← Previous day | Today | Next day → | Search | Index
All times shown according to UTC.
| Time | Nick | Message |
|---|---|---|
| 12:45 | paul_p | hello world |
| 12:45 | gmcharlt | hi paul_p |
| 12:45 | hdl | hi gm |
| 12:45 | hi gmcharlt | |
| 12:46 | gmcharlt | hi hdl |
| 12:46 | paul_p | hi gmcharlt. early wake up for you it seems |
| 12:46 | gmcharlt | it's only 07:45, not that early ;) |
| 16:08 | owen | "27 year bookmobile feature?" |
| 16:09 | paul_p | ??? |
| 16:09 | hi owen | |
| 16:11 | acmoore | I guess the current implementation is only good for 26 years. |
| 16:12 | maybe it's like a volume knob that goes up to 11, instead of just 10. | |
| 16:13 | owen | Our 27 year bookmobile feature was pencil and paper. Our bookmobile never lived to see offline circ. |
| 16:13 | acmoore | oh, that's too bad. |
| 16:19 | liz | question kind of in that vein |
| 16:19 | So, how do we know if a given enhancement (purchased or contributed) is considered "canonical" enough for a version upgrade? | |
| 16:20 | up to the RM? | |
| 16:20 | gmcharlt | liz: what do you mean? |
| 16:20 | ultimately, all contribs of sufficiently quality should make it in | |
| 16:20 | liz | lets take as an example some enhancements you've done for us, say the holds email notify one |
| 16:20 | gmcharlt | barring cases where two groups contribute the same feature |
| 16:20 | liz | that's what I thought |
| 16:21 | gmcharlt | in which case settling on a common version makes sense |
| 16:21 | liz | that will go in the release version of 3.2? |
| 16:21 | hypothetically? | |
| 16:25 | gmcharlt | yes |
| 16:25 | and the holds email notification in particular will make it in official 3.2 | |
| 16:28 | liz | this was my undrstanding, thanks |
| 16:28 | understanding* | |
| 18:47 | chris | wow, what a crud pile to wake up too |
| 18:48 | atz_ | chris: yeah... |
| 19:47 | liz | oi, chris wasnt kidding... |
| 20:22 | acmoore | gmcharlt: thanks for putting the branch transfer limits stuff in. I can't believe those patches still applied. They were a month or 2 old, I think. |
| 20:25 | well, not pushing it into git, but looking at them and passing them along to the patches list. | |
| 20:25 | chris | right, back after a bus ride, a coffee and a meeting |
| 20:33 | paul_p | hi chris |
| 20:33 | gmcharlt | paul_p: happy anniversary! |
| 20:34 | chris | congratulations paul :) |
| 20:34 | busy after getting back from lyon? | |
| 20:37 | paul_p | chris: yep. we have to finish new acq module for the SAN-OP. they go live on jan, 12th ! |
| 20:37 | and there are still a lot of annoying problems | |
| 20:38 | once they're live : | |
| 20:38 | - write a doc (in english) for the community | |
| 20:38 | chris | cool |
| 20:38 | paul_p | - create the patches & send them to patches@ for inclusion into 3.2 |
| 20:38 | chris | ive seen mason working at all hours too |
| 20:38 | excellent :) | |
| 20:38 | paul_p | yep. Mason is a "never sleeping" man... |
| 20:38 | chris | hehe |
| 20:39 | paul_p | we are quite happy to work with him, and we are thinking to continue our cooperation, if we have some stuff that could be done by him |
| 20:39 | chris | cool |
| 20:39 | i think there is quite a bit of work here for him too, so thats good | |
| 20:39 | paul_p | in the next quarter, we will be dedicated to Marseille Universities project. |
| 20:39 | chris | *nod* |
| 20:42 | that will be a lot of work i bet | |
| 20:43 | paul_p | chris: yes. and we know at least 20 french universities looking at this project. |
| 20:43 | chris | awesome |
| 20:44 | let me know if there is anything i can do to help | |
| 20:44 | paul_p | so it's a "quite ou double" project. If it's a success, the next 3 years or so will be easy. Otherwise, they'll probably be hard... |
| 20:44 | chris | yes, that makes sense, very important |
| 20:48 | oh i found out yesterday, that the senate library in thailand runs koha | |
