This week I worked on making the alpha-importer and influx-writer a bit more intelligent in handling bad data. Also, did some rebases on old PRs, nothing much else
2017-03-27 08656, 2017
iliekcomputers
Kinda off topic but I also went to see a cricket match this weekend in what has to be one of the most beautiful cricket grounds in the world. Was a great day!
iliekcomputers: wow. And I even kinda understand cricket, so I wouldn't even be that out of place! If I ever make it to Asia I should check this kind of places
you can see the general idea outlined in sub-tasks and related issues
2017-03-27 08618, 2017
samj1912
okay :) (I got confused since the time changed :P)
2017-03-27 08620, 2017
Gentlecat
the only question is whether we want to have separate ratings on reviews
2017-03-27 08648, 2017
Gentlecat
which is actually related to moving ratings
2017-03-27 08651, 2017
reosarevok
That's required to have multiple reviews with different ratings, right?
2017-03-27 08653, 2017
Freso
Neat. :)
2017-03-27 08656, 2017
reosarevok
If so, yes, IMO
2017-03-27 08659, 2017
bitmap thinks no
2017-03-27 08618, 2017
Freso is lagging a lot tonight, it seems :(
2017-03-27 08626, 2017
Gentlecat
if we decide to have ratings separately, then moving shouldn't be an issue later
2017-03-27 08639, 2017
arbenina_ joined the channel
2017-03-27 08647, 2017
Freso
ruaok: Can you take over leading the meeting? It's no good with a meeting leader that lags a minute behind everyone else.
2017-03-27 08649, 2017
Gentlecat
reosarevok: not necessarily multiple
2017-03-27 08603, 2017
ruaok
I'm half asleep.
2017-03-27 08605, 2017
ruaok
but I can try.
2017-03-27 08610, 2017
CatQuest
lol
2017-03-27 08622, 2017
reosarevok
Gentlecat: just saying that we do need this if we want to have that possibility, right?
2017-03-27 08644, 2017
Gentlecat
but yes, to avoid conflicts
2017-03-27 08606, 2017
Gentlecat
if someone has a review with a rating on CB and also a rating on MB for the same entity
2017-03-27 08620, 2017
psolanki
May be we can begin with release-groups, events and place and urge users from MB to CB for detailed ratings and reviews.
2017-03-27 08624, 2017
CatQuest
yea
2017-03-27 08634, 2017
reosarevok
bitmap: why no?
2017-03-27 08653, 2017
yvanzo
Reviews and ratings are clearly not the same level of critique analysis.
2017-03-27 08605, 2017
bitmap
I assume "separate ratings on reviews" = ratings on reviews + some other rating not associated with anything
2017-03-27 08639, 2017
bitmap
I still lean toward the idea I presented in the ticket
2017-03-27 08644, 2017
CatQuest
I feel that we can avoid those conflicts if we move the ratings to CB proper, it makes sense and, if implementing that one with "admit review only with rating" it would work
2017-03-27 08659, 2017
Gentlecat
I think of it as a "review" being either a rating, some text, or both
2017-03-27 08604, 2017
CatQuest
i forget it's coe number
2017-03-27 08611, 2017
CatQuest
yes
2017-03-27 08617, 2017
reosarevok
bitmap: that was "every rating is a review, but only the latest can be empty?"
2017-03-27 08621, 2017
reosarevok
(text-empty)
2017-03-27 08643, 2017
bitmap
yeah, though I don't feel strongly about the last part
and whether someone sees any general issues with CB-244
2017-03-27 08624, 2017
reosarevok
Gentlecat: Well, if we decide to do 244 in bitmap's way, we're deciding that one by default I guess
2017-03-27 08611, 2017
reosarevok
I see no issue with doing 244 in either unrelated-to-"MB"-ratings way or related, we just need to decide
2017-03-27 08621, 2017
reosarevok
If you're happy with bitmap's idea, I think I'd be too
2017-03-27 08634, 2017
CatQuest
I do think that having ratings in two places is odd
2017-03-27 08642, 2017
CatQuest
so yea?
