[04:45:27] robla: so I'm still waiting for people to come available to work with me on LQT, and I'm running somewhat dry for work. I'm wondering if, if I clear it with Alolita, you need more people to help with the code review backlog. [04:45:41] werdna: please! [04:46:19] OK, I'll ask Alolita what she thinks [04:46:26] she might have some other stuff up her sleeves. [15:02:39] good morning people... [15:08:28] mornin [15:08:29] g [15:17:19] morning Trevor [15:17:26] howdy [15:20:26] Reedy: so, we can go through the details for rating clearing... [15:20:46] TrevorParscal, I'm supposed to be working now [15:20:54] "working" being some bullshit uni module [15:21:00] we need to support setting a rating to 0 or -1 or whatever, not 1-5, and it would have a meaning of "clear this rating record" [15:21:02] "Commercial Development Practise" [15:21:13] that sounds like BS [15:21:17] Mhmm [15:21:18] but feel free to do that [15:21:25] not trying to overrun your time here [15:21:25] I've spent a good 5 hours doing little so far [15:21:30] heh :) [15:21:33] No motivation to do it [15:22:12] Craptastic datasets from the uk government, with mulitple layers of indirection [15:23:52] TrevorParscal, http://www.courses.hull.ac.uk/modules/1011/08911.html [15:25:02] is it just me, or is the pinstripe background of that web page likely to cause a epileptic seizure when scrolling? [15:25:27] some of the IT services here are useless [15:25:33] Visit that site without www., it won't redirect [15:25:42] http://www2.hull.ac.uk/ [15:25:55] HAS to be www2 for the main site, but that redirects [15:26:02] As well as much other shit [15:26:12] TrevorParscal, I agree [15:26:22] that background "flashes" on scroll [15:26:34] It does [15:26:38] That's horrendous [15:26:41] I'll complain about it [15:28:07] it's a web page that can injure people... you don't see that too often outside of lemon party dot com ... for instance... [15:28:11] do not go there [15:28:14] ever [15:28:18] you will be injured [15:28:23] :D [15:28:31] TrevorParscal, add to that, the useless "Maintaining Large Software Systems" module http://www.courses.hull.ac.uk/modules/1011S1/08982.html [15:29:52] when i begin reading the text on this page, I want to be a plumber or something for a living - anything other than a computer programmer... [15:30:02] maybe a panhandler... fresh air might be nice... [15:30:33] TrevorParscal, I think your route into the industry was possibly more sane ;) [15:31:08] and yet, far more contraversial at the time [15:31:13] heh [15:31:34] Explains why I get pissed off, and the crap we were getting with 08982 making me think it'd be easier not to bother completing my masters... [15:31:43] Some of the staff are great [15:31:50] But some of them, really are beyond useless [15:31:57] I just remember having to explain to people, like say my parents or my girlfriend (not my wife) I do these open source projects to develop marketable skills - I'm not wasting my time! [15:32:21] TrevorParscal, amusingly, my mum always said "why are you wasting your time with the wiki stuff" [15:32:35] ha ha [15:32:40] yeah, well that's how it goes [15:33:01] imagine what people woudl think when you said 30 years ago [15:33:13] Holek, I would've been -9 [15:33:20] ;) [15:33:27] Apparently, we'll get marked on coding style for that maintaining large systems, considering he has non, VERY inconsistent whitespace, and javascript that would make your stomach churn [15:33:29] "hey, how about we do some coding just for people" [15:33:48] "publish it free and open it up for anybody to contribute" [15:34:17] Reedy: me too ;) [15:34:19] I was asked at some social gathering to offer advice about how a woman's 15 year old son might succeed in getting into software development and I told her, well college will probably make him want to give up on his passion and become a handyman instead.. He should get involved, like deeply involved in some open source projects [15:34:27] she seemed to think I was joking... [15:35:13] I about half way convinced her after about 10 minutes of conversation, but ... yeah - people don't seem to be able to cope with the possibility that someone