fluid-work IRC Logs-2011-02-15

Owned by Fluid IRC Log Bot
Last updated: Feb 15, 2011Version comment
20 min read

[08:25:30 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> michelled: are there any files in particular that you would like me to lint?
[08:26:27 CST(-0600)] <michelled> Justin_o: we had wanted to lint the framework files and renderer
[08:26:31 CST(-0600)] <michelled> but they are a bit job
[08:27:43 CST(-0600)] <michelled> Justin_o: I mean big
[08:31:00 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> michelled: okay... do you think we should still try that or hold off on that till 1.4
[08:31:17 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> i can work on linting the files that we have changed for this release
[09:01:39 CST(-0600)] <golam> Justin_o: do you remember for JSLINT which options I should enable
[09:02:17 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> golam: i think it's the following...
[09:03:36 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> "strict white space", "disallow undefined variables", "Require Initial Caps for constructors", "Disallow dangling _ in identifiers", "Disallow . and [^...] in /RegExp/, "Disallow bitwise operation", "Assume a browser", "Tolerate unfiltered for in"
[09:03:43 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> michelled: does that look right?
[09:05:52 CST(-0600)] <golam> Justin_o: thanks
[09:17:33 CST(-0600)] <michelled> Justin_o: I usually don't tolerate unfiltered for in and look at each case carefully
[09:17:59 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> michelled: okay thanks
[09:22:47 CST(-0600)] <golam> Justin_o: is your tab set to 4 or 5?
[09:22:57 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> golam: should be set to 4
[09:23:04 CST(-0600)] <golam> ok thanks
[10:15:54 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: I'm going to go ahead and delete our FLUID-4037 fork from my github repo now that we're finished with it
[10:16:05 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark cool
[10:17:03 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Now that I know the one-fork per repo constraint with Github, I think I'm going to do what everyone else has been doing and keep a single fork of infusion with multiple branches for different issues
[10:17:31 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> makes sense
[10:17:42 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark the other issue is http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4060
[10:17:52 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> it's not a huge deal, but would be nice to fix as well
[10:18:14 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, the scroller just sort of randomly appears once you select a file?
[10:18:27 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Select, as in, click on it? Or arrow to it?
[10:18:41 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> when you select the last file, cos the height needs to add the extra 2px border
[10:18:51 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> which causes the scroller to appear
[10:19:12 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> only in FF mac
[10:22:18 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> oh, safari too
[10:50:10 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Hey jameswy
[10:50:30 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I wonder if you have a moment to give us an opinion on the blockerness of two JIRAs heidi_ has filed...
[10:50:36 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4060
[10:50:44 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4061
[10:50:56 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> "Blockerness" being defined as either
[10:51:07 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 1. We hold the release until the issue is fixed
[10:51:13 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 2. Back out the code that caused the issue
[10:51:35 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> Right.
[10:52:55 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> heidi_: to clarify: 4060: after 5 files or more are added, there's no scroller where there should be, unless the last visible file is selected?
[10:53:12 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> Can this issue be seen in the current/oldish nightly build?
[10:53:32 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> jameswy no scroller makes sense, the scroller appears when you click the last file because the 2px border around the selected file makes the height larger all of a sudden
[10:54:11 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> on the old uploader, the bottom border for the last file just isn't visible.. the height doesn't grow.
[10:54:11 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> Alright.
[10:55:49 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> colinclark, heidi_: I don't think 4060 is a blocker. Annoying to the user, unexpected/inconsistent experience, but the user can still accomplish things without work arounds.
[10:56:22 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> yeah functionality is good, just looks kinda crumby
[10:56:37 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> same with 4061 tho looks even crumbier
[10:58:42 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> colinclark, heidi_: 4061 is iffy... I'd say it's a blocker because you're not reflecting the appropriate upload status.
[10:58:56 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> makes sense
[10:59:13 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Okay, cool
[10:59:14 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> It renders the "stop upload" functionality nearly moot.
[10:59:28 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So that's exactly how we prioritized it
[10:59:34 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> Awesome.
[10:59:34 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> thanks jameswy
[10:59:35 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> FLUID-4061 is a blocker, 4060 is critical
[10:59:45 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yeah, thanks jameswy
[10:59:55 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> np!
