and not LanguageConverter. [21:00:29] the reading folks really really really want

[21:00:39] yes, they *want* it, they don't want to *talk* about it. [21:00:43] as far as I can tell. [21:01:00] yeah they just want the magic parsoid/core elves to make it happen [21:01:13] right. so why is it worth talking about? it's already on the parsoid roadmap. [21:01:17] cscott:: I'm rereading T113002 right now, and it appears this is an example of where you aren't taking "no" for an answer. Not done reading yet though, so that may be unfair [21:01:35] whereas there is a great difference of opinion re language converter and content translation. it seems we really *ought* to talk about that. [21:02:11] robla: i believe i am consistent in saying we should keep our options open. [21:02:32] cscott: are you looking for an opportunity to talk *at* people more, or is this something you really intend to learn more about next week? [21:02:45] i've heard from both sides equally often. you should ask @gwicke whether he agrees with @tstarling that we should just add LanguageConverter support to VE and Parsoid, for instance. [21:03:17] well, i'd rather put @tstarling and @gwicke in a room (together with all the others who have strong opinions, including the language team) [21:03:41] last time we did that, we actually came out with a reasonable (short-term) plan forward. [21:03:52] my only advocacy here is that we should have *some* plan. [21:04:46] cscott, I think you've got an opportunity to say your piece about T113002 in the T119022 session at 2pm on Monday [21:05:15] you are causing me to lose all hope in this dev summit. [21:05:35] T119022 doesn't even have an agenda [21:05:46] it has a list of *other* session topics [21:06:25] T113002 has a specific goal, and two very specific options to discuss. i am optimistic we can make progress on concrete technical goals. [21:08:30] and Tim very clearly said T113002 is "potentially distracting from the technical discussion we need to have at the dev summit." [21:09:08] I'm pretty sure he didn't mean that he didn't mean distracting from the technical discussion *in general* thus that we shouldn't discuss T113002 at all. [21:09:15] I'm going ask my question again and then ignore this channel until you answer it [21:09:20] cscott: are you looking for an opportunity to talk *at* people more, or is this something you really intend to learn more about next week? [21:09:40] he's welcome to advocate his point in R2 at the T113002 discussion. i don't believe it is a consensus opinion, but if it is, i'm happy to go with that. that would be a productive outcome of the meeting. [21:10:05] robla: i find that question rather insulting, which is why i politely did not respond to it earlier. [21:10:40] i have spent three years talking to people about T113002. If Tim was expressing a consensus opinion, we'd be done with the matter already and we wouldn't need to continue discussing it. [21:11:41] i'm not saying his opinion is *wrong* (or *right*). I'm just saying that *i* don't have a dog in this fight, other than trying to get the warring sides to reach consensus. and working toward consensus is supposed to be the point of this summit. [21:12:46] also: @tstarling was just referring to the "splitting the wikis" part. you seem to be taking his comment to mean we shouldn't discuss T113002 in a session at all. why is that? [21:15:17] I just fully reread T113002. Tim's comment here I think states the community consensus pretty well: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T113002#1837794 [21:15:55] gwicke hasn't weighed in at all in this task, nor has anyone who disagrees. it's just you versus the world if you read T113002 [21:18:26] robla: perhaps you should have come to my wikimania session last year then. [21:19:07] sorry, I was a little busy then :-P [21:20:26] cscott: is your expectation that you get to use force of personality in undocumented in-person conversations, and then tell everyone else that "sorry, you missed it. we discussed it already" [21:21:18] robla: your ad hominem attacks are really quite depressing, considering that you haven't actually attended any of the talks I've given on this topic. [21:22:09] cscott: do I need to go into further detail as to why I wasn't at Wikimania 2015? [21:22:15] 3~/win 29 [21:23:54] paravoid: ? [21:24:46] * robla is trying to figure out if paravoid is making obscure snark that he's not getting, or if paravoid accidently typed something in the wrong window :-) [21:27:04] robla: i am aware. you had an opportunity at last year's dev summit as well. [21:27:44] cscott: is there video of your talk? [21:28:23] you just seem to be making assumptions about how i've handled this discussion in the past that seem to be at odds with reality. [21:28:35] sadly, no. the wmf is pretty terrible about recording sessions. [21:28:37] cscott: is there video of your talk? [21:28:41] perhaps dev summit '16 will be different? [21:29:07] cscott: you've had ample opportunity to make a tech talk this year [21:29:26] Robertson 1 is the only room that has video this year [21:29:30] ok, i need to step away for a while. [21:29:40] you seem to be making this extremely personal. [22:14:30] * quiddity pours everyone a cup of tea. (208 cups of tea!) Plus platefuls of unspecified types of biscuit/cookie. [22:15:33] thanks quiddity [22:15:43] * cscott thanks quiddity [22:22:56] tea sandwiches? scones? [22:32:32] bd808: what do you envision we should get done on the

side of thigns? [22:33:35] (if you have an opinion) [22:34:57] I'm not sure what needs to be done other than coding it. There are some technical questions as I recall about how to handle various edge cases, but I think that's mostly implementation details [22:49:24] thanks! yeah, I'm going to Phiddle in Phab phor a bit [22:50:33] * robla will never get tired of making s/^f/^ph/ jokes, even if everyone else is already tired of it :-P [22:51:25] oops: s/^f/ph/ [23:51:25] what do toknes mean in phab? [23:52:43] ToAruShiroiNeko: nothing really. some people try to use them a bit like votes in bugzilla (which also really meant nothing to us) [23:53:43] so it isnt cold hard cash showeing my thread then. :/ [23:53:44] :p