2015 06_Meeting_IRC_Log

Michal Čihař edited this page Apr 14, 2016 · 2 revisions
<Marc9> Item 1: supporting 30K tables in one db
<madhuracj> Hi everybody
<Marc9> I would say to that: it's an edge case, we won't support this
<dstorm> Does MySQL has any restrictions on it?
<madhuracj> 30k looked little too big
<Marc9> dstorm: no
<dstorm> then I would say why are we blocking users to do so?
<Marc9> dstorm, we are not blocking
<zixtor> What seems to be the issue btw? If someone researched..
<dstorm> I mean if it stops responding then its like they are blocked to do so
<Marc9> The request never completes
<zixtor> dstorm: its not that we are imposing it consciously ;)
<zixtor> anyway it surely seems an edge case
<madhuracj> According to the reported everything works
<madhuracj> just that it take time
<dstorm> Can using legacy navigation in that case does any good?
<Marc9> dstorm probably
<madhuracj> Legacy navigation is just UI on the same loading mechanism
<madhuracj> So I suppose it wont help
<zixtor> I think it will make only minor difference
<Marc9> dstorm, you mean pre-4.0 ?
<dstorm> Marc9, yes
<madhuracj> I was talking about the configurable feature we have in 4.4
<dstorm> I always had concern with the performance issues of new navigation tree.
<Marc9> Anyway, if we agree that it's an edge case ...
<dstorm> I agree that its an edge case
<madhuracj> Of course I agree
<dstorm> but if there is a way to fix it and we should look for it
<zixtor> I too
<dstorm> *then
<zixtor> I think it would require much effort to further optimize existing navigation mechanism
<Marc9> dstorm I believe we have other priorities which are not edge cases, so I would close this "won't fix"
<madhuracj> I can investigate the issue and write to the devel mailing list whether the situation can be improved
<Marc9> madhuracj sure but don't lose too much time on this, please
<madhuracj> Sure.
<Marc9> Moving on?
<dstorm> Marc9, I am not saying that we should fix this in priority but we can come back to this later
<dstorm> We can move on then
<Marc9> dstorm, well, we said that for other bugs and they are in the tracker 12 years later
<Marc9> 2. Bring back the start row and number of rows in Browse
<madhuracj> I do not see a strong reason to bring it back
<Marc9> Isaac said that he is not in favor; me neither
<zixtor> I also feel having such feature does amount to cluttering the interface..
<nijel> I also don't see much need for this
<Marc9> I am happy with the uncluttering that removing this feature did in the past
<dstorm> I also feel that it won't be used much
<Marc9> Moving on
<Marc9> 3. Browse mode: apply functions to columns (SUM, AVG, etc)
<Marc9> 11 years ago, Michal was unsure about this being used enough to be justified
<Marc9> I share his view
<Marc9> Opinions?
<zixtor> I find it may be useful but again many things can be useful..
<nijel> I haven't changed my opinion in 11 years ;-)
<dstorm> Maybe this could be added in query builder
<madhuracj> I share the same view
<Marc9> zixtor right and we must think about keeping / reaching a clean UI
<Marc9> dstorm IMO it's already there in the query builder, but
<Marc9> the visual query builder is not well known
<Marc9> Moving on
<dstorm> Marc9, to be frank even I have not used visual query builder ever
<Marc9> 4. Working around a PHP bug
<nijel> no workaround for php bug
<Marc9> Especially since this PHP bug has been fixed
<madhuracj> exactly
<Marc9> It's not really our problem if distros are slow to integrate fixes
<zixtor> Agreed..
<Marc9> Also, we did not hear about this problem much
<Marc9> Moving on to our "big" discussion item
<Marc9> 5. Unit tests and HTML
<Marc9> zixtor we are listening to you :)
<Marc9> (then to others)
<zixtor> Well, as we shift to template system, changes in HTML will mostly be just format changes and they will mostly deviate from the static assertions in unit tests..
<zixtor> So in my view its a waste of time to keep format correcting the HTML in these tests... and they come of use rarely
<Marc9> Is it ok to say that we have functions that generate HTML and functions that do not generate HTML? ...
<zixtor> Same utility can be derived by checking for keywords and just having html validation..
<Marc9> So, we should rethink our tests for functions who generate HTML
<dstorm> Even, I don't think we should assert HTML output in unit tests and instead assert only the data that data is being put into it.
<zixtor> Marc9: surely we have both kind of functions
<dstorm> *assert only the data that is being put into it.
<Marc9> Note that the removal of assertTag in phpunit gives us even less choices
<zixtor> Marc9: right
<zixtor> Maybe we can change to data checking as we templatize a particular script.. and till then keep it same..
<Marc9> I mean, it's one thing to test a function like pow(), and a function that generates HTML
<Marc9> zixtor right
<zixtor> yeah they are quite different
<Marc9> For example, a function that is supposed to generate a dropdown (SELECT, OPTION): chances are thin that it would fail
<dstorm> I think Selenium is the correct place for UI tests.
