[09:00:16] <DaveMethvin> mode #jquery-meeting -m
[09:00:18] <DaveMethvin> lol
[09:00:25] <timmywil> beat ya! :)
[09:00:26] <DaveMethvin> juuuust beat me timmywil
[09:00:28] <m_gol> :)
[09:01:02] <timmywil> also, you can't type slashes apparently ;P
[09:01:23] <DaveMethvin> timmywil rwaldron jaubourg mikesherov gnarf m_gol gibson042 orkel
[09:01:28] <DaveMethvin> who'd i forget to call?
[09:01:32] <gnarf> @txjs
[09:01:34] <gnarf> but here
[09:01:45] <DaveMethvin> np i always just say yr name
[09:01:57] <gibson042> also here
[09:02:05] <DaveMethvin> okay i'm lazy about the agenda
[09:02:31] <DaveMethvin> so i think we should be able to get 2.0 out
[09:02:45] <DaveMethvin> if we don't think we need an rc i'd prefer to avoid it
[09:02:55] <DaveMethvin> since nobody tends to look at them anyway :)
[09:03:02] <m_gol> there are a few pull requests
[09:03:06] <DaveMethvin> yeah
[09:03:07] <DaveMethvin> let
[09:03:15] <DaveMethvin> s go through those
[09:03:16] <m_gol> but mostly simple or not really important
[09:03:23] <m_gol> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1239 this is mine and it's dead simple
[09:03:24] <b-ot> m_gol: Pull request #1239 by mzgol (4d 21h ago): Tell uglifyjs to not mangle undefined; saves 44 bytes. Fixes #13759.
[09:03:35] <DaveMethvin> yeah and low risk
[09:03:38] <DaveMethvin> so we can land that one
[09:04:06] <m_gol> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1241 - this one needs some work and it's at risk, I don't know how quick yiminghe will be to patch and I have quite a lot remarks to the current version
[09:04:07] <b-ot> m_gol: Pull request #1241 by yiminghe (10h 43m ago): make left/top auto value consistent across browsers
[09:04:32] <DaveMethvin> it's a patch of something that's been broken for a while though, right
[09:04:35] <DaveMethvin> ?
[09:04:42] <m_gol> yeah
[09:04:47] <DaveMethvin> in that case i dont' have a prob waiting
[09:05:03] <m_gol> it's certainly not critical, can probably go to 2.0.1
[09:05:08] <m_gol> or 2.1 if you prefer
[09:05:24] <DaveMethvin> prob 2.0.1
[09:05:37] <DaveMethvin> but still could go into 1.10
[09:05:56] <DaveMethvin> actualy i saw timmywil added a 1.10/2.0 version
[09:05:58] <m_gol> there is also Krinkle's ajax refactor for 2.0 but it's not ready so I doubt it'll make it to 2.0, too risky
[09:06:03] <m_gol> yeah, nice addition :)
[09:06:05] <DaveMethvin> agreed
[09:06:33] <DaveMethvin> we'll just need to accept that there can be minor diffs btwn 1.10.x and 2.0.x
[09:06:33] <m_gol> what about https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1051 ?
[09:06:34] <b-ot> m_gol: Pull request #1051 by gibson042 (4mon 1w ago): Fix #12838: hook point for non-jQuery.ajax synchronous script fetch/execute in domManip
[09:06:43] <DaveMethvin> yeah i had that on the list
[09:06:57] <DaveMethvin> it's mainly just moving some code from one place to another
[09:07:01] <gibson042> yep
[09:07:07] <DaveMethvin> rwaldron had concerns about exposing the api
[09:07:14] <DaveMethvin> but i don't see a way around it
[09:07:14] <m_gol> ok, so we have 2 pulls to land currently
[09:07:32] <gibson042> https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1216 ought to land as well
[09:07:33] <b-ot> gibson042: Pull request #1216 by gibson042 (1w 4d ago): Fix #13596; #13722: .replaceWith consistency
[09:07:45] <rwaldron> Oh dear
[09:07:51] <rwaldron> I don't want to argue this anymore
[09:08:10] <m_gol> :D
[09:08:35] <DaveMethvin> rwaldron we are sympathetic but need a realistic alternative
[09:09:27] <DaveMethvin> gibson042 the equivalent of 1216 landed for 2.0 right?
[09:09:31] <DaveMethvin> already
[09:09:40] <gibson042> looking it over now, I don't think so
[09:09:43] <gibson042> but I can do that today
[09:10:30] <DaveMethvin> okay right, i thought that pull WAS for 2.0 at one point ... and it can be done a bit differently in 2.0
[09:10:54] <DaveMethvin> per the discussion on the ticket
[09:11:17] <DaveMethvin> i am not sure where https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1205 is right now
[09:11:17] <b-ot> DaveMethvin: Pull request #1205 by ros3cin (4w 1d ago): Fix for the ticket #13483
[09:11:57] <m_gol> this is just missing tests, right?
