2015 05_Meeting_IRC_Log

Michal Čihař edited this page Apr 14, 2016 · 2 revisions
08:49 -!- Hugues_ [52eacbde@gateway/web/freenode/ip.] has joined #phpmyadmin
08:49 < Hugues_> Hi everyone.
08:49 < ibennetch> I can run the meeting and post the log
08:49 < ibennetch> Hello Hugues_
08:51 -!- nisargjh|cloud is now known as nisargjhaveri
08:52 < Marc9> Hi Hugues
08:52 < Marc9> Hi nijel
08:52 -!- Voovode [~Alex@tenatena.static.otenet.gr] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:54 < Hugues_> :)
08:55 < ibennetch> The monthly phpMyAdmin developer meeting will begin in 5 minutes
08:56 < Marc9> ibennetch thanks for taking care of these tasks
08:57 < ibennetch> :)
08:59 -!- madhuracj [~kvirc@] has joined #phpmyadmin
08:59 < Marc9> Hi Madhura
09:00 < ibennetch> The monthly phpMyAdmin developer meeting will begin now. The meeting is logged and posted to wiki.phpmyadmin.net. Welcome.
09:00 < ibennetch> Our first item is the caching RFE
09:00 < madhuracj> Hi Marc
09:00 -!- nijel [~nijel@] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
09:01 < ibennetch> Any discussion of this?
09:01 < Marc9> Obviously I am in favor ;)
09:01 < ibennetch> :)
09:01 < madhuracj> I'm also in favor even though I can think of new things to cache right now
09:01 < madhuracj> cant*
09:02 < Hugues_> I'm in favor too.
09:02 < ibennetch> It seems useful to improve this. Are you interested in working on it Marc9 ?
09:02 < Marc9> At least, we could test if it helps to use memcached
09:02 < Marc9> Yes I am interested
09:03 -!- nisargjhaveri is now known as nisargjh|cloud
09:03 < Hugues_> More than test, it would be useful to have performance measures (link to next point).
09:03 < ibennetch> In that case I would say go ahead and see what you can find and improve. Seems like a useful enhancement.
09:03 -!- nisargjh|cloud is now known as nisargjhaveri
09:03 < Marc9> Hugues good point
09:03 -!- nijelmobile [~yaaic@] has joined #phpmyadmin
09:03 < ibennetch> I guess we can move ahead to the next item?
09:04 < ibennetch> Hello nijelmobile
09:04 < Hugues_> Let's move.
09:04 < nijelmobile> hi,  my network connection sucks today, using phone...
09:05 < ibennetch> Performance and profiling. This seems like something useful for debugging and developer use, of course I don't think we need to profile every user's entire session.
09:05 < ibennetch> I don't know about any external profiler that would help here -- it probably exists, I just don't know about any
09:06 < Marc9> First, is there a general feeling that version 4 is slower than 3?
09:06 < Hugues_> Indeed, there are some. Like xdebug.
09:07 < madhuracj> @Marc9 It's been a long since I used version 3. Probably need to go back and compare them side by side
09:07 < ibennetch> I don't have that feeling, but haven't used 3 in some time so it's hard to compare. I think the AJAX loading of 4 makes it seem slower sometimes, rather than waiting for an entire page to load we're looking at a spinner.
09:07 < Hugues_> And so I'm not sure that we should implement somethink about this. Even if it would be useful... But I  think that we have to see the benefit regarding to the effort to implement it.
09:07 < ibennetch> This seems slower even when it's actually the same amount of time.
09:07 < Marc9> I tend to favor using an external profiler, rather than adding hooks
09:08 -!- nijel [~nijel@] has joined #phpmyadmin
09:08 < Hugues_> Agree with Marc.
09:08 < madhuracj> Agreed
09:08 < nijel> Using external profiler sounds better indeed
09:09 < Hugues_> Maybe, the day will use a framework like Zend or Symfony, we could think about this.
09:09 < Marc9> So, for example, someone could use xdebug to produce profiling data for a known task, and compare version 3.5 to 4.4
09:09 < madhuracj> I would like to configure xdebug and give it a try to see if version 4 is slower than 3
09:09 < Marc9> Madhura thanks for volunteering
09:10 < madhuracj> May be then we can decide whether any action is required
09:10 < Hugues_> Maybe the tests should be done on some defined pages.
09:10 < Marc9> I suggest using a sample database like sakila and some known tasks
09:10 < Hugues_> (I hope this is not linked to multibytes management...)
09:10 < nijel> yes, checking things like browsing table, editing record or table structure...
