[09:00:57] <DaveMethvin> hi guys
[09:01:00] <jaubourg> hey
[09:01:17] <DaveMethvin> happy new year!
[09:01:24] <DaveMethvin> started a new doc for our notes https://docs.google.com/document/d/1su2ZTFZbnp_DD-LGZleuEudTFRJT_g4zf7UfGOMQvco/edit
[09:01:30] <jaubourg> happy new year and best wishes to you all
[09:01:40] <DaveMethvin> you should all have write access, if not let me know and I'll add your email manually
[09:02:02] <gnarf> DaveMethvin: we should probably turn on the "es3" option in https://github.com/jquery/jquery/blob/1.x-master/.jshintrc
[09:02:07] <gnarf> qunit just got bit by it
[09:02:20] <gnarf> https://github.com/jquery/qunit/commit/bc3d7c2fdb9ade9cc655d1a2c8165fd9ea5e2e2c
[09:02:32] <jaubourg> DaveMethvin: seems I'm in view only...  but may have a brain disfunction and not use gdocs properly
[09:02:33] <DaveMethvin> didn't jshint flip the default recently?
[09:02:58] <DaveMethvin> jaubourg i see you as "anonymous badger" i think
[09:03:11] <DaveMethvin> are you logged in? it may be that i have the wrong email
[09:03:16] <gnarf> nevermind: https://github.com/jquery/jquery/blob/1.x-master/src/.jshintrc
[09:03:19] <DaveMethvin> authentication is fun
[09:03:20] <gnarf> its in the src file
[09:03:27] <jaubourg> DaveMethvin: julian@creative-area.net for anything google oauth
[09:03:55] <m_gol> present
[09:04:02] <DaveMethvin> yay!
[09:04:18] <markelog> hey
[09:04:22] <DaveMethvin> so...sorry about disappearing lately, got busy with a bunch of junk
[09:04:28] <DaveMethvin> including tech support for my mom
[09:04:35] <jaubourg> (just a warning, I won't be able to stay until the very end of the meeting)
[09:04:52] <jaubourg> what went wrong with her computer?
[09:04:56] <DaveMethvin> drive failed
[09:05:00] <jaubourg> ouch
[09:05:13] <m_gol> gnarf: we shouldn't
[09:05:15] <DaveMethvin> yeah and it's been acting up for a while, she just didn't know it was failing
[09:05:18] <m_gol> this option is for node only
[09:05:30] <m_gol> for the source files & tests it's turned on
[09:05:37] <jaubourg> DaveMethvin: yeah, mine crashed last year with no warning
[09:05:45] <gnarf> m_gol: i saw the other jshintrc - confusing ;)
[09:06:03] <DaveMethvin> okay, so can we get an RC out this week? What needs to land beforehand? I saw timmywil making some changes to the release script
[09:06:28] <m_gol> gnarf: we did not have it for tests/ up until recently but I added it
[09:06:29] <DaveMethvin> next week we'll be doing a bunch of "State of jQuery" blog posts
[09:06:43] <DaveMethvin> so it would be good to get 1.11/2.1 out next week
[09:06:56] <m_gol> sorry, I've been away recently... why do we need RC?
[09:07:20] <jaubourg> because people test more with RCs than betas
[09:07:23] <DaveMethvin> well we don't NEED it, and actually can skip it if there's not much changed
[09:07:48] <DaveMethvin> i dunno if anyone is testing but we did get some feedback on node for example
[09:07:58] <jaubourg> that's that
[09:08:05] <DaveMethvin> i think some of that is because we hijacked the "jquery" name from node :)
[09:08:22] <DaveMethvin> we got some involuntary testers that way :0
[09:08:38] <m_gol> ah, right, removing the global from the npm version was done after beta 3
[09:08:44] <m_gol> that's enough reason for me ;)
[09:08:54] <DaveMethvin> yeah i think we want to at least let people try that
[09:08:57] <gnarf> DaveMethvin: http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/14283 - I'm with you
[09:09:01] <DaveMethvin> after we publich
[09:09:04] <gnarf> I think <col> is a zero width
[09:09:17] <DaveMethvin> and there's a good workaround anyway gnarf
[09:10:51] <DaveMethvin> on #14663 does everyone agree we'll need to publish 1.x on npm so that browserify works?
[09:10:59] <DaveMethvin> i had forgotten about that case
[09:11:31] <DaveMethvin> we'll just need to document that we don't support 1.x on node and it's there for other use cases
[09:11:52] <jaubourg> well, npm is supposed to be for node... do we want to support rogue use of npm?
[09:12:32] <m_gol> there's quite a vocal community that wants that
[09:12:33] <DaveMethvin> browerify seems to be popular, at least with some people
[09:12:36] <jaubourg> I didn't follow the whole discussion but isn't bower better suited in that case
[09:12:37] <jaubourg> ?