| 22:18 | acmoore | gmcharlt: I may have asked this before, but forgot. In the course of developing a large feature, I've produced some "refactoring patches" like adding warnings to scripts I'm just about to edit, or something like that. Do you care if you get those patches as I create them, or if you get them all along with the patches that add my feature? |
| 22:20 | gmcharlt | I'd prefer them sooner, assuming that they stand alone |
| 22:20 | i.e., a refactoring patch shouldn't add new functionality at the same time | |
| 22:21 | acmoore | they stand alone. I try to "percolate" them up to the newest of my patches, so that my functinoality depends on them. |
| 22:21 | So, should I attribute them to the koha bug that caused me to write them, or give them no bug numer at all? | |
| 22:21 | gmcharlt | they should either have no bug number or a bug number for that indivdual improvement |
| 22:22 | except that you can use shared bugs like 2505 for turning on warnings | |
| 22:22 | acmoore | OK. that makes sense. |
| 22:22 | oh, I forgot about 2505, or maybe I didn't know about it. OK | |
| 22:27 | while I'm asking you oddball stuff... I use 'git rebase --interactive HEAD^10' to get the last 10 commits and change them. And I sort of guess 10 being a good number. But, what I really want is all of the commits that aren't in the origin. | |
| 22:27 | Do you know how to format that for "git-rev-parse" or whatever parses that? | |
| 22:27 | like "git rebase --interactive origin" or somesuch, maybe. | |
| 22:28 | oh, I guess that actually works. I thought I had usuccesfully tried it before. | |
| 22:28 | how embarassing. | |
| 22:28 | ryan | heh |
| 22:29 | gmcharlt | lol - yeah, I use git rebase --interactive origin all the time |
| 22:29 | ryan | acmoore: does that work even if you're up to date with origin? |
| 22:30 | acmoore | perhaps I used "master' or something weird before. |
| 22:30 | ryan: I don't really know. If I were up to date with the origin, I'd exect there to be no commits to rebase. | |
| 22:30 | I guess I can make a new branch and try that. | |
| 22:30 | ryan | ah, it makes sense now. |
| 22:31 | acmoore: don't be embarrassed. i've been guessing at about how many patches to go back against, too | |
| 22:31 | :) | |
| 22:31 | acmoore | heh. time to edit my "my git workflow" page. |
| 22:33 | my favorite part is when I "git fetch ; git rebase origin" and discover that there are *fewer* differences than before. That means that one of my prerequisite patches has been accepted and pushed. so, I have to manage fewer in my branch. | |
| 22:34 | ryan | while we're on random git usage... i sometimes have conflicts or on an 'edit' in rebase -i, i need to change a bunch of things, then do a rebase --continue... |
| 22:34 | i need then to add everything i changed to the index, the way that 'git commit -a' would do | |
| 22:34 | before i can do the --continue . | |
| 22:34 | acmoore | ok, gmcharlt. I just patchbombed about 5 patches for refactoring and warnings and such. If any of them don't seem to be OK, I can work on them before I send in this feature. |
| 22:34 | ryan | is there a way to add everything that changed to the index without doing it explicitly? |
| 22:35 | acmoore | ryan: I'd love to know the answer to that, too. I have to hope that I "format-patch" before hand so that I can look at what should be added in that patch. |
| 22:36 | I wonder if you can 'git add .' | |
| 22:36 | but I don't want to add the ton of unrelated files in my working directory. | |
| 22:36 | ryan | i recall doing a git add * before, with unpleasant results. |
| 22:37 | areinmeyer | there's a git add --all but that's pretty inclusive |
| 22:38 | hence, the --all, i guess | |
| 22:38 | ryan | one of those things i always forget to experiment on until it's really not a good time to be experimenting :) |
| 22:39 | chris | i often do a git add |
| 22:39 | --all | |
| 22:39 | then git status | |
| 22:39 | then a bunch of git rm -f | |
| 22:39 | before the commit | |
| 22:39 | ryan | that may be all i'm missing. |
| 22:39 | chris | you can also do |
| 22:39 | git commit -a | |
| 22:40 | with interactive on | |
| 22:40 | or commit then do amend | |
