popey | e.g. the ios app uploaded earlier, there was an alert that "this is not a valid click package" so i didnt bother doing any further checks, just bounced it | 00:00 |
---|---|---|
aquarius | popey, but... what tests are done that click-reviewer-tools doesn't do? the output I got when my first upload failed certainly seemed to be pretty automated -- it was json, fergawdsake :) | 00:00 |
popey | yeah, i copy/pasted that into the reply ☻ | 00:00 |
popey | i could have edited out the obvious json bits ㋛ | 00:01 |
aquarius | ha! | 00:01 |
aquarius | the impression I had was that you (didn't know it was you btw!) basically downloaded the package, ran click-reviewers-tools, pasted the output errors into an email, and clicked "failed tests". Which is cool, but surely (and I understand, believe me, what it's like that side of the fence) not that hard to do automatically...? :) | 00:02 |
aquarius | lots to do and not many people to do it, though, of course. | 00:02 |
popey | I think so too ☻ | 00:02 |
popey | ask beuno ☻ | 00:02 |
popey | does it not tell you who did the review? didnt know that? | 00:03 |
aquarius | I would do, but I had enough of those sorts of conversations with beuno before I left ;) I'm sure there's plenty of stuff to do and "make it all done by a script" is on the list, it's just that "I uploaded my app and it was in the store fifteen seconds later" would be such a massive PR win :) | 00:03 |
aquarius | popey, I don't think it does, 'cos I'd have noticed if it'd said it was you... but maybe I missed it | 00:04 |
popey | i think you see in the web ui | 00:04 |
popey | i see holbach did mine, but maybe thats my view | 00:04 |
aquarius | today again I talked myself out of making a noddy "USC" which lets you browse and install click packages on the desktop ;) | 00:06 |
popey | someone else did | 00:07 |
popey | well, browse | 00:07 |
popey | http://paste.ubuntu.com/6940344/ | 00:08 |
popey | someone == Robert | 00:08 |
popey | run that, it spawns in your browser | 00:08 |
aquarius | what a good lad. | 00:09 |
ybon | ah, one more bad news because Qt cast to string the value send to the section.delegate: I cannot make that when clicking the date itself it opens the Day view | 00:10 |
aquarius | that's very cool indeed. Well done Schroll. | 00:10 |
ybon | (or I can parsing the string, but... ;) ) | 00:10 |
aquarius | ybon, why not? | 00:10 |
ybon | because I've a string, not a date | 00:10 |
aquarius | ybon, yeah, make the string value be, say, "dateheader:dayviewid" or something :) | 00:10 |
aquarius | this is quite annoying, though | 00:11 |
aquarius | you're supposed to be able to pass JS objects around; that's what makes JS good. | 00:11 |
ybon | ah, but, maybe now I understand why it's done like this: because the value is used to group ListItem together | 00:11 |
ybon | and they don't want to compare complex object | 00:12 |
ybon | (maybe) | 00:12 |
ybon | and given that the section itself is shared between more than one ListItem, what should be the value of the Date sent? | 00:12 |
aquarius | that;s why you should be able to set section.property to be a function, so you can handle the complexity yourself if you want :) | 00:13 |
aquarius | man, this click browser is flamin' excellent. | 00:13 |
ybon | yep | 00:13 |
* popey goes to bed, early start... | 00:13 | |
popey | thanks for the contributions ybon - ping me a mail if there's anything you want me to test, or if there's someone i can poke to help | 00:14 |
ybon | popey: thanks :) | 00:14 |
popey | or leave me a pm, I'm always connected | 00:14 |
ybon | and good night! :) | 00:14 |
popey | nn | 00:14 |
ybon | (and here is the branch for the AgendaView) | 00:16 |
ybon | (https://code.launchpad.net/~yohanboniface/ubuntu-calendar-app/AgendaView I meant :) ) | 00:16 |
ghostmars919 | Hello | 16:14 |
=== Ursinha is now known as Ursinha-afk | ||
DeTorr | hello | 19:09 |
DeTorr | world | 19:09 |
=== Ursinha-afk is now known as Ursinha |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!