[00:00] <blr> I think having two views is unnecessary and possibly even confusing.
[00:00] <wgrant> Indeed, people linking to single comments in forums is just annoying.
[00:01] <pepee> some comments give you more than enough info for what you are trying to show. for example, a workaround or specific info
[00:02] <pepee> that way, when linking you'd say "do what this link says"
[00:02] <pepee> I'm not a webdev, but... I'd leave it as it is, and simply add anchors
[00:03] <wgrant> But then you need two links to each comment.
[00:03] <pepee> people already know that lp links to comments anyway
[00:03] <wgrant> How do you distinguish them?
[00:03] <pepee> yes, which is what forums do
[00:03] <pepee> you click on the date, and get a link. you click on the number, and get an anchor
[00:03] <pepee> ... IIRC
[00:04] <wgrant> That doesn't make sense to me (and the number goes to the out-of-context page today)
[00:05] <pepee> yes, it would be the inverse, but... why not?
[00:06] <wgrant> I don't think "date goes to anchor, number goes out of context" is particularly understandable.
[00:09] <pepee> I'm just giving an example of how I think it could work
[00:10] <pepee> for the dual link/anchor thing
[00:10] <wgrant> Right, but I still really don't see a compelling argument for the single-comment view.
[00:11] <wgrant> We either have to have two links that non-obviously go to slightly different pages, or a single in-context view.
[00:11] <pepee> I mean, that's the way it works now. it doesn't make sense, but it's already working that way
[00:11] <pepee> instead of changing something, add something
[00:11] <wgrant> No, a link to a comment is always out-of-context.
[00:11] <wgrant> There aren't two slightly different links today.
[00:12] <pepee> yes, which I why I asked if someone could add anchors to LP
[00:12] <pepee> I don't even use forums that much, but sometimes context is not necessary, most of the time it is... depends on your needs
[00:13] <pepee> other reason would be to, say, reduce data usage
[00:14] <pepee> some bug reports are lengthy
[00:15] <wgrant> Right, and we only load 100 comments by default for that reason.
[00:15] <wgrant> In the anchor case, we'd load the 100 comments around that comment.
[00:20] <pepee> oh well, I'm not sure if I'm misreading or just not convincing you... in any case, I won't argue anymore
[00:20] <pepee> thanks for your work blr
[00:21] <pepee> also, please make sure it works if you disable JS...
[00:21] <wgrant> That's the only issue I see with the lack of out-of-context view.
[00:22] <wgrant> I'm happy to be convinced that the out-of-context view is useful, but I haven't seen a strong argument yet.
[00:22] <pepee> I'm saying that you could keep both, I have no clue about webdev, even less about webdesign
[00:23] <wgrant> It is certainly technically possible to keep both, but it is undoubtedly confusing.
[00:23] <pepee> in fact, apparently the "link to a specific post" feature in forums is kinda hidden...
[00:23] <wgrant> You seem to think we should keep the out-of-context view, and I'm interested to know why.
[00:24] <pepee> because it can be useful
[00:25] <pepee> imagine you are trying to show someone some specific command that was posted in LP, there is no need to show the whole bug report, you just link to that comment
[00:25] <wgrant> But is there a need to not show the whole bug report?
[00:25] <pepee> or you are talking about the bug report, but only want to show what someone said
[00:25] <pepee> no, there is no need to hide the context, but... there is also no need to load so many resources
[00:26] <wgrant> For the server, the overhead of having a separate view is greater than just rendering the bug.
[00:26] <wgrant> And the extra download size wouldn't be significant.
[00:27] <pepee> $ curl https://bugs.launchpad.net/xserver-xorg-video-intel/+bug/1432194/?comments=all | wc -c   352923
[00:27] <mup> Bug #1432194: Graphics unstable on Ubuntu 14.04 and 14.10 using Intel HD Graphics 5500 <amd64> <trusty> <verification-done> <OEM Priority Project:New> <xf86-video-intel:Unknown> <xserver-xorg-video-intel (Ubuntu):Fix Released> <xserver-xorg-video-intel-lts-utopic (Ubuntu):Invalid>
[00:27] <mup> <xserver-xorg-video-intel-lts-utopic (Ubuntu Trusty):Fix Committed> <xserver-xorg-video-intel (Ubuntu Utopic):Fix Committed by tjaalton> <https://launchpad.net/bugs/1432194>
[00:27] <pepee> $ curl https://bugs.launch  pad.net/xserver-xorg-video-intel/+bug/1432194/comments/85 | wc -c  14160
[00:27] <blr> github shoes the entire thread, and scrolls to the relevant comment fwiw.
