[15:32:36] niedzielski: Hi, are you around? [15:35:57] Just about. What's up? [15:37:40] niedzielski: Hi.. I wanted to ask you about your comment on https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/335036/ How can we make the change at the source? [15:46:53] TheDiscoverer: hm, so i don't even see Gova Konknni https://wikistats.wmflabs.org/display.php?t=wp [15:47:31] niedzielski: it's number 198 in the list [15:50:13] TheDiscoverer: great! i don't see a way to edit these unfortunately and i don't know who owns this instance. i'm going to email Mooeypoo to see if she knows and i'll cc you on it [15:50:53] niedzielski: thank you. alternatively, I guess we could open a request on Phabricator [15:51:28] TheDiscoverer: that's even better! :] i'll cc you and her both [15:57:34] T156814 [15:57:34] T156814: Gõychi Konknni's English Wikistats translation is incorrect - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T156814 [15:58:41] TheDiscoverer: thanks! [15:59:05] niedzielski: Thanks to you :) Good day! [17:21:42] niedzielski: dbrant: about the UX testing custom build patch (https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/335174/) -- did you guys want to review this? should i just do the build? (i've actually never done a one-off custom build, is it documented somewhere?) [17:22:12] mdholloway: i think if rita's happy with it, that's what matters [17:22:18] ^ [17:22:23] it's not going to be merged so it just needs her ok [17:22:40] ok, cool [17:23:03] i probably don't even need to use the "custom" flavor then, just send her an APK [17:23:14] yep [17:37:53] dbrant: meeting time :] [21:54:32] dr0ptp4kt: up for meeting now instead of tomorrow? [22:04:25] mdholloway dbrant: if i'm not mistaken, the only things blocking release are T149915 and a couple merges. i can pick up T149915 [22:04:26] T149915: Instrument eventlogging for description editing - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T149915 [22:05:07] dr0ptp4kt: no prob either way [22:07:11] niedzielski: i just commented on my patch for T149915. tl;dr: i don't know what's causing the multiple logged events but we're only sending on logging HTTP request per event; maybe we can wait on getting user ID until editing is in progress if we're ok losing a few here and there. [22:07:35] s/on/one [22:11:19] i'll update while you're looking [22:12:41] mdholloway: i'm cool with the eventlogging since you checked the okhttp logs [22:14:24] mdholloway: hm, i guess each event logged around a description edit needs the id so we can't just make a request chain for the id then the log because we'd have to do it for each event [22:15:14] niedzielski: you're right. (sorry, switching contexts) [22:15:47] niedzielski: add some UI and call it good? [22:18:20] hm, there's gotta be a way to avoid extra loading screens for the sake of event logging [22:19:34] mdholloway: maybe just retroactively send the start log once you get the id? [22:20:58] maybe lazily retrieving the ID is a mistake after all. yeah, regarding your last point, that's kind of how things work now but it's a little harder to fudge now that we're supposed to be sending a separate 'ready' event when the editor is ready [22:21:36] even though in practice, on a reasonably good connection, they'll be virtually concurrent, or at least it seemed in my testing [22:21:36] brb [22:23:33] maxbinder: apology for delay. i can do 3:00-3:30 your time today if you want, please update if that's cool for you (tomorrow's fine, too) [22:34:19] niedzielski: anyway, back now, i'll update the user ID stuff shortly. [22:35:10] mdholloway: i don't think it has to be done today or anything! i just wanted to know if you knew of anything else we wanted to get in! [22:48:20] niedzielski: nothing else in particular from me [22:49:06] 👍 [23:01:10] dr0ptp4kt: cool. moved and in hangout