09:10 < madhuracj> Probably choose a set of frequenly used functionalities
09:11 < Marc9> Hugues it might be, but the profiling report will tell us
09:11 < Hugues_> I agree. :)
09:11 < ibennetch> Any more discussion on this? If not we can move on to double-click renaming
09:12 < Hugues_> Who would be in charge of this part ?
09:12 < Hugues_> Ah, Madhura. Thanks.
09:12 < madhuracj> :)
09:13 < ibennetch> About double-click renaming, as a user this is not something I would use.
09:13 < Marc9> Double-click renaming feels to me more like a non-essential feature
09:14 < ibennetch> I'm more likely to accidentally double click something than intend to rename my tables often.
09:14 < ibennetch> I feel this is a rare need and better handled by our existing means.
09:14 < madhuracj> I'm also not in favor of this feature
09:14 < Hugues_> Yes... I don't think that table and field's names are really ofter changed.
09:14 < nijel> I agree with Hugues_, it's not really something frequently done
09:15 < Hugues_> And I often double-clic to copy/paste...
09:15 < Marc9> Also, it would have to be implemented in both panels
09:15 < ibennetch> Marc9: thanks for helping with updating the tracker as we go along
09:15 < Hugues_> It would be disturbing indeed.
09:15 < ibennetch> Okay, so no one seems to be in favor at this time.
09:15 < Marc9> and in the main panel, we already have the click on column headers to sort, etc
09:16 < ibennetch> yes, click/double click/right click/alt-click is quite overloaded already :)
09:16 < ibennetch> Okay then, "Select from previously used table or column names"
09:16 < madhuracj> Looks like an edge case to me
09:17 < Marc9> For this one, I believe that copying/pasting an on-screen text is enough
09:17 < ibennetch> I'm having trouble figuring out what the user wants, is this in the SQL window?
09:17 < Hugues_> I don't really catch the need here.
09:17 < Marc9> Ibennetch it's in the table creation dialog
09:18 < ibennetch> Oh, okay. Then the browser autocomplete should suggest previously used names :D
09:18 < Marc9> ibennetch good point
09:18 < ibennetch> I see how it would help this user, but don't think we should do this.
09:19 < Hugues_> Really ?
09:19 < Hugues_> Shouldn't we fill the autocomplete dictionary?
09:20 -!- nijelmobile [~yaaic@] has quit [Quit: AtomicIRC: The nuclear option.]
09:20 < Marc9> Hugues, this is not for the SQL query box with codemirror
09:20 < ibennetch> Hugues_: I think you're interpreting my two statements as being connected, but I didn't mean that.
09:20 < ibennetch> I mean "I see how implementing this feature would help this user, but don't want to implement it" rather than "we shouldn't allow the browser to autocomplete"
09:20 < ibennetch> I _think_ that's the misunderstanding?
09:21 < Hugues_> Thanks Marc9 , I see my mistake.
09:21 < ibennetch> Great, so no one thinks we should implement this one, either.
09:22 < ibennetch> Don't group tables
09:22 < ibennetch> in the tree if the result has only one group"
09:22 < Hugues_> No... Copy/paste is not a big deal and can solve this issue.
09:23 < ibennetch> I think it makes sense to not group if there is only one table/database -- but I don't recall whether this is easy to do in the navigation logic
09:23 < Hugues_> Don't group are open the group by default ?
09:23 < Marc9> about having just one group, I don't see a problem here
09:23 < Hugues_> Don't group or open the group by default? (Sorry for the mistake...)
09:24 < Hugues_> If we don't group, where would be displayed the DB name?
09:24 < Marc9> Hugues_, Olaf does not want to have a group here
09:25 < Marc9> He would like to just see the table names without grouping
09:25 < nijel> don't group if there is just one group
09:25 < Marc9> The DB name is already displayed
09:27 < Marc9> Not grouping here would be inconsistent and we would get a RFE to bring it back
09:27 < madhuracj> I'm undecided on this. I see his point. But wouln't this be confusing where at one place it is grouped and another place it is not
09:27 < Marc9> madhuracj exactly
09:27 < ibennetch> ^^^ this. What madhuracj said is exactly what I think also
09:27 < Hugues_> I agree.
09:28 < Marc9> another won't fix ;)
09:28 < nijel> would not be better to provide easy way to disable groupping through user prefs?
09:29 < Marc9> nijel but he still wants grouping in other cases
09:30 < ibennetch> "dear Olaf, I secretly agree with you but don't want to fix it in order to maintain a consistent user interface for less experienced users"
09:32 < ibennetch> Okay, having thought about it for a few minutes, I propose that we fix it as suggested by Olaf and add a note to the documentation that "when enabled but only one "grouped" database/table is present, grouping is temporarily removed for that database" or something like that.