[09:12:54] <DaveMethvin> yes i think so jaubourg  but people are trying to make npm be everyone's package mgr
[09:12:59] <m_gol> bower just manage files, they want to use require & stuff
[09:13:06] <DaveMethvin> domenic denicola is an advocate for that
[09:13:24] <jaubourg> domenic denicola is an advocate of a lot of things
[09:13:40] <DaveMethvin> anyway, publishing doesn't hurt but we'll need a note so people won't use it with node
[09:14:19] <jaubourg> well, I don't think it's a good idea to publish something on npm that doesn't work in node... but if it's a crowd pleaser
[09:14:29] <m_gol> oth, the browserify author himself is quite opposed to jQuery
[09:14:43] <DaveMethvin> lol
[09:15:06] <m_gol> substack likes tinies modules possible
[09:15:13] <m_gol> like, a function per a module
[09:15:16] <m_gol> i.e. not jQuery
[09:15:29] <rwaldron> m_gol ie. require pollution
[09:15:31] <rwaldron> ;)
[09:15:34] <DaveMethvin> then he prob doesn't like the entire node library, right?
[09:15:45] <m_gol> ]:->
[09:15:46] <DaveMethvin> require("process")
[09:15:54] <DaveMethvin> IT'S TOO BLOATED
[09:16:07] <m_gol> AFAIK he thinks node core should be as small as possible & everything else should be on npm
[09:16:30] <m_gol> anyway, seems some people apart from domenic want it as well
[09:16:43] <m_gol> but they're all quite vocal so it's hard to say if it's really popular
[09:16:51] <m_gol> or if we're just making it work for 10 people
[09:16:55] <DaveMethvin> not necessarily a bad thing, but tiny granularity puts different demands on your package mgr than big lumps
[09:17:23] <DaveMethvin> there was a discussion about this on the Modernizr issues a week ago
[09:17:42] <DaveMethvin> someone wanted to develop with full Modernizr (all detects) but then build with only the ones they used
[09:17:55] <DaveMethvin> that's not the way package managers work
[09:18:03] <rwaldron> require("I") require("hope") require("the") require("pattern") require("will") require("be") require("short") require("lived")
[09:18:19] <DaveMethvin> lol exactly rwaldron
[09:18:43] <m_gol> I'm sure jQuery would be 3x as large with everything in separate modules
[09:18:43] <rwaldron> DaveMethvin should I rebase the data-as-expando changes?
[09:18:50] <rwaldron> m_gol indeed
[09:18:56] <DaveMethvin> eventually rwaldron  but that's 1.12
[09:19:04] <rwaldron> ah, got it
[09:19:13] <rwaldron> sorry, I misunderstood above
[09:19:23] <jaubourg> damn, gotta fly earlier than expected
[09:19:25] <DaveMethvin> i'd like to leave san diego with a solid plan for 1.12/2.2
[09:19:37] <rwaldron> Ok
[09:19:37] <DaveMethvin> including $.xhr jaubourg  !
[09:19:45] <jaubourg> got you
[09:19:45] <m_gol> :)
[09:19:54] <DaveMethvin> had to mention him since he came to visit :)
[09:20:01] <jaubourg> :P
[09:20:12] <DaveMethvin> it's gonna be fun
[09:20:16] <DaveMethvin> and a LOT WARMER
[09:20:28] <DaveMethvin> we're getting down to 2 degrees F tonight
[09:20:31] <jaubourg> I'll try to be more present this year but the timeslot is really not practical for me anymore :/
[09:20:34] <DaveMethvin> in C that's a bigger negative number
[09:20:36] <jaubourg> anyway, gotta fly for real
[09:20:41] <DaveMethvin> ok cyl
[09:21:12] <DaveMethvin> on #14038
[09:21:25] <DaveMethvin> timmywil owns it, dunno if he'll have a chance to fix it tho
[09:21:42] <DaveMethvin> anyone else have a good idea what's going on there and could look at it?
[09:22:25] <rwaldron> ? 14038
[09:22:27] <rwaldron> ack
[09:22:31] <rwaldron> ?14038
[09:22:37] <rwaldron> how does this damn thing work
[09:22:38] <m_gol> not this channel, rwaldron ;)
[09:22:42] <rwaldron> oh right
[09:22:44] <rwaldron> DUH
[09:22:56] <DaveMethvin> timmywil suggested the "small fix" of ignoring non-px borders http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/14038
[09:23:26] <DaveMethvin> which would "fix" this case
[09:23:33] <DaveMethvin> and be small
[09:23:50] <m_gol> "Open your mind and reconsider this shit"
[09:24:14] <DaveMethvin> "free your mind and the code will follow"
[09:24:31] <DaveMethvin> yeah, he could have been more diplomatic, but timmywil handled it wll
[09:24:33] <DaveMethvin> well*
[09:25:06] <DaveMethvin> gibson042: would you be able to take a look?
[09:25:39] <DaveMethvin> oh but you're also on deck fo http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/14484
[09:25:41] <gibson042> sorry, I'm here but not really "here"
[09:25:45] <gibson042> what's up?
