[07:56:54] iskren, jzaefferer, Krinkle, Nikerabbit, santhosh, scott_gonzalez, siebrand, tj_vantoll1 [07:57:00] Krinkle|detached [07:57:26] hey santhosh_, [07:57:37] rxaviers: hello [07:58:19] let's give some mins and see if someone else is joining [08:00:19] rxaviers: it was busy days for me after our last meeting. I must apologize- I did not get a chance to relook at the document we prepared [08:00:59] santhosh_, ok, thanks for letting me know [08:01:02] Krinkle, siebrand, Hi [08:01:10] Good day! [08:01:40] Good day (I guess afternoon/night for you right) [08:02:07] Krinkle, santhosh, Nikerabbit and I are in San Francisco. 08:00 here. [08:02:21] ah! Right, for the event [08:02:29] Nikerabbit, santhosh_, Krinkle, siebrand, do you have any updates? Would someone like to start? [08:04:26] https://docs.google.com/a/wikimedia.org/document/d/1zARV2WMowVU38MOOyYI120ceQ7KY6z-1lh_3kFIcLcc/edit is the doc we were working on. [08:07:33] ok... [08:08:24] morning [08:08:41] Hi Nikerabbit [08:08:49] Hello Nikerabbit [08:10:18] siebrand, anything else? [08:10:27] Not from me. [08:10:32] Ok [08:10:58] Krinkle, Nikerabbit, do you guys have any updates? [08:11:46] Currently having other priorities, so not many changes in our libraries. [08:12:07] if I remember correctly santhosh_ added fallback handling to jquery.i18n [08:13:07] Ok thanks [08:13:11] The document lists the components of a Localization/I18n architecture. I have added comments on the components jQuery Globalize offers a solution. [08:14:57] there are lots of comments in the doc, should we discuss them to get any unclear things resolved? [08:16:16] I think the overall is clear enough now. We could discuss specifics after the meeting [08:17:21] I think a good next action item for us is to identify an initial work we could collaborate. [08:17:45] In my last email to you, I have send my proposal. I would like to hear what you think or if you think we should collaborate on somewhere else. [08:18:15] Once we have something there, we could schedule our next meeting, or it gets kinda pointless I think. [08:18:19] What do you guys think? [08:19:51] with the proposal do you specifically refer to the relative time format for globalize? [08:20:29] correct. That's one place I see we both need. [08:21:17] seems reasonable [08:22:01] Excellent. [08:22:37] I think we could draft an API and start something... [08:23:27] perhaps by creating a new document like the architecture one, or perhaps just beginning implementing something, creating a PR and discuss on github. [08:24:20] we are planning to use the cldr data for that too, right? [08:24:27] correct [08:24:34] Krinkle: are you aware of any specific requirements with relative dates? [08:25:27] (brb, ~15 mins) [08:25:35] Ok siebrand [08:25:43] I guess we're pretty much done for the meeting. [08:26:03] We could continue the relative date talk somewhere else. [08:26:13] Sorry to interrupt on that Nikerabbit. [08:26:20] But, does anyone have anything else to discuss? [08:26:42] rxaviers: Did you want to discuss custom Date object? [08:27:02] It would be good to have iskren on board [08:27:27] But, it's certainly good to have more thoughts about it. [08:27:42] Sure, didn't realize he wasn't here right now. I just got off a call with jzaefferer. [08:28:06] It was very well remembered though [08:28:44] Nikerabbit, santhosh_, siebrand, Krinkle, do you in wikipedia use anything to deal with Olson timezone on dates? [08:29:19] I do not know what is Olson [08:29:30] http://www.iana.org/time-zones [08:29:51] Im not sure if you have to in your application... [08:30:00] Just wondering... [08:31:25] I've exchanged some emails with iskren about it. On moment.js, they have a good piece of work on that regard, it's moment-timezone. [08:32:46] So, Nikerabbit, Krinkle, and who else is interested, we can continue the relative dates discussion on jqueryui-dev channel, or in some other place if you will. [08:33:05] rxaviers: only place is use preferences I think, where you can select the timezone times appear in [08:33:14] (back) [08:35:09] Nikerabbit, do you handle timezone on clientside? [08:35:28] well, to be more specific [08:35:41] we currently have this issue formatting/parsing date timezones: [08:35:49] https://github.com/jquery/globalize/pull/202 [08:36:20] So, feedbacks/suggestions are welcome [08:37:24] Anything else? [08:37:37] rxaviers: hmm I'm pretty sure our Flow project will need to handle those client side [08:37:42] but so far it is mostly server side [08:37:50] That's good to know. [08:38:16] I would like to hear thoughts on that regard. [08:38:50] Please, feel free to invite who you think is interested on it. [08:39:08] :) [08:39:47] Let's keep our next meeting for Feb 6 then (since we have an action item - relative dates)? [08:39:59] same time, same channel [08:41:06] In the meantime, we can also evolve the architecture document and bring anything up if we have something new. [08:42:09] Zzz [08:42:15] oki [08:42:18] :D [08:42:25] Is it jatlag folks?? :p [08:42:36] jet* [08:43:03] So, see you all next meeting [08:43:10] not exactly, there's just huge mess going on [08:43:10] Thanks for you time [08:43:12] np [08:43:32] I see [11:01:14] arschmitz _|Nix|_ agcolom gseguin [11:02:43] <_|Nix|_> Hey! [11:03:18] hey _|Nix|_ [11:03:28] I'm here [11:03:38] hey gseguin [11:03:40] Afternoon all [11:03:41] arschmitz agcolom [11:03:52] hey dam__ [11:03:58] Hey dam__ :-) [11:04:02] missed you guys :) [11:04:05] here [11:04:21] %s/guys/people/gi [11:04:23] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AskujzE4Ig0QdG5nSmZiSUhjYm4ya29CdjhLZmJwSWc#gid=4 [11:04:28] hey dam__! [11:04:44] will you be in San Diego? [11:04:50] I will! [11:04:57] awesome! [11:04:58] great! [11:05:04] can't wait to hack with you all in person again :) [11:05:08] on the beach or at the conference? [11:05:15] heh :) [11:05:16] :) [11:05:42] BOTH! [11:05:42] uGoMobi: mind if i start real super quick? [11:05:54] _|Nix|_: dam is Kristofer from Topcoat [11:06:02] arschmitz: sure go ahead [11:06:09] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: Gotcha! [11:06:11] <_|Nix|_> dam__: Hey! [11:06:22] i just basicly wanted to introduce dam__ to anyone that does not know who he is [11:06:40] as uGoMobi just said he is from topcoat hes the main guy on that project [11:07:05] and he expressed intrest on working with the foundation and the mobile project a few weeks ago [11:07:19] so hes going to be joining the meetings and starting to work with us [11:07:30] Very happy to be of service [11:07:36] awesome [11:07:43] <_|Nix|_> +1 [11:07:48] yay! happy to have you join the effort [11:07:55] he has a lot of awesomne experience with framework development and js and css in general [11:08:09] you are too kind [11:08:15] so hopefully he can help out a lot :) [11:08:45] Will definitely do my best [11:09:03] you also win us back a timezone we lost lol [11:09:18] didnt have anyone on west coast on mobile any more [11:09:38] hey I'm considered west still [11:09:47] thought you were mountain time? [11:09:50] the midwest starts at highway 25 [11:09:54] <_|Nix|_> gseguin: Baby west :) [11:09:55] yes, I failed at converting the time zone last week [11:10:12] oh yeah timezone wise I'm mountain [11:10:16] learned how to add now, so we are all good ;) [11:10:42] ok what do we have for today [11:11:02] I had a chat with a codeclimate guy [11:11:37] oooh [11:11:49] it seems like they would be interested to work with the foundation but I'm not sure under which terms [11:11:50] ok we can start at the bottom of the agenda :) [11:12:12] gseguin: we would have to talk to other projects too [11:12:13] gseguin: ok that's cool [11:12:14] The last numbers I got from codeclimeate are actually not bad [11:12:26] last time this came up in dev leads it was decided we didnt want it [11:12:27] now that I excluded external code and tests [11:12:34] 2.42 GPA [11:12:38] we were a bit worried about misinterpretation [11:12:44] I sent an invite to arschmitz [11:12:53] gseguin: yeah i got it iv been checking it out [11:12:58] uGoMobi: I understand [11:13:20] that's what I told Mike (from code climate) [11:13:25] gseguin: i was suprised that once you excluded tests and other stuff it was not too bad [11:13:58] yeah it's actually pretty accurate [11:14:09] navigation has high complexity [11:14:41] <_|Nix|_> Does codeclimate make specific suggestions about places where the code could use improvement - kinda like coverity, or is it something totally differen? [11:14:42] well duh! We knew that already [11:14:43] :) [11:14:59] it just reports complexity [11:15:04] <_|Nix|_> Oh, OK. [11:15:11] _|Nix|_: it does seem to at least target areas for improvment [11:15:12] sounds complex [11:15:37] <_|Nix|_> arschmitz: OK ... [11:16:12] anyhow, we need to involve the board to talk to these guys to see if they would be willing to offer us free access [11:16:15] gseguin: what is the next step? [11:16:25] ah ok [11:16:43] because the issue is if you just use the open-source side of their