[15:54:32] dbrant: hello! by any chance, can you can write Bashkir? [15:55:51] niedzielski: never heard of it! [15:56:26] dbrant: ah, ok! it was a long shot :) [15:57:10] i can read it phonetically, since it's sort of cyrillic, but can't understand it. [16:00:13] dbrant: ah too bad. we got some new translations in Bashkir and the translators seem to be struggling with some of the technical parts of strings (html, escapes, etc). i thought some native examples would be helpful but i'm sure the twn guys will be able to help just as well [16:28:26] dbrant: can we resolved the items in Done in 78? [16:29:01] mbinder: done! [16:29:31] 👍 📈 [17:30:31] reets: wanna email your update to the ios list? we ran outta time :-/ [17:58:51] bmansurov: i just pestered you on all of those sign off column tasks about urls and such. well, most of them anyway. sorry for filing up your inbox! [18:21:57] dr0ptp4kt: np, replied to al [18:21:58] l [18:41:05] bmansurov: strangely i'm not seeing the border bottom issue you are.. [18:41:21] ok, let me see if I can replicate it on reading staging [18:41:24] awesome [18:42:55] jdlrobson: my bad, forgot to mention that the JS is disabled [18:43:00] jdlrobson: can be seen at http://reading-web-staging.wmflabs.org/wiki/1 [18:43:20] ah js disabled changes things [18:43:48] weird i can see it there but not locally [18:43:51] let me dig a bit deeper [18:43:59] cool [18:45:42] bmansurov: nope still cannot replicate locally.. [18:45:49] i think some extension is probably interfering [18:46:00] hmm [18:46:59] jdlrobson: perhaps you have $wgMFAllowNonJavaScriptEditing set to true, which should be false [18:47:27] yeh that's what it is [18:47:29] good work :) [20:34:54] jdlrobson: bmansurov - bmansurov looks like you're aiming for https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T131093. just wanted to confirm we're okay there and it's clear [20:35:37] dr0ptp4kt: can't we just filter out Main page... [20:35:40] don't we have a field for current page? [20:36:14] jdlrobson: no [20:36:53] wait.. there is no language switcher on the main page. [20:37:05] there never has been.. so why..? [20:37:29] jdlrobson: not in prod cluster, but bmansurov patched it so the button would be restored at the bottom of the main page [20:37:40] jdlrobson: see it in the beta cluster [20:37:44] well that's a bug [20:37:51] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page [20:37:56] so we didn't need the language button on the main page? [20:38:08] the main page for projects varies too much to be considered a translation [20:39:15] ok, so should we revert https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/279937/ then? [20:39:16] that said i guess they show up on desktop [20:39:20] so did we break something? [20:41:25] I'm currently in the middle of writing up some lazy loading images so can't really spare much time right now. [20:41:52] If we can stop reverting/writing new patches around the language switcher and work out what we used to do on the main page that would be great. bmansurov can you use git bisect and work out if we unintentionally removed the main page link as a starting point? [20:43:16] jdlrobson: bmansurov fixed the main page. you just don't see it in beta on the prod cluster yet. [20:43:45] Given the main page is not showing in production stable I would consider that a bigger issue. [20:43:56] (if it's meant to be showing) [20:43:59] jdlrobson: it's showing in stable, just not in the beta mode of production stable [20:44:24] jdlrobson: and agreed - even in beta it's something we wanted fixed. [20:44:35] oh yes. sorry i can't multitask here... [20:44:41] jdlrobson: me neither! [20:45:51] ok, looks like no issue except for the eventlogging bug? anyway, i've submitted a fix https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T131093 [20:46:08] okay, so this is just an event logging discrepancy. Okay. Well I can't make promises I can get round to merging this later but I will try my best. [20:51:45] coreyfloyd: question if yt and have 5 mins [20:51:57] JonKatz: or for you [20:52:26] sorry, meant to sat that JonKatz can probably also answer [20:53:09] nuria I'm around for 5 [20:56:09] JonKatz: on e-mail thread about opt in in IOs we have a proposal to counting uniques with "active device count reported by apple/ opt in rate" [20:56:09] i think that particular solution is not on the table, except as a one-off calc [20:56:09] JonKatz: does that mean we are counting as uniques the users that are choosing to opt in into apple's device count functionality? [20:56:09] just because its so messy and requires someone logging into apple and then running a function.. [20:56:09] nuria sorry, scratch what I just said. [20:56:09] nuria I don't think I understand the question [20:56:09] JonKatz: sorry, let me repeat [20:56:14] https://www.irccloud.com/pastebin/5rg23T1v/ [20:56:19] apples device count may be 90, and then they tell us there is a 90% opt in rate. Then we deduce there are 100 users [20:56:47] nuria yes this IS the method I think we should use [20:56:50] but I don't get the question you are asking [20:58:47] nuria did that answer it? [20:59:37] ok, 90/.90!=100 [21:00:02] sorry 90/.9 =100 [21:00:09] very well , i understand now [21:00:22] i wasn't sure what opt in rate was that one [21:01:47] niedzielski: join uuuus [21:02:04] whoops [21:08:40] * phuedx just received a load of messages in one fell swoop [21:16:12] JonKatz, nuria: as detailed in thread, that's not really a valid calculation [21:16:27] i wonder what the industry standard is in reporting these [21:16:42] HaeB: depends on the app right? [21:16:47] HaeB how is that not valid? [21:17:21] HaeB: You said ; "So overall I think 1 may be a reasonable option, based on the understanding that it's an industry standard, and perhaps with a little wait-and-see reservation about data stability remaining." [21:17:58] nuria: yes, with 1 = "Just use Apple's number as the user count" [21:19:01] JonKatz: as for why it's not valid, see the thread: ' This calculation assumes that the device-opt-inners are equally likely to remain active as other users, and there are all kinds of reasons why that might not be true - they might be a much more active class of users in general, for example." [21:20:37] HaeB I think it is best to live with that weak assumption. it is no worse than the assumption that users do not delete cookies [21:21:19] not sure i agree [21:21:28] why not simply use apple's number? [21:26:30] if apple agrees that dividing active devices by the device-wide opt-in ratio is a sound method, wouldn't they provide that metric themselves ? ;) [21:26:58] plus that ratio is provided only as a rolling 30day average. [21:32:33] nuria: was in a meeting and about to walk into another… [21:32:43] I have a few minutes at the top of the hour [21:32:47] nuria: ^ [22:31:17] coreyfloyd: nv talked with Jon, thnak you [22:31:23] *thank you [23:06:36] dr0ptp4kt: am I crazy or was there a Web retro scheduled for tomorrow? It seems to have disappeared (as have future retros) [23:06:44] and past...? [23:09:29] jdlrobson: ^ [23:13:14] mbinder: usually it's the day after yes [23:13:17] not sure what happened there [23:13:33] jdlrobson: looks like it was deleted, past instances, too. Shall I create another?