Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@p
Created March 16, 2012 08:08
  • Star 0 You must be signed in to star a gist
  • Fork 0 You must be signed in to fork a gist
Star You must be signed in to star a gist
Save p/45555aa0c38a08a3cf22 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
(17:29:37) nw-: nickvergessen: yeah you start fixing something and then turns out it's not as simple as it seemed
(17:29:42) unknownbliss: you can edit the forumrow assign block var
(17:29:44) nickvergessen: ii make a loop called navbar and get all the shit?
(17:29:51) unknownbliss: hm...
(17:30:04) nw-: i get this half the time when i try to process submitted patches
(17:30:18) nickvergessen: nw-: mostly its no one wants to review at the moment, one year later hello-merge-conflicts
(17:30:27) nickvergessen: ask paul999 about his confirm_box class
(17:30:36) nw-: he never explained it
(17:31:05) nw-: that one i read and more than once
(17:31:57) unknownbliss: [21:30:17] <nickvergessen> nw-: mostly its no one wants to review at the moment, one year later hello-merge-conflicts - +1. To be honest there are so many features in people's forks over a year old that never got used because it was never merged
(17:32:12) unknownbliss: merged/reviewed/finished
(17:32:37) unknownbliss: things are much better now though. :)
(17:33:00) nw-: speaking of which https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/538 is moving in the same direction
(17:33:58) nw-: (17:36:15) unknownbliss: things are much better now though. - only because less code is being written
(17:34:16) nw-: i for example have no desire to start any new features
(17:34:47) unknownbliss: tbh 3.1 development has got more active these last few weeks.
(17:34:53) nw-: and for the most part i haven't started one in quite a bit
(17:35:34) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/160 - decision on what to do there needs to be dug out of irc logs, or it needs to be discussed from scratch
(17:35:56) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/210 - very wip
(17:36:09) nickvergessen: nw-: for 160 id say, add ledges :P
(17:36:47) nickvergessen: for 210 im still not in favour (?) of adding one
(17:36:51) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/318 - i would like to see a different design, meaning a nontrivial amount of time needs to be invested. current implementation might work. what should we do?
(17:37:35) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/351 - preempted by hooks, also it changes behavior in 3.0 which means it must be carefully written and tested -> more time needed -> backburner
(17:37:54) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/412 - i fixed that one, igorw prod
(17:38:00) unknownbliss: I might re-write 210 if its not finished and ext admin is finished and i've added lots of ledges
(17:38:14) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/444 - implemented but subsequently rejected by styles team
(17:39:10) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/492 - this looks ok, i've been meaning to review it
(17:39:26) nickvergessen: 444 is still on my todo
(17:39:30) nw-: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/505 - still uncertain as to what permissions we should remove
(17:39:46) nw-: not sure how to even approach that issue
(17:39:55) nw-: we had maybe 10 people commenting in the entire rfc topic
(17:40:14) nw-: these permissions get added for a reason and some of them necessarily must be rare/obscure
(17:40:25) nw-: doesn't mean we can remove them if 10 people don't see a use for them
(17:40:26) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/527 - very much WIP
(17:40:37) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/529 - almost complete?
(17:40:57) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/535 - ready for review?
(17:41:10) nw-: 529 is on me to delete the composer dependency
(17:41:30) nw-: other than that it should be a-ok
(17:41:40) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/538 - already said
(17:41:58) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/542 - needs more reviewing
(17:42:03) nw-: 535 i seem to recall reviewing, not sure what happened there
(17:42:15) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/545 - needs more reviewing
(17:42:16) nw-: ah i know
(17:42:20) nw-: 535's review is in irclog
(17:42:42) nw-: basically it needs to be refactored more
(17:42:58) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/551 - WIP by us three. Doesn't need much saying about it, we all know. :P
(17:43:19) unknownbliss: I'm not even a quarter of the way up?
(17:43:43) nw-: 542 i slightly want to rebase
(17:43:51) nw-: other than that it should be good to go
(17:44:01) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/553 - needs styles team approval
(17:44:29) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/556 - awaiting review
(17:44:36) nw-: 545 the patch did not work for me
(17:45:06) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/561 - needs to have a final review
(17:45:40) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/563 - need reviewing (and god help to whoever does it)
(17:45:55) nw-: 561 is waiting on tests
(17:46:03) nw-: functional ones
(17:46:12) nw-: which i don't recall ever having gotten working on my machine
(17:46:21) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/568 - wip
(17:46:24) nw-: so they need to be unbroken first
(17:46:55) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/571 - needs final review and merge?