2017-03-27 08646, 2017
Gentlecat
it makes sense
2017-03-27 08616, 2017
ruaok
I'd like to take a closer look at this, but like I said a minute ago, I'm asleep.
2017-03-27 08618, 2017
reosarevok
Yeah, I guess bitmap's suggestion avoids the "there's two kinds of ratings"
2017-03-27 08620, 2017
Gentlecat
so is anyone against that?
2017-03-27 08641, 2017
ruaok
can I respond tomorrow?
2017-03-27 08647, 2017
reosarevok
I'd say go for it? I'd probably be able to give a better opinion on whether it feels natural once we have it on a sandbox to check
2017-03-27 08653, 2017
reosarevok
Or somewhere, anyway
2017-03-27 08603, 2017
CatQuest rereads the bitmap suggestion
2017-03-27 08605, 2017
reosarevok
But the general idea seems sensible
2017-03-27 08607, 2017
CatQuest
yea, i liek that
2017-03-27 08618, 2017
Gentlecat
ruaok: ok
2017-03-27 08618, 2017
reosarevok
So if ruaok likes it tomorrow, let's do that? :)
2017-03-27 08628, 2017
ruaok
lol, ok.
2017-03-27 08643, 2017
ruaok
onward, next item: Picard feat. plugin (reo)
2017-03-27 08651, 2017
Gentlecat
can we say that it's ok to proceed with all that if there are no objections during this week
2017-03-27 08657, 2017
reosarevok
+1
2017-03-27 08602, 2017
CatQuest
+1
2017-03-27 08608, 2017
reosarevok
ruaok: No, next was samj1912's review, because he was late. Luckily, they're connected anyway! :)
2017-03-27 08612, 2017
Leftmost
+0.9...
2017-03-27 08619, 2017
yvanzo
+1.1
2017-03-27 08623, 2017
reosarevok
samj1912: go?
2017-03-27 08624, 2017
ruaok
lol.
2017-03-27 08629, 2017
samj1912
reosarevok: hehe yup :P
2017-03-27 08632, 2017
samj1912
Hi everyone
2017-03-27 08634, 2017
yvanzo
Leftmost: do not unbalance the vote please ;)
2017-03-27 08636, 2017
ruaok
reosarevok: you should lead the meeting. you seem with it. :)
2017-03-27 08640, 2017
reosarevok
k
2017-03-27 08644, 2017
Leftmost
yvanzo, 0.9... = 1. :-P
2017-03-27 08647, 2017
CatQuest
+1
2017-03-27 08657, 2017
ruaok
_ø_
2017-03-27 08612, 2017
ZarkBit has quit
2017-03-27 08613, 2017
reosarevok
Gentlecat: seems like a +n
2017-03-27 08615, 2017
reosarevok
;)
2017-03-27 08616, 2017
FresosIRCCloudIs joined the channel
2017-03-27 08618, 2017
reosarevok
samj1912: go on :)
2017-03-27 08630, 2017
ZarkBit joined the channel
2017-03-27 08645, 2017
samj1912
so last week, I worked on reviewing picard PRs as usual, and volunteered for the feat. plugin for which I managed to write a pretty compact code than I expected
2017-03-27 08600, 2017
samj1912
the latter half of the week, I worked on porting picard to py3 since the qt5 port is almost done
My IRCCloud is messing up, so I'll use the Freenode IRCterface.
2017-03-27 08631, 2017
reosarevok
Sophist: this was you too IIRC?
2017-03-27 08657, 2017
CatQuest
wait what about the jira thing?
2017-03-27 08601, 2017
FresosIRCCloudIs
Sophist mentioned on GitHub that they think picard-plugins issues should go to Jira instead of GH issues.
2017-03-27 08613, 2017
Quesito has quit
2017-03-27 08640, 2017
dna6a has quit
2017-03-27 08613, 2017
dna6a joined the channel
2017-03-27 08614, 2017
FresosIRCCloudIs
I think picard-plugins should still live GH issues, since picard-plugins are not supported by "MetaBrainz", but are meant to be much more like a "hotpot"(?) for Picard users to submit their things too.
