fluid-work IRC Logs-2011-02-22

Owned by Fluid IRC Log Bot
Last updated: Feb 22, 2011Version comment
13 min read

[08:24:46 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o anymore testing i can help with? i see only win 7 stuff left but i don't have that one unfortunately
[08:27:23 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: hello
[08:28:07 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> could you do a quick retest of the rich text inline edit.. we were missing a dependency for the demo which we fixed on friday. Not sure if anyone has tried it again to make sure it's all working as expected
[08:28:49 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o i'll check it out
[08:28:55 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: thanks
[08:29:05 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o fix is on the build site?
[08:29:18 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: should be.. let me just make sure it's been rebuilt
[08:29:21 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> k
[08:29:45 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: yep it should be good
[08:33:29 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o the error is gone in IE now. one thing i'm noticing is that when you save in CKEditor, it moves the focus to the top of the page (so the next tab is no longer 'undo')
[08:33:46 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> but maybe that's known
[08:34:07 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> n/m that happens with both editors
[08:34:12 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: can't remember if that's a known issue
[08:34:22 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> okay
[08:36:48 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o the focus moving to the top seems to only be IE... ill check for a jira, cos it is kind of annoying
[08:37:24 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: thanks.. yes i could see how that would be annoying... especially if you were at the bottom of the page
[08:39:14 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o let me know if there's anything else
[08:39:58 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: i think that's good for now.. you may want to check in with anastasiac when you are done
[08:42:54 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> cool. hey jessm do you know which days you'll need website help?
[08:43:25 CST(-0600)] <jessm> heidi_: i think smriti is mostly out today, so i'm thinking later in the week?
[08:43:30 CST(-0600)] <jessm> i need to check in with her still
[08:43:35 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> jessm cool, sounds good
[08:51:28 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, could you double-check the license for qUnit, make sure it's up-to-date?
[08:52:26 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, could you double-check that the license for the new scrolling plugin is present, and in the right place in the code base?
[08:53:08 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac it's moved inside the uploader - does that affect things?
[08:54:07 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: sure.. i updated it, i think it's okay
[08:54:53 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, I think I'm not up-to-date on what was done with the scrolling: I see a jQuery scrollTo plug-in in the jQuery folder: is that not what the uploader uses
[08:54:54 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> ?
[08:55:50 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac ah. yes so scrollTo has been added, but our scrolling component is just inside the uploader. did you want me to check lic for scrollTo?
[08:56:41 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> ok, so the uploader doesn't use the scrollTo plugin. gotcha. Well, if it's in the code, we need to double-check the lic anyway. Why is it there, if we're not using it?
[08:57:24 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac yep it does use scrollTo. sorry i'm confused (the component that uses scrollTo is in the uploader vs fluid view, but that doesn't matter). i'll check its lic (smile)
[08:57:28 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> harriswong: did you do the "run all unit tests" task for IE8 Win 7
[08:57:33 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> if not i can do that today
[08:58:24 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, if the uploader is dependent on the scrollTo plugin, I think the dependencies in the uploaderDependencies.json file need to be checked - they don't mention the plugin...
[08:58:24 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> Justin_o: No I have not gotten a chance to yet.
[08:58:50 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> Justin_o: would you please run those tests on your vm for me, thanks!
[08:58:53 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac ah, good catch. yes we should add scrollTo as a dependency, right colinclark?
[08:59:17 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> most definitely
[08:59:44 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> anastasiac: Didn't you submit a pull request last week with a change to Uploader's dependencies?
[08:59:52 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> and need to add new file in /licenses
[09:00:09 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> I did... I'm just double-checking that now...
[09:01:21 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> ah, I missed the plug-in dependency
[09:01:28 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac colinclark does the jquery lic cover its plugins?
[09:01:51 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: Plugins are totally separate from jQuery
[09:02:32 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark where would the lic info for bgiframe be
[09:02:42 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> It's missing, too
[09:02:49 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> and tooltip
[09:02:53 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Let me think about what the best way to handle this is
[09:03:03 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Since I'm sure the licenses are all the usual jQuery-like GPL/MIT dual
[09:03:17 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Which is probably what motivated people to not bother with separate license files
[09:04:52 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Justin_o: you there?
