| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:22 |
|
book` joined #evergreen |
| 00:37 |
|
RBecker joined #evergreen |
| 01:08 |
|
book` joined #evergreen |
| 01:23 |
|
sandbergja joined #evergreen |
| 01:24 |
|
beanjammin joined #evergreen |
| 05:00 |
pinesol |
News from qatests: Testing Success <http://testing.evergreen-ils.org/~live> |
| 06:55 |
|
jamesrf joined #evergreen |
| 06:56 |
|
agoben joined #evergreen |
| 07:10 |
|
rjackson_isl joined #evergreen |
| 07:12 |
|
yar joined #evergreen |
| 07:37 |
|
bos20k joined #evergreen |
| 07:46 |
|
agoben joined #evergreen |
| 07:53 |
|
stephengwills joined #evergreen |
| 08:01 |
gmcharlt_ |
starting maintenance on git.evergreen-ils.org |
| 08:05 |
|
Dyrcona joined #evergreen |
| 08:11 |
JBoyer |
Daisy... Daisy... give... me... |
| 08:12 |
csharp |
JBoyer++ |
| 08:12 |
csharp |
@who is afraid he can't do that, Dave? |
| 08:12 |
pinesol |
JBoyer is afraid he can't do that, Dave. |
| 08:12 |
csharp |
pinesol++ |
| 08:13 |
Dyrcona |
:0 |
| 08:16 |
|
gmcharlt joined #evergreen |
| 08:29 |
|
collum joined #evergreen |
| 08:41 |
|
mmorgan joined #evergreen |
| 08:51 |
Dyrcona |
gmcharlt++ # Git server upgrade appears to have started |
| 09:03 |
gmcharlt |
today's maintenance of git.evergreen-ils.org is complete and it is back in service |
| 09:03 |
gmcharlt |
as a reminder, we'll do one more round of maintenance on Thursday starting at 8 a.m. EST |
| 09:03 |
csharp |
gmcharlt++ # sys admin for the good of all |
| 09:10 |
|
jamesrf joined #evergreen |
| 09:12 |
|
wcuster joined #evergreen |
| 09:13 |
JBoyer |
gmcharlt++ |
| 09:20 |
|
tlittle joined #evergreen |
| 09:21 |
|
jvwoolf joined #evergreen |
| 09:23 |
|
stephengwills joined #evergreen |
| 09:38 |
rhamby |
gmcharlt++ |
| 09:45 |
|
yboston joined #evergreen |
| 09:49 |
Bmagic |
jeff: sorry - just getting back to this |
| 09:50 |
Bmagic |
jeff: it came up when resolving a merge conflict. http://git.evergreen-ils.org/?p=working/Evergreen.git;a=blobdiff;f=Open-ILS/examples/fm_IDL.xml;h=a25c82b2efccccb308982a314d260fe5b8949050;hp=4e4e9690dd4c62f2b0fa0666041f38e2324c10aa;hb=cc579ade939974875f0f637054fe89a91f1c2f09;hpb=24b17829ea732e916c1f6dad5573eceda7968252 |
| 09:50 |
pinesol |
Bmagic: [evergreen|Jillianne Presley] Docs reorg: Adding a manual about integrating Evergreen with other tools - <http://git.evergreen-ils.org/?p=Evergreen.git;a=commit;h=24b1782> |
| 09:58 |
Bmagic |
jeff: tags/rel_3_1_9 shows non-entities on line 4298. but maybe that's ok. /shrugs |
| 10:01 |
|
jvwoolf1 joined #evergreen |
| 10:02 |
|
gsams joined #evergreen |
| 10:08 |
|
Christineb joined #evergreen |
| 10:22 |
|
beanjammin joined #evergreen |
| 10:26 |
jeff |
Bmagic: fm_IDL.xml line 4298 in tags/rel_3_1_9 is okay to have things like "fine_interval >= '1 day'" because it's within a CDATA block. |
| 10:27 |
Bmagic |
aha! Now I remember. I was looking through the IRC logs for the resolution on this. We had this conversation before..... |
| 10:28 |
jeff |
Bmagic: if you're merging into a version of fm_IDL.xml that has those wrapped in CDATA, you should follow what's in the file you're merging into, so if the file uses > you should change your > to >, etc. |
| 10:28 |
Bmagic |
yep |
| 10:29 |
Bmagic |
it used* to be entities |
| 10:29 |
Bmagic |
that's what git is telling me and the reason it doesn't merge clean |
| 10:30 |
jeff |
And just know that when merging/rebasing/cherry-picking between a version where the source definitions are in CDATA vs not, you might not always trigger a merge conflict. xmllint --noout fm_IDL.xml should return clean before you commit (install xmllint via the libxml2-utils package on Debian, probably Ubuntu also). |
| 10:31 |
Bmagic |
right on, good to know |
| 10:33 |
csharp |
for Angular 6+ changes, is it possible to just move .ts/.html files into place without rebuilding things or is it something that always requires rebuilding ng stuff or does it just depend on the nature of the change? |
| 10:33 |
csharp |
we want to apply some ang6 changes on top of a packaged release - not sure if that's possible |
| 10:34 |
csharp |
e.g., we take the tar.gz, then lay our customized/backported fixes on top |
| 10:35 |
csharp |
with AngularJS, that's been fine, but from what I've gathered, the new Angular pieces require more rebuilds |
| 10:40 |
Dyrcona |
I would rebuild them and manage all of this in git. |
| 10:40 |
JBoyer |
csharp, I believe they require full rebuilds, yes. I think some of the templates are put into the JS as strings for speed. |
| 11:15 |
|
_bott_ joined #evergreen |
| 11:47 |
|
jvwoolf joined #evergreen |
| 11:53 |
|
aabbee joined #evergreen |
| 12:03 |
|
jihpringle joined #evergreen |
| 12:15 |
|
beanjammin joined #evergreen |
| 12:20 |
|
sandbergja joined #evergreen |
| 12:36 |
|
yboston joined #evergreen |
| 12:38 |
|
jvwoolf joined #evergreen |
| 12:59 |
|
khuckins joined #evergreen |
| 13:17 |
berick |
csharp: just confirming full rebuild is required for ang6+ stuff |
| 13:18 |
berick |
