2015 01_Meeting_IRC_Log

11:02 < ibennetch> Okay, time for the meeting to begin.
11:02 < Zixtor> Hi all
11:03 < ibennetch> Hello Zixtor
11:03 < Marc9> Counting the online vote from Michal, we meet the quorum to vote
11:03 < Marc9> Isaac do you accept to run the meeting?
11:03 < Zixtor> If I missed it, i
11:04 < Zixtor> If i missed it I vote yes on Chanaka's removal
11:04 < ibennetch> Sure, I can run things.
11:04 < ibennetch> Greetings to everyone. Sorry for the late start today. This meeting is logged and will be posted to the wiki.
11:05 < ibennetch> First order of business is the official vote to accept Chanaka's resignation.
11:05 < Marc9> Michal voted in favor, by email
11:05 < Marc9> Marc is in favor
11:05 < _dstorm> No issues to me as well
11:06 < ibennetch> Is there any discussion about this? I vote to accept his resignation also.
11:07 < Marc9> Not really a discussion, more a vote to officially accept
11:07 < ibennetch> Then it appears that all present members (plus Michal) vote to accept and we can move on to the agenda for the annual meeting.
11:08 < ibennetch> As a reminder, I won't be there, but think you'll all probably further discuss the codemirror proposal.
11:09 < Marc9> In past annual meetings there were many things to discuss, but for this one we could work on discussing feature requests
11:09 < _dstorm> Agree, and we can also discuss about upcoming GSoC projects
11:09 < ibennetch> Oh, about the committee change, Marc9 could you email Michal and ask him to notify Conservancy as well as remove Chanaka from the repository, -team mailing list, etc?
11:09 < ibennetch> Yes, _dstorm that's a good idea as well
11:10 < Marc9> ibennetch, all has been done except contacting the Conservancy, I'll email Michal
11:10 < ibennetch> Great, thanks.
11:10 < Marc9> _dstorm, do you mean doing a review of current GSoC ideas on the wiki?
11:11 < ibennetch> Marc9: For the meeting, what would you discuss about feature requests -- I presume which ones to accept, which to remove, etc?
11:11 < Marc9> ibennetch, exactly
11:11 < _dstorm> Yes we can review and see if there are any other project idea we can put for them
11:12 < Marc9> _dstorm good point but we'll need mentors for these new ideas as well
11:12 < ibennetch> Refining and prioritizing our ideas page, perhaps?
11:13 < Marc9> ibennetch: not really prioritize because we expect that all will be chosen by some students;
11:13 < Zixtor> I am sceptical about my idea for GSoC so possibly we could discuss that too at the meeting.
11:13 < Marc9> we have to wait the student choices
11:13 < Marc9> Zixtor sure
11:14 < ibennetch> Zixtor: you mean the OOP and refactoring idea?
11:14 < Zixtor> Yes Issac
11:15 < ibennetch> Marc9 is right about waiting to see what student proposals are good.
11:16 < Marc9> I just noticed that there is a schedule on fosdem.org so have a look before the event, so that we can quickly pick a time for the meeting
11:17 < ibennetch> Any other thoughts for the Fosdem meeting? I really like the feature request discussion idea and think that may take some time.
11:18 < Zixtor> S
11:18 < Marc9> yes and it will help to do some cleanup in the feature requests list
11:19 < ibennetch> Will we be able to participate in the MySQL or PHP developer rooms? Even just to go visit with developers there in an unofficial capacity.
11:19 < Zixtor> Sorry, on mobile
11:19 < ibennetch> ("we" being "you" here, really :)
11:19 < ibennetch> Zixtor: no worries
11:20 < Marc9> I plan to go to the MySQL & friends room, and possibly to the PHP one (both on Sunday). I'll also contact someone about a MySQL community dinner.
11:21 < ibennetch> Excellent
11:22 < ibennetch> Is everyone ready to move on to the final agenda topic?