[09:04:57 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, FLUID-4063 for the scrollTo dependency and FLUID-4064 for licences
[09:05:05 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> colinclark, he's here, he just stepped away from his desk
[09:06:14 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac cool, will wait for colinclark's verdict on how to hand jquery plugins licenses
[09:06:25 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, we're not really handling dually licensed code correctly
[09:06:46 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> When code is dual licensed, you have the choice of licensing it under one or the other
[09:06:57 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, for example, Infusion is dually licensed as both BSD and ECL 2.0
[09:07:11 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> That means our users can pick the license they like best, or the license that is most compatible with their code
[09:07:27 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, for example, ECL 2.0 isn't compatible with the GPL, but the BSD is
[09:07:43 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, ATutor, as an example, would choose the BSD license for Infusion
[09:07:49 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> jQuery is like this, too
[09:07:58 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> As well as most of the plugins created for it
[09:08:13 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it's up to the plugin other, but mostly people use the exact same license as jQuery, to keep it simple
[09:09:11 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, heidi_, the first thing you could do to help is to determine all the licenses which code in the lib/jquery directory is offered under
[09:09:18 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> That means core, plugins, and ui
[09:09:25 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I strongly suspect that they are all dual GPL/MIT
[09:09:37 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> but double check for me if you have a sec, heidi_
[09:10:18 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So secondly, we need to be more explicit about which license we've chosen for dually-licensed third party code in Infusion
[09:10:35 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Undoubtedly it will be the alternative to GPL, since it's incompatible with half our license (smile)
[09:10:45 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> colinclark okay.. i'm going finish going through rich inline testing, push a branch for FLUID-4063, and then check the lic
[09:11:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: no
[09:11:01 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> sorry
[09:11:06 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> perhaps I wasn't clear
[09:11:15 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> do that first, so we can make a decision
[09:11:19 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> it should take you all of two minutes
[09:11:24 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> okay np
[09:11:28 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> or delegate it to anastasiac (tongue)
[09:11:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> your choice
[09:12:04 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So the *-LICENSE.txt files throughout our code base should reflect the actual license we've chosen to redistribute our third party libraries with
[09:12:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I noticed, Justin_o and anastasiac, that most of them contain reference to both licenses
[09:12:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> jQuery, for example
[09:13:03 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Assuming all the code inside lib/jquery can be licensed under MIT, I'm fine sticking with the single jQuery-LICENSE.txt file at the top level
[09:13:19 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> yeah, it looks like we just put jQuery's licenses there, instead of putting the jQuery license we choose.
[09:13:26 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> right
[09:13:43 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> so colinclark, if the plugins all fit, we shoudl remove the GPL ref from the license file, right?
[09:13:53 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Yep
[09:14:27 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> We'll leave the source code file's license header untouched, so that if the author mentioned the dual license there, it's still available
[09:14:41 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> gotcha. So heidi_, could you double-check the licenses for the plugins that are in that folder? make sure they can all be licensed under MIT?
[09:14:53 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> scrollTo: Dual licensed under MIT and GPL.
[09:15:11 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> same with bgiframe
[09:15:34 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> and tooltip
[09:15:58 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> it specifies MIT or GPL "Version 2"
[09:16:06 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> that's fine
[09:16:07 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> excellent, so we're good to go.
[09:16:15 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> still ui, anastasiac
[09:16:20 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> ah, right
[09:17:21 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> ui are all the same as well
[09:20:07 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Okay, great
[09:20:22 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, anastasiac, can you close whatever issue you filed for the scrollTo license?
[09:20:37 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> http://issues.fluidproject.org/browse/FLUID-4064
[09:20:41 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> colinclark, hadn't filed a specific issue - there's just the general one
[09:20:50 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ok
[09:20:56 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> This one'll do just fine (smile)
[09:21:30 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'm adding a comment
[09:24:13 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Okay, done
[09:24:32 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> anastasiac: Do you want to do the changes, or shall?
[09:24:41 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac so when it say s"jQuery" is a dependency, that doesn't include its plugins?
[09:24:41 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'd like to review it
[09:25:09 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> colinclark, it might just be simpler for you to make the change directly (smile) But if you'd like me to do it, no problem
[09:25:17 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Okay
[09:25:32 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, no it doesn't include the plugins. the dependencies are very modular
[09:25:39 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'm going to hop on the subway and I'll go ahead and make the change as soon as I get to the office
[09:25:42 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> core, ui, plugins - all separate
[09:25:52 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> even ui is divvied up into two groups
[09:26:21 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac is there a special way to include a plugin, or will "scrollTo" do it? what is the name based off of?
[09:26:27 CST(-0600)] <harriswong> anastasiac: is there anything you would like me to work on?