[11:00:12 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> Seems like you all have it well handled (smile)
[11:01:45 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> justin_o: Here's a repo for the Sakai 2.6.0 master project required by Image Gallery: https://github.com/fluid-project/sakai-master
[11:01:56 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o_> colinclark: thanks
[11:02:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I look forward to removing this some day soon (smile)
[11:02:04 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o_> jamon: ^
[11:02:16 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Once we replace the Gallery with something simpler written with Kettle, that is (smile)
[11:02:17 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o_> colinclark: it would be nice to switch to kettle
[11:02:21 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> +1 for that
[11:03:05 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, if you stick these three repositories side-by-side, the Gallery's clean-build-run.sh script should work quite nicely
[11:03:48 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Although you'll need to redefine the COMPONENTS variable, which I believe is currently set to the old SVN name for Infusion "fluid-components"
[11:05:51 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I will happily review a pull request for that fix
[11:05:54 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> or can make it myself
[11:06:02 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> whatever's easiest
[11:11:39 CST(-0600)] <jessm> jamon: even with the theme change on the joomla site, the content still appears wonky
[11:11:57 CST(-0600)] <jessm> i wonder if the wonkiness is a clue to the upgrade issue as well?
[11:12:11 CST(-0600)] <jessm> perhaps we should try to get the content fixed up in 1.5 and do the migration anew?
[11:19:10 CST(-0600)] * Topic is 'This channel is logged – for details see: http://wiki.fluidproject.org/display/fluid/IRC+Channel' set by jessm on 07:30:00 CST(-0600)
[11:19:16 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: so i added another setState, namely, "setStateFull" that is similar to setStateLoader, in which the difference is it disables the button only.
[11:20:12 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> urg
[11:20:16 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> more of these setState* methods
[11:20:27 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> harriswong: http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-3999
[11:20:55 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: the result i have is the "add more" button is greyed out, but not disabled. Is there another way to disable it without adding another "setState" method?
[11:21:10 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Pastie me some code if you can, harriswong
[11:25:18 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: http://pastebin.com/rJq95fP2
[11:31:11 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> harriswong: Okay, so you're saying that the call to that.strategy.local.disableBrowseButton() is not actually disabling the browse button, is that right, harriswong?
[11:31:35 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: correct.
[11:31:46 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Yeah, that's the same issue as FLUID-3999
[11:31:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> There's something incredibly subtle going on in the case of the HTML5 button
[11:32:10 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I wasn't able to track down the source of the problem in time for 1.3.1
[11:32:28 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, as long as you're using the correct API (and you are), don't sweat it
[11:32:34 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> unless you can magically fix the bug (smile)
[11:33:05 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> harriswong: My comment about the setState* functions wasn't to suggest, necessarily, that there was an obviously better way to do it
[11:33:07 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I mean, there is
[11:33:10 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> which is to use the Renderer
[11:33:15 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> but that will have to come after 1.3.1 as well
[11:33:19 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So I like your implementation here
[11:33:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it's clean and quite straightforward
[11:33:38 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it uses functions and APIs that have already been established in the design
[11:33:39 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> all good things
[11:33:42 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> (smile)
[11:34:01 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: ok, good to know! thanks!
[12:45:04 CST(-0600)] <jhung> ping jameswy
[12:49:14 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> jhung: Yep
[12:51:26 CST(-0600)] <jhung> jameswy: I'm going to send you a mind map I've been working on. I'd like to get some eyes on it... this is my first one and I can use some advice / tips. (smile)
[12:52:38 CST(-0600)] <jameswy> jhung: sure thing
[13:47:37 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: http://issues.fluidproject.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&amp;jqlQuery=project+%3D+FLUID+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%221.3.1%22+AND+resolution+%3D+Unresolved+ORDER+BY+priority+DESC%2C+key+DESC&amp;mode=hide
[13:47:43 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> that's the update 1.3.1 jira list
[13:47:48 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> fluid-everyone: ^
[13:55:30 CST(-0600)] <kasper> Justin_o: ping
[14:40:51 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> colinclark: so jamon and I are having some difficulty with the image gallery
[14:41:00 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> i think it's because of how we were working before
[14:41:01 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> http://source.fluidproject.org/svn/!svn/bc/10000/fluid/infrastructure/gallery2-build/
[14:41:23 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> so in that case it expected image-gallery, infusion, and master to be adjacent..
