[11:33:13] leobalter: there [11:33:23] nice [11:33:46] gibson042 JamesMGreene Krinkle hey! [11:34:16] hi [11:34:26] first thing: nested modules are ready, just need a final review on the docs (thanks @gibson042) [11:34:56] with the nested modules, the 2.0 Milestone is just one feature away! [11:35:12] What's the missing feature? [11:35:22] the standard reporter interface [11:35:54] right [11:36:17] QUnit.only is not on 2.0 but it's not a blocker as well [11:36:55] that leads to the question: how is js-reporters? [11:37:03] Could do another 1.x release once nested modules land [11:37:13] sure, I'll [11:37:17] Or wait for new events [11:37:29] I'm also writing a blog post about the nested modules [11:37:52] js-reporters still suffers from zero participation from anyone outside Franzsika (who was working on it during Google Summer of Code) and me (who was mentoring her) [11:38:20] as for progress, the Mocha adapter is almost ready, hopefully Franzsika is available sometime soon to finish that [11:38:39] to see if we're on a good track, I'd like to integrate all three available adapters into browserstack-runner [11:38:45] is there anything we can do on QUnit to support js-reporter? [11:39:17] we can start implementing the events as currently specified: https://github.com/js-reporters/js-reporters/#event-names [11:39:37] js-reporters has tests for the QUnit-adapter, we should be able to run the same tests against our own implementation [11:41:20] JamesMGreene: seems that we are ready to move https://github.com/jquery/qunit/pull/644 forward [11:42:25] if JamesMGreene is busy, I can rebase his branch and continue working on top of it. [11:42:54] well, he commented on one issue today, but otherwise has been very much unavailable [11:43:05] 101% busy [11:43:17] so makes sense if you'd pick up where he left it [11:44:22] well, I have a question: if we integrate QUnit with js-reporters, how do I tell js-reporters the reporter I want to use? [11:44:28] you can check https://github.com/js-reporters/js-reporters/blob/master/lib/adapters/QUnitAdapter.js as a reference as well [11:44:52] consider js-reporters just a specification for events and event names [11:45:08] registering reporters is still up to each framework [11:45:31] integrating into browserstack-runner would be a good opportunity to figure out how to standardize that part as well [11:45:57] ok. I was thinking about having a tap reporter on QUnit, and it seems that qunit-tap does it really well. https://github.com/twada/qunit-tap [11:47:06] sweet! [11:47:30] It would be nice to have reporters build on top of js-reporters [11:47:53] and/or bundle them with js-reporters: https://github.com/js-reporters/js-reporters/tree/master/lib/reporters [11:48:07] jzaefferer: yes, and we should make some as examples. [11:48:52] Maybe integrate https://github.com/twada/qunit-tap/blob/master/lib/qunit-tap.js into https://github.com/js-reporters/js-reporters/blob/master/lib/reporters/TapReporter.js [11:49:14] sure [11:49:32] btw. I was thinking about moving js-reporters to the jquery org on Github, and trying to get the Foundation to give it some "official" support, whatever that would look like in the end [11:49:41] at least make some noise through blog and twitter [11:50:02] would be nice to have at least one other framework adopt it, so that it looks less sad [11:50:08] but I don't know how [11:50:23] Mocha has tons of built ins reporters [11:50:30] maybe Jasmine is a good one to start [11:50:44] or even Jest [11:51:03] we should write some good reporters based on js-reporters [11:51:46] and see how to contribute to them to use these reporters [11:52:08] I'm not 100% aware on how they work with different reporters. I've had just a brief on Mocha [11:52:22] *just a brief overview on Mocha [11:52:42] also: for QUnit, I'm proposing this thing in order to advance on the custom reporters: https://github.com/jquery/qunit/issues/872 [11:52:56] well, make the tapreporter in the js-reporters repo work properly, then pick a framework to implement the js-reporters interface, contribute an implementation and