[09:27:08 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, anything that can be "depended on" has a JSON file in its folder. To include that thing, you add the base of that filename to your dependencies file
[09:27:11 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> so in this case:
[09:27:36 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> the filename is jQueryScrollToPluginDependencies.json
[09:27:53 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> so in the uploader dependencies, list, you'd add "jQueryScrollToPlugin", heidi_
[09:28:03 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac that makes sense (smile) thanks
[09:28:24 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> and order prob doesn't matter
[09:28:27 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, I do have a wiki page for this... let me dig it up, and you can beta-test it for me
[09:28:59 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: order matters
[09:29:17 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> cool, ill read over the wiki page
[09:29:20 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> To be precise, the name you use is the key for the dependency object in the JSON file
[09:29:32 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_: http://wiki.fluidproject.org/display/fluid/Builder+Dependency+Declaration+JSON+Files
[09:29:47 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So, for example, if you look at line 2 of jQueryScrollToPluginDependencies.json, you'll see the key is "jQueryScrollToPlugin"
[09:29:49 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> and, yes, colinclark, that's right
[09:29:52 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> That's the name you need to use as a dependency
[09:32:46 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac this doc doesn't mention order of dependencies
[09:33:33 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> heidi_, I'm not actually sure that for the dependencies, order matters. each of the dependencies would have its own dependencies, and I think the builder takes care of that. but we should double-check
[09:34:31 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> feels like it should be okay but colinclark said above order matters
[09:35:56 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> order matters
[09:36:11 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Remember how these files get used...
[09:38:17 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ultimately, a file containing all the requisite dependencies for a module gets generated
[09:38:30 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> So if order matters for script tags in the head of a document
[09:38:35 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> similarly, order matters here
[09:40:30 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> makes sense. i put jQueryScrollToPlugin after jQueryUICore
[09:43:12 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Seems fine to me
[09:43:33 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I generally just look at the order of includes in the HTML file, and then make sure it's consistent
[09:43:37 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> which I assume is what you did, too (smile)
[09:45:32 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> that's not what i did, but it's a good tip for the doc anastasiac? however i see framework/core/js/jquery.keyboard-a11y.js comes before the scrollTo plugin in the html... so framework should go before?
[09:46:07 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> anastasiac there's now a pull request for 4063
[09:46:59 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> colinclark, the scrollTo plugin does depend on jQuery, so you'd think it should be listed after it, but its own dependency file lists that dependency. Does the builder not take care of that?
[09:48:09 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> or maybe I'm overestimating the capabilities of the builder?
[10:20:50 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o inlin edit unit test failing in IE
[10:21:10 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> #31, 9) "undo container should not be visiable"
[10:22:11 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_: that's a known issue
[10:22:14 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> it's an IE 8 bug
[10:22:18 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> k
[10:23:11 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> heidi_, anastasiac : is someone looking after your pull requests?
[10:23:27 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> justin_o, I just posted mine right now
[10:23:39 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> Justin_o i assigned mine to ac in the jira
[10:23:41 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> wasn't sure if I should look at heidi_'s, or if someone else should
[10:24:39 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> maybe i'll check in with colin when he gets back into the channel to see if he wants to pick any of those up
[10:29:10 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: did you want to look at either or both of the pull requests we have so far?
[10:29:19 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Justin_o: Of course@
[10:52:44 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> colinclark, heidi_: the scroller work you did, which modified framework/FluidView.js: were those changes backed out? i.e. the changes aren't in FluidView anymore?
[10:52:54 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yes
[11:01:27 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> mlam: which browsers do you have for win 7
[11:01:32 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> ?
[11:01:43 CST(-0600)] <mlam> Justin_o: I only have xp on my machine
[11:02:01 CST(-0600)] <mlam> i can look for a win7 OS and create another virtual machine
[11:02:18 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> mlam: ah.. i see
[11:02:33 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> you can check with bert, i think he has ours
[11:02:41 CST(-0600)] <mlam> Ok, i'll do that
[11:02:48 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> i'm not sure it will matter for this release, but it might be good just to have for development and etc.
[11:05:31 CST(-0600)] <mlam> I see.. ok
[11:32:33 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> colinclark, I've revised those copyright dates in the framework files and pushed the changes to my branch
[11:32:41 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ok
[11:32:45 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> i'll take a look
[11:33:19 CST(-0600)] <jessm> heidi_: ping
[11:33:56 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> jessm hey
[11:34:17 CST(-0600)] <jessm> heidi_: so, re: that webwork... do you have some time today to talk through it and maybe dive in?
[11:34:43 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> jessm sure ya
[11:50:31 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> heidi_: I've pushed your FLUID-4063 push request, the one with the addition of the scrollToPlugin to Uploader's required dependencies
[11:50:55 CST(-0600)] <heidi_> thanks colinclark !
[12:04:54 CST(-0600)] <mlam> fluid-everyone: I have been away for about 2 weeks, so I apologize if this is a repeat question. Did we ever come up with a solution to replacing SVN urls to the new github urls when it comes to linking resources in our documentation?
[12:05:05 CST(-0600)] <mlam> or is the solution to just replace the urls as we come across them?
[12:05:22 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> mlam, it's not a repeat question - it was never answered
[12:05:47 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> I think the plan was that we'd have a bit of a blitz: all-hands-on-deck to try to find everything and change it
[12:05:53 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> but if you're looking at it right now
[12:06:04 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> I'd say feel free to fix whatever you're looking at!
[12:06:32 CST(-0600)] <mlam> Ok, cool. I was just checking over the uploader documentation and found a few broken links, and it rang a bell about this issue
[12:06:46 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> cool
[13:05:55 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> anastasiac: I pushed your FLUID-4064 copyright dates into the project repo
[13:06:03 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> thanks
[13:06:09 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Last task, I think, is to take care of the license files
[13:06:14 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Anything else I'm forgetting?
[13:06:33 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> not according to my list
[13:07:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ok
[13:57:39 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Justin_o and anastasiac: I just made a pull request for license/README file changes for FLUID-4064
[13:57:50 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: thanks.. i'll take a look at that
[13:58:11 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> It's fairly important stuff, so extra eyes make sense
[14:20:03 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Justin_o: I wondered that myself
[14:20:10 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I suppose it does make sense, yes
[14:21:30 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> what do you think?
[14:21:36 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: yes.. so you think it does make sense to add which license we use in the readme
[14:21:48 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> i think it might be clearer to our users that way
[14:22:37 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> In some of the other readme's you had something like "This code is redistributed in Infusion under the MIT license"
[14:23:43 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yep
[14:24:59 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> i guess i'll add that comment to the pull request
[14:28:27 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> thanks, Justin_o
[14:28:35 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I'll make a second commit and pull request?
[14:29:10 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: thanks.. i think you don't have to make a new pull request you can just comment on the current one and let me know when the changes are in your fork
[14:31:32 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ok
[14:44:31 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: is the total progress bar status area at the bottom of the uploader supposed to be tabable
[14:44:40 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ?!
[14:44:42 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> erm
[14:44:52 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> i'm assuming that you should only be able to tab to the browse and add more buttons
[14:44:56 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> not the whole bar
[14:45:03 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Yes, that's right
[14:45:06 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> what's going on?
[14:45:21 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> i can tab to the whole bar at least in ff4 for win 7
[14:48:01 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> yeack
[14:48:05 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Let me take a look
[14:48:23 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Justin_o and anastasiac: I've pushed some new changes to the README me up to my fork's FLUID-4064 branch
[14:48:28 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Can you both have a look?
[14:48:34 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> will do
[14:48:36 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: thanks will do
[14:49:51 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: do you guys call that area on the uploader the status bar or something else?
[14:50:05 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> I can't even remember any more
[14:50:10 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> status bar sounds like a great name for it
[14:50:30 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Yes, the whole bar is indeed focusable, Justin_o
[14:50:30 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> In FF4
[14:51:44 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Justin_o: It's also definitely a regression in 1.3.1
[14:53:45 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: i might be reading it wrong but it looks like the commit hash for qunit is different in the qunit VERSION file and the main README.txt file
[14:54:58 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> ah, perhaps it's been updated
[14:55:17 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> colinclark, your 4064 readme changes look good: they certainly clean the file up, and easy enough to find any particular piece of software if you want
[14:55:28 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> i did update the qunit earlier this month.. i think i probably just forgot to update the README.txt
[14:55:47 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> do you think we need it in the README.txt though..
[14:57:00 CST(-0600)] <colinclark> Justin_o: I pushed your suggested change
[14:57:05 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark: thanks
[14:57:23 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> anastasiac: are you happy with all the changes? did you have any comments?
[14:57:39 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> Justin_o, I'm happy
[14:57:53 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> anastasiac, colinclark: thanks, i'll push it up soon then
[15:18:14 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> colinclark, anastasiac: FLUID-4064 has been pushed and the jira closed
[15:18:17 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> thanks, Justin_o
[15:22:51 CST(-0600)] <michelled> Justin_o: I've got a few minutes before a meeting and I thought I'd do a little JIRA gardening
[15:23:13 CST(-0600)] <michelled> are you ok with me closing resolved issues that have been resolved for released versions without looking at them?
[15:25:47 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> michelled: i think that should be fine
[15:25:51 CST(-0600)] <michelled> thx
[15:39:38 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> michelled, anastasiac, colinclark_: the permissions for needs commit should be fixed now
[15:40:18 CST(-0600)] <colinclark_> thanks!
[15:40:35 CST(-0600)] <anastasiac> looks good Justin_o - i don't see it in the UI when not logged in now
[15:41:20 CST(-0600)] <Justin_o> great.. sorry i missed that before