09:32 < ibennetch> I think it makes the interface cleaner if we implement his suggestion.
09:32 < nijel> I agree with ibennetch
09:33 < Hugues_> If not too expensive, OK.
09:34 < ibennetch> So just to be clear that's three yes answers, and what about the rest?
09:35 < madhuracj> I agree with Hugues. Let's see after inspecting the underlying code as well
09:35 < ibennetch> Good point about checking the cost
09:36 < Marc9> I have no objection
09:36 < ibennetch> Okay, thanks. Moving on to bringing back "Display binary as hex/string"
09:37 < Marc9> Madhura did you have a look at implementing this?
09:38 < ibennetch> From a user perspecitve I definetely think we should do this. From a project standpoint, I'm not sure how difficult it actually is
09:38 < madhuracj> Briefly.
09:38 < madhuracj> I had a look at the commit that removed it and was wondering whether it contained additional things
09:39 < ibennetch> I think Chirayu can probably comment on the code although I don't think he's here now.
09:39 < madhuracj> I thought Chirayu would know better about this
09:39 -!- Irssi: #phpmyadmin: Total of 38 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 37 normal]
09:39 < Marc9> It's a too-part commit that removed a feature to add another one
09:39 < Marc9> I was expecting the presence of Chirayu at the meeting
09:40 < madhuracj> Anyways, I'm in favor of this RFE
09:40 < ibennetch> Are there any objections outright to bringing this back? Aside from concerns about messing up data, etc?
09:40 < Marc9> Yes, I don't think we have a choice here, the user has a valid point
09:40 < ibennetch> If not, I propose we accept it, ask Chirayu for input on the mailing list, and see what happens.
09:41 < Hugues_> I agree, this is quite useful even for us at work.
09:42 < ibennetch> Okay, it seems we all realize this is a good idea to bring back, it's just a matter of figuring out whether it's possible and actually doing it.
09:42 < ibennetch> Marc, could you email the list and ask Chirayu for input, either on list or in the tracker directly (whichever you think is better)?
09:42 < Marc9> will do
09:43 < ibennetch> thanks
09:43 < ibennetch> Group databases and tables by regex
09:43 < ibennetch> This seems like it would be very complex to do, which is what Madhura also found when examining it. I'd say no.
09:44 < Marc9> I would also say no, especially since it was asked a long time ago
09:44 < madhuracj> I thought its benefits are not worth the complexity it brings
09:45 < Hugues_> It will lead to new performance issues.
09:45 < Hugues_> Here, I'm not convinced of the benefit.
09:45 < ibennetch> Okay, great.
09:45 < ibennetch> One more: add a configuration directive for logo_left
09:46 < ibennetch> The user is implementing a custom theme and wants to make the logo a user-configurable option.
09:47 < madhuracj> I feel we already have zillions of configurations and I am not in favor
09:47 < Hugues_> I understand the need, but so... why shouldn't we provide a full theme tool?
09:48 < Marc9> Hugues, let me guess ... lack of manpower?
09:48 < ibennetch> I definetely don't want more configuration options, either. I think this is beyond the scope of what themes were meant to do.
09:48 < Hugues_> Yes, that the point !
09:48 < Hugues_> If we start with this, we'll be asked more graphic options.
09:49 < Marc9> I don't see a valid reason to make this configurable
09:50 < Marc9> Hugues I understood that you were proposing such a tool
09:50 < Hugues_> So let's say "no"?
09:50 < Marc9> We can explain that we feel this is an edge case
09:51 < ibennetch> I agree that we can say no to this
09:52 < Marc9> ibennetch can you reply in the PR with the explanation and close it?
09:52 < ibennetch> Sure
09:52 < madhuracj> Hugues, can you propose the theme tool in more detail as a RFE or a GSoC idea .
09:53 < ibennetch> I believe that's it for the agenda, then, and seven minutes early, too :)
09:53 < Hugues_> Oh... That wasn't the aim of the question, but if you think this is a good idea, yes, I can do this.
09:53 < madhuracj> Yes, I am interested
09:53 < Hugues_> I'll add this as a RFE.
09:54 < madhuracj> Thanks
09:54 < ibennetch> Okay, then I declare the official meeting over. Thank you all for coming
09:54 -!- Irssi: #phpmyadmin: Total of 38 nicks [1 ops, 0 halfops, 0 voices, 37 normal]
09:54 < Hugues_> Thanks.
09:54 < Marc9> Bye all and thanks ibennetch for running the meeting
09:55 < Hugues_> See you.
Clone this wiki locally
You can’t perform that action at this time.
You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session. You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.
Press h to open a hovercard with more details.