agree w/ Dyrcona that changes are best managed in Git for ang6 stuff. |
| 13:23 |
berick |
Dyrcona: your comments about github yesterday... I use github for practically everything else, so moving osrf/eg there has a certain appeal. If you, as a member of the Unnoficial Task Force to Replace Launchpad, are suggesting github, maybe it's time to raise the question again. |
| 13:23 |
berick |
put out some feelers |
| 13:25 |
berick |
whatever we do, it could be done in stages of course. could start by migrating just Hatch, just OSRF, etc. |
| 13:25 |
Dyrcona |
I do think github is the best option at the moment. They have a good deal for nonprofits. |
| 13:26 |
Dyrcona |
There are already Evergreen and OpenSRF mirrors on github. |
| 13:26 |
berick |
yeah |
| 13:27 |
berick |
i know there's more to it than this, but it's arguably the most practical option. |
| 13:28 |
Dyrcona |
I agree, plus I have a number of other things on github, too. |
| 13:29 |
Dyrcona |
I am considering moving CW MARS' repos to github as well. |
| 13:39 |
* csharp |
wishes gitlab was better, but agrees with the GitHub direction |
| 13:46 |
Dyrcona |
Gitlab would do all we want for about $500 to $1,000 per year. Question is who pays for it. |
| 13:46 |
csharp |
I guess that's what I meant by "better" |
| 13:47 |
Dyrcona |
:) |
| 13:47 |
Dyrcona |
It's odd how gitlab is free for schools, but charges non-profits, and github has the opposite policy. |
| 13:48 |
csharp |
BOR-ITS, where PINES is moving pays for GitLab - not sure if the "free for schools" benefit can apply there |
| 14:02 |
|
ningalls_ joined #evergreen |
| 14:03 |
|
Christineb_ joined #evergreen |
| 14:05 |
|
Dyrcona joined #evergreen |
| 14:06 |
|
mmorgan left #evergreen |
| 14:22 |
|
stephengwills joined #evergreen |
| 14:32 |
jamesrf |
https://about.gitlab.com/solutions/open-source/ |
| 14:37 |
|
yboston joined #evergreen |
| 14:42 |
Dyrcona |
jamesrf: Gitlab is not free as in beer. The community edition is basically the enterprise edition with the paid features removed. They recommend you install the enterprise edition so that you can "upgrade" by buying a license. |
| 14:43 |
Dyrcona |
It's OpenSource, but I would not count it as Free. |
| 14:44 |
|
jvwoolf joined #evergreen |
| 14:45 |
jamesrf |
Dyrcona: the full version is free for open-source projects |
| 14:56 |
Dyrcona |
jamesrf: License terms 1.1 may preclude us from using it for free depending on their interpretation of "(B) Customer’s open source project contributors to use the object code of the Software selected by Customer, solely for its internal use in connection with the development of software for which the original source code is made freely available under an OSI-approved open source license, and which does not seek to make pro |
| 14:56 |
Dyrcona |
he resulting project software" |
| 14:56 |
Dyrcona |
That may actually preclude EOLI, CW MARS, and myself, personally, from being able to participate via the gitlab software. |
| 14:57 |
Dyrcona |
And, that's not even good English, not even for a contract. |
| 15:06 |
|
abowling joined #evergreen |
| 15:06 |
jamesrf |
but EOLI and CW MARS are nonprofits? |
| 15:08 |
abowling |
on an egCore.pcrud.search operation where the data has a timestamp (e.g. create_date field), is there a way to retrieve the data so that I get a more granular time specification than to the second? |
| 15:10 |
abowling |
for instance, my db field has a value of " 2018-11-26 23:12:56.997065-05", but the pcrud object displays as "2018-11-26T23:12:57-0500" |
| 15:11 |
abowling |
i have a programming operation where i need to get at those milliseconds for sake of sorting data |
| 15:30 |
abowling |
disregard. momentary lapse in logical thinking. the data has an autogenerated "id" field that will serve perfectly well for the sort required |
| 15:30 |
* abowling |
needs (more || less) coffee |
| 15:35 |
|
jihpringle joined #evergreen |
| 15:48 |
Dyrcona |
jamesrf: Maybe I misunderstand the terms, but I took it to mean that if you use the software as part of your business or charge money for the use of the software, then you don't qualify for the OSS license. Perhaps, they are referring to profiting from the use of gitlab. |
| 16:05 |
|
stephengwills_ joined #evergreen |
| 16:21 |
jamesrf |
Dyrcona: I've informally asked someone I know at GitLab, they said it's probably fine. from what I understand it's more like the "project" can't be making a profit which in this sense would probably be oversight board, and they would be the ones to apply for the license. she also said that any public projects get the "Gold" level features |
| 17:00 |
csharp |
jamesrf++ # thanks for checking on that |
| 17:00 |
csharp |
nice to have options |
| 17:00 |
pinesol |
News from qatests: Failed Running pgTAP tests <http://testing.evergreen-ils.org/~live/test.42.html#2019-02-12T16:58:22,993464351-0500 -0> |
| 17:14 |
|
jamesrf joined #evergreen |
| 17:44 |
|
jvwoolf joined #evergreen |
| 22:01 |
|
sandbergja joined #evergreen |