could learn by doing when it comes to computers, or much of anything for that matter... [15:35:19] TrevorParscal, the guy that does the C based business system that my dads work uses (which runs on SCO unix), had an argument with his sons "IT" teacher, who told the guy that programming was dead, and unneeded due to all the visual tools available now [15:35:37] Needless to say, the guy whoes been doing it for many years, kicked off ;) [15:36:13] ha ha [15:36:57] dude, "programming is dead because of all the visual tools out there" - my head is spinning [15:37:24] IT's like, the guy teaching the large software systems module turned around to me and said something about being an academic, and if i was, I'd be up there teaching the module [15:37:28] I started laughing at him [15:37:50] Little does he know I have more experience than he seemingly does [15:38:04] I'm sure that's true [15:38:43] Well, the more you know, the more you know how much most people are just plain wrong - and how much you don't know... clearly he knows little to nothing... [15:38:51] It really makes me rage [15:39:07] try and stay calm - he's not worth it man [15:39:11] *TrevorParscal holds Reedy back [15:39:17] Haha [15:39:29] *TrevorParscal looses his grip on Reedy [15:39:41] Luckily, my uni mates keep me semi grounded with it [15:39:44] "OH MY! THE CARNAGE!" [15:39:57] right on man [15:40:10] well, you have a few more months right? like... 6? [15:40:13] We've got a module complaint in against him. I was arguing with him at one point in a lecture, and i just turned round, and said "I can't be bothered, it's not worth the effort" and shut up [15:40:54] Amusingly, some of the better lecturers seem to have a hate for him :) [15:41:09] that's called taking the high road, and it's about all you can do with people like that... [15:41:28] Errm. [15:41:30] Let's see [15:41:39] this week and next week... [15:41:49] 3-4 weeks off, then exam period for 2 weeks [15:42:07] Then till early june.. [15:42:19] 10 Jun should be all done by, at latest [15:45:11] There's enough breaks in there to do other stuff to keep me sane ;) [15:46:08] hmm, ia there a way to see recent changes only on pages prefixed with XYZ? [15:46:19] I think I've seen something like this [15:50:17] Holek, there's a selector for namespaces... [15:59:53] yeah, I know, I'm looking for a mix of Special:Recentchanges on Special:Prefixindex [16:01:05] This work really is zapping all motivation [16:05:08] TrevorParscal, Nexus S/Android 2.3 announced [16:05:14] http://www.techradar.com/news/phone-and-communications/mobile-phones/10-things-to-know-about-the-google-nexus-s-913572 [16:05:51] fund [16:05:51] http://is.gd/iiget - 2.3 [16:05:55] *fun... [16:08:12] I'm enjoying being in so early - nobody is here [16:08:27] I would normally have to stay past 7pm to see it this quiet [16:08:31] I *hate* this bug: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20788 [16:08:36] haha [16:08:42] plus I'm able to work to music because nobody is here to tell me to turn it off [16:08:50] TrevorParscal, try doing what Roan and I did - In before most, out after most ;) [16:08:50] *TrevorParscal scouls at where Erik normally sits [16:09:09] Reedy: well, you and Roan are the primary reason I'm trying the 7-3 out [16:09:14] so I can be online with you guys more [16:09:18] Ahhh :) [16:09:28] Sensible I suppose [16:10:06] though, Roan seems to be acustomed to my normal 10-6 schedule, and is a night owl as a result [16:11:13] TrevorParscal: anyone else in the office yet? [16:12:02] TrevorParscal, usually, I'm about for most of that too.. [16:12:46] not on the tech side [16:13:50] *aude wonders if Jay Walsh or Moka will be in today [16:15:54] I keep going to bed after 2am my time (6pm yours), which would be nice if i could kick that habit slightly [16:19:37] Reedy: yeah, I find it's hard to kick that habit too - I used to be nocturnal in fact... the only thing that made me feel sleepy was the sun coming up... [16:20:03] I've done 4 or 5 days on very little sleep, feels like a very bad hangover [16:20:12] Medicene etc means I'm not sleeping great atm.. [16:30:03] *TrevorParscal is eating... [18:13:59] TrevorParscal: hah, we had this talk on open source [18:14:11] which one? [18:14:36] that it's good for marketable skills, etc. [18:14:42] ah [18:14:43] yes [18:14:58] right now a possible future employer is interviewing me [18:15:14] and first question: "do you contribute to any open-source projects?" :D [18:15:49] I'm the official MediaWiki sass-master. That's my contribution. [18:18:59] Shirley: that might not be a very marketable skill [18:19:20] :D [18:43:23] exit [18:53:16] jorm: you don't seem to have responded to Tim's comment - http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/75832#c11164 [18:53:19] it's pretty old too [18:53:28] about 2 or 3 weeks old [18:53:38] that's the one i didn't see. [18:53:45] this seems to have been the advance notification I was asking about [18:54:18] the HTML generation issues he notes are something you could fix [18:54:58] the comments about whether tipsy is a good way to handle this kind of help is something that we should explore, but in the end the UX team should be making those decisions, not general engineering [18:55:23] but you need to participate in code review discussions to defend/discuss/etc this kind of stuff [18:56:41] yeah; i didn't see that comment. i have a mail, though, so i got notified; just not sure why i didn't catch it. [18:57:45] no worries [18:58:05] i still don't think he should revert this kind of thing unless we are preparing a release candidate [18:58:10] which we are not [18:58:16] not until like february [19:04:44] <^demon> jorm, TrevorParscal: Fwiw, I agree with Tim's comment's w.r.t the help boxes. I think tipsy was more visually attractive, but there's a benefit to being able to manually toggle the visibility. Copy+pastability is a big part of it it. [19:05:03] tipsy can also do that [19:05:07] it can be triggered on click [19:05:09] yeah, that's a use case we hadn't really considred. [19:05:12] <^demon> Then we should go for that :) [19:05:20] and go away when you close it with a button or click away [19:05:24] right. [19:05:27] we can easily do that. [19:05:31] it's just something we should obviously iterate on, not revert [19:05:45] <^demon> Commit -> revert -> try again :) [19:05:47] i actually did some work on friday afternoon to fix the left floatin - working on the gravities. [19:06:08] man, i'm not going to redo all the work there. i had to find every field in the codebase and modify it. [19:06:37] <^demon> You can revert his revert in your working copy, that'd do most of the work [19:07:05] i don't know jack shit about svn to even do that. [19:07:24] also, i don't really feel the political muscle to pull off reverting his reversion. [19:07:51] Heh. [19:08:02] the HTML escaping is indefensible, but I think we need to help new developers learn how we handle that stuff... [19:08:12] I'm not sure you "get" Tim, then. [19:08:48] Maybe, but I'm not so sure he "gets" most other people [19:08:58] not sure why that's relevant [19:09:04] The whole concept of letting broken revisions sit around for weeks or months is a relatively new one. [19:09:04] who, me, trevor? [19:09:10] no, Tim [19:09:13] Brion used to revert all of this stuff on a weekly basis. [19:09:17] see Shirley's comment [19:09:17] And nobody complained. [19:09:32] Like ^demon said, commit --> revert --> commit --> revert. [19:09:33] he was also releasing code to the cluster on a weekly basis [19:09:55] there's no need to use that pattern unless you are releasing often, and we are not [19:09:56] Right. The only way you get to a usable trunk is to make it usable. If a revision is broken and stays broken for months, you're not moving forward. [19:10:05] His revert will spark action. [19:10:06] the installer is new code that is being iterated on frequently [19:10:18] And he won't be offended if you re-revert him with improvements. [19:10:21] <^demon> Yes, but the time for leaving stuff broken is drawing to a close. [19:10:21] so would an email [19:10:39] ^demon: agreed, it's getting close to that time [19:10:42] ^demon: Leaving stuff broken time should always be rather short. [19:10:53] <^demon> I still live by "trunk should be runnable at all times" [19:11:09] I