Perl 6 - the future is here, just unevenly distributed

IRC log for #webwork, 2013-12-19

| Channels | #webwork index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:18 rbeezer joined #webwork
04:48 rbeezer_ joined #webwork
14:36 goehle joined #webwork
14:57 aubreyja joined #webwork
14:57 aubreyja joined #webwork
16:46 goehle hey mgage
16:46 mgage hi
16:46 goehle I really want to make this mathpets thing happen.  But finding the art has been really tough.
16:46 goehle I was thinking about having it comissioned
16:47 goehle but would need funds
16:47 goehle also I have a question about the apache24 fix
16:48 mgage that's not impossible, but let me get back on that.  I have to go through the accounts carefully and make sure we have enough for the next 3 code camps
16:48 goehle we could cancel asheville ;)
16:49 mgage we're getting toward the end of the  grant.  so it's time to be careful.
16:49 goehle I half expect it to be impossible. But I figured I would ask
16:49 goehle right
16:49 goehle actually, it seems like we might have a bit of camp overload atm
16:49 goehle or is one of those a library camp
16:49 mgage I kind of want to see ashville :-)   In any case once we know what the situation is we can make choices.
16:50 goehle sure
16:50 mgage the december one is a library camp.  The really definite one is in Portland in July on assessment.
16:50 goehle ah yeah, that will be a big one
16:50 goehle my friend Erin is at the library one atm
16:51 goehle I'm not holding you to this, but what kind of funds would be available for commissioning art.
16:51 mgage the arizona one might be a little tentative -- although I think a major push on documentation would be good for us.  going through the accounts is on my list of things to do -- I went through them partially early in the semester but then life intervened :-)
16:51 goehle happens
16:51 goehle I've been meaning to get mathview latex restored forever
16:51 goehle but other stuff keeps happening
16:52 goehle as for the funding, I just want to see what the order of magnitude is
16:52 mgage I don't even know ball park figure at the moment, but I'll keep this in mind and try to get back to you on it the first week in January
16:52 goehle no problem
16:52 mgage what is the question about apache24?
16:53 goehle just what to do with it
16:53 goehle where should I pull it to
16:54 mgage I don't think it's a rush for release/2.8 -- so I would do a pull request to develop for the moment.
16:54 mgage I think the people who would like release/2.8 over the xmas break will mostly not be upgrading their entire operating system.
16:54 goehle I based the fix of the release candidate for 2.8
16:55 goehle which means it has a bunch of the small fixes we made getting that ready
16:55 goehle so its not as small as a pull as it could
16:55 goehle bbe
16:55 goehle * could be
16:55 goehle on the other hand, those were fixes which would eventually need to make there way to develop anyway
16:55 mgage right -- I wouldn't worry about it being a big pull request to develop.  That is at best beta stability at the moment.
16:56 mgage I don't mind putting it into 2.8 but I also don't think it needs to be rushed for day 1 so I wanted to make sure you guys had time to think about it properly
16:57 mgage I've got an exam tonight and will be grading tomorrow so I can't do much before probably late Saturday.
16:57 goehle its not that huge of a thing.  If we get some forum noise about it we can backport it.  Since I based the fix off of the 2.8 candidate it will be easy
16:58 goehle So right now the pull doesn't automatically merge
16:58 goehle but develop needs to have the tmp branches pulled first
16:58 mgage If you and/or Jason would like to pull release/2.8 into master that would be fine with me -- someone else should start getting experience with this.  I think the release candidate that I have up their would merge cleanly.  If there are minor fixes you can do pull requests to the release candidate and then when everything is set merge that into master.
16:58 goehle then I'll try and make it better
16:58 goehle I wouldn't mind getting it merged.  I wanted to upgrade our server before I left
16:59 goehle the question is if you think we are ready/tested enough
16:59 mgage I think pulls to develop can wait a day or two.
16:59 goehle also
16:59 goehle what happens to master
16:59 mgage we are never tested enough :-)  but waiting longer doesn't improve the situation usually.