tool you don't have control on what you analize [11:16:50] and so you get a crappy score [11:17:00] s/analize/analyze/ [11:17:14] maybe you can inform DaveMethvin and kborchers [11:17:27] uGoMobi: we can just put on agenda for dev leads [11:17:29] arschmitz: you're an admin, feel free to add whoever so they can take a look [11:17:42] gseguin: cool will do [11:17:45] uGoMobi: I'll email you Mike's email address [11:18:24] uGoMobi: then kborchers DaveMethvin and scott_gonzalez can all look and they can go to board or whoever from there [11:19:02] I told Mike that we would reach out if we think we're going to use the tool [11:19:27] arschmitz: right, we have another Dev leads meeting before board meeting in SAN anyway [11:19:35] yup [11:20:36] Are you talking about code climate? [11:20:42] scott_gonzalez: indeed [11:20:43] You should go read https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1415 [11:20:45] yes we were [11:23:17] so using it as an internal tool and not exposing the badge? [11:23:25] fine [11:24:06] we still need to work with these guys to figure out under what terms they would let us use it [11:24:36] I think this stuff is a joke. [11:24:48] yes, that badge could give the wrong impression [11:24:50] But maybe that's just me. [11:25:34] it might not be very useful to someone like scott_gonzalez, but for new contributors it might be nice to have data to determine if they are adding value [11:25:51] I highly disagree with that. [11:26:06] if they understand the results [11:26:21] For example, adding reasonable tests dropped our grade from a D to an F: https://github.com/jquery/jquery-ui/compare/2ef1b16e4d...113e9d0c2c [11:26:37] right that was assuming that the results are easy to comprehend. [11:26:50] <_|Nix|_> dam__: I don't think so. [11:27:01] <_|Nix|_> dam__: If a new contributor gets an F, that might discourage them. [11:27:04] Code complexity is actually a really bad metric to look at. [11:27:08] scott_gonzalez: oh yeah, I excluded tests and external from the report [11:27:09] It's extremely misleading. [11:27:20] that result definitely sways me [11:27:21] Low code complexity != better readability or maintainability. [11:27:31] that's why it should not be made public [11:27:53] so we can keep an eye on things that are actually of value (if any) [11:28:07] anyhow, I'm not pushing for using it [11:28:10] it is interesting since some useful code looks like it would always fail a complexity test [11:28:16] like dom traversal etc. [11:28:27] <_|Nix|_> dam__: How can you "fail" a complexity test. [11:28:34] <_|Nix|_> That's what gets me. [11:28:40] I was just looking into it and reported on it [11:28:41] <_|Nix|_> It's not a pass/fail thing. [11:28:42] totallu [11:28:50] right [11:28:59] <_|Nix|_> The complexity of this code is X. Bam! Thanks for the info *shrug* [11:29:05] if anything complexity is a hot spot to verify [11:29:32] you look at what it points out and decide if you care [11:29:32] i think all the points were already laid out in the PR above ... I do think the measures have some value but putting them in badge form in the README file for armchair developers to critique is not a good thing [11:29:33] scott_gonzalez: totally agree with your statement [11:30:05] DaveMethvin: yup we came up to the same conclusion [11:30:20] that PR discussion is really good [11:30:45] <_|Nix|_> I suppose one positive aspect of having code complexity pointed out to you is to make you wonder: "Why does it have to be so complex?" [11:31:33] _|Nix|_: It's all a lie ;-) [11:31:42] Long functions are not inherintly complex. [11:31:44] I could see chasing complexity tests as a possible net zero yak shaving adventure [11:31:51] But algorithms assume they are. [11:32:08] <_|Nix|_> Right ... [11:32:24] might be interesting for a graduate student to write a paper on ;) [11:32:30] right, what is definition of complex code [11:32:45] <_|Nix|_> Well, that's probably where CC got started :) [11:33:05] zing [11:33:13] <_|Nix|_> I'd rather have a tool that can identify leaks ... [11:33:23] Cyclomatic complexity is clearly defined. [11:33:36] Anyway, I'm done with this discussion... [11:33:49] yeah, but if I would start contributing a jQuery project and were confronted with CC results I wouldn't know what it exactly tells me [11:34:00] :gavel: [11:34:02] yeah, let's move on [11:34:45] also at the bottom of the agenda is the API docs iframe examples [11:35:04] yes, I'll try to do that soon [11:35:09] _|Nix|_ arschmitz : can you check my