think brandon missing that message was unfortunate, but I would rather see people be more aware of being about to be reverted [19:11:14] Anyway, my point is that it isn't about "political muscle." [19:11:18] Somewhere in there. [19:11:19] it was runnable [19:11:56] <^demon> No, it was malforming the HTML that should've been included. [19:11:58] and I'm not sure that I'm claiming he was using political muscle, I'm saying we should be more communicative than this [19:12:06] Personally, I'd like to see Tim and others revert a lot more broken code; so I'm naturally defending him here. [19:12:36] s/broken/a nicer word/ [19:12:38] ^demon: well, on those merits he is more defendable then, I'm not an expert on the patch, I will defer to you since you are more knowledgable on the installer [19:13:21] there's nothing wrong with reverting someone, but when i see people surprised they've been reverted I suspect communication is not what it should be [19:13:24] that's my point [19:14:11] I think that's fair. I'm not sure what more than a code comment and several weeks you'd like to see, though. [19:14:16] this is not the first time I've noticed this, and not just by Tim, and when I reverted someone without quality communication there was a huge thread on wikitech-l - I'm no exception either [19:14:17] I'm being sincere about that. [19:15:16] I think that before you revert someone, you should ping them on IRC, if they aren't there go ahead and do it but send them an email letting them know what you are up to [19:15:52] <^demon> I consider code review to be sufficient notification. [19:17:39] well, fixme and I'm about to revert this are pretty different, if we reverted everything that was being marked fixme we wouldn't have a fixme [19:18:10] haha [19:18:12] *RoanKattouw waves [19:18:12] one thing i've noticed is that CR doesn't send email when you get marked fixme. or at least, i've not gotten notification of that. [19:18:20] It does in trunk [19:18:34] Also, etiquette says you always comment when you mark something fixme [19:18:39] To explain what's wrong with it [19:18:55] And for comments you do get e-mail notifications [19:19:13] <^demon> Fixme has encouraged broken code to remain. [19:19:21] <^demon> As much as it's otherwise helpful. [19:20:16] agreed - but my point is fixme does not nessecarily mean I am about to revert this... [19:20:29] but in Tim's defense, Brandon should have responded [19:20:42] I know brandon didn't see the message on accident [19:20:47] but Tim might not have known that [19:20:48] Context? [19:21:01] <^demon> Tim removing Brandon's tipsy popups from new installer. [19:21:18] Oh [19:21:23] I think I remember him commenting on this [19:21:27] Like last week [19:21:40] <^demon> Probably...we both read everything that goes through CR. [19:21:41] it was actually the 17th of november [19:21:56] ^demon: We do as of Saturday :) [19:21:59] Yay mailing list [19:22:13] Right [19:22:39] So it's the good old "Hey this is broken" *2 weeks of silence* *revert* [19:24:23] <^demon> Man....how did I ever live without status && author filtering on code review? [19:25:20] So in this case, I'm just curious what you think Tim should have done differently. E-mailed directly? A second code comment? Leave it forever? [19:25:38] This probably sounds ruder than I'm intending it. [19:26:16] Well, I have mixed feelings, but generally speaking more communication is going to better than less [19:27:16] it's easy to say "well, I mentioned it in a commit message" or "well, you never responded to my comment on code review", but if you are going to revert something, unless it's trivial, the author should be made aware [19:27:21] Completely agreed. I'm just not sure what form it should take. [19:27:32] I think the fact that the message sat for 2 weeks without comment screams "brandon never saw this" [19:27:33] i am, by the way, not pissed off about the hate on the tipsy, and i'll cop to the parsing issue, etc. i'm just irritated about all the other work that was pulled off. [19:27:39] That gets tricky if you have hundreds of developers. [19:27:48] we don't [19:28:05] By making the author aware do you mean before