denysonique_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
jds_ has joined #bundler
denysonique_ has joined #bundler
chouhoulis has joined #bundler
denysonique_ has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
denysonique_ has joined #bundler
JSharp has joined #bundler
rjhunter has joined #bundler
axl_ has joined #bundler
cwebber has quit []
cwebber has joined #bundler
JordanFaust_ has joined #bundler
JordanFaust_ has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
JordanFaust_ has joined #bundler
samphippen has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
cwebber has quit []
JordanFaust_ has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
chouhoulis has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cwebber has joined #bundler
chouhoulis has joined #bundler
havenwood has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
havenwood has joined #bundler
axl_ has quit [Read error: No buffer space available]
rjhunter has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
axl_ has joined #bundler
cwebber has quit []
rjhunter has joined #bundler
deepender has joined #bundler
ashedryden has joined #bundler
<ashedryden>
hola
<zzak>
ashedryden: hey hey
<ashedryden>
grabbing some links that'll help with the discussion
<zzak>
np
<deepender>
zzak: Does bundler have rpec testing framework?
<deepender>
basically I want to write some spec for it.
<zzak>
deepender: yes we use rspec
<deepender>
so Should I add test inside already created file only.
<deepender>
I want to write spec for bundle
<deepender>
bundle install
<deepender>
with its options
<deepender>
zzak:
<zzak>
deepender: what kind of spec do you want to write?
<deepender>
basically it is for a feature request that is feature --33
<deepender>
that bundle install just gave summary of gem install
<deepender>
like using 45 already installed gems
<deepender>
zzak:
<ashedryden>
okay, re: code of conduct for bundler: there is a pretty strong precedent for other projects having them. the hardest parts are a) making sure people see and understand it and b) making sure it is enforced.
<ashedryden>
having a code of conduct and /not/ enforcing it is worse than not having one at all, imo
<zzak>
deepender: ill have to get back to you as im limited on time, could you comment on the ticket what you'd like to add?
<zzak>
ashedryden: agree, other projects should adopt this thing
<zzak>
ashedryden: we were thinking of top-level file, and linking to it in CONTRIBUTING file
<zzak>
ashedryden: i like fedoras but id like to say something specifically about commenting on issues and patches submitted
<deepender>
zzak: thanks, I will first have a fight myself if I don't understand then I will open ticket
<ashedryden>
zzak: yeah. the only thing that a lot of these CoCs are missing are explicitly stating what is unacceptable, what potential actions taken will be, and who to report to
<zzak>
ashedryden: agree
<ashedryden>
zzak: for instance, we lay out that stuff in a lot of conference CoCs intentionally, because people will argue they "didn't know" they couldn't do/say those things, people will leave projects because they don't know that people care enough about their participation to ensure they have a safe welcoming environment, etc
<zzak>
ashedryden: #1 is hard, #2 seems to be [deleting comments, reporting upstream], and #3 should be any of the maintainers
chouhoulis has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<ashedryden>
zzak: #3 means that all of the maintainers need to be well versed in what the policy is and, hopefully, people that are empathetic to a cause even when they don't necessarily understand or aren't educated about it
<ashedryden>
zzak: that last part is the hardest
<ashedryden>
for other people following along and don't know what i mean about conference codes of conduct laying that stuff out more obviously: http://jsconf.com/codeofconduct.html
<zzak>
#1 should help communicate #3
<ashedryden>
zzak: for sure, but keep in mind that even maintainers may violate the CoC, intentionally or unintentionally, which makes it a little tougher
<ashedryden>
some groups have a policy where one person takes a report - a matter of fact statement, collects evidence, etc - and then three people have to come to a determination about what to do
<ashedryden>
for some things you won't need that obviously, but not everything is cut and dry, not everyone will always agree, etc
<zzak>
i have faith in andre, all issues should be escalated to him
<ashedryden>
and it means making tough decisions, sometimes - it may mean reprimanding someone who is super important to the project
<ashedryden>
zzak: just keep in mind that he can make mistakes, too, and that may be more pressure on him than he's willing to take on alone
<ashedryden>
zzak: he said he's out now, but I'm sure he'll read all this stuff and comment when he has time
<zzak>
so we need 2 parts, code and execution?
<zzak>
we can worry about execution after right. i think coming up with a good code is gonna be hard
rjhunter has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<ashedryden>
zzak: yes
rjhunter has joined #bundler
<ashedryden>
zzak: so probably a mix between fedora's and the conf code of conduct that's become pretty standard?