16:59 goehle shouldn't we save a snapshot if it as 2.7
17:00 goehle I guess my question is, do we expect more testing to be done in the next week, or should we just pull and get it done :)
17:00 mgage yes.  So what is done is that you tag master at 2.7+ before you pull in release/2.8
17:00 goehle what about release/2.7legacy?
17:00 goehle and how do I tag
17:01 mgage the latter I think.  Just let that sit for the time being -- it removes about 10 instances of using //   in the code for those still using RHEL5 and perl 5.8 -- I'm not sure I want to support that longer.
17:01 goehle ok
17:01 mgage do you use SourceTree?
17:01 goehle I'm seeing v2.95 v2.94 etc
17:01 goehle and also WeBWork-2.7+
17:01 goehle WeBWorK-2.7 etc
17:01 goehle as tags
17:02 mgage those are on develop
17:02 goehle which ones
17:02 goehle the v2.9x or all of them
17:02 mgage if you are seeing WeBWorK-2.7+ then that means I already tagged it -- I know I did that for pg and merged in release/2.8 on the PG side.
17:02 goehle ok
17:02 goehle so I can just merge the release candidate?
17:03 mgage the v2.9x  were tags I used while merging Peter's stuff so that we could back out if needed -- that pull was huge
17:03 goehle right
17:03 mgage let me check -- I think so.
17:06 mgage yes.  you should be able to pull the 2.8 merge candidate -- then you can probably pull the fix for ProblemGrader from ion particle as well
17:06 goehle and the fix for the i.e. console.log thing
17:07 mgage right -- that too.
17:09 mgage the main thing that needs to be done in addition to the pull is to go through the release/2.8 release notes and update them -- the easiest way to do this is to scroll through the commit log for the pull request from 2.8_candidate to master and list the big updates on http://webwork.maa.org/wiki/Release_notes_for_WeBWorK_2.8  -- I made a start a few months ago, but more has been done since.
17:10 goehle should I delete the release 2.8 branch?
17:10 goehle we dont want people to pull into that any more
17:11 goehle actually nevermind
17:11 goehle it automatically disappears from the list of unmerged branches
17:11 goehle although it looks like we havent been keeping older release candidate branches
17:13 mgage yes -- I think that will be ok.  I have copies.  The plan is to do the pull request,  make sure that release notes are up to date -- then announce a merry christmas present and also delete the earlier branches.  The branches get saved as tag nodes anyway.
17:13 goehle ok
17:13 goehle will do
17:14 mgage So as soon as we merge 2.8 into master and nothing horrible has gone wrong we tag master with WeBWork-2.8.     Just before we merge with 2.9  we put in a WeBWorK-2.8+ branch to indicate the end of hot fixes to that branch
17:14 goehle ah
17:14 goehle ok
17:14 goehle let me quickly test to see that it hasn't exploded and I'll tag it
17:14 mgage that's been my process so far at any rate.
17:15 mgage need to run now -- I'll be a bit preoccupied until after I give this exam and get it graded.
17:15 goehle no problem
17:15 goehle thanks for all the help
17:15 mgage thank you.    ttyl
17:56 goehle hey mgage, sorry to bother you again
17:56 goehle how grandular should I be when updating the 2.8 release wiki page?
18:59 mgage goehle:  just got back -- you mean how much detail?
18:59 goehle yeah
18:59 goehle I gave it one pass
18:59 goehle do you think it needs more?
19:00 mgage probably enough for now -- I'll take a look at it later and perhaps Jason can to see if there are important things we missed.
19:00 goehle yeah
19:00 goehle I guess thats the biggest thing
19:00 mgage one more thing that has to be done though is to merge release/2.8 into develop
19:00 goehle I put everything in there that I did and I think is important
19:00 goehle and stuff other people did that I know about
19:00 goehle ah yeah
19:01 mgage I saw that -- I just scroll through the commit list and add what pops out at me.
19:02 mgage I think it would have been better to merge 2.8_candidate into develop before we deleted it, but we can accomplish pretty much the same thing by issuing a pull request now from master to develop
19:02 mgage peter wants to start using develop in his classes.
19:03 goehle thats what I'm going to do now
19:04 mgage ok.
19:05 mgage take a look at develop_tmp as well -- you may want to merge that into develop first -- I'm afraid we may get some conflicts where patches have been applied twice.
