Something something about forbidding gay marriage being unconstitutional IIRC
ruaok
that a stupid law that said that marriage was between a man and a woman was overtuned.
reosarevok
Only 10 years late or so :p
ruaok
reosarevok: it wasn't that direct.
djce joined the channel
ocharles
oh, that's good news!
ruaok
they merely said that this one law is unconstitutional.
ocharles: way good news.
reosarevok is amazed that if a law is against the constitution, it takes almost 18 years to find out
and that it came the week before pride was awesome.
SF has been offf the hook the last week
Leftmost
Basically, the SCOTUS decision requires the federal law to recognize same-sex marriages performed at the state level.
It doesn't require states to allow same-sex marriage, but it does mean that if someone gets married in California or Massachusetts or one of the other states that allow same-sex marriage, they get the usual federal benefits.
reosarevok
Even if they then move to $crazy_christ_state?
Leftmost
I'm not totally clear on that.
It might depend on residency, or it might just be that they lose state recognition.
reosarevok
If yes, then I guess it's kinda the same as a full-country legalisation to most effects, except for poor people who can't get to any of those states :/
Leftmost
Or it could be any one of a number of other options.
ocharles
ruaok: is the plan to carry on with VM stuff today?
ruaok
yes, though didn't we agreed to go separate paths?
you lolo, me search and release VM?
Leftmost
I know that a couple of the states that allow gay marriage don't require the married couple to be a resident of the state in question, which could mean that just getting married is sufficient to gain federal recognition.
ocharles
No, I need to give you stuff that assumes only one drive instead of two
ruaok
didn't you check that in already?
Leftmost
Now if Montana allowed gay marriage, it'd get rid of the travel problem: Montana allows double-proxy marriages. (Neither party need be present.)
ocharles
ruaok: no, we decided to that ten minutes before I left work :)
ruaok
woah, really? thats crazy.
ocharles
to do that*
ruaok
ok, np.
then lets carry on with that.
reosarevok
Leftmost: do they need to agree? :p
Leftmost
Yes. :-P
ruaok
if I get not response from the vagrant people tomorrorw, I will just fork over $80
reosarevok
That sounds like you could forge someone's letter and get married without them knowing :p
Leftmost
I think the Montana government should recognize the potential goldmine awaiting them. "Are you in a same-sex relationship and want to get married? Do it from the comfort of your home!"
I live in Montana. It's my business to know how weird a state it really is.
reosarevok
Oh! That explains it :)
Leftmost
A few states allow proxy marriages, but Montana is the only one to allow double-proxy.
outsidecontext joined the channel
ocharles
nikki: I don't know, in short. I don't like shipping the arbitrary scaling, due to my final comment. And in terms of fixing it properly, I need to spend more time understanding how the rank calculation is done
nikki
the proper fix is to get rid of the direct search :P
ocharles
nikki: so for me, if you don't want it in review submitted, I would have to reject the review
that would be my vote, anyway
and yes, I'd love to rather spend my time removing direct search
nikki
and it's not arbitrary scaling, it's displaying all scores consistently
ocharles
no, it's arbitrary, see my last comment
nikki
it doesn't matter that the direct and lucene scores are not comparable, because two lucene scores are also not comparable
ocharles
it doesn't mean what people think it means
basically, I don't think we understand how this score calculation works, so before shipping something I'd like to understand that
nikki
what do people think it means?
ocharles
well lucene tops out at 100
but this ranking doesn't have a maximum
nikki
and the direct one at 10, afaik
ocharles
no, that's just what we see. the ranking choice we use doesn't have a maximum
but I'd like to understand why we only see 10
Or more accurately, why the db only goes to 0.1
reosarevok shrugs
reosarevok
Seems to be pretty consistent in going to 0.1
nikki
that seems like a big waste of time
ocharles
ruaok: oh, it seems like I may indeed have done the VM stuff
ruaok: so grab git pull && git submodule update, and see what happens
zag
did the lucene search make it into the vm yet?
ocharles
zag: no
ruaok
ocharles: :-)
zag
thx, i took a quick look but looked very complicated
ruaok
zag: its really not that bad.
zag
making search consistant around the whole site would be nice ;)
ruaok
ocharles: I could use some help making the war and jar into .deb s
ok, time to head out and hit the office
bbiab
ocharles
ruaok: how do I turn lolo on?
ruaok
feh. we want to turn lolo on now?
ocharles
ruaok: if poss
ruaok
that means we'll get charged for it for the whole month.
oh well.
let me call them. thats the fastest.
should be coming up soon.
ocharles
thanks!
ruaok
bbiab
reosarevok
Meh, if only our blog had as many real human readers as it has spammers saying how great it is :p
there's just the ended checkbox ticked, which is why it shows ????
alastairp
Died:1983
oh
nikki
oh, you're talking about the artist
LordSputnik1 has left the channel
alastairp
oh
I see
the ???? is for the length of the relationship
nikki
yeah
alastairp
not details of the person
never mind then :)
nikki
you might like to tell the person/people doing those edits that the sortname should be latin and then it doesn't need to go in the disambiguation comment :P
alastairp
sure
if there is a sort name, should the non-sorted name also be as an alias?
nikki
hm?
alastairp
name: احمد أقريش, sort name: Aqrish, Ahmed, alias: Ahmed Aqrish