<indirect>
hi
<ashedryden>
good timing
<zzak>
ashedryden: sounds about right
<ashedryden>
there's not a ton of backscroll to the convo, you havent missed much
<indirect>
just caught up
<ashedryden>
should we start a google doc to draft this thing?
<havenwood>
just curious but have violations of the suggested code been a problem or is it just a matter of immunizing from potential future issues?
<indirect>
havenwood: I had to ask someone to not be sexist today in issues; I'd like to have a clear policy to point future violators to
<havenwood>
the tone of the Fedora one is nice indeed. i like the Privacy clause of the OSI one though as well.
<havenwood>
indirect: ah, good point
<ashedryden>
indirect: also helps, too, so people don't feel they're being unfairly taken aside
<indirect>
exactly
<indirect>
I think it's also good ruby community precedent for projects with many contributors/users to have something explicit
<ashedryden>
this puts everyone on equal footing, as far as violators go, but also lets people who want to contribute/who do contribute and have had issues with people know that they should feel safe going to you
<zzak>
i feel like the fedora code is too loos
<indirect>
because the assumption seems to be that if you're on github insults and sexism is fine :\
<ashedryden>
indirect: for sure
<ashedryden>
:(
<indirect>
I mean, the assumption for jerks
<indirect>
not by everyone
<indirect>
but jerks get extra offended because they're in free pass open source land or whatever
<indirect>
"I have contributed to so many projects you can't call me a jerk I quit first"
<ashedryden>
yeah
<ashedryden>
and i have been a part of projects where very prolific contributors do that :(
<indirect>
yeah
<indirect>
no contributors like that please
<ashedryden>
people know they can threaten by using their work to back them up, which makes it so much worse :(
<indirect>
for sure
<ashedryden>
zzak: so
<ashedryden>
zzak: you all have to decide on what the severest punishment could be
<ashedryden>
revoking commit bit? project ban?
<ashedryden>
sucks to think about, and hopefully youll never have to use it, but people should know that it's a possibility if they do something egregious enough
<ashedryden>
also re: escalation to github support: gh may have different ideas of what is appropriate than you are willing to allow, so keep that in mind, too
<ashedryden>
you don't want github to say "oh, we won't do anything for that", and basically leave you with your hands tied
<zzak>
ashedryden: agree
<zzak>
indirect: what do you think?
<zzak>
re: escalation and punishment
<zzak>
id also like to adopt this for ruby
<zzak>
im working on better contributing guidelines soon
<ashedryden>
zzak: i'd be interested to see how that goes over
<ashedryden>
hopefully it's well-received, but there is almost always push back, as I'm sure you know
<ashedryden>
so making sure maintainers at least are all on the same page and know how to respond if/when people get upset
<zzak>
i should probably plan to offer 2 options, one similar to fedora and one like what we're working on
<ashedryden>
maintainers shouldnt be taken by surprise by people getting upset about it :/
<ashedryden>
yeah
<zzak>
1 is better than none
<ashedryden>
i'd start with the one we're working on, truthfully
<ashedryden>
yes
<ashedryden>
because the fedora one is closer to "be excellent to each other" and kind of toothless
<ashedryden>
CoC should be a tool to deal with behavior that you weren't expecting to deal with
<zzak>
can you ban someone from a project on github?
<ashedryden>
may want to add in something about physical spaces, too, if you have sprints and such
<zzak>
much better
<zzak>
ashedryden: +1
<ashedryden>
this is looking good
<ashedryden>
fedora project's website doesn't reflow text when you change the window size :|
<ashedryden>
i like fedora's at the end there
<ashedryden>
helps to set a tone for the space.
<indirect>
yeah
<indirect>
fedora's seems much more over in the "we're trying to stick to asking people to be good" side of the spectrum
<ashedryden>
we expect people to treat each other respectfully so we can work on this together, sometimes disagreements happen and we don't want to stifle that, but don't be shitty about it, etc etc
<ashedryden>
indirect: yeah. it literally says "be excellent to each other" in there
<indirect>
haha
<indirect>
yeeeeah
<ashedryden>
well-intentioned, but if it were that simple and we could expect everyone to act that way, you wouldnt need a code of conduct at all
<ashedryden>
sadly we know that isnt the case :(
<ashedryden>
being explicit sets the ground rules for everyone without being needlessly vague
<indirect>
yeah
<indirect>
exactly
<zzak>
acutally theres kind of a point
<zzak>
we should consider the medium
<indirect>
so how do we feel about events and physical stuff
<zzak>
this is meant for issues
<indirect>
I am inclined to leave it out
<indirect>
because this is supposed to be a demo for an OSS project's online collaboration
<zzak>
i sort of agree to what you said in chat
<indirect>
or like an example of how to do this for an OSS project
<indirect>
and if we ever have events or meetups we can have an event CoC there
<indirect>
but this is about contributing to the project via the intarwebz I think?