11:22 < Marc9> I am
11:22 < _dstorm> Yes
11:22 < Zixtor> Sure
11:23 < ibennetch> First feature request 1574: the legacy navigation pane
11:23 < ibennetch> I thought we discussed this in the past and decided we were not going to implement the old style.
11:23 < _dstorm> How was the navigation pane in past?
11:24 < ibennetch> Although I do not personally object to the idea. For me, I usually work only in one database and don't need to see the others listed when I'm working with that one.
11:24 < _dstorm> which version, I can look for it?
11:24 < ibennetch> Prior to version 4
11:24 < Marc9> _dstorm, there was a dropdown of database names; once you choose it, you see the table names below it
11:24 < _dstorm> Thanks ibennetch
11:25 -!- zixtor_ [b69c6dc8@gateway/web/freenode/ip.182.156.109.200] has joined #phpmyadmin
11:25 < Marc9> Maybe there could be a button to show/hide non-active databases?
11:25 < zixtor_> After so many requests for it since we removed, I also think we should add the "legacy" pane back as optional
11:25 < Marc9> I mean, dbs other than the selected one
11:26 < ibennetch> This seems like a pretty good idea, actually.
11:26 < Marc9> The person says "I don't want to waste space on other databases"
11:26 < _dstorm> I don't understand how it is wasting space?
11:27 < zixtor_> _dstorm, it's a personal thing for the user ;)
11:27 < Marc9> because before 4.0 you only had a small dropdown with database names
11:28 < Marc9> but I'm not yet convinced that we should add the feature back, even as optional
11:29 < zixtor_> Marc, this has been a long standing request which comes up in one form or another every now and then
11:29 < zixtor_> Some people shifting from 3.5 to 4.* find it strange to see the db tree
11:30 < Marc9> zixtor_ I know but you would like the feature implemented exactly as before?
11:30 < zixtor_> yes, I think it won't take much effort but we would be able to keep legacy user experience intact
11:31 < zixtor_> So far we have continuously been improving navi pane by innovation.. But some people just don't get it
11:32 < Marc9> zixtor_ I'm no longer sure what seach features we had with the legacy mode
11:32 < Marc9> search
11:32 < Marc9> probably just some pagination
11:32 < nisargjhaveri> The button to hide other databases looks better to me. So that one can easily switch between them.
11:32 < zixtor_> None as I remember. But we had a select in which one coulf type letters to reach desired database
11:34 < _dstorm> Old one had that select when we select some database. I just had a look at it..
11:34 < zixtor_> Sorry I missed the hide other database proposal, should look similar to old pane except the Select database option?
11:35 < Marc9> Nisarg good point to be able to switch easily
11:35 < _dstorm> I guess that instead of hiding then select option was much better..
11:35 < zixtor_> Hiding would just add another click to the flow
11:36 < ibennetch> I thought the Recent and Favorites links/dropdowns were there in place of the quick search field.
11:36 < _dstorm> For example, if someone wants to change database then he had to unhide and then select from pane
11:36 < Marc9> Thinking about it, hiding won't please old-time users
11:36 < Marc9> ibennetch, only Recent
11:37 < ibennetch> We can already hide tables with the light bulb.
11:37 < zixtor_> _dstorm, right!
11:38 < zixtor_> I think providing optional support will be a final solution to this old-time users request.
11:38 < Marc9> zixtor_ right, so do you volunteer? :)
11:38 < zixtor_> Actually yes I was about to say so
11:38 < zixtor_> I will do it
11:39 < Marc9> You are assigned! :)
11:39 < ibennetch> You mean, an option to basically go back to the old style?
11:39 < _dstorm> by introducing a configuration parameter?
11:39 < zixtor_> Yes Issac, right! Do you agree ?
11:39 < Marc9> ibennetch, yes, via configuration; no need to clutter the navi panel with a switcher
11:39 < zixtor_> Yes with configuration option
11:39 < ibennetch> Where the database is selected by dropdown
11:40 < ibennetch> And then tables are displayed in the navigation pane.
11:40 < ibennetch> Let's say that I don't object :)
11:40 < _dstorm> database are selected by dropdown only when one database is selected..
11:40 < Marc9> Now, we'll have to find a name for this feature
11:40 < ibennetch> I'm not fully on board with the idea, but if you wish to do it I don't mind. Besides, it will keep the users happy.
11:40 < zixtor_> Yeah I think we could just put the old one back and provide configuration option
11:41 < _dstorm> Enable Legacy Navigation Pane
11:41 < ibennetch> "LegacyNavigation"?
11:41 < Marc9> ibennetch, I think that we should keep the new way by default
11:41 < ibennetch> yeah, I agree with that.
11:41 < Marc9> "legacy" is too vague
11:41 < zixtor_> I agree new one should be default
11:42 < Marc9> let's say "database drop-down" or something like that
11:42 < ibennetch> I don't have any problem with this idea; I have some concerns about introducing two ways of doing things and maintaining two navigation panes. They're not strong concerns, but it is something to think about.
11:42 < ibennetch> But sure, we can do this.
11:42 < ibennetch> NavigationOneDatabaseView
11:42 < zixtor_> I think we could name it "ShowNaviDbTree" or hide it
11:43 < Marc9> Both ways have pros and cons. I'm surely most familiar with the old way
11:43 < Marc9> ShowNavigationTree ?
11:44 < zixtor_> As users are familiar with old anyway so we dont need to remind, we can just ask do you want the tree or not ;)
11:44 < zixtor_> Marc, yes fine with me
11:45 < Marc9> In the explanation we can mention that this is to show the tree or the pre-4.0 legacy navi panel
11:45 < _dstorm> I am fine with this.
11:45 < Marc9> or better, the pre-4.0 navi panel
11:46 < zixtor_> Issac, maintenance concern seems right. But I think old one was quite stable and we can rely on it
11:46 < Marc9> zixtor, indeed and the size of the code was much smaller
11:46 < ibennetch> Maybe NavigationTreeView or NavigationDisplayTree ?
11:47 < ibennetch> I think Marc's ShowNavigationTree is closer than any of my previous ideas :)
11:47 < Marc9> available in user prefs too?
11:47 < zixtor_> View may confuse with tables and views ?
11:47 < _dstorm> Are we discussing the name for configuration parameter or the label for it?
11:48 < Marc9> the name
11:48 < ibennetch> Yes, zixtor_ we should avoid the name views
11:48 < zixtor_> I agree with ShowNavigationTree
11:48 < Marc9> The label in short will be "Show navigation tree" :)
11:48 < ibennetch> 12 minutes remain in the scheduled meeting time
11:48 < ibennetch> What about "Show navigation as tree"?
11:48 < Marc9> let's move on
11:49 < ibennetch> Okay
11:49 < zixtor_> I think we can move on
11:49 < Marc9> ibennetch ok for "as"
11:49 < ibennetch> SQL formatting
11:49 < Marc9> is everyone with the notion of formatting?
11:49 < Marc9> this is different than pretty printing syntax
11:49 < Marc9> if everyone *familiar*
11:50 < Marc9> is
11:50 < zixtor_> Yes right, we already provide js ready pretty printing
11:50 < Marc9> formatting is a vertical thing
11:50 < _dstorm> I agree that our parser is poorly written..
11:50 < Marc9> SELECT *
11:50 < Marc9> FROM mytable
11:50 < Marc9> WHERE ...
11:50 < ibennetch> I'm not sure what difference we're talking about here with formatting versus the pretty printing
11:51 < ibennetch> Pretty printing is the colorization?
11:51 < ibennetch> Formatting is breaking lines in logical places?
11:51 < Marc9> exactly
11:51 < zixtor_> I tend to think that 1450 provides a readymade good way to go about formatting
11:51 -!- CoderCandy [~MrOpposit@unaffiliated/mropposite] has joined #phpmyadmin
11:52 < Marc9> By the way, Michal voted for a CodeMirror solution
11:52 < ibennetch> nisargjhaveri proposed replacing the formatting part of sqlparser.lib.php with the library function
11:52 < Marc9> to avoid adding another parser
11:52 < ibennetch> Which is the CodeMirror solution, I believe
11:53 < ibennetch> oh, no, I misread; 1440 is codemirror, 1450 is 'sql-formatter'
11:53 < Marc9> well, Michal said he prefers the CodeMirror solution
11:53 < Marc9> nisarghaveri, anything to add?