comment https://github.com/jquery/api.jquerymobile.com/issues/213#issuecomment-33108028 [11:35:16] agcolom: great, thanks! [11:36:14] we are going to change our PR review policy a bit [11:36:16] uGoMobi: looks right to me [11:36:44] meaning that not *all* PR's have to be reviewed by arschmitz [11:36:51] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: Yeah ... looks about right. In fact, it'll be good to actually have agcolom do a live-fire test on using widgets outside pages. [11:37:25] yeah, good idea to first just test with one [11:37:27] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: For example, popup does work outside the page, but the click-link-to-open-popup doesn't, because you also need the click handler. [11:37:31] oh yes [11:37:32] one widget [11:37:50] gotcha [11:37:53] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: Also, if you want history, you need to resolve some deferreds. [11:38:11] any way you could add links to the code in question to that issue? [11:38:37] listview etc. [11:38:59] <_|Nix|_> dam__: How do you mean? Code for each widget showing how you set it up outside the page? [11:39:05] no [11:39:07] about the PR's though just so its clear if the change your making is trivial like a typo or changeing wording etc... it still needs to be reviewed but it can be anyone [11:39:14] dam__: basically that's a list of all our widgets https://github.com/jquery/jquery-mobile/tree/master/js/widgets [11:39:19] OK [11:39:28] if its a code or functional change in anyway it still needs to be reviewed by me [11:39:55] I've found that linking to where someone could make the change allows for more community contribution [11:40:14] dam__: good point [11:40:36] for instance if I wanted to try to update one of these I would have no idea where to start [11:40:43] dam__: in this case the issue about many of our API docs pages containing iframes for examples [11:40:58] I get that [11:41:01] yeah you are right [11:41:39] you all know the code really well, I would like to get up to speed asap. Seems like a simple way to include more people. :) [11:41:47] <_|Nix|_> dam__: You mean like this: https://github.com/jquery/api.jquerymobile.com/blob/master/entries/controlgroup.xml#L18 ? [11:41:48] we can add links to the pages with examples of thos widgets [11:41:58] those* [11:42:14] _|Nix|_: Exactly [11:42:43] <_|Nix|_> dam__: Well, TBH, grep -niH iframe entries/*xml will give you all the places you need. [11:42:52] and something like "please inform agcolom if you want to help out with this" [11:43:17] *nods [11:43:45] <_|Nix|_> dam__: I suppose I could comment that :) [11:43:53] ok [11:44:04] was just doing that ;) [11:44:17] <_|Nix|_> dam__: Aaah, excellent! [11:44:35] probably good to repeat our new PR review policy because we were talking about two topics at the same time [11:45:05] sure [11:45:08] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: I'm good with it. 4 eyes if it's trivial, 2 eyes + arschmitz if it's not. Right? [11:45:10] so, small changes - especially in docs and on the site - can be reviewed by any team member [11:46:02] bigger changes, especially code and functional changes, still need to be reviewed by arschmitz first [11:46:39] that's good, in particular when timezone is not our friend ;-) [11:46:48] yup [11:47:09] right [11:47:45] the component part of the commit message is used for sectioning the auto-generated changelog [11:48:03] so we have to make a list of what component names we use [11:48:13] some are obvious (widget names), others are not [11:48:36] I noticed things like "source tree" and "gruntfile.js" [11:48:49] I don't think we want separate sections for all of those [11:48:52] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: Yeah, especially the sweeping variety, like "Whitespace" ... or something like that. [11:49:04] _|Nix|_: whitespace is perfectly valid [11:49:09] those are all excluded [11:49:43] but maybe easier to just use "coding standards" [11:50:08] we also have to decide if we want to list widget extensions separate from the widget [11:50:26] i talked to scott_gonzalez about that [11:50:32] it seems like they should not be [11:50:37] ok [11:50:52] I will update the doc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s-FEBk1RkeWjsuwVztwYiqfdFN_993iwOrdHvgbI0Oc/edit) to reflect that [11:51:28] feel free to comment on that doc [11:51:40] would be great if we have a list by next week [11:51:53] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: Why don't we add