<zixtor> Marc9: agreed..
<zixtor> dstorm: right
<Marc9> zixtor, is there an example of data checking in tests done by Jason?
* udan11 a quitté (Remote host closed the connection)
<zixtor> Marc9: no not yet
<zixtor> maybe we can ask him to start working on that
<Marc9> and did he give his views about unit testing his code?
<zixtor> So far that there should be something other than asserting for html.. no idea as he seems to be working further leaving tests for now
<Marc9> dstorm, with Selenium won't we have the same problems as asserting HTML output?
<Marc9> (on moving code)
<dstorm> we won't be asserting html outputs but instead doing user actions to ensure elements are behaving a they should
<dstorm> so if HTML breaks then things like dropdown, checkboxes should stop working
<dstorm> *as
<Marc9> dstorm, OK, I'm not familiar enough with Selenium
<Marc9> zixtor, what would be the new way of testing <input type="hidden" name="field" value="foo" />
<zixtor> dstorm: do we have selenium coverage of most UI? I am not familiar abt it
<dstorm> I don't think it covers most of the UI.
<Marc9> Wasn't there a problem with Selenium on Travis?
<zixtor> Marc9: each template right now uses some data variables.. so we can assert that whole HTML contains valid values of those variables and we can just validate the whole HTML..
<Marc9> zixtor ok
<dstorm> assert the data and just parse the html to see if there is DOM error?
<Marc9> nijel madhuracj anything to add on this?
<nijel> dstorm: that sounds good enough
<Marc9> By the way, via email Isaac said that he also doubted the usefulness of testing HTML
<madhuracj> Well, I agree it's little point asserting html tags
<zixtor> I just saw a popular service to validate, https://validator.nu/ we can research more
<Marc9> zixtor can it be linked to phpunit? I guess not
<dstorm> we can use XML parser in php?
<zixtor> dstorm: but yeah we can just parse it..
<Marc9> To conclude, we won't add more HTML tests and as we move to templates, we won't assert HTML tags
<Marc9> Can we briefly discuss the next IRL meeting?
<madhuracj> Sure
<zixtor> ok
<Marc9> We had suggestions for March 2016 and summer 2016,
<Marc9> and I added suggestions for October 2015 and August 2015
* cipi est maintenant connu sous le nom CiPi
<Marc9> So, it 2015 too early?
<Marc9> is
<zixtor> I expect I will be able to attend those in 2016.. But for this year, in August or October it wil be difficult to find time for me..
<madhuracj> August 2015 would not be possible for me, but others I would be able to attend.
<Marc9> Ideally we should aim to have a maximum of participants
<dstorm> August 2015 seems too early
<Marc9> I guess that Singapore was the most promising one (March 2016)
<dstorm> Maybe we can do vote similar to what we did for choosing the time for team meeting which would give us an idea when maximum team members would be available
<zixtor> Surely sounds like most members can attend that..
<madhuracj> Marc9 Can we do something like a poll where everyone can rank conerences based on availbility and on how interesting the conference is
<madhuracj> I think we did that for previous IRL meeting
<nijel> madhuracj: sounds like a good idea to sort them
<Marc9> madhuracj sure, I'll organize this, but is it too soon to ask for 2016? I mean, we don't even have the dates for DebConf 16
<zixtor> yeah will be nice to have vote/survey to have most people attend as its quite worth it to meet everyone after traveling ;)
<madhuracj> Marc9 true
<Marc9> what's the delay for you Asian guys, about the visas? 2 months?
<dstorm> Marc9, lets add only those options for which dates are finalized and later add more options?
<Marc9> dstorm, I would prefer to do a final poll with a fixed limit date to answer
<dstorm> Marc9, depends on where we would be going
<zixtor> It can be applied for Europe 10 days before, i think Smita got it this year
<madhuracj> But 2 months should generally be enough in my experience
<dstorm> I applied very early this time but was bit troublesome for me.
<Marc9> Ok so a poll at beginning of 2016 should be fine
<Marc9> dstorm you were early and got troubles?
<madhuracj> Whether each member needs to obtain a visa to attend each conference can be a question in the poll
<Marc9> madhuracj good point
<Marc9> Anything to add on this or other subjects?
<zixtor> Still 8 minutes to go
<dstorm> Trouble as in had to go for an interview to consulate which was quite a journey
<Marc9> dstorm maybe Singapore will be easier in this case
<dstorm> Yes, it would be for sure.
<madhuracj> I do not require a visa for Singapore
<madhuracj> I suppose it is same for dstorm and zixtor
<Marc9> and Smita
<madhuracj> yes
<zixtor> yeah need to look abt that on net
<Marc9> I do not require a visa for Singapore
<zixtor> Yeah it seems its available on arrival
<nijel> I don't seem to need it as well
<Marc9> With this, I hereby declare:
<Marc9> *** End of team meeting ***
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.