File size: 10,747 Bytes
4aa5fce
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
[01:21] <wgrant> cprov, cjohnston: people.canonical.com/~wgrant/launchpad/almost-final‽.png
[01:22] <cprov> wgrant: hey hey
[01:24] <cprov> it is coming up very nicely and since the new layout is more flexible (div) it will be easier to increment.
[01:24] <wgrant> I hope so.
[01:25] <cprov> wgrant: I've just opened an asana task about finding a way to materialise the IC threads, specially in emails
[01:25] <wgrant> I've also dropped the "draft" and "publish" terminology. It nows says "Unsaved comment", and then "Include X inline comments" next to the "Save Comment" button.
[01:25] <wgrant> Yeah, I've been wondering about how to do that.
[01:25] <wgrant> It's a bit awkward, as they're all at different depths potentially.
[01:25] <cprov> wgrant: it's annoying to to read the reviews right now
[01:27] <cjohnston> looks good wgrant
[01:27] <wgrant> Someone want to review? https://code.launchpad.net/~wgrant/launchpad/ic-js-cleanup/+merge/219531
[01:28] <cprov> wgrant: I will
[01:29] <cprov> wgrant: can you review https://code.launchpad.net/~cprov/launchpad/delete-branches-with-ics ?
[01:30] <wgrant> Hm
[01:30] <wgrant> What do you guys think about renaming "inline" to "diff"?
[01:30] <wgrant> That pretty much just affects the "Include X inline comments" checkbox
[01:31] <wgrant> Makes it clearer what it refers to.
[01:31] <cprov> wgrant: I wonder if I can just add few other 'ouch' in your MP and let you figure them out ;-)
[01:31] <wgrant> Heh
[01:31] <cjohnston> +1, more ouch
[01:31] <cprov> wgrant: +1 on "diff comments"
[01:32] <cjohnston> if you do that you should probably do the same in the email
[01:32] <cjohnston> what about 'View inline comments'
[01:32] <wgrant> Oh yeah, email and link too, forgot those.
[01:33] <cjohnston> I would argue that 'regular' comments are diff comments too..
[01:33] <cjohnston> IC is actually inline
[01:34] <cprov> wgrant: table-layout: fixed, not only predictable but also faster/easier for browsers. Nice one!
[01:35] <cprov> had to look it up ...
[01:36] <wgrant> It's pretty useful here, since divs expand to fill their container, and tds expand to fit their contents.
[01:38] <cprov> wgrant: what about the TextWidget for review_type ? what does it bring ?
[01:38] <wgrant> cprov: I narrowed it from 20 characters to 15, to ensure that the widgets all fit on one line.
[01:39] <cprov> ah, cool
[01:45] <wgrant> cprov: The rename is pushed.
[01:54] <cprov> wgrant: what does the CSS added in the BMP template do ?
[01:55] <wgrant> cprov: That's a variation on cjohnston's. It adds a bit of space before the publish checkbox.
[01:55] <wgrant> Also, I've just pushed a regression fix for something that seems to have broken a few days ago: the publish checkbox was being added unconditionally, so inline comments crashed and failed to load for anonymous users.
[01:57] <cprov> I think I had fixed that in 17011, on top of cjohnston fixes ...
[01:57] <wgrant> Oh, so you did
[01:58] <wgrant> I'll uncommit and merge
[02:02] <wgrant> cprov: Have you seen any more issues on (qa)staging since those firewall fixes a few hours ago?
[02:02] <cprov> wgrant: wait, there were 2 problems, you have to manually merge the conflicting hunks. I've only fixed the checkbox being rendered multiple times (in tests, essentially) and you have fixed the not-logged-in issue.
[02:03] <wgrant> Also, you added a tab!
[02:03] <wgrant> Die
[02:08] <cprov> I must, I don't know why the emacs in my vm is allowing this shit ... I will review my config
[02:09] <cprov> jslint should have exploded in my face when I try to commit, that's how we should setup project for dummies (like me)
[02:10] <wgrant> Heh
[02:15] <wgrant> cprov: The line-no col is wide enough to contain five digits plus the add sprite.
[02:17] <cprov> up to 99999 lines diffs then, not at problem
[02:17] <wgrant> Well, if you go back to your old days... :P
[02:17] <cprov> wgrant: so, you really want new methods on CRICSet ...
[02:18] <wgrant> cprov: All the other manipulation code (apart from person merge) is in codereviewinlinecomment.py
[02:18] <wgrant> I really don't want it to get like various other LP model classes, where there are ten different modules that alter them.
[02:19] <wgrant> Makes it very difficult to change anything.
[02:20] <cprov> right, you think I should implement also the removal on CRICSet methods, or should I return ResultSet to be removed on the callsite ?
[02:21] <wgrant> I think you should just implement a remove method. We don't expose any ResultSets from CRICS at the moment, and I can't really see any valid reason for someone to want one.
[02:23] <cprov> wgrant: agreed, also the removal() should really consider both CRIC and CRICD as it is implemented in BMP, right ? they are likely to be removed together every time.
[02:25] <wgrant> cprov: Right, that might well be a good thing to do.
[02:25] <wgrant> I can't see much of a reason to split them.
[02:32] <cprov> wgrant: code moved and pushed
[02:39] <wgrant> cprov: I'd rename the method to removeFromDiffs or similar, but that looks great otherwise. Thanks.
[02:41] <cprov> wgrant: no problemo, renamed version pushed
[02:42] <wgrant> cprov: How much longer are you likely to be around? I think I might implement a quick fix to only include commented files (not just hunks, at least not yet) in emails.