demo it using the existing tapreporter [11:53:08] lots of work, but if that's what it takes... [11:53:37] jzaefferer: can we have a individual repo for each reporter on js-reporters and load them as modules? [11:54:42] maybe it it good to have just one default reporter built in on js-reporter [11:55:05] and all the others loads js-reporter [11:55:18] that should be possible [11:55:43] we can start with the current structure and extra modules once we got a better idea what that will look like [11:55:49] like: let's say I want to use the tap-reporter (based on js-reporter): On QUnit I will load it only. [11:56:04] So I will say that reporter is compatible with Mocha, QUnit, Jasmine, etc [11:56:32] QUnit.register(require("js-reporters/tap-reporter") [11:56:54] ok [11:56:56] Mocha.register(require("js-reporters/whutever-reporter")) [11:57:05] (plus actually valid syntax) [11:57:21] Mocha.register(require("custom-reporter")) [11:57:49] dunno if register is a good name, might be fine, might be misleading, based on whatever is actually passed [11:57:58] might also be taken in at least one framework... [11:58:22] Mocha has it's own way to define a custom reporter [11:58:37] on QUnit I believe it's better to stick with something at QUnit.config [11:58:57] like QUnit.config.reporter( ... ) [11:59:17] I don't think that belongs on QUnit.config [11:59:24] QUnit.on will be on the top-level as well [11:59:31] sure [11:59:58] I can imagine a qunit.json with configuration settings [12:00:21] so that's why I'm thinking this way. QUnit.reporter is fine too [12:00:30] anyway, I'll need to finish the events emitter before [12:00:46] to advance on the tests for js-reporters [12:01:06] do you have any contacts to maintainers of other test frameworks? [12:01:14] if not, maybe someone at Bocoup can help? [12:01:33] I can try, but everyone is pretty busy as well. [12:01:55] I'll also take a look at the bugs, where the last one is a recent regression: https://github.com/jquery/qunit/labels/bug [12:02:32] ok [12:03:18] cool. I'm writing the meeting notes now. [12:03:24] I still have a contract with the jQuery Foundation to work on jQuery UI, but only until the end of this month. Maybe afterwards we can make a proposal for me to get some paid time on QUnit. It would have to have a limited scope and specific goal [12:04:46] I would really appreciate more of your time on QUnit. [12:05:07] are you going to be at the Dev Summit in NYC? [12:05:14] yes yes. [12:05:17] good [12:05:21] are you? [12:05:34] Let's discuss it there, we may even be able to get a direct line to the board [12:05:36] yeah [12:05:48] I think we need to stop now, time for `uiteam meeting [12:05:52] `uiteam [12:05:53] ? [12:05:56] meh :/ [12:06:05] b-ot: You're failing... [12:06:18] ping arschmitz fnagel scott_gonzalez [12:06:26] awayrxaviers: [12:06:29] hi [12:06:29] hey [12:07:54] So, button... [12:08:01] arschmitz and jzaefferer have pushed some updates. [12:08:07] Where do we stand with that now? [12:08:52] From my point of view, the branch only needs a rebase [12:09:00] I've addressed everything from my last review myself [12:09:12] With some help from Alex after I got stuck [12:09:23] jzaefferer: i pulled your commits and rebased with master [12:09:26] got everything working in IE8 [12:09:30] but the history needs some fixing [12:09:38] speaking of history [12:09:45] what are we going to land in master? [12:09:49] one commit? 100? [12:10:03] ps: sneaky pushes are sneaky! [12:10:13] jzaefferer: it was just this morning [12:10:15] We're just going to amend the whole thing into whatever the HEAD commit is on master and then force push. [12:10:30] arschmitz: sure, but I could've looked at it before the meeting if I knew [12:10:38] It's only 55 commits right now. [12:10:47] So I'd say just merge as is if it's already rebased. [12:11:07] its rebased as of this morning [12:11:21] like 2 hours ago [12:12:15] so we just merge --fast-foward this? [12:12:26] There's definitely a little commit cleanup that could happen, but I'll leave that up to arschmitz. [12:12:39] I'm more interested in seeing