[09:12:08] <DaveMethvin> I believe so m_gol
[09:12:28] <m_gol> but for 9 days so I don't think we can count on the "pull requester" (is there a name for it?)
[09:12:52] <DaveMethvin> yeah i think he may have lost interest
[09:12:59] <DaveMethvin> i can try pinging him again
[09:13:12] <DaveMethvin> when possible it's nice to have them finish the work if we're giving them credit
[09:13:19] <m_gol> you'd like to ship on Friday?
[09:13:22] <m_gol> yeah, true
[09:13:36] <m_gol> OK, this one doesn't have to make it to 2.0, after all
[09:13:38] <m_gol> let's see
[09:13:48] <DaveMethvin> right
[09:14:07] <m_gol> I'd also look at this ticket: http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/13742
[09:14:13] <DaveMethvin> alright pinged him
[09:14:36] <m_gol> though sb else should probably do it as I'm not sure - are only document-like contexts valid? (e.g. ones from iframes etc.)
[09:14:40] <DaveMethvin> m_gol I think context should always be a `document`
[09:14:53] <orkel> agreed this is a doc issue
[09:14:57] <m_gol> yeah, I was just wondering what's the point of the argument
[09:15:10] <DaveMethvin> i suppose we could look for an `.ownerDocument` on the element but better they get it right for us :)
[09:15:12] <timmywil> other documents
[09:15:28] <DaveMethvin> right like iframes
[09:15:39] <DaveMethvin> if you wanted to parse something and inject into an iframe
[09:16:00] <DaveMethvin> 9 times out of 10 it will be your own doc tho
[09:16:08] <m_gol> if that's the case, it should still be said clearly in docs
[09:16:26] <DaveMethvin> m_gol can you make a docs ticket for that?
[09:16:27] <m_gol> currently it seems there can be any node passed as this arg which is clearly wrong
[09:16:39] <m_gol> sure, will do later today
[09:16:59] <timmywil> actually, we could just stick our nodeType check in parseHTML instead of init and allow elements to be passed as context
[09:17:04] <timmywil> we have the logic already
[09:17:07] <orkel> not any node, only element node but it still wrong though
[09:17:44] <m_gol> I don't know if just ignoring incorrect arguments is a good idea :)
[09:17:54] <DaveMethvin> well what works and what they SHOULD do are different things
[09:18:09] <m_gol> I'd rather see .ownerDocument applied to elements than completely ignoring them
[09:18:30] <timmywil> we can move this https://github.com/jquery/jquery/blob/master/src/core.js#L109
[09:18:45] <m_gol> though it'd look as kind-of ignoring them, too, so I'd rather correct the docs
[09:19:07] <timmywil> it's not uncommon for jQuery to ignore nodeType !== 1
[09:19:14] <DaveMethvin> let's NOT document what it currently does code wise, let's document that the arg should be a `document`
[09:19:24] <DaveMethvin> because it really should be
[09:19:42] <m_gol> it'll look weird if we just say that the second arg has to be document
[09:19:43] <DaveMethvin> i can't think of a reason for us to sniff out the document from an element when the user can be explicit
[09:20:05] <timmywil> DaveMethvin: cause we do already
[09:20:20] <DaveMethvin> in the docs? lemme look
[09:20:24] <timmywil> not fighting here, just saying this is a simple change
[09:20:45] <timmywil> DaveMethvin: I mean in other places, like $()
[09:21:12] <DaveMethvin> but $() uses context in a more general way
[09:21:19] <DaveMethvin> here it really shoudl be a doc
[09:22:02] <DaveMethvin> and i would be for nearly all these people they just need either `document` or `null` there
[09:22:24] <timmywil> yea, that makes sense, but it's all a matter of what we say in the docs. We COULD say "A document, or element from which to retrieve the owner document"
[09:22:43] <DaveMethvin> and i'm not saying it  *can't* work that way, just that i'd prefer to not document that we try to sniff out the document
[09:22:54] <timmywil> ok, that's fine
[09:23:14] <DaveMethvin> i think we'll just confuse people more by accepting lots of different things there
[09:23:18] <timmywil> let's just port this ticket to api then
[09:23:20] <DaveMethvin> or at least saying we do
[09:23:22] <DaveMethvin> agreed
[09:24:08] <m_gol> I'll file the ticket today and then I'll close the current one with a link
[09:24:27] <timmywil> almost done
[09:24:56] <DaveMethvin> http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/13778 is bogus, i'll close with an explain
[09:26:15] <timmywil> ?13742 closed
[09:26:45] <DaveMethvin> 13778 closed
[09:27:36] <timmywil> brb
[09:27:41] <m_gol> can I merge https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1239?