19:05 goehle yeah
19:06 goehle my plan is to pull develop_tmp in first
19:06 goehle I'm testing it now
19:06 mgage ok -- and if there are conflicts github gives you pretty clear instructions about how to deal with it by cloning the branches involved onto your desktop
19:07 goehle anything in particular I should test for develop_tmp
19:07 goehle and develop_tmp2
19:08 mgage a lot of develop is just reconciling with master -- your stuff.
19:08 mgage I don't see a develop_tmp2 (I think that merged automatically with develop_tmp?)
19:08 goehle thats a pull request from a branch on your git
19:09 mgage ok develop_tmp2 is pretty safe.  It's main thing is to allow LB3 to run again for comparison purposes.
19:10 goehle ok
19:11 mgage it might be worth checking that LB1 runs after you add develop_tmp2 but I did already check that.  It's only danger is that it pulls js files from certain locations and various versions have been at cross purposes about that.  this is not a deal breaker and we can work those bugs out in a hurry
19:14 goehle is library browser 3 supposed to be mostly broken?
19:14 mgage I think I got it mostly working with develop_tmp2
19:15 mgage that doesn't mean it works well -- there are still obvious css issues and so forth
19:15 mgage I don't expect it to be updated -- but I would like it around in case there was a UI idea there that hasn't yet made it into Peter's version.
19:16 goehle i'm getting a lot of js errors and nothign seems to be running
19:18 mgage hmmm -- leave it out for now then -- I'll redo it and submit it to develop when I get a chance
19:18 goehle ok
19:19 goehle so develop_tmp doesn *seem* broken
19:19 mgage you'll need to be careful with the merge of develop and master to make sure that the js addresses aren't messed up.
19:19 goehle and peters stuff does run
19:19 goehle so I'm going to merge that
19:19 mgage kk
19:20 mgage I sent you a copy of a note that I just sent to peter
19:21 mgage it's ok if develop is beta for now.
19:22 goehle do I need to do anything special to get library browser 3 to run?
19:24 mgage no -- it doesn't use dancer -- but the places where it gets its js files might not be correct -- I fussed with that a bunch to get it to run.
19:25 goehle looks like it needs some more fussing.
19:25 goehle I'll put a comment on the pull request and leave it for now
19:25 mgage there are also some issues with the updated bootstrap -- see note about "options" in the pull request
19:25 mgage that is fine.
19:25 goehle ?
19:26 mgage bootstrap changed the API for a number of calls.
19:26 goehle the options thing refers to backbone
19:26 mgage sorry -- I meant backbone
19:27 goehle should I merge it anyway then
19:27 mgage lb3 is not worth a lot of effort -- I'll just see if it is easy to get it running.
19:27 goehle and ahve you resubmit another pull which deals with LB3
19:28 mgage I guess that would be ok -- the only other part of it is updating some paths -- make sure those updates look reasonable
19:28 mgage it's ok if LB3 remains broken -- it's already not working
19:28 mgage in develop
19:28 goehle I dont even know where we are with paths anymore
19:29 goehle however
19:29 goehle the library browser 1 runs fine with tmp2 merged
19:29 mgage does peter's library in homework manager run fine?  that is the one that would be affected
19:29 goehle ah ok
19:29 mgage a lot of the js files are now in bower_components
19:30 mgage you should probably consult with peter as well about this
19:30 mgage I'm hoping we can settle the locations of js files down pretty soon so they don't switch around so much.
19:31 goehle hmm
19:31 goehle his library browser seems to hang
19:31 goehle but its not  your files which are causing the problem I think
19:32 mgage do you have perl Dancer running?  -- that is usually an issue
19:33 goehle yeah
19:33 mgage I have a version that was running -- haven't tried it recently -- but I expect there is nothing major wrong.  send peter a note and consult with him on what the issue is.
19:34 mgage I'll come in as soon as I get a chance and get LB3 on track again if it's worth the effort.
19:34 goehle will do
19:34 mgage the version on devel1 is working
19:34 goehle it may be my machine

| Channels | #webwork index | Today | | Search | Google Search | Plain-Text | summary