| 22:40 | acmoore | oh, interactive is probably the best idea. |
| 22:40 | ryan | ah, that makes sense. |
| 22:40 | thx chris | |
| 22:40 | chris | np |
| 22:41 | its all stuff ive learnt from screwing things up :-) | |
| 22:41 | acmoore | nothing improves learning like a good screw up. |
| 22:41 | ryan | i am so glad though that we moved to git... can do _so_ many things that just weren't possible with cvs. |
| 22:41 | chris | yep |
| 22:41 | git is the perl of vcs | |
| 22:42 | there are zillions of ways to do it :) | |
| 22:43 | acmoore | while we're on topic, here's a post-commit hook to let you know when files in your commit don't 'use warnings': http://arwen.metavore.com/~acm[…]mmit-use-warnings |
| 22:43 | so, if you're patching a file that doesn't use warnings, it prints something at you. | |
| 22:43 | chris | sweet |
| 22:43 | ryan | acmoore: nice |
| 22:44 | chris | we should probably start using taint at least on the opac too |
| 22:44 | acmoore | oh no. you just added about 94 zillion hours of work. |
| 22:44 | chris | heh |
| 22:46 | SelfishMan | is koha mod_perl safe? |
| 22:46 | let me rephrase that | |
| 22:47 | is it safe under mod_perl with the apache::registry and similar modules? | |
| 22:47 | chris | im not prepared to confirm nor deny that :) |
| 22:47 | having not tested it enough | |
| 22:48 | acmoore | I've heard that there is at least one module that koha requires that doesn't play well with mod_perl. |
| 22:48 | chris | id suspect the short answer is no |
| 22:48 | gmcharlt | it wouldn't be safe under Apache::Registry |
| 22:48 | acmoore | but, now I can't recall which. |
| 22:48 | gmcharlt | Apache::PerlRun, maybe, but I haven't tested that |
| 22:48 | chris | this looks interesting |
| 22:48 | SelfishMan | Apache::PerlRun is the one I was thinking of |
| 22:48 | chris | http://freshmeat.net/projects/mod_perlite/ |
| 22:49 | SelfishMan | one of my biggest complaints is that there is a lot of overhead to the startup of each script so I think I might look into making it play nice with mod_perl |
| 22:50 | chris | ive been running my dev koha with Apache::PerlRun and Apache::DBI |
| 22:50 | the connection pooling alone is worth it | |
| 22:51 | but it needs a lot more testing, with concurrent users | |
| 22:51 | before id recommend it for any 'real' use | |
| 22:51 | acmoore | yep, Apache::DBI buys you a lot. |
| 22:52 | SelfishMan | What does your startup script look like for it? |
| 22:52 | chris | 2 secs |
| 22:53 | acmoore | OK, I'd better jet. See y'all tomorrow. |
| 22:53 | SelfishMan | have fun |
| 22:53 | chris | if ( ! {MOD_PERL}) { die "GATEWAY_INTERFACE not Perl!"; } |
| 22:53 | use lib qw(/home/chris/git/koha.git); | |
| 22:53 | 1; | |
| 22:53 | theres not a lot to it :) | |
| 22:53 | SelfishMan | Hmm |
| 22:54 | chris | i have PerlModule Apache::DBI in my virtualhost |
| 22:54 | SelfishMan | You aren't initializing Apache::DBI? |
| 22:54 | chris | thats the beauty of it |
| 22:54 | it just works *tm* | |
| 22:55 | SelfishMan | yeah |
| 22:55 | chris | Do NOT change anything in your scripts. The usage of this module is absolutely transparent ! |
| 22:55 | i love it :) | |
| 22:56 | SelfishMan | One of the options I tend to use with Apache::DBI is to have my startup script initialize the DB connection and perform the keepalive |
| 22:57 | chris | that'd work, ive never needed to though |
| 23:22 | hdl | gmcharlt: have you read ILS-DI draft ? |
| 00:56 | mason | anyone about for a git clue? |
| 02:52 | jaakkome | anyone there?-) |
| 08:52 | hdl | chris around ? |
| 08:52 | chris | yep |
| 08:52 | at work still unfortunately | |
| 08:53 | hdl | troubles ? |
| 08:53 | mason | heya guys... |
| 08:53 | hdl | hi mason |
| 08:53 | chris | hdl: just deadlines |
| 08:54 | paul_p | hello chris |
| 08:54 | chris | hi paul |
| 08:54 | paul_p | i've seen you'll have another kind of deadline in some months. congrats ! |
| 08:54 | chris | thank you :) |
| 08:58 | mason | go team cormack! |
← Previous day | Today | Next day → | Search | Index