11:53 < zixtor_> CodeMirror is displeased with maintenance of formatting component. So as Michal suggested if we do choose js solution, we could keep it with us
11:54 < ibennetch> So basically we're trying to decide between CodeMirror and sql-formatter, is that correct?
11:54 < Marc9> zixtor_ we can always propose them a pull request
11:54 < Marc9> ibennetch yes
11:54 < nisargjhaveri> I think we don't need formatting anywhere else in JS. I don't think we should write a parser in JS.
11:54 < zixtor_> Issac, Codemirror solution is based on javascript and basically we are banking as of now on formatting.js
11:55 < ibennetch> thanks
11:55 < zixtor_> The
11:55 < _dstorm> Where will this SQL formatter be used exactly? on SQL tab?? any other place?
11:55 < ibennetch> Can we discuss this with the CodeMirror folks? It may be that they'll either be happy to accept our pull requests or that they plan to remove this functionality soon anyway. That may guide our decision
11:56 < zixtor_> on SQL tab, with a format button
11:56 < nisargjhaveri> I think just one parser in PHP should be fine. User interface enhancement may be done with AJAX.
11:56 < Marc9> zixtor_  yes, a Format button looks fine
11:56 < _dstorm> because I think having this formatting thing in JS will be good. Why put load on server for formatting queries
11:57 < zixtor_> Marc, even the JS solution would require clicking the button
11:57 < nisargjhaveri> They have probably already removed the functionality. We are using one from older version.
11:57 < Marc9> The SQL formatter code is only 1085 lines and looks simple to maintain
11:57 < ibennetch> Three minutes left in the official meeting
11:57 < _dstorm> PHP solution will be a network overhead and will cause delays and JS solution can do that client side
11:58 < nisargjhaveri> _dstorm, for formatting we almost have to parse the query.
11:58 < Marc9> _dstorm not a real problem IMO, as it's done after a user click on Format
11:58 < zixtor_> _dstorm, good point! But we don't have a good solution, I am okay if we write a good solution may be from scratch
11:59 < zixtor_> 1 minute to go..
12:00 < Marc9> The "having to maintain" objection is not real IMO, because if the library is stable, we'll have next to nothing to do
12:00 < _dstorm> Marc9 I feel that AJAX call will be a performance issue with formatting
12:00 < Marc9> _dstorm did you try the pull request?
12:01 < _dstorm> No. I haven't tried that yet.
12:01 < nisargjhaveri> "having to maintain" was the issue if we replace our parser(not just formatter) with this.
12:01 -!- lasdam [~tom@95.141.33.20] has joined #phpmyadmin
12:01 < zixtor_> _dstorm, IMO it is not critical in terms of server load..
12:01 < Marc9> nisarghaveri not only this; any new code become more or less "our" code
12:02 < zixtor_> It will be used sometimes when a user writes a complex query and does choose to click format button
12:02 < Marc9> ok so let's all try the pull request #1450 and continue discussing it on phpmyadmin-devel
12:02 < _dstorm> Sure Marc9
12:02 < ibennetch> Okay Marc9 that is probably the best outcome here.
12:02 < zixtor_> Sure
12:03 < zixtor_> ok guys, thanks for attending:) Bye!
12:03 < _dstorm> Bye all...!!
12:03 < ibennetch> zixtor_: you were going to work on the ShowNavigationTree feature, correct?
12:03 < ibennetch> Thank you all for attending! See you on the mailing list.
12:03 < zixtor_> Issac, yes I volunteered
12:04 < Marc9> bye all
12:04 < _dstorm> *ShowNavigationAsTree ;)
12:04 < nisargjhaveri> Bye all!