[05:57:30] <GerardM->	Mark Herzberger is Mah on IRC right ?
[05:57:58] <bawolff>	no, he's hexmode
[05:58:03] <bawolff>	mah is his commit name
[06:18:48] <GerardM->	<grin> that explains why I never found him here
[16:54:17] <Nikerabbit>	make test for wikidiff2 fails for me
[17:58:00] <Platonides>	what's nelson bugzilla email?
[17:59:22] <Platonides>	rnelson@wikimedia.org did not match anything
[18:00:07] <Platonides>	found: russnelson@gmail.com
[19:29:31] <apergos>	anyone around on a saturday morning/evening that can say why we now have metadata in the image table for images with no frame count and no looping?
[19:29:31] <apergos>	i.e.
[19:29:46] <apergos>	a:3:{s:10:"frameCount";i:0;s:9:"loopCount";i:1;s:8:"duration";d:0;}
[19:30:18] <apergos>	I'm not going to try to do anything about it, just flagging it cause that's well a bunch more stuff in the table if we don't actually need it
[19:32:33] <bawolff>	Its needed so that the code doesn't repetitively try to extract the frame count
[19:32:59] <bawolff>	(I think anyways, its been a while since i last looked at the relevent code)
[19:34:01] <bawolff>	it also allows us to say that the file is definitly a static png, and not an apng definitively, instead of wondering if perhaps the metadata extract failed. (and same for gif)
[19:37:17] <apergos>	whereas if we set it to some much shorter value like 0 that wouldn't suffice?
[19:37:35] <apergos>	I suppose it's a text string so we don't save on it that wat
[19:37:36] <apergos>	way
[19:38:01] <bawolff>	that way has trouble if we want to extend the list of properties later
[19:38:15] <bawolff>	if say we start extracting "author" information from png's, etc
[19:40:45] <apergos>	that's true
[19:41:57] *bawolff 	notes as an aside i do have code written to start extracting author info from png's
[19:50:58] <apergos>	commit commit commit!
[19:53:36] <bawolff>	its in a branch. I'm waiting for 1.17 to be released before looking into merging it in
[19:54:11] <apergos>	*cough*trunk*cough*
[19:54:31] <apergos>	of course I'm a fine one to talk but I do intend actually to get my crpa into trunk and well before the next review cycle starts
[19:54:50] <apergos>	because after commit commit commit it's merge merge merge!
[19:55:29] <apergos>	somewhere there is a pardoy waiting to get out: merge merge merge your code, listen for the scream  ...
[19:57:35] <bawolff>	You know, if we went back to the theoretical release once every 3 months schedule
[19:57:45] <bawolff>	It'd be time for 1.18 to come out soon
[20:02:38] <apergos>	yes it would
[20:02:45] <apergos>	well only after 1.17 comes out
[20:02:48] <apergos>	which it still isn't