[09:25:48] <DaveMethvin> do you think you'll get to that one?
[09:25:50] <DaveMethvin> http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/14484
[09:25:54] <m_gol> this seems like an edge case; whatever we do, it won't be consequential
[09:26:05] <m_gol> (I meant 14038)
[09:26:44] <gibson042> this looks very similar to the +=/-= work
[09:27:04] <DaveMethvin> yeah so maybe tacked together?
[09:28:12] <gibson042> 14038 strikes me as a followup, but yes
[09:28:34] <DaveMethvin> will you have some time in the next couple of days gibson042?
[09:28:50] <gibson042> possibly Wednesday
[09:28:59] <DaveMethvin> that would work
[09:29:14] <DaveMethvin> i'm thinking the rc on Thu or Fri
[09:29:19] <DaveMethvin> then final the following week
[09:29:43] <gibson042> in the immediate future, I do like http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/14038#comment:11
[09:29:57] <gibson042> short-circuit on mismatching units
[09:30:02] <gibson042> can someone get that in?
[09:30:20] <DaveMethvin> markelog or m_gol?
[09:30:23] <gibson042> as a temporary patch to improve behavior without full ticket resolution
[09:30:50] <markelog> for what?
[09:31:03] <markelog> if you do it in wed?
[09:31:11] <DaveMethvin> http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/14038#comment:11
[09:31:21] <DaveMethvin> the "same units" fix described there
[09:31:31] <gibson042> as a hedge against the full fix not being ready in time, or too big to land
[09:31:54] <markelog> i could take it
[09:32:01] <DaveMethvin> cool
[09:32:03] <DaveMethvin> thanks!
[09:32:37] <DaveMethvin> i think that's pretty much it, unless someone wants to sneak in something last minute
[09:32:49] <DaveMethvin> and i'd prefer not :)
[09:33:49] <m_gol> I just put a couple of links ;P
[09:34:31] <m_gol> we can wait with 13767, it's too late for 1.11/2.1
[09:34:34] <DaveMethvin> on #14672 i just don't think its reasonable to expect all options to b visible
[09:34:42] <m_gol> though I think mikesherov closed it too early
[09:35:03] <m_gol> I agree, I wrote a comment under 14672
[09:35:21] <DaveMethvin> on 13767, you want to reopen for discussion on 1.12/2.2?
[09:35:32] <DaveMethvin> if there's a simple fix or way to make it less bad that's fine
[09:36:10] <m_gol> yeah, I'd say just leave static elements as not supported with that
[09:36:20] <m_gol> but it's still be worth IMO to fix the case with positioned ones
[09:36:27] <DaveMethvin> on #14464 ... GOOD GOD there are too many package managers
[09:36:36] <m_gol> mikesherov wrote only about static ones when he closed the issue
[09:36:53] <m_gol> "Build: add jsons.json file"
[09:37:03] <DaveMethvin> since timmywil is knee-deep in that I'll add him for comment
[09:38:27] <DaveMethvin> http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/14671 if we didn't break it ourselves recently then this is some Firefox issue
[09:38:40] <m_gol> I've checked it and for me it works fine
[09:38:50] <m_gol> changed to pending
[09:38:54] <m_gol> maybe a rogue extension
[09:39:10] <DaveMethvin> yeah
[09:39:36] <m_gol> as for the component issue
[09:40:05] <m_gol> if this can be fully automated, why not (if there is a PR submitted for that)
[09:40:25] <m_gol> but I wouldn't want yet another JSON to be modified manually
[09:40:29] <DaveMethvin> yeah i agree
[09:40:39] <DaveMethvin> just wondered if anyone has objections
[09:40:52] <DaveMethvin> other than more crap in the root :)
[09:41:02] <DaveMethvin> mypackagemanager.json
[09:42:15] <DaveMethvin> alright if nobody has anything else let's call it a meeting
[09:42:21] <m_gol> there's one thing we could do (in the future) to ease AMD/ES6/Node module interop
[09:42:34] <m_gol> to use ES6 modules with a build step similar to what we do with AMD now
[09:42:45] <m_gol> it seems npm people plan to add ES6 modules interop
[09:43:02] <DaveMethvin> i think that would be a good 1.12/2.2 thing
[09:43:16] <DaveMethvin> also to avoid people consuming our amd modules directly
[09:43:22] <DaveMethvin> which some people may already be doing
[09:44:02] <m_gol> it may conflict with out jsHint usage
[09:44:17] <m_gol> since we can't enforce es3 & esnext together
[09:44:33] <m_gol> anyway, that's sth good for San Diego :)
[09:44:51] <DaveMethvin> yes, we can start putting together an agenda for that after this releases
[09:45:36] <DaveMethvin> ok, i'll see everyone back in -dev! I'm going to be pretty busy the rest of the day but ping me if you need anything and I'm a blocker