[14:41:25 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ah look at that
[14:41:34 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yes, that's right
[14:41:49 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> what's extra wierd is that jamon can seem to get it working from the shell for some reason without the dependencies present
[14:41:54 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> not sure what's going on there
[14:42:44 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> anyways.. so we need to either find a way to have something like externals and create yet another repo for it
[14:42:59 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> or rewrite the scripts to manage all the checkouts and not have continuum do it
[14:43:08 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> jamon: any other options you can think of
[14:45:17 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Is the problem that continuum can't handle more than one repository per project, justin_o_?
[14:45:49 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> colinclark: i think that's correct
[14:46:52 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> colinclark: also we're missing the top level pom.xml file
[14:47:12 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Ah, that can be easily solved
[14:47:33 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Okay, it sounds like we should start by looking into an equivalent to SVN externals
[14:47:33 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> but i think we can easily just pull that down from svn
[14:47:33 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> {color}
[14:47:42 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> okay
[14:47:57 CST(-0600)] <kasper> justin_o: I got some time to look at automatted acceptance testing this week and on and off over the next weeks
[14:48:58 CST(-0600)] <kasper> justin_o_ ^ .. I've been trying to get a relatively simple test, filling out some fields of a record in collectionspace, but am frustrated to the point of considering jumping off a bridge
[14:49:23 CST(-0600)] <kasper> (luckily there are no bridges around here, so..)
[14:49:40 CST(-0600)] <kasper> anyways, I was wondering how your schedule is looking at the moment
[14:51:07 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> kasper: please don't jump off any bridges (smile)
[14:51:24 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> we're just about to enter testing for our 1.3.1 release
[14:52:02 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> so i'm thinking i'm going to be a bit busy, but can help out here and there... I think i'll have more time mid to late next week though
[14:52:05 CST(-0600)] <kasper> hehe would if could – but no bridges, so I guess I'm stuck with doing acceptance testing
[14:52:12 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> (smile)
[14:52:32 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> kasper: do yo have a github account by any chance
[14:52:36 CST(-0600)] <kasper> justin_o: cool
[14:52:42 CST(-0600)] <kasper> yeah, i do
[14:52:47 CST(-0600)] <kasper> justin_o_, ^
[14:52:50 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> we've moved our code over to git and i have mine sitting in my github repo
[14:53:03 CST(-0600)] <kasper> cool, the wrapper for dojo, that is, right?
[14:53:16 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> kasper: https://github.com/jobara/acceptance-testing
[14:53:22 CST(-0600)] <kasper> awesome, thanks
[14:53:23 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> yes.. that's the one that used to be in the scratchpad
[14:53:51 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> i think it would probably be easier to collaborate on it through github
[14:53:59 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> if you don't mind
[14:54:14 CST(-0600)] <kasper> yeah, definitely, I was actually considering suggesting that we moved it there
[14:54:59 CST(-0600)] <justin_o_> kasper: yes.. it's pretty convenient.. and i think it really embodies the ideals of open source
[14:55:56 CST(-0600)] <kasper> justin_o: would you, and perhaps colinclark have time for a quick skype chat tomorrow.. I've been spending some time looking at dojo (trying to get a test up and going), and gotten a little wiser with the problems.. Actually to a point where I'm considering whether time would be better spent working on your wrapper/our own robot
[14:56:27 CST(-0600)] <kasper> but I might be missing something obvious, and would like to talk it through with someone
[15:10:10 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: some good news and bad news. good news is i had finished and was about to upload it to github
[15:10:25 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ok
[15:10:30 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: bad news is... i did a git diff and somehow something happened now everything is back to head
[15:11:35 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> You committed your changes to your local repo, right?
[15:11:49 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Can you start by checking that you're in the correct branch, and do a log to see if your changes are still there?