(17:47:13) unknownbliss: I don't see much point in changing it as its the only place its used
(17:47:32) nw-: 563 is a good one because if you look at who reviewed such changes historically and then you consider that it's not formally blocking 3.1 the number of people who want to review it is not exactly large
(17:47:54) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/581 - final review and merge?
(17:48:22) nw-: 568 is denied by me
(17:48:35) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/582 - merge?
(17:48:40) nw-: it changes correct behavior into incorrect behavior
(17:48:48) nw-: not sure what rxu wants to do with it
(17:48:57) unknownbliss: 568 needs closing then?
(17:49:06) nw-: that's what i would think
(17:49:16) nickvergessen: 571 needs fixing unknownbliss the call side should be changed insteadof the function default
(17:49:21) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/583 - bantu asked you to review it yesterday
(17:50:19) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/588 - needs review and merge?
(17:50:27) nw-: 571 someone needs to do an audit, see the last comment in the comments
(17:50:37) nw-: unknownbliss: that might be you
(17:50:41) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/589 - review and merge
(17:51:07) unknownbliss: nw-: ok
(17:51:18) nickvergessen: i can also fix 571 but than i cant merge it
(17:51:36) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/591 - review and merge
(17:51:52) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/592 - final review and merge
(17:52:21) nickvergessen: btw basically its https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pulls review and merge
(17:52:45) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/597 - not reviewed at all
(17:52:55) nw-: 581 i should put on my todo list
(17:53:17) nw-: 582 i'm ok with, waiting for bantu's approval/merge
(17:53:27) unknownbliss: nickvergessen: not all. Going through this means those that need attention gets pointed out and this should be posted in the 3.1 status topic for future ref
(17:53:28) unknownbliss: :P
(17:53:48) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/600 - merge
(17:53:58) ckwalsh [~Adium@phpbb/developer/ckwalsh] entered the room.
(17:53:58) mode (+o ckwalsh) by ChanServ
(17:54:07) unknownbliss: https://github.com/phpbb/phpbb3/pull/605 - more reviewing
(17:54:16) nw-: 583 is on my todo list
(17:54:35) nw-: 588 needs to have its commit message fixed to have a non-empty subject
(17:54:42) nickvergessen: unknownbliss: instead of doing things like listing all, you could just go and fix the 571
(17:54:51) nickvergessen: so one can get done^^
(17:54:58) nw-: and then a new pr since rmcgirr won't update that one
(17:55:00) unknownbliss: I'll do that straight after. :P
(17:55:13) nw-: unknownbliss: you can take 588 also
(17:55:29) unknownbliss: ok
(17:55:49) unknownbliss: I won't bother posting the rest as they all are WIP or reviewing
(17:55:53) unknownbliss: none are past that
(17:56:28) nw-: 589 needs a 4th opinion as apparently neither myself nor bantu are certain it's correct
(17:56:55) nw-: and at 4th opinion you start to run out of active developers
(17:56:59) unknownbliss: lol
(17:58:39) nw-: nickvergessen's prs are in my todo list
(17:58:52) unknownbliss: ok
(17:58:56) nickvergessen: i spam the PR section on github all the time
(17:58:57) nickvergessen: :P
(17:59:01) unknownbliss: I replied to 589 with my opinion
(17:59:12) nickvergessen: if i dont own 25% of the PRs i create new ones xD
(17:59:16) unknownbliss: hehe
(17:59:32) nw-: 605 i'm going to leave to naderman/bantu
(18:00:03) nw-: and now we get to the most recent week
(18:00:08) unknownbliss: yeh
(18:00:15) unknownbliss: which has been more busy than normal
(18:00:15) nw-: i don't even start reviewing stuff until it's at least 1-2 weeks old
(18:00:20) unknownbliss: he
(18:01:02) nw-: mostly because i don't evaluate whether the change should go in at all
(18:01:27) nw-: if nobody complains in 2 weeks i'm assuming it's acceptable
(18:02:15) nw-: but the conclusion of this exercise was that out of the 20-ish older open prs maybe 5 are waiting for review, and the other 15 require changes
(18:02:15) unknownbliss: heh, I wish that was true in some other projects I'm involved in
(18:02:27) unknownbliss: yeh
(18:02:53) nw-: the giant pile of code that is not pull requested is very much wip and requires changes
(18:03:13) nw-: and that code is either abandoned by its authors or put on indefinite hold
(18:03:21) unknownbliss: josh has quite a few features in his branch almost finished but not PR'd
(18:03:43) nw-: you can test the prune pr after i fix bantu's comments there
(18:03:49) nw-: that will be one down
(18:03:59) unknownbliss: ok
(18:04:51) unknownbliss: So 571, 588, 622, ledges and extension admin. :)
(18:04:56) unknownbliss: sounds fun
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment