fluid-work IRC Logs-2011-10-07

[08:16:10 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> justin_o: did my email from yesterday eventually go through?

[08:16:23 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: not that i saw

[08:19:04 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> argh

[08:19:09 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> I'll send it yet again...

[08:24:54 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: okay.. are you sure you're sending it to the correct place

[08:26:05 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Yeah. First time I sent it from my gmail acct. 2nd time I forwarded what I sent initially...

[08:26:49 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> I sent it again, so let me know if it shows up Justin_o

[08:27:56 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> what's going on?

[08:28:02 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> something missing?

[08:28:11 CDT(-0500)] * huslage sysadmin ears perk up

[08:28:59 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> hey huslage.

[08:29:20 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Having some issues with an email tried sending twice to the Everyone mailing list yesterday.

[08:29:31 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Both never went through.

[08:29:43 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> lemme check. that server might be unhappy again

[08:29:48 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> First one was an obvious error (I sent it using my gmail identity).

[08:29:52 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: i still didn't get anything yet

[08:29:58 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Second, I forwarded it using my OCAD.

[08:31:14 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> I sent a 3rd email just now to Everyone and it didn't go through (at least not yet)

[08:33:01 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> justin_o: I sent you a test message.

[08:33:29 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> huslage: i see your test e-mail

[08:33:37 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: i got yours to my personal e-mail

[08:33:39 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> jhung where are you sending it?

[08:33:58 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> everyone@idrc.ocad.ca

[08:34:04 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> everyone@lists.idrc.ocad.ca

[08:34:07 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> "everyone" <everyone@lists.idrc.ocad.ca>,

[08:34:08 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> yeah

[08:34:19 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> are you sending from an account that is a member of the list?

[08:34:33 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> did you get my test just now?

[08:34:41 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Yes usually I am unless my client acts cute and switches my identity

[08:34:54 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> (user is blameless, of course

[08:35:04 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> Oct 7 13:33:02 i-0000001f postfix/smtp[31720]: 156CB7AA2B: to=<jhung.utoronto@gmail.com>, relay=gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[74.125.113.26]:25, delay=1.4, delays=0.01/0.06/0.23/1.1, dsn=2.0.0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 OK 1317994382 dr3si6938323vdb.63)

[08:35:10 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> that's where it sent the message

[08:35:26 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> that i just sent

[08:36:07 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> ok. I resent.

[08:36:29 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> there you go.

[08:36:30 CDT(-0500)] <huslage> got it

[08:36:57 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> thanks. False alarm. Thanks Justin_o and Huslage.

[08:39:37 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: no problem

[08:53:21 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: when i get around to working on decapod today i think i'll be spending my time trying to remember how to use mercurial, python, and reviewing our old code there.. don't know if i'll get through all of that today but hopefully it will be a bit of a head start for next week

[08:53:34 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: was there anything else you would like me to look at for decapod?

[08:55:46 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> justin_o: that sounds good to me. Today I'm working on Decapod equipment manifest for shipping and then hopefully get to Hasan's script today.

[08:55:58 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: sounds good

[09:03:41 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> justin_o: I couldn't resist testing Hasan's script.

[09:04:19 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> so it looks like the command line arguments and parameters changes slightly... so we

[09:04:30 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> 'll have to adjust that.

[09:04:52 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Type 1 generation seems faster, although it still parses each line

[09:05:01 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Working on type 2 now.

[09:08:06 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: great thanks.. if you have a chance can you go through the liras that are open for 0.5 in regards to pdf generation and see if those bugs till exist

[09:48:52 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o howcome we don't include screen reader testing in our QA

[09:50:18 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: good question

[09:50:47 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> i'm not sure if we will or not in the future, but at the moment we didn't want to be prescriptive in our AT support

[09:51:00 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: ^

[09:51:11 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: so you are free to test in whichever AT you would like to

[09:51:20 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i think testing popular screen readers is essential to a11y QA

[09:51:30 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> how else will we know how it's working?

[09:53:09 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: yes… but we also don't want to be in a position where we put too much emphasis on screen reader support

[09:53:52 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> and we also haven't wanted to be in a position where we're telling people which AT's we think are the best or even the most popular, i suppose

[09:54:05 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> but that doesn't mean we'll always take this views

[09:54:21 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o but never testing our components with a screen reader ever seems ridiculous

[09:54:32 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: our current philosophy is to test in whichever AT you like basically.. but we don't force any specific ones

[09:55:02 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: so just to be clear with all of our release testing tasks.. they aren't to say that you can't test in anything else, they are just saying that we must test at least these

[09:55:19 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i get not wanting to prescribe ATs but QA testing should still include us checking over some popular ones, no?

[09:56:29 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: I think in a way we would be though if we required it

[09:56:38 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> but i understand what you're saying

[09:57:09 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o i find it really unsettling that our focus is a11y yet we don't try our components with ATs as part of our QA

[09:58:41 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> heidi_: well.. it's not to say that we don't

[09:59:12 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> Justin_o it kind of is - we don't do that

[10:00:43 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> justin_o: sorry I missed your message. I'll check on those bugs now...

[10:01:31 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: thanks

[10:29:09 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> Justin_o: the genpdf issue of inverting still exists.

[10:29:17 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung:

[10:30:00 CDT(-0500)] <jhung> justin_o: I think Deca-157 and Deca-58 should be grouped under a larger issue that genpdf should always produce a faithful version for Type 1 and Type 2 PDFs.

[10:32:46 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> jhung: possibly.. that might be too general a jira though

[12:54:27 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> fluid-everyone: the latest pull-request is in and the nightly rebuilt

[12:57:07 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Hi Justin_o

[12:57:27 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> So, I was concerned about something heidi_ said in the thread this morning...

[12:57:39 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> Bosmon: hello

[12:57:46 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> That is, that it seems that some of our themes use one policy for applying .fl-focus, and some use another

[12:57:59 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> If this is true, it sounds like something we should do something about before release

[12:58:34 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> Bosmon: that's not happening any more, it was one of the proposed solutions

[12:58:40 CDT(-0500)] <Justin_o> michelled: can you confirm this

[12:58:47 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> We should be able to describe a consistent policy in our docs for how this is meant to work

[13:06:33 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> Bosmon: heidi_ was making a suggestion for how we proceed

[13:07:10 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> Bosmon: what we've decided to do for this release is to leave FSS and the themes as is - all of them have focus styling scoped to fl-focus

[13:07:25 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> Bosmon: we fixed the bug by putting fl-focus on the body in the demo

[13:07:45 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> Justin_o, michelled, i've done the work with AContent. what's in infusion I can help with? UIO testing? I know you have concern that I might be too familiar with it to overlook something. :-P

[13:07:48 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> we will also add documentation to FSS saying that when using a theme an implementor should also use fl-focus

[13:08:36 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> cindyli: I think we are at the point where it would be awesome to get more testing help

[13:09:03 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> how about you pick a platform that you don't usually use when you are developing

[13:09:21 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> cool, michelled, i will pick some UIO testings from the task list

[13:09:30 CDT(-0500)] <michelled> thanks!

[13:09:35 CDT(-0500)] <cindyli> np

[13:16:07 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> michelled - that sounds great

[13:25:31 CDT(-0500)] <michelled>

[15:53:02 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> michelled i'm getting a failing unit test for FF6 in win xp

[15:53:26 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> http://build.fluidproject.org/infusion/tests/component-tests/uiOptions/html/FullPreviewUIOptions-test.html "TOC links created" fails

[15:55:09 CDT(-0500)] <heidi_> FF on mac too