[10:25:35] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: is it know that expanding lines is broken on diffs like https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/31608/2/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php ?
[10:46:18] <Nikerabbit>	 Nemo_bis: on chrome yes
[10:48:14] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: also firefox
[10:50:05] <Nikerabbit>	 Nemo_bis: dunno about that
[10:52:21] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: have you opened the diff? I thought your chrome bug broken the diff page entirely
[10:53:31] <Nikerabbit>	 Nemo_bis: hmm true
[10:53:44] <Nikerabbit>	 it is broken in chrome too, not sure if there is a bug report of that
[10:59:29] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: yes there is https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38144
[11:03:28] <Nemo_bis>	 ah, krinkle had re-filed it upstream too
[11:42:24] <hippietrail>	 i can't find docs for the api meta siteinfo fallback field - where should i look?
[11:52:03] <Nikerabbit>	 fallback language?
[11:53:45] <Nikerabbit>	 there is no such field as far as I know
[11:53:54] <hippietrail>	 thanks i found it in the source
[11:54:19] <hippietrail>	 https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki/core.git;a=blob;f=includes/api/ApiQuerySiteinfo.php;hb=HEAD#l146
[11:54:45] <hippietrail>	 been on wikibreak for a year and a half, lots of stale code...
[12:01:29] <thedj>	 we have another JS bug on en.wp
[12:26:59] <Nikerabbit>	 thedj: caused by?
[12:43:18] <thedj>	 https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/41736
[12:43:30] <thedj>	 Nikerabbit: watch star notifications it seems.
[12:46:28] <Nikerabbit>	 thedj: that's the symptom, not the cause?
[13:03:43] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: on https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/31603/ , are JS dependencies really easier to manage?
[13:05:28] <Nikerabbit>	 Nemo_bis: easier than what?
[13:06:10] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: I don't know, that's what the author says
[13:06:34] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: "I figured a JavaScript dependency would be
[13:06:34] <Nemo_bis>	 easier to manage than a PHP dependency."
[13:08:25] <Nikerabbit>	 nobody reads commit messages
[13:10:47] <Nemo_bis>	 Nikerabbit: that's a bug comment
[13:11:15] <Nikerabbit>	 ah
[13:11:59] <Nemo_bis>	 (nobody except you, of course; you even fix code comments in commit messages :p)
[21:23:36] <Platonides>	 Nemo_bis, I see something wrong on your comment 8 of bug 41745
[21:23:38] <Platonides>	 "super-restrictive" but "only after 10 edits" ?
[21:26:07] <Nemo_bis>	 Platonides: "after 10 edits only"?
[21:26:19] <Nemo_bis>	 not "after only 10 edits"
[21:27:21] <Nemo_bis>	 in Italian we have solo, soltanto, solamente as adverbs and solo as an adjective which can vary in gender and number... english provides us only "only" and I nevr understand what it refers to :)
[21:27:39] <Platonides>	 ok, just say it in italan :P
[21:27:44] <Platonides>	 *Italian
[21:28:39] <Nemo_bis>	 hehe
[21:29:58] <Platonides>	 I don't understand what you were trying to say :P
[21:33:05] <Nemo_bis>	 diventano autoverificati solamente dopo 10 contributi
[21:33:22] <Nemo_bis>	 as opposed to: diventano autoverificati dopo soli 10 contributi
[21:34:16] <Nemo_bis>	 "only after [they've reached] 10 edits[, they become autoconfirmed]"
[21:35:06] <Nemo_bis>	 if this doesn't help, I beg the intervention of Nikerabbit :)
[21:36:46] <Nemo_bis>	 aww
[21:37:30] <Platonids>	 you think they should be more contributions?
[21:37:40] <Platonids>	 oh.. I see
[21:38:15] <Platonids>	 yes, solo/solamente can be confusing
[21:40:51] <Platonids>	 thanks