[15:12:16 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> nope, was gonna do a commit to local. but will check log
[15:12:45 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> wait, so you've been working for the past two days without having ever run git commit?
[15:14:14 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: not the ones today, i have the ones before.
[15:14:21 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ack
[15:14:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> okay
[15:14:28 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: things are back to...well not head, the last commit i did
[15:14:44 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> so you've lost all your changes from today
[15:14:55 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> do you still have a record of the commands you ran to get you to this point?
[15:15:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> like in your terminal buffer?
[15:15:22 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> pretty much, oh i am so glad i used pastebin with you
[15:15:38 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> my editor intelligently refreshed everything up to date and last all my ctrl-z
[15:17:04 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> that's a good start (smile)
[15:19:44 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> lost*
[15:29:11 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> kasper: sorry missed your last message
[15:29:24 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> I think i'll be able to squeeze in a bit of time, not sure about colinclark ?
[15:29:43 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> tomorrow's not great for me
[15:29:54 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> maybe thursday once testing has settled in?
[15:34:05 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark no easy solution for FLUID-4061 :|
[15:36:28 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ok
[15:36:33 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> what's the non-easy solution?
[15:36:39 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: ^
[15:37:07 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark taking the header out of the table, basically like how it used to be
[15:37:23 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> can you describe again for me the exact nature of the problem in FLUID-4061
[15:37:25 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ?
[15:37:26 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> i added a comment with some more detail to the issue
[15:37:34 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> okay, I'll take a look
[15:37:47 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, when we're thinking about this problem, we should consider what it means from two perspectives:
[15:37:52 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 1. What it means from the Uploader
[15:37:53 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and
[15:38:03 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> "for the Uploader," that is
[15:38:20 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 2. What it means for users of the FSS's new table styles and the fluid.scrollableTable() component
[15:38:32 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> In other words, is this an issue that will affect just us, or all our users, too?
[15:38:47 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> if you have fixed stuff within your scrollable, there will be issues
[15:38:55 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> when you scroll, it stays fixed
[15:39:02 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> vs moving within it
[15:39:16 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> because the scrollable isn't set to position: relative
[15:39:53 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> i'm trying to think of a solution (for uploader) where our progress bars are marked up in a more flexible way (not fixed divs)
[15:41:05 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark, heidi_, jameswy: I have pushed the changes to github for FLUID-3878 changes - https://github.com/harriswong/infusion/tree/FLUID-3878
[15:43:38 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: So what impact will this have on our users?
[15:43:56 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> i.e. people who use the table styles in FSS
[15:44:47 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark using fixed stuff within a scrollable won't move with the scroller
[15:45:04 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> meaning, they'll experience the same thing we do
[15:45:14 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, I need your honest assessment here, heidi_
[15:45:23 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Is this scrollable table stuff actually useful for people?
[15:45:26 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> unless they think of an awesome solution to use something other than fixed, like i'm trying to do
[15:45:41 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> In other words, is it resilient enough to a diversity of markup to be useful, or does it just cause lots of caveats and workarounds?
[15:46:37 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark i think it's def. useful for ppl who want a properly marked up table with a fixed head and scrolling body that works across browsers
[15:47:02 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> for basic tabular data
[15:47:06 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> okay
[15:47:09 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> so it's a case of documentation
[15:47:45 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> that reminds me
[15:48:06 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Did you ever look at the sort of bizarreness of the location of the scroll bar in our scrollable table demo?
[15:48:23 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I wonder if that is also inherent in this solution to scrolling tables
[15:48:27 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> what bizareness?
[15:48:54 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Doesn't it look to you like the scrollbar just sort of "floats" out to the side?
[15:49:19 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Like, compare it to, say, List View in the Finder
[15:49:47 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> where the scrollbar is inside the table, looking very sharp
[15:49:53 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark mine doesn't look that way
[15:51:17 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> i'll attach a screenshot
[15:51:20 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> oh i see
[15:51:33 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> you want the header to include the scrollbar
[15:51:46 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark ?