or after? [19:28:05] Okay, it gets tricky if you have several dozen. [19:28:25] we have about 20 people who are reasonably active, and half that many that are active enough that you can easily find them on IRC most days [19:28:26] Because after-the-fact author awareness is trivial: mentioned the revid in the revert summary (Tim must've) [19:28:31] <^demon>Man....how did I ever live without status && author filtering on code review? <- +1 [19:28:35] RoanKattouw: after is OK [19:28:52] After isn't okay, from what I'm hearing. ;-) [19:29:39] Really - I think communication is the key here not before/after revert - what was the post revert communication? [19:29:45] A commit message [19:30:07] brandon updates, see's his work is gone, starts investigating, realizes he's been reverted... [19:30:24] that's probably a sign that there was not enough communication [19:30:48] If the commit message mentioned the revid being reverted, Brandon should've gotten another e-mail [19:31:11] the only way i got notified of the revert was the "follow up changes" email. [19:31:14] that's it. [19:31:21] That's what I meant, yes [19:31:28] what rev was that? [19:31:46] You weren't around when we didn't have that notification system yet and Brion was using "Revert X, broken" as his catchphrase [19:32:03] It was always easy to tell he was doing code review [19:32:25] 77860 [19:32:39] if that's the way we are going to work, then fine - that's not what I see as the norm though, so I am operating under the view that this is a more exceptional case [19:32:41] And he was swamped in it too, so even if something was so trivially broken it would've taken 5 mins to fix it, he'd revert it [19:32:48] No, it's not really the norm anymore [19:32:52] i was working on Max's fixme and just didn't get the time in. so i was aware of the html parsing brokenness. [19:33:11] hrm. [19:33:34] Just saying some of the older hats around here aren't likely to be impressed [19:34:40] anyways - Tim's actions may be more defensible than they originally appeared to me [19:34:54] Hey Brion. :-) [19:34:58] <^demon> Speak of the devil [19:35:12] satan satan satan [19:35:19] RoanKattouw: I tried explaining the old norm too. ;-) [19:35:24] i'm not saying that it's not defensible; far from it. [19:35:37] i want to get the *other* changes back. [19:35:40] please excuse me for not giving him much benefit of the doubt, in my experience with him so far I haven't been particularly compelled to do so [19:36:07] (Tim that is) [19:36:19] jorm: Have you considered consulting an SVN wizard? :) [19:36:32] <^demon> I will admit, merging is downright painful. [19:36:46] switch to git [19:36:52] merging is joy [19:39:24] so, okay. [19:39:33] path forward? [19:39:39] *TrevorParscal switches to git [19:39:46] Ask Roan how to re-revert in your working copy? [19:39:50] git in mah bellah. [19:39:55] :D [19:39:55] yah, i was thinking. [19:40:14] so, if i re-revert in my working copy, make some changes, and then can i commit that? [19:40:21] Yes [19:40:29] or do i have to do some sort of fucking mumbo jumbo. [19:40:31] okay. [19:40:34] here's the kicker. [19:40:45] Be sure to commit with a summary like "Redo rNNNN properly" or "Revert rNNN (which was itself a revert of rMMM)" [19:40:48] i have changes in my working copy that will magically disappear. [19:40:50] Just make sure you note that it's a re-do of the prevision revision in your commit summary. [19:40:58] Bah, Roan beat me. And note any new changes. ;-) [19:41:00] Hmmm [19:41:13] minor shit. i'm willing to lose it. [19:41:18] They won't disapepar [19:41:38] But they may conflict with the revert, making it almost impossible to get them back cleanly [19:41:40] i was trying to get tipsy gravity to auto detect its side. [19:41:52] You could just save the diff [19:41:58] svn diff > ~/gravity.diff [19:42:02] <^demon> $r = $argv[1]; $s = $r - 1; passthru( "svn merge -r $r:$s ." ); passthru( "svn ci -m 'Revert r$r, broken' " ); [19:42:02] And apply it again later [19:42:04] <^demon> wheee [19:42:22] ^demon: svn merge -c -$r ;) [19:42:37] <^demon> I keep forgetting that way. [19:42:50] <^demon> because merge -r higher:lower works and I