=== mwhudson_ is now known as mwhudson
=== mwhudson_ is now known as mwhudson
=== matsubara-afk is now known as matsubara
=== mrevell is now known as mrevell-lunch
=== mrevell-lunch is now known as mrevell
* sinzui looks about14:01
sinzuihello everyone and welcome to this week's ameu reviewers meeting.  who's here today?14:01
MootBotMeeting started at 09:01. The chair is sinzui.14:01
MootBotCommands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]14:01
=== flacoste_afk is now known as flacoste
sinzuihmm, we may be an hour early14:02
salgadosinzui, I don't think so14:02
henningedanilo has a bed headache so he might not come.14:03
henningedunno if he's in bed ...14:03
sinzuiwe all have laptops. I assume that some of you are attending this meeting from your bed in you pajamas14:04
sinzui[TOPIC] agenda14:05
sinzui* Roll call14:05
sinzui* Action items14:05
sinzui* UI review call update14:05
sinzui* Peanut gallery14:05
MootBotNew Topic:  agenda14:05
intellectronicapyjamas are a redundant nicety14:05
sinzui[Topic] Action items14:05
MootBotNew Topic:  Action items14:05
sinzui* barry to get with mrevell on guidelines migration from old wiki to new14:05
sinzui^ I do not think this has happened14:05
mrevellNo, it hasn't. My apologies, it's still on my "to do"14:06
sinzuimrevell: thanks14:06
sinzuiI will keep it on the agrenda14:06
sinzui* intellectronica and barry to draft guidelines for drive-by cleanups14:06
intellectronicasorry, i didn't find the time to do this. please keep it on the list, i will do it next week when there's a bit more time14:06
sinzuiI will14:06
sinzui[Topic] UI review call update14:06
MootBotNew Topic:  UI review call update14:06
sinzuiGosh this weeks meeting was pretty quick.14:07
intellectronicayeah, the only interesting item was about helping developers get up to speed with integrating widgets14:08
intellectronicawe decided to talk to tim, who reported some difficulties and has started documenting the process14:08
intellectronicaif any developer still hasn't done any integration work for lazr js widgets, and wants some help and/or wants to help documenting the steps they take, you are most welcome14:09
sinzuithanks intellectronica.14:09
sinzui[Topic] Peanut gallery14:10
MootBotNew Topic:  Peanut gallery14:10
intellectronicab.t.w francis regularly sends meeting notes for that call now. do we really need this section in this meeting?14:10
sinzuiIndeed I was looking at those notes14:10
sinzuiI think we are only concerned that the team is reading them14:11
intellectronicawe can do a quiz14:11
sinzuilightning reviews of the week that was14:12
intellectronicathanks sinzui, you should always chair ;)14:12
sinzuiI'll bring this matter up with the antipodeans.14:12
sinzuiAs I think about all the talent whose attention I assume I have, I want advice on how to test something I have seen in reviews.14:13
sinzuiI do not like story tests that verify a link it not present; they are not a part of the story14:14
sinzuiWe have tales formatters that ensure the links is rendered correctly (or not at all) and we have permission decorators for links14:15
sinzuiSo as long as the link is defined correctly and the approved formatter is used, I do not want to vague test that some user does not see the link...14:15
sinzuiBut there is a problem with out links and views that we are *not* tesing14:16
sinzuilp.testing.menu has a helper that will verify all the links in the menu have a view. During the 3.0 release I found many that did not!14:16
sinzuiI used the helper to find and remove the bad links14:17
sinzuiLast week I found a new problem that I do not know how to test...14:17
sinzuiWe have links and views that disagree about permission.14:17
sinzuieg. the link is public, the view is edit.14:18
sinzuiin my case, though, there was a companion view that as launchpad.View. I had to audit many links and views.14:19
sinzuiQ: Is it possible to test that a link and its view have the same permission?14:19
* sinzui thanks everyone for their patience14:19
adeuringsinzui: perhaps I'm missing your point why tests for non-existence in stories are bad (for yure they are noisy), but they can ensure that the right permission decorator is used.14:21
adeuring...non-existience of links...14:21
sinzuiadeuring: checking for non-existence in a story is wrong.14:21
adeuringsinzui:  where else would you do do this test?14:23
sinzuiadeuring: we can test the links elsewhere. in fact, the menu helper could be used to verify all links for permission, but that will not help with the link to view permission14:23
sinzuiadeuring: testing contract and implementation details belong in browser/tests14:24
intellectronicasinzui: i think i understand why you dislike testing this kind of stuff in stories, but you should consider the benefits. i think they outweigh the problems with this approach14:24
intellectronicadoctests are easier to write and read, and most importantly much much easier to maintain, because they include a lot more context14:25
sinzuiThe testrbowser is not testing tales, and stories should not know about markup.14:25
intellectronicasinzui: why?14:25
sinzuiintellectronica: browser/tests can be unit or doc they can even employ the test browser.14:26
intellectronicasinzui: that's going back to the chaos we had before the tree re-org14:26
sinzuiintellectronica: Stories are integration tests that verify that a user can traverse many pages to accomplish a task. it is slow and labourious to use it to test details that have many factors at play at a high level14:27