[15:52:07 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> that's usually the way i've encountered scrollable tables out in the wild
[15:53:41 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark yes your'e right
[15:53:42 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> colinclark: so i've been looking at git and they have two options for sub repos... subtree merge, and submodules
[15:54:02 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> however, neither of those allows you to call pull on the parent to update the child repos
[15:54:18 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> you have to independently update each child repo
[15:56:21 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> I guess we could write a script for the daily build that calls the necessary git update commands after it updates the parent repo
[15:56:40 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> although we could just right a script to checkout each of the repos itself
[15:56:49 CST(-0600)] <justin_o> write, not right
[15:57:35 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark the width of the th's is set in scrollableTable.css to be the same as the td's but it can be customized however you want
[15:57:48 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> cool
[15:58:01 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, heidi_, I can't remember if we filed a JIRA about it
[15:58:09 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> about which?
[15:58:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> we should probably get jhung or jameswy to do their magic on this demo for the next release
[15:58:43 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> for now, it's a really good start
[15:58:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and in the meantime i guess we won't ship with FLUID-4061 fixed
[15:59:39 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> sure tho i think we'll need to figure out demos re:fss and extra, possibly distracting css
[16:10:42 CST(-0600)] <michelled> heidi_: are you there?
[16:17:29 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Okay, so justin_o and michelled and I just checked in about the 1.3.1 release
[16:17:41 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: You and I need to come up with a plan for what to do about FLUID-4061
[16:17:43 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> It's a blocker
[16:20:14 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, if I understand this all correctly, FLUID-4071 means, concretely, that users will see progress bars behaving very badly if they try to scroll the file queue view while in the midst of uploading a file.
[16:20:47 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> And, from what you say, heidi_, there's no viable fix except to reintroduce the two-table solution to Uploader
[16:21:15 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> If that is the case, then this suggests to me that we're not quite ready to ship any of the scrollable table stuff (the FSS classes and the components in FluidView.js)
[16:21:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and so we should back those changes out and carry on with the two-table solution
[16:24:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> But perhaps there's another option I'm missing
[16:24:36 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> what do you think, heidi_?
[16:27:17 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark thinking..
[16:29:02 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> i think we can leave in fss scrollable table and just document the fixed-contents issue. i imagine it's a relatively rare case, and i think it's powerful to offer a fixed table/scrollable body solution that has proper table markup
[16:29:29 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I see your point, heidi_
[16:29:37 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> as for uploader, we can fix this issue by yes, moving the header out of the table again
[16:29:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> The thing is, our plan all along with this scrollable table work was to fix a bug in Uploader
[16:30:07 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and, if it worked nicely, roll out a quick new feature for our users
[16:30:35 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> or we can figure out a different way of marking up the progress bars so they are not divs floating outside the table, ready to be position within it
[16:30:43 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> *positioned
[16:31:01 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> But since we won't be using it in Uploader, it becomes just this floating feature
[16:31:19 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Something we can't really verify is working awesomely, except through our admittedly preliminary demo
[16:31:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> an extra thing to QA
[16:31:23 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> etc.
[16:31:30 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark we can ditch it if you want
[16:31:51 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> i think the demo is fine
[16:31:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'm not dead set on it
[16:32:13 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'm just thinking, "why ship a new feature in a maintenance release?"
[16:32:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and a good answer to that question is "because it fixes a bug!"
[16:32:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> but I think we might just have our answer for that
[16:32:33 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> right, gotcha. it doesn't align with 1.3.1's purpose
[16:32:51 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> jessm: Do you care to share an opinion?
[16:32:58 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> we can summarize if need be
[16:33:05 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark what do you think about rethinking the progress bars within uploader
[16:33:20 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> instead of floating divs, maybe there's another way of doing it. i'm still brainstorming...
[16:33:23 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I think it would be awesome, heidi_!
[16:33:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I guess it's not something we can do tonight, eh?
[16:33:32 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> (smile)
[16:34:02 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark maybe after some dinner. css is funny that way. you can spend hours stumped , walk away, come back... aha
[16:34:07 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> lol
[16:34:23 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> we have our work cut out for us
[16:34:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> We freeze tonight
[16:34:28 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> right now it positions itself from the top of the scrollable...
[16:34:32 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> yeah that's the thing
[16:34:34 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yeah
[16:34:55 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I mean, if we knew we could fix the progress bars confidently, I'd say go for it
[16:35:11 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark can you help me find in the code where 'top' is set?