learned that first. [19:43:14] okay. let's just say that i want to lose everything i have (i seriously know how to re add it; it's a single line of css code). [19:43:47] so, i want to svn up, accepting theirs; then i want to revert a revision. [19:44:04] guh. this would be fucking trivial in perforce. [19:44:17] svn up; tc? [19:44:19] Is there really no SVN cheatsheet on MW.org? [19:44:23] <^demon> s/perforance/any sane VCS/ [19:44:28] <^demon> Shirley: I think there is [19:44:35] You all should share your magic. :-) [19:44:43] <^demon> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Quick_SVN_merging_guide [19:44:51] \o/ [19:45:02] <^demon> That may be old. [19:45:03] <^demon> I dunno [19:45:14] <^demon> Merging got moderately less painful with 1.5 [19:45:21] or just use tortoise, then you don't have to know about the stinkin oddities of the VCS your working on [19:45:22] It's from Nov. 2010. [19:45:26] <^demon> s/merging/everything/ [19:45:42] jorm: svn merge -c -12345 . . [19:45:58] Where 12345 is the ID of Tim's rev, and . is the current directory [19:45:59] i'm doing an svn up tc [19:46:08] now i want to revert tim's check in. [19:46:17] <^demon> Bryan: I use tortoise for big merges. Conflict handling in that GUI is so pleasant compared to the cli. [19:46:32] which was 77860 [19:46:38] It'll only touch files in the current dir though so you might have to cd up a few levels to make sure it covers all files [19:47:04] Also, for cleanliness, I recommend reverting Tim's revert as one commit and making your changes as a second one [19:47:12] Easier to see what's going on for outsiders [19:47:34] so is that: svn revert 77860? [19:47:35] So if he wants to revert Tim's revert, it's svn merge -c -77860? Or is he merging in the original rev? [19:47:57] yeah, that looks right. [19:48:02] jorm: No. svn merge -c -77860 . . [19:48:12] Shirley: The minus sign is for reverse [19:48:21] Ah, cute. [19:48:26] with the two periods? [19:48:28] jorm: svn revert is for reverting local copy changes [19:48:39] jorm: Yes, for source (current dir) and destination (current dir) [19:48:51] That kind of thing should probably be in a cheatsheet. [19:48:59] I wrote one someplace [19:49:11] alright. then i fix the broken bits and i svn commit again. [19:49:15] Note that the current directory thing means it only touches files in the current directory and below [19:49:27] yeah, that's fine. [19:49:27] So you may have to use cd .. in the right dose [19:49:33] To get full coverage [19:49:36] shit. [19:49:53] (Depends on what the rev touched exactly, and what you care about) [19:49:55] Conflict discovered in 'includes/installer/WebInstallerPage.php'. [19:49:59] ^ [19:50:02] Oh fun [19:50:08] how the fuck did that happen? [19:50:24] Someone changed something that at least looks like it depends on Tim's changes [19:50:39] But it might be trivial [19:50:43] Choose (e) edit [19:50:53] Then find <<< [19:51:47] perhaps somebody with more svn experience should do this revert :) [19:51:55] Yeah :) [19:52:05] great. None of the environment variables SVN_EDITOR, VISUAL or EDITOR are set, and no 'editor-cmd' run-time configuration option was found [19:52:15] Gotta love Macs ^^ [19:52:22] yeah. [19:52:23] EDITOR not defined, srsly [19:52:36] if i postpone, will it go into my codebase and i can manually fix it? [19:52:43] Yes [19:52:51] Do that [19:52:51] so i'll get the <<<<< there? [19:52:54] Exactly [19:53:05] okay. it was only the one file. [19:53:14] Whenever you postpone a conflict, grep your diff for conflict markers ( <<<< , ==== and >>>> ) before committing [19:53:49] you need marked as resolved anyway, right? [19:54:26] <^demon> Mhmm [19:54:57] Yeah that too [19:55:13] oh, yeah. he reintroduced a null user bug that i fixed. [19:55:33] jorm: That's another catch: once you've edited the conflicted file , removed the conflict markers and made sense of what's in there, you have to tell SVN that you fixed it with "svn resolved filename" [19:55:58] Otherwise it'll refuse to commit [19:56:41] hrm. though it looks like the conflict is someone re-fixing the bug i fixed, only more elegantly. [19:57:06] Always nice :) [19:57:26] tstarling * /trunk/phase3/includes/installer/WebInstallerPage.php: Fix fatal error when admin name is blank [19:57:33] so i'll go with his. [19:57:35] jorm: Not sure you got this before: for reviewer sanity, I recommend you commit right after resolving the conflict, then put your post-revert changes in a separate commit [19:57:59] i don't think i should commit until i've fixed the issue tim had. [19:58:11] I think you should [19:58:15] :) [19:58:29] Leaving trunk in a slightly worse state for an hour or so isn't too bad [19:58:44] well, lemme do that after lunch, i think. [19:58:55] We're just talking about the tooltip vs. normal text thing, right? [19:59:03] Not something that like breaks stuff seriously [19:59:04] And something about escaping. [19:59:04] yes, but there was another bug in there. [19:59:09] Oh, escaping, right [19:59:11] html escaping. [19:59:14] Yeah [19:59:25] IMO it's fine to commit noting you'll fix it in 2 hours [19:59:26] yeah. so if i commit now, we'll be back where we were last night. [20:01:58] okay. done. [20:03:02] I loved "Hedda Gabler." [20:03:36] :) [20:04:32] Hey flipzagging , you around? [20:04:44] are there any DEVs here [20:05:03] HeddaGabler: Yes, a few. Just ask your question. [20:05:42] i lost my password and i no have e-mail so how can i login on wikipedia? [20:05:54] <^demon> Create a new account. [20:05:55] Make a new account. [20:06:14] but i have used it for years [20:06:17] <^demon> If you *really* want the old name back, after creating a new account you could ask for an usurp/rename. [20:06:42] can any DEVs give me my account back [20:06:51] <^demon> No, we can't. [20:07:33] no, no developer can do that. [20:07:37] why? [20:07:46] because we'd get pretty much instantly fired. [20:07:57] but now: lunch [20:08:04] <^demon> Developers cannot. System administrators are capable, but don't do it. [20:08:26] One major problem is you can't prove it's your account [20:08:41] see here http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mardetanha#Password_problem [20:08:57] <^demon> Also because if you do it for one person, you'll do it for 10000. And nobody has time for that. [20:09:58] Stewards have time for that. [20:10:18] ResetPass got committed at some point. With logging, even. Don't remember why it didn't make it live, though. [20:11:18] <^demon> Shirley: It got reverted due to some issues when reseting the password of a different account. [20:11:23] <^demon> I never had time to go back to it. [20:11:37] Resetting the password of a different account is the whole point. [20:12:02] Hmm, I wonder if I could get reverted states out of CodeReview. You've gotta be like top-5. ;-) [20:12:28] Unfortunately CR doesn't recognize that [20:12:44] I think autodetection for "Revert r12345" would be neat though [20:13:00] All CR will tell you now is who got reverted most, not who reverted them [20:13:17] Shirley: I have those stats somewhere [20:14:02] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Subversion_statistics#Reversion_ratio [20:14:33] Bryan: <3 [20:14:49] it's pretty obvious that almost everybody accepts brion's coding as the word of god [20:14:53] ie no going against them [20:15:01] hey, some of my code sucks [20:15:04] Note that these stats are unfairly skewed because prior to r40k or so CR statuses didn't exist [20:15:05] don't get too nostalgic about it [20:15:11] *RoanKattouw remembers reverting brion [20:15:14] What Roan said. [20:16:06] The query does limit to ok, fixme, resolved, reverted [20:16:14] But a lot of old stuff was marked OK [20:16:25] I think it was marked as deferred or old [20:16:47] Old didn't exist until very recently [20:20:45] <^demon> Brion's first ForeignApiRepo was pretty nasty :p [20:21:06] i think i put a warning on it to the effect of "this code will run over your dog" [20:21:10] haha [20:21:40] hmm lemme find that one rev [20:23:01] ^demon: I'm not saying that brion writes code like the word of god, only that we treat it like that :p [20:23:49] you know, with a yad [20:24:05] Yad references are so rare. [20:24:22] :p [20:24:54] yeah the saying is normally something like I ain't touching that code with a ten foot pole [20:24:58]