this in master than not seeing fixup commits. [12:12:41] yeah i can clean up and land this if everyone is good with it [12:12:58] i know what needs to be fixed [12:13:01] what would you squash? [12:13:11] controlgroup: fixup for starts lol [12:13:17] all my own fixup commits [12:13:39] He has commits that are labeled as fixup. [12:14:00] yup just minor typos and stuff from reviews that should just be squashed [12:14:14] arschmitz: Do you have a core.excludesfile set up? [12:14:18] Because https://github.com/arschmitz/jquery-ui/commit/dc178e8323466bc29d8cc75094b9d9207af43787 should never be an issue. [12:14:40] heh i lost it when i switched laptops but i have it back now [12:14:44] ah [12:15:49] scott_gonzalez: jzaefferer: so if your both good with this i can land it after all my meetings today [12:15:50] arschmitz: can you push the cleaned up branch somewhere else and let me know? [12:15:59] jzaefferer: sure [12:16:07] if we're doing that, I'd like to take a final look [12:16:18] ok [12:16:21] I'm good with it landing after jzaefferer's review. [12:16:25] ok [12:16:29] I don't want another round of my review to hold anything up. [12:16:35] I'll just get to that after it's in master. [12:16:39] Potentially even after the beta. [12:18:45] sounds good [12:18:56] well, [12:19:04] arschmitz: just squash and merge, nevermind another review from me [12:19:30] Ok, so that brings up to datepicker. [12:19:30] better to review my docs PRs instead of spending more time on button [12:19:59] ok [12:20:36] Sorry guys, due to my relocation I had no time and no internet for almost a week. Even my mobile fallback solution did not work as there was an issue with the local cell. [12:20:56] No problem. [12:20:57] fnagel: im moving in less then a month and dreading that [12:21:05] Regarding the doodle: I'm almost up-to-date with my job duties and promise to send another doodle asap! [12:21:14] Do you need anything before merging https://github.com/jquery/jquery-ui/pull/1590 ? [12:21:19] ok [12:22:02] No, not in specific, but there are some comments I need to work on [12:22:20] Merging master into the branch and fixing style issues should be all that's left [12:22:30] seems so [12:23:47] And: "Sure, as long as we get the jscs changes into the datepicker branch" [12:24:15] yes, that's the "merge master into the branch" part :-) [12:24:19] Do you need help with that? [12:24:33] Not sure what needs to be done [12:24:46] Just merge master into datepicker. [12:24:53] Merge with master and run grunt again :-) [12:25:09] wait for button to bother with master ll [12:25:30] We implemented more specific jscs rules, right? [12:25:46] we removed most of the execptions [12:26:04] but jscs also fixed some problems we are working around in the jquery preset since [12:26:20] to do with comments and something else [12:26:25] issues i had reported [12:28:08] Ok, I can do that soon [12:28:25] Anything else regarding calendar / datepicker? [12:29:01] Don't think so [12:29:13] fixing focus handling will be more interesting than fixing some style issues [12:30:05] Yes. I guess that will come with some general a11y changes. [12:31:28] alright [12:31:36] on docs, I'm looking for reviews on my two PRs [12:31:49] upgrade guide should be complete now: https://github.com/jquery/jqueryui.com/pull/123 [12:32:14] and this adds button, checkboxradio and controlgroup docs: https://github.com/jquery/api.jqueryui.com/pull/280 [12:32:42] fnagel: are you coming to the NYC Dev Summit? [12:32:48] ill review those after i land button [12:34:19] jzaefferer: No, too much workload, espacially with this relocation chaos [12:35:05] arschmitz: yay [12:35:08] fnagel: gotcha [12:35:19] jzaefferer: :-( I would love to [12:35:44] fnagel: can you see which issues from the rewrite we can/should add to the list? https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BAJM7nDkqiCTmYxaqThQj3LNghzPqrX2YQdvbGdxpMA/edit?ts=5613e483#heading=h.11563ywih90x [12:37:09] I've also axed rxaviers to add to that for download builder [12:37:19] I think that's all we have for today [12:38:56] Alright, thanks everyone.