<ashedryden>
indirect: that's a good point. and it isn't like you can't have a separate one for physical space stuff
<indirect>
exactly
<indirect>
like I would be happy with a CoC like the JSConf one at said meetup or whatever
<zzak>
this is separate from event CoC
deepender has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<ashedryden>
right
<zzak>
like most of our events will take place within existing events that _should_ already have CoC
<indirect>
I don't think that means we need to squeeze it into the OSS digital online project CoC
<indirect>
:)
<ashedryden>
zzak: wellll
<indirect>
well, hanging out at a conf isn't exactly an event, but...
<zzak>
but if there isnt then we can add one
<indirect>
bundler has never had an event
<indirect>
as far as I know :P
<zzak>
we should totally do a bug mash sometime
<ashedryden>
zzak: yeah, ideally. but you also want to make sure that the way people act is seemless across mediums, regardless of what an event's CoC does or does not say
<indirect>
yeah
<zzak>
most tickets closed gets a ZILLION DOGECOINS
<indirect>
lool
<ashedryden>
lol
<zzak>
wow such reward
<zzak>
many hacks
<ashedryden>
having sprints during confs is good to help new people contribute, too
<indirect>
yeah
<indirect>
that sounds nice
<indirect>
I mean, I've only ever added internet contributors
<indirect>
but I like the idea :P
<ashedryden>
yeah
<ashedryden>
:)
<zzak>
im from the internet
<ashedryden>
if you wanna do something, let me know and id be happy to help
<zzak>
ashedryden: ++
<zzak>
thanks for your help
<ashedryden>
being explicit about being welcoming to people who havent contributed before is important
<ashedryden>
people want to know it's okay to ask "stupid" questions
<ashedryden>
and that there is more you can contribute than code, too
<indirect>
yep
<indirect>
that is +++ from me
<indirect>
we could maybe even something explicit to the contributing doc about anything being happily accepted
<indirect>
typo fixes
<indirect>
middleman has a great one
<zzak>
should we leave out the resources?
<zzak>
and what about those headings
<ashedryden>
zzak: i put those in there for *our* reference
<zzak>
and then im good to merge this and update CONTRIBUTING
<ashedryden>
so everyone know where we were pulling from
<ashedryden>
i need to sleep soon because its almost midnight and ive been up forever, but you should talk about a couple things eventually: how you'll keep track of violations (google form -> spreadsheet?), making final decisions, etc
<zzak>
i like the idea of an anonymous disclosure/reporting form
<ashedryden>
indirect: i like it
robbyoconnor has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
adam12 is now known as adam
<indirect>
cool
<indirect>
those are both good points
<indirect>
thanks a ton!
<ashedryden>
one of the talks I'm giving this year is about OSS projects being more inclusive, so I'm happy ill get to add bundler to my yay pile
<indirect>
yay
<zzak>
:D
<indirect>
(pile)
<ashedryden>
lol
robbyoconnor has joined #bundler
<indirect>
we strive to be exemplary :P
<indirect>
lols
<indirect>
have a good night!
<ashedryden>
night :)
ashedryden has left #bundler [#bundler]
<zzak>
i am known as パイル
<zzak>
piler
<zzak>
so this makes sense
axl_ has joined #bundler
<indirect>
haha
<zzak>
indirect: how are those headings?
<indirect>
はい、パイル
<indirect>
(are we friends yet, can I be informal)
<zzak>
lol
<zzak>
だいじょぶです
deepender has joined #bundler
patcon has joined #bundler
<zzak>
インダイレクトさん
<zzak>
indirect: im not sure you can access owners page without being owner
<zzak>
can you verify
<indirect>
zzak: ohhh interesting
<zzak>
yeah i just tried going to that link after creating a new account
<zzak>
i think you have to at least be an organization member
patcon has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
<indirect>
booo
<indirect>
um
<indirect>
core team
<indirect>
hmmm
<indirect>
I guess we have a core team page on the site
<zzak>
ok
<zzak>
we can wrap this up tomorrow
<zzak>
ill try to get terences bio
<zzak>
and a picture
<zzak>
can you talk to larry?