[02:42] <cprov> longer enough.
[04:36] <cprov> wgrant: http://lpbuildbot.canonical.com/builders/lucid_lp_lxc/builds/1172/steps/shell_9/logs/summary is that old spurious failure, right ?
[04:36] <wgrant> cprov: Yup, already forced.
[04:36] <cprov> wgrant: thanks
[04:37] <cprov> wgrant: how is the ic-email improvement ?
[08:20] <cjwatson> wgrant: Any luck with the livefs reviews?  I know there's been the whole pg9.3 thing, and lots of work on IC ...
[08:20] <cjwatson> I've put the remaining things people are asking for on the shelf for now, since I reached the point where I could do a touch image build with an added PPA
[08:22] <wgrant> cjwatson: Sorry, busy with staging and postgres and inline comments and PPA microservice and ephemeral PPAs and Malta... Three of those are coming to a close tomorrow, so I might actually have some time.
[08:24] <cjwatson> OK, thanks
[08:26] <wgrant> cjwatson: Is Laney's cron.germinate change sane? I saw some debate over what the name should be.
[08:57] <cjwatson> Oh, that bit of the naming is fine.  I was meaning to review and land that for him today.
[08:58] <cjwatson> It will cause tasks to appear for sdk-libs or something like that, but they were actually wondering why they weren't there anyway
[08:58] <cjwatson> And it will cause cron.germinate to take that bit longer, of course, but I've been looking at parallelising it ...
[09:14] <cjwatson> Laney: Could you please set a commit message for https://code.launchpad.net/~laney/launchpad/germinate-ubuntu-touch/+merge/220233 ?
[09:14] <Laney> cjwatson: Oh right, yes
[09:15] <Laney> try that
[09:17] <cjwatson> Laney: Thanks, landing
[09:17] <Laney> cheers
[12:05] <cjohnston> wgrant: have the new IC changes been released?
[12:05] <cjohnston> I guess maybe it's DC changes now? ;-)
[12:06] <wgrant> cjohnston: In progress.
[12:06] <cjohnston> cool
[12:06] <cjohnston> How'd the DB stuff go?
[12:06] <wgrant> Not quite uneventful, but eventually successful.
[12:06] <cjohnston> cool
[12:06] <wgrant> The master is now 9.3, and the slaves are rebuilding on 9.3.
[12:07] <cjohnston> oh nice.. so the upgrade was done..
[12:10] <wgrant> Yep
[12:10] <wgrant> I poked the comments stuff pretty thoroughly this evening, and fixed a few bugs
[12:11] <wgrant> Including a hilarious off-by-one error in the email formatter, where comments were showing up a line later, and the first line of the diff was always missing.
[12:16] <jelmer> wgrant: is launchpad really going to do inline comments on code reviews?
[12:17] <wgrant> jelmer: On Monday, with a bit of luck.
[12:17] <jelmer> wgrant: good stuff
[12:20] <cjohnston> by "with a bit of luck" he means pencil and paper
[12:21] <cjohnston> wgrant: take a look at https://code.launchpad.net/~ursinha/uci-engine/ts-add-mp-support/+merge/220275  I think we may need to rethink the design of my "comment" a little... cjohnston a moment ago: (and then nothing)
[12:21] <cjohnston> the way it is it looks really odd without any sort of review or comments or anything
[12:21] <wgrant> cjohnston: Yeah, I think we probably want to move the "Show diff comments" link into the body somewhere. We really need space on the bottom of each comment to have links
[12:22] <wgrant> Show diff comments, Reply, and Save/Cancel in the case of the inline editor.
[12:22] <wgrant> There's no way to have actions today.
[12:22] <wgrant> Also the Delete button, and possibly a future Edit feature
[12:22] <cjohnston> edit!
[12:22] <wgrant> It's all really awful atm, no consistency. And the inconsistent bits are dreadful anyway.
[12:58] <wgrant> cjohnston: prod's all up to date now, if you want to prepare that email.
[12:58] <cjohnston> ack. thanks
=== Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk
=== Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha
=== cprov_ is now known as cprov
=== _mup__ is now known as _mup_
[23:02] <cjohnston> wgrant: cprov, what do you think about moving the 'Add comment' stuff to below the diff...
[23:02] <cjohnston> I think it would improve workflow
[23:02] <cjohnston> If you are replying to a comment you may not need to see the diff, but otherwise, your probably going to be adding a comment after reading the diff
[23:02] <cjohnston> so instead of having to click a link to go back up, why not just have the box below
[23:46] <wgrant> cjohnston: The problem is that the diff is enormous.
[23:46] <wgrant> This is why other sites have it on a separate tab.
[23:47] <cjohnston> it apparently isn't completely discoverable That you have to click save comment
[23:49] <wgrant> Yeah, that's one of the big remaining issues.
[23:49] <wgrant> But moving the comment form below the diff would make it very difficult to find.
[23:49] <wgrant> Even for MP-wide comments.
[23:50] <cjohnston> personally i would expect it to be at the bottom and not Where it is
[23:50] <cjohnston> it seems odd to have to scroll back up after scrolling to the bottom
[23:51] <wgrant> Sure, but then you have to scroll through 5000 lines of diff.
[23:51] <wgrant> Just to find the comment form
[23:51] <wgrant> + it separates the comment form from the comment thread
[23:51] <wgrant> Which is weird
[23:51] <cjohnston> or scroll 10k lines to read the diff and then go back up
[23:53] <cjohnston> what do you think about changing the new bottom link to be either 'return to add comment' or 'return to save comments' depending on if drafts are present or not
[23:54] <cjohnston> that may help discoverability slightly