intellectronicasinzui: is this about the time it takes to run the test suite?14:28
sinzuiintellectronica: We still have chaos since we have developer writing form contract testing in stories14:28
sinzuiintellectronica: no, it is about knowing what we are testing and how we test it14:28
intellectronicasinzui: but placing the files in a certain place or writing them in a particular format doesn't buy you confidence that you're testing what you need to14:29
sinzuiintellectronica: you misunderstand me.14:29
flacostesinzui: regarding the discrepancy in permission between links and views, it's usually on-purpose, the link is public but the view protected so that the user can see the link, but is asked to log in14:30
sinzuiTesting the rules of a link or a form are best done in isolation where you control that is happen.14:30
flacostesinzui: it's only a problem if the user is logged in and has permission to the link and not the view14:30
sinzuiflacoste: after discovering the link issue, I tried the links in production. I got a 40314:31
sinzuiflacoste: I understand your point. I think the approach to invite users to explore a feature is fine14:33
sinzuiWell I do not think there is any more to say on this.14:35
intellectronicasinzui: maybe this is a good topic for the list? i really think that i don't understand the motivation behind your argument, so i could use a for-dummies explanation14:35
sinzuiintellectronica: I will. I can get examples14:36
intellectronicasinzui: thanks14:36
sinzuiDoes anyone else have an issue to announce/discuss14:37
sinzuithank you everyone.14:38
MootBotMeeting finished at 09:38.14:38
=== salgado is now known as salgado-lunch
=== rockstar is now known as rockstar-afk
=== salgado-lunch is now known as salgado
=== leonardr_ is now known as leonardr
=== matsubara is now known as matsubara-lunch
=== rockstar-afk is now known as rockstar
=== matsubara-lunch is now known as matsubara
=== salgado is now known as salgado-afk
=== matsubara is now known as matsubara-afk
* sinzui was distracted21:13
sinzuiwho wants to talk about reviews?21:13
rockstarsinzui, :)21:13
rockstarthumper, wgrant, hi21:14
MootBotMeeting started at 16:14. The chair is sinzui.21:14
MootBotCommands Available: [TOPIC], [IDEA], [ACTION], [AGREED], [LINK], [VOTE]21:14
thumperreviewer meeting?21:14
sinzui hello everyone and welcome to this week's antipodean  reviewers meeting.  who's here today?21:14
* rockstar is21:14
mwhudsoni am here21:15
* sinzui thinks everyone who will attend has spoken21:15
sinzui[TOPIC] agenda21:15
MootBotNew Topic:  agenda21:15
sinzui* Roll call21:15
sinzui* Action items21:15
sinzui* UI review call update21:15
sinzui* Peanut gallery21:15
sinzui[Topic] Action items21:16
MootBotNew Topic:  Action items21:16
sinzui* barry to get with mrevell on guidelines migration from old wiki to new21:16
sinzui^ Not done yet21:16
sinzui* intellectronica and barry to draft guidelines for drive-by cleanups21:16
sinzui^ Not done yet21:16
sinzui[Topic] UI review call update21:16
MootBotNew Topic:  UI review call update21:16
* sinzui looks for trascript21:16
sinzuiintellectronica: yeah, the only interesting item was about helping developers get up to speed with integrating widgets21:16
sinzuiintellectronica: we decided to talk to tim, who reported some difficulties and has started documenting the process21:17
sinzuiintellectronica: if any developer still hasn't done any integration work for lazr js widgets, and wants some help and/or wants to help documenting the steps they take, you are most welcome21:17
sinzuiSince the UI meeting is producing notes for all of us to read, do we need a weekly update in this meeting?21:17
thumpersinzui: intellectronica tried, but I was busy :)21:17
rockstarsinzui, I think lazr-js could use more documentation in general.21:18
sinzuiI think documentation and lack of leadership was a concern for other canonical groups when they were told of use it21:19
rockstarsinzui, so does lazr-js need a leader?21:19
sinzuibeuno: quickly recovered by inviting landscape and U1 people to the lazr-js sprint21:19
sinzuirockstar: Without a sense of who is guiding it, many potential contributors are hesitant to join21:20
sinzuimoving on21:21
sinzui[Topic] Peanut gallery21:21
MootBotNew Topic:  Peanut gallery21:21
* thumper throws a peanut at sinzui21:21
sinzuiI brought up the topic of menu and link testing. I do not like the testing that link is not present in a story21:22
sinzuiThe matter was complicated by a subdiscussions about where and what we test21:22
mwhudsonwe test far too much in stories, yes21:22
mwhudsonsinzui: i notice that registry has far more tests in browser/tests these days21:23
sinzuiWe are doing a lot of view tests since we have a tremendous number of them21:24
sinzuiMenus are defines in browser, so that is where I expect to so verification of link permissions, state, etc...21:24
mwhudsonyep, i think it's a good thing21:25
sinzuiI think I need to take my concerns to the dev list.21:25
mwhudsonthis reviewers meeting has a slightly different approach to testing than the other one sometimes :-)21:25
sinzuiI am certain of two things. We have links to views that do not exist. We have links with permissions different from the view it links to21:25
mwhudsonseems likely21:26
sinzuiGentleman, do you have any concerns that we should be discussing?21:27
sinzuithank you gentleman. I will compile the transcripts21:28
mwhudsonthanks sinzui21:28
MootBotMeeting finished at 16:29.21:29

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!