzalez> That's fine.
[09:39:36] <mikesherov> but just for the team's benefit, since I discussed with scott_gonzalez, I'm doing this to get contributors back, clean the pull request queue, and build up a test suite for the eventual rewrite
[09:40:39] <mikesherov> so I'll do that
[09:40:54] <Dave_Stein> so about the rewrite...
[09:41:37] <mikesherov> yes
[09:41:55] <Dave_Stein> what's the latest with the API and when does who want to review the sortable stuff with me?
[09:42:11] <Dave_Stein> I would think scott_gonzalez will want to take a look
[09:42:27] <Dave_Stein> i literally copy-pasted draggable... commented out everything until i needed it, and added a few lines from droppable and got a very very basic sort working
[09:42:57] <mikesherov> right, my approach here would be waiting for scott_gonzalez to define the API… then work out the upgrade guide
[09:43:17] <mikesherov> so we can code the code and transform the tests in tandem
[09:43:33] <mikesherov> although, Dave_Stein, your approach sounds sensible :-)
[09:44:05] <mikesherov> what we need tactically here is just like an hour on the phone to hash the whole thing out :-)
[09:44:20] <mikesherov> or on skype, if you're account hasn't been hacked yet that is
[09:44:25] <Dave_Stein> haha
[09:44:32] <Dave_Stein> if my skype got hacked i woudnt be too sad
[09:44:36] <Dave_Stein> i use it once a year ;)
[09:44:40] <Dave_Stein> i know you guys use it more
[09:44:48] <mikesherov> Dave_Stein: all your chats get exposed
[09:44:53] <mikesherov> if you use it for that
[09:44:55] <mikesherov> but that's OT
[09:45:34] <Dave_Stein> is talking on phone about code/test integration useful before the API is ready?
[09:46:12] <mikesherov> Well, I'd think the call would be to figure out the final API by subtraction
[09:46:25] <mikesherov> scott_gonzalez: ? ^
[09:46:46] <Dave_Stein> there sure is a lot of subtraction in that doc but there's also tweaks like i know what's passed to helper in draggable is different than today
[09:46:50] <Dave_Stein> so gotta be sure on that stuff too
[09:46:55] <mikesherov> right, sure
[09:47:02] <mikesherov> I mean, the call's goal is the defined API
[09:47:09] <mikesherov> that we agree on
[09:47:14] <scott_gonzalez> Sure, we can do that.
[09:47:17] <mikesherov> cool
[09:47:51] <mikesherov> OK, Dave_Stein: can we do a call later this week?
[09:47:57] <mikesherov> scott_gonzalez: ?
[09:48:03] <Dave_Stein> yeah that works
[09:48:10] <scott_gonzalez> yeah
[09:48:49] <mikesherov> cool, let's take scheduling that offline
[09:48:55] <scott_gonzalez> ok
[09:48:57] <Dave_Stein> i have so many meetings today but im open tomorrow and friday
[09:49:10] <mikesherov> OK, Dave_Stein: I'd like to do it after 7PM
[09:49:16] <mikesherov> so, there's that :-)
[09:49:17] <Dave_Stein> even better
[09:49:17] <scott_gonzalez> I've got 1-9-stable running in TestSwarm.
[09:49:23] <mikesherov> scott_gonzalez: cool
[09:49:31] <scott_gonzalez> Currently only against core 1.8.2.
[09:49:46] <scott_gonzalez> I'd like to add jquery-git and old jQuery versions too.
[09:49:56] <mikesherov> scott_gonzalez: what's involved in that?
[09:49:58] <Dave_Stein> okay i think i'll get some lunch now then :) I'll DM my cell to scott cause i don't htink he has it anymore unless he's that nice ha
[09:50:15] <scott_gonzalez> Mostly just creating the jobs in TestSwarm. I was hoping to get TestSwarm green before adding a ton more jobs.
[09:50:27] <mikesherov> cool, good stuff scott_gonzalez
[09:50:37] <scott_gonzalez> We're mostly there now, so I think I'll add the remaining jobs today.
[09:50:49] <mikesherov> at some point, I need to fix testswarm, but that's lower for right now
[09:50:51] <scott_gonzalez> I'll also try go get jquery-ui-1-9-git.js or something like that.
[09:51:34] <Dave_Stein> see you guys later
[09:53:08] <scott_gonzalez> So, CSS clip is not as cool as we thought...
[09:53:19] <mikesherov> no, it isn't
[09:53:24] <scott_gonzalez> mikesherov: Do you still plan on trying to duplicated element approach?
[09:53:38] <mikesherov> scott_gonzalez: it sounds crazy
[09:53:42] <scott_gonzalez> it does
[09:53:59] <scott_gonzalez> It also means that we'll still have issues with .remove()/.stop().
[09:54:10] <mikesherov> petro may investigate, but I don't feel like it's going to bear fruit
[09:54:40] <scott_gonzalez> Ok, so the result of this is lots of tickets against other widgets.
[09:54:51] <scott_gonzalez> For example, dialog has a fair amount of tickets related to effects wrappers.
[09:54:58] <scott_gonzalez> Should we just close them as cantfix?
[09:55:05] <scott_gonzalez> I mean, we technically can fix them.
[09:55:13] <scott_gonzalez> Dialogs are always absolutely positioned.
[09:55:29] <scott_gonzalez> But it would mean having two paths inside effects.
[09:55:33] <scott_gonzalez> Which is also crazy.
[09:55:45] <mikesherov> I'd like to punt another week on this if we can
[09:55:50] <scott_gonzalez> ok
[09:55:50] <mikesherov> and then take another look at it
[09:56:11] <scott_gonzalez> For reference: http://bugs.jqueryui.com/report/27?P=dialog&K=animation
[09:56:49] <mikesherov> yeah, I'm painfully aware :-)
[09:56:54] <scott_gonzalez> Ok, 4 minutes left and we're on the last item: mikesherov breaking stuff :-P
[09:57:03] <mikesherov> so is it just me and you?
[09:57:09] <mikesherov> and also, that I updated the clap
[09:57:50] <scott_gonzalez> I think some people are still lurking.
[09:58:11] <mikesherov> http://oksoclap.com/ui-pull-requests
[09:58:18] <mikesherov> we should schedule a time to review this too
[09:58:38] <scott_gonzalez> ok
[09:59:24] <mikesherov> now that we're in a place to land more of the stuff
[09:59:51] <scott_gonzalez> Assuming you want to do an evening call, 9:00p is the best for me.
[10:00:00] <mikesherov> OK, cool
[10:00:22] <mikesherov> That works for me as well, although not today or tomorrow even. Wednesdays are always bad, and tomorrow I have a night meeting
[10:01:19] <scott_gonzalez> Let's play it by ear then.
[10:01:29] <mikesherov> K
[10:01:56] <scott_gonzalez> Ok, my next meeting just started.
[10:02:01] <mikesherov> later!