[09:27:41] <b-ot> m_gol: Pull request #1239 by mzgol (4d 21h ago): Tell uglifyjs to not mangle undefined; saves 44 bytes. Fixes #13759.
[09:27:52] <m_gol> it should be cherry-picked to 1.x-master, too
[09:28:11] <DaveMethvin> think you're up to it m_gol? your first push is the hardest :D
[09:28:18] <m_gol> ;)
[09:28:26] <DaveMethvin> give it a try
[09:28:30] <m_gol> I see the large merge button... what's the catch? :D
[09:28:50] <DaveMethvin> oh the github api? yuck
[09:29:04] <DaveMethvin> i don't think any of us use it
[09:29:14] <m_gol> ahh
[09:29:16] <DaveMethvin> for one you get a merge commit rather than a fast forward
[09:29:32] <m_gol> so I should just push normally
[09:29:47] <DaveMethvin> rebase your branch, then merge to master
[09:29:53] <m_gol> yup
[09:30:31] <orkel> m_gol: when you try to cherry-pick this commit make sure it saves bytes, uglify options differ from 1.x and 2.x
[09:30:45] <m_gol> ok, I'll check it before
[09:31:01] <orkel> thanks :-)
[09:31:08] <DaveMethvin> there's always revert!
[09:31:10] <DaveMethvin> :D
[09:31:35] <m_gol> btw
[09:31:43] <DaveMethvin> ros3cin replied he says he's gonna work on #13483 tests
[09:31:47] <m_gol> sorry for begginer spam ;)
[09:31:52] <DaveMethvin> np
[09:32:01] <m_gol> but I currently have origin set to mzgol/jquery and upstream to jquery/jquery
[09:32:13] <DaveMethvin> me too
[09:32:18] <m_gol> I pulled master from origin and rebased my branch
[09:32:20] <DaveMethvin> well my own branch for origin
[09:32:33] <DaveMethvin> oh, pull master from jquery
[09:32:35] <gnarf> m_gol: git discuss in -dev later?
[09:32:41] <DaveMethvin> yeah
[09:32:43] <m_gol> right
[09:32:56] <DaveMethvin> i was thinking we should write more of this down, there's a lot that we don't have in a guide
[09:33:03] <DaveMethvin> i have a todo for myself for that
[09:33:21] <m_gol> :)
[09:33:22] <m_gol> ok
[09:33:34] <m_gol> so we have 3 pull requests to merge if I counted correctly
[09:33:49] <gnarf> just ask rwaldron about first commits ;)
[09:33:50] <m_gol> 2 by gibson, 1 by me
[09:34:23] <rwaldron> what about first commits?
[09:34:29] <gibson042> and one by ros3cin with work pending
[09:35:26] <gnarf> rwaldron: your first push to jquery/jquery that then you forced, etc -- good times
[09:35:28] <gnarf> `hi5
[09:35:28] <b-ot> gnarf: ⋰⁵⋱
[09:35:34] <gnarf> ;)
[09:35:39] <DaveMethvin> that was pulley if i recall
[09:35:42] <gnarf> yeah
[09:35:47] <gnarf> tools fault for sure
[09:35:50] <DaveMethvin> manual control FTW
[09:36:12] <gnarf> just sayin, its a good story, basically no matter what gets done, we can repair it tho ;)
[09:36:20] <rwaldron> gnarf I probably also used spaces for indents and trailing whitespace
[09:36:27] <gnarf> rwaldron: :)
[09:36:59] <DaveMethvin> gulp
[09:37:07] <timmywil> back
[09:37:07] <DaveMethvin> hokay
[09:37:49] <m_gol> so, my first meeting is coming to an end, I guess? ;)
[09:38:05] <DaveMethvin> alright i think i recorded this all in the notes
[09:38:19] <DaveMethvin> oh yeah, and it IS your first meeting as a team member!
[09:38:25] <DaveMethvin> congrats m_gol!!!!
[09:38:26] <m_gol> :)
[09:38:32] <m_gol> thx, feels nice :)
[09:38:33] <gnarf> break time @txjs, im out
[09:38:42] <DaveMethvin> cya gnarf eat a donut for me
[09:39:16] <DaveMethvin> i think the other open tix are not an issue for 2.0
[09:39:21] <DaveMethvin> so that's pretty much it
[09:39:24] <DaveMethvin> any other stuff?
[09:39:27] <m_gol> yeah, a few 1.10 ones
[09:39:35] <m_gol> we can probably discuss it next week
[09:39:40] <DaveMethvin> yeah
[09:39:47] <DaveMethvin> or even this week in -dev
[09:40:08] <DaveMethvin> okay guys, see you in -dev!