[16:35:20 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> for those progress bars
[16:35:43 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Line 119, Progress.js
[16:35:44 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> (smile)
[16:35:50 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> ha, thank you
[16:36:20 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> messing with progress.js right now feels like a bad idea
[16:36:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yeah
[16:36:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'm afraid you might be right
[16:36:39 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> this is sort of a drag, but nothing to get discouraged by, I think
[16:36:49 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 1.4 is close on the horizon
[16:37:10 CST(-0600)] <jessm> colinclark: eek, lemme catch up
[16:38:38 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> so, heidi_, do you have time to put together a fork of Infusion
[16:38:55 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> in which remove the scrollable stuff from FluidView.js, the table styles from FSS, and the tests
[16:38:57 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark line 57 of filequeueview.js ... where can i find the contents of refreshView()
[16:39:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> (I could do that part)
[16:39:15 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and then go back to the two-table solution?
[16:39:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> (you'd be better for that part, i imagine)
[16:39:45 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: Line 239 of Progress.js
[16:39:47 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark this sucks, thinking..
[16:40:59 CST(-0600)] <jessm> colinclark: heidi_ so the idea is leave the fss scollable alone, and ship with a bug in uploader? this funky, low probability scoll while uploading thingy?
[16:41:29 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> jessm: No, the bug is too big to ship with
[16:41:35 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> James concurred this morning
[16:41:38 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> The idea is to:
[16:42:12 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 1. Move Uploader back to a kind of ugly markup solution, in which we have two tables, one containing the headers and one containing the scrolling table body
[16:42:43 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 2a. Ship with the scrolling table features in FSS and the framework, even though we don't use them in our own code yet, and there are some caveats to using them
[16:42:58 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> 2b. Roll back those features from FSS and the framework until 1.4, when we've had time to polish the code and the demo further
[16:43:25 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark we could keep scrollableTable fss work/demo, over-ride the .fl-table-scrollable-scroller in uploader with position:relative and move the header out. but maybe that's too dirty
[16:44:23 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> cos it's like, using the scrolling table code but not using it
[16:45:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yeah
[16:45:42 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it's a bit funny
[16:46:13 CST(-0600)] <jessm> colinclark: so we won't ship the scrolling table features in 1.3.1?
[16:46:21 CST(-0600)] <jessm> we'll let it sit until 1.4?
[16:46:58 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> That's what I was thinking of, jessm
[16:47:24 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> This should be the daily build of the scrollable table stuff, jessm: http://build.fluidproject.org/infusion/demos/fss/scrollableTable/demo.html
[16:47:39 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> though it doesn't actually seem to be working, so perhaps the build isn't quite back up and running
[16:47:59 CST(-0600)] <jessm> colinclark: oh, i remember this – this is the one you found...
[16:48:50 CST(-0600)] <jessm> oh, nevermind
[16:48:50 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> i found something?
[16:48:52 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> lol
[16:48:56 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> no worries
[16:49:37 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark okay let's create a branch and ditch scrollableTable stuff and re-tweak uploader
[16:49:49 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: it sucks, i know
[16:50:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> but as I say, 1.4 is a whole new day
[16:50:01 CST(-0600)] <jessm> heidi_: is it metaphorically friday at 4 and we shouldn't change anything major if we intend to have a nice weekend?
[16:50:04 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> as in, not today
[16:50:13 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> jessm hehe ya
[16:50:23 CST(-0600)] <jessm> heidi_: right on
[16:50:29 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: I have to hit the road for a few hours
[16:50:44 CST(-0600)] <jessm> heidi_: we can build this into the 1.4 plan it sounds like
[16:50:47 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> can you do whatever you can in a fork, and I'll finish it up tonight and push it to the project repository?
[16:51:01 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark i wish there was a slick way to get the progress bars in there without fixed, like as rows underneath the file row or something
[16:51:08 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yeah
[16:51:15 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> maybe we'll discover something with a bit more time
[16:51:34 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> okay is there a jira # to name this branch ?