[00:27] <blr> shows
[00:28] <wgrant> cjwatson: You said that the new lazr.delegates broke lazr.restful. Does that only affect the test suite, or are we likely to run into problems with your branch that upgrades LP?
[00:28] <blr> although there's no notion of a comment view there
[00:28] <pepee> 14160 vs 352923 bytes, > 20x, and that's only the page
[00:29] <pepee> and as I said, my guess is that most people will want show the comments in context anyway
[00:31] <wgrant> Right, and the question is whether the very few people who want them out of context justify the overhead and confusion of keeping the extra page around
[00:31] <wgrant> (and comments=all is cheating!)
[00:33] <pepee> I'm using firefox + noscript, and it's the only way I could see all the comments, but you can imagine that some threads are as lengthy as that one...
[00:34] <pepee> thing is, there must be a way to show them that the old "link-to-specific-post" feature exists
[00:34] <pepee> my way is simply looking at the url by moving the mouse pointer, now I'm not even sure how forums do that
[00:35] <pepee> I was wrong when I said that forums have links in the date
[00:39] <pepee> ahh, vbulletin removed this 5 years ago, heh
[00:45] <pepee> oh well, don't mind me...
[00:45] <wgrant> pepee: Hm, so they only provide the in-context link now?
[00:46] <wgrant> It's slightly more awkward for us, because we don't have a batched view, I admit.
[00:46] <pepee> http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/forum/vbulletin-4/vbulletin-4-suggestions/362540-open-single-post
[00:46] <pepee> "showpost.php has been removed for SEO reasons and I don't think it will come back."
[00:51] <pepee> I just don't get why it wasn't done that way from the start
[00:51] <pepee> could have copied functionality in forums...
[01:09] <wgrant> blr: How's the email testing going?
[01:26] <blr> wgrant: ok, although I had forgotten how awful evolution is. Did you want to deploy soon?
[01:27] <wgrant> blr: Yep, my testing seems fine as well. We can deploy whenever you want
[01:33] <blr> wgrant: diffs are all looking healthy
[01:34] <blr> wgrant: is there a binding for forcing a refresh in offlineimap?
[01:36] <blr> going to grab some lunch. 17614 should be green in a sec.
[01:36] <wgrant> blr: I've never used offlineimap.
[01:39] <blr> pleased I can test mail on qastaging, less painful than I thought it would be.
[01:40] <blr> ok, back in a bit.
[09:25] <cjwatson> wgrant: Barry fixed that in lazr.delegates 2.0.3, which is the version I upgraded to.
[09:25] <wgrant> cjwatson: Ahh
[09:56] <wgrant> Heh
[09:56] <wgrant> That didn't go well...
[09:56] <wgrant> Or the new lazr.delegates is really, really fast.
[09:57] <wgrant> Hum
[09:57] <wgrant> cjwatson: Error: Couldn't find a distribution for 'nose==1.1.2'.
[10:00] <wgrant> Ah, it's in ztk-versions.cfg and lazr.delegates newly requires it.
[10:01] <wgrant> I guess you added it to lp-source-dependencies but didn't commit?
[10:01] <wgrant> Fixed.
[10:03] <cjwatson> Oh whoops, probably had junk in my download-cache and didn't notice
[10:03] <cjwatson> Thanks
[17:58] <ev> is https://app.asana.com/0/26780198332250/ up to date with yesterday's stakeholder meeting?
[18:04] <beuno> ev, I didn't add my "split out gpg and ssh storage to a separate service", could you throw that in?
[18:04] <ev> yup
[20:57] <rpadovani> https://code.launchpad.net/~wgrant/launchpad/webhook-api/+merge/264005
[20:58] <rpadovani> Guys, I swear you're making me want to learn well python to help you
[20:59] <rpadovani> (and if you start to work also on the UI of lp I definitely switch from helping ubuntu touch / oxide to lp
[22:36] <cjwatson> rpadovani: we are totally interested in taking patches for it even if we aren't currently focused on it :)
[22:37] <cjwatson> and will be happy to help mentor people who're motivated
[22:38] <rpadovani> I'm really tempted... A couple of weeks I finish uni exams and then I think I'll ping you with a couple of questions ;-)
[22:40] <cjwatson> sure thing