<zzak>
who else is on core?
<zzak>
something something carlhuda
<indirect>
zzak: oh we already have a core team page
<indirect>
and put carlhuda in a "former core team" section
<zzak>
sounds good
<zzak>
we can fix this tomorrow
JordanFaust_ has joined #bundler
deepender has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
axl_ has quit [Quit: axl_]
JordanFaust_ has quit [Quit: My MacBook Pro has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…]
deepender has joined #bundler
havenwood has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rjhunter has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rjhunter has joined #bundler
chouhoulis has joined #bundler
chouhoulis has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
deepender has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
deepender has joined #bundler
retro|cz has joined #bundler
<jds_>
When using rvm, can I do anything to persuade bundler and/or rvm to share gems more efficiently? I'm struggling to fit all the copies of gems & git repos for different ruby versions on my 128GB ssd...
<tmoore>
jds_: probably! by default, bundler will install to the same location that 'gem' does by default
jds_ is now known as jds
<tmoore>
jds: do you have lots of different ruby versions installed in rvm?
<jds>
4
<jds>
but I'm also flip flopping between Rails 3 & Rails 4
<tmoore>
you can have them both installed in the same directory
<tmoore>
do you end up with a separate set of gems per-project or just per ruby version?
<jds>
Per ruby version
<jds>
Which is fair enough for the compiled gems
<jds>
but I wondered if I could at least get bundler to share the git repositories between different versions
<tmoore>
so the git repos are in a couple of places
<tmoore>
there's a cached clone that should be shared across projects already
<tmoore>
but I think that's relative to GEM_HOME, so it will be different for different versions of Ruby under RVM
<jds>
Yeah
<tmoore>
then it clones from there to build a gem from a particular locked revision
<tmoore>
that's the tricky thing about sharing... different projects might not be using the same revision
<tmoore>
Do you just want it to share between different Ruby versions? You should be able to do that by setting GEM_HOME or by using bundle install --path /some/shared/directory in all of the projects
<tmoore>
then when it makes the secondary clones, I'm pretty sure git will use hard links for everything in .git/objects so it shouldn't use much extra space
<tmoore>
though some disk space usage tools might double-count it so that could be misleading
deepender has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
deepender has joined #bundler
deepender has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
cha1tanya has joined #bundler
samphippen has joined #bundler
denysonique_ has left #bundler [#bundler]
cha1tanya has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
patcon has joined #bundler
patcon has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
deepender has joined #bundler
rjhunter has quit [Quit: Leaving...]
cwebber has joined #bundler
chouhoulis has joined #bundler
g0bl1n has joined #bundler
patcon has joined #bundler
patcon has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
havenwood has joined #bundler
cwebber has quit []
houhoulis has joined #bundler
patcon has joined #bundler
houhoulis has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
cwebber has joined #bundler
axl_ has joined #bundler
axl_ has quit [Client Quit]
axl_ has joined #bundler
henrikhodne has joined #bundler
havenwood has quit []
slash_nick is now known as slash_me
axl_ has quit [Quit: axl_]
retro|cz has quit [Read error: Operation timed out]
pipecloud has joined #bundler
axl_ has joined #bundler
adam has quit [Disconnected by services]
adam_ has joined #bundler
havenwood has joined #bundler
axl_ has quit [Quit: axl_]
zzak_ has joined #bundler
axl_ has joined #bundler
havenwood has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
samphipp_ has joined #bundler
samphippen has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
ddd has quit [Quit: KERNEL REBOOT: Updating kernel due to security updates. bbs]
ddd has joined #bundler
havenwood has joined #bundler
samphipp_ is now known as samphippen
shevy has joined #bundler
shevy has left #bundler ["I'll be back ... maybe"]
houhoulis has joined #bundler
axl_ has left #bundler [#bundler]
deepender has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
g0bl1n has quit [Quit: Ex-Chat]
chouhoulis has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
chouhoulis has joined #bundler
chouhoul_ has joined #bundler
chouhoulis has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
Cidan has joined #bundler
<Cidan>
does anyone know why in my Gemfile, when using a :git option for a gem, I get the following: ArgumentError: wrong number of arguments (1 for 0)
<Cidan>
then bundler fails :(
<Cidan>
actually it seems to fail if I pass any argument in
<Cidan>
(this used to work, has for years, gemfile is untouched)
axl_ has joined #bundler
axl_ has left #bundler [#bundler]
<Cidan>
nevermind, a dev decided to commit a stale lock file...