[16:53:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> We can file one
[16:53:32 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark
[16:53:38 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Something related to scrollable tables
[16:53:47 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> jessm: one more thing, if you're still here
[16:53:49 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> one more decision
[16:54:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> i'm sort of putting you in the proxy king position tonight (smile)
[16:54:18 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> harriswong has just given michelled and I a really hot new feature for the Uploader
[16:54:22 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> n/m too much for right now. thinking we could get the 'top' value for the row at its current position, and update when scrolling
[16:55:01 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> you're probably right-too much-but we could do something like that quite easily later heidi
[16:55:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> i worry sometimes about making code-level APIs for stuff that should just work in CSS
[16:55:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Honestly, I feel like CSS3 has to help us out here somehow
[16:55:37 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> yeah
[16:55:42 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> and we can implement some less-than-optimal solution for IE 6
[16:55:51 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> okay, so, jessm and michelled
[16:55:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yes, harriswong has a hot new feature for the Uploader
[16:56:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> proper error handling
[16:56:05 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> matching a hot new interface from jameswy
[16:56:16 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> It's close, but we're right down to the wire
[16:56:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> there's a lot of code and it needs more review
[16:56:37 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> plus we don't yet have it working for the Flash version of Uploader, only the HTML5 version
[16:56:46 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> so the question here, too, is:
[16:56:51 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> punt or delay?
[16:57:02 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'm feeling pretty keen to get this release out the door
[16:57:04 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> on time
[16:57:12 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it means we'd be punting two nice uploader features for 1.4
[16:57:21 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark im thinking of just calling it FLUID-4061 that makes sense right
[16:57:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> sure, go for it
[16:58:21 CST(-0600)] <michelled> colinclark: I wouldn't feel comfortable with reviewing this code with a fresh brain
[16:58:25 CST(-0600)] <michelled> colinclark: there's a lot here
[16:58:38 CST(-0600)] <michelled> I mean without a fresh brain
[16:58:41 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> michelled: You only do code review when you're cooked, huh?
[16:58:43 CST(-0600)] <michelled> perhaps I proved my point (tongue)
[16:59:02 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> hehe
[16:59:07 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> talk about laser eyes
[16:59:09 CST(-0600)] <jessm> punt
[16:59:11 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> more like blood-shot yes
[16:59:13 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> eyes
[16:59:17 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> damn, i can't type either
[16:59:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> okay, harriswong, so are you okay with this?
[16:59:30 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> seems like such a drag
[16:59:35 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it's obviously a really good feature
[16:59:42 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I can see some areas in the code that we'll need to tweak
[16:59:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I don't think there needs to be a relationship between the error handler and the strategy at all
[17:00:02 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it should work for both
[17:00:15 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> even in cases where a few of the errors will be less granular for Flash
[17:00:18 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> so we can figure that out for 1.4
[17:00:58 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> harriswong: I'm also seeing some pretty weird merging things
[17:01:13 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, there is code removed from your version of HTML5Support.js
[17:01:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> which I had written quite recently, and which fixed a bug in the HTML5 strategy
[17:01:33 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> seems like just a weird git-hiccup or something?
[17:02:19 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> so heidi_ ,as I say, do what you can with backing stuff out, and send me and the list a note with whatever needs to get done next
[17:02:25 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> i can do it when i get back from my meeting
[17:02:45 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark yeah we still need scrollTo so we're just backing out makeTable right
[17:02:51 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: mm let me check if the master i have is uptodate.
[17:02:55 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: yep
[17:03:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> michelled: So your vote is to punt FLUID-3878?
[17:03:27 CST(-0600)] <michelled> yes
[17:03:49 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> jessm says yea
[17:03:53 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> harriswong: are you okay with it?
[17:04:20 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> seems like it just needs a few more days of love (smile)
[17:04:27 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> colinclark: mm. sure.
[17:04:36 CST(-0600)] <michelled> cool
[17:04:55 CST(-0600)] <jessm> 1.3.1 is meant to be quick and maintenance – 1.4 is meant to be the next level of greatness
[17:05:13 CST(-0600)] <jessm> everyone go home and have some mac-n-cheese
[17:05:32 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> +1 for mac and cheese