sections as we discover we need them? [11:51:57] I will change the labels in the issue tracker because those should match [11:52:10] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: The number of times we add a new section should decrease quickly over time. [11:52:32] _|Nix|_: we can always add or remove if needed [11:53:04] but it's easier if we make a list and put it on a wiki page [11:53:08] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: Yeah, I guess some things will go into disuse. [11:53:10] "Whitespace" is not an acceptable commit message. [11:53:16] "All: Whitespace" would be [11:53:18] <_|Nix|_> scott_gonzalez: Nono. A section. [11:53:48] <_|Nix|_> scott_gonzalez: Although I guess it's more of an action than a place. [11:54:25] The sections in the changelog ARE the components. [11:54:44] gruntfile.js is also not a component. Build is a component. [11:54:56] <_|Nix|_> scott_gonzalez: Yeah, but what if a change touches multiple components? [11:55:06] scott_gonzalez: (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1s-FEBk1RkeWjsuwVztwYiqfdFN_993iwOrdHvgbI0Oc/edit) [11:55:21] those are what we are planning to use as components [11:55:44] well that doc was just a first pass [11:55:54] gotta run... speak later... [11:55:54] _|Nix|_: Then it's probably a sweeping change, which would fall under "All" [11:55:55] need to remove the extensions etc. [11:56:01] later agcolom [11:56:35] one more thing I wanted to bring up [11:56:48] <_|Nix|_> Another thing that's kinda inaccurate: Demos and Tests [11:56:59] I noticed users are having problems with the change from page events to pagecontainer events [11:57:07] <_|Nix|_> It should be at least "Demos: Navigation: Updated blurb about foo" [11:57:13] nope [11:57:17] just Demos and Tests [11:57:37] <_|Nix|_> I guess ... [11:58:07] Demos is not a catch-all component. [11:58:15] Demos is the component for the demo infrastructure. [11:58:33] <_|Nix|_> scott_gonzalez: So, if I make a change to the controlgroup demo, then where do I file it? [11:58:36] If you're adding/modifying/fixing/whatever a demo for a specific widget, then the comopnent is the widget. [11:58:45] You'd file it under controlgroup. [11:59:03] Components have source, demos, docs, tests. [11:59:42] <_|Nix|_> OK. Sounds good. [11:59:57] i agree with that [12:00:33] ok, that's different from how we have done it before so we have fix the changelog manually [12:00:48] I think all changes in demos have Demos as component now [12:00:52] <_|Nix|_> Yep. [12:00:56] probably the same for tests [12:01:14] <_|Nix|_> I used to do Test: Controlgroup: Blah blah blah [12:01:20] got to run. meeting overlap. Happy to be with you all! [12:01:28] ok later dam__ [12:01:30] we dont need to worry about past stuff [12:01:35] dam__: thanks for joining [12:01:43] just do it right from now on there have not been many commits since 1.4 [12:01:45] <_|Nix|_> But since we've enforced the Component: description standard I switched to Tests: Blah blah controlgroup blah [12:01:55] they can easily be cleaned up when the change log is generated [12:02:08] Yup, don't sweat the old stuff. [12:02:26] arschmitz: yeah [12:02:33] <_|Nix|_> So, now it's gonna be Controlgroup: Blah test blah blah, or Controlgroup blah demo blah blah, or Controlroup: blah blah [12:03:31] _|Nix|_: that's the idea [12:03:47] arschmitz: maybe we can do a post on the learn site or add more info to the upgrade guide to help people with the page events --> pagecontainer events change [12:04:10] see this comment for example https://github.com/jquery/jquery-mobile/issues/6865#issuecomment-33080369 [12:04:21] <_|Nix|_> Yeah, I guess we forgot that the new events are triggered on a different element. [12:05:09] I saw similar comments on social media [12:05:16] so that's something we have to address [12:05:34] <_|Nix|_> OK. This is merely a doc problem. [12:05:38] <_|Nix|_> No, wait. [12:05:46] <_|Nix|_> THe old events are fired elsewhere too .. [12:06:09] I gotta run too [12:06:17] let's discuss that on -dev tomorrow [12:06:24] <_|Nix|_> OK. [12:06:32] <_|Nix|_> Actually old events are triggered on the page, if available. [12:06:39] <_|Nix|_> So, it's merely a doc issue. [12:07:22] <_|Nix|_> Anyhoo ... L8R [12:07:44] anyone has anything else we need to discuss now? [12:08:06] <_|Nix|_> uGoMobi: I'll file a bug about the events. [12:08:24] bug? [12:08:36] _|Nix|_: let's discuss first [12:08:41] arschmitz: ^^ [12:09:03] yeah lets discuss [12:09:05] on dev [12:09:10] ok [12:09:17] thanks all