| 01:10 | <MikeSmith> | TabAtkins: when I run bikeshed remotely on a file, it doesn’t emit the meta[name="document-revision"] output in teh generated HTML? |
| 01:13 | <MikeSmith> | https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47783781/if-no-cors-can-lead-to-ddos-anyways-for-what-reasons-can-non-credentialed-fe |
| 01:14 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: 👆⬆ |
| 02:39 | <TabAtkins> | MikeSmith: That would be because you're running it remotely; that is, not on a file within a github repo. The server just sees bits; it has no idea what revision your local git repo considers those bits to be a part of. |
| 02:40 | <MikeSmith> | ah |
| 04:39 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: the intranet response is correct |
| 04:40 | <annevk> | MikeSmith: did you see my documenting botie question? |
| 04:41 | <MikeSmith> | annevk: yeah I think Simon updated it already |
| 04:42 | <MikeSmith> | yeah https://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/IRC#Bots |
| 04:42 | <annevk> | Great |
| 05:59 | <othermaciej_> | Fairly positive (if mildly confused) blog post about the recent changes: https://love2dev.com/blog/whatwg-adopts-standards/ |
| 07:06 | <foolip> | Domenic: on "we need some kind of label for things that got merged without agreement across implementers" I'm going to explore that space soon by looking at new failing tests that stay failing, hoping to be able to formalize and automate if I find a lot of interesting stuff manually |
| 07:07 | <foolip> | Domenic: next steps in testing feedback loop that is. Any ideas beyond "explore the space" welcome. Plan is to go poking as the one case a week and see what I learn in Q1 |
| 07:07 | <foolip> | annevk: ^ |
| 11:10 | <foolip> | RFC: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/1849 |
| 11:11 | <foolip> | Ooops, I mean https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/1849#issuecomment-351359904, asking for feedback on "testing feedback loop", basically. |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | foolip: seems pretty good |
| 11:23 | <annevk> | foolip: tooling for filing bugs against all implementations or a subset would be rather nice though |
| 11:24 | <annevk> | foolip: especially with all the different interfaces implementations use and some of them being somewhat slow to use |
| 14:16 | <foolip> | annevk: interesting. Domenic was skeptical about that because each engine's bug might be different, but maybe it is worth experimenting with. |
| 14:30 | <smaug____> | what do asserts mean in a spec? |
| 14:30 | <Mek> | smaug____: https://infra.spec.whatwg.org/#assertions |
| 15:05 | <Domenic> | My only gripe with that article is https://whatwg.org/faq#spell-and-pronounce but otherwise seems reasonable :) |
| 16:10 | <annevk> | foolip: I often copy-and-paste |
| 16:23 | <Domenic> | I try to tailor my bugs to what tests are failing in each engine, but I guess that's not crucial. |
| 16:24 | <annevk> | Domenic: I should probably check with you first |
| 16:24 | <annevk> | Domenic: but how would document.on("click").first().then(e => …) work with preventDefault()? |
| 16:24 | <Domenic> | annevk: ah, yeah, first() will break it |
| 16:24 | <annevk> | Okay, so I guess most of the other stuff runs sync? |
| 16:25 | <annevk> | sync is really confusing term, I guess I should say immediately |
| 16:25 | <Domenic> | Right, the promise-returning ones get delayed by the promise machinery, but the combinators and subscribe run sync. |
| 16:25 | <annevk> | Okay |
| 16:26 | <Domenic> | Well, the promise-returning ones call their callbacks synchronously, e.g. forEach(cb) or reduce(cb), but the promise returned is async... |
| 16:26 | <Domenic> | forEach(cb).then(f, r) will run cb sync but f/r async |
| 19:43 | <foolip> | Good news all, DigitalOcean gave us a $500 credit, should last us a while :) |
| 19:44 | <foolip> | No strings attached, don't need to put a banner anywhere :) |
| 20:40 | <TimothyGu> | \o/ |
| 21:43 | <Domenic> | Nice :) |
| 21:43 | <Domenic> | annevk: maybe Mozilla all hands is a good place to gather thoughts on/interest in observables? |
| 22:14 | <Domenic> | TabAtkins: have you rolled widlparser since https://github.com/plinss/widlparser/pull/33 (mixins)? If not want me to file an issue? |
| 22:15 | <TabAtkins> | Not yet, and please do. |
| 22:15 | <TabAtkins> | Been pulled 15 ways this week, sorry. |
| 22:20 | <Domenic> | Great. Filed https://github.com/tabatkins/bikeshed/issues/1154 for anyone else who wants to watch along. |
| 22:21 | <TabAtkins> | (Since the rolling method is literally "delete the folder, re-clone the wildparser repo, then delete its .gitconfig/etc files", I'll def accept a PR for it too if you want it *right now*.) |
| 22:22 | <TabAtkins> | (Yes, this is ridiculous, but fuck git submodules.) |
| 22:23 | <foolip> | There's git subtree, but that's also not great. |
| 22:25 | <TabAtkins> | It's all bad. Manually cloning is literally the most effective method, which is an exceedingly damning indictment of every existing solution. |
| 23:21 | <Domenic> | The fact that whatwg/meta has 13 watchers does not bode well for its status as a replacement for whatwg⊙wo for purposes like https://github.com/whatwg/meta/issues/58 |
| 23:21 | <Domenic> | Probably we should tweet that thread? |
| 23:22 | <Domenic> | And/or send it to whatwg⊙wo? |
| 23:22 | <Domenic> | Also, perhaps we should send a notice of the further working mode changes blog post to whatwg⊙wo. |
| 23:34 | <foolip> | Heh, that would be a good place to post it, yes. It crossed my mind but then it exited my mind again. |
| 23:51 | <jyasskin> | I'll be at the London IETF meeting. |